Agenda Packet — Salinas City Council, March 7, 2023

Tuesday, March 7, 2023
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 Andrew Sandoval, 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 March 7, 2023

ZOOM WEBINAR PARTICIPATION
JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/89714613577
To participate telephonically, call any number below:

US: +1 669 900 9128 or +1 669 444 9171 or +1 719 359 4580 or +1 253 205 0468 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 386 347 5053 or +1 507 473 4847 or +1 564 217 2000 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 646 931 3860 or +1 689 278 1000 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 305 224 1968 or +1 309 205 3325 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 360 209 5623 Webinar ID: 897 1461 3577
If prompted to enter a participant ID, press #.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

PROCLAMATION
National Small Business Development Center Day, March 15, 2023 American Red Cross Month, March 2023

CITY OF CHAMPIONS
Joan Bennett, District 5 Resident

PUBLIC COMMENT PROCEDURES
If you wish to make a general public comment or comment on a specific agenda item, you are encouraged to attend 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.

City of Salinas Page 2 Printed on 3/2/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final March 7, 2023

CONSIDERATION
ID#23-087 Fiscal Year 2023 Mid-Year Budget Review & Supplemental Appropriation Requests
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution accepting the Fiscal Year 2023 mid-year budget report and authorizing budget adjustments to the City of Salinas' Fiscal Year 2023 operating and capital budgets.

ID#23-135 Appointment to the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency Board of Directors
Recommendation: Consider the appointment of one member, and an alternate, to serve on the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency Board of Directors.

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#23-161 Minutes
Recommendation: Approve minutes of February 21, 2023.

ID#23-158 Financial Claims
Recommendation: Approve financial claims report.

ID#23-094 20-Minute Green Zone Designation at 316 Williams Road Recommendation: Approve a Resolution establishing a total of 25 feet of 20-minute green zone designation located at 316 Williams Road.

ID#23-095 “No Stopping” Red Zones Along 3 Quail Run Circle Recommendation: Approve a Resolution establishing a total of 135 feet of "No Stopping" red zones along the driveway of 3 Quail Run Circle.

ID#23-096 Victor Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan Recommendation: Approve a Resolution to implement the Victor Street neighborhood traffic calming plan supported by residents.

ID#23-097 Iverson Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the implementation of the Iverson Street neighborhood traffic calming plan supported by residents.

ID#23-107 Transfer of vehicles and equipment to Monterey County for Animal Services
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the transfer of vehicles and equipment no longer needed for City of Salinas purposes to the County of Monterey to support the provision of Animal Control services within the city limits.

ID#23-127 Purchase and Sales Agreement for 403 East Romie Lane City of Salinas Page 3 Printed on 3/2/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final March 7, 2023
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Purchase and Sales Agreement for the acquisition of a two-story duplex located at 403 East Romie Lane in the City of Salinas for the purpose of providing permanent affordable housing.

ID#23-133 Application to the California Department of Housing and Community Development Prohousing Incentive Pilot Program
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the submission of a Prohousing Incentive Pilot (PIP) Program application to the California Department of Housing and Community Development; and authorizing the City Manager or designee to accept awarded PIP Program funds and execute all required Agreements and related documents necessary to implement the program; and authorize establishment of an HCD PIP Program appropriation of up to $1,660,000 for allowable predevelopment, development, acquisition, rehabilitation, and preservation of multifamily, residential live-work, rental housing and homeownership opportunities.

ID#23-143 Direct Purchase of 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR for the Community Development Department
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution to rescind and replace Resolution 22587 (February 7, 2023) authorizing the direct purchase of a 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR truck from Salinas Toyota at a total cost of $39,613.89 with a 10% contingency not to exceed $43,575.28.

ID#23-153 Police Hiring Incentive
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing a Police Officer and Police Recruit hiring incentive and a staff referral incentive.

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.

CLOSED SESSION
Receive public communications from the audience on Closed session items.

The City Council will recess to closed session pursuant to:

ID#23-159 a. Pending Litigation - California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), conference with legal counsel regarding, Santa Rita Union High School District, et al. v. City of Salinas et al., Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 20CV000242.
b. Pending Litigation - California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), conference with legal counsel regarding, Alisal Union School District, et al. v. City of Salinas, et al., Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 20CV00340.
c. Real Property Negotiation - California Government Code Section 54956.8, conference with real property negotiators, City Manager Steven S. Carrigan, City Attorney Christopher A. Callihan, Community Development Director Megan Hunter, Assistant Community Development Director Lisa Brinton, and Planning Manager Rod Powell to discuss the terms and lease of real property located at 109 John Street, (APN 002353023000) Salinas, California.

