Agenda Packet — Salinas City Council, May 24, 2022 (part 1 of 3)

Tuesday, May 24, 2022
4:00 PM
City of Salinas
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas, CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org

SALINAS ROTUNDA
City Council
Mayor Kimbley Craig
Councilmembers:

Carla Viviana González, District 1 - Tony Barrera, District 2 Steve McShane, District 3 - Orlando Osornio, District 4 Christie Cromeenes, District 5 - Anthony Rocha, District 6 Steven S. Carrigan, City Manager
Christopher A. Callihan, City Attorney
City Clerk’s Office: (831) 758-7381
Meeting Agenda - Final
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 24, 2022

PUBLIC NOTICE
This meeting is being conducted consistent with State of California Executive Order N-29-20 dated March 17, 2020, regarding the COVID-19 pandemic. The public may view the meeting on television and/or online and may participate in-person in the Council Chamber.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURES
If you wish to make a general public comment or comment on a specific agenda item, you are encouraged to attended the City Council meeting in person. Public comment may also be submitted via email at [email protected] and will be entered into the record.

PUBLIC COMMENT TIME RESTRICTIONS
Public comments generally are limited to two minutes per speaker; the Mayor may further limit the time for public comments depending on the agenda schedule.

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS
Receive public communications on items that are not on the agenda and that are in the City of Salinas’ subject matter jurisdiction. Comments on Consent, Consideration, and Closed session items should be held until the items are reached. The public may request that the legislative body consider adding an item for consideration on a future agenda. The public may comment on scheduled agenda items, including closed session items, as they are considered.

PRESENTATION
Councilmember comments on presentations are generally limited to three minutes.

United Way Monterey County

PUBLIC HEARINGS
ID#22-280 Substantial Amendments to United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan and Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan for the Hebbron Family Center CDBG Project Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the submission of a Second Substantial Amendment to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan (AAP) and a First Substantial Amendment to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan; and authorize the allocation of $798,633 in FY 2020-2021 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and $607,980 in FY 2021-2022 CDBG funds to the Hebbron Family Center project.

City of Salinas Page 2 Printed on 5/19/2022
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 24, 2022

CONSENT AGENDA
All matters listed under Consent Agenda may be enacted by one motion unless a member of the Council or the public requests discussion or a separate vote.

ID#22-308 Minutes
Recommendation: Approve minutes of May 10, 2022 and May 17, 2022.

ID#22-307 Financial Claims
Recommendation: Approve financial claims report.

ID#22-164 Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution accepting the Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous "Type B" Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B with Newton Construction, for maintenance and responsibility.

ID#22-201 Professional Services Agreement with Griffin Structure Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Salinas and Griffin Structures in an amount not to exceed $1,293,710 for Program and Construction Management for the Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project.

ID#22-224 Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program Recommendation: Approve a Resolution approving the Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program between the Transportation Agency for Monterey County and the City of Salinas.

ID#22-259 East Laurel Pedestrian Improvements Project, CIP No. 9220 Recommendation: Approve a Resolution accepting the East Laurel Pedestrian Improvements Project, CIP No. 9220, for maintenance and responsibility.

ID#22-265 Direct Purchase of Structural Firefighting Personal Protective Clothing Recommendation: Approve a Resolution approving the direct purchase of structural firefighting personal protective clothing from JAECO Fire and Safety in the amount of $46,745.53.

ID#22-273 Five Cities Partnership/Hartnell College Memorandum of Understanding Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Hartnell Community College District and the Cities of Gonzales, Soledad, Greenfield, and King City to continue support of the Five Cities Partnership.

ID#22-277 Salinas City Center Improvement Association 2021 Annual Report Recommendation: Approve a Resolution accepting and approving the Salinas City Center Improvement Association (SCCIA) 2021 Annual Report.

ID#22-279 Acquisition of Asset Management Software
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution to approving two professional service agreements to install and license CityWorks software.

City of Salinas Page 3 Printed on 5/19/2022
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 24, 2022
ID#22-281 Short-Term Pond 3 Industrial Wastewater Effluent Utilization Agreement Recommendation: Approve a Resolution approving a Short-Term Pond 3 Industrial Wastewater Effluent Utilization Agreement with Monterey One Water and the Monterey County Water Resources Agency.

ID#22-284 Service Agreement with McLaughlin Painting and Waterproofing Corporation Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing a Services Agreement in the amount of $58,461 between the City of Salinas and McLaughlin Painting and Waterproofing Corporation for the painting of three (3) Recreation Centers.

ID#22-286 Sublease of 801 Abbott Place
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing a Sublease Agreement between the City of Salinas and Simplot for the property located at 801 Abbott Place.

ID#22-287 Economic Development Element Target Area K (Ferrasci Business Park Specific Plan) Agreements
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Funding Agreement for the Ferrasci Business Center Specific Plan and also authorizing the establishment of a Capital Improvement Project and appropriation of funding related to the Specific Plan.

ID#22-290 Equipment Donation from Transcend Robotics
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution accepting the donation of a Vantage Robot and authorizing the execution of all necessary donation acceptance documents.

ID#22-297 Agreement for Services for Claims Adjuster
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an agreement for services with Carl Warren Company in the initial amount of $148,789.96 for third party adjusting services of liability claims brought against the City of Salinas.

ID#22-300 Extension of Agreement for Services for Workers’ Compensation Third Party Claims Adjuster
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an extension of an Agreement for Services with CorVel Enterprise Comp., Inc., in the total amount of $216,651 per year, for third party adjusting services for workers' compensation claims brought against the City of Salinas.

ID#22-302 A Resolution Affirming Support of Reproductive Freedom Recommendation: Approve a Resolution affirming the City of Salinas's support of reproductive freedom.

ID#22-304 Display of Commemorative Flag - Progress Pride Flag Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the display of commemorative Progress Pride Flag at City Hall from June 1, 2022 thru June 30, 2022.

COUNCILMEMBERS’ REPORTS, APPOINTMENTS AND FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS Receive communication from Councilmembers on reports, appointments and future agenda items. Councilmember comments are generally limited to three minutes.

City of Salinas Page 4 Printed on 5/19/2022
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 24, 2022

ADJOURNMENT
_____________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk

AGENDA MATERIAL / ADDENDUM
Any addendums will be posted within 72 hours of regular meetings or 24 hours of special meetings and in accordance with Californian Government Code Section 54954.2, unless otherwise allowed under the Brown Act. City Council agenda item reports may be viewed at the Salinas City Clerk’s Office, 200 Lincoln Avenue, Salinas, and are posted on the City’s website at www.cityofsalinas.org via the hyperlinks provided on the agenda. The City Council may take action that is different than the proposed action reflected on the agenda.

Disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, may be requested by any person with a disability who requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in the meeting. Requests should be referred to the City Clerk’s Office At 200 Lincoln Avenue, Salinas, 758-7381, as soon as possible but by no later than 5 p.m. of the last business day prior to the meeting. Hearing impaired or TTY/TDD text telephone users may contact the city by dialing 711 for the California Relay Service (CRS) or by telephoning any other service providers’ CRS telephone number.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
This agenda was posted on Thursday, May 19, 2022 at the City Clerk’s Office, in the Council Rotunda, and the City's website.

Meetings are streamed live at https://salinas.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx and televised live on Channel 25 at 4 p.m. on the date of the regularly scheduled meeting and will be broadcast throughout the day on the Wednesday, Friday, Saturday and Monday following the meeting. For the most up-to-the-minute Broadcast Schedule for The Salinas Channel on Comcast 25, please visit or subscribe to our Google Calendar located at http://tinyurl.com/salinas25. Recent City Council meetings may also be viewed on the Salinas Channel on YouTube at http://www.youtube.com/thesalinaschannel.

City of Salinas Page 5 Printed on 5/19/2022
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#22-280, Version: 1
Substantial Amendments to United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan and Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan for the Hebbron Family Center CDBG Project
Approve a Resolution authorizing the submission of a Second Substantial Amendment to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan (AAP) and a First Substantial Amendment to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan; and authorize the allocation of $798,633 in FY 2020- 2021 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and $607,980 in FY 2021-2022 CDBG funds to the Hebbron Family Center project.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/19/2022
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2022
DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FROM: MEGAN HUNTER, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
BY: ROD POWELL, PLANNING MANAGER
TITLE: SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENTS TO UNITED STATES

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AND FISCAL
YEAR 2021-2022 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR THE HEBBRON

FAMILY CENTER CDBG PROJECT
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion of the City Council to approve a Resolution:

1. authorizing the submission of a Second Substantial Amendment to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan (AAP) and a First Substantial Amendment to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan.

2. authorizing the allocation of $798,633 in FY 2020-2021 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and $607,980 in FY 2021-2022 CDBG funds to the Hebbron Family Center project.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Community Development Department recommends that City Council conduct a public hearing and approve a Second Substantial Amendment to the HUD FY 2020-2021 AAP, a First Substantial Amendment to HUD FY 2021-2022 AAP, and allocate CDBG funds to a new Hebbron Family Center project.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City received a State grant award of $8.1 for the reconstruction of the Hebbron Family Center.

To initiate the process, Library and Community Services and Public Works Departments identified a consultant to assist with construction and program management in an amount just under $1.3 million. The departments requested CDBG funding from the Community Development Department (CDD) to offset these pre-development costs. CDD staff have reviewed the request in Page | 2
consultation with HUD and deemed the project as an eligible activity to receive CDBG funds as it is located within the City’s Alisal Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area and satisfies the National Objective of benefiting a Low Mod Area where 51% of the residents fall within the lowand moderate-income categories.

The emergence of a new, priority project for CDBG, the Hebbron Family Center, requires the execution of a second amendment to the FY 2020-2021 AAP and a first amendment to FY 2021- 2022 AAP. In accordance with the City’s Citizen Participation Plan, a formal Substantial Amendment process is required as the City is proposing to de-obligate and reallocate more than 25% of its CDBG funds from the Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV (FY 2020-2021) and Chinatown Improvements (FY 2021-2022) projects towards the new Hebbron Family Center project. Funds for Sherwood and Chinatown are proposed to be restored in the FY 2022-2023 Annual Action Plan.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Salinas is an Entitlement City in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Community Development Block Grant Program, Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Program, and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME). The City previously adopted its Annual Action Plan for Fiscal Year 2020-2021 through its Consolidated Plan process on August 4, 2020, and subsequently adopted its AAP for FY 2021-2022 on May 11, 2021. Each AAP has been reviewed and approved by HUD.

DISCUSSION:

The City received a CDBG Entitlement allocation in the amount of $2,023,911 for FY 2020-2021 and $2,128,725 for FY 2021-2022. Through its Annual Action Plan process for FY 2020-2021, the City committed $728,633 of CDBG Entitlement funds towards the renovation activities of the Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV and $70,000 towards the Activity Delivery of this project.

Through its AAP for FY 2021-2022, the City committed $577,980 of CDBG Entitlement funds towards Chinatown Improvements and $30,000 towards the Activity Delivery of this project.

In April 2022, following a State grant award of $8.1 for the reconstruction of the Hebbron Family Center, the City’s Community Development Department received a funding request for CDBG funds from its Library and Community Services and Public Works Departments to support the project’s pre-development ‘soft costs’. CDD staff have reviewed the request in consultation with HUD and deemed the project as an eligible activity to receive CDBG funds as it is located within the City’s Alisal Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area and satisfies the National Objective of benefiting a Low Mod Area where 51% of the residents fall within the low- and moderateincome categories.

In compliance with the City’s Citizen Participation Plan, a Notice of Public Hearing and a 30-day public comment period was published in The Californian and El Sol newspapers and posted on the City’s webpage, at City Hall, and at the Community Development Department on Saturday, April 23, 2022. The end of the 30-day comment period corresponds with the scheduled Council public hearing on May 24, 2022. Through the Public Hearings and public comment period, the public is encouraged to review and comment on the proposed Amendment.

Page | 3
In recognition of the proposed reprioritization of CDBG funding to support the Hebbron Family Center project and the importance of completing both the Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV and Chinatown Improvements projects, CDD staff plan to recommend a full restoral of prior funding to each project through the upcoming FY 2022-2023 AAP allocation process. The funding swap will also assist the City in achieving its HUD expenditure deadline because most of the expenditures for Hebbron will occur upfront as pre-development costs, whereas both Sherwood and Chinatown involve construction projects, which will take more time to spend down.

Committing pre-development funds to Hebbron is critical now because state funding for construction of the community center also has a short timeline. In order to achieve the schedule for construction of Hebbron, the City needs to execute a contract with its selected professional services contractor to initiate design and construction plans following approval of these substantial amendments.

DEPARMENT COORDINATION:

The Community Development Department Housing Division coordinated with other City departments including Finance, Legal, Library and Community Services, and Public Works departments. The Housing Division also coordinated with HUD regarding this agenda item.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

The City of Salinas has determined that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15302 et al., Class 2 because the project proposes the replacement and reconstruction of an existing structure.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

Approval of the Second Substantial Amendment to the FY 2020-2021 AAP and First Substantial Amendment to the FY 2021-2022 AAP addresses City Council 2022-2023 Strategic Plan Goals and Strategies including: Infrastructure and Environmental Sustainability, Public Safety, Youth and Seniors, and Effective and Culturally Responsive Government.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

There is no General Fund impact associated with this agenda item. CDD intends to fund all CDBG projects identified in this staff report through the execution of the proposed Substantial Amendments and the future allocation of FY 2022-23 AAP CDBG funds.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
City of Salinas Summary of Second Substantial Amendment to FY 2020-2021 AAP and First Substantial Amendment to FY 2021-2022 AAP - Draft
1 RESOLUTION NO. (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION OF THE SALINAS CITY COUNCIL APPROVING SUBSTANTIAL

AMENDMENTS TO UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FISCAL YEAR 2020-2021 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AND FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR THE HEBBRON FAMILY CENTER

CDBG PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City of Salinas (City) as an Entitlement City, receives and administers United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) entitlement Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) and Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program funding; and
WHEREAS, the Salinas City Council approved the HUD AAP for FY 2020-2021 through its Consolidated Plan process on August 4, 2020, and the HUD AAP for FY 2021-2022 on May 11, 2021, to allocate funds to eligible projects for the CDBG, HOME and ESG programs; and WHEREAS, for FY 2020-2021 the City had committed $728,633 of CDBG Entitlement funds towards the renovation activities of the Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV and $70,000 towards the Activity Delivery of this project for a grand total of $798,633; and WHEREAS, for FY 20201-2022 the City had committed $577,980 of CDBG Entitlement funds towards the Chinatown Improvements Project and $30,000 towards the Activity Delivery of this project for a grand total of $607,980; and
WHEREAS, the City proposes to execute a Second Substantial Amendment to the FY 2020-2021 AAP to de-obligate the $798,633 of CDBG Entitlement Funds from the Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV and reallocate these CDBG Entitlement Funds towards a new priority project, the Hebron Family Center.

WHEREAS, the City proposes to execute a First Substantial Amendment to the FY 2021- 2022 AAP to de-obligate the $607,980 of CDBG Entitlement Funds from the Chinatown Improvement Project and reallocate the CDBG Entitlement Funds towards the Hebron Family Center.

WHEREAS, notices of Public Hearings were published in The Californian and El Sol newspapers and posted at City Hall (200 Lincoln Avenue), the City Community Development Department (65 W. Alisal Street), and on the City’s website and distributed to the City Housing Division NOFA/RFP e-mail distribution list on April 23, 2022 requesting public review and comment regarding the proposed Second Substantial Amendment to the FY 2020-2021 AAP and First Substantial Amendment to the FY 2021-2022 AAP; and WHEREAS, the Salinas Housing and Land Use Committee received these proposed amendments and reallocation of CDBG Entitlement Funds towards the Hebbron Family Center on May 3, 2022 and recommended that the Substantial Amendments to the FY 2020-2021 AAP and FY 2021-2022 AAP, and allocation of $798,633 in FY 2020-2021 CDBG Entitlement Funds and 2 $607,980 in FY 2021-2022 CDBG Entitlement Funds to the Hebbron Family Center project move forward to the City Council for consideration and required public hearing on May 24, 2022; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Second Substantial Amendment to the FY 2020-2021 AAP, First Substantial Amendment to FY 2021-2022, and allocation of $798,633 in FY 2020-2021 CDBG Entitlement Funds and $607,980 in FY 2021-2022 CDBG Entitlement Funds to the Hebbron Family Center project and sought to obtain public comment on May 24, 2022.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council hereby approves the Second Substantial Amendment to the FY 2020-2021 AAP, First Substantial Amendment to the FY 2021-2022, and allocation of $798,633 in FY 2020-2021 CDBG Entitlement Funds and $607,980 in FY 2021-2022 CDBG Entitlement Funds to the Hebbron Family Center project and authorizes its submittal to HUD.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council hereby authorizes the Mayor or designee to execute, for and on behalf of the City any agreements and related documents (e.g., grant contracts, grant certifications, etc.) regarding the Second Amendment to the FY 2020- 2021 AAP, First Substantial Amendment to the FY 2021-2022 AAP and allocation of $798,633 in FY 2020-2021 CDBG Entitlement Funds and $607,980 in FY 2021-2022 CDBG Entitlement Funds to the Hebbron Family Center project.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 24th day of May 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:

______________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:

_________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
City of Salinas FY 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 2 FY 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 1
1 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)

CITY OF SALINAS

SUMMARY OF SECOND SUBTANTIAL AMENDMENT
TO FY 2020-2021 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN AND FIRST SUBSTANTIAL AMENDMENT TO FY 2021-2022 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN
(JULY 1, 2020 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2021)
(JULY 1, 2021 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2022)
The City of Salinas (City) is an Entitlement City in the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Program, Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Program, and HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME). The City of Salinas adopted its Annual Action Plan (AAP) for Fiscal Year (FY) 2020-2021 through its Consolidated Plan process on August 4, 2020 and submitted it to HUD for review and approval. The City of Salinas adopted its AAP for FY 2021-2022 on May 11, 2021 and submitted it to HUD for review and approval.

Per the Citizen Participation Plan a Substantial Amendment (Amendment) is defined as follows:

1. For larger projects, over $200,000, an increase of 25 percent or more in project funding.

Changes that are less than $50,000 are not considered substantial.

2. An increase of 25 percent or more in project beneficiaries (i.e. income groups, limited clientele groups, residents of a targeted area) or a change in purpose, scope or location which would change the project beneficiaries by more than 25 percent or

3. A determination by the Community Development Director, that the change is substantial even though it falls below the standards in Section 1 and 2 above.

4. For ESG components, as long as the maximum 60% threshold for Street Outreach and Emergency Shelter is not exceeded, funding can be moved within the other components to meet expenditure requirements without a substantial amendment.

The second amendment to the FY 2020-2021 AAP and first amendment to FY 2021-2022 are necessary as the City is proposing to de-obligate and reallocate CDBG funds from the Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV (FY 2020-2021) and Chinatown Improvements (FY 2021-2022) projects into a new project, the Hebbron Family Center, through this Substantial Amendment. The de-obligation and reallocation of CDBG funds from these two previously stated projects will be in in excess of 25% towards a new project.

AP-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b)
Introduction
The City received a CDBG Entitlement (EN) allocation in the amount of $2,023,911 for FY 2020-2021 and $2,128,725 for FY 2021-2022. Through its Annual Action Plan (AAP) process for FY 2020-2021, the City committed $728,633 of CDBG Entitlement funds towards the renovation activities of the Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV and $70,000 towards the Activity Delivery of this project.

Through its AAP for FY 2021-2022, the City committed $577,980 of CDBG Entitlement funds towards Chinatown Improvements and $30,000 towards the Activity Delivery of this project.

The City’s Community Development Department received a funding request for CDBG funds from its Library and Community Services and Public Works Departments in early April of 2022. The City reviewed the request and has deemed this project as an eligible activity to receive CDBG funds. The project is located within the City’s Alisal Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area (ANRSA), and City of Salinas FY 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 2 FY 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 1
2 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
it will meet HUD Matrix Code 03F for Parks, Recreational Facilities. Additionally, the project will also satisfy the National Objective of benefitting a Low Mod Area (LMA) where 51% or more of the of the residents of the ANRSA are low and moderate-income persons. Because of this, it is the City’s Community Development intentions to reallocate the CDBG funds from the two above referenced projects into a new project, the Hebbron Family Center, through this Substantial Amendment.

AP-12 Participation - 91.115, 91.300(c)
Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation A Notice of Public Hearings and a 30-day public comment period has been published in The Salinas Californian and El Sol local newspapers; and City’s webpage on Saturday, April 23, 2022; and posted at the Community Development Department, 65 W. Alisal St.; City Hall, 200 Lincoln Ave.; and the City of Salinas webpage on April 23, 2022. The 30-day comment period starts April 23, 2022 and ends May 24, 2022. Through the Public Hearings and public comment period, the public is encouraged to review and comment on the proposed Amendment.

The Second Substantial Amendment to FY 2020-2021 AAP and the First Substantial Amendment to FY 2021-2022 and the Public Notice document are available for review at the following locations:
 City of Salinas’ website: https://www.cityofsalinas.org/our-city-services/communitydevelopment/housing-and-community-development-division/rfps-public-notices.  Request via email at [email protected]. Write “Substantial Amendment for FY 2020-2021 and FY 2021-2022 AAPs” in the subject line of the email.

Please submit electronic, written or mailed comments to:

City of Salinas
Community Development Department Housing Division
Attn: Planning Manager
City of Salinas
65 W. Alisal Street, 2nd Floor
Salinas, CA 93901
[email protected]
AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.320(c) (1,2)
The City through its Annual Action Plan (AAP) process for FY 2020-2021 committed $728,633 of CDBG Entitlement funds towards the renovation activities of the Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV and $70,000 towards the Activity Delivery of this project. Through its AAP for FY 2021-2022, the City committed $577,980 of CDBG Entitlement funds towards Chinatown Improvements and $30,000 towards the Activity Delivery of this project. The City will de-obligate the CDBG funds from these two projects and reallocate the funds towards the new project, the Hebbron Family Center. This new project will be allocated $1,306,613 in CDBG funds for the soft cost activities and $100,000 in CDBG funds for Activity Delivery. In total, the project will receive $1,406,613 in CDBG Funds from a combination of FY 2020-2021 and FY 2021-2022 funds.

City of Salinas FY 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 2 FY 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 1
3 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
AP-38 Project Summary
Project Summary Information – FY 2021-2022
5 Project Name Sherwood Recreation Center – Phase IV
Target Area N/A
Goals Supported Enhanced Neighborhood Conditions
Needs Addressed Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements Funding CDBG: 798,633 $0
Description
The Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV project will provide CDBG funds for improvements and rehabilitation of the recreational facility. The budget for this project also includes $70,000 of program delivery costs.

Target Date 12/31/2023
Estimate the number and type of
families that will benefit from the
proposed activities
50,000
Location Description
Sherwood Recreation Center is located at 920 N. Main Street, Salinas, CA 93901 The project is not located within a target area but is within City limits.

Planned Activities
Phase IV of the Sherwood Recreation Center involves the completion of the multiphase community recreation center project. 11 Project Name Hebbron Family Center
Target Area Alisal Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area Goals Supported Enhanced Neighborhood Conditions
Needs Addressed Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements Funding CDBG: $798,633
Description
Hebbron Family Center project will be located in Census Tract 5.02. The subject property is located at 683,683-B,683-C, 683-D,667, and 669 Fremont St. in Salinas, CA 93905 and the proposed new recreational facility is going to be approximately 7,500 square feet in size. The existing structure was built in the mid 60's and will be demolished as part of this project. The subject project is composed of six (6) Cityowned parcels (APN: 004082038000, 004082036000, 004082017000, 004082016000, 004082023000, 004082024000) for a combined 1.31 acres. The subject project fronts N. Hebbron Ave to the East, Cesar Chavez Park to the North, Terrace St. to the West, and Fremont St. to the South. The project site is split zone and the three zoning designations are as follows: Parks, Residential Low Density, and Public/Semipublic use. The project site will retain its current land use.

The new Hebbron Family Center Project will be a brand-new recreational facility to provide City sponsored youth programs. The provided CDBG funds will be used to cover the soft costs and activity delivery activities involved in this project. Soft costs activities will include architectural, planning, engineering, environmental services, permits, inspections, surveys, reports, administration, and other predevelopment costs.

Target Date June 30, 2025
City of Salinas FY 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 2 FY 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 1
4 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Estimate the number and type of
families that will benefit from the
proposed activities
1,500
Location Description
683,683-B,683-C, 683-D,667, and 669 Fremont St. in Salinas, CA 93905. The project is within the ANRSA target area and it’s within City limits.

Planned Activities
This activity will involve covering the soft costs and activity delivery activities of the Hebbron Family Center. Soft costs activities will include architectural, planning, engineering, environmental services, permits, inspections, surveys, reports, administration, and other predevelopment costs.

Project Summary Information – FY 2021-2022
3 Project Name Chinatown Improvements
Target Area Chinatown Slum and Blight Area
Goals Supported Enhanced Neighborhood Conditions
Needs Addressed Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements Funding CDBG: 607,980 $0
Description
The Chinatown Improvement project could involve multiple areas of work. The improvements can be related to security, sanitation, and broader infrastructure improvements in support of the implementation of the City’s Chinatown Revitalization Plan.

Target Date 06/30/2022
Estimate the number and type of
families that will benefit from the
proposed activities
1,200
Location Description
City of Salinas Chinatown
Specific areas of improvements have not been selected, but they will be conducted within Chinatown which is located within the Chinatown Slum and Blight Area and it is within City limits.

Planned Activities
This activity would potentially involve the following prioritized projects: installing public safety security cameras; site radiation; public restroom installation; sidewalk improvements; or other general infrastructure improvements. 8 Project Name Hebbron Family Center
Target Area Alisal Neighborhood Revitalization Strategy Area Goals Supported Enhanced Neighborhood Conditions
Needs Addressed Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvements Funding CDBG: $0 $607,980
Description
Hebbron Family Center project will be located in Census Tract 5.02. The subject property is located at 683,683-B,683-C, 683-D,667, and 669 Fremont St. in Salinas, CA 93905 and the proposed new recreational facility is going to be approximately 7,500 square feet in size. The existing structure was built in the mid 60's and will be demolished as part of this project. The subject project is composed of six (6) Cityowned parcels (APN: 004082038000, 004082036000, 004082017000, 004082016000, 004082023000, 004082024000) for a combined 1.31 acres. The subject project fronts N. Hebbron Ave to the East, Cesar Chavez Park to the North, City of Salinas FY 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 2 FY 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan Amendment No. 1
5 OMB Control No: 2506-0117 (exp. 09/30/2021)
Terrace St. to the West, and Fremont St. to the South. The project site is split zone and the three zoning designations are as follows: Parks, Residential Low Density, and Public/Semipublic use. The project site will retain its current land use.

Target Date June 30, 2025
Estimate the number and type of
families that will benefit from the
proposed activities
1,500
Location Description
683,683-B,683-C, 683-D,667, and 669 Fremont St. in Salinas, CA 93905. The project is within the ANRSA target area and it’s within City limits.

Substantial Amendments to United States Department
of Housing and Urban Development
Fiscal Year 2020-2021 Annual Action Plan and
Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Annual Action Plan for the
Hebbron Family Center CDBG Project
Rod Powell, Planning Manager
Community Development Department – Housing Division
May 24, 2022
Recommendation
The Community Development Department
recommends that City Council conduct a public hearing
to consider and approve a Second Substantial
Amendment to the HUD FY 2020-2021 AAP, a First
Substantial Amendment to HUD FY 2021-2022 AAP, and
allocate CDBG funds to a new Hebbron Family Center
project.

Background
 Hebbron Family Center
 $1,406,613 (CDBG Funds)
 Soft Cost Activities
 Activity Delivery
 Citizen Participation Plan
 Amendments:
 FY 2020-21 AAP - $798,633
 FY 2021-22 AAP - $607,980
FY 2020-21 HUD AAP CDBG Program Funding
Agency Program Existing Recommended
City of Salinas Program Administration $414,843 $414,843 City of Salinas Project Delivery – Housing Services Program $5,000 $5,000 City of Salinas Project Delivery – Grow Salinas Fund $20,262 $20,262 City of Salinas Project Delivery – Parks and Rec Facilities $70,000 $0 City of Salinas Project Delivery – Sun Rose Apartments $47,860 $47,860 City of Salinas Housing Services Program $50,000 $50,000 City of Salinas Grow Salinas Fund $202,621 $202,621
City of Salinas Sherwood Recreation Center - Phase 4 $728,633 $0 Interim, Inc. Sun Rose Gardens Apartments - 439 Soledad St. $500,000 $500,000 Girl Scouts of California Girl Scouts Alisal Program Center $339,179 $339,179 City of Salinas Project Delivery – Hebbron Family Center $0 $70,000 City of Salinas Hebbron Family Center $0 $728,633
Total $2,074,219 $2,074,219
FY 2021-22 HUD AAP CDBG Program Funding
Agency Program Existing Recommended
City of Salinas Program Administration $435,745 $435,745 City of Salinas Project Delivery – Parks and Rec Facilities $100,000 $100,000 City of Salinas Project Delivery – Chinatown
Improvements $30,000 $0
City of Salinas Sherwood Recreation Center - Phase 4 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 City of Salinas Chinatown Improvements $577,980 $0
Girl Scouts of California Girl Scouts Alisal Program Center $35,000 $35,000 City of Salinas Project Delivery – Hebbron Family Center $0 $30,000 City of Salinas Hebbron Family Center $0 $577,980
Total $2,178,725 $2,178,725
FY 2022-23 AAP Planned Projects
 Sherwood Recreation Center Phase IV
 $728,633 Renovation Activities
 $70,000 Activity Delivery
 Chinatown Improvements
 $577,980 Chinatown Improvements
 $30,000 Activity Delivery
Project Timeline
Activity Date
Demolition Before January 2023
Phase 1 – Visioning May – July 2022
Phase 2 – Concept & Schematic August – December 2022
Phase 3 – Design Development January – May 2023
Phase 4 – Design Builder Bidding &
Award June – August 2023
Phase 5 – Design Builder Management September – April 2025 CEQA Consideration
 The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15302 et al., Class 2 because the project proposes the replacement and reconstruction of an existing structure.

Departmental Coordination
 Finance
 Legal
 Library and Public Services
 Public Works
Strategic Plan Initiative
 Infrastructure and Environmental Sustainability
 Public Safety
 Youth and Seniors
 Effective and Culturally Responsive Government
Fiscal and Sustainability Impact
 No General Fund Impact
 Project funded with CDBG Entitlement Funds
Recommended Motion
A motion of the City Council to approve a Resolution:

2. authorizing the allocation of $798,633 in FY 2020-2021 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and $607,980 in FY 2021-2022 CDBG funds to the Hebbron Family Center project.

Questions & Comments
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#22-308, Version: 1
Minutes
Approve minutes of May 10, 2022 and May 17, 2022.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/18/2022
powered by Legistar™
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#22-307, Version: 1
Financial Claims
Approve financial claims report.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/18/2022
powered by Legistar™
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
457442 05/10/2022 Open $5,463.64
457443 05/10/2022 Open $4,699.73
457444 05/10/2022 Open $3,227.15
457445 05/10/2022 Open $62.24
457446 05/10/2022 Open $4,414.03
457447 05/10/2022 Open $19,075.75
457448 05/10/2022 Open $444.83
457449 05/10/2022 Open $26,100.00
457450 05/10/2022 Open $848.00
457451 05/10/2022 Open $350.45
457452 05/10/2022 Open $5,922.77
457453 05/10/2022 Open $288.00
457454 05/10/2022 Open $180.00
457455 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457456 05/10/2022 Open $234.92
457457 05/10/2022 Open $1,740.94
457458 05/10/2022 Open $385.00
457459 05/10/2022 Open $1,176.42
457460 05/10/2022 Open $1,796.85
457461 05/10/2022 Open $9,294.48
457462 05/10/2022 Open $10,837.20
457463 05/10/2022 Open $7,606.82
457464 05/10/2022 Open $562.68
457465 05/10/2022 Open $20,474.95
457466 05/10/2022 Open $3,600.00
457467 05/10/2022 Open $12,642.86
457468 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457469 05/10/2022 Open $2,703.19
457470 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457471 05/10/2022 Open $10,000.00
457472 05/10/2022 Open $125.00
457473 05/10/2022 Open $2,374.80
457474 05/10/2022 Open $312.24
457475 05/10/2022 Open $52.75
457476 05/10/2022 Open $54.83
457477 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457478 05/10/2022 Open $385.00
457479 05/10/2022 Open $6,100.00
457480 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457481 05/10/2022 Open $3,251.17
457482 05/10/2022 Open $54,732.36
457483 05/10/2022 Open $178.03
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
Alco Water
Alhambra and Sierra Spring DS Waters of America LP
All Environmental, Inc dba AEI Consultants
93 North Castro St Towman Llc
Ace Hardware
Acme Rotary Broom Service
General Account - General Account
Check
4 Imprint
93 North Castro St Towman Llc
Applied Maintenance Supplies & Solutions LLC
Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel Group, Inc
Aromas Firefighters Association
Analgesic Services Inc
Andrew Easterling
Andrew McLaughlin
Allen Shaffer dba Shafcom
Amazon.Com
American Supply Company
Bay Area Community Services Inc.

Bay Property Management
Breakout Prison Outreach dba California Youth Outr
AT and T
AT&T Mobility
Barcodes LLC dba Barcodes, Inc.

Arrowhead Forensics
Assured Aggregates Company Inc
AT and T
California Water Service
California Water Service
California Water Service
ByWater Solutions, LLC
California Towing and Transport
California Water Service
Brent DeBorde
Brownells Inc
Bruce Bush
Central Coast Systems Inc
Cassie McSorley
CDW-G
Central Coast Center For Independent
Candi Swinscoe
Candido Martinez Dba Welders Fabrication and Desig
Carroll D Handley dba Town 'N Country Realty
Pages: 1 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457484 05/10/2022 Open $14,121.00
457485 05/10/2022 Open $16,974.70
457486 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457487 05/10/2022 Open $1,194.10
457488 05/10/2022 Open $126.55
457489 05/10/2022 Open $87.24
457490 05/10/2022 Open $2,896.20
457491 05/10/2022 Open $54.07
457492 05/10/2022 Open $18,054.25
457493 05/10/2022 Open $6,900.00
457494 05/10/2022 Open $27.53
457495 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457496 05/10/2022 Open $55.14
457497 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457498 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457499 05/10/2022 Open $11,359.00
457500 05/10/2022 Open $2,061.37
457501 05/10/2022 Open $18,300.00
457502 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457504 05/10/2022 Open $5,000.00
457505 05/10/2022 Open $1,731.02
457506 05/10/2022 Open $12,000.00
457507 05/10/2022 Open $30.75
457508 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457509 05/10/2022 Open $262.50
457510 05/10/2022 Open $268.90
457511 05/10/2022 Open $5,975.39
457512 05/10/2022 Open $43,498.79
457513 05/10/2022 Open $149.84
457514 05/10/2022 Open $1,091.95
457515 05/10/2022 Open $194.96
457516 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457517 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457518 05/10/2022 Open $84.01
457519 05/10/2022 Open $2,604.62
457520 05/10/2022 Open $8,166.22
457521 05/10/2022 Open $100.28
457522 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457523 05/10/2022 Open $20,799.02
457524 05/10/2022 Open $10,303.20
457525 05/10/2022 Open $855.00
457526 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
Central Coast YMCA
Charles Murray Dba Jaeco Fire and Safety
CorVel Corporation
Crossroads Software Inc
CSC Of Salinas
Coast Counties Truck & Equipment Co dba Coast Coun
Comcast (Business)
Comcast (Business)
Chris Swinscoe
Cintas
Coast Automotive Warehouse Inc
Environmental Systems, Inc of Northern California
Ernesto Sanchez
Eulalio Villegas-Rivera Petty Cash Custodian
David L Crabill
Dilbeck And Sons
Discount School Supply
Daniel David Green
Dataflow Business Systems Inc
Dave Shaw
Granite Construction Company
Granite Rock Co
Green Rubber Kennedy Ag
Gabriel Hernandez
Global Water Technology, Inc
Golden State Truck and Trailer Repair
First Alarm Security & Patrol Inc dba An Allied Un
Forrest L. Story dba Public Sector Excellence
G2Solutions, Inc
Ingram Book Company
Interstate Battery System Inc
Jacqueline Pacelli
Henry Gomez
Hilda Garcia Petty Cash Custodian
Ines Mendoza
Greens Camera Shop
HD Supply White Cap Construction Supply
Heath Johnson
Jeff Gibson
Jam Services Inc
James Bradley Blesso dba 2-Eleven Shields
Jamie Tugel
Pages: 2 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457527 05/10/2022 Open $14,400.00
457528 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457529 05/10/2022 Open $204.00
457530 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457531 05/10/2022 Open $4,815.00
457532 05/10/2022 Open $1,900.00
457533 05/10/2022 Open $44.63
457534 05/10/2022 Open $2,000.00
457535 05/10/2022 Open $693.00
457536 05/10/2022 Open $550.79
457537 05/10/2022 Open $4,322.51
457538 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457539 05/10/2022 Open $1,945.00
457540 05/10/2022 Open $3,588.87
457541 05/10/2022 Open $3,230.00
457542 05/10/2022 Open $1,360.00
457543 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457544 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457545 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457546 05/10/2022 Open $717.13
457547 05/10/2022 Open $512.50
457548 05/10/2022 Open $14,345.34
457549 05/10/2022 Open $547.05
457550 05/10/2022 Open $20,624.53
457551 05/10/2022 Open $3,957.36
457552 05/10/2022 Open $1,010.42
457553 05/10/2022 Open $2,316.17
457554 05/10/2022 Open $115.38
457555 05/10/2022 Open $821.18
457556 05/10/2022 Open $1,697.09
457557 05/10/2022 Open $647.65
457558 05/10/2022 Open $409.15
457559 05/10/2022 Open $1,030.52
457560 05/10/2022 Open $17,837.49
457561 05/10/2022 Open $1,643.44
457562 05/10/2022 Open $485.50
457563 05/10/2022 Open $419.76
457564 05/10/2022 Open $2,925.00
457565 05/10/2022 Open $210.00
457566 05/10/2022 Open $873.00
457567 05/10/2022 Open $865.97
457568 05/10/2022 Open $736.07
Johnson Electronics
Jonathan Barnes
Jose Sovia
Jeremy Hobbs
Jesse Pinon
Lance Miraco
Landset Engineers Inc
Laser Technology Inc.

