Trail and
Wayfinding
Signage
“Don't Trash Pinole Creek" or
similar signs with posts and
concrete.
$250 12 $3,000.00
Information
Board plus
display
materials
Interpretive sign along
Creekside Park that educate
the public about its natural
and cultural history
$5,000 1 $5,000.00
Art/Scuptures
(two
locations)
Trailside art to increase public
awareness of the history and
cultural importance of the
creek to the Native
Community
$10,000 2 $20,000.00
Monument
Sign (two
locations)
consultation with Nations of
Lisjan will inform the final
design of the monument signs
$10,000 2 $20,000.00
Picnic Tables $3,500 3 $10,500.00
Benches $3,500 6 $21,000.00
Tri-Stream
Receptacles
Pads, post install, labeling for
trash/recycling/organics,
including shipping
$5,000 4 $20,000.00
Tools, Safety
Gear, Etc
Tools, equipment, safety gear,
and cleanup supplies needed
for community cleanup
activities and planting
$12,000.00
Erosion
Control
Waddles $10,000.00
Planting
Ground Covers, Perennials,
grasses, wildflower seed
(natives)
$30,000.00
Soil
Amendment/
Mulch (in CY)
Soil amendment, organic
mulch - in kind
$50 130 $ 6,500.00 $ 5,000.00
B. Total
Materials
and Supplies
$158,000.00
$ 5,000.00
Installation
(prevention) CivicCorps Install signs and receptacles,
assist with concrete $47 130 $6,110.00
Installation
(prevention)
Public Works
Lead making concrete bases
for receptacles; installation of
waddles, etc
$75 70 $5,250.00
C. Total
Install
Prevention
$11,360.00
Education City of Pinole Facility rentals for meetings
and engagement $516 4 $2,064.00 $ 4,128.00
Education City of Pinole Facility rentals for meetings
and engagement
In-Kind 8 $ 4,128.00
Education City of Pinole Communication Engagement In-Kind $ 3,280.00 Education City of Pinole Communication Engagement $82 40 $3,280.00 Education FOPCW In-Kind 150 $0.00 $ 6,000.00
Education Earth Team In-Kind 20 $0.00 $ 340.00
Education SF Academy of Art Public Service Annoucements In-Kind 400 $0.00 $ 6,800.00
D. Total
Planning &
Education
$5,344.00
$ 20,548.00
Conceptual
Plans and
Budgeting
BASE In-kind $0.00
$ 16,000.00
Consultation Nations of Lisjon $200 12 $2,400.00
E. Total
Consultation
and Planning
$2,400.00
$ 16,000.00
Subtotal
A+B+C+D $277,032.00
$ 81,548.00
C.
Administrati
on (8% of
total)
Project management,
reporting, coordination,
compliance.
— — $22,162.56
TOTAL
PROJECT
COST
$299,194.56
$ 248,772.00
Sarah Drive
60 ft
Scale:
MAP LEGEND
P
ni ole
Valley
Ro
a
d
t
o
HWY I-80 ------->
Pinole Valley High School
Pinole Library
Pinole Creek
Creekside Site - Revised 1/14/25
Sarah Ct-Pinole Valley Road
C L E A N C A C O M M U N I T Y C L E A N U P A N D
E M P L O Y M E N T P A T H W A Y G R A N T P R O G R A M HWY I-80
Hwy I-80
Access Point to Site
Creekside Trail
Shopping Center
Current Zachichi Parcel
APN: 430-461-025 (City
owned parcel)
Waste Location
APN 430-330-027:
Pinole Valley
High School
Pinole Library
Sarah Ct
<----- to HWY I-80
Access View (next page)
Resulting Parcel After
Donation to City of Pinole
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
Clean California Local Grant Program (State)
Restricted Grant Agreement
This Restricted Grant Agreement (RGA), between the State of California acting by and through its Department of Transportation, referred to herein as CALTRANS, and the CITY OF PINOLE, hereinafter referred to as AGENCY, will commence on April 15, 2026, or upon approval by CALTRANS, whichever occurs later. This RGA is of no effect unless approved by CALTRANS.
AGENCY shall not receive payment for work performed prior to approval of this RGA and before receipt of Notice to Proceed from CALTRANS. This RGA shall expire on November 30, 2027.
Recitals
1. Under this RGA, CALTRANS intends to convey State restricted grant funds to AGENCY, pursuant to Budget Act Line Item 2660-130-0001, who will implement the project pursuant to the attached Approved Grant Application and Amendment(s) to Grant Application, Attachment III under the terms, covenants, and conditions of this RGA.
2. CALTRANS and AGENCY intend that only funds that are authorized as restricted grants will be subject to this RGA, and that no funds that should be the subject of a Joint Powers Agreement, Interagency Agreement, or other non-grant agreement shall be subject to this RGA.
3. WHEREAS, the Clean CA Program, through its Clean CA Local Grants Program, is authorized under California Streets and Highways Code Section 91.41 to provide funding and resources to support local projects that advance the program's goals and objectives;
4. WHEREAS, California Streets and Highways Code Section 91.41 provides the legislative authority for the Clean CA Program to advance the following intent and objectives:
a. Reduce Waste and Beautify Public Spaces: The primary goal of the program is to allocate grants to local and regional public agencies, transit agencies, and tribal governments to reduce waste and debris within public rights-of-way, tribal lands, parks, pathways, transit centers, and other public spaces. The program aims to enhance, rehabilitate, restore, or install measures to beautify and improve these public spaces. b. Improve Public Health and Community Placemaking: The program seeks to enhance public health, cultural connection, and community placemaking by improving public spaces for walking and recreation. By investing in the improvement of these spaces, it aims to create a positive and welcoming environment for the community. c. Promote Equity for Underserved Communities: The program places a strong emphasis on advancing equity for underserved communities.
d. Support Sustainable Practices: The program encourages the implementation of sustainable practices in the beautification and enhancement of public spaces. This includes greening efforts, such as providing shade and reducing the urban heat island effect, as well as using native, low-water plants.
e. Engage Local Communities: The program promotes community engagement by requiring project proposals to reflect community priorities. It encourages the involvement of local communities in the development and selection of projects to ensure they meet the needs and preferences of the affected population.
f. Prohibit Displacement of Persons Experiencing Homelessness: The program prohibits
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
grants from funding projects that displace persons experiencing homelessness. This reflects the intention to address public space improvements without negatively impacting vulnerable populations.
g. Transparent and Efficient Grant Allocation: The program requires the program to issue a call for projects and announce grant awards. The guidelines for allocating grants must include project selection criteria and program evaluation metrics.
5. WHEREAS, the purpose of this RGA is to authorize Caltrans districts to enter into agreements with local agencies to support the development, implementation, and funding of local agencies partnership projects that align with the goals and priorities of the Clean CA Program and comply with California Streets and Highways Code Section 91.41;
6. WHEREAS, this RGA establishes a framework for Caltrans districts to provide financial contributions and other assistance to local agencies, fostering effective collaboration and coordination to deliver successful transit partnership projects;
7. WHEREAS, this RGA emphasizes transparency, objective evaluation, and fair allocation of resources, ensuring that projects scoring higher based on established criteria receive prioritization for funding and implementation;
8. WHEREAS, the Clean CA Program facilitates collaboration between Caltrans districts and local agencies to support litter abatement and public space beautification efforts on locally owned public right-of-way while creating workforce development opportunities for individuals facing barriers to employment that align with the goals and priorities of the Clean CA Program and comply with California Streets and Highways Code Section 91.41;
9. WHEREAS, the Clean CA Program, in partnership with Caltrans districts, seeks to enhance local right-of-way areas to address waste management challenges, graffiti mitigation, and public space beautification, thereby contributing to create cleaner, safer, and more equitable public spaces throughout California;
10. WHEREAS, the Clean CA Program, established by the State of California, is a transformative initiative which promotes sustainable transportation alternatives, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and combatting climate change to improve the overall quality of life for residents and visitors of California;
11. WHEREAS, the Clean CA Program envisions a comprehensive approach to address transportation challenges, enhance transit infrastructure, and support local agencies in their efforts to create efficient, safe, and environmentally friendly transit options;
12. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants herein contained, the Parties enter into this RGA to advance the purpose and intent of the Clean CA transit initiative, harnessing the legislative authority provided under California Streets and Highways Code Section 91.41, and collaborating on transit partnership projects that contribute to a sustainable, innovative, and well-connected transportation network throughout the State of California.
Now, Therefore, based upon the terms, covenants, and conditions of this RGA, the parties agree as follows:
Section I
AGENCY Agrees:
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
To timely and satisfactorily complete all Project work described in Attachment III (“Project Work”) within the project budget and in accordance with the items of this RGA.
Section ll
CALTRANS Agrees:
That when conducting an audit of the costs claimed by AGENCY under the provisions of this RGA, to conduct the audit in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
Section lII
It Is Mutually Agreed:
1. Under this RGA, CALTRANS will convey State grant restricted funds to AGENCY, pursuant to Budget Act Line Item 2660-130-0001, and AGENCY will use the funds to only conduct the scope of work identified in this agreement and authorized by Streets and Highway Code section 91.41 The funds subject to this RGA must be identified as available to a public entity that is responsible for implementing the scope of work authorized under the Clean California Program in CALTRANS’ budget, and AGENCY represents and warrants that it is a public entity that is responsible for implementing the scope of work authorized under the Clean California Program.
2. Under this restricted grant, funds may be only used for the purposes set forth in this RGA, AGENCY Resolution (Attachment IV), Approved Grant Application and Amendment(s) to Grant Application (Attachment III), and the Grant Program Guidelines (Attachment I), and the funds may only be used for costs and expenses that are directly related to such purpose.
3. AGENCY shall perform all the duties and obligations described in City of Pinole Creekside Park Phase 1: Creek Cleanup, Restoration & Community Employment, hereinafter “Project”, subject to the terms and conditions of this RGA and Approved Grant Application and Amendment(s) to Grant Application (Attachment III), which are attached hereto as Attachment III.
4. The resolution authorizing AGENCY to execute this RGA pertaining to the above-described Project is attached hereto as Attachment IV.
5. All services performed by AGENCY pursuant to this RGA shall be subject to and performed in accordance with California Streets and Highways Code §91.41 including, but not limited to, Government Code Section 14460(a)(1), as well as all applicable Federal, State, and Local laws, regulations, and ordinances, all applicable CALTRANS policies and procedures, and all applicable CALTRANS published manuals, including, but not limited to, the Grant Program Guidelines (Attachment I).
California Government Code Section 14460(a)(1) provides: “The department [CALTRANS], and external entities that receive state and federal transportation funds from the department, are spending those funds efficiently, effectively, economically, and in compliance with applicable state and Federal requirements. Those external entities include, but are not limited to, private for profit and nonprofit organizations, local transportation agencies, and other local agencies that receive transportation funds either through a contract with the department or through an agreement or grant administered by the department.”
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
6. Project funding is as follows:
Fund Title Fund Source Dollar Amount
Clean California Funds State General Fund (0001)
Budget Item 2660-130-0001
State Program Code
20.30.010.900
FY 2025/26 $299,494.56
Local Match/In-Kind $248,772.00
Total Project Costs $548,266.56
For Caltrans Use Only
I hereby Certify upon my own personal knowledge that budgeted funds are available for encumbrance.
Accounting Officer Printed
Name
Accounting Officer
Signature
Date Amount Certified
7. This RGA is exempt from the legal review and approval by the Department of General Services, pursuant to Legal Opinions of the Attorney General: 58 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 586 (1975), 63 Ops.
Cal. Atty. Gen. 290 (1980), 74 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 10 (1991), and 88 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 56.
8. Notification of Parties
a. AGENCY’s Project Manager for Project is Kapil Amin (510) 372-0989. b. CALTRANS’ District Partnership Liaison is Ida Tu (510) 496-9069. “District Partnership Liaison” as used herein includes his/her designee.
c. All notices herein provided to be given, or which may be given, by either party to the other, shall be deemed to have been fully given when made in writing and received by the parties at their respective addresses:
City of Pinole
Attention: Kapil Amin, Sustainability Project Manager
Phone Number: (510) 372-0989
Email: [email protected]
Address: 2131 Pear Street, Pinole, CA 94564
California Department of Transportation, District Partnership Liaison District 4 Clean California
Attention: Ida Tu, Clean CA Grant Manager
Phone Number: (510) 496-9069
Email: [email protected]
Address: 111 Grand Avenue, Oakland, CA 94612
Jie Chen 04/07/2026 $299,494.56
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
9. Period of Performance
a. Reimbursable work under this RGA shall begin no earlier than on April 15, 2026, following the written approval of CALTRANS and AGENCY’s receipt of the Notice to Proceed letter of this RGA by CALTRANS. All reimbursable work shall terminate no later than July 30, 2027.
Project closeout and final invoicing to CALTRANS must be submitted no later than November 30, 2027. Work incurred after July 30, 2027, will not be reimbursed. Payment shall be forfeit for any and all invoicing submitted to CALTRANS after November 30, 2027. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Caltrans will reimburse for actual close out costs incurred by AGENCY through November 30, 2027 (which, in total, shall not exceed 5% of the grant award). b. If requested by the CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison, AGENCY will attend a kickoff meeting with CALTRANS to be scheduled within one (1) week from receipt of Notice to Proceed sent by CALTRANS.
10. Changes in Terms/Amendments
This Agreement may only be amended or modified by mutual written agreement of the parties.
11. Cost Limitation
a. The maximum total amount granted and reimbursable to AGENCY pursuant to this RGA by CALTRANS shall not exceed $299,495.00.
b. It is agreed and understood that the Clean CA funds are limited to the amount granted.
CALTRANS will only reimburse the cost of services actually incurred in accordance with the provisions of this RGA and as authorized by the CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison at or below that fund limitation established herein.
12. Termination
a. CALTRANS reserves the right to terminate this RGA upon written notice to AGENCY at least 30 days in advance of the effective date of such termination in the event CALTRANS determines (at its sole discretion) that AGENCY failed to proceed with PROJECT Work in accordance with the terms of this RGA. In the event of termination for convenience, CALTRANS will reimburse AGENCY for all allowable, authorized, and non-cancelled costs up to the date of termination.
AGENCY shall return any unused advance amounts which cannot be supported by eligible expenditure documentation.
b. This RGA may be terminated by either party for any reason by giving written notice to the other party at least 30 days in advance of the effective date of such termination. In the event of termination for convenience, CALTRANS will reimburse AGENCY for all costs that are expressly allowable, pre-authorized in writing, and non-cancellable, up to the date of termination. c. AGENCY has 60 days after the Termination Date to submit accurate invoices to CALTRANS to make final allowable payments for Project costs in accordance with the terms of this RGA.
Failure to submit invoices within this period of time shall result in a waiver by AGENCY of its right to reimbursement of expended costs. Costs that are reimbursed and later determined to be ineligible for reimbursement shall be returned by AGENCY to CALTRANS.
13. Budget Contingency Clause
a. It is mutually agreed that if the US Congress or the State Legislature fail to appropriate or allocate funds during the current year and/or any subsequent years covered under this RGA do not appropriate sufficient funds for the program, this RGA shall be of no further force and effect.
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
In this event, CALTRANS shall have no liability to pay any funds whatsoever to AGENCY or to furnish any other considerations under this RGA and AGENCY shall not be obligated to perform any provisions of this RGA.
b. The certification of FY 2025/26 funds will be contingent upon the passage of the FY 2023/24 Budget. Payment for any work performed that is funded by FY 2023/24 will be delayed if the FY 2023/24 Budget is not signed by June 30, 2023. Pursuant to Government Code (GC), Section 926.10, no late payment penalty shall accrue during any time period for which no Budget Act in effect. If funding for any fiscal year is reduced or deleted by US Congress or State Legislature for purposes of this program, CALTRANS shall have the option to either terminate this RGA with no liability occurring to CALTRANS or offer an RGA Amendment to AGENCY to reflect reduced amount.
14. Payment and Invoicing
a. AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors and sub-recipients, shall establish and maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate incurred Project costs and matching funds by line. The accounting system of AGENCY, its contractors, all subcontractors, and sub-recipients shall conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) and any standards specified by the source of funds, to enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion, and to provide support for reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices.
b. The method of payment for this RGA will be based on the actual allowable costs that are incurred in accordance with the provisions of this RGA and in the performance of the Approved Grant Application and Amendment(s) to Grant Application (Attachment III). CALTRANS will reimburse AGENCY for expended actual allowable direct costs, and including, but not limited to, labor costs, travel, and contracted consultant services costs incurred by AGENCY in performance of the Project Work. Indirect costs are reimbursable only if the AGENCY has identified the estimated indirect cost rate in Attachment II and an approved Indirect Cost Allocation Plan or an Indirect Cost Rate Proposal as set forth in Section III–Cost Principles, Item 16d. The total cost shall not exceed the cost reimbursement limitation set forth in Section III–Cost Limitations, Item 11a. Actual costs shall not exceed the estimated wage rates, labor costs, travel, and other estimated costs and fees set forth in Attachment III without an amendment to this RGA, as agreed between CALTRANS and AGENCY. c. Reimbursement of AGENCY expenditures will be authorized only for those allowable costs actually incurred by AGENCY in accordance with the provisions of this RGA and in the performance of Project Work. AGENCY must not only have incurred the expenditures on or after the start date and the issuance of the Notice to Proceed letter for this RGA and before the Expiration Date but must have also paid for those costs to claim any reimbursement. d. The AGENCY indirect cost rate must be approved in writing by the California Department of Transportation Independent Office of Audits and Investigations or federal cognizant agency before any reimbursement payment is made by CALTRANS to AGENCY for such cost. e. Travel expenses and per diem rates are not to exceed the rate specified by the State of California Department of Human Resources for similar employees (i.e. non-represented employees) unless written verification is supplied that government hotel rates were not then commercially available to AGENCY, its subrecipients, contractors, and/or subcontractors, at the time and location required as specified in the California Department of Transportation's Travel Guide Exception Process at the following link: https://travelpocketguide.dot.ca.gov/.
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
Also see website for summary of travel reimbursement rules. f. AGENCY shall submit invoices to CALTRANS at least quarterly, but no more frequently than monthly, in arrears upon completion of project tasks, milestone and/or deliverables in accordance with the Project Timeline in Attachment III to the satisfaction of CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison
g. Invoices shall reference this RGA Number and shall be signed and submitted to CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison, as stated in Section III–Notification of Parties, Item 8c. h. Invoices shall include the following information:
1) Names of the AGENCY personnel performing work
2) Dates and times of Project Work
3) Locations of Project Work
4) Itemized costs as set forth in Attachment III, including identification of each employee, contractor or subcontractor staff who provided services during the period of the invoice, the number of hours and hourly rates for each employee, contractor, sub-recipient or subcontractor staff member, authorized travel expenses with receipts, receipts for authorized materials or supplies, and contractor, subrecipient and subcontractor invoices. 5) AGENCY shall submit written progress reports with each set of invoices to allow CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison to determine if AGENCY is performing to expectations, is on schedule, is within funding cost limitations, to communicate interim findings, and to afford occasions for airing difficulties respecting special problems encountered so that remedies can be developed.
i. Incomplete or inaccurate invoices shall be returned to the AGENCY unapproved for correction.
Failure to submit invoices on a timely basis may be grounds for termination of this RGA for material breach per Section III–Termination, Item 12.
j. CALTRANS will reimburse AGENCY for all allowable Project costs at least quarterly, but no more frequently than monthly, in arrears as promptly as CALTRANS fiscal procedures permit upon receipt of an itemized signed invoice.
k. The RGA Expiration Date refers to the last date for AGENCY to incur valid Project costs or credits and is the date this RGA expires. AGENCY has until July 30, 2027, to make final allowable payments to Project contractors or vendors, and November 30, 2027, to submit the Project’s Final Report, as defined in Attachment I and a final invoice to CALTRANS for reimbursement for allowable Project costs. Any unexpended Project funds not invoiced by the 60th day will be reverted and will no longer be accessible to reimburse late Project invoices contractor.
l. The final invoice will be paid upon submission by AGENCY to CALTRANS and acceptance by CALTRANS of the Final Delivery Report. Complete final delivery reports and invoices must be submitted to CALTRANS by November 30, 2027.
15. Quarterly Progress Reporting
a. AGENCY shall submit written quarterly progress reports to the CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison to determine if AGENCY is performing to expectations, is on schedule, is within funding cost limitations, to communicate interim findings, and to afford occasions for airing difficulties respecting special problems encountered so that remedies can be
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
developed.
16. Cost Principles
a. AGENCY agrees to comply with Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards.
b. AGENCY agrees, and will assure that its contractors, sub-recipients, in-kind contributors, and subcontractors will be obligated to agree, that (a) Contract Cost Principles and Procedures, 48 CFR, Federal Acquisition Regulations System, Chapter 1, Part 31, et seq., shall be used to determine the allowability of individual Project cost items and (b) and (b) all parties shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards.
Every sub-recipient receiving Project funds as a sub-recipient, contractor, or subcontractor under this RGA shall comply with Federal administrative procedures in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards to the extent applicable. c. Any Project costs for which AGENCY has received payment or credit that are determined by subsequent audit to be unallowable under 2 CFR, Part 200, and/or Part 48, Chapter 1, Part 31, are subject to repayment by AGENCY to CALTRANS. Should AGENCY fail to reimburse moneys due CALTRANS within 30 days of discovery or demand, or within such other period as may be agreed in writing between the parties hereto, CALTRANS is authorized to intercept and withhold future payments due AGENCY from CALTRANS or any third-party source, including, but not limited to, the State Treasurer, the State Controller or any other fund source.
d. Prior to AGENCY seeking reimbursement of indirect costs, AGENCY must have identified estimated indirect cost rate in Attachment II, prepare and submit annually to CALTRANS for review and approval an indirect cost rate proposal and a central service cost allocation plan (if any) in accordance with 2 CFR, Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards and Chapter 5 of the Local Assistance Procedures Manual which may be accessed at: https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dotmedia/programs/local-assistance/documents/lapm/ch05.pdf e. AGENCY agrees and shall require that all its agreements with consultants and subrecipients contain provisions requiring adherence to this section in its entirety except for section c, above.
17. Americans with Disabilities Act
By signing this Agreement, AGENCY assures CALTRANS that in the course of performing Project Work, it will fully comply with the applicable provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, as amended, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability, as well as all applicable regulations and guidelines issued pursuant to the ADA (42 USC Section 12101 et seq.).
18. Iran Contracting Act
AGENCY must complete and submit to CALTRANS the Iran Contracting Act Certification certifying that it is not on the most current DGS list of Entities Prohibited from Contracting with Public Entities in California per the Iran Contracting Act, 2010 (https://www.dgs.ca.gov/PD/Resources/PageContent/Procurement-Division-Resources-List-Folder/List-of-Ineligible-Businesses), before the
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
Agreement has been executed, unless Contractor is exempted from the certification requirement by Public Contract Code Section 2205(c) or (d). If claiming an exemption, the proposed Contractor shall provide written evidence that supports an exemption under Public Contract Code Section 2203(c) or (d) before execution of the Agreement.
19. Indemnification
a. Neither CALTRANS nor any officer or employee thereof is responsible for any injury, damage, or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by AGENCY, its officers, employees, agents, its contractors, its subrecipients, or its subcontractors under or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction conferred upon AGENCY under this RGA.
It is understood and agreed that AGENCY shall fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless CALTRANS and all of CALTRANS’ officers and employees from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description brought forth under, including, but not limited to, tortuous, contractual, likeness statutes under California Civil Code §§ 3344 and 3344.1, inverse condemnation, or other theories or assertions of liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by AGENCY, its officers, employees, agents, contractors, subrecipients, or subcontractors under this RGA.
b. AGENCY agrees to fully defend, indemnify, and save harmless CALTRANS and all of its officers and employees from any and all claims, lawsuits, or legal actions, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and legal costs, relating to intellectual property claims arising from or related to the Project and/or any work procured under this RGA, including but not limited to claims based on (1) U.S. federal or state trademark infringement laws, (2) patent infringement laws (3) 17 U.S.C. §§ 101-810 (the Copyright Act of 1976, as modified), (4) 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a) (the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990, “VARA”), (5) 17 U.S.C. § 113, (6) California Civil Code § 987 (the California Art Preservation Act), California Civil Code §989, or (7) any other rights arising under U.S. federal or state laws or under the laws of any other country that conveys rights and protections of the same nature as those conveyed under 17 U.S.C. §106A(a) and California Civil Code §987, including intellectual property claims arising from or related to breach of contract, inverse condemnation, conversion, and/or taking of property.
20. Nondiscrimination Clause (2 CCR 11105 Clause b)
a. During the performance of this RGA, the AGENCY, its contractors, its subrecipients, and its subcontractors shall not deny the contract's benefits to any person on the basis of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status, nor shall they discriminate unlawfully against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status. AGENCY shall ensure that the evaluation and treatment of employees and applicants for employment are free of such discrimination. b. AGENCY shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Gov. Code Sections 12900 et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Sections 11000 et seq.), the provisions of Article 9.5, Chapter 1, Part 1,
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
Division 3, Title 2 of the Government Code (Gov. Code Sections 11135-11139.5), and the regulations or standards adopted by CALTRANS to implement such article. c. AGENCY shall permit access by representatives of the Department of Fair Employment and Housing and CALTRANS upon reasonable notice at any time during the normal business hours, but in no case less than 24 hours' notice, to such of its books, records, accounts, and all other sources of information and its facilities as said Department or CALTRANS shall require to ascertain compliance with this clause.
d. AGENCY and its contractors, its sub-recipients, and its subcontractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement.
e. AGENCY shall include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all agreements with its sub-recipients, contractors, and subcontractors, and shall include a requirement in all agreements with all of same that each of them in turn include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all contracts and subcontracts they enter into to perform work under this RGA.
21. Retention of Records/Audits
a. AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and sub-recipients, agree to comply with Title 2, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Part 200, Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards.
b. AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors, and sub-recipients shall establish and maintain an accounting system and records that properly accumulate and segregate incurred Project costs and matching funds by line. The accounting system of AGENCY, its contractors, all subcontractors, and sub-recipients shall conform to Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), enable the determination of incurred costs at interim points of completion, and provide support for reimbursement payment vouchers or invoices. All accounting records and other supporting papers of AGENCY, its contractors, subcontractors and sub-recipients connected with Project performance under this RGA shall be maintained for a minimum of three (3) years from the date of final payment to AGENCY and shall be held open to inspection, copying, and audit by representatives of CALTRANS, the California State Auditor, and auditors representing the federal government. Copies thereof will be furnished by AGENCY, its contractors, its subcontractors, and sub-recipients upon receipt of any request made by CALTRANS or its agents. In conducting an audit of the costs and match credits claimed under this RGA, CALTRANS will rely to the maximum extent possible on any prior audit of AGENCY pursuant to the provisions of State and AGENCY law. In the absence of such an audit, any acceptable audit work performed by AGENCY’s external and internal auditors may be relied upon and used by CALTRANS when planning and conducting additional audits. c. For the purpose of determining compliance with applicable State and AGENCY law in connection with the performance of AGENCY’s contracts with third parties pursuant to Government Code Section 8546.7, AGENCY, AGENCY’s sub-recipients, contractors, subcontractors, and CALTRANS, shall each maintain and make available for inspection all books, documents, papers, accounting records, and other evidence pertaining to the performance of such contracts, including, but not limited to, the costs of administering those various contracts. All of the above referenced parties shall make such materials available at their respective offices at all reasonable times during the entire Project period and for three (3) years from the date of final payment to AGENCY under this RGA. CALTRANS, the
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
California State Auditor, or any duly authorized representative of CALTRANS or the United States Department of Transportation, shall each have access to any books, records, and documents that are pertinent to a Project for audits, examinations, excerpts, and transactions, and AGENCY shall furnish copies thereof if requested. d. AGENCY, its subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors will permit access to all records of employment, employment advertisements, employment application forms, and other pertinent data and records by the State Fair Employment Practices and Housing Commission, or any other agency of the State of California designated by CALTRANS, for the purpose of any investigation to ascertain compliance with this RGA.
e. Additionally, all grants may be subject to a pre-award audit prior to execution of this RGA to ensure AGENCY has an adequate financial management system in place to accumulate and segregate reasonable, allowable and allocable costs.
f. Any contract with a contractor, subcontractor, or sub-recipient entered into as a result of this RGA shall contain all the provisions of this article.