City of Salinas Page 4 Printed on 3/2/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final March 7, 2023

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 and 54956. City Council agenda reports and other writings distributed to the legislative body 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 in accordance with California Government Code section 54597.5. 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. Language interpretation may be requested as soon as possible but by no later than 5 p.m. of the last business day prior to 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 March 1, 2023 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 3/2/2023
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-087, Version: 1
Fiscal Year 2023 Mid-Year Budget Review & Supplemental Appropriation Requests Approve a Resolution accepting the Fiscal Year 2023 mid-year budget report and authorizing budget adjustments to the City of Salinas’ Fiscal Year 2023 operating and capital budgets.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 3/1/2023
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 7, 2023
DEPARTMENT: FINANCE
FROM: MARK ROBERTS, DIRECTOR OF FINANCE
TITLE: FISCAL YEAR 2023 MID-YEAR BUDGET REVIEW & BUDGET

ADJUSTMENTS
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

Staff recommends the City Council approve a resolution to:
1) accept and file the Fiscal Year 2023 Mid-Year Budget Review report; 2) approve various adjustments to the City of Salinas’ fiscal year 2023 operating and capital improvement program (CIP) budgets;
3) authorize the establishment of AB 178 Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant appropriation(s) in the Board of State and Community Corrections Fund totaling up to $96,887.41 and corresponding revenue budget to support AB 178 Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant activities;
4) approve the adjustment of the City’s workforce allocation, to add a Risk/Benefit Analyst position and a Human Resources Technician position and corresponding modification to the Classification – Salary Schedule;
5) approve an agreement with Environmental Systems, Inc., of Northern California for emergency repair to the Sherwood Hall cooling tower for a not-to-exceed amount of $172,429; and
6) authorize the City Manager to direct the transfer of appropriations for operating activities currently in the City’s CIP budget to the appropriate operating budgets and designate unspent appropriations for the activities at fiscal year-end as assigned fund balance.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

This report provides the status of the Fiscal Year 2023 budgets for the City’s General Fund, Measure E Fund, and Measure G Fund (collectively, “general fund[s]”). In addition, the report recommends supplemental appropriations for various funds based upon staff analysis of actual fiscal-year-to-date expenditures and estimated expenditures through the end of the fiscal year. The recommended appropriation adjustments are summarized in the “Fiscal and Sustainability Impact” section of this report, and details, including an agreement related to one of the adjustments, are provided in Exhibit A to this report. Consistent with the recommended actions provided in this report, the City Manager will transfer appropriations from the CIP budget to operating budgets, as a clean-up measure, to appropriately reflect non-CIP appropriations in the applicable operating Page | 2
budgets, and designate unspent appropriations for the related activities at fiscal year-end as assigned fund balance until expended.

BACKGROUND:

The City’s Fiscal Year 2023 operating and capital budgets were adopted on June 14, 2022. As adopted, the combined general funds budget included a budgetary surplus of approximately $2.2 million.

DISCUSSION:

Revenues & Transfers In
Overall, Fiscal Year 2023 revenues through December 31, 2022 were strong. Table 1 below compares revenue totals for the general funds through the mid-point of the current fiscal year and previous fiscal year, while Table 2 reflects current fiscal-year-to-date revenues versus their budgeted totals.

Table 1
General Fund1 Revenues & Transfers In as of December 31st Fiscal Year 2023 vs Fiscal Year 2022
Category FY 23 FY 22 Difference
Sales & Use Tax $16,951,000 $15,619,000 $1,332,000
Transactions & Use Taxes221,429,000 20,677,000 752,000
Property Taxes 11,529,000 10,969,000 560,000
Property Tax in Lieu of VLF 7,861,000 7,416,000 445,000 Other Revenues 15,847,000 13,822,000 2,025,000
Transfers In 1,488,000 2,044,000 (557,000)
Total $75,105,000 $70,548,000 $4,557,000
1 Includes General, Measure E, & Measure G Funds
2 Measures E & G tax revenues
Table 2
General Fund1 Revenues
Fiscal Year 2023 Budget vs Fiscal-Year-to-Date Actual
Category
Adopted
Budget
Adjusted
Budget
FYTD
Actual
FYTD vs
Adjusted
Sales & Use Tax $ 37,570,000 $37,570,000 $16,951,000 $20,619,000 Transactions & Use Taxes249,269,000 49,269,000 21,429,000 27,840,000 Property Taxes 19,432,000 19,432,000 11,529,000 7,903,000 Property Tax in Lieu of VLF 15,621,000 15,621,000 7,861,000 7,760,000 Other Revenues 42,841,000 42,841,000 15,847,000 26,994,000 Page | 3
Transfers In 2,975,000 2,975,000 1,488,000 1,488,000
Total $167,708,000 $167,708,000 $75,105,000 $92,603,000 1 Includes General, Measure E, & Measure G Funds
2 Measures E and G tax revenues
The general funds’ primary sources of revenue are the sales & use tax, the transactions & use tax, property taxes, and property tax in lieu of vehicle license fees. During the first six months of the current fiscal year, these revenues were approximately $57.8 million, $3.1 million ahead of last year, while general fund revenues and transfers in, as a whole, totaled $75.1 million, approximately $4.6 million more than the same period last year. The most significant factor in the year-to-year difference is receipts from sales-related taxes, which, combined, were $2.1 million higher than those received for the same period of the prior fiscal year. Combined, sales-related taxes currently are projected to end the year $2.6 million above their budgeted amounts (Sales & Use +$0.9 million, Transactions & Use +$1.7 million). Property taxes are projected to be $0.8 million more than budgeted. And property tax in lieu of VLF will be $0.1 million higher. “Other Revenues” comprises all other general fund revenues not specifically identified in the above table, e.g., franchise fees and business license taxes. These revenues were $2.0 million higher during the first half of the year compared to the first half of last year. As is to be expected, some of the accounts are ahead of last year’s amounts and some are behind, because of the nature of the funding source and variations that occur from year to year in the timing of receipts. Staff has been unable to estimate revenues to be collected or allocated at year end; however, as a whole, these revenues are expected to meet, or slightly exceed their budgeted total. “Transfers In” primarily represents transfers from its Gas Tax funds, to fund some of the City’s street-maintenance-related expenditures, which are budgeted in the General Fund. In addition, it includes the furlough transfers to the General and Measure E Funds from the Measure G Fund and transfers from the Traffic Safety Fund, to support enforcement of the California Vehicle Code. At the fiscal year mid-point, transfers to the general funds were $0.6 million lower for the current fiscal year than for fiscal year 2022, due to a combined $0.5 million decrease in the furlough transfers, which is being phased out over a two-year period, ending in fiscal year 2024. This is amount is offset by a corresponding decrease of $0.5 million (rounded) in transfers out from the Measure G Fund to the General and Measure E Funds, which is referenced in the “Operating Expenditures” section below. Transfers in, individually and overall, are not expected to deviate from their budgeted amounts.