Kysmet Security & Patrol
Lakeshore Learning Materials
Lamplighter Salinas LLC dba Lamplighter Mobilehome
Julio Cervantes
Kelly-Moore Paint Company
KRM Apartment Rentals LLC dba KRM Enterprises
Monterey Transfer and Storage Inc
MSA Systems, Inc
Office Depot Business Service Division
Martin Persijn
Michael Groves
Midwest Tape, LLC dba Midwest Tape
Liebert Cassidy Whitmore
Lisa Marie Vetter dba Tour de force Speakers
Mark Freedman
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
One Workplace L Ferrari, LLC dba Peninsula Busines
Owen Equipment Sales
Pacific Coast Flag
Peninsula Messenger, LLC
Pinnacle Medical Group Inc dba Pinnacle Healthcare
Pinnacle Peak Holding Corp. dba Setcom Corp.

Paper Direct
Patricia Meraz
Pedro C Estrada Dba Estrada Janitorial Service
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Truck Parts Inc
Professional Police Supply, Inc dba Adamson Police
Pages: 3 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457569 05/10/2022 Open $146.58
457570 05/10/2022 Open $213.18
457571 05/10/2022 Open $1,242.00
457572 05/10/2022 Open $652.34
457573 05/10/2022 Open $8,400.00
457574 05/10/2022 Open $108.36
457575 05/10/2022 Open $173.40
457576 05/10/2022 Open $982.25
457577 05/10/2022 Open $235.98
457578 05/10/2022 Open $124.22
457579 05/10/2022 Open $87.51
457580 05/10/2022 Open $125.89
457581 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457582 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457583 05/10/2022 Open $305.24
457584 05/10/2022 Open $4,920.00
457585 05/10/2022 Open $758.43
457586 05/10/2022 Open $5,924.00
457587 05/10/2022 Open $1,800.00
457588 05/10/2022 Open $224.49
457589 05/10/2022 Open $28,807.55
457590 05/10/2022 Open $754.45
457591 05/10/2022 Open $1,140.48
457592 05/10/2022 Open $7,000.00
457593 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457594 05/10/2022 Open $61.50
457595 05/10/2022 Open $2,100.00
457596 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457597 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457598 05/10/2022 Open $229.23
457599 05/10/2022 Open $76,898.74
457600 05/10/2022 Open $17,002.30
457601 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457602 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457603 05/10/2022 Open $8,400.00
457604 05/10/2022 Open $1,821.14
457605 05/10/2022 Open $185.00
457606 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457607 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457608 05/10/2022 Open $8,960.63
457609 05/10/2022 Open $1,062.10
457610 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
Refrigeration Supplies Distributor
Regional Government Services
RELX Inc. dba LexisNexis, Division of RELX Inc.

R&R Technologies, Inc. dba VehicleCounts.com
RDO Equipment Company
Rebecca Gonzales
Protel Communications, Inc dba Protelesis Corporat
Quality Water Enterprises
Robert Half International, Inc dba Accountemps, Of
Roosevelt Street Townhomes LP dba Roosevelt Townho
Ruth Maria Milla-Leon dba Andersen's Lock & Safe
Republic Services of Salinas
Richard Maldonado
Ricky Williams
Rent-A-Fence.com, Inc
Republic Services of Salinas
Republic Services of Salinas
SAS Investment Group
Scott Tyler
Sentry Alarm System
Salinas Toyota
Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority
San Benito County
Salinas Bay Limited
Salinas Firefighters Assoc
Salinas Toyota
Stanley Cooper
Suzanne Cottle-Gavalla
Sylvia Agamao
Smart and Final Iris
Smith and Enright Landscaping
Snap-On Tools Corporation
Sergio Esparza
Sheldon Bryan
Simon Jimenez
Todd Swinscoe
Terry Gerhardstein
Tina La Perle
Todd Hearnsberger dba TH Electric
TALX UC Express
Target Pest Control
Ted Koch
Pages: 4 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457611 05/10/2022 Open $4,576.47
457612 05/10/2022 Open $765.59
457613 05/10/2022 Open $4,550.00
457614 05/10/2022 Open $17,357.12
457615 05/10/2022 Open $1,018.39
457616 05/10/2022 Open $72.70
457617 05/10/2022 Open $11,499.80
457618 05/10/2022 Open $1,876.92
457619 05/10/2022 Open $1,793.17
457620 05/10/2022 Open $333.69
457621 05/10/2022 Open $528.81
457622 05/10/2022 Open $1,000.00
457623 05/10/2022 Open $861.84
457624 05/10/2022 Open $301.41
457625 05/10/2022 Open $904.52
457626 05/10/2022 Open $4,016.81
457627 05/10/2022 Open $91.00
457628 05/10/2022 Open $3,497.02
457629 05/10/2022 Open $3,700.00
457630 05/10/2022 Open $300.00
457631 05/10/2022 Open $500.00
457632 05/10/2022 Open $1,768.99
457633 05/10/2022 Open $96.28
457634 05/10/2022 Open $919.64
457635 05/10/2022 Open $100.00
457636 05/10/2022 Open $315.60
457637 05/10/2022 Open $92.49
457638 05/10/2022 Open $4,788.00
457639 05/10/2022 Open $1,344.61
457640 05/10/2022 Open $25.02
457641 05/10/2022 Open $214.00
457642 05/10/2022 Open $363.75
457643 05/10/2022 Open $297.99
457644 05/10/2022 Open $120.50
457645 05/10/2022 Open $250.75
457646 05/10/2022 Open $229.00
457647 05/10/2022 Open $1,302.12
457648 05/10/2022 Open $120.50
457649 05/10/2022 Open $199.43
457650 05/10/2022 Open $229.00
457651 05/10/2022 Open $229.00
457652 05/10/2022 Open $229.00
Trentman Corp. dba Interstate Sales/T-Man Traffic
Tri County Fire Protection
Valley Mobile Park
Vals Plumbing and Heating Inc
Vegetable Growers Supply Company
United Parcel Service
University Corporation at Monterey Bay
Valley Fabrication Inc
Tsutomu T. Yamashita
U.S. Bank National Association ND
Uline, Inc
Verizon Wireless
Veronica Nevarez
VJK Investments LLC
Verizon Wireless
Verizon Wireless
Verizon Wireless
Venissa Rosa
Veritiv Operating Company Formerly xpedx
Verizon Wireless
WCDJR LLC dba Watsonville Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram
Williams Ranch Housing Partners, LP
Wingfoot Plastic Printing Services, Inc.

W&M Marketing Group Inc dba B-Impressed Branding
Wayne Vance
WCAF, LLC dba Watsonville Ford
VJK Investments LLC
Voyager
W W Grainger Inc
Daniel Garcia
Eric Sandoval
Gabriel Gonzalez
Anthony Cardoza
Brian Johnson
Christie Cromeenes
Worldpac
Elodia Andalon
Angel Gonzalez
Joshua Lynd
James Arensdorf
Jeff Munoz
Joseph Kinney
Pages: 5 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457653 05/10/2022 Open $120.50
457654 05/10/2022 Open $99.50
457655 05/10/2022 Open $149.30
457656 05/10/2022 Open $80.00
457657 05/10/2022 Open $229.00
457658 05/10/2022 Open $229.00
457659 05/10/2022 Open $72.00
457660 05/10/2022 Open $242.78
457661 05/11/2022 Open $15,088.92
457662 05/11/2022 Open $18,378.23
457663 05/17/2022 Open $4,198.00
457664 05/17/2022 Open $3,300.00
457665 05/17/2022 Open $42,955.11
457666 05/17/2022 Open $2,601.16
457667 05/17/2022 Open $70.97
457668 05/17/2022 Open $7,787.67
457669 05/17/2022 Open $298.51
457670 05/17/2022 Open $41.68
457671 05/17/2022 Open $170.24
457672 05/17/2022 Open $151.73
457673 05/17/2022 Open $162.30
457674 05/17/2022 Open $257.72
457675 05/17/2022 Open $8,945.00
457676 05/17/2022 Open $231.52
457677 05/17/2022 Open $489.00
457678 05/17/2022 Open $10,040.00
457679 05/17/2022 Open $66.58
457680 05/17/2022 Open $3,689.22
457681 05/17/2022 Open $6,664.25
457682 05/17/2022 Open $2,086.66
457683 05/17/2022 Open $559.72
457684 05/17/2022 Open $261.16
457685 05/17/2022 Open $178.13
457686 05/17/2022 Open $9,168.26
457687 05/17/2022 Open $12,789.00
457688 05/17/2022 Open $1,147.12
457689 05/17/2022 Open $3,636.51
457690 05/17/2022 Open $653.48
457691 05/17/2022 Open $36,001.20
457692 05/17/2022 Open $4,475.00
457693 05/17/2022 Open $4,050.00
457694 05/17/2022 Open $2,700.00
Robert Asamoto
Robert Hampson
Robert Zuniga
Luis Bravo
Martha Guizar
1701 Independence, LLC dba Creekbridge Apartments
2NDNATURE, LLC
4 Imprint
Estate of Santos Bautista
U.S. Bank National Association ND
1317 Garner Ave LLC
Ruby Alvarez
Ryan Macoubrie
Sophia Rome
Alhambra and Sierra Spring DS Waters of America LP
Alhambra and Sierra Spring DS Waters of America LP
Alison Heller-Ono dba Worksite International
Alco Water
Alco Water
Alhambra and Sierra Spring DS Waters of America LP
72 Hour LLC dba Chevrolet of Watsonville/National
93 North Castro St Towman Llc
Alco Water
Applied Maintenance Supplies & Solutions LLC
Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel Group, Inc
Asap Alisal Signs And Printing
Amazon.Com
American Supply Company
Applied Concepts, Inc-Stalker Radar
Allstar Fire Equipment Inc
ALTEC INDUSTRIES, INC.

Alvin F Abbott dba Abbott Plumbing
C2 Builders, Inc
Cadence Team, Inc
California Alisal LLC dba Jose Luna
Blick Art Materials LLC dba Blick Art Materials/
BrightView Landscape Services, Inc
Brownells Inc
AT and T
B & H Foto & Electronics Corp
Blancas Construction, Inc.

California Alisal LLC dba Jose Luna
Pages: 6 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457695 05/17/2022 Open $526.87
457696 05/17/2022 Open $117.35
457697 05/17/2022 Open $126.85
457698 05/17/2022 Open $141.68
457699 05/17/2022 Open $47,097.61
457700 05/17/2022 Open $903.43
457701 05/17/2022 Open $766.58
457702 05/17/2022 Open $7,699.91
457703 05/17/2022 Open $51,563.89
457704 05/17/2022 Open $21,232.82
457705 05/17/2022 Open $105.00
457706 05/17/2022 Open $2,586.00
457707 05/17/2022 Open $1,204.53
457708 05/17/2022 Open $7,915.00
457709 05/17/2022 Open $2,243.43
457710 05/17/2022 Open $29,624.39
457711 05/17/2022 Open $39,961.60
457712 05/17/2022 Open $9,939.98
457713 05/17/2022 Open $18,822.90
457714 05/17/2022 Open $5,851.11
457715 05/17/2022 Open $3,312.00
457716 05/17/2022 Open $4,722.00
457717 05/17/2022 Open $25,621.17
457718 05/17/2022 Open $9,282.77
457719 05/17/2022 Open $265.37
457720 05/17/2022 Open $87.24
457721 05/17/2022 Open $607.05
457722 05/17/2022 Open $142.58
457723 05/17/2022 Open $175.57
457724 05/17/2022 Open $250.49
457725 05/17/2022 Open $250.80
457726 05/17/2022 Open $240.80
457727 05/17/2022 Open $140.32
457728 05/17/2022 Open $12,600.00
457729 05/17/2022 Open $61.99
457730 05/17/2022 Open $525.85
457731 05/17/2022 Open $1,809.00
457733 05/17/2022 Open $5,522.00
457734 05/17/2022 Open $385.60
457735 05/17/2022 Open $589.10
457736 05/17/2022 Open $236.00
457737 05/17/2022 Open $584.20
California Water Service
California Water Service
Casentini Street Apartments, Llc
California Water Service
California Water Service
California Water Service
California Water Service
California Water Service
CMP-1 Llc dba The Pointe at Harden Ranch
CMP-1 Llc dba The Pointe at Harden Ranch
CMP-1 Llc dba The Pointe at Harden Ranch
CHISPA Inc.

Cintas
ClientFirst Consulting Group, LLC dba ClientFirst
CDW-G
Central Coast Center For Independent
Central Coast Systems Inc
Coast & Valley Properties, Inc
Coast Automotive Warehouse Inc
Coast Counties Truck & Equipment Co dba Coast Coun
CMP-1, Llc dba Boronda Manor
CMP-1, LLC dba Cambridge Court Apartments Homes
CMP-1, Llc dba Laurel Tree Apartment Homes
CMP-1 Llc dba The Pointe at Northridge
CMP-1 Llc dba The Pointe at Westlake
CMP-1, Llc dba Boronda Manor
CSC Of Salinas
Dario Soto
Direct TV LLC
Comcast (Business)
Comcast (Business)
Comcast (Business)
Comcast (Business)
Comcast (Business)
Comcast (Business)
Extra Space Management Inc
Extra Space Management Inc
Extra Space Management Inc
Extra Space Management Inc
Discount School Supply
East Bay Tire Company
Eulalio Villegas-Rivera Petty Cash Custodian
Pages: 7 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457738 05/17/2022 Open $381.30
457739 05/17/2022 Open $268.30
457740 05/17/2022 Open $926.60
457741 05/17/2022 Open $315.40
457742 05/17/2022 Open $1,967.16
457743 05/17/2022 Open $91.41
457744 05/17/2022 Open $3,102.34
457745 05/17/2022 Open $2,790.00
457746 05/17/2022 Open $380.00
457747 05/17/2022 Open $1,800.00
457748 05/17/2022 Open $320.00
457749 05/17/2022 Open $262.50
457750 05/17/2022 Open $393.30
457751 05/17/2022 Open $128.78
457752 05/17/2022 Open $5,304.84
457753 05/17/2022 Open $9,710.00
457754 05/17/2022 Open $1,624.20
457755 05/17/2022 Open $5,369.77
457756 05/17/2022 Open $381.48
457757 05/17/2022 Open $2,400.00
457758 05/17/2022 Open $2,500.00
457759 05/17/2022 Open $1,000.00
457760 05/17/2022 Open $872.33
457761 05/17/2022 Open $116.01
457762 05/17/2022 Open $1,839.00
457763 05/17/2022 Open $6,950.00
457764 05/17/2022 Open $312.00
457765 05/17/2022 Open $247.91
457766 05/17/2022 Open $1,022.58
457767 05/17/2022 Open $213.86
457768 05/17/2022 Open $6,480.00
457769 05/17/2022 Open $127.00
457770 05/17/2022 Open $6,498.00
457771 05/17/2022 Open $4,125.01
457772 05/17/2022 Open $911.99
457773 05/17/2022 Open $4,206.13
457774 05/17/2022 Open $2,217.48
457775 05/17/2022 Open $3,547.80
457776 05/17/2022 Open $9,041.53
457777 05/17/2022 Open $6,000.00
457778 05/17/2022 Open $1,863.52
457779 05/17/2022 Open $7,588.00
Extra Space Management Inc
Extra Space Management Inc
G2Solutions, Inc
Gerardo Cardenas Torres
Glasswork by Design
Fed Ex
Ferguson US Hodings, Inc dba Ferguson Enterprises
Forefront Technologies LLC
Extra Space Management Inc
Extra Space Management Inc
Fastenal Company
Granite Rock Co
Green Rubber Kennedy Ag
Hector Campos
Golden State Truck and Trailer Repair
Goldfarb and Lipman
Golight Inc.

Global Water Technology, Inc
Gold Star Motors dba Gold Star Buick GMC
Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service Inc
Jensco Inc Dba J M Electric
Jesse And Evan Inc dba La Plaza Bakery
Jonathan Saguil dba Flying Artichoke
Interstate Battery System Inc
Isaac Blum dba Integrated Armament Systems
Jan Roehl Dba Jan Roehl Consulting
Hemi's Landscaping and Concrete Inc
Hubert Manalo
Hydro Turf
Knox Associates, Inc. dba Knox Company
Kristofer Vandermeulen dba Moorpark Metals
L Keith Slama
Karen Kramer Dba Kramer Workplace investigations
Kelly-Moore Paint Company
Kistabra, Inc dba Rubber Dummies
Jose Luis Corral dba Salinas Pizza
Justina T Moises
Kanco Inc. / Mighty Auto Parts
Las Casas de Madera Cooperative, Inc
L.N. Curtis & Sons dba Curtis Blue Line
La Lonnie Revels
Lamplighter Salinas LLC dba Lamplighter Mobilehome
Pages: 8 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457780 05/17/2022 Open $32,693.69
457781 05/17/2022 Open $403.20
457782 05/17/2022 Open $11,096.00
457783 05/17/2022 Open $5,400.00
457784 05/17/2022 Open $163.08
457785 05/17/2022 Open $2,970.00
457786 05/17/2022 Open $5,622.75
457787 05/17/2022 Open $98,507.00
457788 05/17/2022 Open $575.10
457789 05/17/2022 Open $5,550.00
457790 05/17/2022 Open $2,858.00
457791 05/17/2022 Open $2,765.44
457792 05/17/2022 Open $4,663.62
457793 05/17/2022 Open $682.08
457794 05/17/2022 Open $352.24
457795 05/17/2022 Open $900.00
457796 05/17/2022 Open $1,685.00
457797 05/17/2022 Open $2,291.71
457798 05/17/2022 Open $150.00
457799 05/17/2022 Open $4,162.50
457800 05/17/2022 Open $6,615.46
457801 05/17/2022 Open $7,100.00
457802 05/17/2022 Open $4,725.00
457803 05/17/2022 Open $5,475.00
457804 05/17/2022 Open $38.29
457805 05/17/2022 Open $4,551.34
457806 05/17/2022 Open $4,996.28
457807 05/17/2022 Open $546.00
457808 05/17/2022 Open $158.52
457809 05/17/2022 Open $1,157.04
457810 05/17/2022 Open $5,970.89
457811 05/17/2022 Open $1,309.25
457812 05/17/2022 Open $235.44
457813 05/17/2022 Open $378.72
457814 05/17/2022 Open $506.54
457815 05/17/2022 Open $766.81
457816 05/17/2022 Open $609.04
457817 05/17/2022 Open $310.82
457818 05/17/2022 Open $1,022.53
457819 05/17/2022 Open $416.71
457820 05/17/2022 Open $711.62
457821 05/17/2022 Open $1,288.63
Liebert Cassidy Whitmore
Lisa Villafranca
Mackay Motor Parts, Inc dba Napa Auto Parts
LAZ Karp Assoc., LLC dba LAZ Parking California
LexisNexis Risk Data Management Inc Accurint Acct
Monterey County The Herald
Monterey One Water
Monterey One Water
Michael Spencer dba Tire & Wheel World
Miguel Reynoso
Monterey Bay Air Resources District
Mariner Village Group Limited
Maurilio Serrano
McGilloway, Ray, Brown and Kaufman
NPI Capital Partners LP dba Northridge Park Apartm
NPI Capital Partners LP dba Northridge Park Apartm
NPI Capital Partners LP dba Northridge Park Apartm
National Emblem
New Image Landscape Company
Nitro Software, Inc.

Monterey One Water
Monterra Ranch Of Monterey Home Owner's Associatio
MT Realty, LLC
Owen Equipment Sales
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
One Workplace L Ferrari, LLC dba Peninsula Busines
Operation Freedom Paws
Oriental Trading Company Inc
NPI Capital Partners LP dba Northridge Park Apartm
O'Reilly Auto Parts
Office Depot Business Service Division
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pages: 9 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457822 05/17/2022 Open $692.52
457823 05/17/2022 Open $335.19
457824 05/17/2022 Open $554.73
457825 05/17/2022 Open $375.14
457826 05/17/2022 Open $258.93
457827 05/17/2022 Open $513.58
457828 05/17/2022 Open $3,240.49
457829 05/17/2022 Open $5,499.77
457830 05/17/2022 Open $2,724.29
457831 05/17/2022 Open $431.70
457832 05/17/2022 Open $2,175.00
457833 05/17/2022 Open $3,864.00
457834 05/17/2022 Open $865.97
457835 05/17/2022 Open $667.50
457836 05/17/2022 Open $22,339.44
457837 05/17/2022 Open $365.49
457838 05/17/2022 Open $1,268.67
457839 05/17/2022 Open $2,385.00
457840 05/17/2022 Open $4,053.00
457841 05/17/2022 Open $729.10
457842 05/17/2022 Open $5,395.00
457843 05/17/2022 Open $8,600.00
457844 05/17/2022 Open $246.78
457845 05/17/2022 Open $92.51
457846 05/17/2022 Open $1,168.14
457847 05/17/2022 Open $272.89
457848 05/17/2022 Open $358.17
457849 05/17/2022 Open $1,468.32
457850 05/17/2022 Open $3,046.50
457851 05/17/2022 Open $305.24
457852 05/17/2022 Open $150.00
457853 05/17/2022 Open $2,550.00
457854 05/17/2022 Open $463.19
457855 05/17/2022 Open $119.00
457856 05/17/2022 Open $250.00
457857 05/17/2022 Open $1,781.52
457858 05/17/2022 Open $13,172.71
457859 05/17/2022 Open $4,500.00
457860 05/17/2022 Open $3,350.00
457861 05/17/2022 Open $6,039.00
457862 05/17/2022 Open $6,300.00
457863 05/17/2022 Open $2,520.00
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Truck Parts Inc
Pacific Water Resources
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Professional Police Supply, Inc dba Adamson Police
Pure Water
Quadient Finance USA, Inc dba NeoFunds/TotalFunds
Pinnacle Medical Group Inc dba Pinnacle Healthcare
Pinnacle Peak Holding Corp. dba Setcom Corp.

PLM Lender Services Inc
Pape Machinery, Inc.

PARS Retirement Services
Pedro C Estrada Dba Estrada Janitorial Service
Republic Services of Salinas
Republic Services of Salinas
Republic Services of Salinas
Regency Place LLC dba Palm Court Apartments
Regency Place LLC dba Palm Court Apartments
Republic Services of Salinas
R3 Consulting Group, Inc.

Rafael Felix dba CO Century 21 A Property Shoppe
RDO Equipment Company
Ruth Maria Milla-Leon dba Andersen's Lock & Safe
Ryan Alexander
Ryan Macoubrie
Robert Half International, Inc dba Accountemps, Of
Russell Auria Pest Control Services
Ruth E Johnson
Republic Services of Salinas
Rhythm Engineering, LLC
Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Salinas Cross LLC dba c/o Century 21 A Property
Salinas Capital Partners, LP
Salinas Capital Partners, LP
Salinas Capital Partners, LP
S & L Investments dba Salinas Valley ProSquad
Safe Life Defense
Salinas Capital Partners, LP
Pages: 10 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457864 05/17/2022 Open $6,449.46
457865 05/17/2022 Open $3,650.00
457866 05/17/2022 Open $28,807.55
457867 05/17/2022 Open $28,807.55
457868 05/17/2022 Open $28,807.55
457869 05/17/2022 Open $139.00
457870 05/17/2022 Open $5,678.04
457871 05/17/2022 Open $32.50
457872 05/17/2022 Open $218.65
457873 05/17/2022 Open $6,950.58
457874 05/17/2022 Open $528.00
457875 05/17/2022 Open $128.80
457876 05/17/2022 Open $4,647.82
457877 05/17/2022 Open $360.60
457878 05/17/2022 Open $3,647.16
457879 05/17/2022 Open $2,286.88
457880 05/17/2022 Open $4,026.02
457881 05/17/2022 Open $2,160.00
457882 05/17/2022 Open $154.04
457883 05/17/2022 Open $2,563.53
457884 05/17/2022 Open $81,203.73
457885 05/17/2022 Open $25.00
457886 05/17/2022 Open $1,023.80
457887 05/17/2022 Open $295.00
457888 05/17/2022 Open $1,200.00
457889 05/17/2022 Open $398.50
457890 05/17/2022 Open $24,625.55
457891 05/17/2022 Open $47.29
457892 05/17/2022 Open $342.33
457893 05/17/2022 Open $500.00
457894 05/17/2022 Open $259.27
457895 05/17/2022 Open $5,000.00
457896 05/17/2022 Open $38.01
457897 05/17/2022 Open $893.06
457898 05/17/2022 Open $847.54
457899 05/17/2022 Open $562.33
457900 05/17/2022 Open $339.48
457901 05/17/2022 Open $1,835.97
457902 05/17/2022 Open $23,742.50
457903 05/17/2022 Open $1,297.95
457904 05/17/2022 Open $2,325.97
457905 05/17/2022 Open $563.21
Salinas Custom Gate Company Inc
Salinas Pointe 2019 LP
San Lorenzo Lumber
Sedgwick Claims Management Services, Inc
Sentry Alarm System
Salinas Valley Ford Inc
Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority
Same Day Shred
Salinas Toyota
Salinas Toyota
Salinas Toyota
Special Services Group LLC
State Water Resource Control Board
Stommel Inc dba Lehr
Smith and Enright Landscaping
Southern California Veterinary Dental Specialties
SpeakWrite LLC
Shred-It US JV LLC dba Shred-It USA LLC
Silver and Wright LLP
Smart and Final Iris
U.S. Bank National Association ND
United Parcel Service
United Site Services
Target Pest Control
Tehama Golf Club LLC
U.S. Bank National Association dba U.S. Bank Equip
Sturdy Oil Company
Sunstar Media
Super Seer Corporation
Verizon Wireless
Verizon Wireless
W W Grainger Inc
Verizon Wireless
Verizon Wireless
Verizon Wireless
Urban & Regional Information Systems Assoc
Vals Plumbing and Heating Inc
Veritone, Inc
WCDJR LLC dba Watsonville Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram
Wallace Group A California Corporation
Walmart Community BRC
WCAF, LLC dba Watsonville Ford
Pages: 11 of 12
Number Date Status
Transaction
Amount
City of Salinas
Claim Checks 457442-457927
From Payment Date: 5/5/2022 - To Payment Date: 5/17/2022 Payee Name
General Account - General Account
Check
457906 05/17/2022 Open $4,248.00
457907 05/17/2022 Open $216.94
457908 05/17/2022 Open $1,750.00
457909 05/17/2022 Open $904.00
457910 05/17/2022 Open $312.13
457911 05/17/2022 Open $299.00
457912 05/17/2022 Open $273.75
457913 05/17/2022 Open $384.00
457914 05/17/2022 Open $42.50
457915 05/17/2022 Open $125.82
457916 05/17/2022 Open $234.00
457917 05/17/2022 Open $392.51
457918 05/17/2022 Open $42.50
457919 05/17/2022 Open $42.50
457920 05/17/2022 Open $77.50
457921 05/17/2022 Open $26.25
457922 05/17/2022 Open $361.25
457923 05/17/2022 Open $390.25
457924 05/17/2022 Open $26.25
457925 05/17/2022 Open $361.25
457926 05/17/2022 Open $390.25
457927 05/17/2022 Open $153.40
$2,059,846.68
Yvonne St Pierre dba Design Path Studio
Fresh Market Produce
Alfonso Meraz
Williams Ranch Housing Partners, LP
Worldpac
Jorge Magana
Kayleen Gomez
Kurt Han
Froylan Aranda
Hilda Peralta
Ichelle Herrera
Anthony Avila
Brian Johnson
Elise Ramirez
General Account - General Account Totals
Ryan Keating
Steve McShane
Type Check Totals:

Nathan Castillo
Rod Powell
Ruben Sanchez
Luis Bravo
Luis Ochoa
Mario Reyes
Pages: 12 of 12
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#22-164, Version: 1
Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B
Approve a Resolution accepting the Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B with Newton Construction, for maintenance and responsibility.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/18/2022
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2022
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
FROM: DAVID JACOBS, P.E., L.S., PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
BY: ELISE RAMRIEZ, P.E., SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER

JONATHAN ESTEBAN, JUNIOR ENGINEER
TITLE: ACCEPTANCE OF JOB ORDER CONTRACTING (JOC) FOR
MISCELLANEOUS “TYPE B” BUILDING/BUILDING
MAINTENANCE WORK CONTRACT NO. 2016-JOB03 TYPE B

WITH NEWTON CONSTRUCTION
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to approve a Resolution to accept the Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B with Newton Construction, for maintenance and responsibility.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that City Council approve a resolution to accept, for maintenance and responsibility, Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B with Newton Construction.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On February 7, 2017, City Council approved a resolution awarding Newton Construction a Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B. A contract for a minimum job order contract value of $50,000 and a non-guaranteed maximum aggregate contract value of $5,000,000 for a term of 5 years. The contract term expired on February 7, 2022. There are five (5) job orders that have been completed by Newton Construction under this contract for a total amount of $971,490. Staff recommends the approval of a resolution to accept the Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B for maintenance and responsibility.

BACKGROUND:

On February 7, 2017, City Council approved Resolution No. 21118, approving awards of Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous Type B Building/Building Maintenance Work 2016- JOB03-Type B to Staples Construction Company Inc., Newton Construction & Management Inc., Page | 2
and Ausonio Inc. for guaranteed minimum amounts of $50,000 and maximum amounts of $1 million. On November 7, 2017, City Council approved Resolution No. 21295 revising the three contracts for a minimum job order contract value of $50,000 and a non-guaranteed maximum aggregate contract value of $5,000,000 for a term of 5 years. The contract allows the City to expeditiously issue individual work orders to awarded contractors as a part of the City’s effort to maintain, improve, rehabilitate, or upgrade city buildings, including demolition work.

On July 2, 2018, the City submitted a Notice of Intent to Terminate Agreement letters to Staples Construction Co. Inc., Newton Construction & Management, and Ausonio Inc. Ausonio Inc. had not performed any work under the contract and thus was given the minimum contract value of $50,000. Newton Construction & Management Inc. declined contract termination and requested a modified agreement for “Type B” On-Call Contractor Contract for the remainder of the agreement term.

On November 6, 2018, the City entered into a revised agreement with Newton Construction & Management Inc. which expired on February 7, 2022.

Below is a list of job orders assigned and completed by Newton Construction for the JOC “Type B” Contract No. 2016-JOB03-Type B:

Facility Painting of Exterior of Freight Building at 1 Station Place; J06B-02-9875-01 On February 18, 2019, the City issued work orders J06B-02-9875-01 and J06B-02-9875-02 in the amount of $48,403 and $9,724, respectively.

Project work order J06B-02-9875-01, involved the exterior painting of the historic Salinas Freight Building. The improvements consisted of the removal of all lead paint, by scraping, sealing, priming, and painting all exterior building walls; painted three (3) light fixtures and all roll-up doors; repaired and painted wood gutters.

There was an additive alternate, J06B-02-9875-02, for the painting of handrails, building skirt and the application of a wood sealant to the existing decking, for an additional $9,724.

The project commenced on February 26, 2019, was completed on March 21, 2019. The contractor has completed all punch list items and the job order has been deemed complete and the construction methods and materials met the project specification requirements. There was one (1) contract change orders issued for a total increase of $9,724 for a final work order amount of $58,127.

Facility Painting of Exterior of Women’s Club Building at 215 Lincoln Ave; J06B-04-9052-01 On June 12, 2019, the City issued work order J06B-04-9052-01 in the amount of $104,497 to Newton Construction to paint the historic Salinas Women's Center, a two-story stucco building at 215 Lincoln Ave. with work commencing on June 12, 2019. The job consisted of the preparation of the exterior building walls, placing one coat of primer, two coats of paint, painting decorative iron fencing, and building trim. The project also replaced all windows and damaged glazing. There was one contract change order which granted six (6) additional days for the replacement of window glazing at no additional cost to the City including all impacts and markups for this project. The project was completed on August 27, 2019.

Page | 3
Fire Station No. 1 Reroof, Window Replacement, and Skylight Replacement; J06B-06-9235-01 On November 16, 2020, the Fire Station No. 1 Reroof, Window Replacement, and Skylight Replacement was authorized for Newton Construction in the amount of $637,642. The scope of work included installation of new overlay of PVC Roof System at built-up flat roof, removal and disposal of existing skylights and replacement with thermal insulating skylights, removal and disposal of existing wood shingles roofing, installation of metal roofing with waterproof membrane and fire barrier, and removal and replacement of eight (8) windows. The project was completed on July 22, 2021. The construction methods and materials met the project specification requirements, contractor has completed all punch list items and the job order has been deemed complete. There were four (4) contract change orders issued for a total increase of $44,732 for a total job order amount of $682,374.

Demolition and Abatement of West Wing Office Area of City Hall; J06B-07-9300-01 On February 4, 2021, the Demolition and Abatement of West Wing Office Area for Salinas Fire Department was authorized for Newton Construction in the amount of $106,134. The scope of work included demolition of the wall partitions, ceiling, lighting fixtures, in-wall electrical, mechanical system ducts, miscellaneous above ceiling utilities, and associated non-structural facilities and abatement of hazardous materials at the West Wing Offices at City Hall in preparation for the Salinas Fire Department City Hall Tenant Improvements. The project was completed on July 29, 2021. The construction methods and materials met the project specification requirements, the contractor has completed all punch list items and the job order has been deemed complete. There were two (2) change orders for this job order increasing the total by $17,758 for a total job order amount of $123,892.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

The City of Salinas has determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378).

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

This project addresses the current City Council’s Goals of “Infrastructure and Environmental Sustainability”, “Public Safety”, and “Effective and Culturally Responsive Government”.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

There has been coordination between Salinas Fire Department, Finance Department, Community Development Department (Building Division) for various job orders under this contract.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

The maximum contract value of the Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B is $5,000,000 with a minimum contract value of $50,000. Newton Construction’s final contract amount is $971,490.00.

Funds are appropriated and available to CIP’s 9875 (Freight Building); 9052 (Women’s Club Building); 9235 (Fire Station No. 1) and 9300 (West Wing).