22. Adjudication of Facts in Disputes
a. Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this RGA that is not disposed of by agreement shall be decided by the CALTRANS Contract Officer, who may consider any written or verbal evidence submitted by AGENCY. The CALTRANS Contract Officer shall issue a written decision within 30 days of receipt of the dispute. If AGENCY rejects the decision of the CALTRANS Contract Officer, AGENCY can pursue any and all remedies authorized by law. Neither party waives any rights to pursue remedies authorized by law.
b. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by CALTRANS Contract Officer will excuse AGENCY from full and timely performance in accordance with the terms of this RGA.
23. Third-Party Contracts
a. AGENCY shall perform the work contemplated with resources available within its own organization and no portion of the work shall be contracted to a third party without prior written authorization by the CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison unless expressly included (subrecipient identified) in Attachment III as Project Work. b. All State-government-funded procurements must be conducted using a fair and competitive procurement process. AGENCY may use its own procurement procedures as long as the procedures comply with the local AGENCY’s laws, rules, and ordinances governing procurement and all applicable provisions of State law, including, without limitation, the requirement that the AGENCY endeavor to obtain at least three (3) competitive bids for solicitation of goods, services, and consulting services (see Part 2, Chapter 2, Articles 3 and 4 of the Public Contract Code); a qualifications-based solicitation process, for which statements of qualifications are obtained from at least three (3) qualified firms for architecture and engineering services (see Title 1, Division 5, Chapter 10 of the Government Code); and, the applicable provisions of the State Contracting Manual (SCM), Chapter 5, which are not inconsistent with this Item 23, Third Party Contracts. The SCM can be found and the following link: https://www.dgs.ca.gov/OLS/Resources/PageContent/Office-of-Legal-Services-Resources-List-Folder/State-Contracting.
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
c. Any contract entered into as a result of this RGA shall contain all the provisions stipulated in this RGA to be applicable to AGENCY’s sub-recipients, contractors, and subcontractors.
Copies of all agreements with sub-recipients, contractors, and subcontractors, must be submitted to the CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison. d. CALTRANS does not have a contractual relationship with the AGENCY’s subrecipients, contractors, or subcontractors, and the AGENCY shall be fully responsible for all work performed by its subrecipients, contractors, or subcontractors. e. Prior authorization in writing by the CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison shall be required before AGENCY enters into any non-budgeted sub-agreement. AGENCY shall provide an evaluation of the necessity or desirability of incurring such costs. AGENCY shall retain all receipts for such purchases or services and shall submit them with invoices per Section III–Payment and Invoicing, Item 14(h)(4), above. f. Any contract entered into by AGENCY as a result of this RGA shall mandate that travel and per diem reimbursements and third-party contract reimbursements to subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors, will be allowable as Project costs only after those costs are incurred and paid for by the subrecipients, contractors, and subcontractors. Travel expenses and per diem rates for subcontractors shall be reimbursed pursuant to Section III–Payment and Invoicing, Item 14c, above.
24. Drug-Free Workplace Certification
By signing this RGA, AGENCY hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of California that AGENCY will comply with the requirements of the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Gov. Code Sections 8350 et seq.) and will provide a Drug-Free workplace by doing all of the following:
a. Publish a statement notifying employees that unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensation, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited and specifying actions to be taken against employees for violations, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a). b. Establish a Drug-Free Awareness Program as required by Government Code Section 8355(a)(2) to inform employees about all of the following:
1) The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace.
2) The person's or organization's policy of maintaining a Drug-Free workplace. 3) Any available counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs. 4) Penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations. c. Provide, as required by Government Code Section 8355(a)(3), that every employee who works on the proposed contract or grant:
1) Will receive a copy of the company's Drug-Free policy statement. 2) Will agree to abide by the terms of the company's statement as a condition of employment on the contract or grant.
d. Failure to comply with these requirements may result in suspension of payments under this RGA or termination of this RGA or both, and AGENCY may be ineligible for the award of any future state contracts if CALTRANS determines that any of the following has occurred: (1) AGENCY has made a false certification or, (2) AGENCY violates the certification by failing to
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
carry out the requirements as noted above.
25. Relationship of Parties
It is expressly understood that this agreement is executed by and between two (2) independent governmental entities and is not intended to, and shall not be construed to, create the relationship of agent, servant, employee, partnership, joint venture or association, or any other relationship whatsoever other than that of an independent party.
26. State-Owned Data
a. AGENCY agrees to comply with the following requirements to ensure the preservation, security, and integrity of State-owned data on portable computing devices and portable electronic storage media:
1) Encrypt all State-owned data stored on portable computing devices and portable electronic storage media using government-certified Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) cipher algorithm with a 256-bit or 128-bit encryption key to protect CALTRANS data stored on every sector of a hard drive, including temp files, cached data, hibernation files, and even unused disk space.
2) Data encryption shall use cryptographic technology that has been tested and approved against exacting standards, such as FIPS 140-2 Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules.
3) Encrypt, as described above, all State-owned data transmitted from one computing device or storage medium to another.
4) Maintain confidentiality of all State-owned data by limiting data sharing to those individuals contracted to provide services on behalf of the State, and limit use of State information assets for State purposes only.
5) Install and maintain current anti-virus software, security patches, and upgrades on all computing devices used during the course of the Agreement. 6) Notify the CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison immediately of any actual or attempted violations of security of State-owned data, including lost or stolen computing devices, files, or portable electronic storage media containing State-owned data. 7) Advise the owner of the State-owned data, the AGENCY Information Security Officer, and the AGENCY Chief Information Officer of vulnerabilities that may present a threat to the security of State-owned data and of specific means of protecting that State-owned data. b. AGENCY agrees to use the State-owned data only for State purposes under this Agreement. c. AGENCY agrees to not transfer State-owned data to any computing system, mobile device, or desktop computer without first establishing the specifications for information integrity and security as established for the original data file(s) (State Administrative Manual (SAM) Section 5335.1).
27. CALTRANS’ Use of “Before” and “After” Project Photographs a. AGENCY acknowledges it provided a “Before” photograph of the Project with the AGENCY’s application for the Clean California Local Grant Program. AGENCY acknowledges and agrees it must provide an “After” photograph of the Project as part of the close out reporting process. b. AGENCY warrants it is the copyright owner of the “Before” and “After” Project photographs. c. Neither the “Before” nor “After” Project photographs shall include the faces of any
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
individuals.
d. AGENCY grants to CALTRANS an irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free, sublicensable, unlimited, worldwide license to prepare derivative works, make, publish, display, and distribute two-dimensional reproductions and/or copies, digitally and in print, of the “Before” and “After” Project photographs, or derivatives thereof, for non-commercial purposes or any State government purposes. This includes, but is not limited to, reproductions used in brochures, media publicity, public outreach campaigns (including television and social media campaigns), education, and exhibition catalogues or other similar publication. e. When applicable, AGENCY shall obtain and provide to CALTRANS any and all documentation CALTRANS reasonably determines is necessary or desirable to perfect the license described in this RGA to CALTRANS. This documentation shall be provided to CALTRANS within fifteen (15) days of written notice that this documentation is required.
28. Limited Grant of Rights to CALTRANS for Use of Educational Programming (“educational programming”) Created or Produced for Project and Visual Art Located Outside of State Right-ofWay (“Artwork”) Created or Produced for Project a. Educational programming:
i. AGENCY shall obtain from any and all copyright owner(s) of educational programming a sublicensable, irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free, unlimited, worldwide license to prepare derivative works, make, publish, display, and distribute two-dimensional reproductions and/or copies, digitally and in print, of the educational programming created or produced for Project under this RGA, or derivatives thereof, for non-commercial purposes or any State government purposes. This includes, but is not limited to, reproductions used in brochures, media publicity, public outreach campaigns (including television and social media campaigns), education, exhibition catalogues or other similar publication. AGENCY shall obtain any and all other intellectual property rights necessary to make this grant to CALTRANS as described in this RGA.
ii. AGENCY grants to CALTRANS an irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free, sublicensable, unlimited, worldwide license to prepare derivative works, make, publish, display, and distribute two-dimensional reproductions and/or copies, digitally and in print, of the educational programming created or produced for Project under this RGA, or derivatives thereof, for non-commercial purposes or any State government purposes. This includes, but is not limited to, reproductions used in brochures, media publicity, public outreach campaigns (including television and social media campaigns), education, and exhibition catalogues or other similar publication.
iii. When applicable, AGENCY shall obtain and provide to CALTRANS any and all documentation CALTRANS reasonably determines is necessary or desirable to perfect the license or sublicense described in this RGA to CALTRANS. This documentation shall be provided to CALTRANS within fifteen (15) days of written notice that this documentation is required.
iv. To the extent any logos, including trademarks or service marks, belonging to third parties and/or the AGENCY are used on educational programming created or produced for Project under this RGA, AGENCY agrees to obtain and grant all necessary rights for CALTRANS to use and allow agents of CALTRANS to use the logos in connection with use of the educational programming for non-commercial purposes or State government purposes. This includes but is not limited to reproductions used in brochures, media publicity, public outreach
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
campaigns (including television and social media campaigns), education and exhibition catalogues or other similar publication. This documentation shall be provided to CALTRANS within fifteen (15) days of written notice that this documentation is required. b. Artwork:
i. AGENCY shall obtain from the artist(s), or any other copyright owner(s) of Artwork, a sublicensable, irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free, unlimited, worldwide license to prepare derivative works, make, publish, display, and distribute two-dimensional reproductions and/or copies, digitally and in print, of Artwork created or produced for Project under this RGA, or derivatives thereof, for non-commercial purposes or any State government purposes. This includes, but is not limited to, reproductions used in brochures, media publicity, public outreach campaigns (including television and social media campaigns), education, and exhibition catalogues or other similar publication. AGENCY shall obtain any and all other intellectual property rights necessary to make this grant to CALTRANS as described in this RGA.
ii. AGENCY grants to CALTRANS an irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free, sublicensable, unlimited, worldwide license to prepare derivative works, make, publish, display, and distribute two-dimensional reproductions and/or copies, digitally and in print, of Artwork created or produced for Project under this RGA, or derivatives thereof, for non-commercial purposes or any State government purposes. This includes, but is not limited to, reproductions used in brochures, media publicity, public outreach campaigns (including television and social media campaigns), education, and exhibition catalogues or other similar publication.
iii. AGENCY shall obtain and provide to CALTRANS any and all documentation CALTRANS reasonably determines is necessary or desirable to perfect the license or sublicense described in this RGA to CALTRANS. This documentation shall be provided to CALTRANS within fifteen (15) days of written notice that this documentation is required.
29. Government Purpose Rights for Inventions
a. Inventions are any idea, methodologies, design, concept, technique, invention, discovery, improvement or development regardless of patentability made solely by AGENCY or jointly with the AGENCY’s contractor, subcontractor and/or subrecipient during the term of this RGA and in performance of any work under this RGA, provided that either the conception or reduction to practice thereof occurs during the term of this RGA and in performance of work issued under this RGA.
b. CALTRANS will have Government Purpose Rights to any inventions created as a result of the Project. “Government Purpose Rights” are the unlimited, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual, royalty-free, non-exclusive rights, and licenses to use, modify, reproduce, perform, release, display, create derivative works from, and disclose any said invention. “Government Purpose Rights” also include the right to release or disclose said invention(s) outside CALTRANS for any State government purpose and to authorize recipients to use, modify, reproduce, perform, release, display, create derivative works from, and disclose the invention(s) for any State government purpose. “Government Purpose Rights” do not include any rights to use, modify, reproduce, perform, release, display, create derivative works from, or disclose the invention(s)
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
for any commercial purpose.
30. Additional Intellectual Property Provisions
a. To the extent any intellectual property is created or produced for Project under this RGA, and not covered in other provisions of this RGA, AGENCY agrees to take reasonable steps to ensure that CALTRANS has the rights necessary to allow for use of the intellectual property in a fashion substantially similar to other rights for non-commercial uses and State government purposes described in this RGA.
b. If additional uses are reasonably determined to be needed by CALTRANS for public outreach purposes, AGENCY will obtain rights and grant CALTRANS and its agents said additional rights for use of the “Before” and “After” Project photos, Artwork created or produced for Project under this RGA, and educational programming created or produced for Project under this RGA.
The grant will be an irrevocable, non-exclusive, perpetual, royalty-free, sublicensable, unlimited, worldwide license.
c. When requested to so do by AGENCY, all reproductions and/or copies by CALTRANS of “Before” or “After” Project photographs, educational programming, and Artwork shall contain a credit to the Artist/ Copyright owner(s) and a copyright notice in substantially the following form:
© [Artist/Copyright owner’s name, date of publication]. AGENCY bears sole responsibility to promptly notify CALTRANS, in writing, about instances where such accreditation is requested and provide the Artist/ Copyright owner’s name and date of publication. CALTRANS will make reasonable efforts to affix the copyright notice in a timely manner. d. Required disclaimer language for educational programming and Artwork created or produced for Project under this RGA.
i. Educational programming: AGENCY must place a disclaimer statement in a conspicuous manner on the educational programming created or produced for Project under this RGA a disclaimer that states the content of the educational programming does not reflect the official views or policies of CALTRANS. The educational programming does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation.
ii. Artwork: AGENCY must place a disclaimer statement in a conspicuous manner on or in close proximately to the Artwork created or produced for Project under this RGA a disclaimer statement that the contents of the artwork do not reflect the official views or policies of CALTRANS.
e. Avoidance of Infringement: In performing work under this RGA, AGENCY and its employees agree to avoid designing or developing any items that infringe one or more patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party. If AGENCY or its employees becomes aware of any such possible infringement in the course of performing any work under this RGA, AGENCY or its employees shall immediately notify CALTRANS in writing. f. Contractors, Subcontractors, and Subrecipients: Through contract with its sub-recipients, contractors, and subcontractors, AGENCY shall affirmatively bind by contract all of its contractors, subcontractors, subrecipients, and service vendors (hereinafter “AGENCY’s Contractor/Subcontractor/Subrecipient”) providing services under this RGA to conform to the provisions of paragraphs 31-33 of this RGA. In performing services under this RGA, AGENCY’s Contractor/Subcontractor/Subrecipient shall agree to avoid designing or developing any items that infringe one (1) or more patents or other intellectual property rights of any third party. If AGENCY’s Contractor/Subcontractor/Subrecipient becomes aware of any such possible
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
infringement in the course of performing any work under this RGA, AGENCY’s Contractor/Subcontractor/Subrecipient shall immediately notify the AGENCY in writing, and AGENCY will then immediately notify CALTRANS in writing.
31. Visual Art Located on California State Right-of-Way AGENCY agrees if Project involves visual art located on California State right-of-way, Project must be submitted and adhere to CALTRANS’ most current Transportation Art Proposal process, policies, guidelines, and requirements. Information regarding CALTRANS’ Transportation Art program can be found at https://dot.ca.gov/programs/design/lap-landscape-architecture-andcommunity-livability/lap-liv-j-transportation-art. AGENCY bears sole responsibility for ensuring that any Project will be timely submitted through CALTRANS’ Transportation Art Proposal process, approved, and installed prior to any deadlines as required by this RGA. a. AGENCY acknowledges that funds provided by CALTRANS under this RGA shall not be used for maintenance outside of the project time limits as provided in this RGA. b. AGENCY acknowledges that the CALTRANS’ Transportation Art Proposal process requires, among other things, CALTRANS ownership of any tangible visual final artwork, an unlimited, irrevocable copyright assignment to CALTRANS of the final artwork, and waiver of moral rights under California Civil Code § 987 (the California Art Preservation Act) and 17 U.S.C. § 106A(a) (the Visual Artists Rights Act of 1990, “VARA”) of the final artwork. c. AGENCY acknowledges that any submittal to the CALTRANS’ Transportation Art Proposal process includes restrictions on the type of work that can be located on California State right-ofway.
32. Assumption of Risk and Indemnification Regarding Exposure to Environmental Health Hazards In addition to, and not a limitation of, AGENCY’s indemnification obligations contained elsewhere in this Agreement, AGENCY hereby assumes all risks of the consequences of exposure of AGENCY’s employees, agents, Subcontractors, Subcontractors’ employees, and any other person, firm, or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement, to any and all environmental health hazards, local and otherwise, in connection with the performance of this Agreement. Such hazards include, but are not limited to, bodily injury and/or death resulting in whole or in part from exposure to infectious agents and/or pathogens of any type, kind or origin. AGENCY also agrees to take all appropriate safety precautions to prevent any such exposure to AGENCY’s employees, agents, Subcontractors, Subcontractors’ employees, and any other person, firm or corporation furnishing or supplying work services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement. AGENCY also agrees to indemnify and hold harmless CALTRANS, the State of California, and each and all of their officers, agents and employees, from any and all claims and/or losses accruing or resulting from such exposure. Except as provided by law, AGENCY also agrees that the provisions of this paragraph shall apply regardless of the existence or degree of negligence or fault on the part of CALTRANS, the State of California, and/or any of their officers, agents and/or employees.
33. Mandatory Organic Waste Recycling
It is understood and agreed that pursuant to Public Resources Code Sections 42649.8 et seq., if AGENCY or its subcontractor generates two (2) cubic yards or more of organic waste or commercial solid waste per week, AGENCY or its subcontractor shall arrange for organic waste or commercial waste recycling services that separate/source organic waste for organic waste
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
recycling. AGENCY shall provide proof of compliance, i.e. organic waste recycling services or commercial waste recycling services that separate/source organic waste recycling, upon request from CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison
34. Project Close Out/Closeout Report
a. AGENCY will provide a final close out report to the CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison no later than November 30, 2027.
CALTRANS reserves the right to inspect the project location prior to approving the final invoice and closeout report.
b. CALTRANS reserves the right to withhold final payment to AGENCY pending receipt and approval of the final closeout report by the CALTRANS District Partnership Liaison. c. Payments shall be forfeit if invoices are submitted after November 30, 2027.
35. ADA Compliance
All entities that provide electronic or information technology or related services that will be posted online by CALTRANS must be in compliance with Government Code Sections 7405 and 11135 and the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 or subsequent version, published by the Web Accessibility Initiative of the World Wide Web Consortium at a minimum Level AA success. All entities will respond to and resolve any complaints/deficiencies regarding accessibility brought to their attention.
36. Prevailing Wages and Labor Code Compliance
AGENCY shall comply with any and all applicable labor and prevailing wage requirements in Labor Code Sections 1720 through 1815 and implementing regulations for any public works or maintenance contracts and subcontracts executed for the AGENCY’s work on or for the Project.
37. In the event of any inconsistency between the provisions which constitute this RGA, the following order of precedence shall apply:
I. This Restricted Grant Agreement (as amended);
II. The CALTRANS Local Grant Program Guidelines;
III. Approved Indirect Cost Rate (if applicable);
IV. Approved Grant Application (as amended); and
V. AGENCY Resolution.
38. Survival
AGENCY’s representations, the indemnification provisions in paragraph 21, intellectual property provisions in paragraphs 30, 31, 32, and 33, and all other provisions which by their inherent character establish ongoing obligations shall remain in full force and effect, regardless of any expiration and/or termination of this RGA.
39. Sanctions
No agreements under this RGA shall be made with individuals and/or entities that are determined to be a target of sanctions by the State of California while such sanctions are in
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
effect.
Section IV
Attachments:
The following attachments are incorporated into and are made a part of this RGA by this reference and attached hereto.
I. Clean CA Community Cleanup and Employment Pathway (CCEP) Grant Program Guidelines II. Approved Indirect Cost Rate (if applicable)
III. Approved Grant Application and Amendment(s) to Grant Application (if applicable) IV. AGENCY Resolution (if applicable)
City of Pinole
Agreement Number 04-CCEP-06
AMS ADV ID: 0426000314
Project Number: CCEP-5126(023)
In Witness Whereof, the parties hereto have executed this RGA on the day and year first herein above written:
AGENCY NAME
City of Pinole
By:
Printed Name:
Garrett Evans
Title:
Interim City Manager
Date:
CALTRANS DISTRICT PARTNERSHIP LIAISON
CLEAN CALIFORNIA PROGRAM
By:
Printed Name:
Ida Tu
Title:
Clean CA Grant Manager
Date:
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
CLEAN CALIFORNIA PROGRAM
By:
Printed Name:
Walter Yu
Title:
Clean California Program Director
Date:
PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED Pinole Creek Places of Interest
National Geographic, Esri, Garmin, HERE, UNEP-WCMC, USGS, NASA, ESA, METI, NRCAN, GEBCO, NOAA, increment P Corp.
May 1, 2023 0 2 4 8 mi
0 3 6 12 km
1:288,895
8 miles
SAN PABLO BAY
PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED
1 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025 The Pinole Creek Watershed is an unique watershed
whose waters flow through the East Bay hills and the town of Pinole before entering the San Pablo Bay. Historically, the creek was home to native anadromous steelhead trout that nested in the upper watershed. The upper watershed remains relatively undeveloped and with the completion
of several major projects, steelhead are returning.
However, as Pinole has grown, so have threats to Pinole Creek’s environmental health*.
As Pinole Creek flows down to San Pablo Bay, it picks up a disheartening amount of trash due to littering and illegal dumping of household trash and larger items such as
furniture and vehicle tires*.
The Creek offers opportunities to increase social and
ecological connectivity along its entire length, inviting the people of Pinole to celebrate the water, the riparian
vegetation and the rainbow trouts!
*Text from Friends of Pinole Creek Watershed website
PINOLE CREEK | EXISTING CONDITIONS + OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOCIAL AND ECOLOGICAL CONNECTIVITY
NATIVE PLANTING
GA
R
D
E
N
0.6 miles
HIGHWAY 80
SAN PABLO BAY
FERNANDEZ
PARK
SALMON PASSAGE
DOWNSTREAM
RIPARIAN VEGETATIO
N
2 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 BAYFRONT PARK
FERNANDEZ PARK
COLLINS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
MALL
PINOLE VALLEY HIGH SCHOOL
PINOLE LIBRARY
PINOLE SWIMMING POOL
SAVAGE AVENUE PARK
ELLERHORST ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
PINOLE DOG PARK
PINOLE VALLEY PARK
PINOLE SKATE PARK
PINOLE VALLEY PARK TRAILS
SOBRANTE RIDGE REGIONAL PARK
SOBRANTE RIDGE REGIONAL PRESERVE
BAY AREA RIDGE TRAILHEAD
OPPORTUNITIES FOR SOCIAL AND
ECOLOGICAL CONNECTIVITY
OPPORTUNITIES FOR CONNECTIVITY
RIPARIAN VEGETATION
PINOLE TOWN
SCOPE OF WORK
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
12 13
13 14
15 16
14 15
16
PINOLE CREEK | COMMUNITY INPUT AND PROGRAM PREFERENCES
POLLINATOR GARDEN
EDUCATIONAL SIGNAG
E
TRASH & RECYCLING
BIN
S
WATER LOG
ART
LIGHTING
COMMUNITY BOARD
BENCHES
MINI WATER FRONT
PICNIC TABLES
SHADE
BOULDERS
STUMPS
NEW BRIDGE
3 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025
PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPT PLAN
1 PINOLE VALLEY
HIGH SCHOOL
MALL
1 1
PINOLE VALLEY ROAD
4 1 2
5 8
6 7
7 5
9 3
6 PINOLE CREEK
ENTRANCE 1
ENTRANCE 2
ENTRANCE 3
SARAH
COURT
PATH
2 9
9 4 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
HIGLIGHTED ENTRANCE:
OVERHEAD WOODEN
TRELLIS PLANTED WITH VINES
OR SCULPTURE
WOODEN BRIDGE
PICNIC AREA
HABITAT RESTORATION
PARK TREAD TRAIL
FENCE WITH ART
ART EXPRESSION OF CREEK
AND SALMON
SIGNAGE
TRASH BINS
LIGHTING ALONG THE TRAIL
KEY AND PRIORITIES
4 3
3 3
8 8
PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPT PLAN - ENTRANCE 1
PARK TREAD
(E) RIPARIAN VEGETATION
MEADOW
PINOLE VALLEY
HIGH SCHOOL 1
PINOLE VALLEY ROAD
2 3 4
5 6
5 PINOLE CREEK
5 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025 LEGEND
7 1
ENTRANCE
2 LOG/STUMP/
BOULDER EDGE
3 4
PICNIC TABLE
TRASH BINS
5 6 7
ART SIGNAGE LIGHTING
PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPT PLAN - PATH
PARK TREAD
(E) RIPARIAN VEGETATION
MEADOW
PINOLE VALLEY
HIGH SCHOOL
1 2
3 PINOLE CREEK
6 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025 LEGEND
1 SHADE
2 LIGHTING
3 ART ON FENCE
PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPT PLAN - ENTRANCE 1
PROPOSED INTERVENTIONS
EXISTING
MEADOW
PLANTING
PARK TREAD TRAIL
SALMON ART
ON FENCE
LIGHTING
ART
SHADE
LOCATION
PINOLE VALLEY
HIGH SCHOOL
MEADOW
PLANTING
7 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025
PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPT PLAN - ENTRANCE 2
PARK TREAD
(E) RIPARIAN VEGETATION
MEADOW
(E) ASPHALT
PINOLE VALLEY
HIGH SCHOOL
1 2
3 4
5 6
PINOLE CREEK
MALL 5
5 6
8 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025 LEGEND
7 2
STUMP EDGING
3 4
PICNIC TABLE
TRASH BINS
5 6
7 ART SIGNAGE
LIGHTING
8 9
10 WATER LOG BOULDERS
COMMUNITY
BOARD
9 8
10 11
ENTRANCE
11 12
WOODEN
BRIDGE
12 1
WATER FRONT
PROPOSED INTERVENTIONS
PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPT PLAN - ENTRANCE 2
EXISTING
LOCATION
PINOLE VALLEY
HIGH SCHOOL
WOODEN BRIDGE
BOULDERS
ART
WATER FRONT
PARK TREAD TRAIL
LIGHTING
PICNIC
TABLES
9 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025
WOODEN
BRIDGE
ENTRANCE
OVERHEAD
TRELLIS
PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPT PLAN - ENTRANCE 2
EXISTING
LOCATION
PROPOSED INTERVENTIONS
SIGNAGE
ART
10 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025
PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPT PLAN - ENTRANCE 3
(E) ASPHALT
(E) RIPARIAN VEGETATION
MEADOW
SARAH COURT
1 2
3 4
5 6
PINOLE CREEK
4 11 PINOLE CREEKSIDE PARK CONCEPTUAL DESIGN
CITY OF PINOLE, FRIENDS OF PINOLE CREEK WATERSHED 28 APRIL 2025 LEGEND
1 ENTRANCE
3 TRASH BINS
2 SIGNAGE
4 ART
5 COMMUNITY BOARD
6 LIGHTING
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.G.