Operating Expenditures & Transfers Out
Expenditures through December 31, 2022 are ahead of last year’s pace overall. A comparison of fiscal-year-to-date general fund expenditures as of the mid-point of the current and previous fiscal years are shown in Table 3 below. Fiscal-year-to-date expenditures and their budgeted totals are reflected in Table 4.

Page | 4
Table 3
General Fund1 Operating Expenditures by Category as of December 31st Fiscal Year 2023 vs Fiscal Year 2022
Category FY 23 FY 22 Difference
Personnel Compensation 54,666,000 $51,343,000 $3,323,000 Maintenance & Operations 10,452,000 8,045,000 2,407,000 Capital Outlays 642,000 340,000 302,000
Transfers Out 16,307,000 19,932,000 (3,625,000)
Total $82,067,000 $79,660,000 $2,407,000
1 Includes General, Measure E, & Measure G Funds
Table 4
General Fund1 Expenditures
Fiscal Year 2023 Budget vs Fiscal-Year-to-Date Actual
Category
Adopted
Budget
Adjusted
Budget
FYTD
Actual
FYTD vs
Adjusted
Personnel Compensation $105,295,000 $105,299,000 $54,666,000 $50,632,000 Maintenance & Operations 27,352,000 28,863,000 10,452,000 18,411,000 Capital Outlays 1,092,000 1,609,000 642,000 967,000
Transfers Out 31,776,000 51,751,000 16,307,000 35,444,000 Total $165,514,000 $187,522,000 $82,067,000 $105,455,000 1 Includes General, Measure E, & Measure G Funds
As of December 31, 2022, expenditures and transfers in totaled $82.1 million, above those at the same point last year by $6.0 million, with higher costs in all three categories. The primary factors in the year-to-year differences in these categories were:
▪ Personnel Compensation – higher salary and benefit costs are primarily the result of increased employee compensation per the City’s collective bargaining agreements and compensation plans with/for its labor groups, in addition to a $1.7 million increase in the combined unfunded accrued liability of the City’s pension plans and a $0.5 million increase in health insurance premium costs.
▪ Maintenance & Operations – expenditures are up in nearly all departments. Although no item accounts for a majority of the $2.4 million increase, the sum of drivers such as professional services, utilities, fuel, supplies, and maintenance have increased costs Citywide.

Staff also has been unable to complete thorough analyses of operating expenditures. But due to the vacancy factor included in personnel-related appropriations for the current fiscal year and projected overtime costs, particularly in the public safety departments, little, if any salary-related savings are anticipated for the current fiscal year. Maintenance & operations expenses are similarly expected to end the year near their budgeted totals.

Page | 5
“Transfers Out” includes both capital transfers (i.e., to the CIP Fund for capital project expenditures and vehicle purchases) and operating transfers to support the activities of various other City funds, including payment of debt service. Transfers to the CIP Fund at the fiscal year mid-point were $0.8 million higher for the current fiscal year than for fiscal year 2022, due to vehicle costs, which were $2.0 million greater, and $1.2 million lower spending on capital projects, primarily as the result of typical year-to-year variations in the timing of work and invoicing from contractors. Debt service transfers were $6.5 million lower than at the same point last year primarily due to a transfer from the Measure G Fund for a $7.4 million payment for early redemption (call) of some of the 2018 Lease Revenue Bonds for the City’s Public Safety Building Project made in the prior year but not the current year. Operating transfers to other funds were $2.1 higher compared to the prior fiscal year with the changes below primarily accounting for the difference:
▪ Industrial Waste Fund – $1.7 million;
▪ Internal Service – General Liability Self-Insurance (Internal Service) Fund – $0.5 million; ▪ Internal Service – Insurances Fund – $0.3 million;
▪ Emergency Medical Services Fund – $0.2 million;
▪ General Fund (furlough transfer from Measure G Fund) – ($0.4 million); ▪ Measure E Fund (furlough transfer from Measure G Fund) – ($0.2 million).