Page | 4
ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
1 RESOLUTION NO. (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF JOB ORDER CONTRACTING (JOC) FOR MISCELLANEOUS “TYPE B” BUILDING/BUILDING MAINTENANCE WORK CONTRACT NO. 2016-JOB03 TYPE B WITH NEWTON CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, on February 7, 2017, City Council approved Resolution No. 21118, approving award of Job Order Contract (JOC) for Miscellaneous Type B Building/Building Maintenance Work 2016-JOB03-Type B to Staples Construction Company Inc., Newton Construction & Management Inc., and Ausonio Inc. for guaranteed minimum amounts of $50,000 and maximum amounts of $1 million; and
WHEREAS, on November 7, 2017, City Council approved Resolution No. 21295 revising the three contracts, Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03-Type B, for a minimum job order contract value of $50,000 and a non-guaranteed maximum aggregate contract value of $5,000,000 for a term of 5 years.; and
WHEREAS, on July 2, 2018, the City submitted a Notice of Intent to Terminate Agreement letters to Staples Construction Company Inc., Newton Construction & Management Inc., and Ausonio Inc.; and
WHEREAS, on November 6, 2018, the City entered into a revised agreement with Newton Construction & Management Inc.; and
WHEREAS, Newton Construction & Management Inc.’s contract term expired on February 7, 2022.; and
WHEREAS, there are five (5) job orders that have been completed by Newton Construction under this contract for a total amount of $971,490.; and WHEREAS, the following job orders have been completed under said Job Order Contracting (JOC) for Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B with Newton Construction: Facility Painting of Exterior of Freight Building at 1 Station Place, J06B-02-9875-01 (CIP 9875), Facility Painting of Exterior of Women’s Club Building at 215 Lincoln Ave, J06B-04-9052-01 (CIP 9052), Fire Station #1 Reroof, Window Replacement, and Skylight Replacement - J06B-06-9235-01 (CIP 9235), and Demolition and Abatement of West Wing Office Area of City Hall for Salinas Fire Department - J06B-07-9300-01 (CIP 9300); and
WHEREAS, on February 18, 2019, the City issued work order for Facility Painting of Exterior of Freight Building at 1 Station Place - J06B-02-9875-01 in the amount of $48,403. There was one (1) contract change orders issued for a total increase of $9,724 for a final work order amount of $58,127. Job order was completed on March 21, 2019.; and WHEREAS, on June 12, 2019, the City issued work order for Facility Painting of Exterior 2 of Women’s Club Bldg. at 215 Lincoln Ave - J06B-04-9052-01 in the amount of $104.497. Job order was completed on August 27, 2019.; and
WHEREAS, on November 16, 2020, the City issued work order for Fire Station No. 1 Reroof, Window Replacement, and Skylight Replacement - J06B-06-9235-01 in the amount of $637,642. There were four (4) contract change orders issued for a total increase of $44,732 for a total job order amount of $682,374. Job order was completed on July 22, 2021.; and WHEREAS, on February 4, 2021, the City issued work order for Demolition and Abatement of West Wing Office Area of City Hall for Salinas Fire Department - J06B-07-9300- 01 in the amount of $106,134. There were two (2) change orders for this job order increasing the total by $17,758 for a total job order amount of $123,892. Job order was completed on July 29, 2021.; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council hereby accepts the Job Order Contracting (JOC) For Miscellaneous “Type B” Building/Building Maintenance Work Contract No. 2016-JOB03 Type B with Newton Construction for maintenance and responsibility.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 24th day of May 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#22-201, Version: 1
Professional Services Agreement with Griffin Structure
Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Salinas and Griffin Structures in an amount not to exceed $1,293,710 for Program and Construction Management for the Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/18/2022
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2022
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT

LIBRARY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES
FROM: DAVID JACOBS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

KRISTAN LUNDQUIST, LCS DIRECTOR
TITLE: PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY

OF SALINAS AND GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Salinas and Griffin Structures in an amount not to exceed $1,293,710 for Program and Construction Management for the Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Professional Services Agreement between the City of Salinas and Griffin Structures in an amount not to exceed $1,293,710 for Program and Construction Management for the Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On December 8, 2021, the City issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) for Project and Construction Management and Community Engagement Assistance for the Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project. On January 18, 2022, the City received seven (7) Statements of Qualifications (SOQ). City Staff rated and ranked the SOQs and invited the top three (3) firms for interviews. After the interviews Griffin Structures was selected as the most qualified for the Hebbron Project. Following selection, Griffin Structures submitted a proposal, which was reviewed by City Staff. The proposal includes a scope of work, budget, and schedule for:

1. Project management

2. Demolition plans and specifications
Page | 2

3. Community outreach

4. Design development

5. Management of the selection of a Design Build Entity

6. Construction oversight
After discussions between City staff and Griffin Structures a final proposal was submitted at a cost not to exceed of $1,293,710. The final scope, budget and schedule is provided as Exhibit B to the Professional Services Agreement, which is attached to this staff report.

To expedite the project’s completion, CDD staff are seeking separate, prior Council authorization to execute a Second Substantial Amendments to the City’s U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) FY 20-21 Annual Action Plan (AAP) and a First Substantial Amendment to its FY 21-22 AAP to allow the necessary allocation of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Entitlement Funds. These funds will support predevelopment costs associated with the Hebbron Family Center project as stipulated in the Professional Services Agreement for Griffin Structures.

BACKGROUND:

In July of 2019, the Salinas City Council adopted the Parks, Recreation and Libraries Master Plan.

The Master Plan represents a community engagement effort that connected with thousands of residents and community leaders over eighteen (18) months. The plan assessed the state of our current park, recreation, and library facilities and engaged resident to prioritize the need for maintenance. The Hebbron Family Center is not only identified in the Master Plan to have “no architectural value” but scored and ranked the highest in priorities due to its current structural conditions as well as community feedback. In addition, the Alisal Vibrancy Plan (AVP) also adopted by the City Council in 2019, is an action-oriented, comprehensive strategy for the City of Salinas’ (City’s) East Salinas (Alisal) neighborhoods. Created with equity at its core, the AVP is a community-driven plan to alleviate and reverse decades of neglect and underinvestment in the 95% Hispanic/Latino Alisal neighborhoods of the City and to improve the quality of life for residents by building upon the social and cultural wealth of the Alisal. Rebuilding the Hebbron Family Center was identified by the community as a top priority in the AVP as a vital community resource that is in serious disrepair.

The Hebbron Family Center has served residents since the 1960s, the Center was once a community church and then repurposed as a community center in the 1970s. The center has provided many critical programs and services for the community, including after-school recreation and homework assistance programs, a teen lounge, martial arts training, food bank distribution, citizenship classes, a pre-kinder program, and much more. Unfortunately, the Hebbron Community Center closed in 2020 due to the ongoing pandemic and critical safety issues such as roof leaks, potential mold, and significant foundation problems.

Page | 3
Following the recommendations of the Master Plan, staff has worked diligently to secure funding sources to rebuild the Hebbron Family Center. In 2019 and 2020, LCS submitted a Prop 68 application to the Office of Grants and Local Services (OGALS) but was unsuccessful in securing funds for the renovation of the Hebron Family Center. In addition to seeking grant funding, the City submitted a direct request for funds from the State of California through Assemblymember Rivas’ office. The City was notified in September 2021 that the Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project would receive $8.1 Million from the State.

In April 2022, the LCS and PW Departments made an inquiry to the CDD about the availability of HUD CDBG Entitlement Funds to support the project’s pre-development costs. CDD staff reviewed the request in consultation with HUD staff and have deemed the project as an eligible activity to receive CDBG Entitlement Funds as the project satisfies the National Objective of benefiting a Low Mod Area where 51% of the residents fall within the low- and moderate-income categories. The ability to allocate CDBG funds to support the Hebbron Family Center project will result from prior Council action following a required public hearing to consider the submission of two proposed Substantial Amendments to the City’s FY 20-21 AAP and FY 21-22 AAP on May 24, 2022.

DISCUSSION:

With the short time frame allotted by the State for delivering the new Hebbron Family Center (all money spent by December 2025) and the organizational capacity of current City Staff a design build process was selected. In the design build process plans and specifications are developed to a 30% level. The 30% plans are then put out for proposals to design and build the project. To get to the 30% level an architect is hired, outreach is conducted, and a conceptual plan is developed.

The design build entity selected takes the 30% plans and finalizes the design, goes through the permitting process, and builds the structure.

Griffin Structures’ proposal includes 6 phases which include:

Phase 0: Demolition
Phase 1: Visioning
Phase 2: Concept Schematic Design
Phase 3: Design Development
Phase 4: Design Builder Bidding and Award
Phase 5: Design Build Management
Demolition includes plans and specifications to demolish the existing building. There could have been project savings by including the demolition in the design build process, but the condition of the current facility requires it to be demolished as soon as possible.

Page | 4
Visioning includes the establishment of a master schedule, project team meetings, stakeholder discussions, and community meetings.

Concept and Schematic Design includes property survey, geotechnical testing, an open house for the community to view the concepts and give feedback, three conceptual designs and a schematic design.

Design Development this phase will take the community input ad staff input and develop the bridging documents (30% design) that will be used for the performance-based selection of the design build team.

Design Builder Bidding and Award in this phase Griffin will distribute plans to the design teams, conduct a por-bid meeting, answer any requests for information and help the City evaluate the proposals.

Once the Design Build Entity is under contract, Griffin will start the Design Build Management which includes reviewing the construction schedule, holding progress meetings, shop drawing review, answering requests for information, review progress payments, and quality assurance.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

This action supports the Council’s initiative of “Youth and Seniors” and “Economic Development” and implements a top priority of the PRLMP and AVP.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

The Public Works Department worked with the Library & Community Services and Community Development Departments to develop the RFQ, rate and rank the SOQs, interview the top firms, and negotiate a final scope of work and budget proposal.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

City of Salinas HUD FY 20-21 and FY 21-22 CDBG Entitlement Funds will support the predevelopment ‘soft costs’ scope of work as outlined in the Professional Services Agreement in the Page | 5
amount not to exceed $1,293,710. A total of $8.1 million has also been appropriated in CIP 5800.55.9336 for the reconstruction of the Hebbron Family Center.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Professional Service Agreement
Exhibit B scope of services
Exhibit C CDBG regulations and Requirements
1 RESOLUTION NO. (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION OF THE SALINAS CITY COUNCIL APPROVING

A PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF SALINAS AND GRIFFIN STRUCTURES
WHEREAS, the Parks, Recreation and Libraries Master Plan identified Hebbron Family Center to have “no architectural value” and was the highest ranked priority due to its current structural conditions; and
WHEREAS, the Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project has received $8.1 Million from the State of California; and
WHEREAS, The City issued a Request for Qualifications for Project and Construction management and Community Engagement assistance; and
WHEREAS, Griffin Structures was selected as the most qualified consultant from the seven (7) qualifications submitted; and
WHEREAS, Griffin submitted a proposal in the amount not to exceed $1,293,710; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed, prior public hearing on May 24, 2022 authorizing the submission of a proposed Second Substantial Amendment to the FY 2020- 2021 AAP, First Substantial Amendment to FY 2021-2022, and allocation of $798,633 in FY 2020-2021 CDBG Entitlement Funds and $607,980 in FY 2021-2022 CDBG Entitlement Funds to the Hebbron Family Center project.

WHEREAS, the approval of a professional service agreement is not considered a project per the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALINAS approves the Professional Services Agreement between the City of Salinas and Griffin Structures and authorizes the City Manager to enter into such agreement; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the use of up to $1,293,710 of Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from FY 20-21 and FY 21-22 Annual Actions Plans for the professional agreement.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 24
th day of May 2022, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:
2 ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 1 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022

AGREEMENT

FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

BETWEEN

THE CITY OF SALINAS AND
GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INC.

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 2 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
Contents
RECITALS ..................................................................................................................................... 4 TERMS ........................................................................................................................................... 4

1. Scope of Service. ................................................................................................................. 4

2. Term; Completion Schedule. ............................................................................................... 4

3. Compensation. ..................................................................................................................... 4

4. Billing. ................................................................................................................................. 4

5. Meet & Confer. .................................................................................................................... 5

6. Additional Copies................................................................................................................. 5

7. Responsibility of Consultant................................................................................................ 5

8. Responsibility of City. ......................................................................................................... 5

9. Acceptance of Work Not a Release. .................................................................................... 6

10. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. ................................................................................... 6

11. Insurance.............................................................................................................................. 6

12. Access to Records................................................................................................................ 6

13. Non-Assignability. ............................................................................................................... 7

14. Changes to Scope of Work. ................................................................................................. 7

15. Ownership of Documents. ................................................................................................... 7

16. Termination.......................................................................................................................... 7

17. Compliance with Laws, Rules, and Regulations ................................................................. 8

18. Exhibits Incorporated........................................................................................................... 8

19. Independent Contractor........................................................................................................ 8

20. Integration and Entire Agreement........................................................................................ 8

21. Jurisdiction and Venue......................................................................................................... 9

22. Severability .......................................................................................................................... 9

23. Notices. ................................................................................................................................ 9

24. Nondiscrimination.............................................................................................................. 10

25. Conflict of Interest. ............................................................................................................ 10

26. Headings. ........................................................................................................................... 10

27. Attorneys’ Fees.................................................................................................................. 10

28. Non-Exclusive Agreement................................................................................................. 10

29. Rights and Obligations Under Agreement......................................................................... 10

30. Licenses.............................................................................................................................. 10

31. Counterparts....................................................................................................................... 11

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 3 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022

32. Legal Representation. ........................................................................................................ 11

33. Joint Representation........................................................................................................... 11

34. Warranty of Authority........................................................................................................ 11

35. No Waiver of Rights. ......................................................................................................... 11 Exhibit A - Insurance Requirements............................................................................................. 13 Exhibit B - Scope of Service......................................................................................................... 16 Exhibit C - CDBG Regulations and CDBG Requirements .......................................................... 17

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 4 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SALINAS AND GRIFFIN STRUCTURES, INC.

This Agreement for Professional Services (the “Agreement” and/or “Contract”) is made and entered into this ____ day of ______, 202_, between the City of Salinas, a California Charter city and municipal corporation (hereinafter “City”), and Griffin Structures, Inc., a California corporation (hereinafter “Consultant”).

RECITALS
WHEREAS, Consultant represents that he, she, or it is specially trained, experienced, and competent to perform the special services which will be required by this Agreement; and WHEREAS, Consultant is willing to render such professional services, as hereinafter defined, on the following terms and conditions.

WHEREAS, Consultant is aware that the professional services agreements is being funded through the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Entitlement Program and shall adhere to the CDBG regulations and requirements.

NOW, THEREFORE, City and Consultant agree as follows:

TERMS

1. Scope of Service. The project contemplated and the scope of Consultant’s services are described in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

2. Term; Completion Schedule. This Agreement shall commence on May __, 2022, and shall terminate on September 30, 2025, unless extended in writing by either party upon (30) days written notice. This Agreement may be extended only upon mutual written consent of the parties, and may be terminated only pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

3. Compensation. City hereby agrees to pay Consultant for services rendered the City pursuant to this Agreement on a time and materials basis according to the rates of compensation as set forth in Exhibit B. The total amount of compensation to be paid under this Agreement shall not exceed one million two hundred ninety-three thousand seven hundred and ten dollars ($1,293,710).

4. Billing. Consultant shall submit to City an itemized invoice, prepared in a form satisfactory to City, describing its services and costs for the period covered by the invoice.

Except as specifically authorized by City, Consultant shall not bill City for duplicate services performed by more than one person. Consultant’s bills shall include the following information to which such services cost or pertain:
(A) A brief description of services performed;

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 5 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
(B) The date the services were performed;
(C) The number of hours spent and by whom;
(D) A brief description of any costs incurred; and
(E) The Consultant’s signature.

Any such invoices shall be in full accord with any and all applicable provisions of this Agreement.

City shall make payment on each such invoice within thirty (30) days of receipt; provided, however, that if Consultant submits an invoice which is incorrect, incomplete, or not in accord with the provisions of this Agreement, City shall not be obligated to process any payment to Consultant until thirty (30) days after a correct and complying invoice has been submitted by Consultant. The City shall process undisputed portion immediately.

5. Meet & Confer. Consultant agrees to meet and confer with City or its agents or employees with regard to services as set forth herein as may be required by the City to ensure timely and adequate performance of the Agreement.

6. Additional Copies. If City requires additional copies of reports, or any other material which Consultant is required to furnish as part of the services under this Agreement, Consultant shall provide such additional copies as are requested, and City shall compensate Consultant for the actual costs related to the production of such copies by Consultant.

7. Responsibility of Consultant. By executing this Agreement, Consultant agrees that the services to be provided and work to be performed under this Agreement shall be performed in a fully competent manner. By executing this Agreement, Consultant further agrees and represents to City that the Consultant possesses, or shall arrange to secure from others, all of the necessary professional capabilities, experience, resources, and facilities necessary to provide the City the services contemplated under this Agreement and that City relies upon the professional skills of Consultant to do and perform Consultant’s work. Consultant further agrees and represents that Consultant shall follow the current, generally accepted practices in this area to the profession to make findings, render opinions, prepare factual presentations, and provide professional advice and recommendations regarding the projects for which the services are rendered under this Agreement.

This Agreement for Professional Services is being funded through the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Entitlement Program. The CDBG Program is authorized under Title 1 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, Public Law 93-383, as amended; 42 U.S.C. 5301 et seq.

The Consultant agrees to adhere to the CDBG regulations and requirements specificized under Exhibit C.

8. Responsibility of City. To the extent appropriate to the projects to be completed by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement, City shall:

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 6 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
(A) Assist Consultant by placing at its disposal all available information pertinent to the projects, including but not limited to, previous reports and any other data relative to the projects. Nothing contained herein shall obligate City to incur any expense in connection with completion of studies or acquisition of information not otherwise in the possession of City. (B) Examine all studies, reports, sketches, drawings, specifications, proposals, and other documents presented by Consultant, and render verbally or in writing as may be appropriate, decisions pertaining thereto within a reasonable time so as not to delay the services of Consultant.
(C) Steve Carrigan, City Manager, or his designee, shall act as City’s representative with respect to the work to be performed under this Agreement. Such person shall have the complete authority to transmit instructions, receive information, interpret and define City’s policies and decisions with respect to materials, equipment, elements, and systems pertinent to Consultant’s services. City may unilaterally change its representative upon notice to the Consultant.
(D) Give prompt written notice to Consultant whenever City observes or otherwise becomes aware of any defect in a project.

9. Acceptance of Work Not a Release. Acceptance by the City of the work to be performed under this Agreement does not operate as a release of Consultant from professional responsibility for the work performed.

10. Indemnification and Hold Harmless.

Consultant agrees to indemnify, including the cost to defend, City and its officers, officials, and employees from and against any and all claims, demands, costs, or liability that arise out of, or pertain to, or relate to the negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct of Consultant and its employees or agents in the performance of services under this contract, but this indemnity does not apply to liability for damages arising from the sole negligence, active negligence, or willful acts of the City; and does not apply to any passive negligence of the City unless caused at least in part by the Consultant (aka Design Professional).

11. Insurance. Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement insurance meeting the requirements specified in Exhibit A hereto.

12. Access to Records. Consultant shall maintain all preparatory books, records, documents, accounting ledgers, and similar materials including but not limited to calculation and survey notes relating to work performed for the City under this Agreement on file for at least three (3) years following the date of final payment to Consultant by City. Any duly authorized representative(s) of City shall have access to such records for the purpose of inspection, audit, and copying at reasonable times during Consultant’s usual and customary business hours.

Consultant shall provide proper facilities to City’s representative(s) for such access and inspection.

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 7 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022

13. Non-Assignability. It is recognized by the parties hereto that a substantial inducement to City for entering into this Agreement was, and is, the professional reputation and competence of Consultant. This Agreement is personal to Consultant and shall not be assigned by it without express written approval of the City.

14. Changes to Scope of Work. City may at any time, and upon a minimum of ten (10) days written notice, seek to modify the scope of services to be provided for any project to be completed under this Agreement. Consultant shall, upon receipt of said notice, determine the impact on both time and compensation of such change in scope and notify City in writing. Upon agreement between City and Consultant as to the extent of said impacts to time and compensation, an amendment to this Agreement shall be prepared describing such changes.

Execution of the amendment by City and Consultant shall constitute the Consultant’s notice to proceed with the changed scope.

15. Ownership of Documents. Title to all final documents, including drawings, specifications, data, reports, summaries, correspondence, photographs, computer software (if purchased on the City’s behalf), video and audio tapes, software output, and any other materials with respect to work performed under this Agreement shall vest with City at such time as City has compensated Consultant, as provided herein, for the services rendered by Consultant in connection with which they were prepared. City agrees to hold harmless and indemnify the Consultant against all damages, claims, lawsuits, and losses of any kind including defense costs arising out of any use of said documents, drawings, and/or specifications on any other project without written authorization of the Consultant.

16. Termination.
(A) City shall have the authority to terminate this Agreement, upon ten days written notice to Consultant, as follows:
(1) If in the City’s opinion the conduct of the Consultant is such that the interest of the City may be impaired or prejudiced, or
(2) For any reason whatsoever.
(B) Upon termination, Consultant shall be entitled to payment of such amount as fairly compensates Consultant for all work satisfactorily performed up to the date of termination based upon the Consultant’s rates shown in Exhibit B and/or Section 3 of this Agreement, except that:
(1) In the event of termination by the City for Consultant’s default, City shall deduct from the amount due Consultant the total amount of additional expenses incurred by City as a result of such default. Such deduction from amounts due Consultant are made to compensate City for its actual additional costs incurred in securing satisfactory performance of the terms of this Agreement, including but not limited to, costs of engaging another consultant(s) for such purposes. In the event that such additional

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 8 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
expenses shall exceed amounts otherwise due and payable to Consultant hereunder, Consultant shall pay City the full amount of such expense. (C) In the event that this Agreement is terminated by City for any reason, Consultant shall:
(1) Upon receipt of written notice of such termination promptly cease all services on this project, unless otherwise directed by City; and (2) Deliver to City all documents, data, reports, summaries, correspondence, photographs, computer software output, video and audio tapes, and any other materials provided to Consultant or prepared by or for Consultant or the City in connection with this Agreement. Such material is to be delivered to City in completed form; however, notwithstanding the provisions of Section 15 herein, City may condition payment for services rendered to the date of termination upon Consultant’s delivery to the City of such material.
(D) In the event that this Agreement is terminated by City for any reason, City is hereby expressly permitted to assume the projects and complete them by any means, including but not limited to, an agreement with another party.
(E) The rights and remedy of the City and Consultant provided under this Section are not exclusive and are in addition to any other rights and remedies provided by law or appearing in any other section of this Agreement.

17. Compliance with Laws, Rules, and Regulations. Services performed by Consultant pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed in accordance and full compliance with all applicable federal, state, and City laws and any rules or regulations promulgated thereunder. This Agreement shall also adhere to requirements and regulations of the HUD CDBG Entitlement Program.

18. Exhibits Incorporated. All exhibits referred to in this Agreement and attached to it are hereby incorporated in it by this reference. In the event there is a conflict between any of the terms of this Agreement and any of the terms of any exhibit to the Agreement, the terms of the Agreement shall control the respective duties and liabilities of the parties.

19. Independent Contractor. It is expressly understood and agreed by both parties that Consultant, while engaged in carrying out and complying with any of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, is an independent contractor and not an employee of the City. Consultant expressly warrants not to represent, at any time or in any manner, that Consultant is an employee or servant of the City.

20. Integration and Entire Agreement. This Agreement represents the entire understanding of City and Consultant as to those matters contained herein. No prior oral or written understanding shall be of any force or effect with respect to those matters contained

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 9 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
herein. This Agreement may not be modified or altered except by amendment in writing signed by both parties.

21. Jurisdiction and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California, County of Monterey, and City of Salinas.

Jurisdiction of litigation arising from this Agreement shall be in the State of California, in the County of Monterey or in the appropriate federal court with jurisdiction over the matter.

22. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is found to be in conflict with applicable laws, such part shall be inoperative, null and void insofar as it is in conflict with said laws, but the remainder of the Agreement shall continue to be in full force and effect.

23. Notices.
(A) Written notices to the City hereunder shall, until further notice by City, be addressed to:

City Manager
City of Salinas
200 Lincoln Avenue
Salinas, California 93901
With a copy to:

City Attorney
City of Salinas
200 Lincoln Avenue
Salinas, California 93901
(B) Written notices to the Consultant shall, until further notice by the Consultant, be addressed to:

Rodger Torriero, President & CEO
Griffin Structures, Inc.
1850 Warburton Ave., Suite 120
Santa Clara, CA 95050
(C) The execution of any such notices by the City Manager shall be effective as to Consultant as if it were by resolution or order of the City Council, and Consultant shall not question the authority of the City Manager to execute any such notice. (D) All such notices shall either be delivered personally to the other party’s designee named above, or shall be deposited in the United States Mail, properly addressed as aforesaid, postage fully prepaid, and shall be effective the day following such deposit in the mail.

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 10 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022

24. Nondiscrimination. During the performance of this Agreement, Consultant shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, ancestry, creed, sex, national origin, familial status, sexual orientation, age (over 40 years) or disability. Consultant shall take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, ancestry, creed, sex, national origin, familial status, sexual orientation, age (over 40 years) or disability.

25. Conflict of Interest. Consultant warrants and declares that it presently has no interest, and shall not acquire any interest, direct or indirect, financial or otherwise, in any manner or degree which will render the services required under the provisions of this Agreement a violation of any applicable local, state or federal law. Consultant further declares that, in the performance of this Agreement, no subcontractor or person having such an interest shall be employed. In the event that any conflict of interest should nevertheless hereinafter arise, Consultant shall promptly notify City of the existence of such conflict of interest so that City may determine whether to terminate this Agreement. Consultant further warrants its compliance with the Political Reform Act (Government Code section 81000 et seq.) and Salinas City Code Chapter 2A that apply to Consultant as the result of Consultant’s performance of the work or services pursuant to the terms of this Agreement.

26. Headings. The section headings appearing herein shall not be deemed to govern, limit, modify, or in any manner affect the scope, meaning or intent of the provisions of this Agreement.

27. Attorneys’ Fees. In case suit shall be brought to interpret or to enforce this Agreement, or because of the breach of any other covenant or provision herein contained, the prevailing party in such action shall be entitled to recover their reasonable attorneys’ fees in addition to such costs as may be allowed by the Court. City’s attorneys’ fees, if awarded, shall be calculated at the market rate.

28. Non-Exclusive Agreement. This Agreement is non-exclusive and both City and Consultant expressly reserves the right to contract with other entities for the same or similar services.

29. Rights and Obligations Under Agreement. By entering into this Agreement, the parties do not intend to create any obligations express or implied other than those set out herein; further, this Agreement shall not create any rights in any party not a signatory hereto.

30. Licenses. If a license of any kind, which term is intended to include evidence of registration, is required of Consultant, its representatives, agents or subcontractors by federal, state or local law, Consultant warrants that such license has been obtained, is valid and in good standing, and that any applicable bond posted in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 11 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022

31. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute a single agreement.

32. Legal Representation. Each party affirms that it has been represented, if it so chose, by legal counsel of its own choosing regarding the preparation and the negotiation of this Agreement and the matters and claims set forth herein, and that each of them has read this Agreement and is fully aware of its contents and its legal effect. Neither party is relying on any statement of the other party outside the terms set forth in this Agreement as an inducement to enter into this Agreement.

33. Joint Representation. The language of all parts of this Agreement shall in all cases be construed as a whole, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any party. No presumptions or rules of interpretation based upon the identity of the party preparing or drafting the Agreement, or any part thereof, shall be applicable or invoked.

34. Warranty of Authority. Each party represents and warrants that it has the right, power, and authority to enter into this Agreement. Each party further represents and warrants that it has given any and all notices, and obtained any and all consents, powers, and authorities, necessary to permit it, and the persons entering into this Agreement for it, to enter into this Agreement.

35. No Waiver of Rights. Waiver of a breach or default under this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of a subsequent breach of the same or any other provision of this Agreement. The failure to provide notice of any breach of this Agreement or failure to comply with any of the terms of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver thereof.

Failure on the part of either party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not be construed as a waiver of the right to compel enforcement of such provision or any other provision. A waiver by the City of any one or more of the conditions of performance under this Agreement shall not be construed as waiver(s) of any other condition of performance under this Agreement.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have made and executed this Agreement on the date first written above.

CITY OF SALINAS
____________________________
Steve Carrigan
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 12 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
□ Christopher A. Callihan, City Attorney, or
□ Rhonda Combs, Assistant City Attorney

CONSULTANT
___________________________________
By: Rodger Torriero
Title: President & CEO

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 13 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
Exhibit A - Insurance Requirements
Insurance Requirements
Consultant shall procure and maintain for the duration of the Agreement insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder and the results of that work by the Consultant, his agents, representatives, employees, or subcontractors. With respect to General Liability and Professional Liability, coverage should be maintained for a minimum of five (5) years after Agreement completion.

MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:
(A)Commercial General Liability (“CGL”): Insurance Services Office Form (“ISO”) CG 00 01 covering CGL on an occurrence basis, including products and completed operations, property damage, bodily injury, and personal & advertising injury with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit. (B) Automobile Liability: ISO Form CA 0001 covering any auto, or if Consultant has no owned autos, hired and non-owned, with limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.
(C)Workers’ Compensation insurance as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employer’s Liability Insurance with a limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.
(D)Professional Liability (also known as Errors and Omissions) insurance appropriate to the work being performed, with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, $2,000,000 aggregate per policy period of one year.

If the Consultant maintains broader coverage and/or higher limits than the minimums shown above, the City of Salinas requires and shall be entitled to the broader coverage and/or higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the City.

OTHER INSURANCE PROVISIONS
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

Additional Insured Status
The City of Salinas, its officers, officials, and employees are to be covered as additional insureds on the CGL policy with respect to liability arising out of work or operations performed by or on behalf of the Consultant including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Consultant’s insurance (at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 10, CG 11 85, or both CG 20 10, CG 20 26, CG 20 33, or CG 20 38; and CG 20 37 forms if later revisions used).

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 14 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
Primary Coverage
For any claims related to this Agreement or the project described within this Agreement, the Consultant’s insurance coverage shall be primary coverage at least as broad as ISO Form CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City, its officers, officials, and employees. Any insurance or selfinsurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, or employees shall be excess of the Consultant’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.

Notice of Cancellation
Each insurance policy required above shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City.

Waiver of Subrogation
Consultant hereby grants to City a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Consultant may acquire against the City by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance.

Consultant agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation, but this provision applies regardless of whether or not the City has received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City of Salinas for all work performed by the Consultant, its employees, agents, and subcontractors.

Self-Insured Retentions
Self-insured retentions must be declared by Consultant to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, Consultant shall provide coverage to reduce or eliminate such self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees; or the consultant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administrations, and defense expenses. The policy language shall provide, or be endorsed to provide, that the self-insured retention may be satisfied by either the named insured or City.

Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.

Claims Made Policies
If any of the required policies provide coverage on a claims-made basis:

1. The Retroactive Date must be shown and must be before the date of this Agreement or the beginning of Agreement work.

2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the Agreement of work.

3. If coverage is canceled or non-renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the Agreement effective date, the Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of Agreement work.

4. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted to the City for review.

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 15 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
Verification of Coverage
Consultant shall furnish the City with original certificates and amendatory endorsements or copies of the applicable insurance language effecting coverage required by this Agreement. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the City before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Consultant’s obligation to provide them. The City reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time.

Subcontractors
Consultant shall require and verify that all sub-consultants and/or subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Consultant shall ensure that Entity is an additional insured on insurance required from such sub-consultants and/or subcontractors.

Special Risks or Circumstances
City reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

Maintenance of Insurance
Maintenance of insurance by Consultant as specified shall in no way be interpreted as relieving Consultant of its indemnification obligations or any responsibility whatsoever and the Consultant may carry, at its own expense, such additional insurance as it deems necessary.

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 16 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
Exhibit B - Scope of Service
[Scope of Service; Compensation]

Form: Professional Services Agreement v. January 2021 Page 17 of 18 Griffin Structures, Inc.

May 2022
Exhibit C - CDBG Regulations and CDBG Requirements

GRIFFIN STRUCTURES FEE PROPOSAL

HEBBRON FAMILY CENTER REVITALIZATION PROJECT

CITY OF SALINAS
04/01/2022
Griffin Structures’ Fee Proposal is based on all reasonable costs necessary to perform Program and Construction Management services for the Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project. For these requisite services, Griffin Structures proposes the following Not to Exceed Fee:

Program & Construction Management: $ 631,000
Master Architect (Bridging Documents): $ 540,070
Public Outreach Specialist: $ 67,340
Geotechnical Investigation: $ 45,000
Site Survey: $ 10,300
Total $ 1,293,710
All proposed hourly rates are fully burdened and include overhead, profit, taxes, and benefits. The hours identified for each individual employee and task are estimates only and are not to be construed as not to exceed hours for any individual task, phase, or time-period. We reserve the right to reallocate hours between staff members and tasks to accomplish the overall objectives and requirements of the project.

Services are based on the attached Fee Schedule, Resource Allocation Schedule, which provides detail on the allocation of hours. Any extension of the schedule or services may result in additional fee, in good faith negotiation with the City.

APPROACH TO FEE AND PROJECT SCHEDULE
This proposal assumes a project schedule as illustrated in our technical proposal as follows:

Phase 0 – Demolition: May 2022 – January 2023
Phase 1 – Visioning: May 2022 – July 2022
Phase 2 – Concept & Schematic: August 2022 – December 2022 Phase 3 – Design Development: January 2023 – May 2023
Phase 4 – Design Builder Bidding & Award: June 2023 – August 2023 Phase 5 – Design Builder Management: September 2023 – April 2025 1

Page 2 of 3 ends

APPROACH TO STAFFING
To bring value to the City and to perform all tasks listed in the RFP, Griffin Structures proposes the following staffing allocation:

Roger Torriero will service as Principal in Charge for the duration of the project and will provide direction and quality assurance to the project team for a total of 144 hours. To bring value to the City, Roger’s time is offered AT NO COST for a total VALUE ADDED of $39,600
Jon Hughes will serve as the Project Executive for the duration of the project. In this role Jon will provide guidance and insight from his years of managing the design and construction of public facilities. For this level of service, we have allocated a total of 288 hours of Jon’s time.

Hernan Munayco will serve as the Program & Construction Manager and primary point of contact for the duration of the project. During the Demolition phase, Hernan will apply roughly 20-35 hours per month toward this effort. Concurrently, Hernan will apply roughly 8 hours per week (35 hours per month) to manage Phases 1, 2, and 3. As the project moves into DBE bidding and DBE design management, Hernan’s time will increase to 60 hours per month. Once construction begins Hernan will then increase his time to 3 days per week (104 hours per month). This approach results in a total hourly allocation of 2666 hours of Hernan’s time.

Jay Helekar will provide estimating services for this project. This scope includes a preliminary statement of probable cost based on the conceptual design, a schematic design estimate, and an engineer’s estimate at the completion of bridging documents. For this level of service, we have allocated 160 hours of Jay’s time.

QUALIFICATIONS AND EXCLUSIONS

1. Hourly rates are valid through December 31st, 2024 and will escalate by CPI annually thereafter.

2. Insurance costs are included as a reimbursable expense and will be billed monthly at the rate of $8 per $1,000.

3. On-site trailer rental, furniture, utilities, and sanitary facilities for our field staff (Project Management team) are excluded. We assume that offices will be provided as part of the construction site trailer(s) being provided by the City’s contractor.

4. Costs for all permits required for the project are excluded. It is assumed that the City will pay for all permitting fees, assessments, easements, school fees, and other agency or governmental fees or costs to support the design and construction the project. We have not included any permit related fees within our fee proposal. Permits will be pulled by others.

5. Costs for construction staking, environmental and hazardous materials surveys, and all environmental and hazardous materials transportation and remediation costs are excluded. Our proposal does include initial site surveying for inclusion in the Bridging Documents, but will rely upon the DBE to perform any and all necessary surveying thereafter.

6. Software licenses or user fees and all software training costs for specific project management software being required by either the City or their contractor(s) is excluded.

7. Cost of bulk blueprinting for plans and specifications for use by the contractors and subcontractors is excluded. Funds included in reimbursable expenses are for Griffin printing costs alone. 2

Page 3 of 3 ends

8. Labor Compliance and auditing will be performed by the City of Salinas and is therefore excluded from this proposal, with the exception of field interviews. Griffin Structures will perform the necessary field interviews during construction.

9. Independent or third-party testing companies such as Roofing, Peer Reviews, LEED, or other specialized third-party oversight services other than those listed herein are excluded.

10. Commissioning requirements required by Cal Green (Title 24) are excluded. Griffin will manage the commissioning process, but we have not included a commissioning agent, nor development of commissioning specifications.

11. No FF&E or OS&E is included in this proposal.

12. Security and 24-hour surveillance is excluded.

13. Project Manager will review all pertinent RFI’s, Submittals, and Substitutions only for completeness, approvals to be executed by the designer of record.

14. This proposal does not include a formal independent Inspector of Record (IOR). All City Building Dept.

Permit Inspections are assumed to be performed by the City Building Dept. Full time inspections are recognized as Quality Assurance inspections.

15. Construction Cost Estimates, when provided, are based on standard industry practice, professional experience and knowledge of market conditions. Griffin has no control over material and labor costs, contractor’s methods of establishing prices or the market and bidding conditions at the time of bid.

Therefore, Griffin does not guarantee that bids received will not vary from the cost estimate provided and Griffin is not liable for any costs, liabilities, or damages incurred by City arising from Griffin’s opinion of cost, the actual project cost to City delays caused by events outside the control of Griffin, or any labor or material cost increases.

16. Griffin is not responsible for, and City will hold Griffin harmless from, any schedule delays and/or any losses, damages, or liabilities resulting therefrom that are caused by (1) events or conditions that are outside of Griffin’s control or (2) the acts or omissions of parties for whom Griffin is not legally liable (collectively, “Non-Consultant Delays”). The schedule for completion will be extended for any NonConsultant Delays. If Griffin incurs additional costs or expenses due to Non-Consultant Delays, then Griffin’s fee compensation will be equitably adjusted to cover such additional costs or expenses.

17. In its role as Project Manager, Griffin Structures will provide management and oversight of the project on behalf of the City, but all decision-making authority will remain with the City of Salinas, which shall provide a single point of contact authorized to make final decisions on behalf to the City.

18. This proposal does not include any other subconsultants other than those listed. Any additional consultants needed for this project (Commissioning, Furniture Vendor, Hazmat, Deputy Inspections) will be under separate contract with the City. This proposal does include the procurement of necessary consultants and the management thereof on the City’s behalf.

SCOPE OF WORK
Phase 0: Demolition
Based on discussions with the City, Griffin Structures and its team will manage and implement a separate building demolition project independent of the design build construction of a new facility. This demolition package will include the following:
a. Site Investigation :

Griffin Structures (GSI) in collaboration with Anderson Brule Architects (ABA) will perform an initial investigation to evaluate the site conditions necessary for preparing the demolition documents. This effort will include verifying dimensions, scope, existing conditions, and code investigation for representation in the demolition package of drawings.
b. Hazardous Materials Solicitation and Investigation:

Concurrent with the investigation phase, GSI will prepare and oversee a solicitation effort to procure Hazardous Materials investigation services for inclusion in the bid documents. This effort will involve inviting a minimum of 3 bidders from the City’s on call list, managing all solicitation correspondence, evaluating the proposals and making recommendations to the City for approval.