DATE: APRIL 21, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director, [email protected] SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRA COSTA CLEAN WATER PROGRAM AGREEMENT (JULY 1, 2026 – JUNE 30, 2041)
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the amended and restated Contra Costa Clean Water Program Agreement effective as of July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2041.
BACKGROUND
Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) requires that stormwater discharges in urbanized areas be regulated by a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP) is comprised of the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, Clayton, Concord, El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Oakley, Orinda, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek; the towns of Danville and Moraga; and the county of Contra Costa and Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District are joint permittees under the Municipal Regional Permit.
The joint permittees are Parties to the Agreement, under the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit (No. CAS612008). The current joint Program Agreement has expired and is being replaced with a new, amended and restated Agreement effective July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2041. Due to the expiration of the prior agreement, the CCCWP has continued operating on a month-to-month basis, maintaining existing provisions and program responsibilities to ensure ongoing compliance with the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit until a new long-term agreement is approved.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The CCCWP was established in 1991 to enable Contra Costa County, its cities, and the Flood Control District to jointly comply with stormwater regulations under the NPDES permit. Over the years, the Program Agreement has been periodically updated to reflect evolving regulatory requirements. Since January 2025, CCCWP Management Committee has reviewed a draft renewal agreement that introduces updates to administrative processes, committee structures, and compliance frameworks. Additionally, the amended and restated agreement for July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2041, outlines long-term obligations, cost-sharing formulas, and governance provisions for all co-permittees.
Key updates in the amended agreement include:
• Administrative and Contracting Updates: Aligning contracting processes with Contra Costa County procurement standards and clarifying indemnification provisions. • Committee Structure: Introducing tiered participation based on population size and formalizing roles for sub-committees such as Monitoring, Development, Public Information, and Regional Alternative Compliance (RAC). • Termination and Continuity: Revised withdrawal procedures and a provision allowing the expired agreement to remain in effect until renewal is executed, ensuring uninterrupted compliance.
• Program Staffing Flexibility: Options for staff augmentation to minimize operational disruptions.
• Cost Allocation: Future program costs will be apportioned based on population using a standardized formula.
Should the City Council decline approving participation in the amended agreement, the City will have to secure independent NPDES permit coverage and assume full compliance responsibilities.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no immediate fiscal impact. Future costs will be allocated proportionally based on population as outlined in the Agreement’s cost-sharing formula. The Stormwater Utility Assessment (SUA) budget will continue to offset program costs for participating agencies.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. CCCWP Agreement
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-___
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE,
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED CONTRA
COSTA CLEAN WATER PROGRAM AGREEMENT
EFFECTIVE JULY 1, 2026, THROUGH JUNE 30, 2041
WHEREAS, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (Clean Water Act) requires that stormwater discharges in urbanized areas be regulated by a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit; and
WHEREAS, in California, the Federal NPDES stormwater permit program is administered and enforced by the State Water Resources Control Board through the nine (9) Regional Water Quality Control Boards (Water Boards); and WHEREAS, the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (SFRWQCB) is charged with making critical water quality decisions, including setting standards, issuing waste discharge requirements and NPDES permits, determining compliance and enforcing requirements for nine counties including Contra Costa; and WHEREAS, the Contra Costa Clean Water Program (CCCWP) is comprised of the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, Clayton, Concord, El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Oakley, Orinda, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek; the towns of Danville and Moraga; and the County of Contra Costa and Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (“Co-Permittees”) are joint permittees under the Municipal Regional Permit; and WHEREAS, the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit, NPDES Permit No. CAS612008 issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (“Municipal Regional Permit”), requires the City of Pinole, as a Co-Permittee, to implement best management practices and other control measures in order to control the discharge of pollutants through its municipal stormwater system; and WHEREAS, the Co-Permittees have historically been parties to a joint Program Agreement to establish the “Contra Costa Clean Water Program” for the purpose of administering joint obligations under the Municipal Regional Permit on behalf of the CoPermittees; and WHEREAS, the Co-Permittees desire to extend the joint Program Agreement by entering into an amended and restated agreement effective July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2041; and
WHEREAS, the City of Pinole desires to remain a party to the Contra Costa Clean Water Program by entering into the amended and restated joint Program Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the City Council of the City of Pinole hereby approves:
1- The Amended and Restated Contra Costa Clean Water Program Agreement (July 1, 2026 - June 30, 2041) attached hereto as Exhibit “A”. 2- Authorize the Interim City Manager to execute the Program Agreement on behalf of the City of Pinole.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 21st day of April 2026 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 21st day of April 2026.
____________________________
Heather Bell
City Clerk
EXHIBIT A
AMENDED AND RESTATED
CONTRA COSTA CLEAN WATER
PROGRAM AGREEMENT
(July 1, 2026 – June 30, 2041)
1 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
Amended and Restated Contra Costa Clean Water
Program Agreement between
The Contra Costa County Flood Control
and Water Conservation District
and
Agencies Named Below
THIS AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is jointly entered into by the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District (“District”); the cities of Antioch, Brentwood, Clayton, Concord, El Cerrito, Hercules, Lafayette, Martinez, Oakley, Orinda, Pinole, Pittsburg, Pleasant Hill, Richmond, San Pablo, San Ramon, and Walnut Creek; the towns of Danville and Moraga; and, the County of Contra Costa (collectively, the “Parties” and individually each a “Party”; the Parties are sometimes referred to herein as "Co-Permittees" or individually as “Co-Permittee”, and sometimes as “Agencies" or individually as “Agency”). This Agreement is entered into as of July 1, 2026 (“Effective Date”).
RECITALS
A. The Parties are joint permittees under the Municipal Regional Stormwater National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES") Permit issued by the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. NPDES Permit No. CAS612008 or an equivalent regional stormwater NPDES permit issued to the Parties is collectively referred to herein as the “Municipal Regional NPDES Permit.” Under current law, each issuance of the Regional Municipal NPDES Permit is expected to expire five years from its effective date, but may be amended, revoked, or reissued before the expiration date, or administratively extended beyond the expiration date pending reissuance.
B. The cities, towns and County have previously entered into joint program agreements with the District. As set forth more particularly in Section B below, the Parties wish to extend the joint agreement until terminated by the written agreement of all Co-Permittees then Parties to this Agreement. The purpose of this Agreement is to amend and extend the prior agreement on the terms set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES AGREE AS FOLLOWS:
A. Program Activities.
In accordance with the management and organizational structure set forth herein, the Contra Costa Clean Water Program (“Program”) shall administer the joint obligations under the Regional Municipal NPDES Permit on behalf of the Parties and implement the activities jointly carried out pursuant to this Agreement by the Parties including, but not limited to, the following
2 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
activities:
1. Provide the necessary administrative, technical, and clerical resources to implement all Program activities directed by the Management Committee in order to implement the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit. By way of example, this includes the development of an old industrial control measure plan pursuant to Provision C.11.c of the current Municipal Regional NPDES Permit. Administrative activities may include attending all Management Committee and sub-committee meetings, and preparing committee staff reports, minutes and/or summaries of committee actions.
2. Administer all consulting services contracts (technical, legal, public relations and associated services) including the coordination, invoicing, and monitoring of all such activities.
3. Represent the Program at federal, state, regional and local governmental, civic, professional, and political organizations and agencies.
4. Coordinate the yearly compilation of the Program’s (Group Program) Annual Reports for submittal to the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Boards, but not the individual agencies’ annual reports under the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit. However, the Program will develop Municipal Regional NPDES Permit compliance plans for individual agencies.
5. Conduct monitoring activities, which may include the permitting, environmental review of, purchase, installation and testing of equipment at designated sites.
6. Ensure all regulatory fees and assessments collected by the Agencies and necessary to obtain and implement the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit are lawful, appropriate and, if so, paid.
7. Ensure adequate information is available to all Co-Permittees for implementation of a comprehensive stormwater management ordinance and its regulations in compliance with the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit.
8. Implement a comprehensive public information/participation program on behalf of all Co-Permittees. The Program will be responsible for developing independently or in cooperation with the Bay Area Municipal Stormwater Collaborative (“BAMSC”) original public information materials; and, Co-Permittees shall be responsible for reproducing and distributing these materials.
9. As part of the Program’s annual budgeting process, the Management Committee may fund the Program’s participation in special studies determined by the Program, the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, BAMSC, California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA), if any, or other appropriate entities. Such participation may include funding or in-kind
3 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
services, such as Program representation on BAMSC as determined by the Management Committee.
10. Ensure adequate information is available for Co-Permittees to implement a comprehensive program for field inspection and investigation activities for unauthorized connections and illegal dumping.
11. Ensure adequate information is available for Co-Permittees to implement source controls, site design measures, and stormwater treatment and runoff control measures on new development and redevelopment projects, and to ensure ongoing operation and maintenance of post-construction stormwater management facilities.
12. Ensure adequate information is available for Co-Permittees to mitigate impacts to stormwater quality resulting from construction activities specifically focusing on proper site management; erosion control; sediment control; run-on and runoff control; nonstormwater management control; and, proper operation and maintenance of such construction site control best management practices (“BMPs”).
13. Expend funds collected by assessments for the District’s Stormwater Utility Areas Nos. 1 through 18 (“SUA”) and other sources in accordance with applicable law and regulations and the Program’s annual budget, as adopted by the Management Committee.
B. Termination.
This Agreement will remain in effect until terminated by the written agreement of all Co-Permittees then parties to this Agreement. Should any individual Co-Permittee desire to withdraw from the Program and terminate its obligations under this Agreement at any time, the following conditions must be met:
1. The Co-Permittee shall provide written notice to the Program Manager (as defined below) and Management Committee chairperson and vice chairperson of its intention to withdraw from the Program by no later than 5:00 p.m., of the December 31 immediately preceding the commencement of the following fiscal year (July 1 - June 30) before which it is seeking to terminate its obligations under this Agreement. To ensure an orderly transition, the withdrawing Co-Permittee shall also obtain written confirmation from the Regional Water Quality Control Board Executive Officer that such Co-Permittee has obtained or will obtain coverage under an NPDES Permit for its municipal stormwater discharges. A copy of the Executive Officer’s written confirmation shall be provided to the Management Committee chairperson and vice chairperson along with the notice of withdrawal.
2. The Co-Permittee shall be committed to fulfill all of its financial obligations outlined in this Agreement through the end of the fiscal year (June 30) in which it submits its notice of withdrawal. Termination shall be effective as of 11:59 p.m. on June 30 of that fiscal year.
4 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
3. The Co-Permittee shall also fulfill all of its individual obligations for projects, studies, and other programs and activities undertaken on behalf of the Program or BAMSC through the duration of any such projects, studies, programs, and activities. The terminating Co-Permittee’s obligations under this Section B.3. shall survive termination as to that Co-Permittee until the terminating Co-Permittee’s obligations under this Section are fully satisfied.
4. In the event that a Co-Permittee does not fully fund its obligations under this Agreement from its SUA assessments or appropriate sufficient funds for any fiscal year beyond the 2025-2026 fiscal year, this Agreement shall cover payment for the Co-Permittee’s financial obligations only to the conclusion of the last fiscal year in which the Co-Permittee appropriates sufficient funds. Thereafter, such Co-Permittee’s financial obligations shall be automatically suspended, and the Co-Permittee shall receive no benefit arising out of this Agreement, until the Co-Permittee appropriates sufficient funding to meet its financial obligations in such fiscal year(s).
C. Management Committee.
1. The Management Committee (“MC”) is the Program’s decision-making body. It shall be responsible for setting policies, providing directions, approving contracts and agreements, approving group submittals to the Regional Water Quality Control Boards, authorizing expenditures, and advising on staffing in accordance with Section J below. Within five years following the effective date, and every five years thereafter, the Management Committee shall perform an evaluation of the Program and deliver a report to the Co-Permittees that includes the Management Committee’s findings.
2. Each Co-Permittee’s manager (i.e., city or town manager or county administrator) shall designate in writing and submit to the Program Manager, and chairperson or vice chairperson of the Management Committee, the Management Committee representative and alternate(s) for their jurisdiction. The designated Management Committee representative and alternate(s) may be identified by job classifications or as named individuals. The CoPermittee’s manager shall designate at least one (1) Management Committee representative and no less than two (2) alternate Management Committee representatives. The Management Committee representative or, in the absence of the representative, one alternative Management Committee representative, shall vote on behalf of their Agency at all Management Committee meetings. Each Co-Permittee shall have only one vote on the Management Committee, even if both the designated representative and an alternate(s) attend the same meeting. The voting decisions of the Management Committee representatives shall be binding upon their Agency, provided they are consistent with the delegations of authority contained in this agreement.
3. A Management Committee representative shall be an individual responsible for supervising or administering the stormwater management program for their appointing Agency. An alternate should, but need not, meet the foregoing criteria.
5 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
4. A Management Committee representative’s term shall continue for the entire term of the Agreement unless changed by the Co-Permittee’s manager by providing written notification to the Program Manager.
5. Any decision made by the Management Committee shall be binding upon all Co-Permittees, provided it is consistent with the delegations of authority in this Agreement.
Except to the extent expressly set forth in this Agreement, nothing in this Agreement delegates legislative authority of any Agency or the discretion vested in each Agency’s governing body. If the Management Committee acts in a manner inconsistent with the authority delegated by this Agreement, any such action shall not be binding upon any Agency unless approved or ratified by that Agency’s governing body. This Agreement does not create a joint exercise of powers agency separate from the agencies, and the Contra Costa Clean Water Program is not a legal person that can enter into contracts or sue and be sued.
6. The Management Committee chairperson and vice chairperson shall be selected by a majority vote of the Management Committee members at each May Management Committee meeting and shall hold those offices beginning July 1 and ending June 30 of the following fiscal year.
D. Sub-committee Structures.
The following Program sub-committees are hereby established:
1. Administrative Committee ("AC") is a sub-committee responsible for administration, strategic planning, personnel, budget recommendations and conflict resolution.
2. Monitoring Committee ("MonCom") is a sub-committee responsible for water quality monitoring activities and coordination of associated special studies/projects.
MonCom is responsible for overseeing the preparation of guidance on TMDL pollutant control programs, stormwater quality management programs, and for reviewing, researching, and making recommendations to the Management Committee on matters related to pollutant control and load-reduction planning, tracking, and reporting.
3. Development Committee ("DC") is a sub-committee responsible for preparing guidance and training on construction site stormwater quality management programs, post-construction stormwater quality management programs, and for reviewing, researching, and making recommendations to the Management Committee on matters related to land development activities.
4. Public Information/Participation Committee ("PIP") is a sub-committee responsible for development of stormwater pollution prevention materials and products, information dissemination, training, marketing and public outreach for the Program and to assist each Co-Permittee.
6 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
5. Municipal Operations Committee (“MOC”) is a sub-committee responsible for development of guidance and training on stormwater pollution prevention activities for municipal maintenance activities, commercial/industrial inspection programs, illicit discharge control activities, trash load reduction activities, and other municipal stormwater activities.
6. Select or Ad Hoc (Ad Hoc”) Workgroups are established by the Management Committee as needed for a temporary period for the purposes of reviewing, researching and making recommendations to the Management Committee or a sub-committee on a permit compliance matter or a permit requirement covering multiple sub-committees (such as cost reporting, and asset management). Select or Ad Hoc Workgroups may act on behalf of the Management Committee or sub-committee if approved and directed by the Management Committee.
7. The Management Committee may amend the responsibilities of each subcommittee, dissolve a sub-committee, or add a new sub-committee.
8. Each Co-Permittee shall only be allowed one vote per sub-committee. CoPermittees may participate in the discussions of any sub-committee. However, participants at sub-committee meetings, other than approved members, shall not be allowed to vote on any item under consideration.
9. The first order of business for each sub-committee at its June meeting is to choose a chairperson and vice chairperson, who will serve as chairperson and vice chairperson for the following fiscal year. The second order of business for each sub-committee at its June meeting is to establish the sub-committee's work plan for the following fiscal year dealing with its goals, objectives, timelines and related items, consistent with the requirements in the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit. Upon preparation of the sub-committee’s work plan, it shall be provided to the Management Committee for review and approval.
E. Committee Membership.
1. For the purposes of this agreement, a “Small Municipality” is designated as having a population of less than 30,000, a “Medium Municipality” is designated as having a population of between 30,000 and 65,000; and a “Large Municipality” is designated as having a population of more than 65,000, based on population data from the State of California’s Department of Finance. Contra Costa County is deemed a “Large Municipality”. The population data published in January of each year will be used for determining each Co-Permittee’s designation for the following fiscal year. Refer to Exhibit “A” for the Committee membership designation as of the effective date of this Agreement.
2. Each Co-Permittee designated as a “Small Municipality” shall have one voting representative on the Management Committee and a minimum of one voting representatives on one sub-committee.
7 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
3. Each Co-Permittee designated as a “Medium Municipality” shall have one voting representative on the Management Committee and a minimum of one voting representative on two sub-committees.
4. Each Co-Permittee designated as a “Large Municipality” shall have one voting representative on the Management Committee and a minimum of one voting representative on three sub-committees as follows (except as stipulated in Section E.10. below):
• Administrative Committee
• Monitoring Committee
• Development Committee
• Public Information/Participation Committee
• Municipal Operations Committee, or
• BAMSC sub-committee duly recognized by the Management Committee
5. The District shall be a permanent member of the Administrative Committee, and it shall participate as a voting member on at least one additional sub-committee.
6. The Management Committee chairperson for any fiscal year shall also serve as chairperson of the Administrative Committee for that same fiscal year.
7. By the end of May of each fiscal year, the incoming Management Committee chairperson who will take office July 1, shall consult with all Co-Permittees and recommend membership on all sub-committees effective July 1 of the next fiscal year.
Recommendations shall be considered and acted upon by the Management Committee at its May meeting. Sub-committee members shall be encouraged to rotate every two years.
8. Participation in any Ad Hoc Workgroup duly created by the Management Committee shall be voluntary.
9. Each of the following sub-committees shall have the following minimum number of members:
• Administrative Committee 8
• Monitoring Committee 5
• Development Committee 5
• Public Information/Participation Committee 5
8 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
• Municipal Operations Committee 5
10. BAMSC Committee. Co-Permittees serving as voting members of any BAMSC sub-committee shall represent all Program Co-Permittees. Co-Permittees designated as voting members of a BAMSC subcommittee shall also participate on the Program’s subcommittee that has similar or equivalent subject matter jurisdiction, as determined by the Management Committee to best serve the interests of the Program.
11. Administrative Committee. The Management Committee will select members for the Administrative Committee to enhance the Administrative Committee’s manageability and overall effectiveness in attaining goals and objectives, taking into account factors that encourage awareness of matters affecting the Program. More specifically, the Administrative Committee shall consist of the following minimum membership and conditions, and shall generally follow the rotation guidelines contained in Exhibit "B":
• Management Committee chairperson 1
• Flood Control District 1
• Large Municipality 2
• Medium Municipality 2
• Small Municipality 2
Total 8
a) The Management Committee chair may recommend additional members for the Administrative Committee pursuant to Section E.7. above. b) In any fiscal year in which the Management Committee chairperson represents a municipality that is scheduled for membership on the Administrative Committee under the rotation guidelines in Exhibit “B”, then the Management Committee shall select another Co-Permittee for membership on the Administrative Committee from the municipality category from which the Management Committee chairperson represents. If the Management Committee chair represents the Flood Control District, then the Management Committee shall select another Co-Permittee from any of the three categories of municipalities. c) For the duration of a Co-Permittee’s term as the “Large Municipality” member serving on the Administrative Committee, that Co-Permittee shall also serve as the voting member of two additional sub-committees of their choice. d) Administrative Committee voting membership can only be changed during the fiscal year by the Management Committee chairperson, provided the minimum membership per Section E.11. is maintained.
9 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
12. A quorum for each sub-committee shall consist of a majority of its voting members.
13. A sub-committee may adopt by-laws to govern its organizational structure and meetings, consistent with the terms of this Agreement.
F. Meeting Attendance
1. Program staff will take attendance at all meetings. Attendance at all Management Committee and sub-committee meetings shall be published in each meeting’s minutes/summary and the Program’s annual report provided to the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
2. Management Committee representatives and sub-committee members are expected to attend at least 80% of their regularly scheduled meetings. If a Management Committee representative or a sub-committee member misses two consecutive meetings, then Program staff shall contact the member of the committee to clarify the rules and understand the reason for the repeated absences. If absences continue, then the Management Committee may request that the Co-Permittee’s manager appoint a new representative to the Management Committee or sub-committee, as the case may be.
G. Program Costs Participation and Allocation.
1. The program costs for Fiscal Year 2025-2026 are apportioned among the co-permittees as set forth in Exhibit “C”, attached hereto. In Fiscal Year 2025-2026, and in each fiscal year thereafter, all program costs for that fiscal year shall be apportioned among CoPermittees proportionally based on each Co-Permittee’s population as of January 1 immediately preceding the fiscal year, in relation to the total population of all Co-Permittees as of January 1 immediately preceding the fiscal year, calculated as follows:
[(Co-permittee’s population as of January 1) / (All co-permittee’s population as of January 1)] x 100 = Percentage of Program Costs Apportioned to Co-Permittee (“Cost Sharing Formula”).
Population data will be based on data annually published by the State of California, Department of Finance, on January 1 immediately preceding the Fiscal Year for which the calculation is made.
The population data published in January of the preceding year will be used to form the cost allocations of the following fiscal year.
2. The Management Committee shall annually prepare and approve a budget setting forth all anticipated Program costs and revenues for the following fiscal year.
3. Each Co-Permittee shall pay its share of the annual budget in accordance with the Cost Sharing Formula. If a Co-Permittee receives SUA assessments, then the District will apply lawfully collected SUAs to such Co-Permittee’s share of the annual budget. District staff shall annually submit an invoice to each Co-Permittee for each fiscal year reflecting each CoPage 210 of 535 10 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
Permittee’s Program costs no later than February 28th of each year (for the first SUA disbursement statement); June 30th (for the second SUA disbursement statement); and October 31st (for the third SUA disbursement statement). Upon receiving an invoice from the Program, each Co-Permittee shall pay its invoice to the District within sixty (60) days of the invoice’s date.
4. A Co-Permittee will be delinquent if its invoiced payment is not received by the District within sixty (60) days after the invoice’s date. The District will follow the procedure listed below, or such other procedure that the Management Committee directs to effectuate payment: 1) verbally contact the Co-Permittee’s manager; and 2) submit a formal letter from the Management Committee’s chairperson to the Co-Permittee. If payment is not received within ninety (90) days of the invoice date, then the delinquent co-permittee may be subject to termination from this Agreement and withdrawal under Section B. Thereafter, the Cost Share Formula shall be revised to reflect the new Program membership and the Management Committee shall revise its budget and Program cost allocations in accordance with the Cost Sharing Formula to account for the delinquent Permittee’s costs. A terminated Co-Permittee shall remain obligated to District for its delinquent payments and any other obligations incurred prior to the date of termination.
5. The Management Committee may suspend or modify the scope of work being performed by any contractor retained by the District whenever any Co-Permittee has not paid its invoice within ninety (90) days of the invoice date.
6. Any delinquent payments by a Co-Permittee shall accrue compound interest at the average rate of interest paid by the Local Agency Investment Fund during the time that the payment is delinquent.
H. Optional Services.
Additional services requested by a Co-Permittee to fulfill requirements of the Regional Municipal NPDES Permit may be provided by Program staff as long as the services minimally burden Program staffing and are approved by the Management Committee. Such requests shall be submitted in writing to the Management Committee and shall explain the services requested of Program staff or contractors. Such services shall be completely paid for by the requesting Co-Permittee at the fully burdened labor rate of the applicable Program staff, and the Program shall bear no financial responsibility for the requested services. Such services requested by a Co-Permittee may include consultant or contractor assistance involving a contract directly between the individual Co-Permittee and the District, at the District’s discretion. The Program shall bear no financial responsibility for such contracts.
I. Contracting.
1. In accordance with the procedures set forth herein, and on behalf of the Program, the District shall enter into and administer all contracts for the Program and implementation of the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit. The District shall pay all contractors in a timely manner in accordance with the terms of the applicable contract.
11 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
2. Prior to the District entering into a contract or amending a contract on behalf of the Program, the Management Committee shall establish an independent selection committee as an Ad Hoc Workgroup pursuant to Section D.7. The independent selection committee may prepare an RFP, conduct interviews and take such other actions as requested by the Management Committee. The independent selection committee shall thereafter make a recommendation on a proposed contract and contractor to the Management Committee. Upon considering the independent selection committee’s recommendation, the Management Committee shall thereafter make a recommendation to the District, which shall have final approval authority over the contract and contractor.
3. Contracts may be entered into with a maximum term of five years, provided each contract must include either a termination for convenience clause, or a clause allowing termination for non-appropriation of funds. Contracts entered into for a period of less than five years may be extended, based upon satisfactory performance, for a total contract term of five years.
4. For a contract scope of work designated as a “technical service” by the Management Committee, then the independent selection committee shall also consider responses from Co-Permittees who respond in writing and request to provide the requested technical service as part of an RFP process.
5. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary above, all contracting processes on behalf of the Program shall comply with the District’s procurement process.
6. If a Co-Permittee other than Contra Costa County or the District intends to contract on behalf of the Program, then a separate agreement between the District and such CoPermittee shall be executed setting forth the terms of the Co-Permittee’s contracting role. The Management Committee shall review and approve such separate agreement.
J. Staffing.
1. The Program is not a legal entity capable of employing staff, suing or being sued, or entering into contracts, among other activities that only legal entities may perform.
Program staff, including the Program Manager, are employees of Contra Costa County and/or the District, who are assigned to administer the Program. The Program Manager is the primary Contra Costa County employee assigned to manage the Program. In the event that Contra Costa County does not assign an employee to serve as the Program Manager and the Program Manager position is vacant, the Management Committee may recommend that the District contract with a qualified firm or public agency to perform the services of Program Manager until Contra Costa County appoints a Program Manager. The Management Committee may also request that the District contract for other Program services that are not performed by a Contra Costa County employee in accordance with Section I above.
2. To the extent requested by the District and/or Contra Costa County, the Management Committee shall annually advise the District and/or Contra Costa County regarding
12 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
staff evaluations, job classifications and salary ranges. With respect to any Program staff who qualify as independent contractors, the Management Committee shall annually advise the District regarding the consultant’s satisfactory performance of their contractual obligations. The Administrative Committee shall advise the Management Committee on such evaluations.
3. The Management Committee shall negotiate an administrative overhead rate with any appropriate agency providing services to the Program.
4. Program staff shall provide a written record of all policies, rules and regulations duly adopted by the Management Committee.
5. Contra Costa County shall be responsible for all health and safety trainings and other certifications required by law for its employees; however, the Program may pay for Program staff training that relates to the Municipal Regional NPDES Permit.