CIP appropriations unspent at fiscal year-end are not considered savings, as the remaining appropriations (and corresponding transfers) are carried forward to the succeeding fiscal year(s) until the applicable projects are completed and closed. Transfers to support the activities of other funds, including those for debt service, are not expected to deviate significantly from their budgeted amounts.

Staff will continue to monitor all revenues and expenditures and will provide updates as necessary and in conjunction with the Fiscal Year 2024 budget development process.

Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Expenditures
The total Fiscal Year 2023 CIP budget is $132.6 million and includes $36.6 million budgeted as part of the Fiscal Year 2023 adopted budget, $10.2 million in adjustments through December 31st, and $85.8 million of projects in progress for which appropriations are carried forward year-to-year until completed. Year-to-date CIP expenditures totaled $11.5 million, and encumbrances totaled $15.2 million at the mid-point of the year.

Department
Adjusted
Budget
FYTD
Actual
Budget -
Actual
%
Budget
Administration Used $ 89,000 $ 77,000 $ 12,000 86.5%
Finance 199,000 39,000 161,000 19.6%
Comm. Development 17,095,000 648,000 16,447,000 3.8%
Police 5,114,000 1,553,000 3,561,000 30.4%
Fire 4,426,000 958,000 3,469,000 21.6%
Public Works 83,322,000 7,778,000 75,543,000 9.3%
Page | 6
Library & Comm. Services 22,364,000 435,000 21,929,000 1.9% Total Exp. Budget $ 132,609,000 $ 11,488,000 $ 121,122,000 8.7% Operating and Capital Expenditure Adjustments
General Funds (General Fund, Measure E Fund, & Measure G Fund) Approval is requested for up to a combined $1.8 million of operating budget appropriation adjustments to the General and Measure G Funds and up to $0.8 million of adjustments to the CIP budget. Detailed costs and explanations for these requests are included in Exhibit A to this report.

A summary of requests by department and budget type (operating and CIP) are shown below. For the CIP amounts, supplemental appropriations would occur in the CIP Fund with corresponding increases to the capital transfer budgets of the applicable fund.

Department Operating CIP Total
General Fund
Administration (IT) $ - $ 352,000 $ 352,000
Human Resources 69,400 - 69,400
Community Development 46,500 - 46,500
Police 430,000 - 430,000
Fire 148,600 - 148,600
Public Works 250,000 97,000 347,000
Non-Departmental 774,500 - 774,500
Subtotal, General Fund $ 1,719,000 $ 449,000 $ 2,168,000 Measure G Fund
Comm. Dev. $ 82,000 $ - $ 82,000
Library & Comm. Services 15,000 373,900 388,900
Subtotal, Measure G Fund $ 97,000 $ 373,900 $ 470,900
Total $ 1,816,000 $ 822,900 $ 2,638,900
Other Funds
Approval is also requested for appropriation adjustments for non-general funds. Detailed costs and explanations for these requests are included in Exhibit A to this report. A summary of requests by fund and budget type are shown below. All funds listed are funded by restricted funding sources. As with the general fund adjustments above, for the CIP amounts, supplemental appropriations would occur in the CIP Fund with corresponding increases to the capital transfer budgets of the applicable fund.

Page | 7
Fund Operating CIP Total
Harden Ranch Land. Dist. Fund $ 46,000 $ - $ 46,000
Mira Monte Maint. Dist. Fund 41,000 - 41,000
Monte Bella Maint. Dist. Fund 80,200 - 80,200
Gas Tax - Motor Veh. Fuel Tax Fund - 53,000 53,000
Emergency Medical Svc Fund 157,500 - 157,500
Int. Svcs – Insurance Fund 20,000 - 20,000
Int. Svcs – Workers’ Comp. Fund 39,800 - 39.800
Int. Svcs – Fleet Maint. Fund 90,000 - 90,000
Grants / Intergovernmental Allocations
Ratification is requested for appropriation increases and corresponding revenue budgets of $160,000 and $110,233 to the Selective Traffic Enforcement Fund and Pedestrian & Bike Safety Program Fund, respectively, for grant-funded activities. Acceptance of these funds was approved by the City Council on September 20, 2022; however, approval of the required appropriations and corresponding revenue budget for the grant funds was not requested at that time.

Approval is requested for establishment of AB 178 Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant appropriation(s) in the Board of State & Community Corrections Fund totaling up to $96,887.41 and corresponding revenue budget to support AB 178 Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant activities. California’s 2022 Budget Act (AB 178, Chapter 45, Statutes of 2022) established the Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant Program which provides $50 million for city and county law enforcement agencies for the purpose of improving officer wellness and expanding mental health sources. The City of Salinas’ share, which is based on the number of peace officers, is $96,887.41. This allocation does not require an application or a State Agreement for receipt. The funds have been sent in advance, and the City is required to abide by all typical grant requirements, including restrictions on use and annual reporting regarding how funds are spent and the resulting impact.