GSI will then manage the investigation efforts and reporting of results into a comprehensive report that indicates if any Lead Based Paint (LBP), Asbestos Containing Materials (ACM), or other contaminants, their location found, the rough quantities discovered, and recommendations for safe removal and disposal. c. Demolition Plan Set
ABA, with Griffin oversight, will prepare a set of bid documents for demolition that will include a cover sheet, site demolition plan, basement demolition plan, floor demolition plan, roof demolition plan, Civil plans for demolition, and MEP demolition plans, and any necessary specifications required for a complete set of biddable demolition documents. This effort will also include coordinating with the building department for plan check approval.
d. Demolition Bidding
Once complete, Griffin will oversee and manage the City’s bidding effort. Utilizing the City’s existing procurement systems and protocols, Griffin will oversee the bid effort including the following:

1. Pre-Bid Site Meeting

2. Bid Correspondence

3. Issuance of Addenda

4. Bid Opening

5. Bid Review and Recommendation for Award
At the completion of bidding, Griffin will assist the City in preparing a staff report for award of contract, make initial contact with the successful bidder, and make preparations for mobilization. e. Demolition
Once under contract, Griffin will oversee the demolition contractor in its efforts to perform the scope of work prepared in the documents. This oversight will include:

1. Overseeing Site Conditions

2. Managing Contractor Communication
4 SCOPE OF WORK

3. Chair Meetings as Needed

4. Issues Resolution

5. Schedule Oversight

6. Budget Oversight

7. As Needed Owner Representation
At the completion of the demolition phase, Griffin will closeout the contract and collect the necessary documentation for the City to finalize the effort and provide a clean and safe condition for the next phase of construction.

Minimum Limits of Demolition Scope:

Phase 1: Visioning and Needs Assessment
a. Initial Assessment
Griffin Structures begins every project with a comprehensive Initial Assessment. This assessment provides the City with a fresh perspective on all aspects of the project currently underway and allows Griffin to strategically assess the priorities for executing our services. In this case, given our current participation in developing the program, in partnership with LPA, we have effectively already performed this assessment 5 SCOPE OF WORK
and are therefore in a position to ‘hit the ground running’ and begin the process of implementing other protocols in earnest.
b. Establish a Master Schedule
With a program in place, Griffin will produce a comprehensive master project schedule. This schedule will include all aspects of the project including but not limited to:

1. Design Iterations

2. Bridging Document review times

3. Design Build Contractor prequalification (if desired)

4. Bidding

5. Construction Document completion

6. Phases of construction

7. City installations

8. Utility connections

9. City IT installations

10. Punch List

11. Commissioning
This initial schedule will serve as the basis for establishing the overall construction duration that will be incorporated into the bridging documents. Naturally, Griffin will incorporate the input of all team members in that regard.
c. Communication and Document Control
Griffin will then establish standardized communication protocols. These protocols are critical in a construction project of this size and scope and are particularly key to a successful Design Build contract.

Accordingly, Griffin will establish a clear line of communication between the team members which will be utilized during the development of the bridging documents and be maintained through the construction process. Working closely with the City, Griffin will identify the proper channels for all communication between all members of the project team.
d. Project Team Meetings and Project Management
The Project Team will be comprised of the City’s Project Manager and a small work team of key City staff that will provide internal project direction and ensure technical accuracy of deliverables. This team is expected to regularly, at least 2 times per month via a digital platform. e. Project Outreach Kickoff
The Griffin Team will meet with the City’s Project Manager and key staff in a 2-hour conference to initiate the outreach process and discuss the desired project outcomes, available background materials, communication protocols, engagement strategies, and schedule. f. Stakeholder Discussion #1 - Visioning
To initiate the community conversation, members of the Griffin team meet and facilitate a discussion with select group of stakeholders to discuss their vision and programming needs for the Hebbron Community Center. City staff will identify participants but may include members of the Project Team, additional city staff members from Public Works, Planning, and the Parks, Recreation and Library Departments. 6 SCOPE OF WORK
Additional non-staff stakeholder may be included at the City’s discretion. One in person meeting is proposed at the onset of the Visioning Phase.
g. Visioning Community Meetings
Two (2) broad-based bilingual community meetings are proposed for this phase of the engagement process.

Community Meeting #1 will take place at the onset of this phase and will be the official public kickoff. It is proposed to be held in person at a venue coordinated by city staff. Community Meeting #2 is proposed at the end of Phase 2 as a virtual meeting. The purpose of the second meeting will be to share with the community the ideas, concerns, and questions heard and discussed with the Community. h. Pop-up Events and Materials
In coordination with city staff, the Griffin Team will develop a pop-up event outreach approach and materials, including a Project Fact Sheet. The Griffin Team will attend and assist with two (2) events. Events may be previously scheduled fairs or parades or other community events. The Griffin team will staff two events, but City staff may use materials to staff additional pop-up events. i. Summary of Visioning and Needs Assessment Tasks

1. Conduct a Project Outreach Kick-off

2. Conduct a stakeholder Visioning Session

3. Conduct 2 Community Visioning Meetings

4. Conduct 2 Pop-up Events

5. Provide materials for meetings

6. Attend bi-weekly project management meeting
Phase 2: Concept and Schematic Design
Once the initial project assessment and information gathering phase is completed, the Griffin team will then begin to produce the Concept Designs which in turn will be further developed into Schematic Designs.

Specifically, this effort will involve the following:
a. Stakeholder Discussion #2 – Charrette
At the onset of Phase 2, the Griffin team will design and facilitate a Charrette with the Project Team and Stakeholders. The Charrette will be designed to be a hands-on event for stakeholders to provide direct input on site plans and concepts.
b. Open House
In coordination with city staff, the Griffin Team will develop and coordinate a series of exhibits for an Open House event. Flexible in nature, the open house can be hosted to allow participants to stop in at any point during a given block of time. They can stop in to view bilingual exhibits and discuss ideas and/or concerns with the Project Team. This format allows for participants to discuss the project in a more personal way in either English or Spanish.
c. Online Survey
7 SCOPE OF WORK
To amplify the extent of the community conversation a bilingual online survey is proposed. Utilizing a platform such as Survey Monkey or Bang the Table, the concepts and schematic designs exhibited during the Open House can be integrated and preferences can be captured through polling and text feedback. d. Social Media Roll Out
A social media series is proposed to roll out the emerging themes and concepts. Images from the Open House and/or the Online Survey will be used as the basis for the social media posts. The posts will help promote awareness of the discussion and emerging ideas for the Hebbron Community Center and will drive participation in Survey.
e. Stakeholder Discussion #3
A third stakeholder discussion will help review feedback received during the above activities. In advance of the Discussion, the Griffin Team will synthesize the concepts and begin to present the direction of the concept. The discussion will serve as a platform to confirm key components of the schematic design, and how the engagement process has informed its development. f. Virtual Open House
A page on the Vision Salinas website is proposed to be dedicated to showcasing the both the emerging ideas and the preliminary design. This page can function as a Virtual Open House that can continuously showcase the schematic design and concept iterations.
g. Programming
Concurrent with the community outreach, we will conduct a one day programming exercise with project stakeholders to create the building program and start room data sheets. We will obtain geotechnical and survey information, meet with agencies and jurisdictions to understand codes and requirement specific to the project.
h. Conceptual Design
Incorporating the information gleaned from stakeholder engagement and public outreach the team will then develop 3 Conceptual Designs that incorporates the following:

1. Obtain property survey

2. Obtain geotechnical testing and recommendations

3. Conduct a programming exercise with stakeholders

4. Meet, (virtual where possible), with City Officials, including Planning, Building, Fire, and Police to understand requirements and needs.

5. Create a space program

6. Create room Data Sheets

7. Conduct a stakeholder charrette

8. Create three illustrative site / floor plan schemes to facilitate discussion

9. Create interactive boards to glean design and idea directions, (green dot, red dot exercise)

10. Conduct an open house to share plans and gather comments

11. Provide an online survey to share plans and gather comments i. Schematic Design
8 SCOPE OF WORK
Built from the information from outreach we will develop the Schematic Design. These plans will include information required for stakeholders and agencies to contribute to the design and make decisions regarding scope, design, and materiality. Outcomes include the look and feel of the building, the plan and functionality, decisions regarding different systems, including structural, mechanical, electrical, and audio visual/ IT. The site will be finalized including planting strategies and an understanding of site functions and uses.
j. Summary of Tasks for Concept and Schematic Design

1. Obtain property survey

2. Obtain geotechnical testing and recommendations

3. Conduct a programming exercise with stakeholders

4. Meet, (virtual where possible), with City Officials, including Planning, Building, Fire, and Police to understand requirements and needs.

5. Create a space program

6. Create room Data Sheets

7. Conduct a stakeholder charrette

8. Create three illustrative site / floor plan schemes to facilitate discussion

9. Create interactive boards to glean design and idea directions, (green dot, red dot exercise)

10. Conduct an open house to share plans and gather comments

11. Provide an online survey to share plans and gather comments

12. Conduct a stakeholder meeting to affirm and confirm design direction(s)

13. Conduct individual meetings with appropriate stakeholders to determine basis of designs for systems and maintenance issues

14. Schematic Design Package to include:
i. Concept Diagrams
ii. Site Plan
iii. Floor Plan(s)
iv. Elevations
v. Preliminary Landscape Design
vi. Preliminary Civil Design
vii. Basis of Designs for Structural, Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing, AV/low Voltage viii. Conduct a virtual open house to share outcomes
ix. Bi-weekly management meetings
Phase 3: Celebration and Bridging Documents
Once the initial project assessment and information gathering phase is completed, the Griffin team will then begin to produce the Concept Designs which in turn will be further developed into Schematic Designs.

Specifically, this effort will involve the following:
a. Celebration
Once a preliminary design passes to the next stage to 50% design, a second open house will function as a celebration of the completion of the design development phase and engagement process. As the project heads into Design and Construction, additional engagement tasks may be necessary to keep the community updated. These may include updated fact sheet, updates to the website, social media, among others. 9 SCOPE OF WORK
b. Bridging Documents (30% Design Completion)
The design intent of the project as well as community input will then need to be reflected in the bridging documents. These will convey this intent, as well as protecting the city’s investment, as well as future costs, through performance-based selections and specifications. The documentation will do this while allowing the DBE to pursue value-based options to meet both the needs and criteria set forth by the community, stakeholders, and city staff. Those documents will include:

2. Architectural
i. Site Plan
ii. Site Details and Notes
iii. Floor Plans
iv. Reflected Ceiling Plans
v. Roof Plan
vi. Building Sections
vii. Wall Sections, if required
viii. Exterior Elevations
ix. Room Data Sheets calling out performance criteria, finishes, and “special” criteria x. Basis of Design, including Concept diagrams, building performance criteria xi. Performance specifications

3. Structural
i. Framing plan, showing structural members, and framing ii. Foundation Plan(s)

4. Mechanical
i. Locations of units and equipment
ii. Location and Types of “special” HVAC Components
iii. HVAC Strategies
iv. Energy performance criteria
v. Performance Specifications

5. Electrical
i. Location of equipment and gear
ii. Relative size of switchgear
iii. Lighting and power plans
iv. Locations of fire alarm equipment
v. Call outs of “special” equipment or lighting
vi. Energy performance criteria
vii. Performance specifications

6. Plumbing
i. Location of equipment and gear
ii. Sizing of mains, laterals, and POCs
iii. Fixture locations
iv. Hardware types and locations
v. Fire Sprinkler criteria, including riser location
vi. Performance Specifications

7. AV/Low Voltage
i. Location of head-end devices
ii. Specifications of user interface
10 SCOPE OF WORK
iii. Back bone locations and performance
iv. MDF criteria and layouts
v. Performance specifications

8. Landscape Architecture
i. Site plans
ii. Planting criteria plans
iii. Site features
iv. Irrigation POC and backflow locations
v. Irrigation criteria
vi. Performance specifications

9. Civil
i. Horizontal control plan
ii. Basic grades and pad elevations
iii. LID and WQMP strategies and best practices
iv. Water management, including preliminary sizing and design of storm drain, swales/retention/detention basins
v. Parking layouts and hard scape design
vi. Wet utility POC
vii. Site fire design including access and hydrant location(s) c. Constructability Reviews
At key stages of the design development phase of the project, Griffin will perform constructability reviews of the plans and specifications. This effort will seek to identify items that are unclear or in conflict with other aspects of the project, as well as biddability and best value. This effort will result in a Bluebeam and Excel report which will also include a marked-up set of plans. d. Front End Documentation
Working with City Staff, Griffin will gather the Architectural and Engineering outline specifications and incorporate them with the City’s standard front-end specifications. This will include items such as, invitation to bid, bidder information, bid sheets, subcontractor listings, special provisions, general provisions, and the incorporation of Division 01 contractor project management provisions. e. Contractor Prequalification
Griffin applauds the City for its decision to employ a Contractor prequalification process, as we firmly believe the City will benefit from having a healthy pool of competent bidders which will in turn provide a higher quality construction effort, a more predictable expenditure of project funds, while also continuing to enjoy the benefits of a competitive bidding environment. To execute the prequalification effort, Griffin will employ the following measures:

1. Griffin uses as its base template the Department of Industrial Relations Contractor Prequalification Questionnaire in the development of the solicitation request. In addition to the stock language however, Griffin will introduce enhanced language which will further bring value to the City. Specifically, these enhancements will include:
i. Contractor financial condition
ii. Bonding capacity
iii. Specialized criteria for similar project experience 11 SCOPE OF WORK
iv. Specialized criteria for any critical subcontractors that the City may want to prequalify
v. Critical litigation history
vi. Project specific references
vii. Enhance scoring methods and/or disqualification parameters designed to maximize City flexibility.
viii. Maintain Public Contract Code compliance to ensure the process is protest free.

2. Griffin will then solicit interest in the contractor marketplace by distributing the RFQ to know contractors who have successfully completed similar projects in the past. This effort will also include some project renderings and other components to entice as many respondents as possible. The goal in this phase is to maximize contractor participation to establish the most robust list possible.

3. Griffin will then utilize its Contractor Prequalification Scoring system to evaluate all responses, score each answer, check on references, evaluate financial capacity, and review litigation history.

4. Once completed, Griffin will review its scoring with the City and provide documentation to support its recommendations.

Of course, this entire process will be performed in close coordination with the City and will also include any City legal counsel review and dialogue as may be required. Once completed, the City will that have a short list of prequalified bidders who will then have the opportunity to provide a price proposal for the project. In all, our goal is to have this process result in a bid pool of no less than 3 and no more than 7 prequalified bidders as we have found that range to provide the best value for the City.

Phase 4: Design Build Entity Bidding and Award
Once a short list of prequalified contractors is established, Griffin will manage the contractor bidding process. To that end, Griffin will employ the following measure to ensure a fully responsive and responsible bid is delivered to the City.
a. Distribute Plans:

Once bidding is underway, Griffin will work closely with the City and Design Team to coordinate the publishing of the bid documents with the appropriate publications and websites. b. Mandatory Pre-Bid Meeting:

Griffin Structures will prepare an agenda and work closely with the City and Design team to ready all relevant documents for the pre-bid meeting. This will include our agenda, presentation, sign-in sheet, site tour, hard copies of plans, specs, and other relevant materials. Griffin will then publish the minutes, sign-in sheet, and formal responses to any questions in the form of an Addendum. c. Bid RFIs:

Griffin will serve as the point of contact for all bid questions and will coordinate the distribution of questions and answers to the relevant parties. Once answers are provided, Griffin will work closely with the Design Team to assemble appropriate Addenda for distribution to plan holders. d. Bidder Qualifications:
12 SCOPE OF WORK
Griffin possesses a deep understanding of parks and what is required of a successful Contractor. We will bring this experience to bear as we evaluate the qualifications of all bidders and offer recommendations to the City.
e. Issue Addenda:

Griffin will take the lead in gathering the necessary documents and City templates and will coordinate the distribution of bid Addenda.
f. Bid Evaluations:

Griffin will utilize its tailored Bid Analysis sheet to evaluate the bids on a line-item basis and offer recommendations to the City for award. Any non-responsive bids or non-responsible bidders will be flagged and forwarded to the City for consideration.

Phase 5: DBE Design Management & Construction
Once a Design Build Entity is under contract, Griffin will employ a vast array of policies, protocols, and techniques to oversee and manage the contractor successfully. Those services include the following:
a. DBE Design Management (Construction Documents)
The Griffin team will then over see the DBE in its efforts to further the design to completion and permitting. In this effort Griffin will attend all design coordination meetings, enforce programming and bridging document parameters, perform a follow up constructability review, and serve as the point of contact for the City in the management of the BDE. The goal of this phase will be to ensure the design progresses in a manner consistent with Bridging Documents including the following:

1. Review of substitutions and alternates

2. Review of submittals for conformity to design intent

3. Review of construction details for consistency with program

4. Enforcement of design schedule

5. Permitting

6. Review of final construction documents
Once the Construction Documents are complete and the DBE is ready to begin construction, we will then perform the following efforts
b. Pre-Construction Meeting
Griffin will arrange for and conduct the Pre-Construction meeting and will provide both and agenda and meeting minutes accordingly. Griffin will ensure that all pertinent team members will be present in coordination with City staff.
c. Review Construction Schedule
As discussed above, Griffin will review any and all schedules provided by the Contractor to confirm they meet the overall objectives of the project. Accordingly, Griffin will oversee and ensure the activities in the field are consistent with the approved schedule and will recommend corrective action should they fail correlate.
d. Construction Progress Meetings
13 SCOPE OF WORK
Griffin will schedule, host, and oversee all project meetings. Griffin will provide, or cause to be provided, agendas and minutes as required for the effective discussion and resolution of all project related issues and resolution.
e. Shop Drawings and Submittal Reviews
Griffin will oversee the DBE’s distribution of all shop drawings and will evaluate if those shop drawings are consistent with the programming documents and bridging documents established by the City. f. RFI’s
As with shop drawings and submittal reviews, Griffin will oversee the DBE’s process for coordination of all RFI’s in a manner that achieve efficient design solutions and maintains construction progress without diminishing the design intent.
g. Review all Change Orders
Griffin will review all change orders and provide supplemental information as needed to justify their approval or rejection. Griffin will negotiate with the Contractor on the City’s behalf and serve as the point of contact for resolving issues and mitigate against potential claims. Specifically, Griffin will seek to avoid claims as detailed above.
h. Cost Accounting Records
Griffin has extensive experience in cost accounting methods including but not limited to the management of contract unit costs, T&M analysis, and will employ that experience to provide comprehensive cost accounting records and controls.
i. Cost Control System
Griffin will use its extensive cost controls system to establish a master budget that captures all costs associate with the project and will provide regular updates to the City throughout the duration of the project. j. Coordination of Other Consultants
Griffin will coordinate and oversee the scheduling of all other consultant inspections including but not limited to geotechnical, NPDES, materials testing, deputy inspection, and special laboratory testing. k. Progress Payments
Griffin will establish, or cause to be established by the contractor, a comprehensive Schedule of Values for the entirety of the project for approval by the City. Once approved this will serve as the basis for all progress payments, which Griffin will review for consistency with progress in the field and make recommendations to the Contractor for correction. Once corrected, Griffin will then make recommendations to the City for processing
l. Labor Compliance
Consistent with SB 854, Griffin will require and enforce the Dept. of Industrial Relations’ requirements for enrollment in the DIR’s labor compliance data base. Griffin will also monitor the results of the DIR’s processing of the contractor’s labor compliance and will enforce the proper submission of documents accordingly. It is our understanding that the City will perform all auditing and certified payroll oversight.

Griffin will perform all field interviews as required and enforce all labor compliance 14 SCOPE OF WORK
m. Quality Assurance
Griffin will serve as the ‘eyes and ears’ of the City for quality control. Accordingly, Griffin will walk the site regularly and inspect all installations for consistency with the construction documents. Specifically, Griffin will enforce the highest level of quality of workmanship to ensure the City receives the best value for the investment made on behalf of the community.
n. Ready for Inspection
Griffin will ensure that the contractor has completed their work in a manner that is satisfactory to meet all necessary conditions for final inspection.
o. Punch Walk
Griffin will coordinate the final punch walk of the project to ensure all improvements are per the plans and specifications. Specifically, Griffin will employ a Field Observation Log during the course of construction that will seek to identify quality issues observed by the project team on an ongoing basis. This will serve to function as an ongoing pre-punch list, and therefore help to minimize the issues discovered at the final punch walk. Griffin will also oversee the following punch walks to confirm corrective action is resolved. p. Punch List
Once completed, Griffin will issue a comprehensive punch list for completion by the contractor. Griffin will oversee the completion of these items and ensure that all deficiencies and corrections are completed to the satisfaction of the City.
q. Closeout Documents
Integral to our cloud-based document management system, Submittal Exchange will assemble all guarantees, certifications, affidavits, leases, easement deed, operating and maintenance manuals, warranties, and any other closeout documents. This system will provide a complete digital file for all documents, for future use, as well as maintain cloud-based file for future use. r. Final Payment
Griffin will review all conditions of the project and will ensure that all criteria are met prior to the execution of the Contractor’s final payment.
s. Final Delivery: Once complete, Griffin will deliver all project files, data, as-built’s, and documentation to the City for record purposes.
15 04/01/2022 City of Salinas
Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project
Fee Proposal
Griffin Structures

PRINCIPAL IN
CHARGE

PROJECT

EXECUTIVE

CONSTRUCTION

MANAGER ESTIMATING
Roger Torriero Jon Hughes Hernan Munayco Jay Helekar
$275/hr. $220/hr. $195/hr. $185/hr.
0 PHASE 0: DEMOLITION Incl. Incl. 150 - $29,250

0.1 Site Investigation Incl. Incl. Incl. -

0.2 Solicitation of Hazmat Consultant Incl. Incl. Incl. -

0.3 Design Management Incl. Incl. Incl. -

0.4 Contractor Bidding Incl. Incl. Incl. -

0.5 Demolition Contractor Oversight Incl. Incl. Incl. -

0.6 Demolition Closeout Incl. Incl. Incl. -
1 PHASE 1: VISIONING AND NEEDS ASSESSMENT 12 24 105 0 $25,755

1.1 Project Team Meetings & Project Management Incl. Incl. Incl. -

1.2 Project Outreach Kickoff Incl. Incl. Incl. -

1.3 Stakeholder Discussion - Visioning Incl. Incl. Incl. -

1.4 Visioning Community Meetings (2 Meetings) Incl. Incl. Incl. -

1.5 Pop Up Events and Materials Incl. Incl. Incl. -

1.6 Team Meetings Incl. Incl. Incl. -

1.7 Team Coordination and Communication Incl. Incl. Incl. - 2 PHASE 2: CONCEPT AND SCHEMATIC DESIGN 20 40 175 30 $48,475

2.1 Design Management Incl. Incl. Incl. -

2.2 Develop Master Budget Incl. Incl. Incl. -

2.3 Develop Master Schedule Incl. Incl. Incl. -

2.4 Public Outreach Meetings Incl. Incl. Incl. -

2.5 Coordination with City Staff Incl. Incl. Incl. -

2.6 Procurement of Other Consultants Incl. Incl. Incl. Incl.

2.7 Estimating Incl. Incl. Incl. -

2.8 Public Outreach Meetings Incl. Incl. Incl. -

2.10 Team Meetings Incl. Incl. Incl. -

2.11 Team Coordination and Communication Incl. Incl. Incl. - 3 PHASE 3: CELEBRATION AND BRIDGING DOCUMENTS 20 40 210 130 $73,800

3.1 Design Management Incl. Incl. Incl. -

3.2 Constructability Review Incl. Incl. Incl. -

3.3 Update Master Budget Incl. Incl. Incl. -

3.4 Update Master Schedule Incl. Incl. Incl. -

3.5 Coordination with City Staff Incl. Incl. Incl. -

3.6 Consultant Oversight Incl. Incl. Incl. -

3.7 Contractor Prequalification Incl. Incl. Incl. -

3.8 Estimating Incl. Incl. Incl. Incl.

3.9 Public Outreach Meetings Incl. Incl. Incl. -

3.10 Team Meetings Incl. Incl. Incl. -

3.11 Team Coordination and Communication Incl. Incl. Incl. - 4 PHASE 4: DBE BIDDING & AWARD 12 24 180 0 $40,380

4.1 Preparation of Front End Documents Incl. Incl. Incl. -

4.2 Invitation to Bid Incl. Incl. Incl. -

4.3 Pre-Bid Meeting & Site Walk Incl. Incl. Incl. -

4.4 Bid RFI's and Addenda Incl. Incl. Incl. -

4.5 Bid Opening Incl. Incl. Incl. -

4.6 Bid Evaluation and Recommendation Incl. Incl. Incl. -

4.7 Assist in Preparation of Staff Report Incl. Incl. Incl. - 5 PHASE 5: DBE DESIGN MANAGEMENT & CONSTRUCTION 80 160 1846 0 $395,170

5.1 DBE Design Management Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.2 Program Verification and Oversight Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.3 Quality Assurance Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.4 Schedule Oversight and Enforcement Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.5 Communication Coordination Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.6 Issues Resolution Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.7 Deputy Inspections Coordination Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.8 City Vendors Oversight Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.9 Pay Application Review and Recommendations Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.10 Change Order Review Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.11 Punch List Oversight Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.12 Training Oversight Incl. Incl. Incl. -

5.13 Turnover Coordination Incl. Incl. Incl. -
Total Hours 144 288 2666 160
Subtotals $39,600 $63,360 $519,870 $29,600
CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT TOTAL GRATIS $612,830
6 REIMBURSABLE COSTS $18,170

6.1 Insurance $13,170

6.2 Misc. Office Supplies and Printing $5,000
GRAND TOTAL $631,000
Item
No.

PROJECT PHASE TOTAL COST
16 04/01/2022 City of Salinas
Hebbron Family Center Revitalization Project
Resource Allocation Schedule
Griffin Structures

MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 0 DEMOLITION PHASE
Site Investigation & Hazmat Solicitation
Hazmat Investigation
Prepare Demolition Bid Documents
Permitting
Contractor Bidding
Demolition
Demolition Closeout
1 VIIONING & NEEDS ASSESSMENT PHASE
Kickoff Meeting
Public Information Gathering
Staff Review of Outreach Findings
2 CONCEPT AND SCHEMATIC DESIGN PHASE
Programming & Public Outreach
Initial Concepts (3)
Refined Concept Design (1)
Finalize Concepts
3 CELEBRATIONS & BRIDGING DOCUMENT PHASE
Celebration of Design - Community Rollout
Design Development to 50%
DBE Prequalification
4 DBE BIDDING & AWARD
DBE Bidding
5 DBE DESIGN MANAGEMENT & CONSTRUCTION PHASE
Construction Documents
Permitting
Construction
Punch List and Closeout
Project Executive 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 Project Executive 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 Construction Manager 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 35 45 35 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 Construction Manager During Demolition 20 20 20 35 35 20 Estimating 30 80 50
Project Executive $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 Project Executive $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 Construction Manager $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 8,775 $ 6,825 $ 11,700 $ 11,700 $ 11,700 $ 11,700 $ 11,700 $ 11,700 $ 11,700 $ 11,700 Construction Manager During Demolition $ - $ - $ - $ 3,900 $ 3,900 $ 3,900 $ 6,825 $ 6,825 $ 3,900 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - Estimating $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 5,550 $ - $ - $ - $ 14,800 $ - $ - $ 9,250 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 8,585 $ 8,585 $ 8,585 $ 12,485 $ 12,485 $ 18,035 $ 15,410 $ 15,410 $ 12,485 $ 23,385 $ 10,535 $ 8,585 $ 22,710 $ 13,460 $ 13,460 $ 13,460 $ 13,460 $ 13,460 $ 13,460 $ 13,460

JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG 5 DBE MANAGEMENT PHASE
Construction Documents
Permitting
Construction
Punch List and Closeout
Principal In Charge 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 144 Project Executive 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 288
Construction Manager 60 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 104 90 2,516 Construction Manager During Demolition 150
Estimating 160
Principal In Charge $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ 1,100 $ - $ - $ - $ - GRATIS Project Executive $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ 1,760 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 63,360 Construction Manager $ 11,700 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 20,280 $ 17,550 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 490,620 Construction Manager During Demolition $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 29,250 Estimating $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 29,600 $ 13,460 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 22,040 $ 19,310 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 612,830 2023
2024

MONTHLY STAFFING HOURS
PHASE 1

MONTHLY STAFFING HOURS
PHASE 2
2022
2025
17 Salinas Hebbron Family Community Center
Scope Proposal
TypeMeeting Travel Number of PICPM/PAJCDesignerPlannerAdminstrative Fixed Fees Costs Total Services $ 275.00 $ 210.00 $ 175.00 $ 155.00 $ 200.00 $ 135.00
Phase 0: Demolition
Site Investigation, 10.00 10.00 10.00
incl. measuring for plans and travel
Code investigation 4.00
Cover Sheet 1.00 8.00
Site Demolition Plan 1.00 4.00 4.00 16.00
Basement Demolition Plan 1.00 4.00 16.00
Floor Demolition Plan 1.00 4.00 16.00
Roof Demolition Plan 1.00 2.00 16.00
Demolition Specifications, (sheet) 8.00 8.00 $ 6,000.00 Coordination with Environ Report 1.00 8.00 8.00
Civil 1.00 6.00 $ 8,500.00
PME 1.00 8.00 $ 5,000.00
BD Submittal and responses 8.00 24.00
total Hours 8.00 66.00 22.00 114.00 0.00 0.00 210.00
total cost $ 2,200.00 $ 13,860.00 $ 3,850.00 $ 17,670.00 $ - $ - $ 19,500.00 $ 57,080.00 Total for Demo Plans Phase 1: Visioning & Needs Assessment
Team planning meeting(s) Virtual 2 0 1 2.00 3.00

8.00 8.00 8.00
Community Outreach Meeting 1 Live 4 4 1
Pop-Up 1 Live 4 4 1 8.00 8.00 2.00
Pop-Up 2 Live 4 4 1 1.00 8.00 2.00
Stakeholder/Staff Outreach Live 2 4 1 6.00 6.00 2.00
Additional Pop-ups City Staff
Community Outreach Meeting 2 Virtual 2 0 1 4.00 4.00 4.00 Management
Bi-weekly Project Team Meeting(s)
Virtual -
Arrange in
person
when team
is in Salinas 1 0 6 6.00 6.00
total Hours 35.00 43.00 0.00 18.00 0.00 0 1.00 97.00
Bridging Document - Architecture and Engineering 18
total cost $ 9,625.00 $ 9,030.00 $ - $ 2,790.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 21,445.00 Total for Visioning Phase 2: Concept and Schematic Design
Programming Live 3 4 1 intake 7.00 7.00
develop
program/build
room data sheets 2.00 4.00 8.00
Community Touch Points:

Staff / Stakeholder Coordination Virtual 2 0 1 2.00 2.00 2.00 Preliminary/Conceptual Design Live 2 4 1
3 Plan / Site Options for Discussion
develop 3
schemes
sketch up? Plans? 12.00 12.00 32.00
Imagery/Design Elements Building pull imagery 4.00 4.00 4.00 Imagery/Design Elements Landscape 2.00 2.00 0.00
Staff / Stakeholder Followup/Commentary/Direction Virtual 1 0 1 1.00 1.00 1.00 develop the
composit scheme
revise
plans/imagery per
stakeholder input 2.00 2.00 16.00

32.00 34.00 0.00 63.00 0.00 0.00 129.00
$ 8,800.00 $ 7,140.00 $ - $ 9,765.00 $ - $ - $ - $ 25,705.00 Total for Conceptual Design and Engagement Schematic Design
50% SD (meeting) Live 1 4 1 5.00 3.00
Concept Diagrams, if appropriate 2.00 2.00 4.00
Civil (Landscape)
Site Plan 2.00 2.00 2.00 8.00
Prelim Landscape
Floor Plans 4.00 6.00 8.00
Building Massing / Color Elevations, (3 ideas) 6.00 2.00 20.00 8.00 Materiality 2.00 4.00 8.00
Staff / Stakeholder Followup/Commentary/Direction Virtual 1 0 1 1.00 1.00 2.00 develop the
composit scheme
revise
plans/imagery per
stakeholder input
Staff / Stakeholder Review and Comment Virtual 1 0 1 1.00 1.00 2.00 revisions
Finale (public meeting) Virtual 2 0 1 2.00 2.00
Concept Diagrams, if appropriate 2.00 4.00
Civil
Site Plan, (with Roof) 4.00 4.00 8.00
Landscape Design
Floor Plan 4.00 4.00 8.00
19 Elevations 4.00 4.00 8.00
Sketch Renderings 4.00 8.00
Staff / Stakeholder Approval(s) 2.00 2.00
Specifications (Borland) $ 7,200.00
Landscape (MIG) $ 25,800.00
Structural, (Biggs Cardoza) $ 26,400.00
AV/Low Voltage/Security (Salter) $ 10,350.00
Electrical (Aurum) $ 15,000.00
Mechanical (Cypress) $ 24,180.00
Plumbing (Cypress) $ -
Civil (Whitson) excluding survey $ 26,580.00
Bi-weekly Project Team Meeting(s)
Virtual -
Arrange in
person
when team
is in Salinas 1 0 8 8.00 8.00 4.00
total Hours 53.00 45.00 22.00 80.00 0.00 0.00 200.00
total cost $14,575.00 $ 9,450.00 $ 3,850.00 $12,400.00 $ - $ - $ 135,510.00 $ 175,785.00 Total For Schematic Design Phase 3: Celebration and Bridging Documents
Site Plan 4.00 8.00 16.00 32.00
Site Details/Notes 1.00 4.00 16.00 32.00
Floor Plans 4.00 8.00 16.00 32.00
Enlarged Floor Plans 8.00
Room Data Sheets 2.00 4.00 4.00 16.00
Roof Plan 1.00 4.00 8.00 16.00
Reflected Ceiling Plan 2.00 4.00 16.00 32.00
Building Sections 2.00 4.00 16.00 24.00
Wall Sections 2.00 8.00 16.00 32.00
Exterior Elevations 4.00 4.00 16.00 32.00
Elevation Details/Enlargements 2.00 2.00 4.00 8.00
Coordination
Specifications 2.00 4.00 6.00
AV/Low Voltage 2.00 6.00
Electrical 2.00 6.00
Mechanical 2.00 6.00
Plumbing 2.00 4.00
Civil? 6.00
BOD Review 4.00 6.00 6.00
Architectural
Concept Diagrams 2.00 2.00 4.00
Building Performance 2.00 4.00 4.00
20 Performance Specifications 4.00 4.00
Specifications (Borland) $ 4,800.00
Landscape (MIG) $ 17,200.00
Structural, (Biggs Cardoza) $ 17,600.00
AV/Low Voltage/Security (Salter) $ 6,900.00
Electrical (Aurum) $ 10,000.00
Mechanical (Cypress) $ 16,120.00
Plumbing (Cypress) $ -
Civil (Whitson) excluding survey $ 17,720.00
Bi-weekly Project Team Meeting(s)
Virtual -
Arrange in
person
when team
is in Salinas 1 0 10 10.00 10.00
total Hours 42.00 92.00 170.00 272.00 0.00 0.00 576.00
total cost $11,550.00 $19,320.00 $29,750.00 $42,160.00 $ - $ - $ 90,340.00 $ 193,120.00 Total for Bridging Documents Phase 4: DBE Bidding & Award
DBE Selection Process
Review substitutions / Alternatives 2.00 16.00
Review proposals for conformance with the
design intent 6.00 6.00
Meetings virtual 1 4 4.00 4.00
Phase 5: DBE Design Management & Consruction
DBE Design
Review substitutions / Alternatives one day/month 12.00 24.00 Meetings virtual 1 8 8.00 8.00
Construction
Review Substitutions / Alternatives
maybe 8
hrs/week at up
front, less as it
moves on 24.00 72.00
Electrical $ 5,715.00
MIG $ 22,380.00
Meetings Live 2 4 12one meeting / month 24.00 72.00

80.00 202.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 282.00
$22,000.00 $42,420.00 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 28,095.00 $ 92,515.00 Total for Post Design Services Total $ 508,570.00
Riembersable $ 31,500.00
Grand Total $ 540,070.00
21 Hours $195 Hours $145 Hours $195 Hours @ $100 Hours @ $110 Hours Cost

1.1 Project Team Meetings and Project
Management $0 40 $5,800 8 $1,560 $0 0 $0 48 $7,360 $7,360

1.2 Project Outreach Kickoff $0 8 $1,160 8 $1,560 $0 8 $880 24 $3,600 $300 $3,900

1.3 Stakeholder Discussion #1 - Visioning $0 8 $1,160 8 $1,560 $0 16 $1,760 32 $4,480 $4,480

1.4 Visioning Community Meetings (2) $0 16 $2,320 8 $1,560 12 $1,200 24 $2,640 60 $7,720 $300 $8,020

3.8 Pop-up Events and Materials $0 16 $1,760 $0 32 $3,200 24 $2,640 48 $7,600 $300 $7,900 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0
0 0 88 $12,200 32 6240 44 4400 72 $7,920 212 $30,760 900 $31,660

2.1 Stakeholder Discussion #2 - Charrette $0 12 $1,740 $0 8 $800 16 $1,760 36 $4,300 $4,300

2.2 Open House $0 8 $1,160 8 $1,560 16 $1,600 16 $1,760 48 $6,080 $100 $6,180

2.3 Online Survey $0 6 $870 0 $0 $0 16 $1,760 22 $2,630 $2,630

2.4 Social Media Roll Out $0 6 $870 $0 8 $800 8 $880 22 $2,550 $2,550

2.5 Stakeholder Discussion #2 - Affirmation $0 12 $1,740 8 $1,560 $0 12 $1,320 20 $4,620 $4,620

2.6 Virtual Open House $0 $0 $0 16 $1,600 12 $1,320 16 $2,920 $2,920 0 0 44 $4,640 8 1560 32 3200 56 $6,160 128 $15,560 100 $23,200

3.1 Open House $0 12 $1,740 $0 $0 18 $1,980 30 $3,720 $100 $3,820

3.2 Supplemental D&D Tasks $0 32 $4,640 $0 $0 32 $3,520 64 $8,160 $500 $8,660

3.3 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0

3.4 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 0 $0 $0
0 0 44 $6,380 0 0 0 0 50 $5,500 94 $11,880 600 $12,480
TOTALS $0 $0 176 $23,220 40 $7,800 76 $7,600 178 $19,580 434 $58,200 $1,600 $67,340 Phases 4 and 5 - Bidding and Construction
Phase 3 - Celebration & Bridging Document Phase
Phase 1 - Visioning and Needs Assessment
Phase 2 - Concept and Schematic Design
MIG
PIC Project Manager, Totals
Planner
Landscape Architect Jr Graphic Designer Outreach Associate Ana Padilla
e s t i m a t e d p r o j e c t c o s t
MIG, Inc.