K. Indemnification.
Each Party to this Agreement agrees to protect, indemnify and hold harmless the other parties and their officers, employees, contractors and volunteers from and against all claims, demands, liabilities, losses, expenses, and damages (collectively, “Liabilities”) but only to the extent that the Liabilities arise out of or are connected with the negligence or willful misconduct of the indemnifying Party or any of its officers, employees, contractors, or volunteers while performing the indemnifying Party’s obligations under this Agreement. This section shall survive and remain enforceable following the termination or expiration of this Agreement or following any Party’s withdrawal from this Agreement.
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]
13 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
Dated: CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER
CONSERVATION DISTRICT:
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF ANTIOCH
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF BRENTWOOD
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF CLAYTON
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF CONCORD
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
14 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
Dated: COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: TOWN OF DANVILLE
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF EL CERRITO
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF HERCULES
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF LAFAYETTE
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
15 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
Dated: CITY OF MARTINEZ
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: TOWN OF MORAGA
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF OAKLEY
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF ORINDA
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF PINOLE
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
16 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
Dated: CITY OF PITTSBURG
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF PLEASANT HILL
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF RICHMOND
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF SAN PABLO
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
Dated: CITY OF SAN RAMON
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
17 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
Dated: CITY OF WALNUT CREEK
By:
Its:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Attorney
18 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
EXHIBIT “A”
CONTRA COSTA CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP DESIGNATION BEGINNING FY 2026-2027 Municipalities Population
(Based on
1/1/2024 Data)
Category 1 Management
Committee
Min. Number
of Sub-Committee(s) 2
Antioch 115,632 Large x 3
Brentwood 64,811 Medium x 2
Clayton 10,683 Small x 1
Concord 121,513 Large x 3
Contra Costa County 3 174,289 Large x 3
CCC Flood Control District 3 0 Non-Population x 1 4
Danville 42,567 Medium x 2
El Cerrito 25,700 Small x 1
Hercules 26,063 Small x 1
Lafayette 24,808 Small x 1
Martinez 36,439 Medium x 2
Moraga 16,784 Small x 1
Oakley 45,736 Medium x 2
Orinda 19,191 Small x 1
Pinole 18,192 Small x 1
Pittsburg 75,085 Large x 3
Pleasant Hill 33,352 Medium x 2
Richmond 112,735 Large x 3
San Pablo 31,088 Medium x 2
San Ramon 82,525 Large x 3
Walnut Creek 69,433 Large x 3
1 Membership designation categories are determined by population size. Small Municipality has population under 30,000; Medium Municipality has population between 30,000 and 65,000; and Large Municipality has population larger than 65,000. 2 Participation in the required minimum number of sub-committee(s) per fiscal year, in addition to mandatory Management Committee participation.
3 Contra Costa County and the Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District are represented as one agency for this designation purpose.
4 Contra Costa County Flood Control and Water Conservation District is a standing member of the Administrative Committee.
19 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
EXHIBIT “B”
CONTRA COSTA CLEAN WATER PROGRAM
ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE
PARTICIPATION ROTATION GUIDELINE
Municipalities by
Size Designation &
Geographic
FY
26/27
FY
27/28
FY
28/29
FY
29/30
FY
30/31
FY
31/32
FY
32/33
C o u n t y w i d e ( A l l )
Flood Control District x x x x x x x
A p p o i n t e d M a n a g e m e n t C h a i r
Agency: x x x x x x x
L a r g e - S i z e C o m m u n i t i e s ( p o p u l a t i o n > 6 5 , 0 0 0 ) All: Contra Costa County x x
Central: Concord x x
Central: Walnut Creek x x
East: Antioch x x
East: Pittsburg x x
Lamorinda: San Ramon x x
West: Richmond x x
M e d i u m - S i z e C o m m u n i t i e s ( p o p u l a t i o n 3 0 , 0 0 0 - 6 5 , 0 0 0 ) Central: Martinez x x
Central: Pleasant Hill x x x
East: Oakley x x
East: Brentwood x x
Lamorinda: Danville x x x
West: San Pablo x x
S m a l l - S i z e C o m m u n i t i e s ( p o p u l a t i o n < 3 0 , 0 0 0 ) Central: Clayton x x
Lamorinda: Lafayette x x
Lamorinda: Orinda x x
Lamorinda: Moraga x x
West: Hercules x x
West: El Cerrito x x
West: Pinole x x
20 13074-0002\2978003v15.doc
EXHIBIT “C”
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.H.
DATE: APRIL 21, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director, [email protected] SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A Z23SLT FORCE VEHICLE FOR $76,295.61, A 2025 FORD SUPER DUTY F-350 DRW TRUCK FOR $57,511.69, AND A 2026 FORD SUPER DUTY F-250 SRW TRUCK FOR $58,369.89
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution approving the purchase of a Z23SLT Force vehicle for $76,295.61, a 2025 Ford Super Duty F-350 DRW truck for $57,511.69, and a 2026 Ford Super Duty F-250 SRW truck for $58,369.89.
BACKGROUND
In 2025, the Public Works Department had to retain external contractors to perform some of the maintenance of the soccer field and open space areas. For work performed by the maintenance crew, often three to four team members have to join efforts to maintain fields due to the limited heavy-duty equipment. The recommended purchase of a multi-function turf/soil Z23SLT Force vehicle can be operated by one crew member thereby saving on staff time, as well as minimizing or eliminating the need for contractual services and associated costs. The Force vehicle is to be purchased from California Turf Equipment & Supply, Inc., for a total cost of $76,295.61 including tax and fees. The Force vehicle, for example, will be equipped with removable broadcast spreader, various type blades, an aerator system, and a dual slope laser transmitter. It should be noted that California Turf Equipment & Supply, Inc. is an exclusive supplier of the referenced Force vehicle.
The second recommended maintenance operations truck will also serve multiple functions.
The referenced truck is a new 2025 Ford Super Duty F-350 DRW to be purchased from National Auto Fleet Group (a Sourcewell contractor) for a total cost of $57,511.69 including tax and fees. In addition to supplementing the maintenance operations fleet, this truck will be retrofitted to allow specialized services such as pavement markings including stenciling.
The recommended purchase of a wastewater maintenance truck is for a new 2026 Ford Super Duty F-250 SRW for a total amount of $58,369.89 including tax and fees. This new truck will be purchased from National Auto Fleet Group and will replace an existing 2002 Ford F-250 model.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The two recommended maintenance operation trucks will assist in reducing the Department’s
reliance on contractual services and associated costs. The referenced vehicles will also assist the Public Works team in performing specialized services such pavement markings, as well as reducing staff’s time spent on maintenance operations including maintenance of sports fields and open space.
The recommended wastewater maintenance truck will replace a 24-year-old truck that has been costly to maintain. Once the new truck is received, the 2002 truck will be auctioned to replenish some of the costs.
FISCAL IMPACT
Purchase of the multi-function turf/soil Force vehicle ($76,295.61) and the multi-function maintenance operations truck ($57,511.69), will be funded by Equipment Reserve Fund (Fund 160) which currently has a sufficient balance to cover the purchase costs.
Purchase of the wastewater maintenance truck ($58,369.89) will be funded by Sewer Enterprise Fund (Fund 500). Once the new truck is received, the 2002 truck will be auctioned, and the revenue will be deposited in the Sewer Enterprise Fund.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-___
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE,
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF A Z23SLT FORCE
VEHICLE FOR $76,295.61, A 2025 FORD SUPER DUTY
F-350 DRW TRUCK FOR $57,511.69, AND A 2026 FORD
SUPER DUTY F-250 SRW TRUCK FOR $58,369.89
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department aims to purchase a new multi-function Z23SLT Force vehicle from California Turf Equipment & Supply, Inc. for a total cost of $76,295.61 including tax and fees to assist with maintenance of sports fields and open space areas; and
WHEREAS, the California Turf Equipment & Supply, Inc. is an exclusive supplier of the Z23SLT Force vehicle; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department aims to purchase a new 2025 Ford Super Duty F-350 DRW truck from the National Auto Fleet Group (a Sourcewell contractor) for a total cost of $57,511.69 including tax and fees to assist with road and other maintenance activities; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Department aims to purchase a new 2026 Ford Super Duty F-250 SRW truck from the National Auto Fleet Group (a Sourcewell contractor) for a total amount of $58,369.89 including tax and fees to replace an existing 2002 Ford F-250 model used for wastewater maintenance activities.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the City Council of the City of Pinole hereby approves:
1- Purchase of the Z23SLT Force vehicle from California Turf Equipment & Supply, Inc. for a total cost of $76,295.61 funded by Equipment Reserve Fund (Fund 160).
2- Purchase of the 2025 Ford Super Duty F-350 DRW truck from the National Auto Fleet Group for a total cost of $57,511.69 including tax and fees funded by Equipment Reserve Fund (Fund 160).
3- Purchase of the 2026 Ford Super Duty F-250 SRW truck from the National Auto Fleet Group for a total cost of $58,369.89 including tax and fees funded by Sewer Enterprise Fund (Fund 500).
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 21st day of April 2026 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 21st day of April 2026.
____________________________
Heather Bell
City Clerk
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 9.I.
DATE: APRIL 21, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Garrett Evans, Interim City Manager, [email protected] SUBJECT: SB 1216 LETTER OF SUPPORT
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the Letter of Support for Senate Bill 1216 (Cabaldon) regarding the Housing Leadership Designation within Planning and Zoning law.
BACKGROUND
The existing Planning and Zoning law requires each city to adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan for the physical development of the city, and specified land outside its boundaries, that includes, among other specified mandatory elements, a housing element. Existing law requires the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to determine whether the housing element is in substantial compliance with those provisions. Existing law requires HCD to designate jurisdictions as pro-housing pursuant to emergency regulations adopted by HCD, as prescribed, and requires that jurisdictions that are pro-housing and that are in substantial compliance with specified provisions be awarded additional points or preference in the scoring of applications for specified state programs. Pinole has been designated as a pro-housing city by HCD.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
SB 1216 would require HCD to publish a list of housing leadership designated jurisdictions on its website. For Pinole to qualify for a housing leadership designation, SB 1216 would require that the City has submitted a complete annual progress report for the preceding 5 years and, as applicable, that it meet specified requirements relating to housing production, as those terms are defined. SB 1216 would authorize Pinole, with a housing leadership designation, to take prescribed actions, including to establish by ordinance an exemption or modification of specified provisions of the Planning and Zoning Law. The bill would also exempt Pinole with a housing leadership designation from requirements to include specified analyses in the housing element.Pinole has constructed 339 new housing units from 2021 – 2025. Out of the 339 new units, Pinole has constructed 262 affordable units during that same time period. With the completion of the Appian Village Project, Pinole will be over 51% towards its RHNA goals for the current Housing Element.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact to the General Fund by approving the support letter.
ATTACHMENTS
A. 4-21-26 SB 1216 (Cabaldon) Support Letter
C I T Y O F P I N O L E
April 21, 2026
The Honorable Jesse Arreguín
Chair, Senate Housing Committee
1021 O Street, Suite 3330
Sacramento, CA 95814
RE: Support for SB 1216 (Cabaldon): Planning and Zoning Law, Housing Leadership Designation.
On behalf of the City of Pinole, I write to express our support for SB 1216 (Cabaldon), which establishes a Housing Leadership Designation Program to recognize and reward jurisdictions that demonstrate exceptional housing production outcomes with meaningful regulatory flexibility.
We support SB 1216 because it advances a practical, outcomes-based framework that aligns state objectives with local implementation. For too long, California's housing laws have treated all jurisdictions the same, rewarding compliance on paper while paying little attention to whether homes are actually getting built. SB 1216 changes that by distinguishing jurisdictions that are delivering real results and giving them the trust and discretion they have earned.
Pinole has been designated as a Pro-housing community. Currently, Pinole has constructed 339 new units since 2021, of which 262 units are affordable (77%). Pinole has a new development under construction which will boost its production to 51% of the units needed this Housing Element cycle.
SB 1216's performance-based approach is particularly meaningful to us because it provides an incentive structure that reinforces what effective jurisdictions are already working to accomplish: increasing housing supply while maintaining strong planning standards and community outcomes. By tying regulatory flexibility directly to demonstrated production, the bill creates a constructive pathway for local governments to reduce friction and direct resources toward housing delivery.
For these reasons, the City of Pinole is pleased to support SB 1216. Thank you for your leadership in advancing solutions that recognize performance, encourage housing production, and strengthen the partnership between the State and local jurisdictions.
Sincerely,
Mayor Anthony Tave
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 12.A.
DATE: APRIL 21, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Eric Casher, City Attorney, N/A, [email protected] SUBJECT: OVERVIEW OF OPTIONS FOR ADOPTION OF WAGE THEFT ORDINANCE
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council receive a report and provide direction to staff on drafting a local wage theft ordinance for City Council consideration.
BACKGROUND
Council Member Sasai requested a future agenda item and presentation on wage theft ordinances. Wage theft is a term used to describe an employer’s failure to pay wages owed to employees including nonpayment of minimum wage or overtime, requiring employees to perform work off-the-clock, illegal deductions and/or employee misclassifications. In an effort to address wage theft issues, several California cities have adopted local wage theft ordinances that promote compliance with labor laws and impose sanctions for wage theft violations.
The City of Pinole does not currently have a wage theft ordinance or regulations in the Pinole Municipal Code.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
California Labor Code Section 1205(b) allows local jurisdictions to enforce state labor standards and requirements regarding the payment of wages. Wage theft ordinances enforce labor standards through the City-issued permit and licensing process, and ties a company’s ability to obtain a permit or license to wage law compliance.
Attached to the Staff Report are examples of wage theft ordinances from the cities of South San Francisco, Milpitas, Mountain View, San Francisco, San Jose, South San Francisco, and Berkeley. The following is an overview of the types of wage theft regulations imposed in the attached ordinances.
Enforcement through Business Licenses
One regulation imposed by some wage theft ordinances is a requirement that businesses applying for a city business license or license renewal submit an affidavit confirming labor law compliance. This affidavit certifies the business has not been found to be in violation of any wage and hour laws and/or that the business has fully satisfied or complied with any decisions against it for violation of wage and hours laws. For example, in the City of Milpitas, failing to comply with or satisfy any final court order or administrative action of an investigatory agency
as it pertains to wage and hour laws constitutes grounds for business license suspension or revocation.
Enforcement for Construction Projects
In other cities, wage theft ordinances do not pursue enforcement through the business license issuance or renewal process and instead aim for labor law compliance by contractors on certain construction projects.
The City of Berkeley’s wage theft ordinance requires contractors of projects (newly constructed buildings of 30,000 square feet or more, not subject to prevailing wage and not under a valid Project Labor Agreement) to submit a “pay transparency acknowledgment” prior to the issuance of any building permit and again following project completion. The ordinance provides that the requirement for submission of the acknowledgment be included in the conditions of approval for any use permit or zoning certificate, and that failure to comply constitutes grounds for revocation of the use permit issued for the project.
Under the City of San Francisco’s residential construction wage theft ordinance, a project owner must secure a bond for the benefit of the City, which must be in place from permit issuance and remain until the project is complete and any wage claims are resolved. The City may draw from the bond to remedy any labor-related violations or unpaid wages.
Finally, the City of San Jose’s Responsible Construction ordinance requires labor law compliance for projects. To obtain a building permit, an applicant must first submit an acknowledgment that the owner, contractor, and subcontractors will comply with the Labor Code. With the request for a certificate of occupancy for a project, the owner must submit a “pay transparency certification” for certain contractors and subcontractors containing a statement that the owner, the contractor, and the subcontractors do not have any unpaid wage theft judgments entered against them. If an owner fails to submit the certification or the City receives a complaint of unpaid wage, the building official is prohibited from issuing a certificate of occupancy.
FISCAL IMPACT
If the City were to adopt a wage theft ordinance, there would be some administrative costs associated with enforcement and nominal costs associated with adopting the ordinance, though additional staffing or costs may be incurred depending on the structure of the program.
ATTACHMENTS
A. milpitas wage theft ordinance
B. berkeley wage theft ordinance
C. mountai view wage theft ordinance
D. san francisco example
E. san jose example
F. South SF wage theft ordinance
City of South San Francisco
City Council
Ordinance: ORD 1662- 2024
P.O. Box 711 ( City Hall, 400
Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
File Number: 24- 1043 Enactment Number: ORD 1662- 2024
Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco amending Title 8 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to add Chapter
8. 78 to regulate certain private development projects by withholding the certificate of occupancy or building permit final when an owner or contractor has unpaid final wage theft judgments.
WHEREAS, the labor advocate Nor Cal Carpenters Union has identified wage theft as an ongoing issue on construction projects and has requested local jurisdictions to take reasonable enforcement action to reduce this type of violation; and
WHEREAS, the failure by an employer to pay owed and earned wages by contract can affect the health and welfare of employees and/or residents of South San Francisco; and WHEREAS, in compliance with California State law, the City has drafted a local ordinance for enforcement of final wage theft judgments made by the State of California Labor Commission; and WHEREAS, this ordinance would withhold Certificate of occupancy or Building permit final approvals from a contractor ifCity staff have sustained a complaint of an unpaid wage theft judgment; and WHEREAS, by withholding Certificate of occupancy or Building permit final, the City will incentivize resolution of an unresolved wage theft judgment since most private contracts require complete approvals prior to final payment; and
WHEREAS, this ordinance will be enforceable for new construction meeting certain size and valuation thresholds.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Preamble
The City Council finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated into the Ordinance by this reference.
Section 2. Adoption of Chapter 8.78 Wage Theft Ordinance
8.78.010 Title and purpose
This chapter provides local enforcement and penalty for any contractor doing a project within the City and deemed to have an unresolved wage theft judgment on their record. The City has the right to withhold a Certificate of occupancy or Building permit final in this circumstance as a local measure to ensure fair and equitable wage payments to employees.
City ofSouth San Francisco
File Number: 24- 1043 Enactment Number: ORD 1662-2024
8.78.020 Definitions
The following words and phrases, whenever used in this Part, shall be construed as defined in this section:
A. " Certificate of occupancy" means the building official' s certification that the project complies with all applicable requirements for occupancy. The building official' s signature on the final inspection card may serve as the certificate of occupancy.
B. " Building permit final" means all components related to the project are complete: There are no construction crew left on site working, there are no outstanding correction items from any department and all departments have signed off.
C. " Contractor" means the prime contractor for the project.
D. " Subcontractor" means any business or person that carries out work of the prime contractor or another contractor for the project.
E. " Hearing officer" means the City Attorney or designee.
F. " Labor Code Section 226( a)" is a provision of the California Labor Code that requires the employer to provide each employee, either bimonthly or at the time of payment of wages, an itemized wage statement that contains certain specified information concerning the employee' s wages and deductions.
G. " Labor Code Section 2810.5" is a provision of the California Labor Code that requires the employer, at the time of hiring, to provide each employee a written notice containing certain specified information about the employer, the employee' s rate of pay, worker' s compensation insurance, and sick leave.
H. " Mail" means to deposit in United States mail, postage prepaid, unless the parties have agreed in writing to receive notifications by email in lieu of United States mail.
I. " New construction" means construction of new buildings or structures including additions to existing buildings and structures.
J. " Owner" means the person or persons, firm, corporation, partnership or other legal entity exercising ownership of the project.
K. " Remodeling" means internal or external reconstruction, renovation, or improvements to an existing building or structure that does not constitute complete replacement of the existing building or structure.
L. " Project" means a construction project that requires a building permit from the City of South San Francisco.
M. " Project construction employees" means employees of the contractor or subcontractor.
N. " Representative" means a person authorized to legally bind the owner and/ or contractor (for example, a corporate officer, general partner, or managing member of a limited liability company).
O. " Unpaid wage theft judgment" means a judgment, decision or order, for which all appeals have been exhausted or the time to appeal has expired, that was issued by a court of law or an investigatory government agency authorized to enforce applicable federal, state and local wage and hour laws, including, but not limited to, the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act, the California Labor Code, and the City of South San Francisco Minimum Wage Ordinance ( Chapter 8. 71), and which has not been fully paid or satisfied. As used in this subsection, " investigatory government agency" includes the United States Department of Labor, the California Division of Labor Standards Enforcement, the city of South San Francisco, or any other governmental entity or division tasked with the investigation and enforcement of wage and hour laws.
8.78.030 Exemptions
A project that meets any of the following criteria is exempt from the requirements of this chapter.
A. The project consists of less than five thousand square feet of new construction or remodeling.
City of South San Francisco
File Number: 24-1043 Enactment Number: ORD 1662-2024
8. 78.040 Acknowledgement of responsibility
As a condition of approval for any building permit required for a project, an applicant shall sign an acknowledgement that:
A. The owner, contractor, and all subcontractors on the project will comply with all applicable provisions of this chapter and the California Labor Code, including Labor Code Sections 2810.5 and 226a.
B. The owner and contractor are responsible for ensuring that the contractor and all subcontractors on the project pay any wage theft judgments that have been entered against them either before or during the construction of the project.
C. A violation under Section 8. 78. 070 will result in withholding of the certificate of occupancy/building permit final, whichever is applicable, at the conclusion of the project.
8.78. 050 Posting
Each day that work is performed on the project, the contractor shall post, in a conspicuous place at each job site where work takes place, the notice published each year by the city informing employees of their rights under this chapter. The notice shall be written in the top three languages spoken in the city based on the latest available census information for the City.
8.78.060 Pay transparency certification
Prior to issuance of approval of certificate of occupancy or building permit final for a project, for each contractor or subcontractor whose portion of the work exceeds one hundred thousand dollars or one percent of the value of the construction cost of the project, whichever is greater, owner shall provide to the city a pay transparency certification (" certification"), signed by a representative of the owner, the contractor and any subcontractor under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of California. The certification required under this section shall be in a form approved by the city and contain the following.
A. A statement that the owner, contractor, and any subcontractors have no unpaid wage theft judgments; and
B. A statement that:
1) Project construction employees of the contractor and any subcontractors received written notice of the employers' pay practices as required by California Labor Code Section 2810. 5 and wage statements under Labor Code Section 226(a); or
2) Project construction employees of the contractor and/or any subcontractors are covered by a valid collective bargaining agreement that expressly provides for the wages, hours of work, and working conditions of the employee, and the agreement provides premium wage rates for all overtime hours worked and a regular hourly rate of pay for those employees of not less than thirty percent more than the state minimum wage. (See Labor Code Section 2810.5( c)).
8.78.070 Violations
A. The building official shall not issue a certificate of occupancy or building permit final under either of the following circumstances:
1) The owner has failed to submit the pay transparency certification required by Section
8. 78.060.
2) The City Attorney has sustained a complaint of an unpaid wage theft judgment pursuant to Section 8. 78. 080, and the owner or contractor has neither cured the unpaid wage theft judgment nor reversed the City Attorney' s determination by appeal pursuant to Section 8. 78. 090.
City of South San Francisco
File Number: 24- 1043 Enactment Number: ORD 1662-2024
8. 78.80 Unpaid wage theft judgment - Complaint
A. Any person who is aware of an unpaid wage theft judgment against the contractor or a subcontractor on a project whose portion of the work exceeds one hundred thousand dollars or one percent of the value of the construction cost of the project, whichever is greater, may submit a complaint to the building official. The complaint must include: ( 1) a copy of a labor commissioner' s order, decision or award; 2) a copy of the judgment entered by a court of law that the specified contractor or subcontractor is the subject of an unpaid wage theft judgment; and ( 3) a declaration signed under penalty of perjury from the person that is owed the unpaid wages under the final wage theft judgment against the specified contractor or subcontractor that the judgment has not been satisfied.
B. The complaint must be received by the building official before the building official has issued a certificate of occupancy or building permit final. After receiving a complaint, the building official shall not issue the certificate of occupancy or building permit final if the City Attorney finds that the complaint is sustained.
C. The City Attorney shall, within 10 working days, mail written notice of the complaint to the owner and contractor at the address( es) on file with the city for the project. If the review of the complaint will delay issuance of the certificate of occupancy or building permit final, the City Attorney shall notify the owner and contractor as soon as practicable.
D. The owner or contractor may provide a written response to the complaint within 30 working days of the mailing of the notice of alleged violation. Failure to respond may be deemed an admission to the truth of the facts alleged in the complaint.
E. After consideration of the complaint and the owner or contractor' s response, if any, the City Attorney shall make a finding that the complaint is either sustained or not sustained. The City Attorney' s decision shall be mailed to owner, contractor, complaining party, and the person that is owed the unpaid wages under the final wage theft judgment.
8.78.090 Unpaid wage theft judgment - Appeal
A. If an owner or contractor is aggrieved by a decision of the City Attorney pursuant to Section
8. 78. 080, the aggrieved owner or contractor may appeal the decision by submitting a written appeal with the hearing officer within 10 working days of the mailing of the City Attorney' s decision. The appeal shall contain the facts and basis for the appeal. The appeal shall be accompanied by payment of the appeal fee adopted by the city council.
B. The hearing shall be heard by the hearing officer within 60 working days of receipt of the appeal, or at a date and time agreed to by the parties. The complaining party shall be the respondent at the appeal hearing.
C. All parties involved shall have the right to offer testimonial, documentary, and tangible evidence bearing on the issues, to be represented by counsel, and to confront and cross-examine witnesses.
Testimony may be taken on oath or affirmation. The hearing shall not be conducted according to formal rules of evidence. Any relevant evidence may be admitted if it is the sort of evidence upon which reasonable persons are accustomed to relying in the conduct of serious affairs.
D. The hearing shall be de novo. The complaining party must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the contractor or a subcontractor on the project is the subject of an unpaid wage theft judgment.
E. The hearing officer shall issue a written decision within 10 working days of the hearing. The decision shall be final and shall be subject to judicial review according to the provisions and time limits set forth in Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
City of South San Francisco
File Number: 24- 1043 Enactment Number: ORD 1662-2024
8.78. 100 Cure of violation
The owner, contractor, or subcontractor may cure a violation of this chapter at any time, including a violation related to an unpaid wage theft judgment, by providing evidence that the judgment has been paid, or that it has been secured by a labor payment bond, lien release bond, or similar security instrument in a form and amount sufficient to ensure that any wage claims and penalties can be fully paid.
8.78. 110 No private right of action
Nothing in this chapter shall be interpreted to authorize a right of action against the city.
Section 3. Publication and Effective Date
Pursuant to the provisions of Government Code Section 36933, a summary of this Ordinance shall be prepared by the City Attorney. At least five (5) days prior to the Council meeting at which this Ordinance is scheduled to be adopted, the City Clerk shall ( 1) publish the Summary, and ( 2) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of this Ordinance. Within fifteen ( 15) days after the adoption of this Ordinance, the City Clerk shall ( 1) publish the summary, and ( 2) post in the City Clerk's Office a certified copy of the full text of this Ordinance along with the names of those City Council members voting for and against this Ordinance or otherwise voting.
At a meeting of the City Council on 10/23/ 2024, a motion was made by Councilmember Addiego, seconded by Councilmember Nicolas, that this Ordinance be adopted. The motion passed.
Yes: 5 Mayor Coleman, Vice Mayor Flores, Councilmember Addiego, Councilmember Nagales, and Councilmember Nicolas
Attest by
sa Govea Acosta, City Clerk
James Coleman, Mayor
City ofSouth San Francisco
CITY COUNCIL
REPORT 12.B.