Workforce Allocation Adjustments
Approval is requested for adjustment of the City’s workforce allocation and corresponding modification to the Classification – Salary Schedule for two positions in the Human Resources Department. Human Resources assumed administration of the City’s Workers’ Compensation Program from the City Attorney’s Office, effective September 1, 2022. Human Resources is requesting to add a Risk and Benefits Analyst and one Human Resources Technician. These positions will administer the Workers’ Compensation Program in addition to Human Resources’ risk management functions which include, among other things, safety, employee leaves, and Page | 8
employee benefit programs, such as employee health benefits, life insurance, Employee Assistance Program (EAP), flexible spending programs, deferred compensation, and unemployment.

Agreements
Ratification/Approval is requested for an agreement for emergency repair of the Sherwood Hall cooling tower, which failed in January 2023. Sherwood Hall was serving as an emergency shelter at the time of the failure, and this repair was necessary to continue operation of the shelter. In January, the Library & Community Services Department received notice that the Sherwood Hall cooling tower was inoperable. The cooling tower three-way valve had failed, and the chiller would not stay online. The water condenser was short cycling into the tower basin only. Upon further investigation, it was found that the tower piping had also failed due to debris and mineral deposit build up preventing air flow. Due to the nature of the repairs and with the facility being used as a Shelter due to the storm, consistent with Salinas Municipal Code section 12-24, given the emergency need to protect the public health and safety, the City entered into an agreement with Environmental Systems Inc. in the amount of one hundred and seventy-two thousand, four hundred and twenty-nine dollars ($172,429.00). Environmental Systems was selected due to their familiarity of the cooling tower and is the only semi-local vendor certified to work on the Delta System that runs the HVAC system at Sherwood Hall; no other local vendors possess the ability to complete this sort of repairs.

CIP Appropriations
As part of its ongoing efforts to improve the City’s financial operations and management, Department of Finance staff is reviewing the manner in which activities have been budgeted and has determined appropriations for operating activities appear in the CIP budget, where only capital activities should be appropriated. To correct this, the appropriations for these activities/programs should be transferred from the CIP budget to the operating budgets for their funding sources.

These transfers will have a “net zero” affect upon the City’s total combined operating and capital budget, as the appropriations will be moved from the CIP budget to the operating budget in equal amounts.

Due to the nature of these activities, their unspent appropriations at year-end should be reserved in the same manner as they would be if left in the CIP budget, i.e., as assigned fund balance until the appropriations have been expended. Further, since some of these activities have significant costs and multiple funding sources, the appropriations for these activities have been established to set aside funding in advance for the costs. In these cases, establishment of a separate fund may be necessary. As noted above, however, transfer of the appropriations will have no net impact upon the City’s overall budget.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

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

Page | 9
STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

Monitoring the growth of revenues and expenditures, including determining when supplemental appropriations are necessary, supports the City of Salinas Strategic Plan 2023-2025 goal of Effective Government.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

Preparation of this report and supplemental appropriation schedule required collaboration with all departments.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

If approved, the supplemental appropriations requested would increase the City’s general fund appropriations by up to $2,638,900. This amount exceeds the current fiscal year’s net budgetary surplus of $2.2 million. However, assets accrued from prior years’ operations and the current fiscal year’s revenues, which are projected to exceed their overall budgeted totals, are expected to be sufficient to accommodate all of the requests. The fund balances of the other funds for which supplemental appropriations are requested are sufficient to accommodate those requests.

As noted above, transfers of CIP Fund appropriations to operating budgets will have no fiscal impact, nor will the establishment of AB 178 Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant appropriation(s) totaling up to $96,887.41 in the Board of State and Community Corrections Fund, due to the establishment of a corresponding revenue budget in the same amount.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution – Fiscal Year 2023 Mid-Year Budget Adjustments

2. Exhibit A – Fiscal Year 2023 Supplemental Appropriation Requests

3. Agreement – Environmental Systems, Inc., of Northern California 1 RESOLUTION NO. ______ (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION APPROVING BUDGET ADJUSTMENTS AND
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2023