Expenses Fee
Salinas Hebbron Totals
Joan Chaplick Noe Noyola Jose Leal
Public Outreach Specialist 22

EXHIBIT C - CDBG REGULATIONS AND CDBG REQUIREMENTS
(ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE PART OF THIS AGREEMENT)
Contractor shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing the use of the CDBG funds as set forth in 24 C.F.R. Part 570. In the event of any conflict between this Agreement and applicable laws and regulations governing the use of the CDBG funds, the applicable laws and regulations govern.

The laws and regulations governing the use of the CDBG funds include (but are not limited to) the following:
(1) Environmental and Historic Preservation. 24 C.F.R. Part 58, which prescribes procedures for compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4361), and the additional laws and authorities listed at 24 C.F.R. 58.5; (2) Applicability of Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards. The applicable policies, guidelines, and requirements of 2 C.F.R. Part 200;
(3) Debarred, Suspended or Ineligible Contractors. The prohibition on the use of debarred, suspended, or ineligible contractors set forth in 24 C.F.R. Part 24; (4) Civil Rights, Housing and Community Development, and Age Discrimination Acts. The Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.) and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 100; Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended; Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 as amended; Section 104(b) and Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 as amended; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 USC 794, et seq.); the Age Discrimination Act of 1975 (42 USC 6101, et seq.); Executive Order 11063 as amended by Executive Order 12259 and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R.

Part 107; Executive Order 11246 as amended by Executive Orders 11375, 12086, 11478, 12107; Executive Order 11625 as amended by Executive Order 12007; Executive Order 12432; Executive Order 12138 as amended by Executive Order 12608;
(5) Lead-Based Paint. The requirement of the Lead-Based Paint Poisoning Prevention Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4821 et seq.), the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act (42 U.S.C. 4851 et seq.), and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 35;
(6) Relocation. The requirements of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970 (42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.), and implementing regulations at 49 C.F.R. Part 24; Section 104(d) of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. 42 et seq.; 24 C.F.R. 570.606; and California Government Code Section 7260 et seq. and implementing regulations at 25 California Code of Regulations Sections 6000 et seq. If and to the extent that development of the Project results in the permanent or temporary displacement of residential tenants, homeowners, or businesses, then Contractor shall comply with all applicable local, state, and federal statutes and regulations with respect to relocation planning, advisory assistance, and payment of monetary benefits. Contractor shall prepare and submit a relocation plan to the City for approval. Contractor is solely responsible for payment of any relocation benefits to any displaced persons and any other obligations associated with complying with such relocation laws. Contractor shall indemnify, defend (with counsel reasonably chosen by the City), and hold harmless the City against all claims that arise out of relocation obligations to residential tenants, homeowners, or businesses permanently or temporarily displaced by the Project;
(7) Discrimination against the Disabled. The requirements of the Fair Housing Act (42 U.S.C. 3601 et seq.) and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 100; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794), and federal regulations issued pursuant thereto, which prohibit discrimination against the disabled in any federally assisted program, the requirements of the Architectural Barriers Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 4151-4157) and the applicable requirements of Title II and/or Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12131 et seq.), and federal regulations issued pursuant thereto; (8) Clean Air and Water Acts. The Clean Air Act, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq., the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq., and the regulations of the Environmental Protection Agency with respect thereto, at 40 C.F.R.

Part 1500, as amended from time to time;
(9) Uniform Administrative Requirements. The provisions of 24 C.F.R. 570.502 regarding cost and auditing requirements;
(10) Training Opportunities. The requirements of Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, 12 U.S.C. 1701u and implementing Regulations at 24 C.F.R. 75 (“Section 3”);
(a) Pursuant to Section 3, to the greatest extent feasible, and consistent with existing Federal, state, and local laws and regulations, Contractor shall ensure:
(i) that employment and training opportunities arising in connection with the Project are provided to Section 3 workers within the metropolitan area (or nonmetropolitan county) in which the Project is located. Where feasible, priority for opportunities and training described above should be given to: (A) Section 3 workers residing within the service area or the neighborhood of the Project, and (B) participants in Youth Build programs; and (ii) that contracts for work awarded in connection with the Project are provided to business concerns that provide economic opportunities to Section 3 workers residing within the metropolitan area (or nonmetropolitan county) in which the Project is located. Where feasible, priority for opportunities and training described above should be given to: (A) Section 3 business concerns that provide economic opportunities to Section 3 workers residing within the service area or the neighborhood of the Project, and (B) participants in Youth Build programs.
(b) Contractor will be considered to have complied with the Section 3 requirements, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, if it certifies that it has followed the prioritization of effort set forth in subsection (A) above, and meets or exceeds the applicable Section 3 benchmark as described in 24 C.F.R. 75.23(b). (c) Contractor shall maintain records of its Section 3 activities and cause such records to be accurate and current and in a form that allows the City to comply with the reporting requirements of 24 C.F.R. 75.25.
(d) Contractor shall require all contractors and subcontractors performing work on the Project to comply with the Section 3 requirements; (11) Labor Standards. The labor requirements set forth in 24 C.F.R.

Section 570.603; the prevailing wage requirements of the Davis-Bacon Act and implementing rules and regulations (40 U.S.C. 3141-3148); the Copeland “Anti-Kickback” Act (40 U.S.C. 276(c)) which requires that workers be paid at least once a week without any deductions or rebates except permissible deductions; the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act – CWHSSA (40 U.S.C. 3701-3708) which requires that workers receive “overtime” compensation at a rate of 1-1/2 times their regular hourly wage after they have worked forty (40) hours in one (1) week; and Title 29, Code of Federal Regulations, Subtitle A, Parts 1, 3 and 5 are the regulations and procedures issued by the Secretary of Labor for the administration and enforcement of the DavisBacon Act, as amended; (12) Drug Free Workplace. The requirements of the Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988 (P.L. 100-690) and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R. Part 24; (13) Anti-Lobbying; Disclosure Requirements. The disclosure requirements and prohibitions of 31 U.S.C. 1352 and implementing regulations at 24 C.F.R.

Part 87;
(14) Historic Preservation. The historic preservation requirements set forth in the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended (16 U.S.C. Section 470) and the procedures set forth in 36 C.F.R. Part 800. If archeological, cultural, or historic period resources are discovered during construction, all construction work must come to a halt and Contractor shall immediately notify the City. Contractor shall not shall alter or move the discovered material(s) until all appropriate procedures for “post-review discoveries” set forth in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act have taken place, which include, but are not limited to, consultation with the California State Historic Preservation Officer and evaluation of the discovered material(s) by a qualified professional archeologist; (15) Flood Disaster Protection. The requirements of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 (P.L. 93-234) (the “Flood Act”). No portion of the assistance provided under this Agreement is approved for acquisition or construction purposes as defined under Section 3(a) of the Flood Act, for use in an area identified by HUD as having special flood hazards which is not then in compliance with the requirements for participation in the national flood insurance program pursuant to Section 201(d) of the Flood Act. The use of any assistance provided under this Agreement for such acquisition or construction in such identified areas in communities then participating in the National Flood Insurance Program is subject to the mandatory purchase of flood insurance requirements of Section 102(a) of the Flood Act. If the Project is located in an area identified by HUD as having special flood hazards and in which the sale of flood insurance has been made available under the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4001 et seq., the property owner and its successors or assigns must obtain and maintain, during the ownership of the Project, such flood insurance as required with respect to financial assistance for acquisition or construction purposes under -Section 102(s) of the Flood Act. Such provisions are required notwithstanding the fact that the construction of the Project is not itself funded with assistance provided under this Agreement;
(16) Religious Organizations. If the Contractor is a religious organization, as defined by the CDBG requirements, the Contractor shall comply with all conditions prescribed by HUD for the use of CDBG Funds by religious organizations, including the First Amendment of the United States Constitution regarding church/state principles and the applicable constitutional prohibitions set forth in 24 C.F.R. 570.200(j); (17) Violence Against Women. The requirements of the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013 (Pub. L. 113–4, 127 Stat. 54) applicable to HUDfunded programs; (18) Conflict of Interest. The conflict of interest provisions set forth in 24 C.F.R. 570.611; and
(19) HUD Regulations. Any other HUD regulations present or as may be amended, added, or waived in the future pertaining to the Grant funds.

City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#22-224, Version: 1
Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program Approve a Resolution approving the Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program between the Transportation Agency for Monterey County and the City of Salinas.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 5/18/2022
powered by Legistar™

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2022
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS
FROM: DAVID JACOBS P.E., L.S., PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR

ANDREW EASTERLING, TRAFFIC ENGINEER
TITLE: REGIONAL FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR PEDESTRIAN AND

BICYCLE WAYFINDING PROGRAM
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to approve a Resolution to approve the Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program between the Transportation Agency for Monterey County and the City of Salinas.

RECOMMENDATION:

Public Works staff recommends the approval of the Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program between the Transportation Agency for Monterey County and the City of Salinas.

BACKGROUND:

On May 25, 2016, the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) Board of Directors adopted the Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County (Attachment 2) and authorized the submission of grant applications to implement the Wayfinding Plan. TAMC was awarded Local Transportation Funds and State SB1 Local Partnership Program funds in the amount of One Million Nine Hundred Thirty-one Thousand Dollars ($1,931,000) for the development and implementation of the Wayfinding Plan within TAMC’s jurisdictional boundaries. TAMC developed construction plans for the Regional Wayfinding Program Signs (Attachment 3) and is now preparing for construction.

The Regional Wayfinding Program Signs proposes the installation of wayfinding signs on City streets, through an encroachment permit. The installation of these signs would be funded by TAMC. The City would agree to pay for costs related to this action, including the issuance of permits, and the maintenance and repair of wayfinding signage within its jurisdiction.

The Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program (Attachment 1) delineates the obligations of both TAMC and the City with respect to the implementation of the Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan within the City of Salinas.

TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
The Regional Wayfinding Program Signs in Monterey County was presented to the Traffic and Transportation Commission at its June 10, 2021 meeting. The Commission voted 6-0 to recommend to City Council the approval of the Regional Funding Agreement between the Transportation Agency for Monterey County and the City of Salinas.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

The Wayfinding Plan was determined to be exempt from CEQA under 14 CCR Section 15301:

Existing Facilities, as affecting minor alterations to existing public structures and facilities. The Transportation Agency for Monterey County filed the Notice of Exemption on April 28th, 2016.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

The installation of Regional Wayfinding Program Signs is intended to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety. This action aligns with the City Council goal of “Public Safety”.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

There is no direct cost to the City for the installation of the wayfinding signs. The installation of the signs would be funded by TAMC, and the City will incur staff time from the coordination of the program and permitting. Additional costs to the City will be incurred in on-going maintenance.

There are approximately 50 new signs that are proposed in Salinas. Traffic signs typically need replacement every 7-10 years, due to damage, graffiti, theft, or loss in reflectivity. The increased annual maintenance costs are estimated to be roughly $4,500 per year based on current construction costs.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Attachment 1: Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Attachment 2: Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County Attachment 3: Regional Wayfinding Program Signs
- 1 -
RESOLUTION NO. __________________ (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE THE REGIONAL FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR

PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE WAYFINDING PROGRAM BETWEEN THE

TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY AND THE CITY OF SALINAS WHEREAS, On May 25, 2016, the Transportation Agency for Monterey County Board of Directors adopted the Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County and authorized the submission of grant applications to implement the Wayfinding Plan; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Agency for Monterey County developed construction plans for the Regional Wayfinding Program Signs and is now preparing for construction; and WHEREAS, the installation of these signs would be funded by the Transportation Agency for Monterey County; and
WHEREAS, The City would agree to pay for costs related to this action, including the issuance of permits, and the maintenance and repair of wayfinding signage within its jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, The Traffic and Transportation Commission voted 6-0 at its June 10, 2021 meeting to recommend to City Council the approval of the Regional Funding Agreement between the Transportation Agency for Monterey County and the City of Salinas; and WHEREAS, the Transportation Agency for Monterey County filed the Notice of Exemption on April 28th, 2016; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby approves the Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program between the Transportation Agency for Monterey County and the City of Salinas.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 24th day of May, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
- 2 -
ATTEST:
_________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk

PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE WAYFINDING PROGRAM

REGIONAL FUNDING AGREEMENT
between the

TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY
and the

CITY OF SALINAS
This Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program (“Agreement”) is effective the ______ of __________________, 2022, and is entered into by and between the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (“TAMC”) and the City of Salinas (“RECIPIENT”).

RECITALS

1. On May 25, 2016, the TAMC Board of Directors adopted the Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County (“Wayfinding Plan”) and authorized the submission of grant applications to implement the Wayfinding Plan.

2. The Wayfinding Plan was determined to be exempt from CEQA under 14 CCR Section 15301: Existing Facilities, as affecting minor alterations to existing public structures and facilities. All applicable statutes of limitations concerning the approval of the Wayfinding Plan under CEQA have been exhausted.

3. TAMC has been awarded Local Transportation Funds and State SB1 Local Partnership Program funds in the amount of One Million Nine Hundred Thirty‐one Thousand Dollars ($1,931,000) for the development and implementation of the Wayfinding Plan within TAMC’s jurisdictional boundaries.

4. RECIPIENT desires to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety within its jurisdiction, and concurrent with this Agreement, has also determined that TAMC’s Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan is one means to achieve that desire.

5. This Agreement delineates the obligations of the Parties to this Agreement with respect to the implementation of the Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan, adopted by the TAMC Board, within the jurisdiction of RECIPIENT.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the Parties as follows:

Article I:

Covenants of Recipient

1.1. Project Description. The complete Project Description is specified in Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference. The Project consists of the acceptance of Wayfinding signage, the identification of appropriate locations for Wayfinding signage and the installation and maintenance of such signage.

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 2 OF 14

1.2. Change In Project Scope. No change in the Project scope as described in Exhibit A may be approved or implemented until it has been reviewed and approved in writing by an amendment to this Agreement approved by the TAMC Board of Directors.

1.3. Eligible Costs. Eligible costs to be funded by TAMC pursuant to this Agreement are those related to the solicitation and award of one or more contract by TAMC for the manufacture and installation of Wayfinding signage approved by RECIPIENT, as set forth below.

RECIPIENT shall bear all costs related to Recipient’s actions related to this Agreement, including the issuance of permits, and the maintenance and repair of Wayfinding signage within its jurisdiction.

1.4. Acceptance of Signage. RECIPIENT hereby accepts the designs relative to the Wayfinding signage as shown in Exhibit “B,” and incorporated herein by this reference.

RECIPIENT shall allow the placement of at least 44 and up to 55 signs within its jurisdiction, generally at the locations designated in Exhibit “C,” and incorporated herein by this reference.

RECIPIENT agrees to work diligently and in good faith to provide and issue necessary permits for such signage at or near the designated locations, as physical conditions permit.

1.6. Timing of Installation. RECIPIENT shall permit and allow the installation of at least 44 signs within the first six (6) months after notification by TAMC.

1.7. Maintenance and Repair. RECIPIENT shall, at its cost, maintain the installed signage in good repair and visibility throughout the period of this Agreement.

Article II:

Covenants of TAMC

2.1. TAMC shall develop, award and fund one or more contracts for the fabrication and installation of Wayfinding Signage in generally the following manner:

2.1.1. A customized “Sign Topper” portion approved by RECIPIENT that incorporates agreed upon logos and color scheme that helps to establish a regional wayfinding brand. A rendering of the Jurisdictional Sign Topper selected by RECIPIENT is shown as Exhibit B.

2.1.2. A standardized “directional/distance” portion shared by all Wayfinding signage pursuant to the TAMC Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan that assists a traveler in determining directions/distance to relevant locations. A rendering of the Directional/ Distance signage is shown as Exhibit B.

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 3 OF 14

2.1.3. Installation of Wayfinding Signage, suitable to the location and manner of installation of such Wayfinding signage. Such installation may be by new post(s) or pole(s), or installation on an existing structure.

2.1.4. In addition, a standardized “confirmation” portion shared by all Wayfinding signage pursuant to the TAMC Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan that indicates travelers are on a designated regional route. A rendering of the Confirmation signage is shown as Exhibit B.

2.2. In entering into a contract for the fabrication and installation of Wayfinding Signage for RECIPIENT, TAMC shall call for the fabrication of one and one‐half (1.5) times the number of Jurisdictional Sign Toppers. The additional Jurisdictional Sign Toppers above the number to be installed pursuant to this Agreement shall be directed to be delivered to RECIPIENT for use in RECIPIENT’s maintenance responsibilities.

Article III:

Mutual Covenants

3.1. Term. This Agreement shall remain in effect until discharged or terminated as provided in Section 3.2 or Section 3.15.

3.2. Discharge/Termination. This Agreement shall be subject to discharge as follows:

3.2.1. Termination by Mutual Consent. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of the Parties. At the time of any such mutual termination, TAMC shall receive or retain any Jurisdictional Sign Toppers and standardized Directional signs which may be the subject of an executed contract as described in Section 2.1, but not yet installed.

3.2.2. Discharge Upon Completion of Project. Except as to any rights or obligations which survive discharge as specified in Section 3.14, this Agreement shall be discharged, and the Parties shall have no further obligation to each other, upon completion of the Project, which shall continue for a ten (10) year period after installation of the last Wayfinding Sign pursuant to this Agreement.

3.3. Indemnity. It is mutually understood and agreed that RECIPIENT shall, to the full extent permitted by law, fully defend, indemnify and hold harmless TAMC, its Board and Directors, and any officer, agent, or employee of TAMC, against any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RECIPIENT under the Agreement. It is also fully understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, RECIPIENT shall fully defend, indemnify and hold TAMC, its Board and Directors, its officers, agency and employees, harmless from any liability imposed for injury as defined by Government Code Section 810.8 occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RECIPIENT under this Agreement or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to RECIPIENT or funded by RECIPIENT under this Agreement.

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 4 OF 14

3.4. Liability. As TAMC is only acting with the approval of RECIPIENT with respect to the design, designated location and installation of Wayfinding signage herein identified, TAMC is not liable for any loss, cost, liability, damage, claim, lien, action, cause of action, demand or expense which may arise as a result of the acts or omissions of RECIPIENT or its agents, contractors, consultants, engineers, or representatives. Nor shall TAMC be liable for any loss, cost, liability, damage, claim, lien, action, cause of action, demand or expense which may arise as a result of TAMC’s provision of funds or materials which may be utilized in, but not limited to the acquisition of, the design, implementation, or construction of the Project herein described.

3.5. Notices. Any notice which may be required under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be given by personal or electronic (delivery receipt enabled) service, or by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, to the addresses set forth below:

TAMC RECIPIENT
Todd A. Muck David Jacobs, PE, LS
Executive Director Public Works Director
55 B Plaza Circle 200 Lincoln Avenue
Salinas, California 93901 Salinas, California 93901
[email protected] [email protected]
Either Party may change its address by giving notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided in this Section 3.5. All notices and other communications shall be deemed communicated as of actual receipt or after the second business day after deposit in the United States mail.

3.6. Additional Acts and Documents. Each Party agrees to do all such things and take all such actions, and to make, execute and deliver such other documents and instruments, as shall be reasonably requested to carry out the provisions, intent, and purpose of the Agreement.

3.7. Integration. This Agreement, together with the Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan, represents the entire Agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.

No representations, warranties, inducements, or oral agreements have been made by any of the Parties except as expressly set forth herein, or in other contemporaneous written agreements.

3.8. Amendment. This Agreement may not be changed, modified, or rescinded except in writing, signed by all Parties hereto, and any attempt at oral modification of this Agreement shall be void and of no effect.

3.9. Independent Agency. RECIPIENT renders its services under this Agreement as an independent agency and TAMC is also an independent agency under the Agreement. None of the RECIPIENT's agents or employees shall be agents or employees of TAMC and none of TAMC’s agents or employees shall be agents or employees of RECIPIENT.

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 5 OF 14

3.10. Assignment. The Agreement may not be assigned, transferred, hypothecated, or pledged by any Party without the express written consent of the other Party.

3.11. Binding on Successors. This Agreement shall be binding upon the successor(s), assignee(s) or transferee(s) of TAMC or RECIPIENT, as the case may be. This provision shall not be construed as an authorization to assign, transfer, hypothecate or pledge this Agreement other than as provided above.

3.12. Severability. Should any part of this Agreement be determined to be unenforceable, invalid, or beyond the authority of either Party to enter into or carry out, such determination shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement which shall continue in full force and effect; provided that, the remainder of this Agreement can, absent the excised portion, be reasonably interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the Parties.

3.13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts and shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by the Parties; each counterpart shall be deemed an original, but all counterparts shall constitute a single document.

3.14. Survival. The following provisions in this Agreement shall survive discharge:

As to both Parties, the following section shall survive discharge: Section 3.3. (indemnity) and Section 3.4 (Liability), until the expiration of all relevant statutes of limitations.

3.15. Time. Time is and shall be of the essence of this Agreement and each of its provisions in which performance is a factor.

3.16. Remedies Cumulative. No remedy or election of remedies provided for in this Agreement shall be deemed exclusive but shall be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity. Each remedy shall be construed to give the fullest effect allowed by law.

3.17. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California.

3.18. Captions. The captions in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not a part of this Agreement. The captions do not in any way limit or amplify the provisions of this Agreement and shall not affect the construction or interpretation of any of its provisions.

3.19. No Continuing Waiver. The waiver by any Party of any breach of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same, or of any other provision of this Agreement.

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 6 OF 14

3.20. No Rights in Third Parties. Nothing in this Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer any rights or remedies on any third‐party, nor is anything in this Agreement intended to relieve or discharge the obligation or liability of any third‐party to any Party to this Agreement, nor shall any provision of this Agreement give any third‐party any right of subrogation or action over or against any Party to this Agreement.

3.21. Signatory’s Warranty. Each Party warrants to each other that he or she is fully authorized and competent to enter into this Agreement in the capacity indicated by his or her signature and agrees to be bound by this Agreement as of the day and year first mentioned above upon the execution of this Agreement by each other Party.

3.22. List of Exhibits. This Agreement contains the following Exhibits:

Exhibit A: Project Description
Exhibit B: Wayfinding Sign Designs
Exhibit C: General Locations of Wayfinding Signs

** SIGNATURES ON THE NEXT PAGE **
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 7 OF 14 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first written above.

CITY OF SALINAS (RECIPIENT): TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR
MONTEREY COUNTY (TAMC):

By:   By: ___________________________
Steven Carrigan    Todd A. Muck
City Manager    Executive Director
Dated:    Dated:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By:   By: ___________________________
Chris Callihan    Katherine Hansen
City Attorney    TAMC Counsel
Dated:    Dated:

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 8 OF 14

EXHIBIT A

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Installation and maintenance of signs at the locations generally described in Exhibit C, in order to encourage and facilitate active transportation to and around locations in Monterey County, with an emphasis on the City of Salinas.

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 9 OF 14

EXHIBIT B

WAYFINDING SIGN DESIGN ACCEPTED BY RECIPIENT

1. CUSTOMIZED SIGN TOPPERS (to be used in conjunction with confirmation and direction signs) Full Color

2. CONFIRMATION SIGNS

3. DIRECTION SIGNS

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 10 OF 14

EXHIBIT C

GENERAL LOCATION OF WAYFINDING SIGNS
Overall Map

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 11 OF 14 Detail Map 1 (Santa Rita and Bolsa Knolls)

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 12 OF 14 Detail Map 2 (East Alisal Street)

Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 13 OF 14 Detail Map 3 (Downtown)
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Salinas, March 19, 2022
Wayfinding Regional Funding Agmt ‐ Salinas Final.docx PAGE 14 OF 14 Detail Map 4 (South Salinas)
Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County Prepared by: Transportation Agency for Monterey County ● 55-B Plaza Circle, Salinas, CA● www.tamcmonterey.org May 2016
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
1 | P a g e
Contents
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................3 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................4 Purpose......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................4 Funding ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................5 Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee & Community Involvement ..........................................................................................................................................5 Goals ..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................7 Existing Conditions.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................8 Regulatory Requirements..........................................................................................................................................................................................................9 Wayfinding Sign Design Criteria...............................................................................................................................................................................................10 Identification of Regional Routes ............................................................................................................................................................................................11 Development of Wayfinding Sign Design ....................................................................................................................................................................................15 Step 1: Vision ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................15 Step 2: Concept Development.................................................................................................................................................................................................18 Step 3: Final Wayfinding Sign Designs.....................................................................................................................................................................................18 Implementation Strategy.............................................................................................................................................................................................................20 Coordination with Existing and Future Signage.......................................................................................................................................................................20 Sign Production........................................................................................................................................................................................................................21 Signs Per Mile...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................21 Potential Funding Sources.......................................................................................................................................................................................................23 Jurisdiction Agreements for Sign Installation and Maintenance.............................................................................................................................................23 Implementation Phasing..........................................................................................................................................................................................................23 Cost Estimates..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................24 Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
2 | P a g e
Appendix A – Regional Bicycle Routes, Underlying Jurisdictions & Destinations........................................................................................................................28 Appendix B – Draft Conceptual Designs......................................................................................................................................................................................42 Appendix C – Final Wayfinding Sign Designs and Placement Scenarios......................................................................................................................................47 Appendix D – Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes......................................................................................................................................59 Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
3 | P a g e
Executive Summary
The Transportation Agency for Monterey County developed the Regional Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County to provide standard guidelines for bicycle and pedestrian wayfinding throughout Monterey County.

The goal of the Wayfinding Plan is to improve access to regional destinations, provide consistent wayfinding signs for regional connections, and promote key sign features that jurisdictions will be encouraged to incorporate into their own signs in order to improve wayfinding within city boundaries. Uniform signage supports residents and visitors who want to bicycle or walk for transportation and recreation, and can enhance each jurisdiction’s brand as a regional destination.

The Wayfinding Plan includes:
 Introduction: The overall goal of the Wayfinding Plan is to improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities, and to promote bicycling and walking as viable transportation alternatives for Monterey County residents and visitors. This section describes the need and purpose for bicycle and pedestrian wayfinding signage, funding, the function of the Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee and community involvement in the development of the Plan.
 Existing Conditions: While the county is currently served by a wide variety of bicycle facilities, the majority of the area lacks a clear, comprehensive, and consistent sign system that provides bicycle users with directional information and mileage to points of interest.

This section includes a summary of regulatory criteria for wayfinding signage, and includes design criteria developed by the Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee. This section includes criteria for the development of regional routes and destinations.  Development of Wayfinding Signage: Development of the preferred sign design was a three-step process guided by an extensive community input process. This section describes the visioning process, concept development, and final design of the wayfinding signage.
 Implementation Strategy: This section includes information about the regional routes that will be signed, sign placement guidelines, sign production, and an estimate of the number of signs per mile. Potential funding sources, a discussion about jurisdiction agreements and information about implementation phasing are also included in this section.

Implementation of the Wayfinding Plan will begin once the Plan is adopted. TAMC will apply for grant funding for full implementation of the Plan, work on the procurement of signage, and will coordinate with the underlying jurisdictions to install signage.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
4 | P a g e
Introduction
Bicycle and pedestrian facilities are integral components of Monterey County’s multimodal transportation system. This Wayfinding Plan is part of a regional effort to enhance the bicycle and pedestrian network to encourage people to bike or walk for transportation purposes.

Purpose
The need for a Wayfinding Plan was identified in the Transportation Agency’s 2011 Master Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan as a means for promoting bicycling and walking throughout the county. Wayfinding signs can ease navigation for bicyclists and pedestrians, reduce travel times, and enhance a region’s brand by reinforcing key regional destinations. When combined with secure bicycle storage and a connected network of bicycle paths and lanes, a wayfinding system can attract the estimated 60% of potential bicyclists who indicate that they would cycle more often if it were safer and easier to do so1. By enhancing the environment for bicycling and walking signs can also improve the visibility and safety for these alternative forms of transportation. Cities around the nation with significant bicycle ridership and pedestrian activity have implemented similar wayfinding plans and programs including: Berkeley and Oakland in California along with Portland, Oregon (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Examples of Signs
Berkeley, CA Oakland, CA Portland, OR

1 “Four Types of Cyclists”; Source: Roger Geller, Portland Office of Transportation.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
5 | P a g e
Funding
TAMC programmed $30,000 of Regional Surface Transportation Funds in the 2014/2015 fiscal year to prepare this Wayfinding Plan. For the next three years, TAMC has programmed a total of $90,000 for the implementation of the Wayfinding Plan.

Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee & Community Involvement The Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee is an ad-hoc committee comprised of project stakeholders including representatives from TAMC’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee, the County of Monterey, local cities, the Monterey County Health Department, Building Healthy Communities, Fort Ord Re-use Authority, the Velo Club, Green Pedal Couriers, Fort Ord Recreation Trails Friends, Pebble Beach, and Monterey-Salinas Transit. Table 1 lists the full Committee membership. The purpose of the group was to develop plan goals, assist in the identification of regional routes to be signed, provide input on the preferred sign design and implementation. The group met monthly from February to November, 2015, and again in February 2016 to provide final input on the Plan.

In addition to Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee input, Agency staff consulted with TAMC’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee (BPC), which is composed of volunteer representatives from each supervisorial district and city in Monterey County as well as representatives from public agencies and a bicycle/pedestrian interest group, as appointed by the TAMC Board of Directors, and TAMC’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), comprised of public works representatives from each of the twelve cities in Monterey County, Monterey County Public Works, Monterey County Planning, Caltrans, Monterey-Salinas Transit, the Fort Ord Reuse Authority, the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District, and the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments.

Table 1: Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee members.

Stakeholder Representative
Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments Eliza Yu
TAMC Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee D.L. Johnson Building Healthy Communities Jeanette Pantoja
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea Victoria Beach
City of Marina Justin Meek
City of Monterey Andrea Renny
City of Salinas James Serrano
Victor Gomez
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
6 | P a g e
City of Soledad Brent Slama
California State University Monterey Bay Bernard Green
Fort Ord Reuse Authority Josh Metz
Green Pedal Couriers Michael Baronial
Monterey County Ryan Chapman
Monterey County Health Department Krista Hanni
Monterey-Salinas Transit Lisa Rheinheimmer
Pebble Beach Company Kevin Cole
Fort Ord Recreation Trails Friends/Pedal Alpini, Inc. Eric Peterson Velo Club Bill Boosman
Lastly, TAMC staff developed a project specific Wayfinding Plan page on the TAMC website. Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee meeting agendas, meeting minutes and draft documents were posted on this site. Staff gathered community input using the TAMC Wayfinding Plan mySidewalk page, an online public engagement tool similar in layout to Facebook. Agency staff used the mySidewalk to obtain input on regional routes and sign designs. The mySidewalk tool was particularly useful in obtaining feedback on sign design, as people were able to vote for their preferred design. Figure 2 illustrates the Wayfinding Plan mySidewalk page, along with page view statistics.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
7 | P a g e
Figure 2: Wayfinding Plan mySidewalk page.

Goals
The overall goal of the Wayfinding Plan is to improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities in order to promote bicycling and walking as viable transportation for Monterey County residents and visitors. Directing bicyclists and pedestrians to safer routes will increase traffic safety for all street users and will encourage bicycling and walking in Monterey County. Outlined below are the Wayfinding Plan’s specific goals.

1. Create uniform wayfinding sign design guidelines
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
8 | P a g e

2. Promote connectivity between communities and encourage connectivity to regional destinations, such as parks, trails, educational institutions, employment centers, transit, park and ride lots, and tourist destinations

3. Identify and brand pedestrian and bicycle routes and provide signage that supports new and infrequent users to walk and bicycle more frequently

4. Support the local economy by providing Monterey County residents and tourists with directional and distance information

5. Use wayfinding signage to provide distance information and facilitate pedestrian and bicyclist access to regional destinations within Monterey County Wayfinding signage should incorporate technology, and be accessible via GPS and online map tools

6. Wayfinding signage should be distributed equitably across the County

7. Create safer pedestrian and bicyclists facilities by using wayfinding signage to make bicycle and pedestrian routes more visible

8. Maintain community engagement throughout the planning process Existing Conditions
The region’s mild climate and relatively flat topography make biking and walking a viable mode of travel for county residents. There are currently 213 bikeway miles in Monterey County, consisting of 43.7 miles of Class I separated bike paths, 115.1 miles of Class II striped bike lanes, and 54.5 miles of Class III shared bicycle routes2. Among the bike and pedestrian facilities in Monterey County, the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail is the largest Class I facility, extending from Lovers Point in Pacific Grove to Del Monte Boulevard north of Marina (14 miles). In addition, there are 8.4 bikeway miles on the California State University, Monterey Bay campus: 0.3 miles of Class I separated bike paths, 2.5 miles of Class II striped bike lanes, 4.7 miles of Class III shared bicycle routes and 0.9 miles of Class IV protected bike lanes.

While the county is currently served by a wide variety of bicycle facilities, the majority of the area lacks a clear, comprehensive, and consistent sign system that provides bicycle users with directional information and mileage to points of interest. The County of Monterey and each of the jurisdictions currently use the standard California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Device guide signage indicating the existence of Class I, II and III bikeways. Caution Watch for Bicyclists signs are also used to warn motorists of potential bicyclist activity, such as where the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail intersects Sand Dunes Road in Monterey. Figure 8 shows the typical bikeway signage present throughout the region.

2 Data source: TAMC 2015 bikeways data.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
9 | P a g e
Figure 3: California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices design spectrum. (Source: Alta Planning + Design) Regulatory Requirements
There are many different types of bicycle wayfinding signs used in the United States. The most commonly-used signs are from the Federal Highway Administration’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (Federal Manual), as national compliance provides liability protection.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
10 | P a g e
The California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (California Manual) is the most commonly used guide in the State, and it conforms to and contains most of the signs in the Federal Manual, along with state-specific additions and modifications.

The goal of both manuals is to ensure consistency of traffic control devices. In the California Manual, street sign traffic control devices are defined as “signs, signals, markings…used to regulate, warn or guide traffic, placed on, over, or adjacent to a street, highway, pedestrian facility, bikeway, or private road open to public travel.” Both the Federal Manual and the California Manual require that wayfinding signage meet certain regulatory requirements, such as font type and text size. On the other hand, section 2D.50 of the Federal Manual, which deals with community wayfinding, allows for custom colors and enhanced graphics. Figure 3 illustrates the spectrum of Federal Manual compliance. In the visioning portion of the planning process, the Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee, along with input from community stakeholders, choose to develop a sign design similar to options #1 and #2 of the State Manual design spectrum.

Wayfinding Sign Design Criteria
This Wayfinding Plan sets uniform wayfinding sign design guidelines. In consideration of signage regulatory requirements, the Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee developed criteria for signs based on Plan goals. Signs should be clear, concise, consistent and compatible with existing wayfinding signs across jurisdictional boundaries, including into Santa Cruz County and San Benito County. More specifically, wayfinding signs design should meet the following criteria:

1. There will be three wayfinding sign types, including: gateway signage, directional and distance information signage, and add-on signage that can be placed on existing signage

2. Wayfinding signage should be accessible to people of all literacy levels, be legible to a wide range of users, and use symbols to convey directional information

3. Wayfinding signage should improve access to regional destinations, such as regional parks and open spaces, trails, educational institutions, major employment centers, transit, park and ride lots and tourist destinations

4. Wayfinding signage should provide information such as: location of bike supportive amenities, comfort level and ADA accessibility

5. Wayfinding signage should be eye-catching and have space for a city logo or identifier

6. Wayfinding signage should reflect the character of the region

7. When applicable, wayfinding signage will be placed in accordance with the regulatory requirements spelled out in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
11 | P a g e
Identification of Regional Routes
In order to meet the goals of the Wayfinding Plan to promote walking and bicycling, connect bicyclists and pedestrians to regional destinations within their communities, and encourage connectivity between communities, it a best practice for signs to identify cities, downtown areas, neighborhood districts, regional parks and recreation areas, academic institutions, and civic destinations. The regional routes and destinations proposed for wayfinding directional and distance signs meet the following criteria.