DATE: APRIL 21, 2026
TO: MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS
FROM: Heba El-Guindy, Public Works Director, [email protected] SUBJECT: ADOPT RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CITY’S ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION PLAN
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the attached Resolution approving the City’s first Active Transportation Plan.
BACKGROUND
Development of the City’s Active Transportation Plan (ATP) was first added to the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) in 2021 (Project IN2106). On March 7, 2023, the City Council approved a Consulting Services Agreement between the City and GHD, Inc. for the development of the City’s ATP. The ATP aims to outline strategies and actions that will support and encourage the use of environmentally sustainable modes of travel including walking, cycling, and use of public transit. The consultant’s work scope included a review of policies and plans, data collection and analysis, recommend strategies and capital improvement projects, develop concept improvements that incorporate the community’s feedback, and develop a cost estimate for the recommended projects.
On June 17, 2025, the City Council approved an amendment to the Consulting Services Agreement to extend Term of Services and to increase compensation from the originally approved $188,000 to a not-to-exceed amount of $218,000, an increase of $30,000 to be paid at satisfactory completion of the ATP.
REVIEW AND ANALYSIS
The Consultant, GHD, Inc., in coordination with staff conducted the necessary research and data collection, carried out a comprehensive community consultation process, and developed a draft ATP which was presented to the City’s Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Committee (TAPS) on January 8, 2025. In performing this work, GHD, Inc. invoiced the City and was paid a total of $187,983.19 out of the total initial budget of $188,000.
On June 17, 2025, the Consulting Services Agreement was extended, and its budget was increased by an additional $30,000. This is to complete remaining chapters of the draft ATP, and to make necessary revisions resulting from comments by staff, project stakeholders, and the public.
The draft ATP was revised to include a more comprehensive grid of bicycle facilities of the
various classes (Class I/multi-use path, Class II/bike lane, Class III/bike route, and Class IV/protected bike lane or cycle track). Road classifications, abutting land uses, posted speed limits, and community input are some of the factors that were taken into consideration in recommending the various cross sections and associated multi-modal improvements. The revised ATP report is included as Attachment B for the City Council review and consideration of approval.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts for the recommended City Council approval of the Active Transportation Plan.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution
B. ATP Report
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-___
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PINOLE,
COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE CITY’S
ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PLAN
WHEREAS, the City of Pinole (“City”) adopted a Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) which includes the development of an Active Transportation Plan (Project IN2106); and WHEREAS, the Active Transportation Plan (ATP) aims to outline strategies and multi-modal infrastructure improvements that will support and encourage the use of environmentally sustainable modes of travel including walking, cycling, and use of public transit; and
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2023, the City Council awarded a Consulting Services Agreement to GHD, Inc. (“Consultant”) for development of the City’s ATP in an amount not-to-exceed $188,000 and ending on March 7, 2025; and WHEREAS, Consultant in coordination with City staff conducted the necessary research and data collection, community consultation and developed a draft ATP, and expended the project budget while performing this work; and WHEREAS, on June 17, 2025, the City Council approved extending the Consulting Services Agreement, and increased the budget by an additional $30,000, for a total contract fee of $218,000, to ensure satisfactory finalization of the ATP; and WHEREAS, the draft ATP was revised to include a more comprehensive grid of various class bicycle facilities, and to recommend multi-modal improvements in light of the road classifications, abutting land uses, posted speed limits, and community input.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Pinole does hereby approve the City’s Active Transportation Plan attached as “Exhibit A”.
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Pinole City Council held on the 21st day of April 2026 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 21st day of April 2026.
____________________________
Heather Bell
City Clerk
City of Pinole
Active Transportation Plan
April 2026
Prepared for the City of Pinole by GHD Inc.
PAGE
i
Table of Contents
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Overview ................................................................................................................................................... 1 Purpose of the Plan .................................................................................................................................. 1 Summary of the Plan ................................................................................................................................ 1 Goals and Objectives ........................................................................................................................... 3 Goal 1 ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Goal 2 ....................................................................................................................................................... 4 Goal 3 ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 Existing Conditions and Opportunities ............................................................................................ 7 Local Context ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Disadvantaged Community Status ............................................................................................................ 8 Transportation Network ............................................................................................................................ 8 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis ........................................................................................ 14 Safety...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Relevant Plans and Programs ................................................................................................................ 17 Stakeholder and Public Engagement .............................................................................................. 25 In-Person Engagement ........................................................................................................................... 26 Online Engagement ................................................................................................................................ 28 Other Stakeholders ................................................................................................................................. 29 Recommendations .............................................................................................................................. 31
PAGE
ii
Types of Bicycle Facilities ....................................................................................................................... 32 Bicycle Network Improvements............................................................................................................... 34 Pedestrian Network Improvements ......................................................................................................... 40 Non-Infrastructure Programs .................................................................................................................. 45 Preferred Concept Plans ........................................................................................................................ 48 Implementation .................................................................................................................................. 53 Implementation Opportunities ................................................................................................................. 53 Cost Estimates ........................................................................................................................................ 53 Prioritization ............................................................................................................................................ 63 Funding ................................................................................................................................................... 67 Appendix A ......................................................................................................................................... 72 Appendix B ......................................................................................................................................... 74 Appendix C ......................................................................................................................................... 76 Appendix D ......................................................................................................................................... 78 Appendix E ......................................................................................................................................... 80 Appendix F ......................................................................................................................................... 82
PAGE
iii
Index of Figures
Figure 1: City & Regional Vicinity Map ........................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: Existing DAC Status Map ................................................................................................................ 9 Figure 3: Existing Street Network Map ......................................................................................................... 10 Figure 4: Existing Speed Limits Map ............................................................................................................ 11 Figure 5: 2010 City of Pinole General Plan – Bicycle Facility Map .............................................................. 13 Figure 6: Existing Bicycle LTS Map .............................................................................................................. 16 Figure 7: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Collisions Map ........................................................................... 19 Figure 8: 2010 City of Pinole General Plan – Land Use Map ....................................................................... 20 Figure 9: Contra Costa ATP - Existing and Proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Map ...................... 22 Figure 10: Recommended Bicycle Network Improvements ......................................................................... 36 Figure 11: Recommended Pedestrian Network Improvements ................................................................... 43 Figure 12: San Pablo Avenue & Tennent Avenue ......................................................................................... 44 Figure 13: Tennent Avenue & Prune Street .................................................................................................. 44 Figure 14: Existing San Pablo Ave at Tennent Ave ...................................................................................... 49 Figure 15: Potential Future San Pablo Ave at Tennent Ave (Preferred) ....................................................... 49 Figure 16: Existing San Pablo Ave at Meadow Ave ...................................................................................... 49 Figure 17: Potential Future San Pablo Ave at Meadow Ave (Preferred) ...................................................... 49 Figure 18: Existing Pinole Valley Rd at Julia Ct ............................................................................................ 50 Figure 19: Potential Future Pinole Valley Road at Julia Ct (Preferred) ........................................................ 50 Figure 20: Existing Tennent Ave at Plum St ................................................................................................. 50 Figure 21: Potential Future Tennent Ave at Plum St (Preferred) ................................................................. 50
PAGE
iv
Figure 22: Existing Appian Way at Belden Ct/Mann Dr ................................................................................ 51 Figure 23: Potential Future Appian Way at Belden Ct/Mann Dr (Preferred)................................................. 51 Figure 24: Existing Fitzgerald Dr at Jovita Ln .............................................................................................. 52 Figure 25: Potential Future Fitzgerald Dr at Jovita Ln (Preferred) ............................................................... 52 Index of Tables
Table 1: Existing Modes of Transportation (Daily Trips) ............................................................................... 7 Table 2: Existing Street Network Miles .......................................................................................................... 8 Table 3: Bikeway Projects ............................................................................................................................ 37 Table 4: Bicycle Crossing Projects ............................................................................................................... 38 Table 5: Sidewalk Projects ........................................................................................................................... 41 Table 6: Pedestrian Crossing Projects ......................................................................................................... 42 Table 7: Cost Estimates: Class I and Class IV Bikeways ............................................................................. 55 Table 8: Cost Estimates and Additional Items: Class I and Class IV Bikeways ........................................... 56 Table 9: Cost Estimates: Class II and Class III Bikeways ............................................................................ 57 Table 10: Cost Estimates and Additional Items: Class II and Class III Bikeways ........................................ 58 Table 11: Cost Estimates: Bicycle Crossings ............................................................................................... 59 Table 12: Cost Estimates and Additional Items: Sidewalks ......................................................................... 60 Table 13: Cost Estimates: Pedestrian Crossings ......................................................................................... 61 Table 14: Prioritization Criteria .................................................................................................................... 63 Table 15: Prioritized Bikeways ..................................................................................................................... 65 Table 16: Prioritized Bicycle Crossings ........................................................................................................ 66
PAGE
v
Table 17: Prioritized Sidewalks .................................................................................................................... 66 Table 18: Prioritized Pedestrian Crossings .................................................................................................. 66 Appendices
Appendix A: Existing Conditions & Opportunities Report
Appendix B: Stakeholder & Public Engagement Summary
Appendix C: Stakeholder & Public Comments
Appendix D: Toolkit
Appendix E: Project Prioritization
Appendix F: Glossary
PAGE
1 Introduction
Overview
The City of Pinole (“City”) is located northeast of the City of San Franciso, situated on the shores of San Pablo Bay in West Contra Costa County (Figure 1).
Generally, the City land use pattern is a mix of residential neighborhoods and commercial and business centers, combined with parks and open spaces. Distinct areas include Historic Old Town (to the northeast), Pinole Vista and Pinole Ridge Shopping Center (to the west), and Pinole Valley (to the south). The City is bisected by Interstate 80 (I-80). The City is linked together by greenways, paths, and roads, including the San Francisco Bay Trail (Bay Trail) and arterials (e.g., arterials of regional significance).
Purpose of the Plan
The City of Pinole Active Transportation Plan (ATP) aims to support safe, connected, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle travel, expanding the active transportation network to support the transportation needs of all residents, workers, visitors, and community members, regardless of transportation mode or user age or ability.
Summary of the Plan
The ATP presents:
Goals and Objectives
Existing Conditions and Opportunities
Stakeholder and Public Engagement
Recommendations
Implementation
Recommendations were developed based on the goals and objectives, existing conditions and opportunities, and stakeholder and public engagement described in the following chapters. A plan for implementing the recommendations also is provided, and includes implementation opportunities, cost estimates, prioritization, and funding.
PAGE
2 Figure 1: City & Regional Vicinity Map
Summary of the Plan
The Plan presents:
Goals and Objectives
Existing Conditions and Opportunities
Stakeholder Engagement
Recommendations
Implementation
Recommendations were established based on the goals and objectives, existing conditions, and stakeholder engagement.
Implementation includes project prioritization and cost estimates, as well as funding opportunities.
PAGE
3 Goals and
Objectives
The ATP outlines an action plan to guide the City and its partners as they work to improve walking and bicycling in Pinole.
The goals, objectives, and performance measures reflect the needs and priorities expressed by the community throughout the public outreach process, as well as established City priorities and policies. These inform the selection and prioritization of projects, programs and policies, and create metrics for measuring success as recommendations from the Plan are implemented.
PAGE
4 Goal 1
Increase connectivity and accessibility by providing a cohesive network of facilities for people to walk, bicycle, and roll.
Objective 1.1: Create a cohesive active transportation
network that enhances connectivity in Pinole for all
users of all abilities.
Performance Measure 1.1a: close gaps in walkways and bikeways, prioritizing areas with high residential density, to and from key destinations and downtown, in areas with poor connectivity, and in disadvantaged communities (DACs).
Performance Measure 1.1b: Improve access to recreation by connecting existing and future pedestrian and bicycle networks to recreational areas and trails, like the Bay Trail and Point Pinole Regional Shoreline.
Performance Measure 1.1c: Maintain an inventory of existing networks and conditions to prioritize maintenance and repair. In addition to the public works contact information where residents can report needed street repairs, implement a phone number, email, and/or website comment box where specifically pedestrian and bicycle facility repairs can be reported.
Performance Measure 1.1d: Enhance accessibility for people with disabilities throughout the transportation network.
Objective 1.2: Increase awareness of and access to the
active transportation network in Pinole.
Performance Measure 1.2a: Increase wayfinding signage and maps along routes and trails.
Performance Measure 1.2b: Implement technologies that highlight active transportation routes. Examples could include interactive digital maps located on the city website, maps user can access via their mobile devices, or other technologies that increase accessibility to recreation information. The city may use their own website to house maps of transportation routes and/or use a thirdparty trail website/app.
Goal 2
Foster a safer environment for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Objective 2.1: Reduce pedestrian and bicyclist
fatalities and severe injuries.
Performance Measure 2.1a: Develop a Vision Zero Action Plan with emphasis on the Safe Systems approach, which centers on infrastructure that proactively reduces risks and decreases the severity of crashes for all people. Components of the plan should include gathering relevant pedestrian and bicycle safety data, develop community engagement activities that support the creation of Vision Zero initiatives and projects, and create a plan that is context specific with actionable goals and projects to create safer roadways in Pinole.
Performance Measure 2.1b: reduce pedestrian and bicycle fatalities and severe injuries by 50% by 2030.
Objective 2.2: Use Complete Streets tactics to increase safety on roadways with high stress levels.
Performance Measure 2.2a: Implement Complete Streets tactics to improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Complete streets tactics include, but are not limited to:
PAGE
5 Improving intersections and pedestrian crossings by increasing crossing opportunities, using curb extensions and pedestrian medians to shorten crossing distances, high visibility crosswalks, leading pedestrian interval signals, etc.
Removing lanes of traffic, reducing lane widths, constructing medians for traffic slowing and greenspace opportunities. Creating protected bike lanes and multi-use paths separated from vehicle traffic.
Performance Measure 1: Perform a Level of Traffic stress (LTS) analysis on streets and roadways from LTS 3 and 4 to 1 and 2.
Objective 2.3: Improve actual and perceived safety
through educational tactics.
Performance Measure 2.3a: Partner with Contra Costa County to encourage involvement in the County’s safe routes to school program.
Performance Measure 2.3b: Create and promote educational programs for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users and drivers.
Educational programs might include:
Safety campaign materials that can be developed educate drivers about sharing the road with bicyclists and pedestrians, how to navigated road reconfigurations, and information about driving through school zones. Similar materials can be created for pedestrians and bicyclists on new routes and infrastructure. Open street events that can be used energize specific locations by drawing in residents and visitors, provide an opportunity to hold community events, and demonstrate the benefits of
walkable/bikeable areas.
Guided walking and bicycling tours can educate residents about new trails and amenities. Group bicycling tours can reach people curious about bicycling but are hesitant due to concerns about safety, lack of knowledge, not having a bicycle, and more. Tours can be accompanied by a safety element where participants can learn how to navigate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure. The City may want to partner with bicycle groups in the Bay area to assist with this program
Demonstration products can educate residents about possible pedestrian and bicycle design elements prior to making long term infrastructure investment. Demonstration projects may include (but are not limited to):
- Protected bicycle lanes
- Parklets
- High visibility crosswalks
Goal 3
Reduce vehicle miles traveled by encouraging active transportation and multimodal travel.
Objective 3.1: Create a comfortable environment for
pedestrians and bicyclists.
Performance Measure 3.1a: increase canopy coverage over walkways and bikeways.
Performance Measure 3.1b: increase pedestrian and bicycle support facilities like lighting, drinking fountains, trash cans, benches, picnic tables, public restrooms, shade structures, bicycle parking, bicycle repair stations, comfortable walking surfaces and more on recreational trails and networks throughout the city.
PAGE
6 Objective 3.2: Prioritize access to transit and active transportation facilities.
Performance Measure 3.2a: Prioritize pedestrian and bicycle facilities that support first- and last-mile trips to and from transit facilities.
Performance Measure 3.2b: Prioritize pedestrian and bicycle facilities near higher density housing to accommodate for influxes in population and vehicle traffic.
Performance Measure 3.2c: Reduce city-wide parking minimums and explore bicycle facility requirements for developers i.e. bicycle parking.
Objective 3.3: Increase walking and bicycling share of
trips by 50% by 2030
Performance Measure 3.3a: Implement a pedestrian and bicyclist evaluation program to track how users respond to infrastructure improvements and non-infrastructure programs. Examples of evaluation programs include an annual pedestrian and bicycle program, and an annual report card and ride along to track program process.
Performance Measure 3.3b: improve the bicycle level of traffic stress (LTS) score to LTS 1 or 2, indicating low-stress comfortable facilities, on arterial and collector streets in Pinole. Performance Measure 3.3c: increase walking and bicycling share of trips 50% by 2030.
PAGE
7 Existing Conditions and Opportunities
Local Context
The City of Pinole is located in West Contra Costa County, approximately 17 miles northeast of the City of San Francisco. Pinole is approximately 4 square miles and is home to 19,065 people.
The City’s urban area is characterized by single-family homes within subdivisions. Large retail centers are concentrated at intersections of major streets and along I-80. Schools, parks, and other civic uses are located throughout the City, within walking distance for many residents. Pinole’s historic downtown commercial district, located at the heart of the City, is walking distances from some residential neighborhoods, as well as Pinole Creek, Fernandez Park, and the bayfront.
As shown in Table 1, walking comprises roughly 10 percent of daily trips in Pinole, 15 percent of daily trips in Contra Costa County, and nearly 17 percent of daily trips statewide. Bicycling comprises 2.2 percent of daily trips in Pinole, 1.3 percent of daily trips in Conta Consta County, and roughly 1.5 percent of daily trips statewide. The relatively limited provision of bikeway facilities in most communities is a key factor behind the relatively low rate of bicycling. Higher rates of bicycling is common in communities that have invested in bikeway networks, particularly low-stress bikeway facilities.
Table 1: Existing Modes of Transportation (Daily Trips) State of
California
(2010-12)
Pinole (2023) Contra Costa
County (2023)
Drive alone 49.3% 64.6% 58.3%
Carpool/Van
pool
26.5% 19.8% 23.4%
Public
Transit
4.4% 0.4% 0.7%
Walk 16.6% 10.3% 14.7%
Bicycle 1.5% 2.2% 1.3%
Other 1.1% 2.7% 1.6%
Source: 2010-2012 California Household Travel Survey (2013) for State of California; Replica (2023) for Contra Costa County. Note: Year 2023 transit rate reflects reduced transit ridership following the COVID pandemic. Additional Note: “Other” modes include taxi/TNC, as well as company shuttles, paratransit, and scooters.
PAGE
8 Disadvantaged Community Status
The Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP) is one of the most common funding programs for bicycle and pedestrian improvement projects.
While guidelines can change between funding rounds, the ATP application scoring rubric has consistently awarded points to projects that serve or are located in DACs. The ATP program guidelines define DAC thresholds using a variety of metrics:
Median household income (MHI): community median household income is less than 80% of the state median household income. CalEnviroScreen: community is within the most disadvantaged in the state according to the CalEPA and based on CalEnviroSreen 4.0 scores (greater than or equal to 40.05).
Free and reduced-price school lunches: more than 75% of students are eligible for free or reduced lunches.
California Healthy Places Index (HPI): community is within the most disadvantaged in the state based on HPI scores (within the 25th percentile or less).
Other: communities may also use a local definition of DACs if it has been formally adopted at the metropolitan planning organization (MPO) or regional level.
Communities that meet one or more of the qualifications above are considered disadvantaged under recent ATP application guidelines.
As shown in Figure 2, using the CalEnviroScreen metric, DACs mostly are located in northern portion of the City, with Census Tract 3922.02, which is located north of San Pablo Avenue and west of Pinole Shores Drive, having the highest score (score of 85).
Transportation Network
Street Network
Most of Pinole is organized into suburban residential, commercial, and more rural/open space/park tracts, connected by a 79-mile street network (Figure 3), including roughly 20 miles of arterial and collector streets. Arterials are generally 4 lanes wide and typically intersect with other arterials at signalized intersections.
Within the tracts, collectors provide access to residential neighborhoods characterized by cul-de-sac and loop streets in some neighborhoods; residential neighborhoods immediately adjacent to Downtown exhibit a gridlike pattern.
The I-80 freeway runs diagonally north-south through Pinole, providing regional connections but also creating barriers to internal circulation between Pinole neighborhoods, including disrupting the continuity of the Pinole Creek Trail, resulting in mobility challenges for people walking and bicycling.
Existing speed limits are shown in Figure 4. As shown, collectors have speeds of 25 mph and arterials have speeds ranging from 25 to 40 mph.
Table 2: Existing Street Network Miles
Street Classification Existing Miles
Arterial Route of Regional Significance 5.47 mi
Arterials 4.99 mi
Collectors 10.40 mi
Local Streets 58.29 mi
TOTAL 79.15 mi
Source: GHD (based on GIS data containing street network)
PAGE
9 Figure 2: Existing DAC Status Map
PAGE
10 Figure 3: Existing Street Network Map
PAGE
11 Figure 4: Existing Speed Limits Map
PAGE
12 Bicycle Facilities
Pinole has an existing bikeway network of just over 10 miles. It primarily consists of scenic multi-use paths along Pinole Creek and San Pablo Bay, which serve as the active transportation spine within the community. The existing network includes 3.93 miles of Class I Shared Use Paths, 1.47 miles of Class II Bicycle Lanes, 4.88 miles of Class III Bicycle Routes, and no Class IV Separated Bikeways.
Pedestrian Facilities
Sidewalks are provided in most residential and commercial areas, but gaps exist on portions of Pinole Valley Road (east of I-80), on some segments of San Pablo Avenue, and in some neighborhoods where sidewalk does not exist on both sides of the street. Other barriers to walking in Pinole include the rail lines that bisect the city, disrupt the pedestrian network, and lack safe crossing facilities.
Public Transit
WestCAT, a service of the Western Contra Costa Transit Authority, provides public transit service to Pinole. The following routes service Pinole on weekdays: Routes 16, C3, JPX, and JX. Route J (JR/JL) provides service in Pinole every day of the week. WestCAT also provides paratransit service for passengers with disabilities and a Dial-A-Ride service for senior citizens.
PAGE
13 Figure 5: 2010 City of Pinole General Plan – Bicycle Facility Map
PAGE
14 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS)
Analysis
This section provides information about the bicycle level of traffic stress (LTS) analysis and results for the bicycle network in Pinole. Bicycle LTS measures the perceived sense of danger associated with bicycling in or adjacent to vehicle traffic.
Studies have shown that traffic stress is one of the biggest deterrents to bicycling and walking. The less stressful the experience, and the lower the LTS score, the more likely it is to appeal to a broader segment of the population. A bicycle and pedestrian network will attract a large portion of the community if it is designed to reduce stress associated with potential motor vehicle conflicts and connects people to their destinations.
Streets are considered low stress for cyclists if they have few interactions with vehicle traffic (such as slow, low-traffic neighborhood streets) or if greater separation is provided between people walking or bicycling and vehicle traffic.
The Bicycle LTS scores are being used to develop project recommendations that would create a lower stress bikeway network for people of different ages, abilities, and comfort with bicycling in Pinole. Using the LTS scores presented here, the City can select facility recommendations to increase separation between bicyclists and vehicle traffic, especially on higher-speed, multi-lane arterials. LTS scores will be used as a metric to prioritize the composite list of recommendations.
Bicycle LTS assigns a score from 1 to 4 to street segments, intersection approaches, and intersection crossings based on roadway data, including:
Posted speed limit
Number of vehicle lanes
Intersection control devices (stop signs, traffic signals) Type of bikeway, if applicable
Separation between bicycle facilities and vehicles
Configuration of right-turn lanes at intersections
PAGE
15 Types of Bicyclists
Research conducted by the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) indicates the majority of people in the United States would bicycle if dedicated bicycle facilities were provided. Based on their skill level and confidence, most people self-identify as one of the four “types of bicyclists” shown in the graphic below. Only a small percentage of Americans are willing to ride if no facilities are provided—the so-called “Strong and Fearless” bicyclists.
A score of LTS 1 indicates a street with low stress and high comfort for people bicycling. LTS 4 reflects a highly stressful experience. A lower-stress network means all bicyclists, regardless of age or ability, can comfortably ride to their destination.
To better meet the needs of the “Interested but Concerned” bicyclists, it is recommended that communities work to decrease stress and improve comfort on their bikeway network. LTS 1 and 2 streets are typically appealing to these bicyclists.
Most local streets, including the residential streets in Pinole neighborhoods, would score LTS 1. However, local streets do not provide access to major destinations, and most local streets in Pinole do not provide for continuous circulation to or from adjacent neighborhoods. Low-stress local streets typically provide access to high-stress arterial or collector streets, where most average adults would not feel comfortable riding a bicycle.
Image created by GHD, using PBOT data
PAGE
16 Figure 6: Existing Bicycle LTS Map
PAGE
17 Safety
Collision data involving people walking and bicycling in Pinole was queried from the California Highway Patrol (CHP) Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). Eight years of data was evaluated, between January 2015 and December 2022. A total of 1,404 collisions were reported within the City of Pinole during this period, 400 of which occurred on local roadways.
There were nine bicycle-involved collisions during this period. Of these, four collisions resulted in visible injury, two collisions resulted in injury with complaint of pain, and three collisions resulted in property damage only. The Primary Collision Factors (PCF) for these collisions included improper turning, automobile right of way, pedestrian right of way, and wrong side of road. Reported bicycle collisions occurred entirely on only five local roadways: Appian Way, Fitzgerald Drive, San Pablo Avenue, Tennent Avenue, and Pinole Valley Road. Four of the nine reported bicycle collisions occurred when lighting conditions were dark with streetlights illuminated.
There were 13 pedestrian-involved collisions during this period. Of these, two collisions were fatal, two collisions resulted in severe injury, two collisions resulted in visible injury, and seven collisions resulted in injury with complaint of pain. The PCFs for these collisions included pedestrian right of way, pedestrian violation, unsafe speed, traffic signals and signs, other improper driving, and unknown. Reported pedestrian collisions occurred mostly (62 percent) at intersections, with a small number of intersections establishing pedestrian collision hot spots: San Pablo Avenue at Tennent Avenue, Tennent Avenue at Pear Street, Fitzgerald Drive near Appian Way, and Pinole Valley Road near I-80. Most of the reported pedestrian collisions occurred in daylight.
Relevant Plans and Programs
This section provides an overview of relevant plans and programs.
City of Pinole General Plan (2010)
Pinole’s General Plan identifies the community’s vision for the future and provides policy guidance for future city development, including decisions on growth and conservation of open space and resources in Pinole. The General Plan is intended for use by City decision-makers, City staff, community members, and other interested groups as a guide to future land use and economic development through its goals, policies, and actions.
Relevant Elements of the General Plan are summarized below.
Circulation Element
The Circulation Element of the General Plan provides maps, goals, policies, and actions aimed at creating and maintaining a multimodal transportation system in the City and avoiding sprawl. This element supports energy efficient transportation choices by prioritizing safety improvements for people bicycling and walking and supporting transit via focused development along high-capacity transportation corridors. It also establishes programs to reduce single occupancy vehicle commute trips.
Relevant policy priorities include building the transportation system in conjunction with sustainable land use practices, promoting and supporting alternative transportation through infrastructure and non-infrastructure efforts, and prioritizing safety and funding for alternative transportation.
Growth Management Element
The Growth Management Element sets policies to guide growth in Pinole and establishes how the City collaborates on transportation and land use planning regionally. It encourages future growth along main travel corridors as well as areas easily served by transit. Relevant policy priorities include setting service standards for alternative transportation modes, providing safe
PAGE
18 and accessible transit to all, encouraging hiking and biking trails, and prioritizing trips within Pinole as opposed to trips that cut through the City.