OPERATING AND CAPITAL BUDGETS FOR THE CITY OF SALINAS
WHEREAS, on June 14, 2022, the City Council of the City of Salinas adopted the Fiscal Year 2023 Operating and Capital Budgets; and
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2023 the City Council of the City of Salinas met and reviewed the mid-year budget and considered staff’s recommended budget adjustments, workforce allocation adjustments, and agreement for emergency repair of the Sherwood Hall cooling tower.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Salinas, that the Council hereby accepts the Fiscal Year 2023 Mid-Year Budget Review report; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Salinas, that the Council hereby approves supplemental appropriations for fiscal year 2023 up to the amounts listed on the attached Exhibit A; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Salinas, that the Council ratifies appropriation increases and corresponding revenue budgets of $160,000 and $110,233 to the Selective Traffic Enforcement Fund and Pedestrian & Bike Safety Program Fund, respectively, for grant-funded activities; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Salinas, that the Council authorizes the establishment of AB 178 Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant appropriation(s) in the Board of State and Community Corrections Fund totaling up to $96,887.41 and corresponding revenue budget to support AB 178 Officer Wellness and Mental Health Grant activities; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Salinas, that the Council authorizes adjustment of the City’s workforce allocation, to add a Risk/Benefit Analyst position and a Human Resources Technician position and corresponding modification to the Classification – Salary Schedule; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Salinas, that the Council ratifies the agreement with Environmental Systems, Inc. of Northern California for emergency repair to the Sherwood Hall cooling tower for a not-to-exceed amount of $172,429; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Salinas, that the Council authorizes the City Manager to direct the transfer of appropriations for operating activities 2 currently in the City’s CIP budget to the appropriate operating budgets, establishing a separate fund, if necessary, and designate unspent appropriations for the activities at fiscal year-end as assigned fund balance until the appropriations have been expended.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 7
th day of March, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
______________________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
Supplemental Appropriation Request
Fiscal Year 2023
Fund: 1000 - General Fund
Human Resources Department
Risk/Benefit Analyst (25%) - 3 months of FY 22-23 (April - June 2023). 8,900.00 HR Technician (50%) - 3 months of FY 22-23 (April - June 2023). 13,100.00 Neogov Applicant Tracking System necessary for HR recruitment. 47,400.00 Subtotal Human Resources Department 69,400.00
Community Development Department
Two (2) new radios for the Salinas Outreach Response Team to be compatible with Salinas PD, Fire, and County Communications to provide safety during street outreach. 20,500.00
Tenting of 65 W. Alisal due to termites. Previous treatments have not worked. 26,000.00 Subtotal Community Development Department 46,500.00
Police Department
At 50% through the FY, this line item is 94% through the budget, and for all funds we are 56% through the OT budget. This is $226,723 overbudget for OT. We do not have salary savings to cover this overage. We require additional funding to support continued OT to address homeless issues. In the first four months of the FY, we were able to document 1,428 hours of homeless-related OT at a cost of approximately $127,931. 250,000.00
Funds to augment the Federal award for the Salinas Police Integrated Technology for Community Safety. Since the submission of the award application in early-2022, equipment prices have increased significantly, resulting in a shortfall of just over $150,000. We are requesting funds that will allow us to purchase the full amount of equipment as indicated in the original Earmark application.
150,000.00
Supplemental
Appropriation
Explanation/Justification Requested

Page 1 of 8 ends

Supplemental Appropriation Request
Fiscal Year 2023
Fund: 1000 - General Fund
Supplemental
Appropriation
Explanation/Justification Requested
Funds to support contracted Information Technology Support services given the hold placed on the creation of an additional IT position to support the Police and Fire Departments.
30,000.00
Subtotal Police Department 430,000.00
Fire Department
Training Overtime for periods above 56 hours and while attending paramedic training. 42,600.00 Backfill Overtime for periods when coverage is needed for the positions left open on the line while personnel are attending paramedic training.
14,100.00
Training classes are held at a non-commutable distance. 11,200.00 The department has experienced difficulty recruiting certified paramedics, much less those who can provide advanced life support. Expanding the paramedic force will allow the department to accurately and efficiently staff engines while relieving significant mandatory overtime due to short staffing.
27,800.00
To replace decaying/faulty and low stock of radios. 52,900.00 Subtotal Fire Department 148,600.00
Public Works Department
Original budget was created to accommodate for our CPR and other Admin trainings. HR has recently brought to our attention that in-house training of drivers that are in need of their Class A license are no longer acceptable within the State of California.

An outside source for this training is being set in motion by the HR department but the cost has fallen back to Public Works to fund the program. The original budget did not take into account the fee that would be charged to get our employees trained and certified. At this time there are 6 employees that need to be certified. 40,000.00
The account has been exhausted due to HVAC/Plumbing/Roof expenditures. Facilities has been replacing HVAC units that have failed as well as piping and roof leaks. There is additional HVAC control issues as well as security issues at the yard that need to be addressed.
60,000.00

Page 2 of 8 ends

Supplemental Appropriation Request
Fiscal Year 2023
Fund: 1000 - General Fund
Supplemental
Appropriation
Explanation/Justification Requested
This account has been exhausted due to repairs made to HVAC units/Duct system. The repairs are necessary due to meeting required minimum air standards. We have also had half of the sump pump system fail which brought on other necessary repairs to the plumbing system. There has been an increase of costs when getting contractors to perform work over the last year. This amount will also cover security for the city yard which has been broken into on a weekly basis. These labor funds are tied to the increase in building maintenance supplies.
150,000.00
Subtotal Public Works Department 250,000.00
Non-Departmental
City Manager contingency budget for unanticipated expenditures throughout the end of the fiscal year. 270,000.00 To fund the new Information Technology asset management project. 99,000.00 Various IT related overages including copier repairs, copier/printer leases, outside services and support, software renewal and licensing, and telecommunications support.
248,000.00
Transfer Out to Fund 2501 EMS requests. 157,500.00
Transfer Out to Fund 5800 CIP requests. 449,000.00
Subtotal Non-Departmental 1,223,500.00
TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST $ 2,168,000.00