Criteria for Wayfinding Signs on
Bicycle and Pedestrian Routes
Criteria for Identification of Regional
Destinations & Points of Interest in Signs
 Regional bicycle routes identified in
the Transportation Agency’s 2011
Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan
classified as Class I, II, III and planned
Class I, II, III, and IV facilities
 Routes with low volume automobile
traffic Routes near transit
 Destinations located along a route that
attract intercity or intercounty travel,
such as transit centers, regional parks,
colleges and job centers.
 Points of interest located within
vicinity of a regional route but not
directly along a route, such as transit
centers, regional parks, colleges and
job centers.

Using the Transportation Agency’s 2011 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan as a foundation, the Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee went through a regional bicycle mapping exercise. Based on this exercise, and on the input from a variety of stakeholder groups, including TAMC’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee and Technical Advisory Committee, the team created a map of key regional routes along which wayfinding signs will be placed, shown in Figure 4. Table 2 lists the length of these routes, a high-level description of the route’s streets and roads and destinations. An interactive map with these routes will also be maintained on the TAMC website. Appendix A contains a more detailed set of maps, and a table that includes regional route beginning and end points, and underlying jurisdictions.

Jurisdictions can also develop and place signage along their own local routes that may connect to the larger regional routes. In these cases, local jurisdictions are encouraged to use the signs in this Plan to promote their own local destinations.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
12 | P a g e
Table 2: Regional Routes
North County Routes Description Miles
1 Elkhorn Slough Loop Connects Pajaro, Las Lomas, Moss Landing and Castroville; via Salinas Road, Highway 1, Molera Road and Elkhorn Road

32.42 2 Pajaro – Salinas Connects Pajaro, Las Lomas, Prunedale Shopping Centers, Prunedale Park and Ride lot, Manzanita County Regional Park, North Salinas, Salinas, Spreckles via Hall Road, San Miguel Canyon Road, Prunedale South Road, Harrison Road

24.28 3 Salinas Periphery Loop Connects Southwest Salinas, North Salinas Shopping Center, Northeast Salinas schools and parks, Hartnell College Main Campus and Hartnell College Alisal Campus; via Davis Road and Boronda Road and crosses Salinas through Alisal Street

16.29 4 Marina – Salinas Multimodal Corridor Connects Oldtown Salinas, Salinas Amtrak Station, MST Salinas Transit Center, City of Salinas and Monterey County Government Centers, Hartnell College Main Campus, East Garrison, California State University Monterey Bay Campus, Marina Shopping Center, MST Marina Transit Exchange; via West Alisal Street, Blanco Road, Davis Road, Reservation Road, Imjin Parkway, 2nd Avenue and Divaty Street

14.94 5 North Salinas to San Benito County via San
Juan Grade Rd
Connects North Salinas and San Juan Bautista, San Benito County; via San Juan Grade Road

12.12 6 Castroville – Salinas Connects Castroville and Oldtown Salinas; via Merritt Street, Castroville Boulevard and West Market Street

8.17 Peninsula Routes Miles
7 Monterey Peninsula Loop Connects Castroville, Marina, California State University Monterey Bay, Seaside, Sand City, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Pebble Beach and Carmel-by-the-Sea; via Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail along the Peninsula, and California Avenue, General Jim Moore Boulevard, Canyon Del Rey Boulevard and Aguajito among other internal local city streets

40.89 8 Carmel – Monterey Connects Carmel-by-the-Sea and Monterey; via San Carlos Street, 5.11 Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
13 | P a g e
Carpenter Street, the Highway 1 bike path, Viejo Road, and Munras Avenue
9 Fort Ord Loop Connects Salinas, Spreckles, California State University Monterey Bay, and Fort Ord; travels via Highway 68 and Reservation Road

23.44 10 Fort Ord Inner Loop Connects California State University Monterey Bay, Seaside, Fort Ord, Ryan Ranch and Del Rey Oaks; via Gigling Road, Hennekens Ranch Road, Barloy Canyon Road and South Boundary Road

11.63 South County Routes Miles
11 Marina – Greenfield via Reservation Rd &
River Rd
Connects Marina, East Garrison, Salinas, Spreckles, Fort Romie and Greenfield; travels via Reservation Road and River Road

49.31 12 Salinas – King City & San Ardo Connects Salinas, Chualar, Gonzales, Soledad, Greenfield, King City, San Lucas and San Ardo ; travels via Natividad Road, Old Stage Road, Old US 101 roads, Metz Road and Cattleman Road

65.31 13 Carmel Valley – Greenfield Connects Carmel Valley to Greenfield; via Carmel Valley Road 55.52 14 Soledad – Pinnacles Connects Soledad to the Pinnacles National Park; via Highway 146 9.31 Figure 4: Overview of Regional Routes
It is important to note that there are routes, such as the Carmel Valley to Greenfield Route, identified along corridors that do not have official existing or planned bicycle facilities, but instead are considered commonly used routes. In these cases, route segments will be analyzed for potential inclusion in the upcoming Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan update, and can be signed at a later phase.

Development of Wayfinding Sign Design
Step 1: Vision
The Transportation Agency contracted with Alta Planning + Design to develop designs for gateway signs, directional and distance information signs, and add-ons that can be placed on existing signs. On June 4, 2015, the Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee participated in a visioning exercise to assist in the development of the wayfinding sign design concepts. As part of the visioning meeting, Committee members shared the opportunities and challenges in navigating Monterey County’s active transportation network and provided input on the preferred sign designs. Figure 5 summarizes the input from the visioning meeting.

Figure 5: Poster boards from the June 4, 2015 visioning meeting prepared by Alta Planning + Design.

When asked about the message that best conveys Monterey County, Committee members most frequently mentioned: beauty, scenic, friendly and fun.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
17 | P a g e
Committee members, staff and the public gave the highest ranking to: the Mountains to Sea color palette and textured aluminum, brushed steel and concrete to corten steel materials .

Step 2: Concept Development
Based on Committee, staff and public input gathered during the visioning session, Alta Planning + Design prepared three draft wayfinding design concepts. Each of the design concepts included a directional sign, a sign topper to be placed on existing signs, an information gateway kiosk treatment and a trail post design. Figure 6 shows examples of the three directional sign design concepts. The full set of draft design concepts are shown in Appendix B.

Figure 6: Directional Sign Design Concepts
Concept #1 Concept #2 Concept #3
Step 3: Final Wayfinding Sign Designs
Following an extensive community outreach effort and Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee discussion, Alta Planning + Design developed a package of final wayfinding sign designs, based on Concept #1, with elements from Concept #2. Two design options were developed to allow local jurisdictions the flexibility to choose their level of conformity with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. In addition, the decorative non-standard sign elements are now in the sign topper. Figure 7 shows an example of the final wayfinding sign design, with the complete design package shown in Appendix C.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
19 | P a g e
Figure 7: Final Wayfinding Sign Designs
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
20 | P a g e
Implementation Strategy
Coordination with Existing and Future Signage
There will be coordination of signs with other current and future wayfinding signs in order to avoid sign clutter, as sign clutter is unsafe and undesirable. Existing signage for the Pacific Coast bike route along Highway 1, Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail, signage for CSU Monterey Bay’s bicycle boulevard network, along with standard bike path, bike lane and bike route signs currently exist throughout the region. Figure 8 provides an overview of the existing signs throughout Monterey County.

Figure 8: Examples of Existing Bicycle Facility Sign Types Pacific Coast Bike Route CSU Monterey Bay,
Bike Boulevard
Class I Bike Path Class II Bike Lane Class III Bike Route Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
21 | P a g e
Wayfinding Plan signs will supplement existing signs, such as those that denote bike lanes and bike routes. Directional signs will be placed as prescribed by the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Countrol Devices along a route. Appendix C contains typical placement scenarios. Sign toppers to identify the regional route name will be placed on top of existing bike path, bike lane and bike route signs, where feasible. Figure 9 shows an example of how toppers can be used to supplement existing bicycle facility signage. Gateway kiosks will be placed at trailheads, and can be placed in downtown areas or other areas with more pedestrian activity. It is the goal to place signs along regional bicycle routes identified in this Wayfinding Plan.

Local jurisdictions are encouraged to use the sign designs to sign their own local bicycle and pedestrian routes. The City of Monterey is in the process of initiating a citywide vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian wayfinding sign plan. TAMC staff will remain involved in the process to ensure regional and local coordination in wayfinding sign locations and designs.

Sign Production
Two sign options were developed to accommodate local city preferences of using the standard directional plate that does not include miles or minute information and for Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee members that have advocated for in-house local sign shop production of the directional sign portion when possible. However, due to the limitations of local sign shops, Committee members discussed the need to contract out for the add-on signs that may be beyond the capability of local city sign shops.

Committee members have also suggested that TAMC should take the lead in the procurement of signage.

TAMC will issue an invitation for bids for production of the sign toppers and directional sign templates.

Signs Per Mile
Overall installation costs will be determined based on the number of signs per mile. In general, the number of signs will be determined by the number of destinations along a route. Appendix C includes sign placement guidance. Signs will be placed in conformance with the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. For on-street regional bike routes, directional signs will be placed at decision points where two routes intersect and confirmation signs, such as the sign topper pictured in Figure 9, will be placed about every 2 to 3 blocks on existing bikeway signs along a regional route. For the regional routes identified in the plan, Table 3 shows the approximate number of signs needed Figure 9: Sign Topper on
Existing Sign
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
22 | P a g e
per route based on route length and number of destinations. Appendix A provides detailed information about the street network and destinations along routes proposed for signage.

Table 3 – Signs per Regional route mile
Route Miles Destinations
(approx.)
Directional Signs with Sign Toppers
(approx.)
Sign Toppers for Confirmation Signs
(approx.)
Elkhorn Slough Loop 32.42 10 30 38
Pajaro – Salinas 24.28 11 65 85
Salinas Periphery
Loop

16.29 11 32 18
Marina – Salinas
Multimodal Corridor

14.94 8 8 10
North Salinas to San
Benito County

12.12 3 9 14
Castroville – Salinas 8.17 3 6 16
Monterey Peninsula
Loop

40.89 41 80 65
Carmel – Monterey 5.11 4 4 6
Fort Ord Loop 23.44 6 10 36
Fort Ord Inner Loop 11.63 10 10 18
Marina – Greenfield
via Reservation Rd &
River Rd

49.31 8 28 40
Salinas – King City &
San Ardo

65.31 16 50 130
Carmel Valley –
Greenfield

55.52 6 12 60
Soledad – Pinnacles 9.31 2 8 16
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
23 | P a g e
Mile marker posts should be used at intersections with other separated bike paths or when a direction sign is not used and at locations where the route is not explicit. Mile marker posts should be located at ½ to 2-mile intervals along a corridor. For on-street bike routes, signs will be placed at decision points where two routes intersect, and in advance of turns. Pavement markings are recommended to be used in between signs to confirm that a bicyclist is on a preferred route, and to minimize sign clutter.

Potential Funding Sources
TAMC currently has a total of $75,000 of Regional Surface Transportation Funds budgeted over the next three years for the implementation of the Wayfinding Plan. However, this funding may be leveraged to pursue grants for full implementation of the plan. Other potential funding sources include: state Active Transportation Program, Transportation Development Act 2% for bicycle/pedestrian projects, city or county road funds, and local transportation sales tax revenues. Individual jurisdictions or TAMC can apply for Active Transportation Program funds to assist in the implementation of regional route portions.

Jurisdiction Agreements for Sign Installation and Maintenance TAMC staff will work coordinate sign installation and maintenance with local jurisdictions. Agreements, contracts or memorandums of understanding to install signs along a route will be handled on a case-by-case basis.

Maintenance is a crucial component of the Wayfinding Plan. Once signs are installed, a GIS database should be maintained to keep track of sign stock. This database will assist in the development of a maintenance schedule. In case of theft, signs will be replaced on an as-needed basis.

Implementation Phasing
Throughout the planning process, Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee members and members of the community expressed the need to prioritize signage along key areas where connectivity from one bike facility to another is confusing. Such areas, which will be signed in the first phase include:
 Canyon del Rey Boulevard (SR 218)
 Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail in Sand City
 Carmel-by-the-Sea to Monterey route
The following routes will be signed in the second phase of the implementation program:

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
24 | P a g e
 Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail from Marina to Pacific Grove  Salinas Periphery Loop
The regional routes that do not yet have existing or proposed designated bikeway facilities may or may not be signed until the facilities are in place. However, in some cases placing signs on proposed Class III facilities located along a regional route will make those routes Class III.

Similarly, future regional routes and trails, such as the Fort Ord Recreational Trail and Greenway, will be signed once they are constructed.

Routes that will be signed in the third phase include:
 South County route via River Rd (Marina – Greenfield via Reservation Rd & River Rd)  Salinas – King City/San Ardo
Cost Estimates
TAMC staff obtained estimates for sign fabrication and third party installation. Final cost will depend on local jurisdiction sign option preference, hardware preference and whether a third-party contractor or local jurisdiction staff will install signs. A visual of sign options with accompanying cost estimates for fabrication are shown in Figure 10, and cost estimates for hardware and third-party contractor installation are shown in Table 3.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
25 | P a g e
Figure 10: Sign Cost Estimate
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
26 | P a g e
Table 3: Hardware & Installation Estimates
Item Cost Estimate
Galvanized Steel Unistrut Pole $158.00
Galvanized Steel Cylindrical Pole $78.00
Installed into a Concrete Footer $676.00
Installed into soil 3’ deep, no concrete $360.00
In considering the fabrication costs and the costs of new cylindrical sign poles TAMC has developed a draft estimate for the implementation of the Wayfinding Plan. The estimate was prepared assuming a sign cost of $250 per sign, which includes the cost of a sign with topper and a cylindrical pole, and $70 per sign topper to act as a confirmation sign and to be placed on an existing sign. The total cost estimate for signs for all three phases is $125, 710. Table 4 summarizes this budget for the cost of purchasing signs only, and does not include installation costs.

Local jurisdiction ability to install signs or the need to use a third-party contractor will determine the final installation cost.

Table 4: Cost Estimate for Each Phase of Implementation Phase 1
Cost per
Route
Total
Signs
Directional
Signs
Confirmation
Signs
Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail in Sand City $1,140 6 4 2 Carmel-by-the-Sea to Monterey route $1,420 10 4 6
Canyon del Rey Boulevard (SR 218) $1,530 9 5 4
Total Signs Phase 1 25 13 12
Total Cost Estimate for Signs - Phase 1 $4,090 $3,250 $840 Phase 2
Cost per
Route
Total
Signs
Directional
Signs
Confirmation
Signs
Monterey Peninsula Loop: Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail from Marina to Pacific Grove $20,950 145 60 85
Salinas Periphery Loop $9,260 50 32 18
Total Signs Phase 1 195 92 103
Total Cost Estimate for Signs - Phase 2 $30,210 $23,000 $7,210 Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
27 | P a g e
Phase 3
Cost per
Route
Total
Signs
Directional
Signs
Confirmation
Signs
Elkhorn Slough Loop $10,160 68 30 38
Pajaro – Salinas $22,200 150 65 85
Marina – Salinas Multimodal Corridor $2,700 18 8 10
North Salinas to San Benito County $3,230 23 9 14
Castroville – Salinas $2,620 22 6 16
Fort Ord Loop $5,020 46 10 36
Fort Ord Inner Loop $3,760 28 10 18
Marina - Greenfield via Reservation Rd & River Rd $9,800 68 28 40 Salinas - King City & San Ardo $21,600 180 50 130
Carmel Valley - Greenfield $7,200 72 12 60
Soledad - Pinnacles $3,120 24 8 16
Total Signs Phase 3 749 268 481
Total Cost Estimate for Signs - Phase 3 $91,410 $67,000 $33,670 Total for all 3 Phases $125,710
Implementation of the Wayfinding Plan will begin once the Plan is adopted. TAMC will pursue grant funding for implementation of the Plan as opportunities arise, work on the procurement of signage, and will coordinate with the underlying jurisdictions to install signage.

Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
28 | P a g e
Appendix A – Regional Bicycle Routes, Underlying Jurisdictions & Destinations The regional routes identified in the Wayfinding Plan will be signed and are detailed in this section. This section also includes maps of the regional routes. An interactive map of the routes will also be maintained on the TAMC website.

North County Routes
Route Miles Underlying Jurisdiction(s) Street Network Destinations & Points of Interest
Elkhorn Slough Loop 32.42 Monterey County
Caltrans
On the West Side:
- McGowan Road
- Trafton Road
- Bluff Road
- Jensen Road
- Highway 1
- Molera Road
On the East Side:
- Salinas Road
- Elkhorn Road
- Omart Road
- Del Monte Farms Road
- Castroville Boulevard
- Watsonville
- Pajaro
- Pajaro Middle
School
- Las Lomas
- Elkhorn Slough
Preserve
- Kirby Park
- Moss Landing
- Moss Landing State
Wildlife Area
- Royal Oaks County
Park
- Castroville
Pajaro – Salinas 24.28 Monterey County
City of Salinas
From Las Lomas/Prunedale:
- Hall Road
- San Miguel Canyon Road
- Prunedale North Road
- Prunedale South Road
- Reese Circle
- County Meadows Road
- Harrison Road
From Salinas:
- Las Lomas
- Manzanita County
Park
- Prunedale
Shopping Center
- Bolsa Knolls School
- Santa Rita School
- North Salinas
Shopping District
- Salinas Sports
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
29 | P a g e
- Russell Road
- San Juan Grade Road
- North Main Street
- East Alvin Drive
- Maryal Drive
- East Bernal Drive
- Sherwood Drive
- East Front Street
- East Abbott Street
- Harkins Road
- Spreckles Avenue
Complex
- Sherwood Park
- Oldtown Salinas
- Spreckles
- Highway 68
Salinas Periphery Loop 16.29 City of Salinas From the East:
- East Alisal Street
- Bardin Road
- Williams Road
- East Boronda Road
From the North:
- Boronda Road
- North Davis Road
From the West:
- South Davis Road
- Blanco Road
- West Alisal Street
- Hartnell College
Alisal Campus
- Alisal High School
- Natividad Creek
Park
- Everett Alvarez
High School
- North Salinas
Shopping District
- North Davis
Shopping District
- Hartnell Park
- Hartnell College
- Monterey County
Civic Center
- Salinas City Hall
- Oldtown Salinas
Marina – Salinas
Multimodal Corridor

14.94 City of Salinas
Monterey County
From Salinas:
- Salinas Street
- Oldtown Salinas
- Monterey County
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
30 | P a g e
City of Marina - West Alisal
- Blanco Road
To Marina:
- South Davis Road
- Reservation Road
- Imjin Parkway
- 2
nd Avenue
- Divarty Street
Civic Center
- Hartnell College
- Hartnell Park
- East Garrison
- Marina Equestrian
Center
- California State
University,
Monterey Bay
- Monterey
Peninsula College
at Marina
North Salinas to San Benito
County via San Juan Grade Rd

12.12 City of Salinas
Monterey County
- San Juan Grade Road
- Salinas Road
- Bolsa Knolls
School?
- San Juan Bautista
Salinas – Castroville 8.91 City of Salinas
Monterey County
From Salinas:
- East Market Street
- West Market Street
To Castroville:
- Castroville Boulevard
- Merritt Street
- Oldtown Salinas
- Salinas Rail Station
- Castroville
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
31 | P a g e
Peninsula Routes
Route Miles Underlying Jurisdictions Street Network Destinations & Points of Interest
Monterey Peninsula Loop 40.89 Monterey County
City of Marina
City of Seaside
Sand City
California State Parks
City of Monterey
Monterey Peninsula
Regional Park District
City of Pacific Grove
Pebble Beach Company
City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
On the Peninsula Side (North to
South):

Castroville Area:
- Castroville Bike Path
(parallel to Highway 156)
- Nashua Road
- Monte Road
Marina, Seaside, Sand City Area:
- Monterey Bay Sanctuary
Scenic Trail (parallel to
Del Monte Boulevard)
Monterey Area:
- Monterey Bay Sanctuary
Scenic Trail (parallel to
Highway 1)
- Monterey Bay Sanctuary
Scenic Trail (City of
Monterey portion)
Pacific Grove Area:
- Monterey Bay Sanctuary
Scenic Trail (City of Pacific
Grove portion)
- Oceanview Boulevard
- Sunset Drive
Pebble Beach Area:
- 17 Mile Drive
- Spyglass Hill Road
On the Peninsula Side
(North to South):
- Castroville
- Marina
- Locke-Paddon Park
- Marina Courthouse
- Fort Ord Dunes
State Park
- Seaside High School
- Sand City
- Monterey State
Beach
- Del Monte Lake
- Naval Post
Graduate School
- Fisherman’s Wharf
- Fisherman’s
Shoreline Park
- San Carlos Beach
Park
- Presidio of
Monterey
- Cannery Row
- Monterey Bay
Aquarium
- Lover’s Point Park
- Asilomar State
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
33 | P a g e
- 17 Mile Drive
Carmel Area:
- Carmel Way
- North San Antonio
Avenue
- Ocean Avenue
- Scenic Drive
- Carmelo Street
- Dolores Street
- Lasuen Drive
- Rio Road
On the Inland Side (North to
South):

Marina, Seaside, Sand City Area:
- California Avenue
- Imjin Parkway
- 2
nd Avenue
- Inter-Garrison Road
- 7
th Avenue
- General Jim Moore
Boulevard
- Broadway Avenue
- Noche Buena Street
- Playa Avenue
- Metz Road
- Tioga Avenue
Del Rey Oaks, Seaside, Monterey
Area:
- General Jim Moore
Boulevard
- Canyon del Rey Boulevard
Beach
- Pebble Beach
- 17 Mile Drive
- Carmel Beach
- Carmel Mission
- Mission Trail Park
- Carmel River State
Beach
- Carmel Valley
Shopping Center
On the Inland Side (North
to South):
- Marina Equestrian
Center
- Marina Shopping
- California State
University,
Monterey Bay
- Fort Ord National
Monument
- Seaside Broadway
Shopping
- Frog Pond
- Del Rey Oaks City
Hall
- Laguna Grande
Regional Park
- Monterey County
Fairgrounds
- Monterey Regional
Airport
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
34 | P a g e
- North Fremont Street
- Casa Verde Way
- Fairgrounds Road
- Mark Thomas Drive
- Aguajito Road
- Fremont Street
- Abrego Street
- Pearl Street
- Van Buren Street
- Scott Street
- Pacific Street
- Artillery Street
- Corporal Ewing Road
- Pvt Bolio Road
- Hawthorne Street
- Laine Street
Pacific Grove Area:
- David Avenue
- Spencer Street
- Pine Avenue
Pebble Beach Area:
- 17 Mile Drive
Carmel Area:
- Carmelo Street
- 15th Avenue
- Dolores Street
- Santa Catalina
School
- Monterey
Peninsula College
- Presidio of
Monterey
- New Monterey
- Pacific Grove
- George Washington
Park
- Pebble Beach
Carmel – Monterey 5.11 City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Monterey County
Caltrans
City of Monterey
Carmel Area:
- Rio Road
- 13th Avenue
- San Carlos Street
- Camino Del Monte
Carmel Area:
- Carmel Mission
- Ocean Avenue
Shopping
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
35 | P a g e
- Serra Avenue
- Carpenter Street
- Carpenter Street
- Highway 1
- Highway 68
- Highway 1 Bike Path
Monterey Area:
- Viejo Road
- Soledad Drive
- Munras Avenue
- Abrego Street
- Washington Street
Monterey Area:
- Del Monte
Shopping
- Monterey Sports
Center
Fort Ord Loop 23.44 City of Del Rey Oaks
Monterey County
Bureau of Land
Management
Fort Ord Reuse Authority
California State University,
Monterey Bay
From Northwest to Southwest:
- Gigling Road
- Hennekens Ranch Road
- Eucalyptus Road
- Barloy Canyon Road
- South Boundary Road
- California State
University
Monterey Bay
- Fort Ord National
Monument
- Laguna Seca
Raceway
- York School
- Ryan Ranch
- Del Rey Oaks
Fort Ord Inner Loop 11.63 Caltrans
Monterey County
California State University,
Monterey Bay
From Salinas to Del Rey Oaks:
- Highway 68
From California State University,
Monterey Bay to Highway 68:
- Inter-Garrison Road
- Reservation Road
From Salinas to Del Rey
Oaks:
- South Salinas
- Toro County Park
- San Benancio
- Corral de Tierra
- Fort Ord National
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
36 | P a g e
Monument
- Laguna Seca
- Ryan Ranch
From California State
University, Monterey Bay
to Highway 68:
- California State
University,
Monterey Bay
- East Garrison
- Fort Ord National
Monument
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
37 | P a g e
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
38 | P a g e
South County Routes
Route Miles Underlying Jurisdictions Street Network Destinations & Points of Interest
Marina – Greenfield via
Reservation Road and River
Road

49.31 City of Marina
Monterey County
Caltrans
City of Gonzales
City of Greenfield
From North to South:

Marina/South Salinas Area:
- Reservation Road
- River Road
Chualar Area:
- Chualar River Road
- River Road
Gonzales Area:
- Gonzales River Road
- River Road
Soledad/Greenfield Area:
- Fort Romie Road
- Arroyo Seco Road
- Thorne Road
- El Camino Real
- Elm Avenue
From North to South:
- Marina Library
- Marina Shopping
- UC MBEST
- East Garrison
- Chualar
- Gonzales
- Soledad Mission
- Downtown
Greenfield
Salinas – King City/San Ardo 65.31 City of Salinas
Monterey County
City of Gonzales
City of Soledad
King City
From North to South:

Salinas Area:
- Natividad Road
- Old Stage Road
- Alisal Road
- Old Stage Road
From North to South:

Salinas Area:
- Natividad Hospital
- Rancho Cielo
- Hartnell College
Alisal Campus
- Old Stage Road
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
39 | P a g e
Chualar/Gonzales Area:
- Chualar River Road
- Payson Street
- Grant Street
- Chualar Road
- Foletta Road
- Alta Street (Old US
Highway 101)
- Tavernetti Road
- Gonzales River Road
Soledad Area*:
- Pending Soledad frontage
roads
- Front Street
- Monterey Street
- East Street
- Metz Road
- Metz-Soledad Road
King City Area:
- Metz-King City Road
- 1
st Street
- Mesa Verde Road
- Wildhorse Road
- Cattleman Road
South County:
- Chualar
- Gonzales
- Downtown
Gonzales
- Gonzales City Hall
- Soledad
- Downtown Soledad
- Soledad City Hall
- YMCA
- King City
- Downtown King
City
- San Lucas
- San Ardo
Carmel Valley – Greenfield 55.52 Monterey County North to South:
- Bike path parallel to
Highway 1 between Rio
Road & Carmel Valley
Road
- West Carmel Valley Road
Carmel Area:
- Carmel Mission
- Carmel Valley
Shopping
- Garland Ranch
Regional Park
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
40 | P a g e
- Laureles Grade Road
(connection to Highway
68)
- East Carmel Valley Road
- Arroyo Seco Road
- Carmel Valley
- Los Padres National
Forest
- Greenfield
Soledad – Pinnacles 9.31 City of Soledad
Caltrans
West to East:
- Metz Road
- Shirtail Canyon Road
- Soledad
- Pinnacles National
Park

Appendix B – Draft Conceptual Designs
MONTEREY COUNTY BIKE & PEDESTRIAN WAYFINDING SIGN DESIGN | CONCEPT DESIGN | 07.31.15 | ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN

WAYFINDING CONCEPT DESIGN
This package presents concept designs for bicycle and pedestrian wayfinding signs and bike map. The concepts build upon the guidance provided by Transit Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee and TAMC staff.

COMMON ELEMENTS FOR SIGN CONCEPTS:

Ū Based on the preferred “Mountains to Sea” color palette Ū Provide guidance for implementing a cohesive County-wide sign system while providing flexibility for local jurisdictions to choose wayfinding elements that fit within the local community context.

Ū Provide opportunities to incorporate City names and logos on sign elements Ū Provide for 2” minimum font height for destination names on signs to be read when bicyclists are in motion.

SIGN CONCEPT OVERVIEW:

MOUNTAINS TO SEA COLOR PALETTES

WAYFINDING CONCEPT DESIGN
Elements within each concept can be combined to form a preferred option. 1- EXPLORE MONTEREY COUNTY - MODERN CONTEMPORARY
Ū “Explore Monterey County” by walking and biking logo developed as a unifying theme. Directional signs compare to options 2 and 3 on the CAMUTCD spectrum. 2- EXPLORE MONTEREY COUNTY - GROUNDED CONTEMPORARY
Ū A compass rose icon used as a unifiying theme. Unique colors identify County identified bike routes. Directional signs compare to options 2 and 3 on the CAMUTCD spectrum.
3- MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL ICONS
Ū Features four icons representing the coast, the mountains, vineyards and agricultural lands. Directional sign options compare to option 1 on the CAMUTCD spectrum (FHWA approved). Sign toppers highlight County and local branding. 10’
11’
12’
9’
8’
7’
6’
5’
4’
3’
1’
2’

EXPLORE MONTEREY COUNTY

MODERN CONTEMPORARY
Destination I
Milage Time in Mins
Milage Time in Mins
Milage Time in Mins
Destination II
Destination III
Fort Ord Loop
SALINAS 1/2
3 2

MILECOASTAL PATH

10.5 SALINAS

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
Destination I
Milage Time in Mins
Milage Time in Mins
Milage Time in Mins
Destination II
Destination III

FORT ORD LOOP

SALINAS

SALINAS
E��l��
E��l��
E��l��
E��l��
E��l��
Duis aute irure
Duis aute irure
Walk from here
2 mins walk
Lorem ipsum dolor
Lorem ipsum dolor
2 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Duis aute irure
Duis aute irure
Ride your bike from here
2 mins walk
Lorem ipsum dolor
Lorem ipsum dolor
2 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
E��l��

SALINAS

SALINAS
E��l��

SALINAS
1 MONTEREY COUNTY BIKE & PEDESTRIAN WAYFINDING SIGN DESIGN | CONCEPT DESIGN | 07.31.15 | ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN

EXPLORE MONTEREY COUNTY - MODERN CONTEMPORARY
The contemporary concepts take a modern approach using brushed stainless steel, concrete and painted metal. An “Explore Monterey County” logo has been drafted as a way to tie together the County Routes.

CAST CONCRETE

BASE WITH

ETCHED CITY
SEAL

DESTINATION NAME,

MILAGE AND TIME IN

MINUTES

PAINTED ACRYLIC

MAP PANEL

LIST OF LOCAL

DESTINATIONS

WITH DISTANCES

AND TRAVEL TIMES
LOCAL

INFORMATION

PAINTED

GALVANIZED

STEEL POST

VINYL DECAL

GATEWAY

MONUMENT DIRECTIONAL SIGN TRAIL POST SIGN TOPPER

BRUSHED

STAINLESS
STEEL
CAST

MONOLITHIC

CONCTRETE
POWDERCOATED SHEET
METAL

PRIMARY

MATERIALS

WEATHERVANE

NAVIGATIONAL

ELEMENT
ROUTE
NAME
CUSTOM
PLAQUE

OPTIONS
PLAQUE

OPTIONS
VINYAL
COATED
POLE

GREEN AND WHITE

OPTION WITH CITY

NAME AND SEAL
10’
11’
12’
9’
8’
7’
6’
5’
4’
3’
1’
2’

EXPLORE MONTEREY COUNTY

OLD WORLD CONTEMPORARY
Destination I
Milage Time in Mins
Milage Time in Mins
Milage Time in Mins
Destination II
Destination III

FORT ORD LOOP

SALINAS
Destination
Destination
Road Name
Destination I
Mileage Time in Mins
Mileage Time in Mins
Destination II
Destination III

FORT ORD LOOP
MILE

10.5 E��l��
SALINAS E��l��

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

SALINAS

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
E��l��
SALINAS E��l��
N
S
W
E
Fort Ord Loop

FORT ORD LOOP

FORT ORD LOOP
2 MONTEREY COUNTY BIKE & PEDESTRIAN WAYFINDING SIGN DESIGN | CONCEPT DESIGN | 07.31.15 | ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN The Grounded Contemporary concept has a warmer approach featuring a compass rose theme pairing clean lines with the rough, tactile texture of corten steel.

EXPLORE MONTEREY COUNTY - GROUNDED CONTEMPORARY

CORTEN STEEL

PAINTED

ALUMINUM
CAST

CONCRETE

PRIMARY

MATERIALS

GATEWAY

MONUMENT DIRECTIONAL SIGN TRAIL POST SIGN TOPPER
CAST

CONCRETE
BASE

LASER CUT

CORTEN STEEL
PANEL

LASER CUT

CORTEN STEEL
PANEL

PRINTED ACRYLIC

MAP PANEL

DESTINATION NAME,

MILAGE AND TIME IN

MINUTES

ROUTE NAME

WITH COLOR
PLAQUE

COLOR TO

MATCH ROUTE
NAME

ALTERNATIVE

SIGN TOPPER

DESIGNS

OPPORTUNITY FOR

UNIQUE COLOR TO BRAND

COUNTY IDENTIFIED

ROUTES, CORESPONDS

WITH BIKE MAP
10’
11’
12’
9’
8’
7’
6’
5’
4’
3’
1’
2’
Coast
Mountains
Agriculture
Vineyards

VINEYARD BIKE ROUTE

VINEYARD BIKE ROUTE
1/2
3 2
Destination II
Destination I
Destination III
1/2
3 2
Destination II
Destination I
Destination III

CARMEL VALLEY

CARMEL VALLEY CARMEL VALLEY
1/2
3 2
Destination II
Destination I
Destination III
1/2
3 2
Destination II
Destination I
Destination III

COASTAL PATH
MILE

10.5 MONTEREY
COUNTY

REGIONS

CARMEL VALLEY

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK

CARMEL VALLEY
E��l��
Duis aute irure
Duis aute irure
Walk from here
2 mins walk
Lorem ipsum dolor
Lorem ipsum dolor
2 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk

CARMEL VALLEY
3 MONTEREY COUNTY BIKE & PEDESTRIAN WAYFINDING SIGN DESIGN | CONCEPT DESIGN | 07.31.15 | ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN The Regional Icon concept features iconic elements representing the main regions of Monterey County; the coast, the mountains, vineyards, and agricultural lands.

MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL ICONS

PAINTED

METAL, TBD

WOOD OR

RECYCLED
LUMBER

PRIMARY

MATERIALS

GATEWAY

MONUMENT DIRECTIONAL SIGN TRAIL POST SIGN TOPPER

FHWA APPROVED MUCTD

MODIFIED BICYCLE

DESTINATION SIGN

CAMUCTD BICYCLE

DESTINATION SIGN

EXAMPLE ICONS

FOR COASTAL,

AGRICULTURE AND

MOUNTAINOUS AREAS

JET CUT ALUMINUM PLATE,

ALTERNATIVE MATERIALS AND

COLORS POSSIBLE

WOOD OR

RECYCLED

LUMBER POST

ALUMINUM
PLAQUE

OPTION FOR UNIQUE

COLOR PLAQUE TO MATCH

BIKE ROUTE

OPTION FOR UNIQUE

COLOR VINYL DECAL

JET CUT

ALUMINUM PLATE,

PAINTED
LOCAL

INFORMATION

VINYL DISTRICT/

TRAIL MAP
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
47 | P a g e
Appendix C – Final Wayfinding Sign Designs and Placement Scenarios

BIKE & PEDESTRIAN WAYFINDING SIGN DESIGN
Monterey County
MARCH 2016
MONTEREY COUNTY BIKE & PEDESTRIAN WAYFINDING SIGN DESIGN | MARCH 2016 | ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN

WAYFINDING CONCEPT DESIGN
This package presents preferred concept designs for regional bicycle and pedestrian wayfinding signs. Through a public engagement process led by the Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) and a series of work sessions with the TAMC Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee a final design was developed that is a reflection of the County’s community assets. Standards, unique branding, visibility, and cost were considered when developing and finalizing the sign family. This suite of options is both durable and flexible. It uses materials that resist the natural elements and deter vandalism. In addition, this design considers modular components that may be fabricated and maintained by City facilities staff.

The “Explore Monterey County” theme draws upon the environment that makes Monterey County unique; the mountains, agriculture, vineyards, and the sea. A mountains to sea color palette was selected to highlight these assets. The signage family provides guidance for implementing a cohesive county-wide sign system while providing flexibility for local jurisdictions to choose wayfinding elements that fit within the local community context. The family also provides opportunities to incorporate City names and logos on sign elements.