Land Use and Economic Development Element
The Land Use and Economic Development Element use goals, policies, and actions to create a framework for Pinole to continue to grow with a healthy mix of land uses while keeping its strong sense of community identity and supporting its historic roots and culture. This element’s land use designations guide future growth and demand on the City’s transportation and mobility system. Relevant policy priorities include maintaining the residential character of the City’s neighborhoods by providing active transportation facilities and encouraging affordable housing developments.
PAGE
19 Figure 7: Existing Bicycle and Pedestrian Collisions Map
PAGE
20 Figure 8: 2010 City of Pinole General Plan – Land Use Map
PAGE
21 Natural Resources and Open Space Element
The Natural Resources and Open Space Element seek to protect open space, particularly public open space, in Pinole for recreation and other purposes through its goals, policies, and actions. The contents of this element work together to protect the City’s open space and to make it accessible to residents and visitors via trails, bikeways, parks, and other facilities. Relevant policy priorities include creating a comprehensive trail network and encouraging community engagement in open space stewardship.
Community Services and Facilities Element
The Community Services and Facilities Element address how new development will impact City-provided services and facilities, including civic/community; police; fire; parks, trails, open space, and recreational facilities; community health; education; water; wastewater; stormwater; solid waste/recycling; streets; and energy and communication. Relevant policy priorities include ensuring all public buildings and facilities are accessible to all, growing a multi-use trail system, and updating the existing roadway network to improve access to alternative transportation modes while maintaining safe mobility for motorists.
Sustainability Element
The Sustainability Element articulates existing City sustainable land use programs and policies and describes new goals, policies, objectives, and programs to promote a sustainable future for Pinole. Relevant policy priorities include reducing the heat island effect, reducing vehicle miles traveled, encouraging alternative transportation, improving the alternative transportation network, and engaging the public regarding transportation issues, projects, and processes.
Contra Costa County Active Transportation Plan
(2022)
The Contra Costa ATP seeks to improve active transportation in unincorporated County areas by identifying needs and opportunities and prioritizing specific projects for implementation. Goals of the ATP include:
Prioritize active transportation investments based on factors such as collision history or systemic risk, location in an impacted community, location near key destinations, and funding
opportunities.
Shift trip modes by Contra Costa County residents and visitors from motor vehicles to active modes such as walking and biking to create a more sustainable community and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Provide a vision for arterials and collectors within the unincorporated County roadway network to assist County
departments in planning for private development, capital projects, and maintenance efforts.
PAGE
22 Figure 9: Contra Costa ATP - Existing and Proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Map Source: Contra Costa ATP
PAGE
23 City of Pinole Local Roadway Safety Plan (2023)
The Pinole Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) is a traffic safety plan that aims to address roadway safety needs and reduce the number of collisions for all modes through local agency collaboration, analysis of traffic safety issues, and prioritization of improvements. All modes and users of all ages and abilities are emphasized throughout the document. Goals of the LRSP include:
Goal 1: Identify and analyze road safety issues from a systemic perspective and recommend improvements
Goal 2: Improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety through the application of proven effective countermeasures
Goal 3: Coordinate the actions of key stakeholders to implement road safety improvements and Emergency response in the City of Pinole Goal 4: Continually seek funding for safety improvements Goal 5: Ensure that all safety improvements are made in a fair and equitable manner for all residents of the City of Pinole City of Pinole Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan
FY 2025-26 Through FY 2029-30
The Pinole Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) is a document that identifies infrastructure projects, capital expenditures, and funding sources. Relevant projects include yearly road improvements such as ADA facilities, signing and striping, signal upgrades, Safe Routes to School, and traffic calming measures.
Bicycle and pedestrian improvements can be included as part of CIP projects. For example, making changes to pavement marking to enhance pedestrian crossings and add bicycle lanes, and add curb ramps as part of the annual pavement rehabilitation program.
Pinole Creek Watershed Vision Plan (2004)
The Pinole Creek Watershed Vision Plan is a community-led planning document meant to imagine an improved future state for the Pinole Creek Watershed during the Pinole Creek flood control channel redesign project.
This plan was a collaborative effort between public, private, and non-profit organizations to provide a local design alternative with broad community support. A relevant goal of the vision plan is to improve recreation opportunities along the creek by upgrading the existing creek trail, providing a usable trail crossing of I-80, enhancing trail crossings of other major roadways to support safety, improving creek access, and adding connections to housing.
City of Pinole Climate Action and Adaptation Plan
(CAAP)
The City is currently in the process of developing a CAAP, which will act as a framework and guide for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in Pinole as well as boost local resiliency efforts in response to the effects of climate change. While planning efforts are ongoing, the CAAP’s website indicates relevant mitigation methods may include the use of active transportation, like bicycling.
City of Pinole Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy
(2008)
The City’s Neighborhood Traffic Calming Policy seeks to use education, enforcement, and engineering to lessen the impact of motor vehicle traffic on residential streets while improving overall community livability. The policy outlines each step in the traffic calming request process, from initial complaint to installation and follow up. It also includes all of the necessary forms required for requestors to notify and engage their neighbors about any traffic-related concerns and/or requested mitigations. Relevant traffic calming tools available through the policy include:
PAGE
24 higher visibility crosswalks
entrance treatments
speed humps
curb extensions/chokers/bulb-outs
traffic circles and roundabouts
one-way streets
median barriers
semi-diverters or half closures
diagonal diverters
cul-de-sacs or street closures
traffic calming signs
City of Pinole Three Corridors Specific Plan (2010;
updated 2020)
The Three Corridors Specific Plan establishes new land use designations, design standards, and transit opportunities along the City’s three main transportation corridors: San Pablo Avenue, Pinole Valley Road, and Appian Way.
Future development is encouraged with the goal of reducing trips by single occupancy vehicles. Each of the three corridors are designated as Priority Development Areas, incorporating objectives like supporting transit, pedestrian, and bicycle travel.
Relevant policy priorities include:
Provide a mobility network that is safe and efficient to move people and goods.
All future improvements to streets and intersections must prioritize pedestrian and traffic safety.
Use traffic calming tools to make the Specific Plan Area more pedestrian-friendly, particularly in designated pedestrian priority areas and developments along San Pablo Avenue.
Ensure the mobility network is improved in the Specific Plan Areas to accommodate future traffic demands.
Discourage cut-through and truck traffic, especially on streets not designed to accommodate them. The City will take action to discourage through-traffic on local streets.
San Pablo Avenue, Pinole Valley Road, and Appian Way should accommodate safe passage for pedestrians and bicyclists. All Intersections and crossings should be made accessible to all, particularly those with mobility impairments and individuals with no or low vision.
Street and intersection improvements must conform with this specific plan.
Other bicyclist enhancements recommended within the specific plan area include developing a bicycle wayfinding system, using advanced bicycle loop detectors, and implementing colored bicycle lanes.
Old Town Pinole Parking & Pedestrian Safety Study
(2020)
This study seeks to facilitate efficient parking, improve pedestrian safety, increase connectivity between parking and destinations, and enhance the unique character and pedestrian experience in Old Town Pinole. Relevant study priorities include:
Improve wayfinding and signage for drivers and pedestrians, particularly to and from area parking facilities.
Narrow lane widths and remove slip lanes to slow traffic and improve safety.
Implement new pedestrian facilities to enhance safety, including curb extensions and high visibility crosswalks. Close pedestrian network/sidewalk gaps.
Install more street trees throughout Old Town Pinole. Add placemaking elements, including pedestrian scale lighting.
PAGE
25 Stakeholder and Public Engagement
The ATP and its recommendations were shaped through a robust stakeholder and public engagement process.
The public was engaged throughout the planning process in a variety of different ways, including:
In-person engagement, including pop-ups and a workshop Online engagement, including a project website, an interactive map, and online surveys
Stakeholders were engaged as well.
This chapter summarizes the stakeholder and public engagement process.
For additional details, see Appendix B.
Community Engagement; Source: GHD
PAGE
26 In-Person Engagement
Three in-person engagement events were held throughout the planning process, including two pop-ups held in Fall 2023 and one formal workshop held in July 2024.
Pop-Ups
Two pop-ups were held in Pinole. At each pop-up, the project team had a table, educational materials, and engagement activities where community members could learn about the ATP and provide feedback.
The community expressed concerns about speeding drivers, unsafe pedestrian crossings and barriers to active transportation. When asked about priorities for the ATP, community members chose safety for pedestrians and bicyclists as their top priority, followed by supporting a culture of walking and bicycling and increasing accessibility and comfort.
Engagement materials included:
- Two Project Area Maps, one of the entire study areas and the other of Downtown Pinole, displayed locations of pedestrian and bicycle collisions. Participants identified areas of concern and made location-based comments on sticky notes.
- An Information Board with project’s background, goals, and timeline.
- Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility Handouts that highlighted potential infrastructure options.
- A Getting Around Pinole Dot Exercise that asked:
o 1) What prevents you from walking, bicycling, or rolling (ebike, scooter, skateboard, etc.) in Pinole? o 2) What would you like to prioritize in Pinole? Participants were encouraged to place dots indicated their response to each question.
Materials were printed in both English and Spanish.
Pop-Up 1
The first pop-up was held outside the Peet’s Coffee on Pinole Valley Road from 9 am to 1 pm on October 28, 2023. The purpose of the event was to introduce the project to the community, gain feedback about community concerns and familiarize the public with potential active transportation design solutions.
Feedback was gathered from about 25 people during the engagement, and participants generally commented on pedestrian and bicycle safety and recreation access. Comments specifically addressed:
- Challenges crossing Pinole Valley Road. Improved pedestrian crossings near the library (Pinole Valley High School), San Pablo Avenue, and I-80.
- Improved safety around shopping center, specifically for pedestrians walking along Pinole Valley Road.
- Interest in raised crosswalks and RRFBs.
- Improved sidewalks and crossing on San Pablo Avenue,
specifically near the senior center (Pinole Valley Road) and Tennent Avenue.
- Wayfinding and maps for bicyclists.
- Maintenance and improvements on Bay Trail.
- Interest in protected bicycle lanes and green paint.
- Bicycle parking at major destinations.
PAGE
27 Community Engagement; Source: GHD
Pop-Up 2
The second pop-up was held at the Pinole Farmer’s Market on the corner of Tennent Avenue and San Pablo Avenue from 9 am to 1 pm on November 4, 2023. The purpose of the event was to introduce the project to the community, gain feedback about community concerns and familiarize the public with potential active transportation design solutions.
Feedback was gathered from over 60 people during the engagement One-hundred and twenty responses were provided on the Getting Around Pinole Dot Exercise. When asked what prevents people from walking, bicycling, or rolling, speeding drivers was the most common response, followed by difficulty crossing major streets followed by difficulty crossing major streets, physical barriers, freeways, railroad crossings. Participants prioritized safety for pedestrians and bicyclist, support a culture of walking and bicycling, and an increase accessibility and comfort.
Thirty-eight sticky note comments were made on the two project area maps.
Approximately half of the comments on the map of downtown Pinole were concerns of low bus frequency and the need for improved transportation/connection. Participants also commented about high vehicle speeds, and pedestrian safety, specifically vehicles not yielding to pedestrians. New crosswalks were requested on both maps. Facilities for accessibility and roadway improvements were also recommended.
Community Engagement; Source: GHD
Workshop
A workshop was held on July 11, 2024, and provided an opportunity for the community to comment on the ATP. The event took place at the Pinole Senior Center from 6 to 8 pm.
The workshop included draft concept plans along San Pablo Avenue, Pinole Valley Road / Tennent Avenue, Appian Way, and Fitzgerald Drive.
Additionally, a round table discussion was held to facilitate conversation about the recommendations.
PAGE
28 Comments left on the boards included:
- Safety concerns regarding how bicyclists would turn from the twoway bikeways at intersections - Concerns about removing parking on Tennent Avenue, specifically regarding the impacts to the church and school
- How the City will decide which side of the street will have parking, and which side will have bikeways on roadways where two-way bicycle facilities are recommended
- Support for slowing traffics speeds along Appian Way as drivers exit I-80
Online Engagement
To further engagement and public input, a project website was created and hosted an interactive map and online surveys for community members to give feedback throughout the planning process.
Project Website
A project website was developed, which included project background, ways to get involved, examples of existing active transportation infrastructure, examples of potential improvements, a project timeline, upcoming and past workshops, project documents, and a contact form.
Project Website
Interactive Map
An interactive map tool was available on the project website, which allowed users to place location-specific comments and concerns (or digital pins) on a map. The pins were categorized by comment type: Walking/Pedestrian Comment, Bicycling Comment, Kids/School Comment, Work/Commute Comment, Traffic Safety Comment, and Recreation Comment. Users were able to view and respond to pins by others, including voting on pins through a “like” or “dislike” feature. The tool accepted input from 2023 through 2024.
Over 500 comments were received. For more details, see Appendix C.
Mostly, the comments were related to crossings and intersections at 49%, bicycle connections and separation at 18%, and vehicle speed and traffic safety at 16%.
PAGE
29 Interactive Map
Online Transportation Survey
An online transportation survey was available on the project website. The survey gathered information about participants’ travel patterns, barriers to active transportation, and prioritization of improvements to the transportation network. The survey gathered 102 responses from the public.
A majority of survey respondents own property in Pinole, while others work, rent, own a business and/or go to school in the area.
Survey respondents most often said they drove once or multiple times a day (67%). A large portion of respondents reported walking with 47% walking once or more a day and 45% walking at least a few times per month. Fewer respondents reported riding a bicycle, or skateboard, and a majority of those who did rode a few times a month. Carpooling and taking public transit in pinole is less common. More than half of respondents reported never carpooling (52%) and almost 75% reported never using public transportation Pedestrians reported shorter trips between 1 and five miles to be most challenging. Bicyclists reported longer trips over five miles to be most challenging, but also reported being challenged by shorter trips. Many respondents said no length of bicycle trip was challenging. Respondents reported a disconnected sidewalk or bike path network and poor quality of pedestrian or bike infrastructure posed the greatest challenges when walking and bicycling in Pinole
Online Concept Survey
An online concept survey was created to gather community input on the draft concept plans presented at the in-person workshop. Commenters were instructed to vote how much they liked each concept and were allowed provide written feedback and upvote other comments.
Generally, commenters favored Class IV separated bikeways over other bikeways. Some commenters expressed concern about road diets and traffic congestion. Other commenters expressed support for road diets and traffic calming.
Other Stakeholders
A Community Engagement Committee (CEC) was convened to assist the City in reviewing the public participation plan for the ATP, choosing dates/locations for workups and pop-up events, sharing information about the ATP and workshops with community members and stakeholders, as well as participating in other task related to engagement. The CEC met four times virtually throughout the course of the project and voiced support for traffic calming and low-stress bikeways.
The City shared the draft plan with the Traffic and Pedestrian Safety (TAPS) Committee and multifamily housing properties. At the December 11, 2024 TAPS Meeting, comments on the draft plan were provided.
Additionally, the City displayed the draft concept plans at Pinole City Hall and held an interdepartmental City staff meeting to discuss the ATP, in which representatives from the Pinole Police Department were present.
For additional details, see Appendix B and C.
PAGE
30 This page intentionally left blank
PAGE
31 Recommendations
This section presents the recommended bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure improvements, as well as the recommended non-infrastructure improvements.
Infrastructure improvements are the physical changes that build a connected, comfortable, and safe bicycle and pedestrian network.
Infrastructure improvements include site-specific bicycle and pedestrian projects.
Non-infrastructure improvements are the programs or policies that aim to encourage active transportation and support safety along the bicycle and pedestrian network.
A toolkit of improvements is provided in Appendix D. The toolkit provides details on a variety of available infrastructure and non-infrastructure improvement types, as well as wayfinding and amenity options for consideration.
The recommended improvements were identified based on the existing conditions analysis, stakeholder and community feedback, and City staff input.
This section also presents the preferred concept plans.
PAGE
32 Types of Bicycle Facilities
This section describes the different bicycle facility types, as well as typical bikeway dimensions. Bikeway design standards are derived from Caltrans Design Information Bulletin (DIB) 94 Complete Streets: Contextual Design Guidance, Caltrans DIB 89-01 Class IV Bikeway Guidance, and the Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM).
Class I Shared-Use Paths
Class I bikeways (shared-use paths) are exclusive walking and bicycling facilities where motor vehicles are prohibited.
Per DIB 94 (Table 5.1.1), for Class I (Two Way), the minimum/preferred width is 10-12 feet.
Per HDM 1003.1 (Class I Bikeways):
Traveled Way—the minimum paved width for travel way for a two-way bike path shall be 8 feet (10-foot preferred).
Shoulder—a minimum 2-foot-wide shoulder (3 feet where feasible) shall be provided adjacent to the traveled way of a bike path when not on a structure.
Bike Paths Parallel and Adjacent to Streets and Highways—the minimum separation between the edge of traveled way of a bike path and the edge of traveled way of a parallel road shall be 5 feet plus the standard shoulder width.
Class II Bicycle Lanes
Class II bikeways (bicycle lanes) are striped lanes for bicyclists that provide a designated space for bicyclists within the roadway, helping to define where motorists and vehicles are. Bike lanes are distinguished using color, lane markings, signage, and intersection treatments. Class II bicycle lanes may be buffered to provided visual separation between bicyclists and vehicles.
Class I shared-use path. Source: GHD.
Class II buffered bicycle lane. Source: GHD.
PAGE
33 Per DIB 94 (Table 5.1.2):
For Class II, adjacent to edge of pavement/curb/parking (exclusive of the gutter), the minimum width is 5-7 feet.
When provided, buffers adjacent to Class II should be a minimum of 2 feet (2-4 feet preferred).
Class III Bicycle Routes and Bicycle Boulevards
Class III bicycle routes are designated routes for bicyclists within roads, where bicyclists share the road with motorists, indicated by signage or a painted “sharrow.” These features enhance motorists’ awareness of bicyclists’ presence. They are most appropriate on lower speed roads.
Class III bicycle boulevards are roads designed for bicycle traffic, with traffic calming strategies aimed at slowing vehicle speeds. Bicycle boulevards can be considered near destinations or along routes frequented by vulnerable road users, such as children and families.
The City may consider customized signage for bicycle routes and bicycle boulevards. In place of bicycle routes, the City may consider bicycle boulevards.
Class IV Separated Bikeways
Class IV separated bikeways are on-street bicycle facilities with a physical barrier, between the bikeway and motor vehicle lanes. Bikeways may be separated by a variety of buffers including bollards, a concrete curb, a parking lane, planters, and more. Separated bikeways may be one-way or two-way.
Per DIB 94 (Table 5.1.3 and Table 5.1.4, respectively):
For Class IV (One Way), between curb and buffer, the minimum width is 5-8 feet (preferred width is 6-8 feet).
For Class IV (Two Way), between curb and buffer, the minimum width is 9-12 feet (preferred width is 10-12 feet).
Class III bicycle route. Source: GHD
Class IV separated bikeway. Source: GHD.
PAGE
34 Per DIB 89-01 (Figure 2):
For Class IV (One Way), for on-street parking separated bikeway on street, the bikeway width is 5 feet minimum (7 feet preferred) and the buffer width is 3 feet minimum (5 feet minimum if accessible parking). For Class IV (One Way), for no parking separated bikeway on street, the bikeway width is 5 feet minimum (7 feet preferred) and the buffer width is 2 feet minimum (3 feet preferred).
DIB 89-01 also notes that, for Class IV (Two Way), the same width as Class I should apply.
NACTO
The NACTO Urban Street Design Guide provides a comprehensive set of design guidelines for pedestrian and bicycle facilities. The guide includes principles for designing complete streets, which are streets that provide safe and accessible travel for all users. This guide also was used for guidance.
Bicycle Network Improvements
The recommended bicycle network improvements are shown in Figure 10.
These improvements include the bikeway projects and bicycle crossing projects.
Development of the bicycle network focused on the existing bikeways, providing improvements to the bicycle facility type, and connecting gaps in the bikeway network. Bicycle facility types were selected in accordance with state and local guidance, as well as street right-of-way and other considerations. Additionally, feedback from the City, prior planning efforts, and local knowledge informed bicycle facility selection. 1 The City may consider additional Class III facilities on local streets, depending on community needs and abutting land uses.
Connectivity to regional bikeways also was considered. Two existing Class I shared use paths span the length of the City and provide a backbone for the bicycle network. On the northern end of the City, the existing Bay Trail is a shoreline path connecting Pinole to the greater region. The existing Pinole Creek path begins near the Bay Trail and runs south parallel to Pinole Valley Road, terminating just before I-80.
Connectivity to transit and key destinations also was considered. Pinole sits between two transit hubs.
The Hercules Hub is a regional housing and transportation development that will be located along the Bayfront in the City of Hercules. The Hercules Hub is expected to generate transit ridership and connect to other transit services, such as bus, carpool, ferry, and rail. The Richmond Parkway Transit Center is located at Richmond Parkway and Blume Drive, just west of I-80 in the City of Richmond. There is also a Park and Ride lot at the Richmond Parkway Transit Center.
The bikeway projects list below include connectivity to key destinations within the City, regional bikeways, and transit.
Bikeways
As shown in Table 3, there are 24 bikeway projects. Proposed on-street bikeways include Class II buffered bicycle lanes, Class III bicycle routes1, and Class IV separated bikeways. Where feasible, more robust facilities are recommended. Proposed off-street bikeways include Class I multi-use paths, extending existing bikeways along the Bay Trail and Pinole Creek.
The existing bikeway network is 10 miles, comprised mostly of scenic multiuse paths along San Pablo Bay and Pinole Creek.
PAGE
35 The proposed bikeway network would be 19 miles, including 16,813 feet (3 miles) of Class IV bikeways along Appian Way, Pinole Valley Road, San Pablo Avenue, and Tara Hills/ Canyon Drive.
San Pablo Avenue is recommended to be improved to a Class II buffered bicycle lane and a Class IV separated bikeway.
Pinole Valley Road is recommended to be improved to a Class II buffered bicycle lane and a Class IV separated bikeway.
Class II buffered bicycle lanes and Class IV separated bikeways add buffers to bike lanes, which allow the rider to feel safer with a physical barrier between vehicle traffic. These lower the stress a biker may feel on the roadway and lower potential multi-modal conflicts.
PAGE
36 Figure 10: Recommended Bicycle Network Improvements
PAGE
37 Table 3: Bikeway Projects
Bikeway
# Primary Road Start Road End Road Project Description
1 Appian Way San Pablo Ave Fitzgerald Dr/Sarah Dr Class IV 2 Appian Way Fitzgerald Dr/Sarah Dr 220 ft s/o Michael Dr Class II Buffered 3 Connector Trail (Pinole Creek
Trail)
Pinole Creek (n/o I-80) Pinole Creek (near Ellerhorst Elementary School)
Class I
4 Doidge Ave Wright Ave End of Wright Ave Class III
5 Fitzgerald Dr Western City Limit (I-80 Overpass) Appian Way Class II Buffered 6 Hanley Dr Marlesta Rd Limerick Rd Class III
7 Limerick Rd Hanley Dr Tara Hills Dr Class III
8 Marionola Way Marlesta Rd Henry Ave/Ridgecrest Rd Class III 9 Marlesta Rd Hanley Dr Marionola Way Class III
10 Pinole Valley Rd Henry Ave Pinole Valley High School Class II Buffered 11 Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley High School Simas Ave Class IV 12 Pinole Valley Rd Simas Ave Southern City Limit (600 ft s/o Marlin Ct) Class II Buffered 13 Ramona St/Savage Ave Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley Rd Class III 14 Ridgecrest Rd/Henry Ave Appian Way Eastern City Limit (130 ft east of Alice Way) Class III 15 San Pablo Ave Western City Limit Sunnyview Dr Class IV 16 San Pablo Ave Sunnyview Dr Eastern City Limit Class II Buffered 17 Sarah Dr/Shea Dr Appian Way Pinole Valley Rd Class III 18 Simas Ave Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley Rd Class III
PAGE
38 Bikeway
# Primary Road Start Road End Road Project Description
19 Sunnyview Dr San Pablo Ave Marlesta Rd Class III
20 Tara Hills Dr/Canyon Dr Western City Limit (230 ft e/o Cornelius Dr) Appian Way Class IV 21 Tennent Ave Railroad Ave San Pablo Ave Class III
22 Tennent Ave/Pinole Valley Rd San Pablo Ave Ridgecrest Rd/Henry Ave Class III 23 Tennent Ave/Railroad Ave San Francisco Bay Trail (w/o Tennent Ave) Pinole Creek (e/o Railroad Ave) Class I 24 Wright Ave Pinole Valley Rd Doidge Ave Class III
Table 4: Bicycle Crossing Projects
Bike
Crossing
# Primary Road Cross Road Project Description
1 Appian Way Tara Hills Dr / Canyon Dr Protected Intersection 2 Appian Way Fitzgerald Dr / Sarah Dr Protected Intersection 3 San Pablo Ave Appian Way Protected Intersection
4 Pinole Valley Rd Simas Ave Striping improvements, signal timing improvements 5 Pinole Valley Rd Shea Dr/Granada Ct Striping improvements, signal timing improvements 6 Pinole Valley Rd Estrella Ct Striping improvements, signal timing improvements 7 Pinole Valley Rd Ramona St Striping improvements, signal timing improvements 8 Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley High School Striping improvements, signal timing improvements
PAGE
39 Bicycle Crossings
As shown in Table 4, there are eight bicycle crossing projects.
Three bicycle crossing projects are protected intersections along Appian Way, to accommodate the Class IV separated bikeway. Protected intersections lower traffic stress by allowing bicyclists to cross one leg of traffic at a time with pedestrians, rather mixing with traffic to access the left turn pocket. They do this by providing a painted or physically protected space at each corner of the intersection for bicyclists to wait for the light.
Five bicycle crossing projects are striping and signal timing improvements along Pinole Valley Road, to accommodate the Class IV separated bikeway.
The Class IV separated bikeway could be a two-way bikeway on the east side of the street, which would require accommodations at the signalized intersections.
Protected intersection. Source: GHD.
PAGE
40 Pedestrian Network Improvements
The recommended pedestrian network improvements are shown in Figure
11. These improvements include sidewalk projects and pedestrian crossing projects.
Sidewalks
Much of the City has sidewalk coverage, but sidewalk gaps exist on key corridors, such as Pinole Valley Road and San Pablo Avenue. Sidewalk gaps in the pedestrian network disrupts citywide connectivity, discourages active transportation, and specifically disadvantages those with mobility devices, such as a walker, stroller, and/or wheelchair. In some cases, narrow sidewalks or poor sidewalk quality also limit accessibility for users.
As shown in Table 5, there are eight sidewalk projects, which total 12,169 feet.
Sidewalk #3 is along Pinole Valley Road. This project in intended to capture sidewalk gap closures and/or new sidewalks along the south side of the street (from Simas Avenue to Marlin Ct), where sidewalk gaps exist. Most destinations and residences are located on the north side of the street, where the sidewalk is complete. On the south side of the street, there are fewer destinations.
Sidewalks #4, #5, #6, and #7 are along San Pablo Avenue. This is a key transportation corridor in Pinole and is also identified for bicycle network improvements. Adding sidewalks to this street will create a more complete multimodal corridor that better connects residents to their destinations.