Page 3 of 8 ends

Supplemental Appropriation Request
Fiscal Year 2023
Fund: 1200 - Measure G
Community Development Department
Eight (8) new radios for Code Enforcement Officers to be compatible with Salinas PD, Fire, and County Communications for officer safety.
82,000.00
Subtotal Community Development Department 82,000.00
Library & Community Services Department
The Aquatic Center's budget is at capacity with no funds available for any maintenance or repairs for the remaining months of the fiscal year.
15,000.00
Subtotal Library & Community Services Department 15,000.00 Non-Departmental
Transfer Out to Fund 5800 CIP requests. 373,900.00
Subtotal Non-Departmental 373,900.00
TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST $ 470,900.00
Explanation/Justification
Supplemental
Appropriation
Requested

Page 4 of 8 ends

Supplemental Appropriation Request
Fiscal Year 2023
Fund: 2501 - Emergency Medical Service Fund
124,100.00
33,400.00
TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST $ 157,500.00
Explanation/Justification
Supplemental
Appropriation
Requested
The Lucas Device is a backpack sized CPR technology designed to increase opportunities for better patient outcomes. It is placed around the chest of a patient in need of CPR and uses a plunger like motion to provide continuous chest compressions to the patient. The Lucas Device will help Salinas Fire provide the best quality service to all areas of the City.

Page 5 of 8 ends

Supplemental Appropriation Request
Fiscal Year 2023
Fund: 5800 - Capital Projects
This CIP is for the design and implementation of a video data archive, backup, index and retrieval system. The systems will be a combination of technology including networking, hardware and software. This is compliance related expenditure. GENERAL FUND 1000.
352,000.00
Architectural design services and construction for alterations and accessibility improvements to the existing Finance Department service area consisting of public and staff side counter area, service window, staff entry door and public self-service kiosks located on the 1st floor of City Hall. GENERAL FUND 1000. 97,000.00
201,400.00
172,500.00
This CIP is used for traffic signal repairs and upgrades. It is critical for responding to QAlerts and service requests. This account funds replacement of video detection cameras, controller units, radios, ICCUs, MMUs, and switches. The CIP budget was lower than previous years, and the account is at 84% YTD. Additional funding is requested to ensure there are funds to get through the end of the fiscal year. GAS TAX 2404.
53,000.00
TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST $ 875,900.00
Explanation/Justification
Supplemental
Appropriation
Requested
The Recreation and Parks Division received notice that the Sherwood Hall Cooling Tower is inoperable. The cooling tower threeway valve has failed, and the chiller will not stay on. In addition, the tower piping has also failed with debris and mineral deposits preventing flow, leaving the building's HVAC cooling system inoperable at this time. The winter storms of 2023 exacerbated the need for new roofs at the Community Center and Sherwood Hall. The leakage amount throughout the facility is substantial that repairs are no longer an option.

Ratification of the emergency agreement for the cooling tower repair is also requested.

MEASURE G 1200.

Page 6 of 8 ends

Supplemental Appropriation Request
Fiscal Year 2023
Fund: Assessment & Maintenance Districts
2106 - Harden Ranch Landscape District
Tree trimming throughout district. 46,000.00
Subtotal 2106 - Harden Ranch Landscape District $ 46,000.00 2108 - Mira Monte Maint District
To cover cost of irrigation repair and tree trimming service (unanticipated cost). 41,000.00 Subtotal 2108 - Mira Monte Maint District 41,000.00
2109 - Monte Bella Maint District
To cover cost of landscape services at Monte Bella park (district portion), inadvertently left out of annual budget due to cross departmental duties' assignments.
40,200.00
Tree trimming along Monte Bella Soundwall. 40,000.00
Subtotal 2109 - Monte Bella Maint District 80,200.00
TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST $ 167,200.00
Explanation/Justification
Supplemental
Appropriation
Requested

Page 7 of 8 ends

Supplemental Appropriation Request
Fiscal Year 2023
Fund: Internal Service Funds
7102 - Internal Services Insurances
First Alarm Employee Wellness, necessary Internal Service charges per HR. 20,000.00 Subtotal 7102 - Internal Services Insurances $ 20,000.00 7103 - Worker's Comp
Risk/Benefits Analyst (75%) - 3 months of FY 22-23 (April - June 2023). 26,700.00 HR Technician (50%) - 3 months of FY 22-23 (April - June 2023). 13,100.00 Subtotal 7103 - Worker's Comp 39,800.00
7120 - Fleet/Equipment Maintenance
The Police Dept. has spent 56% of the vehicle parts budget. At this spending rate we will be approximately $40,000 over budget for vehicle parts and supplies. This overage is the result of significant and expensive repairs (engines, transmissions, etc.) required to keep existing vehicles on the road while awaiting the upfitting of Police Vehicles. (Delayed due to the continued vacancy of the Upfitting position).
40,000.00
During the FY 23 budget process, $55,000 was removed from the budget to support 6-months of a new Upfitting Position which HR anticipated to be hired by January 1st. That position is not filled and the Police Department currently has 21 vehicles which require upfitting. We have identified a vendor willing to contract to assist with the building of the vehicles and we need $50,000 to support this service.
50,000.00
Subtotal 7120 - Fleet/Equipment Maintenance 90,000.00
TOTAL SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS REQUEST $ 149,800.00
Explanation/Justification
Supplemental
Appropriation
Requested

Page 8 of 8 ends

Agreement for Services v. November 2022 Page 1 of 8
Environmental Services Inc.