WAYFINDING CONCEPT DESIGN
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
MARINA
1 MILES 20 MIN
2 MILES
3 MILES
40 MIN
18 MIN 120 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
Duis aute irure
Duis aute irure
Walk from here
2 mins walk
Lorem ipsum dolor
Lorem ipsum dolor
2 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Duis aute irure
Duis aute irure
Ride your bike from here
2 mins walk
Lorem ipsum dolor
Lorem ipsum dolor
2 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
SALINAS E��l��

SALINAS
E��l��

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
E��l��

SALINAS
FONTS
Direction Sign Typography
Kiosk Typography
Sign Topper Design Kiosk Topper Design Compass Design
Kiosk Destination Distance Typography
Sign faces to be retroflective for low light and nighttime visibility.

ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
1234567890

HIGHWAY GOTHIC
COLOR
COLOR
KIOSK OPTION 2
KIOSK OPTION 1

GREEN/WHITE

LASER CUT

GREEN/WHITE

HIGHWAY GOTHIC EXPANDED
UNIVERS LT STD 59 ULTRA CONDENSED
Font: Segoe Script

ARTWORK

SALINAS

GRAPHIC STANDARDS
COLORS
C=11 M=46 Y=99 K=1
C=61 M=24 Y=72 K=4
C=72 M=42 Y=100 K=35
C=63 M=27 Y=0 K=0
C=88 M=59 Y=22 K=4
1 10’
11’
12’
9’
8’
7’
6’
5’
4’
3’
1’
2’

EXPLORE MONTEREY COUNTY

DESTINATION SIGNS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
MARINA
1 MILES 20 MIN
2 MILES
3 MILES
40 MIN
18 MIN 120 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SOLEDAD
1 MILES
2 MILES
3 MILES 18 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN

SALINAS
16”
4”
22”
22”
24”
4”
24”
8”
33”
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
1 2.5
3 SALINAS
2 WAYFINDING SIGNS
Direction Signs and Confirmation Signs
The concepts below provide modular components to provide flexibility for the various jurisdictions in the County while maintaining consistency along County routes. Two sign topper designs have options for a full color or a green and white topper. Direction and confirmation sign “1” uses CAMUTCD standard bike guide sign plaques. Direction signs “2A” and “2B” use a modified CAMUTCD guide sign where city name, distance, and travel time to destinations is provided.

Description
Destination signs inform people riding bikes or walking of the designated regional route to access key destinations. The signs mark the junction of two or more regional bikeways or pedestrian routes. Each sign has space for a maximum of three destinations. Travel times for bicycles and pedestrians are optional but recommended.

Confirmation signs indicate to people walking and riding bikes that they are on a designated County Route.

Placement
Direction signs are to be placed on the near-side of intersections in advance of a junction with another bicycle or pedestrian route. They can also be placed along a route to indicate a nearby destination.

Sign toppers can be placed along a route to provide supporting confirmation to users that they are on a County route.

Confirmation sign 1 (D1-3) can be used in conjunction with Direction sign 1 (D1-3A).

Sign Details
Ū All signs are 2’ wide with bottom of sign 7’ from the ground.

Ū Destination text to be 2” minimum height and distance letter height to be 1.25” minimum height.

Ū All lettering and symbols to be retroreflective.

Ū Aluminum sign panel, 1/4” corner radius, typical.

Ū Front of sign to be screened, all exposed surfaces to be painted.

Ū A casual pace travel time of 6 minutes per mile (10 mph) should be used for bicyclist time estimates and 20 minutes per mile (3 mph) for pedestrian time estimates.

DESTINATION

NAME, MILEAGE

AND TIME IN

MINUTES FOR

BIKES AND

PEDESTRIANS

FOR USE ALONG

SHARED-USE PATHS

OR BIKE & PEDESTRIAN

CORRIDORS

FOR USE ALONG

BIKE ROUTES

DESTINATION

NAME, MILEAGE

AND TIME IN

MINUTES FOR
BIKES
SIGN TOPPER 1A:

COLOR
OPTION 1 OPTION 2
SIGN TOPPER 2A:

COLOR
SIGN TOPPER 1B:

GREEN & WHITE
SIGN TOPPER 2B:

GREEN & WHITE
SIGN TOPPER 1A:

COLOR
DIRECTION SIGN 1:

CAMUTCD D1-3
DIRECTION SIGN 2A:

MODIFIED CAMUTCD
DIRECTION SIGN 2B:

MODIFIED CAMUTCD
CONFIRMATION SIGN:

CAMUTCD D11-1
CONFIRMATION SIGN 1:

CAMUTCD D1-3A

COMMUNITY

NAME ON

SIGN TOPPER

ALLOWS GUIDE

SIGN TO BE

CA MUTCD

STANDARD
SIGN

CA MUTCD

STANDARD

BIKE GUIDE

SIGN OPTION
10’
11’
12’
9’
8’
7’
6’
5’
4’
3’
1’
2’

EXPLORE MONTEREY COUNTY

PEDSTRIAN KIOSK OPTIONS

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

SALINAS SALINAS
Duis aute irure
Duis aute irure
Walk from here
2 mins walk
Lorem ipsum dolor
Lorem ipsum dolor
2 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Duis aute irure
Duis aute irure
Ride your bike from here
2 mins walk
Lorem ipsum dolor
Lorem ipsum dolor
2 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk
Ad minim veniamt 5 mins walk
5 mins walk

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK

SALINAS

SALINAS
6”
E��l�� E��l��
E��l�� SALINAS E��l��
8’-0”
3’-10”
26”
7’-6”
1’-6”
3”
4”
8”
6”
1’-0”
1’-10”
2’-1”
6”
6”
6’-9”
1’-0”
1’-3”
25” 26”
16”
2 WAYFINDING SIGNS
Description
Pedestrian Kiosks are freestanding two-sided information displays that orient users to Monterey County’s regional bicycle and pedestrian routes. Kiosks provide regional and local maps, destinations, rules of use, and safety information. A detailed map should show the local district or trail, indicating “you are here”, highlight major/minor access points, landmarks, restrooms and other trail and on-street bikeway networks.

The kiosk could provide additional information on local destinations within a 5 minute ride or 10 minute walk from the current location. The kiosk is also an opportunity to illustrate ecological, historical or cultural interpretive information of the local area.

Placement
Kiosks can be located at trailheads, trail access points and selected public gathering spaces. The Kiosk should be setback from the path a minimum of 3 feet to provide space for people to read and consider the information without blocking the trail. A minimum of 3 feet should also be provided for each side of the mapboard per accessibility guidelines.

Sign Details
Design material options available for the Kiosks detailed below:

Pedestrian Kiosk
Two kiosk options showcase the look of corten steel (or faux corten steel finish) and painted aluminum. Jurisdictions can select the preferred material based on the proposed location of the kiosk.

KIOSK 1

SIDE FRONT BACK SIDE FRONT BACK
KIOSK 2

CAST CONCRETE BASE

WITH STAMPED COMPASS

ROSE ORIENTED NORTH
LOGO

LOGO CITY/TRAIL
NAME

REPLACEABLE

LOCAL MAP

PRINTED ACRYLIC

ON ALUMINUM PANEL REGIONAL

BIKE MAP

INTERPRETIVE
INFO
CITY/
TRAIL
NAME
TRAIL/
CITY
INFO
CITY
LOGO/
SEAL

LASER CUT

CORTEN STEEL
PANEL

DESTINATION

BIKE DISTANCE/
TIME
TRAIL/

CITY INFO

DESTINATION
WALK

DISTANCE/TIME

LOCAL MAP

DESTINATION WALK

DISTANCE/TIME

DESTINATION BIKE

DISTANCE/TIME
Corten Steel Faux Corten
Steel Finish
Painted Aluminum
PROS • Strong, durable material.
• Capable of conveying a
warm, natural feel as well as
longevity and permanence
• Unique custom shapes
possible
• Low maintenance
• Strong,
durable
material
• Lightweight
• Less expensive
than corten
• Strong, durable
material
• Lightweight
• Less expensive than
corten
• Low maintenance
CONS • Unpredictable weathering
process
• Rust may run and stain
adjacent surfaces
• Visibility of cut-out style
can be compromised
depending on the background
environment
• Highest cost
• Quality of faux
finish may not
compare to
Corten
• Lacks warm, natural
feel
10’
11’
12’
9’
8’
7’
6’
5’
4’
3’
1’
2’

EXPLORE MONTEREY COUNTY

POST OPTIONS
MILE

10.5 SALINAS
E��l��
1’-6”

CLEARANCE
FROM
BOTTOM
4’-6”
10” 10”
Drinking
Water
Information
First Aid
Telephone
Picnic Site
Restaurant/
Food
Restrooms
Campground
Pets on Leash
Horse Trail
Wildlife
Viewing

DIGITAL VINYL

DESTINATION

ICON AND
ARROW

CITY OR

TRAIL NAME

DIGITAL VINYL

MILE MARKER
10” X 10” ALUMINUM

POST PAINTED BLUE

DIGITAL VINYL
LOGO
2 WAYFINDING SIGNS
Description
Pedestrian directional posts provide en route reassurance of trail identity and inform users they are on the designated regional route. They display the “Explore Monterey County” brand and trail name. The pedestrian directional posts also provide space for supplemental directional arrows to help users stay on the identified regional route.

Pedestrian directional posts can also serve as mile markers. Mile markers are a small feature with large significance and are an important element of wayfinding along pathways. They allow users to track how far they have traveled and help people put their location in context by matching the marker to a map. Most trail users identify strongly with distance from home, distance from their favorite place, or simply with knowing a certain location based on its relationship to a mile point.

Knowing one’s location on a trail is critical to assisting emergency responders trying to locate a person in distress. Mile markers could also be provided as a pavement marking.

Placement
Place pedestrian directional posts at minor pathway access points, intersections with other trails or when a direction sign is not used and at locations where the route is not explicit. Mile markers should be located at half to two mile intervals along the corridor.

Sign Details
Ū Painted Aluminum with digital vinyl icons and lettering Pedestrian Directional Post

FRONT SIDE OPTIONAL ICONS
3 SIGN PLACEMENT
The Monterey County wayfinding elements should be
located in a consistent manner across all jurisdictions.

The following diagrams represent typical sign placement scenarios seen throughout Monterey County.
• Downtown Pedestrian / Bike Route Intersection
• On-Street Bike Route
• On-Street Shared-Use Path Connection
• Shared-Use Path Intersection
Per both the CA MUTCD and the California Highway
Design Manual, the nearest edge of any sign should be
a minimum of two feet from the edge of the shareduse path, 3 feet preferred. The lowest sign edge shall be seven feet. Follow local agency design standards for on-street signs.

Sign Placement

BIKE ROUTE

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

DESTINATION
K
C
D
C
C
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
Downtown Pedestrian/Bike Route Intersection
K- Kiosk
In downtown pedestrian areas, kiosks
should be placed in selected public
gathering spaces along regional
routes. It is an opportunity to display
the Monterey County map and
interpretive information.

D- Direction Signs
Direction signs should be placed
advance of turns to local destinations
and services.

C- Confirmation Signs
Confirmation signs indicate to
bicyclists that they are on a
designated bikeway. They can be
placed every 2 to 3 blocks along
regional bike routes. They should be
placed soon after turns to confirm
the intended direction was taken.

The “Explore Monterey County” sign
topper can be used as a confirmation
sign. Confirmation sign 1 (D1-3a) can
be used in conjunction with direction
sign 1 (D1-3).

SIGN PLACEMENT 3
D- Direction Signs
Direction signs should be placed in
advance of turns to local destinations
and services.

On-Street Bike Route

BIKE ROUTE

BIKE ROUTE
On-Street Connection
D
D
D
D C
C
C
C
C
*Refer to California MUTCD Chapter 9B for current
setback requirements for signs from intersections.

Type Sign Type Design Standards Placement
Confirmation
Sign
Ū Explore Monterey
County Sign Topper
Ū Monterey County
Confirmation Sign 1:

CA MUTCD D1-3a
(destinations with
mileage)
Ū Opportunities to add
Explore Monterey County
sign topper to existing bike
and pedestrian signs where
appropriate.

Ū One sign per ¼ directional
mile (mid-block) and
at the far side of key
intersections
Decision Signs Ū Direction Sign 1:

CAMUTCD D1-3
(destinations with
arrow)
Ū Monterey County
Direction Sign 2A
and 2B: Modified

CAMUTCD
Ū Maximum of three
destinations per plaque
Ū Destinations shall use upper
case and lower case letters
Ū For destination names
that do not fit on one line
abbreviations or two-line
entry may be used
Ū Destinations shall be listed
by closest proximity to the
sign placement
Ū Left and straight arrows shall
be aligned left on the sign;
right arrows shall be aligned
to the right
Ū Signs should be placed the
at the following distances
before an intersection
depending on the number
of lanes a bicyclist must
travel across in order to
initiate a legal left turn:

Ū 25 feet before a zero lane
merge
Ū 100 feet before a one
lane merge
Ū 200 feet before a two
lane merge
C- Confirmation Signs
Confirmation signs indicate to
bicyclists that they are on a
designated bikeway. They can be
placed every 2 to 3 blocks along
regional bike routes. They should
be placed soon after turns to
The typical pattern for on-street wayfinding signs includes a direction sign prior to the intersection of route options, followed by an optional confirmation sign. The table below provides design and placement standards for the on-street bikeway sign types. confirm the intended direction was
taken. The “Explore Monterey
County” sign topper can be used as a
confirmation sign. Confirmation sign
1 (D1-3a) can be used in conjunction
with direction sign 1 (D1-3).

SIGN PLACEMENT
On-Street Shared-Use Path Connection STOP
STOP
100' Min.
100' Min.

SB = Street Banner
I= Arrival Identity
K = Trailhead Kiosk
M = Mapboard
D= Direction Sign
C= Conrmation Marker
G-1 = On-Street Guide
Conrmations
G-2= Turn Sign
G-3= Decision Sign
SS= Street Sign
On-Street Connection
P
D
D
P
D
D
D
D
D
K
D
STOP
STOP
D
D
D
D
D D
At-Grade Crossing & Trail Intersection
K
P
P
P
P
P
Shared-Use Path Intersection
K- Kiosk
Place kiosks at access points of shared-use
paths. It is an opportunity to display the
Monterey County map and interpretive
information.

D- Direction Signs
Direction signs should be placed advance of
turns to local destinations and services.

P- Pedestrian Directional Post
Posts reinforce the identity and direction
along a shared-use path.

K- Kiosk
Place kiosks at the intersection of connecting shareduse paths. It is an opportunity to display the Monterey County map and interpretive information.

D- Direction Signs
Direction signs should be placed advance of turns to
local destinations and services.

P- Pedestrian Directional Post
Posts reinforce the identity and direction along a
shared-use path.
3 YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
MARINA
1 MILES 20 MIN
2 MILES
3 MILES
40 MIN
18 MIN 120 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SOLEDAD
1 MILES
2 MILES
3 MILES 18 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
SALINAS E��l��

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
E��l��

SALINAS
SALINAS E��l��
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
1 2.5
3 YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
MARINA
1 MILES 20 MIN
2 MILES
3 MILES
40 MIN
18 MIN 120 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SOLEDAD
1 MILES
2 MILES
3 MILES 18 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
SALINAS E��l��

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
E��l��

SALINAS E
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
1 2.5
3 YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
MARINA
1 MILES 20 MIN
2 MILES
3 MILES
40 MIN
18 MIN 120 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SOLEDAD
1 MILES
2 MILES
3 MILES 18 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
SALINAS E��l��

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
E��l��

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
1 2.5
3 YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

DESTINATION
DESTI

DESTINATION

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
MARINA
1 MILES 20 MIN
2 MILES
3 MILES
40 MIN
18 MIN 120 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SOLEDAD
1 MILES
2 MILES
3 MILES 18 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
SALINAS E��l�

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
E��l��

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III
1 2.5
3 Destination Sign
Option 1A
Destination Sign
Option 1B
Destination Sign
Option 2A
Destination Sign
Option 2B
COST ESTIMATES 4
Topper Only
$68.00
Sign Face Only
$90.00
Total Sign Only
$.00
Topper Only
$64.00
Sign Face Only
$90.00
Total Sign Only
$4.00
Topper Only
$58.00
Sign Face Only
$105.00
Total Sign Only
$.00
Topper Only
$56.00
Sign Face Only
$101.00
Total Sign Only
$.00
Note: This total does not include costs for installation.

Installation cost will vary depending
on pole hardware, need for concrete footer and use of
a third-party contrator or local jurisdiction staff.

April 2016 cost estimate provided by
AD/S COMPANIES www.ad-s.com

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

SALINAS
ation I
ation II
on III
DAD
N
2 MIN
6 MIN
SALINAS E��l��

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
E��l��

SALINAS
E��l��

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

SALINAS
Destination I
Destination II
stination III

SOLEDAD
MILES
MILES
ES 18 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
SALINAS E��l��

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
E��l��

SALINAS
E��l��

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

SALINAS
tination I
tination II
ation III
ARINA
S 20 MIN
S
40 MIN
18 MIN 120 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
Destination I
Destination II
Destination III

SOLEDAD
1 MILES
2 MILES
3 MILES 18 MIN
12 MIN
6 MIN
SALINAS E��l��

SALINAS
ARTS

DISTRICT

YOU ARE HERE STREET NAME

STREET NAME

DESTINATION

STREET NAME
5 MINUTE WALK
E��l��

SALINAS
E��l��
Kiosk Option 1 Kiosk Option 2 Pedestrian
Directional Post
COST ESTIMATES 4
Total Cost
$2,350.00
Total Cost
$6,350.00
Corten Steel
$6,850.00
Faux Corten Steel
$5,700.00
Note: Singular item pricing.

April 2016 cost estimate provided by
AD/S COMPANIES www.ad-s.com
Regional Bicycle & Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County May 2016
59 | P a g e
Appendix D – Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 2\Minutes_Meeting 1_AG.docx
Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee
Tuesday, February 10, 2015
1:35 p.m. – 2:35 p.m.

Call in: (760)569-0800 Participant Code:580128#
Transportation Agency for Monterey County—Conference Room 55-B Plaza Circle, Salinas, CA 93901-2902

1. Welcome & Introductions
Committee members present:

Eric Peterson Fort Ord Friends Trails, and Pedal Alpini Lisa Rheinheimmer Monterey-Salinas Transit
D.L. Johnson TAMC Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Advisory Committee
Jeanette Pantoja Building Healthy Communities
Eliza Yu Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
Bill Boosman Velo Club Monterey
James Serrano City of Salinas
Justin Meek City of Marina
Krista Hanni Monterey County Health Department
Daniel Gho (by phone) City of Pacific Grove
Kevin Cole (by phone) Pebble Beach
Brent Slama (by phone) City of Soledad
Todd Bodem (by phone) City of Sand City
Ryan Chapman (by phone) County of Monterey Public Works Andrea Renny (small group meeting February
10, 2015)
City of Monterey
Bernard Green (small group meeting February
10, 2015)
California State University, Monterey Bay
TAMC staff present:

Debbie Hale, Executive Director Todd Muck, Deputy Executive Director Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner
Others present:

Cory Caletti (by phone) Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission
P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 2\Minutes_Meeting 1_AG.docx

2. Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee Purpose Pages 1-4 Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, reviewed the purpose of the ad-hoc Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee. Ms. Murillo noted that the purpose of the Committee is to assist staff with the development of the Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Wayfinding Plan that will provide standard guidelines for bicycle and pedestrian wayfinding signage throughout Monterey County.

She noted that Committee members are expected to provide input on the content of the plan, the content of the wayfinding sign design and will assist staff in soliciting public input. Ms. Murillo also reviewed the Committee meeting schedule, noting that the committee is expected to meet biweekly from February to June.

In our small group meeting on Friday, February 10th, Committee member Andrea Renny suggested that as part of our Wayfinding Plan implementation strategies we look into using business improvement district funding for sign installation, and mentioned that we adhere to the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices guidelines on signage font sizes and signage placement.

3. Overview of Wayfinding Sign Programs Presentation
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, presented an overview of wayfinding sign programs, including examples of gateway and directional signage, and reviewed the goals and timeline of the Wayfinding Plan.

Questions from the committee members:
 Will on-pavement markings be included in the plan? - Yes  Will there be a bike map that reflects the routes? - Yes There was difficulty setting up the telephone for conference calling, and participants were connected at approximately 1:45pm. The Committee had a second round of introductions, and Ms. Murillo quickly reviewed the committee purpose and wayfinding sign programs.

4. Develop Wayfinding Plan Purpose and Goals Page 5
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, reviewed the draft Wayfinding Plan background, content and goals with the Committee and asked for Committee input.

Committee members offered the following input:
 The advisory committee should develop criteria to identify regional destinations  The Wayfinding Plan should encourage connectivity between communities, and provide connectivity to regional parks and open space, trails, educational institutions, employment centers, transit, park and ride lots and tourist destinations  Signage should: be accessible to people of all literacy levels, be legible for a wide range of users, clear and concise, demonstrate multimodal access, denote difficulty level for trails and ADA access, show where restrooms, bike shops and other bike-supportive amenities are, and have space for a city logo or identifier
 Sign design should be consistent/compatible across jurisdictional boundaries, including into Santa Cruz County and San Benito County
 Signs should be eye-catching as opposed to standard MUTCD signs which blend in P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 2\Minutes_Meeting 1_AG.docx
 Signs should be distributed equitably across the County  Wayfinding signage should also incorporate technology, and be accessible via GPS and online (consider using existing apps/tech such as Strava and Google Multimodal Trip Planner)
 Staff and the Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee should maintain community engagement throughout the process
Committee member Bill Boosman also mentioned that wayfinding should not be restricted to signage, and that maps are also a part of wayfinding. He also mentioned that Map my Ride and Strava are examples of mobile apps that already exist to track routes. Ms. Murillo noted that a part of the Wayfinding Plan will be branding routes. Committee member James Serrano said this was a great idea, and that it is an opportunity for each city to promote its own identity.

In our small group meeting on Friday, February 10th, Committee member Andrea Renny suggested that we clarify that the Wayfinding Plan will “create safer pedestrian and bicyclists facilities by using signage to make routes more visible.”

5. Discussion Items:
a) Stakeholder Outreach
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, noted that staff will begin using MindMixer (http://mindmixer.com/), which is an online public participation tool as an outreach tool to gather Committee and public feedback on the Wayfinding Plan.

Ms. Murillo asked the committee if there are special groups that staff should outreach to.

Committee members recommended that staff reach out to:
 MST’s Mobility Advisory Committee
 Caltrans District 5
 Business groups, such as Chambers of Commerce
 Regional Parks
 State Parks
 Monterey Peninsula College
 Local hospitals
 Monterey Off Road Cycling Association (MORCA)
 South County
In our small group meeting on Friday, February 10th, Committee member Andrea Renny suggested that staff present the draft Wayfinding Plan to city councils to receive feedback. Staff will be adding city council presentations to the Wayfinding Plan project timeline. She also suggested that we use Scribble Maps (http://scribblemaps.com/) as we identify regional routes and sign locations.
b) Site Visits to Identify Sign Locations and Routes
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, noted that staff is interested in doing site visits to gather an inventory of existing signage as part of the planning process. She also noted that there is a free signage inventory iPhone/iPad app called GIS Assets P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 2\Minutes_Meeting 1_AG.docx
(https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/gisassets/id723243246?mt=8) that staff will plan on using as part of the inventory process.

In our small group meeting on Friday, February 10th,Committee member Andrea Renny mentioned that the City of Monterey has an inventory of existing signage along the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail.
c) Meeting Schedule and Location
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, asked if this meeting time works best for everyone. Committee member Eric Peterson said Tuesday afternoon might not be the best time, as that is the Board of Supervisor’s meeting time. Ms. Murillo said that she will be sending out another Doodle poll for the next meeting.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 3\Minutes_Meeting

2.docx
Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee
Thursday, February 26, 2015
10:00a.m. - 11:00a.m.

Call in: (760)569-0800 Participant Code:580128#
Transportation Agency for Monterey County—Conference Room 55-B Plaza Circle, Salinas, CA 93901-2902

1. Welcome & Introductions
Committee members present:

Eric Petersen Fort Ord Friends Trails, and Pedal Alpini Lisa Rheinheimmer Monterey-Salinas Transit
Jeanette Pantoja Building Healthy Communities
Eliza Yu Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
Josh Metz Fort Ord Re-use Authority
Brent Slama (by phone) City of Soledad
Andrea Renny City of Monterey
Bernard Green California State University, Monterey Bay Victoria Beach (by phone) City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
TAMC staff present:

Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation
Planner
Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner
Todd Muck, Deputy Executive Director
Others present:

2. Review Draft February 10, 2015 Meeting Minutes Pages 2-5 The Committee members did not have comments on the draft meeting minutes.

3. Review Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee membership Page 6 Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, noted that in the first meeting a Committee member asked about the membership of the Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee. She noted that the Committee membership list shows which stakeholder groups are represented on the Committee.

4. Finalize Wayfinding Plan Goals and Wayfinding Sign Design Pages 7-10 P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 3\Minutes_Meeting

2.docx
Criteria
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, reviewed the revised draft Wayfinding Plan background, content and goals with the Committee and asked for Committee input.

Committee members offered the following input:
 Wayfinding Sign Design Criteria section goal #2 should include safety language, and indicate the use of symbology for legibility of signage  Wayfinding Sign Design Criteria section goal #4 should include comfort level  Wayfinding Sign Design Criteria section goal #7 should include “When applicable, wayfinding signage will be placed in accordance with the regulatory requirements spelled out in the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices.” Committee member Victoria Beach noted that she really liked the use of symbology, and distance and directional information in the Rochester wayfinding sign example that was shown at the February 10th meeting. Committee member Andrea Renny noted that we should use the wayfinding signage to capitalize on missed opportunities, such as areas of the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail where tourists get lost, and routes such as Monterey to Marina and a route from North Monterey County and Big Sur.

5. Review Bicycle Facilities Classification Handout
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, shared a handout from the City of Emeryville’s Resources for the Design of Bicycle Facilities Manual that outlined and described the three classes of bicycle facilities. She also mentioned that there are now Class IV bicycle facilities, and asked Committee member Bernard Green to share more about the new Class IV facilities. Committee member Bernard Green mentioned that Class IV facilities, also known as cycle tracks are bicycle paths that are protected from traffic. Committee member Eric Petersen expressed his concern about the design.

6. Develop Criteria for:
a) Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Routes
b) Regional Destinations
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, reviewed the draft regional route and destination criteria and asked for Committee input. Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner, reminded the Committee that this is a regional project and the Committee will be asked to think about this project in a regional context. Ms. Green pointed out that some routes will cross through local cities, but noted that this project would not be focused on local city routes. Ms.

Murillo pointed out that because this is a regional project, the regional destinations would include areas like regional parks and colleges.

Committee member Bernard Green mentioned that it is still important to include local routes that continue on to become regional routes. Committee member Jeanette Pantoja mentioned that this would be a great opportunity to include South County routes. Committee member Brent Slama mentioned that a South County wine corridor could be a regional route in South County. Mr.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 3\Minutes_Meeting

2.docx
Slama mentioned that this route would follow River Road and continue on to Metz Trail. Another route he mentioned is the route to the Pinnacles National Monument, which would be along Metz Road. Committee member Victoria Beach noted that it would be interesting to see if the Committee could identify one continuous regional route for Monterey County.

Committee member Josh Metz mentioned that identifying routes is a task that can be efficiently accomplished by the Committee using large maps that identify existing bicycle facilities. Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, noted that this route mapping is a task that staff would like Committee members to complete before our next meeting, which will be a working meeting to identify regional routes.

7. Review Revised Meeting Schedule
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, reviewed the revised meeting schedule with the Committee noting that the Committee would now be meeting monthly. She noted that she expects the Committee to begin meeting biweekly once a design consultant is chosen.

8. Discuss:
a) Route Mapping Activity
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, asked Committee members to use the maps from the Transportation Agency’s 2011 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan to highlight the regional routes. Ms. Murillo mentioned that staff will work on enlarging the regional maps for the next meeting.
b)Meeting Schedule
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, noted that she would be sending out another Doodle Poll to schedule the March meeting.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Minutes\Minutes_Meeting 3_AGedits.docx
Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee
Thursday, March 19, 2015
11:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

Transportation Agency for Monterey County—Conference Room 55-B Plaza Circle, Salinas, CA 93901-2902
Minutes

1. Welcome & Introductions
Committee Members Present
Eliza Yu Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments
Bernard Green California State University, Monterey Bay Victoria Beach City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Justin Meek City of Marina
Brent Slama City of Soledad
Ryan Chapman County of Monterey Public Works
Eric Petersen Fort Ord Recreation Trails Friends, and Pedal Alpini Josh Metz Fort Ord Reuse Authority
Lisa Rheinheimer Monterey-Salinas Transit
TAMC Staff Present
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation
Planner
Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner
Todd Much, Deputy Executive Director

2. Review Draft February 26, 2015 Minutes Pages 2-4
Committee member Victoria Beach noted that she had phoned in for that meeting and was not listed as present. Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, corrected the meeting minutes to reflect this.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Minutes\Minutes_Meeting 3_AGedits.docx

3. MindMixer Training
www.Tamc.MindMixer.com
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, walked the Committee through the Wayfinding Plan MindMixer page. She mentioned that she would like to gather more input from Committee members and from members of the public using the MindMixer page. Committee member Bernard Green noted that the topic is text heavy, and it would be nice to keep the topic short. He also mentioned that it might be best to rename the bike classes so more people can understand the differences between the classes. Ms. Murillo noted she would work on making these changes.

4. Receive Update on Request for Proposals No Enclosure Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, provided an update to the Committee on the Request for Proposals (RFP) for the design of wayfinding signage and the update of the Monterey County bike map. She notified members that the review committee, comprised of Transportation Agency staff and Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee members, chose Alta Planning + Design.

Alta Planning + Design was the most experienced firm and offered additional items, such as cost comparison matrices for signage.

Committee member Josh Metz asked why Committee members were not notified of the RFP’s circulation. Ms. Murillo reported that the RFP had been out for the month of February, and that members of the Committee were invited to review the proposals. Committee member Bernard Green, who was part of the RFP review committee, noted that Alta Planning + Design was the highest ranked firm, and that some of the other proposals did not have as much experience with wayfinding signage for bicyclists and pedestrians. Committee members Lisa Rheinheimer and Victoria Beach mentioned that they have worked with Alta Planning + Design in the past and that they have been content with the firm’s work. Ms. Murillo mentioned that she would email the RFP to Committee member Josh Metz.

5. Review Regional Route Criteria Pages 5-7
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, reminded the Committee about the route criteria noting that routes must be identified in the Transportation Agency’s 2011 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan classified as Class I, II, and III and planned Class I, II, III, and IV facilities.

The routes and destinations must be regional.

6. Identify Activity
i. Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Routes
ii. Regional Destinations
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, asked Committee members to identify regional routes using map handouts that include bicycle facilities routes. Committee member Victoria Beach asked if certain areas of maps could be enlarged to make it easier to see. Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner, mentioned that the map is accessible online and may be found P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Minutes\Minutes_Meeting 3_AGedits.docx
on TAMC’s MindMixer pager (http://tamc.mindmixer.com/). The Committee members spent the rest of the meeting identifying regional bike routes using the maps provided by TAMC staff.

Committee member Victoria Beach asked if staff could map the routes that committee members identified to make it easier for all to collaborate. Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, noted that she would try and consolidate the maps into one map that includes the routes identified by the Committee.

Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, thanked the Committee members for identifying regional routes.

6. Site Visit Sign-ups
There was no time to discuss this.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 5\Minutes_Meeting

4.docx
Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee
Thursday, April 23, 2015
10:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m.

Call in: (760)569-0800 Participant Code:580128#
*DIFFERENT LOCATION: City of Monterey—Orca Room
735 Pacific Street, Monterey
AGENDA

1. Welcome & Introductions
Committee Members Present
Victoria Beach City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Ryan Chapman County of Monterey
Kevin Cole Pebble Beach
Andrea Renny City of Monterey
Josh Metz Fort Ord Reuse Authority
Eric Petersen Fort Ord Recreation Trails Friends, and Pedal Alpini Lisa Rheinheimmer Monterey-Salinas Transit
Krista Hanni (by phone) Monterey County Health Department Brent Slama City of Soledad
Staff Present
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation
Planner
Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner

2. Review Draft March 19,2015 Minutes Pages 2-4
There were no comments on the March 19th meeting minutes.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 5\Minutes_Meeting

4.docx

3. Update on Consultant Timeline No Enclosure
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, provided an update on Alta Planning + Design’s timeline, noting that the project is expected to wrap up in September. Ms. Murillo noted that the Committee would likely meet during the week of May 18th to discuss the theme for the wayfinding signage, and that Alta Planning + Design would create draft designs based on the preferred theme during the month of June.

4. Regional Bicycle and Pedestrian Routes and Destinations Activity a) Review Routes from March 19th Meeting
b) Discuss Route Limits: Length and Connectivity
c) Discuss Destinations
d) Discuss Route Branding
Ms. Murillo demonstrated the combined regional routes based on the Committee’s route map exercise activity. She asked the Committee for input on the preliminary routes, noting that there are route length and connectivity limitations. Committee members provided the following input:

Peninsula Routes:
 Include connection along Casa Verde Way in Monterey to connect the Peninsula Cities Route to the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail
 Scenic Road in Carmel-by-the-Sea is one way, so consider adding a parallel route, such as San Antonio Street or Carmelo Street
 17 Mile Drive in Pebble Beach is narrow and may not be suitable for all riders but is one of the few routes between Pebble Beach and Carmel.
 Tehama Road is a private road, so there is no connection between Carmel Valley and the Peninsula through Tehama Road
 Include route from Sand City to Seaside that connects to the Monterey Bay Sanctuary Scenic Trail
 Include a connection to Fort Ord via Ryan Ranch and South Boundary Road North County – Salinas Routes:
 Include a connection from Castroville to North Salinas via Espinosa Road  Connect the Prunedale-Salinas Route to San Miguel Canyon Road north of Prunedale  Consider a North Main Street Route in Salinas, as an alternative to taking Russell Road and San Juan Grade Road
 Include a connection from East Boronda Road to Old Stage Road via Natividad Road South County Routes:
 Prioritize River Road as a regional South County route Ms. Murillo mentioned that she received a comment requesting the consideration of a regional P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 5\Minutes_Meeting

4.docx
route connecting the Soledad Mission to the San Antonio Mission. The Committee asked about connectivity to Pinnacles National Park from King City. Committee Member Ryan Chapman said he would look into which roads are County maintained roads in South County, which can help the Committee identify the most appropriate route for this connection. Committee Member Victoria Beach mentioned that the Big Sur Land Trust is planning an access point between Carmel and Palo Corona Regional Park as part of the Carmel River FREE project.

Committee Member Kevin Cole said he would be willing to do some reconnaissance work along the 17 Mile Drive route, and asked staff to look into apps, such as Map my Ride, that could help with this task. Committee Member Cole said it would be worthwhile for the Committee to take a ride on the suggested regional routes to get a better sense of their feasibility. Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner, and Ms. Murillo noted that staff would brainstorm and research some apps that might be appropriate for this and would send out more information to the Committee.

Ms. Murillo also noted that the regional routes map is accessible online through the MindMixer site.
1 Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee
Thursday, June 4, 2015
1:30p.m. – 3:00 p.m.

Call in: (760)569-0800 Participant Code:580128#
Transportation Agency for Monterey County —Conference Room 55-B Plaza Circle, Salinas

MINUTES

1. Welcome & Introductions
Committee Members Present
Kevin Cole Pebble Beach
Andrea Renny City of Monterey
Josh Metz Fort Ord Reuse Authority
Eric Petersen Fort Ord Recreation Trails Friends, and Pedal Alpini D.L. Johnson TAMC Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee
Justin Meek City of Marina
Brent Slama City of Soledad
Staff Present
Debbie Hale, Executive Director Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner Todd Muck, Deputy Executive Director Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner Others Present:

Jerry Landesman Mary Stewart, Alta Planning + Design
Linda Petersen (by phone) Emily Duchon, Alta Planning + Design 2 2. Review Draft April 23, 2015 Minutes
There were no comments on the April 23rd meeting minutes.

4. Wayfinding Visioning Exercise Activity
a) Project Overview
b) Introduction to Wayfinding
c) Wayfinding Strategy (Facilitated Discussion)
d) Wayfinding System (Breakout Exercise)
e) Next Steps
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, introduced Mary Stewart and Emily Duchon, the wayfinding sign design consultants from Alta Planning + Design’s. Ms. Duchon provided a project overview, and discussed wayfinding principles with the Committee. Ms. Duchon and Ms. Stewart facilitated the discussion on choosing a preferred wayfinding sign design, color palette, and bike map design. More detailed visioning exercise notes are on the following page.