Sidewalks #2, #7, and #8 will require coordination with other jurisdictions (i.e., Caltrans, the City of Hercules, and the California Public Utilities Commission, respectively). These projects provide pedestrian connectivity to key destinations beyond the City of Pinole.
Pedestrian Crossings
In the City, pedestrian crossing infrastructure mostly is comprised of standard and high visibility crosswalks. In some cases, limited or unsafe crossing conditions, especially on arterial roadways, limit pedestrian connectivity. During community engagement, residents expressed crossing safety concerns, stating issues with visibility, a lack of curb cut-outs, accessibility, and safety.
Pedestrian crossing projects were identified based on the feedback received from the community and an analysis of collision history. Collision hotspots included intersections along San Pablo Avenue, Appian Way, and Pinole Valley Road near I-80. Pedestrian crossing projects were also considered near key destinations that generate high levels of pedestrian activity, such as Tennent Avenue, or where vulnerable road users are present, including schools.
As shown in Table 6, there are 23 pedestrian crossing projects. Pedestrian crossing projects are spread throughout the City, with a density of projects along San Pablo Avenue and Pinole Valley Road. Key improvements include human activated flashing beacons (i.e., rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs)), high visibility crosswalks, leading pedestrian intervals (LPIs), bulbouts, and right-turn slip lane removals. These improvements generally improve pedestrian visibility and encourage yielding.
For Pedestrian Crossing #13, the City has commenced preliminary engineering (PE) for the bridge. PE is anticipated to be completed in two phases due to funding limitations. The City has received initial funding from the Caltrans Highway Bridge Program; however additional funds may be needed. This project was included, as this bridge is an integral part of the area's transportation network. It is anticipated that the project will accommodate bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
PAGE
41 Table 5: Sidewalk Projects
Sidewalk
# Primary Road Start Road End Road
Length
(ft) Project Description
1 Appian Way 265 ft south of Michael Dr City Limits (Dalessi Ln) 734 Sidewalk (east side) 2 Richmond Parkway Blume Dr 475 ft e/o I-80 NB off ramp 1,400 Sidewalk (south side) 3 Pinole Valley Rd Simas Ave (s/o Potrero Ct) City Limits (s/o Marlin Ct) 7,528 Sidewalk (south side) 4 San Pablo Ave Western City Limit (130 ft w/o Golden
Gate Park)
Dursey Dr 480 Sidewalk (north side)
5 San Pablo Ave 3rd Ave 2nd Ave 297 Sidewalk (north side) 6 San Pablo Ave Alvarez Ave (80 ft e/o Alvarez Ave) Oak Ridge Rd 515 Sidewalk (north side) 7 San Pablo Ave RR Undercrossing (900 ft w/o
Hercules Ave)
Hercules Ave 1,028 Sidewalk (south side)
8 Tennent Ave n/o RR crossing (n/o Railroad Ave) s/o RR crossing (n/o Railroad Ave) 187 Sidewalk (west side)
PAGE
42 Table 6: Pedestrian Crossing Projects
Ped
Crossing
# Primary Road Cross Road Project Description
1 Fitzgerald Dr Best Buy Parking Lot High visibility crosswalks, remove sidewalk spur 2 Fitzgerald Dr Jovita Ln Curb return with ramp (4), high visibility crosswalks 3 Pinole Creek Trail Henry Ave Curb extension (2), high visibility crosswalks, RRFB 4 Pinole Valley Rd I-80 NB Ramps High visibility crosswalks, LPI 5 Pinole Valley Rd I-80 SB ramps High visibility crosswalks, LPI 6 Pinole Valley Rd Estates Ave Curb return with ramps (3), high visibility crosswalks, LPI 7 Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Creek RRFB
8 Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley High High visibility crosswalks (9) 9 Pinole Valley Rd Adobe Rd (w/o Savage Ave) Remove free right, square up intersection (e.g., sidewalk, curb/gutter, bulb-out (half corner), curb return with ramp)
10 Pinole Valley Rd Savage Ave Curb extensions (2), bulb-outs (2), curb return with ramp (1), high visibility crosswalks, RRFB 11 Pinole Valley Rd Simas Ave Curb return with ramp (2), high visibility crosswalks, curb extension (1) 12 Pinole Valley Rd Adobe Rd (s/o Wright Ave) Curb extensions (2), high visibility crosswalks 13 San Pablo Ave BNSF Railroad Bridge
14 San Pablo Ave 640 San Pablo Ave RRFB
15 San Pablo Ave Fifth Avenue Pedestrian Hybrid Beacon
16 San Pablo Ave Tennent Ave Remove right-turn slip lane (e.g., sidewalk, curb/gutter, curb return with ramp), replace signal equipment (1)
17 San Pablo Ave Jones Ave/Laurel Ave RRFB, curb return with ramp (2), high visibility crosswalks 18 San Pablo Ave 3rd Ave RRFB
19 San Pablo Ave Walter Ave Curb return with ramps (4), high visibility crosswalks, stripe centerline on Walter Ave 20 Tara Hills Dr Kildare Way Bulb-outs (Full Corner) (4), high visibility crosswalks 21 Tennent Ave Plum St Bulb-outs (Full Corner) (4)
22 Tennent Ave Prune St Bulb-outs (Full Corner) (4), high visibility crosswalks 23 Tennent Ave Pear St Bulb-outs (Full Corner) (4)
PAGE
43 Figure 11: Recommended Pedestrian Network Improvements
PAGE
44 Figure 12: San Pablo Avenue & Tennent Avenue Figure 13: Tennent Avenue & Prune Street To calm traffic, improve pedestrian safety, and provide new green space for the community, removal of the right-turn slip lane is recommended at San Pablo Avenue and Tennent Avenue. Installation of a marked crosswalk and appropriate safety enhancements is recommended across Tennent Avenue and Prune Street to better connect the bridge over Pinole Creek to St. Joseph School.
PAGE
45 Non-Infrastructure Programs
Programs support walking and bicycling in a community by sharing information, promoting safety, and fostering a vibrant active transportation culture.
Communities with high rates of walking and bicycling often use a “Five E’s” approach, with education, encouragement, evaluation, and equity complementing engineering improvements.
Education programs share information about safety, benefits of active transportation, and resources or facilities available in the community. They should address people bicycling, walking, and driving.
Encouragement programs promote bicycling and walking as fun, convenient, and enjoyable modes of transportation and recreation. Evaluation programs monitor success through counts, surveys, and data review to inform adjustments or modifications to programs, policies, and the built environment.
Equity is a lens through which all programs and infrastructure projects should be viewed to ensure disadvantaged members of the community have access to and benefit from the City’s investments in active transportation.
Existing Programs
Traffic and Pedestrian Safety Committee
The Traffic and Pedestrian Safety (TAPS) Committee is a specific undertaking by the Pinole City Council to address pedestrian safety concerns and transportation issues brought by residents and stakeholders. 2 https://cchealth.org/injury-prevention/safe-routes.php TAP Committee discussions include areas for improvement across the pedestrian and multimodal network, including planning and grant funding activities.
Safe Routes to School
Safe Routes to School (SRTS) programs offer education and encouragement activities intended to increase the number of children who walk or bicycle to school and reduce traffic congestion in school areas.
Contra Costa Health’s Injury Prevention and Physical Activity Promotion SRTS program works with cities and community-based organizations (CBOs) to encourage children to walk and bike to school as a form of regular exercise and community building.2 Contra Costa Health coordinates and implements SRTS activities at Crespi Junior High School in El Sobrante and Pinole Middle School through several programs listed below:
Walk to School Day
In-Class Presentations and Assemblies
Leadership Development
Walking School Buses can address parent concerns by organizing groups of students to walk to school together along a “bus route” with supervision from a parent or other volunteer
Bike Rodeos offer on-bike skills practice for students and are held either during school as part of an assembly or physical education, or after school
On-Campus Kiosks promote walking and bicycling
Bike Helmet Safety Education includes information on the importance of wearing a helmet as well as proper fit and adjusting straps
PAGE
46 Additionally, the City has an annual SRTS project that provides minor capital improvements to enhance the safety of pedestrians and bicyclists on public roads in school areas. In coordination with the TAPS Committee and the School District, the City will address safety concerns and develop strategies to encourage the use of alternative modes of transportation in the vicinity of schools. SRTS improvements may include enhancements to pavement markings, regulatory and advisory signs, installation of traffic control devices such as RRFBs, and minor concrete improvements.
Pass2Class Free Bus Passes for Students
Regular commutes to and from school aboard transit often include first- and last-mile connections made by walking or rolling. Students in Pinole, as part of Contra Costa County, can receive free transit bus passes as part of the Pass2Class program at the beginning of each school year, reducing traffic congestion and air pollution and encouraging multimodal travel. The 2023 program offers free County Connection, Tri Delta Transit, WestCAT, or AC Transit bus passes for up to two students per household for up to 2 months.3 Community Education & Encouragement
Several local entities contribute to educational and encouragement campaigns targeting Pinole residents, such as the City and Bike East Bay, the local bicycle advocacy organization.
Bicycle Education Classes sponsored by Bike East Bay are free classrooms, on-bike, and webinar-based classes on a variety of topics to help community members do more by bike. Class types include “Urban Cycling 101 for Adults and Teens” as well as workshops, family rides, and group rides.4
Community events and rides sponsored by Bike East Bay include regular “Try an E-Bike” rides on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge, Family Cycling Rodeos, and so much more. As a not-for-profit 3 https://511contracosta.org/schools/pass2class-program/ community organization, Bike East Bay seeks to promote healthy, sustainable communities by making bicycling safe, fun, and accessible.
Non-Infrastructure Recommendations
The City already has a history of hosting non-infrastructure programs or working with local partners to improve safety and active transportation.
Appendix D provides a list of non-infrastructure recommendations that the City may consider to implement as standalone programs or explore potential partnerships with existing departments, programs, or community groups.
The following section highlights few of these programs.
Traffic Safety Educational Campaign
An education campaign uses print and digital media, radio, and television to educate the community about safe driving, bicycling, and walking behavior.
The campaign could be used to target behaviors that are particularly prevalent in the City. Education campaigns could target parents specifically through newsletters, online resources, back to school materials, and inperson meetings.
Evaluation and Monitoring
Tracking the progress the City makes on achieving the goals set forth by this ATP is to establish methods for evaluating or monitoring progress on the proposed recommendations. This may include updating to local and regional programs and policies as best practices change, monitoring existing transportation conditions, and staying updated on technological advancements in traffic safety.
An annual report card could assess the City’s progress toward the goals and implementation of recommended projects and programs. Annual report cards can also incorporate performance measures and a review of 4 https://bikeeastbay.org/education
PAGE
47 effectiveness to evaluate costs and benefits of various efforts and adjust investments to maximize results, using metrics such as collision data, program participation data, progress of project implementation, and other relevant metrics to highlight successes and challenges of improving bicycling and walking to school each year.
One way to support the annual report card would be to conduct an annual walk audit or ride-along to identify new opportunities or challenges that may arise in the future as new development and the Plan are implemented. Audit findings could be incorporated into the annual report card.
Potential partnerships to host the program may include the TAPS under the Pinole City Council, or active community or volunteer organizations.
Bike Share and E-Scooter Share Programs
Bike share and E-scooter share programs can provide a convenient way for people to travel to their destinations within the City, especially considering the grade changes in parts of the City. These programs can also augment last-mile transportation to transit and provide connections to neighboring communities and key destinations, such as the future Hercules Hub.
Bicycle Parking
Bicycle racks at convenient locations provide secure places to park and lock bicycles on a short-term basis. Bicycle parking should be sited at level locations that are highly visible to avoid bicycle theft and promote safety, as well as complementary to other amenities, like end of trip facilities. Special care should be taken to comply with accessibility requirements and avoid conflicts with motor vehicles, pedestrians, and mobility devices. Providing sanctioned bike parking in the right locations can help avoid bikes locked to objects such as trees, fences, railings, gutters, light poles, signs, and benches, which may cause maintenance or accessibility issues.
Community Safety Training Programs
Educational programs can be implemented to raise awareness about sharing the road with all types of roadway users with a focus on school-age children, new drivers, and seniors. The City Police and Public Works Departments could work in collaboration with community organizations to offer programs (e.g., Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Education Program and Traffic Safety Program) that provide free workshops, activities, and safety equipment to residents.
Crash Evaluation Programs
The City could use crash evaluation programs (e.g., Crossroads Software) to assess crash data and improve traffic safety. The City has received and will continue to assess California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) grants for programs to reduce motor vehicle crashes, injuries, and fatalities.
PAGE
48 Preferred Concept Plans
This section presents the preferred concept plans for key corridors, including:
San Pablo Avenue
Pinole Valley Road/Tennent Avenue
Appian Way
Fitzgerald Drive
The preferred concept plans illustrate potential future roadway modifications to accommodate the recommended bikeways, with final design to be determined and developed by the City in the future.
Development of the preferred concept plans included consideration of stakeholder and public input on the draft concept plans, as discussed in Appendix B and C.
San Pablo Avenue
Class II Buffered Bicycle Lane
Existing San Pablo Avenue at Tennent Avenue is shown in Figure 14.
At this location, a Class II buffered bicycle lane is recommended. (Previously, a Class IV separated bikeway and a Class I shared use path were considered.) The recommended bikeway was selected to both preserve and function alongside on-street parking (both sides of the street), which supports businesses. The recommended bikeway would require a road diet, which is anticipated to provide traffic calming. Old Town Pinole is a key destination in the City, with this portion of San Pablo Avenue providing a Main Street experience.
At this location, the preferred concept plan is shown in Figure 15. In constrained areas (as shown), a Class II bicycle lane may be needed. In the future (e.g., following construction of the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Over Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railroad project), the City may consider other options.
Class IV Separated Bikeway
Existing San Pablo Avenue at Meadow Avenue is shown in Figure 16.
The preferred concept plan is shown in Figure 17. This location was not presented in the draft concept plans but represents an area where a Class IV separated bikeway is feasible. In this area, San Pablo Avenue abuts land uses with on-site (off-street) parking; therefore, the removal of on-street parking (one side of the street) is possible.
Pinole Valley Road / Tennent Avenue
Class IV Separated Bikeway
Existing Pinole Valley Road at Julia Cout is shown in Figure 18.
At this location, a Class IV separated bikeway is recommended. The recommended bikeway is consistent with stakeholder and public input on the draft concept plans, as Future Concept B was the favored concept. To accommodate the recommended bikeway, removal of the southbound bike lane and northbound parking lane would be required (Figure 19).
Class II Buffered Bicycle Lane
Existing Tennent Avenue at Plum Street is shown in Figure 20.
At this location, a Class III bicycle route is recommended. The recommended bikeway would include signage and markings.
During stakeholder and public input on the draft concept plans, Future Concept D was the favored concept. To accommodate Future Concept D, the removal of on-street parking (one side of the street) would be required.
In the future, the City may consider a Class II buffered bicycle lane. For this bikeway, the preferred concept is shown in Figure 21.
PAGE
49 Figure 14: Existing San Pablo Ave at Tennent Ave
Figure 15: Potential Future San Pablo Ave at Tennent Ave (Preferred) Figure 16: Existing San Pablo Ave at Meadow Ave
Figure 17: Potential Future San Pablo Ave at Meadow Ave (Preferred)
PAGE
50 Figure 18: Existing Pinole Valley Rd at Julia Ct
Figure 19: Potential Future Pinole Valley Road at Julia Ct (Preferred) Figure 20: Existing Tennent Ave at Plum St
Figure 21: Potential Future Tennent Ave at Plum St (Preferred)
PAGE
51 Appian Way
Class IV Separated Bikeway
Existing Appian Way at Belden Court/Mann Drive is shown in Figure 22.
At this location, a Class IV separated bikeway is recommended, with the preferred concept plan shown in Figure 23. The preferred concept does not propose a road diet and would maintain the existing drive lanes.
Fitzgerald Drive
Class II Buffered Bicycle Lane
Existing Fitzgerald Drive at Jovita Lane is shown in Figure 24.
At this location, a Class II buffered bicycle lane is recommended (Figure 25).
This is the only bikeway type considered for this location and only one draft concept plan (i.e., Class II buffered bicycle lane) was presented to the stakeholders and the public for input. To accommodate the bikeway, lane widths would be reduced.
Figure 22: Existing Appian Way at Belden Ct/Mann Dr
Figure 23: Potential Future Appian Way at Belden Ct/Mann Dr (Preferred)
PAGE
52 Figure 24: Existing Fitzgerald Dr at Jovita Ln Figure 25: Potential Future Fitzgerald Dr at Jovita Ln (Preferred)
PAGE
53 Implementation
The ATP provides project and program recommendations to improve safety and mobility for active transportation users. Implementation of this plan will require community support, political leadership, and significant funding.
This chapter provides a strategy for implementation of the ATP projects.
Implementation Opportunities
The City should consider concurrent roadway projects that may provide opportunities to implement the ATP projects. Beyond project prioritization, there may be opportunities to implement lower-cost and lower-complexity projects in the interim.
Resurfacing
Resurfacing can be a method for implementing projects that only require striping. These projects may include, but are not limited to, Class II Bicycle Lanes, Class III Bicycle Routes and Bicycle Boulevards, high visibility crosswalks, and narrowing travel lanes. Even if these projects are not on the prioritized projects, they may be lower cost and easily implemented with restriping and repaving projects.
Reconstruction
Reconstruction projects, or projects that address roadway issues in a more expansive way than resurfacing, are another way to implement active transportation projects. This may include projects that require roadway reconfiguration and traffic calming, such as curb extensions, Class IV bikeways, raised crosswalks, and more.
Capital Improvement Projects
The Pinole FY 2025-26 to FY 2029-30 Five-Year CIP includes a number of existing Streets and Roads projects, including the ADA Transition Plan Update, Traffic Calming Program, SRTSs, Pavement Marking and Signage Upgrade, Pinole Signals Upgrade, Accessibility Improvements, Sidewalk Rehabilitation Program, Road Maintenance Repairs, Safety Improvements on Arterial Roadways, Road Rehabilitation, and San Pablo Avenue Bridge Over BNSF Railroad projects.
These existing projects either include projects or programs in this plan (i.e., the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Over BNSF Railroad project) or could include or incorporate projects or programs in this plan, either in the current or future Pinole CIP.
Cost Estimates
For the projects, planning-level construction cost estimates are provided.
The tables below include unit costs for each facility type, and the total estimated cost for the total proposed feet of each facility type.
These cost estimates do not include design, environmental work, right-ofway acquisition, permits, or other pre-construction activities. They do not consider project- or location-specific factors that may significantly affect costs, such as retaining structures, major drainage or utility work, moving roadway centerlines, etc. Actual project costs may differ from these cost estimates.
PAGE
54 Additional items considered for all cost estimates include:
Construction Contingency 20%
Traffic Control 10%
Erosion and Sediment Control 2%
Project Contingency 32% (Partial)
If a project includes infrastructure involving earthwork, grading, or concrete improvements, the following items were considered as well:
Minor Drainage 10%
Minor Utility Work 10%
Construction Staking and Layout 5%
Project Contingency 57% (Full)
For linear projects (e.g., bikeways and sidewalks), contingencies are shown separately. For crossing projects contingencies are included in the individual project cost.
Bicycle Projects
Bicycle projects include bikeways and bicycle crossings.
Bikeways
Bikeways were grouped by type.
Class I and IV were grouped together (due to the infrastructure requirements) and were assigned the full contingency of 57 percent. For these bikeway projects, cost estimates are provided in Table 7 and Table 8.
Class II and III were grouped together (signage and striping only) and were assigned the partial contingency of 32 percent. For these bikeway projects, cost estimates are provided in Table 9 and Table 10.
Bicycle Crossings
For the bicycle crossing projects, cost estimates are provided in Table 11.
Pedestrian Projects
Pedestrian projects include sidewalks and pedestrian crossings.
Sidewalks
For the sidewalk projects, cost estimates are provided in Table 12.
Pedestrian Crossings
For the pedestrian crossing projects, cost estimates are provided in Table
13.
PAGE
55 Table 7: Cost Estimates: Class I and Class IV Bikeways Bikeway
#
Primary Road Start Road End Road Cost Estimate
3 Connector Trail Pinole Creek (n/o I-80) Pinole Valley Trail (near Contra Costa Fire Station 74)
$4,266,440.61
23 Tennent Ave/Railroad Ave San Francisco Bay Trail (w/o Tennent Ave) Pinole Creek (e/o Railroad Ave) $346,811.49 1 Appian Way San Pablo Ave Fitzgerald Dr/Sarah Dr $474,039.51 11 Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley High School Simas Ave $264,639.63 15 San Pablo Ave Western City Limit Sunnyview Dr $332,025.71 20 Tara Hills Dr/ Canyon Dr Western City Limit (230 ft e/o Cornelius Dr) Appian Way $252,841.41 Note: These estimates do not include design, environmental work, right of way acquisition, permits, or other pre-construction activities. They do not consider project or location specific factors that may significantly affect costs such as retaining structures, major drainage or utility work, moving roadway centerlines, etc. Actual project costs may differ from the planning estimates provided.
PAGE
56 Table 8: Cost Estimates and Additional Items: Class I and Class IV Bikeways Item Quantity (ft) Unit Price Total
Class I 9,998 $461.40 $4,613,252
Class IV 16,813 $78.72 $1,323,546
Subtotal $5,936,798
Construction Contingency 20% $1,187,359.67
Traffic Control 10% $593,679.84
Erosion and Sediment Control 2% $118,735.97
Minor Drainage 10% $593,679.84
Minor Utility Work 10% $593,679.84
Construction Staking and Layout 5% $296,839.92
Total $9,320,773
Note: These estimates do not include design, environmental work, right of way acquisition, permits, or other pre-construction activities. They do not consider project or location specific factors that may significantly affect costs such as retaining structures, major drainage or utility work, moving roadway centerlines, etc. Actual project costs may differ from the planning estimates provided. These projects were assigned a 57% project contingency depending on the nature of the work.
PAGE
57 Table 9: Cost Estimates: Class II and Class III Bikeways Bikeway
#
Primary Road Start Road End Road Cost Estimate
2 Appian Way Fitzgerald Dr/Sarah Dr 220 ft s/o Michael Dr $29,262.99 5 Fitzgerald Dr Western City Limit (I-80 Overpass) Appian Way $158,458.41 10 Pinole Valley Rd Henry Ave Pinole Valley High School $93,212.71 12 Pinole Valley Rd Simas Ave Southern City Limit (600 ft s/o Marlin Ct) $251,067.00 16 San Pablo Ave Sunnyview Dr Eastern City Limit $197,667.75 4 Doidge Ave Wright Ave End of Wright Ave $6,172.83
6 Hanley Dr Marlesta Rd Limerick Rd $1,881.64
7 Limerick Rd Hanley Dr Tara Hills Dr $1,435.96
8 Marionola Way Marlesta Rd Henry Ave/Ridgecrest Rd $7,322.34 9 Marlesta Rd Hanley Dr Marionola Way $23,010.51
13 Ramona St/Savage Ave Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley Rd $24,477.32 14 Ridgecrest Rd/Henry Ave Appian Way Eastern City Limit (130 ft east of Alice Way) $38,620.98 17 Sarah Dr/Shea Dr Appian Way Pinole Valley Rd $23,965.21 18 Simas Ave Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley Rd $25,811.94 19 Sunnyview Dr San Pablo Ave Marlesta Rd $4,565.88
21 Tennent Ave Railroad Ave San Pablo Ave $10,343.78
22 Tennent Ave/Pinole Valley Rd San Pablo Ave Ridgecrest Rd/Henry Ave $8,646.13 24 Wright Ave Pinole Valley Rd Doidge Ave $17,582.37
Note: These estimates do not include design, environmental work, right of way acquisition, permits, or other pre-construction activities. They do not consider project or location specific factors that may significantly affect costs such as retaining structures, major drainage or utility work, moving roadway centerlines, etc. Actual project costs may differ from the planning estimates provided.
PAGE
58 Table 10: Cost Estimates and Additional Items: Class II and Class III Bikeways Item Quantity (ft) Unit Price Total
Class II 23,171 $31.49 $729,668.86
Class III 49,702 $3.90 $193,836.88
Subtotal $923,505.74
Construction Contingency 20% $184,701.15
Traffic Control 10% $92,350.57
Erosion and Sediment Control 2% $18,470.11
Total $1,219,027.58
Note: These estimates do not include design, environmental work, right of way acquisition, permits, or other pre-construction activities. They do not consider project or location specific factors that may significantly affect costs such as retaining structures, major drainage or utility work, moving roadway centerlines, etc. Actual project costs may differ from the planning estimates provided. These projects were assigned a 32% project contingency depending on the nature of the work.
PAGE
59 Table 11: Cost Estimates: Bicycle Crossings
Bicycle
Crossing #
Primary Road Cross Road Cost Estimate
1 Appian Way Tara Hills Dr / Canyon Dr $1,334,500.00
2 Appian Way Fitzgerald Dr / Sarah Dr $1,334,500.00
3 San Pablo Ave Appian Way $1,334,500.00
4 Pinole Valley Rd Simas Ave $278,204.00
5 Pinole Valley Rd Shea Dr/Granada Ct $278,204.00
6 Pinole Valley Rd Estrella Ct $278,204.00
7 Pinole Valley Rd Ramona St $278,204.00
8 Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley High School $278,204.00 Note: These estimates do not include design, environmental work, right of way acquisition, permits, or other pre-construction activities. They do not consider project or location specific factors that may significantly affect costs such as retaining structures, major drainage or utility work, moving roadway centerlines, etc. Actual project costs may differ from the planning estimates provided. These projects were assigned a 32% or 57% project contingency depending on the nature of the work.
PAGE
60 Table 12: Cost Estimates and Additional Items: Sidewalks Item Quantity Unit Price Total
Sidewalks (Linear Foot) 12,169 $380 $4,624,220
Subtotal $4,624,220
Construction Contingency 20% $924,844
Traffic Control 10% $462,422
Erosion and Sediment Control 2% $92,484
Minor Drainage 10% $462,422
Minor Utility Work 10% $462,422
Construction Staking and Layout 5% $231,211
Total $7,260,025
Note: These estimates do not include design, environmental work, right of way acquisition, permits, or other pre-construction activities. They do not consider project or location specific factors that may significantly affect costs such as retaining structures, major drainage or utility work, moving roadway centerlines, etc. Actual project costs may differ from the planning estimates provided. These projects were assigned a 57% project contingency depending on the nature of the work. Price per Linear Foot assumes construction of curb, gutter, and 6-foot-wide sidewalk, including sawcut and all base materials.
PAGE
61 Table 13: Cost Estimates: Pedestrian Crossings
Pedestrian
Crossing #
Primary Road Cross Road Cost Estimate
1 Fitzgerald Dr Best Buy Parking Lot $60,052.50
2 Fitzgerald Dr Jovita Ln $144,942.40
3 Pinole Creek Trail Henry Ave $221,448.50
4 Pinole Valley Rd I-80 NB Ramps $36,960.00
5 Pinole Valley Rd I-80 SB ramps $18,480.00
6 Pinole Valley Rd Estates Ave $127,389.80
7 Pinole Valley Road Pinole Creek $59,400.00
8 Pinole Valley Rd Pinole Valley High $96,096.00
9 Pinole Valley Rd Adobe Rd (w/o Savage Ave) $239,903.85 10 Pinole Valley Rd Savage Ave $464,060.60
11 Pinole Valley Rd Simas Ave $164,355.45
12 Pinole Valley Rd Adobe Rd (s/o Wright Ave) $152,996.50 13 San Pablo Ave RR Undercrossing (900 ft w/o Hercules Ave) $32,477,454* 14 San Pablo Ave 640 San Pablo Ave $59,400.00
15 San Pablo Ave Fifth Avenue $392,500.00
16 San Pablo Ave Tennent Ave $483,528.60
17 San Pablo Ave Jones Ave/Laurel Ave $149,715.20
18 San Pablo Ave 3rd Ave $59,400.00
19 San Pablo Ave Walter Ave $148,239.40
PAGE
62 20 Tara Hills Dr Kildare Way $542,435.00
21 Tennent Ave Plum St $487,485.00
22 Tennent Ave Prune St $542,435.00
23 Tennent Ave Pear St $487,485.00
Note(s):
1 These estimates do not include design, environmental work, right of way acquisition, permits, or other pre-construction activities. They do not consider project or location specific factors that may significantly affect costs such as retaining structures, major drainage or utility work, moving roadway centerlines, etc. Actual project costs may differ from the planning estimates provided. These projects were assigned a 32% or 57% project contingency depending on the nature of the work.
2 RRFBs assigned 32% contingency, unless other work required (52% contingency). 3 LPI should be included as part of signal timing audit ($2,000 per intersection). * For the San Pablo Avenue Bridge Over BNSF Railroad project, the cost estimate was obtained from the Pinole FY 2025-26 to FY 2029-30 Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan. The cost estimate included project management, planning and design and right-of-way, construction, and contingency.
PAGE
63 Prioritization
The projects were prioritized based on the criteria listed in Table 14 below.
For each criterion, the full points possible were assigned if the criterion was met; no partial points were awarded. For each project, a total of 20 points was possible.
Project prioritization will help the City identify which projects should be selected and targeted for implementation first. Project selection methodology is based upon typical grant criteria and modified to fit the context of the City.
Other considerations, such as available funding and grant program criteria, may result in projects being implemented in a modified order from that suggested by the prioritization.
The highest scoring projects (15 points or more, where possible) are summarized below. For all project scores, see Appendix E.
Table 14: Prioritization Criteria
Criterion Description Points
Possible
Safety Projects located within 500 feet of a location with a fatal or severe injury bicycle or pedestrian collision 5 DAC Projects located in a DAC, as defined by CalEnviroScreen (greater than or equal to 40.05) 4 Gap Closure Projects that close a gap in the sidewalk network, close a gap in the bicycle network, or bicycle projects along a high bicycle stress roadway (Bicycle LTS 3 or 4)
3 Community Input Projects that address a challenge or include and improvement identified by the community during public engagement activities for this Plan
3 Activity Generator Projects located within ½ mile of an activity generator such as parks, civic facilities (library, community center, City Hall), grocery stores, or medical services
2 Transit Mobility Projects located within ¼ mile of transit stops 2 Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Projects located within ¼ mile of a K-12 school 1 Total 20
PAGE
64 Bicycle Projects
For the bikeway projects, scores ranged from 2 point to 20 points, with 9 projects of the 24 projects scoring 15 points or more.
For the bicycle crossing projects, scores ranged from 8 points to 20 points, with two projects of the eight projects scoring 15 points or more.
Bikeways
As shown inTable 15, 9 projects scored 15 points or more. These projects are located along major corridors, including Pablo Avenue, Pinole Valley Road, and Appian Way
Bikeway #10 and #16 scored 20 points each. These projects scored all available points. Bikeway #10 is approximately 0.5-mile-long and is a key north-south corridor, while Bikeway #16 is approximately 1.2-mile-long and is a key east-west corridor.
Bikeway #14 and #22 scored 19 points each. These projects scored all available points, excluding the SRTS points (1 point). Like Bikeway #16, Bikeway #14 is a lengthy (1.9-mile-long) bikeway along a key east-west corridor.
Bicycle Crossings
As shown in Table 16, two projects scored 15 points or more. These projects are located along Appian Way.
Bicycle Crossing #1 scored 20 points. This project scored all available points. This project is located near community destinations both north and south of I-80.
Bicycle Crossing #3 scored 19 points. This project scored all available points, excluding the SRTS points (1 point).
Pedestrian Projects
For the sidewalk projects, scores ranged from 5 points to 14 points, with no projects scoring 15 points or more. The highest scoring projects are discussed below.
For the pedestrian crossing projects, scores ranged from 4 points to 17 points, with five projects of the 23 projects scoring 15 points or more.
Sidewalks
As shown in Table 17, two projects scored 14 points. These projects are located along San Pablo Avenue.
Sidewalk #5 and #6 scored 14 points each. These projects scored all available points, excluding the Safety and SRTS points (5 points and 1 point, respectively). Sidewalk #5 is just beyond 500 feet of two pedestrian fatal or severe injury collisions.
Pedestrian Crossings
As shown in Table 18, five projects scored 15 points or more.
Pedestrian Crossing #16, #17, and #23 scored 17 points each. These projects scored all available points, excluding the Gap Closure points (3 points).
PAGE
65 Table 15: Prioritized Bikeways
Bikeway # Primary Road To/From DAC Safety
Gap
Closure SRTS
Community
Input
Activity
Generator
Transit
Mobility Total
10 Pinole Valley Rd
Henry Ave to Pinole
Valley High School 4 5 3 1 3 2 2 20
16 San Pablo Ave
Sunnyview Dr to
Eastern City Limit 4 5 3 1 3 2 2 20
14 Ridgecrest
Rd/Henry Ave
Appian Way to
Eastern City Limit 4 5 3 0 3 2 2 19
22 Tennent Ave/Pinole
Valley Rd
San Pablo Ave to
Ridgecrest
Rd/Henry Ave 4 5 3 0 3 2 2 19
1 Appian Way
San Pablo Ave to
Fitzgerald Dr/Sarah
Dr 4 5 3 1 3 0 2 18
9 Marlesta Rd
Hanley Dr to
Marionola Way 4 5 0 1 3 2 2 17
11 Pinole Valley Rd
Pinole Valley High
School to
Simas Ave 0 5 3 1 3 2 2 16
20 Tara Hills Dr/
Canyon Dr
Western City Limit
to Appian way 4 5 3 1 3 0 0 16
15 San Pablo Ave
Western City Limit
to Sunnyview Dr 4 0 3 1 3 2 2 15
PAGE
66 Table 16: Prioritized Bicycle Crossings
Bike
Crossing # Primary Road Cross Road DAC Safety
Gap
Closure SRTS
Community
Input
Activity
Generator
Transit
Mobility Total
1 Appian Way Tara Hills Dr /
Canyon Dr
4 5 3 1 3 2 2 20
3 San Pablo Ave Appian Way 4 5 3 0 3 2 2 19
Table 17: Prioritized Sidewalks
Sidewalk
# Primary Road To/From DAC Safety
Gap
Closure SRTS
Community
Input
Activity
Generator
Transit
Mobility Total
5 San Pablo Ave 3rd Ave to 2nd Ave 4 0 3 0 3 2 2 14
6 San Pablo Ave
Alvarez Ave to
Oak Ridge Rd 4 0 3 0 3 2 2 14
Table 18: Prioritized Pedestrian Crossings
Ped
Crossing# Primary Road Cross Road DAC Safety
Gap
Closure SRTS
Community
Input
Activity
Generator
Transit
Mobility Total
16 San Pablo Ave Tennent Ave 4 5 0 1 3 2 2 17
17 San Pablo Ave Jones Ave/
Laurel Ave
4 5 0 1 3 2 2 17
23 Tennent Ave Pear St 4 5 0 1 3 2 2 17
21 Tennent Ave Plum St 4 5 0 1 3 0 2 15
22 Tennent Ave Prune St 4 5 0 1 3 0 2 15
PAGE
67 Funding
A variety of existing transportation funding sources as well as those more specifically aligned with bicycle and pedestrian uses exist. Many are limited to new construction, though some may also offer funds for maintenance of existing facilities. Capital Projects for bicycle and pedestrian facilities are typically funded through a combination of sources and not one single source.
State and Federal Programs
Active Transportation Program
The ATP was created by Senate Bill 99 (SB 99) to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation, such as walking and bicycling. The ATP consolidated various transportation programs into a single program and was originally funded at about $123 million a year from a combination of state and federal funds. SB 1 directed an additional $100 million annually to the ATP (see SB 1 – Road Repair and Accountability Act). The goals of the ATP include, but are not limited to, increasing the proportion of trips accomplished by walking and biking, increasing the safety and mobility of non-motorized users, advancing efforts of regional agencies to achieve greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals, enhancing public health, and providing a broad spectrum of projects to benefit many types of users including disadvantaged communities. Application cycles occur approximately every two years, typically in late spring or summer. Funding is awarded at both the state level through the Californian Transportation Commission (CTC) and at the regional level.
Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities Program
The Affordable Housing Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program funds land-use, housing, transportation, and land preservation projects to support infill and compact development that reduce GHG emissions. The program assists project areas by providing grants and/or loans, or any combination thereof, that will achieve GHG emissions reductions and benefit Disadvantaged Communities through increasing accessibility of affordable housing, employment centers, and key destinations via low-carbon transportation resulting in fewer vehicle miles traveled through shortened or reduced trip length or mode shift from single occupancy vehicle use to transit, bicycling, or walking. The three Project Area types include:
Transit Oriented Development Project Areas
Integrated Connectivity Project Areas
Rural Innovation Project Areas
SB 1 – Road Repair and Accountability Act
The “Road Repair and Accountability Act” of 2017 (SB 1) invests $54 billion over a decade to repair roads, improve traffic safety, and expand public transit systems across California, with funds split equally between state and local investments. SB 1 directs $100 million annually to the ATP to fund infrastructure projects, program implementation, and plan development to increase bicycling and walking. SB1 funds come to the City either directly or through one of several competitive programs. SB1 also created the Local Partnership Program (LPP), which continuously appropriates $200 million annually from the Road maintenance and Rehabilitation Account to local and regional transportation agencies that have sought and received voter approval of taxes or that have imposed fees, which taxes or fees are dedicated solely for transportation improvements, to improve active transportation, aging infrastructure, road conditions, and other benefits.
Highway Safety Improvement Program
The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core federal-aid program with the purpose of achieving a significant reduction in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads, including non-state-owned roads and roads on tribal land. The HSIP requires a data-driven, strategic
PAGE
68 approach to improving highway safety on all public roads with a focus on performance.
Local Road Safety Plan
A Local Road Safety Plan (LRSP) identifies and analyzes systemic safety problems and makes recommendations for safety improvements. The process of preparing an LRSP facilitates the development of local agency partnerships and results in a prioritized list of improvements and actions that can be used to apply for federal and state funds. Since 2022, an LRSP or equivalent document is required for an agency to be eligible for HSIP funds.
Pinole completed an LRSP in 2023.
Local Highway Bridge Program
The Local Highway Bridge Program (HBP) replaces or rehabilitates public highway bridges over waterways, other topographical barriers, other highways, or railroads when the State and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) determine that a bridge is significantly important and qualifies under the HBP program guidelines. Reimbursable scopes of work include replacement, rehabilitation, painting, scour countermeasures, and preventative maintenance activities.
Sustainable Transportation Planning Grants
Caltrans Sustainable Transportation Planning Grants are available to communities for planning, study, and design work to identify and evaluate projects, including conducting outreach or improving pilot projects.
Communities are typically required to provide a local match, with staff time or in-kind donations eligible to be used towards the match.
Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity Grants
Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity (RAISE) Grants are awarded on a competitive basis by the US Department of Transportation (USDOT) for investments in surface transportation infrastructure that will have a significant local or regional impact. RAISE Grant Funds were authorized under the Local and Regional Assistance Program in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL). Eligible grantees include public or government agencies or authorities, units of local government, special purpose districts, transit agencies, federally recognized Indian Tribes, and multi-state or multijurisdictional groups of entities. The Federal share grant may fund up to 80 percent of the costs of projects located in an urban area and up to 100 percent of the costs of a project located in a rural area, a historically disadvantaged community, or an area of persistent poverty.
Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvement Program The Congestion Management and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program, with funding through the BIL, provides a flexible funding source to State and local governments for transportation projects and programs to help meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. Funding is available to reduce congestion and improve air quality for areas that do not meet the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone, carbon monoxide, or particulate matter (nonattainment areas) and for former nonattainment areas that are now in compliance (maintenance areas).
Carbon Reduction Program
The Carbon Reduction Program (CRP), established by the BIL, provides federal funding for projects designed to reduce transportation emissions, defined as carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from on-road highway sources.
CRP funds may be used for transportation alternative projects including, but not limited to, the construction, planning, and design of on-road and off-road trail facilities for pedestrians, bicyclists, and other nonmotorized forms of transportation. CRP funding is apportioned to regions and local agencies based on population, using the 2020 U.S. Census. California’s share of the CRP is $106,704,653.
Safe Streets and Roads for All Program
The Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) program was established following passage of BIL in 2021, with the first competitive application cycle
PAGE
69 commencing in 2022. Local government agencies may directly apply to the program, with funding being provided in three categories: Action Plans, Supplemental Planning, and Implementation Grants. Applications for all three categories must be focused on implementing complete streets which will ultimately reduce serious injuries and fatalities for roadway users. Action Plan grants fund development of a qualifying Plan to support complete streets and reduction of roadway fatalities/serious injuries. Supplemental Planning activities include follow-up efforts to further the existing Action Plans. Implementation Grants, which implement activities from existing action plans, including constructing roadway safety treatments, including systemic safety fixes, constructing complete streets facilities such as walking and bicycling facilities, and non-infrastructure program activities to support the infrastructure investments.
Reconnecting Communities and Neighborhoods Program
The Reconnecting Communities and Neighborhoods (RCN) Program combines two Federal funding opportunities: the Reconnecting Communities Pilot (RCP) and the Neighborhood Access and Equity (NAE) Program. Both programs address transportation barriers that have negatively impacted connectivity and access to resources in disadvantaged communities. The RCN program distributes funding through three grant types: Capital Construction projects, Community Planning activities, and Regional Partnership Challenges.
Funding supports planning grants and capital construction grants, as well as technical assistance, to restore community connectivity through the removal, retrofit, mitigation, or replacement of eligible transportation infrastructure facilities, including active transportation improvements. Eligible applicants include state, units of local government, federal recognized Tribal governments, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), non-profit organizations.
Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and CostSaving Transportation Program The BIL allocates funding for the Promoting Resilient Operations for Transformative, Efficient, and Cost-Saving Transportation (PROTECT) program with the purpose of helping local agencies improve the resiliency of their on-system transportation infrastructure. The program provides Federal funding to projects to help communities address vulnerabilities due to weather, natural disasters, and climate change through four types of grants:
Planning Activities (limited to developing a resilience improvement plan), Resilience Improvements, Community Resilience and Evacuation Route Activities, and At-Risk Coastal Infrastructure Activities. Vulnerabilities the program addresses include, but are not limited to, current and future weather events, increasing frequency and magnitude of natural disasters, and changing climate conditions, including sea level rise.
The PROTECT program funds are distributed federally and by formula and competitive grants.
Office of Traffic Safety Grants
The California OTS offers grants annually, funded by the Federal Highway Safety Program, for programs that aim to reduce motor vehicle crashes, injuries, and fatalities. Eligible programs address priority areas, established by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) like alcoholand drug-impaired driving, pedestrian and bicycle safety, public relations, advertising, and marketing programs, and more. Public entities are eligible for grant funding, but non-profits must have a public entity as their host agency.
Urban Greening Program
The California Natural Resources Agency allocated $50 million to the Urban Greening program for urban greening and urban forestry projects that reduce GHG emission and provide multiple health benefits. Cities, counties, special districts, non-profit organizations, or agencies/entities formed pursuant to the Joint Exercise Powers Act can apply for funding. Applicants
PAGE
70 are expected to a) acquire, create, enhance, or expand community parks and green spaces and/or b) use natural systems that mimic natural systems to achieve multiple benefits.
Local and Regional Programs
Community Development Block Grant Program
The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program is a flexible federal funding program that provides communities with resources to address a wide range of unique community needs. These funds are provided through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). These funds are allocated to the City annually and can be used for capital projects that remove a barrier to accessibility.
Measure K and Measure J
Measure K is a half-cent sales tax originally approved in 1998 to provide 20 years of funding for transportation projects in Contra Costa County, including BART extension, freeway improvements, better bus service, enhanced bicycle facilities, and expanded transportation options for senior citizens and people with disabilities. The Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA) was created to manage these funds.
Measure J was approved in 2004 to continue the county’s half cent sales tax and is scoped to provide approximately $2.5 billion for countywide and local transportation projects and programs through 2034. Over the program’s 30- year period, CCTA will allocate $391.5 million to the County’s four Regional Transportation Planning Committees, including the Central, West, Southwest, and East Counties.
The West Contra Costa Transportation Commission (WCCTC) subregion, which houses Pinole, El Cerrito, Hercules, Richmond, San Pablo, and the unincorporated portions of West County, will receive 0.7% of the $391.5 million funds for safe transportation for children, 0.5% for additional local streets maintenance and improvements, 0.4% for livable communities,
0.04% for additional pedestrian, bicycle, and trail facilities, and 0.3% for subregional transportation needs.
More information about the Measure J Funding can be found in Contra Costa’s Transportation Sales Tax Expenditure Plan.
Measure I
Measure I established a voter-approved, ½ cent Pinole sales tax designed to improve the City’s long-term fiscal sustainability. Once fully established, the City has predicted that Measure I will generate approximately $2.5 Million dollars annually. This funding is dependent on sales tax revenue and varies year by year. All funds generated by Measure I will go towards the General Fund and will be spent on maintaining core City services such as 911 public safety response and maintaining local streets and roads. Further, the City itself controls all funds raised — by law, the State cannot take Measure I funding.
The collection of Measure I funds will begin in April 2025 and the City will begin receiving those funds in July 2025. This locally controlled funding that Measure I provided will help address Pinole’s annual deficit, which is projected to be at least $1.6 Million in the next fiscal year alone.
TDA 3 Program
The TDA 3 program in Pinole, California, provides funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects through the Transportation Development Act (TDA). This funding is allocated annually and allows counties to use 2% of Transit Development Act (TDA) funds collected for TDA 3 projects in their county.
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) allows counties to use 2% of TDA funds collected for TDA 3 projects in their county. Some counties competitively select projects, while other counties distribute the funds to jurisdictions based on population. MTC Resolution 4108 sets forth MTC's policies and procedures for TDA 3 funds. All projects must be reviewed by the City or County Bicycle Advisory Committee.
PAGE
71 One Bay Area Grant Program
In May 2012, the MTC adopted the inaugural One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) Program (Cycle) 1 to better integrate the region’s federal transportation program with its Sustainable Communities Strategy. The OBAG County program established funding guidelines and policies to reward jurisdictions that accept housing allocations through the Regional Housing Need Allocation process and that have historically produced housing.
In January 2022, MTC adopted the OBAG Cycle 3 framework. Like past cycles, the OBAG 3 framework was designed to advance the implementation of Plan Bay Area 2050, incorporate recent MTC policy initiatives, address federal planning and programming requirements, advance equity and safety, and emphasize a partnership between MTC and county transportation agencies like the Transportation Authority.
Transportation Fund for Clean Air Program
The Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) program is a California program funded by a $4 vehicle registration surcharge to support projects that reduce motor vehicle emissions and improve air quality. Forty percent of these funds are distributed to the nine Bay Area Counties. CCTA administers funds to Contra Costa County, which receives about $1.5 million from this fund annually.
Regional MTC ATP Application
The Regional MTC ATP program is a supplemental funding source to State ATP funds. The Regional ATP follows the same two-year funding cycle as the State ATP, and local agencies are able to submit applications to both funding sources for the same project.
Vehicle Impact Fees
In Pinole, vehicle impact fees are part of the Master Fee Schedule that outlines various fees for services, permits, and business licenses. These fees are designed to mitigate the impacts of new development on public services and infrastructure. For example, the Vehicle Impact Fee is applied to development projects to ensure that the costs associated with new developments are covered by the property owners.
Appendix A
City of Pinole
Pinole Active Transportation Plan
Existing Conditions & Opportunities Report
March 2024
Prepared for the City of Pinole by GHD Inc.
PAGE
i
Table of Contents
Table of Contents ............................................................................. i Table of Figures ............................................................................... ii Tables ............................................................................................... iii Introduction ..................................................................................... 1 Purpose of the Report ......................................................................1 Relevant Plans & Studies ............................................................... 4 Local Plans & Studies ......................................................................4 Regional Plans ...............................................................................23 Local Context ................................................................................. 32 Land Use Pattern ...........................................................................32 Rates of Walking & Bicycling .........................................................38 Street Network............................................................................... 39 Traffic Speeds ................................................................................42 Pedestrian Facilities ...................................................................... 44 Barriers to Walking ........................................................................46 Bikeway Network ......................................................................... 47 Type of Bikeways ...........................................................................47 Existing Bikeway Network ..............................................................48 Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) Analysis ...............................51 Bicycle Support Facilities ...............................................................55 Safety & Collision Data ................................................................ 58 Bicycle-Related Collisions ............................................................. 58 Pedestrian-Related Collisions ....................................................... 59 Programs ........................................................................................ 62 Traffic & Pedestrian Safety Commission ....................................... 62 Safe Routes to Schools................................................................. 62 Pass2Class Free Bus Passes for Students................................... 63 Community Education & Encouragement ..................................... 63
PAGE
ii
Table of Figures
Figure 1: City Overview & Regional Vicinity Map ...................................... 2 Figure 2: 2010 General Plan - Bikeway Map ............................................. 7 Figure 3: 2010 General Plan – Land Use Map .......................................... 8 Figure 4: Three Corridors Specific Plan (Project Areas) ........................ 14 Figure 5: Appian Way Circulation Opportunities & Constraints (Three Corridors Specific Plan)............................................................ 15 Figure 6: Pinole Valley Road Circulation Opportunities & Constraints (Three Corridors Specific Plan) ................................................ 16 Figure 7: San Pablo Avenue Circulation Opportunities & Constraints (Three Corridors Specific Plan) ................................................ 17 Figure 8: Old Town Pinole Boundaries ................................................... 18 Figure 9: 2018 Countywide Bike and Pedestrian Plan – Bikeway Map for Pinole & Vicinity ........................................................................ 24 Figure 10: 2018 Countywide Bike and Pedestrian Plan - Proposed LowStress Bikeway Network ........................................................... 25 Figure 11: Contra Costa Countywide Bike and Pedestrian Plan – Pedestrian Priority Areas .......................................................... 26 Figure 12: MTC Equity Priority Communities Map ................................. 35 Figure 13: Disadvantaged Communities Map (CalEnviroScreen 4.0 Percentile) ................................................................................ 36 Figure 14: 2021 Median Household Income (MHI) Map ........................ 37 Figure 15: Existing Street Network Map................................................. 40 Figure 16: Existing Speed Limits Map .................................................... 41 Figure 17: Wide Travel Lanes & Higher Vehicle Speed .......................... 43 Figure 18: Existing Bikeway Network Map ............................................ 49 Figure 19: San Francisco Bay Trail - Pinole Segment Map .................... 50 Figure 20: Bicycle Level of Traffic Stress Map ...................................... 53 Figure 21: Existing WestCAT Bus Routes .............................................. 57 Figure 22: Bicycle and Pedestrian Collisions by Severity 2015-2022 .... 60 Figure 23: Bicycle and Pedestrian Collisions Density 2015-2022 ......... 61
PAGE
iii
Tables
Table 1: 2023 LRSP - List of Viable Safety Projects ............................... 20 Table 2: 2018 Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan - Proposed Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects ............................................... 27 Table 3: 2017 Countywide Comprehensive Transportation Plan - 10- Year and 20-Year Project List ................................................... 30 Table 4: District 4 Pedestrian Plan for the Bay Area - Location-Based Needs ....................................................................................... 31 Table 5: District 4 Pedestrian Plan for the Bay Area - Needs Prioritization ............................................................................. 31 Table 6: Age of Pinole Residents ........................................................... 34 Table 7: Modes of Transportation (Daily Trips) ..................................... 38 Table 8: Mode of Transportation to Work (Employed Residents) .......... 38 Table 9: Existing Street Network Miles .................................................. 39 Table 10: Existing Bikeway Network Miles............................................. 48
PAGE
1 Introduction
The City of Pinole (“City”) is ready to move into the next stage of its commitment to supporting active transportation modes with the development of the Pinole Active Transportation Plan (“ATP” or “Plan”). While historical development patterns may not have always provided dedicated facilities for bicycling and walking, the City seeks to support the diverse transportation needs of its residents, workers, visitors, and stakeholders. Further, the City imagines a future where its mobility network allows people of all ages and abilities to get to and from their destinations safely, efficiently, and, as often as possible, without the use of single occupancy vehicles.
Purpose of the Report
Understanding the existing conditions, current challenges, and prime opportunities helps form the foundation for strategic active transportation project, program, and policy recommendations that meet the needs of the Pinole community. This report describes the active transportation landscape in the City today.
This report sets the planning context and goals for this Plan, describes the current environment for walking and bicycling in Pinole, identifies key constraints and initial improvement opportunities.
PAGE
2 Figure 1: City Overview & Regional Vicinity Map
PAGE
4 Relevant Plans & Studies
This section provides an overview of other plans and studies that are relevant to active transportation in Pinole.
Local Plans & Studies
City of Pinole General Plan (2010):
Pinole’s General Plan identifies the
community’s vision for the future and
provides policy guidance for future city
development, including decisions on growth
and conservation of open space and
resources in Pinole. The General Plan is
intended for use by City decision-makers,
City staff, community members, and other
interested groups as a guide to future land
use and economic development through its
goals, policies, and actions. Relevant
Elements of the General Plan are
summarized below.
CIRCULATION ELEMENT
The Circulation Element of the General Plan provides maps, goals, policies, and actions aimed at creating and maintaining a multimodal transportation system in the City and avoiding sprawl. This element supports energy efficient transportation choices by prioritizing safety improvements for people bicycling and walking and supporting transit via focused development along high-capacity transportation corridors. It also establishes programs to reduce single occupancy vehicle commute trips. Relevant policy priorities include:
Policy CE.1.2: The transportation system should be built with sustainable land use in mind.
o Action CE.1.2.2: Require development to provide facilities for transit, bicyclists, pedestrians, and alternative fuel vehicles.
o Action CE.1.2.3: Provide safe and convenient access for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Policy CE.1.3: Development should promote alternative transportation and support City and regional transit goals. o Action CE.1.3.2: Developments should have pedestrian, bicycle, transit, and electric vehicle facilities wherever possible.
Policy CE.1.4: Existing transit and active transportation networks in the City should be maximized.
o Action CE.1.4.2: The City’s website should have links to public transit resources, bike trails information and maps, pedestrian trails and maps, as well as carpool/vanpool
information.
o Action CE.1.4.4: There should be wayfinding signage and trail markers at transit stops and along multi-use trails. Policy CE.4.3: Impact fees will be assessed on new developments by the City to fund transit, bike, pedestrian, and multimodal infrastructure and accommodations.
o Action CE.4.3.1: Study multimodal impact fees and how best to implement such a program.