Visioning Meeting Goals:

The primary intent of the visioning meeting was to introduce the project stakeholders, learn about the Monterey County audience and what is currently effective and challenging in navigating the active transportation network and gather preferences regarding sign design

ITEM COMMENTS
Project Overview
 Mary Stewart, Alta Planning + Design’s Project
Manager, presented an overview of Alta’s
scope, schedule and workshop goals
Introduction to Wayfinding
 Emily Duchon, Alta’s Wayfinding Designer
presented a brief introduction to wayfinding
and discussed wayfinding principals, best
practices, and technical guidance
Wayfinding Strategy (Facilitated Discussion)
 Participants shared overall thoughts on the
existing active transportation network oMonterey County has a unique way of 3  What is the character and experience of the
pathway network?
--------------------------------------------------------  What existing navigational elements are
effective?
getting to destinations
oLimitation of connectivity
oScenic. Want to get out and absorb the
experience, like openness, vistas. Enjoy the
view.
oComfortable and safe
oPeople use trails for their health
oLots of families, enjoy the view, beauty
oDiversity of experiences
-------------------------------------------------
oSharrows and pavement markings on road.

They are easier to read and doesn’t compete
with sign clutter
oLike having minutes on sign. Account for
uphill riding.
oLike Portland, OR style signs with minutes.

Like pavement markings, good use when
routes jog/detour and are hard to track
oLike standard/not too creative signs for easy
use by visitors
oBe consistent with neighbors (adjacent
Counties)
oStrong hardware to keep from getting stolen
oAllow space for place name and logo for
each community.
oCity additions for existing route signs.

Include unincorporated communities.

Wayfinding System Input
The group broke out to participate in an interactive exercise to capture input on wayfinding design preferences. Three boards asked the advisory committee members to vote on preferred options for wayfinding themes, style and flexibility of sign design. In addition, participants were asked to provide 4 comments on the existing bicycle map.

Following the meeting the workshop boards were posted on the social media site MySidewalk to solicit additional input from committee members who were not able to attend in person. A summary of the input is outlined below.

Board 2: Wayfinding Style
Color Palette:

The top ranked preferred color
palettes are “Mountains to the Sea”
a more natural and muted palette
and “Vineyards” a more
contemporary palette.

Materials and Style:

Meeting participants leaned toward
the contemporary end of the design
spectrum with the layered and
textured aluminum style receiving
the most votes, and brushed
stainless steel and concrete and
colorful powdered coated steel one
vote behind.

TAMC Input:
o Color preference?
o Style Preference?
5 Board 3: Sign Design
Flexibility of Design:

Total votes including results of the
MySidewalk online poll are as
follows:
#1- 0 votes
#2 – 12 votes
#3 – 4 votes
#4 – 2 votes
The majority of committee members
preferred a slightly modified
CAMUTCD sign which allows for
customization of a regional identity,
local place name, route name, while
still maintaining the standard
CAMUTCD green background, shape
and dimensions.

Sign Types:

Alta is scoped to design three sign
types, a map kiosk, direction sign
and add-on signage.

TAMC Input:
o Develop options that fall
into one or two styles?
6 Monterey County Bicycle Map Comments
Global
o Overall Map- Too busy, Break into Regions- Accuracy?
o Global-Use consistent North Arrow
o Eye is drawn to San Benito County because of darker color, the viewer should see the bike routes/paths 1st
o Consider making land color white or more neutral color o Create multiple Maps at different Scale
o Countywide
o Monterey Peninsula
o North County
o Etc.
o Map too large, use smaller paper size
o Bigger Blowups
o Agreed too much blank space, consider scale and blow up o Too much green color. Topographic/slope color are distraction/confusing o Make path/late/route lines more prominent inside
o Choose fewer colors/paths
o Remove proposed lanes/paths
North End
o Inset 1-Too busy, simplify
o Caltrans Route 101 North of Russell – Bike route?
o In Legend (Caltrans Route) – Make clear that this is non-bike route or remove o Old Stage at Zabala-Simplify as one line due to map scale South End
o Too much blank space (in Los Padres NF near Tassajara Hot Springs) o Larger scale-blow up on more populated areas
o Connect Elm to Metz

3. mySidewalk training No Enclosure
Ms. Murillo provided a training on the new mySidewalk public forum tool. Ms. Murillo noted that the new mySidewalk tool is much easier to use, and that participants can sign up using their email, through their Facebook, LinkedIn or Google+ account. Committee Member Justin Meek suggested reaching out to students using this tool.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Minutes\Minutes_Meeting 6.docx Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee
Thursday, June 18th, 2015
9:30 a.m. – 10:30 a.m.

Call in: (760)569-0800 Participant Code:580128#
Transportation Agency for Monterey County —Conference Room 55-B Plaza Circle, Salinas

MINUTES

1. Welcome & Introductions
Committee Members Present
Eliza Yu Association for Monterey Bay Area Governments
Jeanette Pantoja (by phone) Building Healthy Communities Bernard Green California State University, Monterey Bay Justin Meek (by phone) City of Marina
Andrea Renny City of Monterey
Brent Slama City of Soledad
Ryan Chapman County of Monterey Public Works
Josh Metz Fort Ord Reuse Authority
Krista Hanni (by phone) Monterey County Health Department Lisa Rheinheimmer (by phone) Monterey-Salinas Transit
Staff Present
Todd Muck, Deputy Executive Director Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner
P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Minutes\Minutes_Meeting 6.docx

2. Review Draft June 4, 2015 Minutes Pages 2-7
There were no comments on the June 4th meeting minutes.

3. Discuss Visioning Meeting and Next Steps No Enclosure Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, provided an overview of the June 4th visioning meeting, and highlighted the poster board votes included in the June 4th meeting minutes.

Ms. Murillo also mentioned that these materials were placed in the www.tamc.mysidewalk.com page for vote. Ms. Murillo reported that the next step will be for Alta Planning + Design to develop draft wayfinding signs.

Ms. Murillo reported that option #2 in the flexibility of sign Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) design spectrum was the most popular during the visioning meeting and in the mySidewalk poll. Committee Member Ryan Chapman expressed concern about design option #2, and mentioned that MUTCD compliance is a requirement for federal funding. Committee Member Chapman also expressed concern about long term maintenance for this design option. Committee Member Andrea Renny agreed that the design option should be more on the rigid MUTCD compliance spectrum.

Committee Member Victoria Beach asked about the materials, and expressed her preference for corten steel. Committee Member Beach mentioned that architects tend to prefer this material because it is very durable and has a more natural aesthetic. Committee Member Jeanette Pantoja asked about the costs associated with the materials and sign design. Ms. Murillo mentioned that in Alta Planning + Design’s presentation at the visioning meeting, the materials and sign design included an associated range of costs.

Committee Member Beach asked about the branding portion of the Wayfinding Plan. Committee Member Beach asked about Alta’s capacity to develop a brand for the regional routes, and used the Napa Vine Trail as an example of a branded regional bike network. Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner, mentioned that one Alta Planning + Design’s ideas was that the word “explore” can be incorporated into the signage as a way to maintain uniformity while allowing jurisdictions the opportunity to maintain their local identities. For example, a sign can say “Explore: Seaside” when a portion of the route is in Seaside, and “Explore: Marina” when a portion of the route is in Marina. Ms. Murillo mentioned that Alta is not scoped to develop a brand, but that the branding portion of the Wayfinding Plan is something that the Committee can do. Committee Member Beach asked staff to do more research on how other regions have successfully branded their regional bike networks.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Minutes\Minutes_Meeting 6.docx

4. Update on Regional Routes Page 8-10
a) Review Regional Route List
b) Discuss Route Limitations
c) Discuss Route Prioritization
Ms. Murillo reported that the Agency’s legal counsel suggested that only routes that have existing or proposed bicycle facilities be signed, with a priority for existing facilities. Ms. Murillo mentioned that routes identified by the Committee that are not in listed as existing or proposed will be compiled and analyzed in the next Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan update.

Ms. Murillo walked the Committee through the consolidated regional routes. Ms. Green mentioned that Alta Planning + Design introduced the idea of creating loops for a variety of users, and mentioned that staff will try and take a look at potential loops already present in the regional routes. Committee Member Beach and Todd Muck, Deputy Executive Director, asked whether Molera Road is the most direct route to Castroville, since Dolan Road appears to be a more direct connection. Ms. Green noted Molera Road is a popular route choice for cyclists. Committee members offered the following input:
 The Hartnell College Route via Alisal Street can close the loop for the Salinas Periphery Route. This loop can be known as the Ag Loop.
 San Juan Grade Road can be a connection to San Benito County.  Consider Divarty as a connection through the California State University, Monterey Bay area.
 Consider the AIDS route.

Committee Member Bernard Green showed the Committee the www.nationalbikechallenge.org page, which maps the routes that cyclists using the Strava app currently take.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 8\Minutes_Meeting

7.docx
Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee
Thursday, August 13th, 2015
2:00p.m. – 3:00p.m.

Call in: (760)569-0800 (641)569-0800 Participant Code:580128# Transportation Agency for Monterey County —Conference Room 55-B Plaza Circle, Salinas

MINUTES

1. Welcome & Introductions
Committee Members Present
Bernard Green California State University, Monterey Bay Victoria Beach (by phone) City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Andrea Renny City of Monterey
Ted Lopez Fort Ord Reuse Authority
Lisa Rheinheimer Monterey-Salinas Transit
Eric Petersen Pedal Alpini/Fort Ord Recreation Trails Friends Staff Present
Todd Muck, Deputy Executive Director Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner

2. Review Draft June 18, 2015 Minutes
There were no comments on the June 18th meeting minutes.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 8\Minutes_Meeting

7.docx

3. Discuss Draft Wayfinding Sign Designs & Bike Map
Layouts
Presentation
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, presented the three draft wayfinding sign design concepts and the draft bike map layouts to the Committee for input. Ms. Murillo noted that the elements from the three different sign design concepts can be combined into a preferred design.

Committee Member Eric Petersen asked about the size of the directional signs. Ms. Murillo noted that the size of the signs will comply with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).

Committee Member Petersen also asked about the possibility of placing distance information in kilometers and miles. Ted Lopez, Fort Ord Reuse Authority alternate asked about translation for the wayfinding sign designs. Committee members offered the following input:
 Preference for Option #1 (pictured below) – Modern, Contemporary directional sign.

Committee Members Bernard Green and Andrea Renny and Todd Muck, Deputy Executive Director, liked the “Explore by bicycling and walking” logo. Committee Member Renny mentioned that the logo can easily be created with vinyl stickers. Committee members liked the “Explore Salinas” text order, over the “Salinas Explore” text order. In general, Committee members liked the destination, mileage and minutes distance information for the directional signs. Ms. Murillo mentioned that the www.TAMC.mySidewalk.com voting results also show a preference for Option #1.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 8\Minutes_Meeting

7.docx
 Preference for the Option #2 (pictured below) – Grounded, Contemporary compass rose add-on sign. Committee Member Victoria Beach noted that this is a cost-effective option for add-on signs. Mr. Muck asked about the possibility of having the compass rose be a bicycle wheel.
 Preference for the layout of Option #3 in the Option #2 structure of the gateway kiosk (pictured below).

Option #3 Option #2
P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 8\Minutes_Meeting

7.docx
Committee Member Renny noted that the continual structure of gateway kiosk option #2 was important for Americans with Disabilities (ADA) compliance, since someone that is visually impaired can detect the continual structure. Committee Member Beach also expressed her preference for the more natural aesthetic of gateway kiosk option #2, and noted that the other options would not have a high durability. Both she and Committee Member Renny liked the materials of the gateway kiosk option #2, noting that these materials have a high durability. Committee Member Renny also mentioned that baked enamel maps are a durable option for the gateway treatments.

Ms. Murillo also presented the planning level cost estimates for the sign designs, and noted that these estimates include the cost of installation and fabrication. Ms. Murillo mentioned that the cost of fabrication for the directional signs ranges from $100 (directional sign option #3) to $250-$300 (directional sign option #1). Ms. Murillo mentioned that the planning level cost estimates pictured below are based on current bids. Committee Member Renny noted that it would be more costeffective to go out to bid for the production of customized signs.

Committee Member Renny suggested that TAMC set up a contract with a sign shop that can produce the customized signs, as local sign shops have limited capacity for fabrication of directional sign option #1. That way the jurisdictions can have better access to the signage when replacements are needed. Ms. Murillo mentioned that Emily Duchon, from Alta Planning + Design, suggested that TAMC order extra blank signs to keep as replacements.

Committee Members expressed a preference for Vertical Bicycle Map Layout #3. Committee Member Eric Petersen mentioned that this layout would work well with handle bar map holders.

Committee Members Green and Beach also liked the vertical map layout, noting that it would be useful for cyclists looking at individual city panels. Committee Member Lisa Rheinheimer noted that the bike map colors should match the sign design color palette.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 10\Minutes_Meeting

9.docx
Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee
Thursday, November 19th, 2015
1:30 p.m. – 3:00 p.m.
*Join online: https://zoom.us/j/617724260
Call in: 1(415)762-9988 Meeting ID: 617-724-260
Transportation Agency for Monterey County —Conference Room 55-B Plaza Circle, Salinas

DRAFT MINUTES

1. Welcome & Introductions
Committee Members Present:

Bernard Green California State University, Monterey Bay Victoria Beach (by phone) City of Carmel-by-the-Sea
Justin Meek City of Marina
Lisa Rheinheimer Monterey-Salinas Transit
Eric Petersen Pedal Alpini/Fort Ord Recreation Trails Friends Jeanette Pantoja Building Healthy Communities
James Serrano City of Salinas
Kevin Cole (by phone) Pebble Beach Company
Doug Thurston Big Sur Marathon
Krista Hanni (by phone) Monterey County Health Department Staff Present
Todd Muck, Deputy Executive Director Ariana Green, Associate Transportation Planner Maria Montiel, Administrative Assistant Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner Debbie Hale, Executive Director (by phone)
P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 10\Minutes_Meeting

9.docx

2. Review Draft September 14th, 2015 Minutes
There were no comments on the September 14th meeting minutes.

3. Discuss Final Wayfinding Sign Design Concept
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, noted that enhancing the environment for bicycling and walking with signage can increase the number of bicyclists and pedestrians using the county’s roadway network, and can improve the visibility and safety for these alternative forms of transportation. Having uniform signs can support residents and visitors who want to bicycle and in the cities and in the county, and can enhance each jurisdiction’s brand as a regional destination. Ms. Murillo walked the committee through the concepts below showcase three options for the “Explore Monterey County”.

The Committee had the following suggestions and comments to the Final Wayfinding Sign Design Concept:
 Consider having two sign options for cities to choose from  Consider including the agriculture fields on design
 Consider including destination information
 Consider removing the word “Explore” to make the bike/pedestrian bigger  Consider looking at a proof before printing production  Consider having each city decide to have miles and minutes Committee member James Serrano noted that the toppers will provide the theme. He noted that less information will make it easier for those biking to read. The Committee agreed on Option #2 as the final design option, noting the need to maintain all three design options to provide jurisdictions with flexibility. Ms. Murillo noted that Alta Planning + Design would finalize this option to include agricultural fields in the design.

Committee member Lisa Rheinheimer noted that having the information of how far things and places are would be helpful for those who are on a timely schedule and for those who don’t walk or bike far. She also, noted that using kilometers would possibly benefit better for the tourist.

P:\Work Program\Bike Ped\Wayfinding Plan\Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee\Meetings\Meeting 10\Minutes_Meeting

9.docx
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, noted that the two kiosk options showcase the looks of corten steel and painted aluminum. She went over the pros and cons of the two kios material options.

The Committee had the following suggestions and comments to the two kiosk options:
 Consider in the urban area the corten steel
 Consider in the modern area the painted aluminum

4. Review Draft Wayfinding Plan & Discuss Implementation Strategies Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, noted that there will be a three step phasing.

The Committee had the following suggestions on the draft Wayfinding Plan:
 Consider directional signage at Canyon Del Rey, Seaside  Consider signage at Fort Ord Monument
 Consider ATP grant
 Consider having signage at Chular
 Consider signage at River Road (wine corridor)
 Consider signage to monuments and trailheads

5. Bike Map Status Update
Virginia Murillo, Assistant Transportation Planner, updated the Committee on the status of the bike map. Ms. Murillo shared the draft bike map with the Committee.

SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE NONE
NDM/EJ
4252
T-1 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS TITLE SHEET 6/7/2021 NDM/EJ

REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS

PROJECT PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF

TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY
PROJECT No. 6550.04.RWP

IN MONTEREY COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

SHEET INDEX

ABBREVIATIONS

APPROVED BY THE TRANSPORTATION
DEBRA L. HALE

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY (TAMC)
SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE NONE
NDM/EJ
4252
CD-1 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT

TYPICAL LOCATION - CASE 'B'
(CURB WITH SIDEWALK 5' TO 6' WIDE)

TYPICAL LOCATION - CASE 'A'
(CURB AND NO SIDEWALK;
OR SIDEWALK WIDER THAN 5')

TYPICAL LOCATION - CASE 'R'
(RURAL LOCATIONS, NO CURB OR SIDEWALK)

TYPICAL LOCATION - CASE 'M'
(MULTI-USE PATHS AND CLASS I BICYCLE FACILITIES)

TYPICAL LOCATION - CASE 'C' (OFFSET SIGN)
(CURB WITH SIDEWALK 4' TO 6' WIDE)

TYPICAL LOCATION - CASE 'D' (OFFSET SIGN)
(CURB WITH SIDEWALK 5' TO 6' WIDE)
SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE NONE
NDM/EJ
4252
CD-2 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 6/7/2021 NDM/EJ

GALVANIZED PIPE SIGN POST AND FOOTING
"TELESPAR" TYPE SIGN POST AND FOOTING
SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE NONE
NDM/EJ
4252
CD-3 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT

SIGN TOPPER

DIRECTIONAL SIGN

PANEL TYPE 'A'
Marina
Monterey
Salinas 555

DIRECTIONAL SIGN

PANEL TYPE 'B'
Royal Oaks
County Park
Pajaro 12 555

DIRECTIONAL SIGN

PANEL TYPE 'C'
BIKE ROUTE SIGN PANEL D11-1
BIKE ROUTE DESTINATION SIGN PANEL D11-1c
Steinbeck 5
City Center
Transit Center 5 5 12 MILE 3 MIN c C 8 MIN
Center
2 MILES c15 MIN C 45 MIN
1 MILE c10 MIN C 20 MIN

CONFIRMATION SIGN

PANEL TYPE 'E'
Marina
Salinas 52 c c
TO Monterey c
BIKE ROUTE 3
Watsonville 8
SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE NONE
NDM/EJ
4252
CD-4 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS CONSTRUCTION DETAILS 6/7/2021 NDM/EJ COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
COUNTY G11

MONTEREY
COUNTY G12

MONTEREY
COUNTY G16
MONTEREY CALIFORNIA 68 CALIFORNIA 183 CALIFORNIA 1 CALIFORNIA 1 CALIFORNIA 1 CALIFORNIA 1 COUNTY G16

MONTEREY
L1.4
L2.4 L2.5
L3.4 L3.6
L4.4 L4.5 L4.6
L5.4 L5.6
L6.4 L6.5 L6.6
L7.3 L7.6
L8.3 L8.4 L8.5 L8.6
L7.7
L9.3
L9.2
L10.2
L10.1
L9.1
L11.1 L12.1
L13.1 L14.1
L9.6
L10.3
L9.5
101
101
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
PS Pajaro - Salinas
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SP Soledad - Pinnacles BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 8,000'
NDM/EJ
4252
L-1 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SHEET INDEX - NORTH COUNTY 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R Gonzales
Salinas
Watsonville
Pacific Grove
Moss
Landing
Carmel
Pebble Beach Monterey
Sand City
Seaside
Marina
Carmel Valley
Castroville
CALIFORNIA 1 CALIFORNIA 1
101 CALIFORNIA 146 CALIFORNIA 68
101
L13.2
L14.2
L13.3
L14.4
L14.5
L14.3
COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
COUNTY G13

MONTEREY
COUNTY G14

MONTEREY
COUNTY G15

MONTEREY
COUNTY G16

MONTEREY
L13.1 COUNTY G16
MONTEREY L11.1
L10.2 L10.3
L12.1
COUNTY G17
MONTEREY L14.1
L10.1
L9.2 LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 12,000'
NDM/EJ
4252
L-2 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SHEET INDEX - SOUTH COUNTY 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R Gonzales
Soledad
Greenfield
King City
San Ardo
Carmel Valley
Las Lomas CALIFORNIA 1
PS-H002 PS-H001
ES-S080
ES-S079
ES-S078
ES-S077
ES-T076
ES-T075
ES-T074
ES-T073
ES-T072
ES-H013
ES-E012
ES-E011
ES-S010
ES-E009
ES-W008
ES-W006
ES-S006
ES-S005
ES-T004
ES-S003
Pajaro
To Watsonville
ES-P001
ES-P002
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

MATCH LINE
(SEE RIGHT)

MATCH LINE
(SEE LEFT)
Elhorn
Slough
Kirby Park CALIFORNIA 1
ES-H082
ES-H081
ES-T071
ES-B070
ES-J069 ES-J068
ES-J067
ES-J066
ES-J065 ES-J063
ES-H062
ES-H061
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

MATCH LINE
(SEE RIGHT) I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R

MATCH LINE
(SEE LEFT)
COUNTY G12

MONTEREY
Moss
Landing
Moss Landing State Wildlife Area CALIFORNIA 1
ES-H060 ES-H059
ES-H054
ES-M053
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

COUNTY PARK
US
101
US
101
COUNTY G12

MONTEREY
PS-S016
PS-L022
PS-S015
PS-S014
PS-S013
PS-S012
PS-E011
PS-S090
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 600'
NDM/EJ
4252
L4.5 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R Manzanita
County Park
Prundale
Shopping Center CALIFORNIA 156
US
101
US
101
PS-S017
PS-P037
PS-P036
PS-P035
PS-P033 PS-B034
PS-P032
PS-B031
PS-P030
PS-P029
PS-P028
PS-P027
PS-L022
PS-S025
PS-S023
PS-P024
PS-S015 LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 600'
NDM/EJ
4252
L4.6 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R Castroville CALIFORNIA 156 CALIFORNIA 1 CALIFORNIA 1 CALIFORNIA 183 CALIFORNIA 183 ES-H027
ES-H026 ES-H025
ES-S023
MP-N001
MP-M002
CS-H013 CS-H012
ES-M044
ES-M045
ES-N043
ES-N042
ES-H041
ES-H040
ES- S022
ES-C021
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

UC MBEST
Marina Library
Marina
Shopping
Center
City of Marina
US
101
MP-RT020
MP-RT019
MP-RT021
MP-D018
MP-P017
MP-P016
MG-R004
MP-D015
MP-D013
MP-RT012
MP-RT014
MG-R003
MG-C008
MG-R007
MG-C006
MG-R005
MG-C011
MG-R009
MG-R010
MG-IM016
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 600'
NDM/EJ
4252
L7.3 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R Monterey County
City of
Salinas
Salinas Rail Station
Salinas
Hartnell College City Hall
Salinas Sports
Complex
City of
Salinas
US
101 CALIFORNIA 183
SP-F029
SP-F028
CS-M009
CS-D008
CS-M007
CS-D006
CS-M004
CS-M003
CS-V001 CS-M002
SP-L027
SP-L026
MS-L060
MS-L050
MS-L040
MS-L030
SP-D024
SP-D023
SP-D021
SP-D020
SP-A008 SP-A009
SP-A006 SP-A007
SP-A005
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 600'
NDM/EJ
4252
L7.7 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R Fort Ord Dunes State Park
C S U Monterey Bay
City of Marina
City of
Seaside
Presidio of
Monterey
Annex
City of Marina CALIFORNIA 1 CALIFORNIA 1
MS-IM011
MS-D015
MP-G068
MP-S086
MP-S085
MP-S084
MP-IN083
MP-IN081
MP-G082
MP-IN079
MP-G080
MP-IN078 MP-IN075
MP-G070
MP-G067
MP-N031 MP-N032
MP-N030 MP-N029
MP-E028 MP-E027
MP-RT026 MP-RT025
MP-RT024
MP-RT023 MP-RT022
MS-D021 MS-D020
MS-S019
MS-D018
MS-S017
MS-S016
MS-S014
MS-IM009
MS-IM008
MS-C007
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 600'
NDM/EJ
4252
L8.5 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R City of
Salinas
Hartnell College City Hall
artnell Park
US
101 CALIFORNIA 68 CALIFORNIA 68
PS-M066
FO-H002
FO-H001
PS-H080
PS-H079
PS-H078
PS-A077
PS-H076
PS-A075
PS-B074
PS-A073
PS-B072
PS-A071
PS-A070
PS-A069
PS-A068 PS-R067
PS-A065
PS-L064
PS-A063
PS-J062
PS-J061
PS-A060
PS-J059
PS-A058
PS-F057
SP-F029
SP-L027
SP-L026
SP-A011
SP-A010
SP-A008
SP-A006 SP-A007
SP-A004 SP-A005
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

CALIFORNIA 68
CALIFORNIA 68
CALIFORNIA 68
MP-D221
MP-D220
MP-D219
MP-D217 MP-L218
MP-L215
MP-L214
MP-IR213
MP-L212
MP-IR211
MP-P210
MP-IR209 MP-IR208
MP-P207
MP-P206
MP-S204 MP-P205
MP-S203
MP-S202
MP-F201 MP-F200
MP-P199
MP-P197
MP-P198
MP-S194 MP-P195
MP-S196
MP-S193
MP-S192
MP-S191
MP-S199
MP-S176 MP-S177
MP-R175A
MP-R174
MP-R176
MP-R175B
MP-R173
MP-R172
MP-R171
MP-R170
MP-H169
MP-R168
MP-R167
MP-R164
MP-R161
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monterey County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION MP-L214
MP-IR213
MP-IR211 MP-L212
MP-P210 MP-IR209
MP-IR208
MP-P207
MP-P206
MP-P205
MP-S204
MP-S203
MP-S202
MP-F201 MP-F200
MP-P199
SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

I N E E
S

ON W E N
IT H
S
G
R

DETAIL A

DETAIL A
DETAIL ON L9.2
City of
Monterey
City of
Monterey
Monterey County Fairgrounds
Naval Post Graduate School
Del Monte Lake
CALIFORNIA 218
CALIFORNIA 1
MP-F116
MP-P127
MP-F129
MP-R150
MP-D221
MP-D220
MP-D219
MP-D217 MP-L218
MP-L215
MP-L214
MP-IR213
MP-L212
MP-IR211
MP-P210
MP-IR209 MP-IR208
MP-P207
MP-P206
MP-S204 MP-P205
MP-S203
MP-S202
MP-F201 MP-F200
MP-P199
MP-R175A
MP-R174
MP-R176
MP-R175B
MP-R173
MP-R172
MP-R171
MP-R170
MP-H169
MP-R168
MP-R167
MP-R166
MP-R155
MP-R154
MP-R165
MP-R146B MP-R145
MP-R164
MP-R161
MP-R160
MP-R159 MP-R158
MP-R157 MP-R153
MP-R152
MP-R151
MP-R149
MP-R148
MP-R147
MP-R146A
MP-S144
MP-S143
MP-F130
MP-P128
MP-F126
MP-F124
MP-A123
MP-P122
MP-P121
MP-W120
MP-A118
MP-A117
MP-A115
MP-F114
MP-F112
MP-A113
MP-M109
MP-M107 MP-M108
MP-F106
MP-F105
MP-C104 MP-C103
MP-F102
MP-C101
MP-C099
MP-F098
MP-C097
MP-H095
MP-F094
MP-F093 MP-H092
MP-F116
MP-P127
MP-F129
MP-F130
MP-P128
MP-F125
MP-F126
MP-F124
MP-A123
MP-P122 MP-P121
MP-W120
MP-P119
MP-A118
MP-A117
MP-A115
MP-F114
MP-D221
MP-D220
MP-D219
MP-L218
MP-D217
MP-D216
MP-L215
MP-R175B
MP-R168
MP-R167
SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

I N E E
S

ON W E N
IT H
S
G
R

DETAIL B

DETAIL A

DETAIL A
DETAIL ON L9.1
City of Seaside
City of Seaside
Presidio of
Monterey
Annex
City of Seaside
Fort Ord Dunes State Beach
Seaside High
School CALIFORNIA 1 CALIFORNIA 1
MP-B056
MP-S143
MP-T140
MP-T141
MP-T142
MP-N067
MP-N066
MP-G065
MP-G064
MP-C063
MP-S062
MP-G061
MP-G069
MP-B059
MP-Y058
MP-Y057
MP-B055
MP-N054
MP-P053
MP-N052
MP-S051
MP-P044 MP-N045
MP-N046
MP-N047
MP-L050
MP-L049
MP-N048
MP-P043 MP-P042
MP-P041
MP-RT049
MP-RT039
MP-RT038
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 600'
NDM/EJ
4252
L10.1 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R City Of
Monterey
Monterey County
City of
Monterey
Monterey Airport
Del Monte Shopping
Center
Monterey
Peninsula
College CALIFORNIA 1 CALIFORNIA 68
MP-A110
MP-A527
MP-A526
MP-A525
MP-A524
MP-A522 MP-A523
MP-A520 MP-A521
CM-S006
CM-M002
CM-M001
MP-A117 MP-F112
MP-A113
MP-A111
MP-M109
MP-M107 MP-M108
MP-F106
MP-F105
MP-C104 MP-C103
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 600'
NDM/EJ
4252
L10.2 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R City of Seaside
City of Monterey
City of
Del Rey Oaks CALIFORNIA 68 CALIFORNIA 218 CALIFORNIA 218 CALIFORNIA 68 FO-H031
FO-H029
FO-H030
MP-C099
MP-F098
MP-C097
MP-H095
MP-F094
MP-F093 MP-H092
MP-H091
MP-G089
MP-H090
MP-G088
MP-H087
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 600'
NDM/EJ
4252
L10.3 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 6/7/2021 NDM/EJ I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R City of Carmel
Monterey County Hatton Cyn State Park
Carmel State Beach
Carmel Mission CALIFORNIA 1 CM-S034
CG-C003
CG-T002
CG-T001
MP-A520
MP-T513
MP-R512
MP-R511
MP-R510
MP-OC509
MP-C508
MP-F507 MP-F506
MP-C505
MP-F504
MP-S503
MP-OC502 MP-S501
MP-S500
CM-C015
CM-H014
CM-R040
CM-R039
CM-R038
CM-T037
CM-S036
CM-S035
CM-S033
CM-S032
CM-C031
CM-S030
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 600'
NDM/EJ
4252
L11.1 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R Laguna Seca
Raceway
Corral De
Tierra
York
School
Fort Ord
National
Monument CALIFORNIA 68
CG-C010
CG-L020
CG-L021
FO-H019 FO-H018
FO-H024
FO-H028 FO-H026
FO-H027
FO-H025 FO-H023
FO-L021
FO-H022 FO-H020
FO-H008
FO-H010
FO-H012
FO-H011
FO-H009
FO-H007
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 1,500'
NDM/EJ
4252
L12.1 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R Carmel Valley Road Carmel Valley
COUNTY G16
MONTEREY CG-051
CG-C050
CG-L018
CG-L019
CG-C010
CG-L017
CG-L021
CG-C015
CG-C014
CG-C013
CG-C005
CG-C004
CG-C011
CG-C012
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 2,000'
NDM/EJ
4252
L13.1 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT SEE L13.2 SEE L11.1 I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R Carmel V
Garland
Regional
Park
Carmel Valley Road
COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
COUNTY G16

MONTEREY
CG-C052
CG-C027
CG-C029
CG-C030
CG-C031
CG-C032
CG-C028
CG-C026
CG-L018
CG-L019
CG-C025
CG-C024
CG-C023
CG-C022
CG-C016
CG-L017
CG-C015
MG-R065
MG-R064
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 4,000'
NDM/EJ
4252
L13.2 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R SEE L13.3 SEE L13.1
US 101
US 101
US 101
COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
COUNTY G15

MONTEREY
COUNTY G16

MONTEREY
COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
CG-A038 CG-C037
CG-A039
CG-A041
CG-A042
CG-A044
CG-C029
CG-C030
CG-C031
CG-C032
CG-C033
CG-C034
CG-C035
CG-C036
CG-C028
MG-E134
MG-E133
MG-E132 MG-E131
MG-E130
MG-E129
MG-E127 MG-E128
MG-T126
MG-T123
MG-T122
MG-A119
MG-A117 MG-A118
MG-A113
MG-A112
MG-P106
MG-A105
MG-A104
MG-A102
MG-F101
MG-F100
MG-F099
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

DETAIL C

DETAIL D

DETAIL B

DETAIL A
US
101
US
101
COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
MG-A079
MG-A078
MG-G077
MG-G076
MG-G075
MG-R072 MG-R074
MG-R073
MG-R065
MG-R064
MG-F057
MG-F056
MG-R055
MG-C055
MG-C054
MG-R047
MG-R046
MG-C062 MG-R061
MG-R060
COUNTY G17
MONTEREY MG-R074
MG-R072
MG-R073
MG-A079
MG-A078
MG-G077
US
101
MG-F057
MG-F056
MG-R055
COUNTY G17
MONTEREY MG-C062
MG-R061
MG-R060
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 4,000'
NDM/EJ
4252
L14.1 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R SEE L14.2

DETAIL A DETAIL B

DETAIL C DETAIL D
SEE L9.6
City of Soledad
Soledad Mission

DETAIL B

DETAIL A
US
101
CALIFORNIA 146
COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
COUNTY G15

MONTEREY
COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
CALIFORNIA 146
SS-H212
SS-M214
SS-M215
SS-M213
SS-M211
SS-M210
SS-M209
SS-M208
SS-E206 SS-M205
SS-M204
SS-W203
MG-P106
MG-A105
MG-A102
MG-F101
MG-F100
MG-F099
MG-F094
MG-F093
MG-R092
MG-R087
MG-R084
COUNTY G17

MONTEREY
MG-P106
MG-A105
MG-A104
MG-A103
MG-A102
MG-F101
US
101 CALIFORNIA 146
SS-E207 SS-M208
SS-E206
SS-M205
SS-M204 SS-W203
SS-W202
SS-F200
SS-F201
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 3,000'
NDM/EJ
4252
L14.2 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT

I N E E
S

ON W E N
IT H
S
G
R
SEE L14.3
SEE L14.1

DETAIL A DETAIL B

DETAIL A
Greenfield

DETAIL B
US
101
US
101
COUNTY G15

MONTEREY
SS-M217
SS-M016
CG-A044
MG-M139
MG-E137 MG-M138
MG-E136
MG-E135
MG-E134
MG-E133
MG-E132 MG-E131
MG-E130
MG-E129
MG-E127
MG-E128
MG-T126
MG-T123
MG-T122
MG-A119
MG-A118 MG-A117
MG-A113
MG-A112
MG-E134
MG-E133
MG-E132
MG-E131
US
101
MG-E127
MG-E128
MG-T126
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 3,000'
NDM/EJ
4252
L14.3 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R SEE L14.4
SEE L14.2

DETAIL A DETAIL B
SEE L13.3
King City

DETAIL A

DETAIL B
US
101
US
101
COUNTY G13

MONTEREY
COUNTY G15

MONTEREY
SS-M218
SS-C231
SS-W230
SS-W229
SS-M228
SS-M225
SS-B224
SS-M222 SS-F223
SS-M220
SS-M221
SS-M219
COUNTY G15
MONTEREY COUNTY G13

MONTEREY
SS-B224
SS-M222
SS-F223
US
101
SS-C231
SS-W230
SS-W229
SS-M228
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 3,000'
NDM/EJ
4252
L14.4 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT SEE L14.5
SEE L14.3 I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R

DETAIL A DETAIL B
San Lucas
San Ardo

DETAIL B
US
101 CALIFORNIA 198
SS-C239
SS-C238
SS-C237
SS-C236
SS-C235
SS-C234
SS-C239 CALIFORNIA 198
SS-C236
SS-C235
SS-C234
LEGEND
Army
Caltrans
Carmel
CSUMB
D.R.O.

Gonzales
Greenfield
King City
Marina
Monteret County
Monterey
Pacific Grove
PBCSD
Salinas
Sand City
Seaside
Soledad
State Parks
TAMC
CM Carmel - Monterey
CG Carmel Valley - Greenfield
CS Castroville - Salinas
ES Elkhorn Slough Loop
FO Fort Ord Inner Loop
FO Fort Ord Outer Loop
MG Marina - Greenfield
MS Marina - Salinas
MP Monterey Peninsula Loop
SS Salinas - King City - San Ardo
SP Salinas Periphery Loop
SB San Benito County Connection
SO Soledad - Pinnacles
PS Pajaro - Salinas BIKE ROUTES PROPOSED SIGNS, BY JURISDICTION SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE 1" = 5,000'
NDM/EJ
4252
L14.5 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN LOCATION PLAN 3/16/21 NDM DRAFT 5/25/21 NDM/EJ DRAFT I N E E S ON W E N IT H S G R SEE L14.4

DETAIL A

DETAIL B

DETAIL A
SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE NONE
NDM/EJ
4252
Q-1 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN TABLE 6/7/2021 NDM/EJ

SIGN SUMMARY TABLE
SHEET
OF
SCALE:

DRAWN:

JOB No.: SUBMITTAL / REVISION Civil Engineering Land Surveying 6 Harris Court Monterey, California 831.649.5225 whitsonengineers.com NOT VALID WITHOUT SIGNATURE NONE
NDM/EJ
4252
Q-2 TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY REGIONAL WAYFINDING PROGRAM SIGNS SIGN TABLE 6/7/2021 NDM/EJ