January 2023

AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SALINAS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES INC.

Sherwood Hall – Cooling Tower Emergency Repairs
THIS AGREEMENT is executed this 20th day of January 2023, (“Agreement” or “Contract”) between the City of Salinas, a California Charter city and municipal corporation (hereinafter “City”) and ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, INC., OF NORTHERN CALIFORNIA, a California corporation (hereinafter “Contractor”).

IT IS HEREBY MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

1. Scope. Contractor hereby agrees to provide to the City, as the scope of services under this Agreement, the following services: Emergency Repair to Sherwood Hall cooling tower. Scope of work is further discussed in Contractor’s Proposal dated 1/13/23, Attachment B.]

2. Timeliness. Contractor shall perform all tasks in a timely fashion, as set forth more specifically in Section 3 below. Failure to so perform is hereby deemed a material breach of this Agreement, and City may terminate this Agreement with no further liability hereunder, or the city may agree in writing with Contractor to an extension of time.

3. Term. The work under this Agreement shall commence January 20, 2023, and shall be completed by August 31, 2023 unless City grants a written extension of time as set forth in Section 2 above.

4. Payment. City agrees to pay, and Contractor agrees to accept as full and fair consideration for the performance of this Agreement, one hundred and seventy two thousand, four hundred and twenty-nine Dollars ($172,429.00) as more fully described in title of Contractors Proposal, Attachment B. Contractor has no right of reimbursement for expenses under this Agreement.

Compensation shall become due and payable 30 days after City’s approval of Contractor’s submission of monthly written invoices to the City. The payment of any compensation shall be contingent upon performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement to the satisfaction of the City. If City determines that the work set forth in the written invoice has not been performed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, City shall not be responsible for payment until such time as the work has been satisfactorily performed.

5. Meet & Confer. Contractor 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 City to insure timely and adequate performance of this Agreement.

6. Insurance. Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of this Agreement insurance meeting the requirements specified in Attachment A hereto.

7. Indemnification. Contractor shall hold harmless, defend at its own expense, and DocuSign Envelope ID: F8A5ABC9-985B-4C32-86AF-341B47E23550 Agreement for Services v. November 2022 Page 2 of 8
Environmental Services Inc.

January 2023
indemnify City and its officers, officials, employees, agents, and volunteers from and against all liability, claims, damages, losses, and/or expenses including reasonable City attorney fees arising from all acts or omissions of Contractor or its officers, agents, or employees arising out of the performance of the work under this Contract, caused in whole or in part by any negligent act or omission of the Contractor, any subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them, or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, except where caused by the active negligence, sole negligence or willful misconduct of the City.

8. Licensing. Contractor warrants that it is properly licensed to perform the work specified under this Agreement, including but not limited to possession of a current City business license.

9. Termination. City may terminate this Agreement upon ten days’ written notice. The amount of damages, if any, as a result of such termination may be decided by negotiations between the parties or before a court of competent jurisdiction.

10. Agency. In performing the services specified under this Agreement, Contractor is hereby deemed to be an independent contractor and not an agent or employee of City.

11. Non-Assignability. The rights and obligations of Contractor hereunder are not assignable and cannot be delegated without written consent of City.

12. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire Agreement between the parties hereto and supersedes any and all prior agreements, whether oral or written, relating to the subject matter thereof. Any modification of the Agreement will be effective only if it is in writing signed by both parties hereto.

13. Validity. If any provision in this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions will continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way.

14. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in multiple originals, each of which is deemed to be an original, and may be signed in counterparts.

15. Laws. Contractor agrees that in the performance of this Agreement it will comply with all applicable State, Federal and local laws and regulations. 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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement is entered into by the parties hereto on the day and year first written above.

DocuSign Envelope ID: F8A5ABC9-985B-4C32-86AF-341B47E23550 Agreement for Services v. November 2022 Page 3 of 8
Environmental Services Inc.

January 2023

CITY OF SALINAS
__________________________________
Steve Carrigan
City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_________________________________
Christopher A. Callihan, City Attorney, or
Rhonda Combs, Assistant City Attorney

CONTRACTOR
___________________________________
By (Printed Name):___________________
Its (Title):___________________________
DocuSign Envelope ID: F8A5ABC9-985B-4C32-86AF-341B47E23550 Corp. Sec.

Gene Enfantino
Agreement for Services v. November 2022 Page 4 of 8
Environmental Services Inc.

January 2023
Attachment A
Insurance Requirements
Contractor shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract, and for three years thereafter, insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work hereunder by the Contractor, his/her/its officers, agents, representatives, employees, and/or subcontractors.

MINIMUM SCOPE AND LIMIT OF INSURANCE
Coverage shall be at least as broad as:

1. Commercial General Liability (“CGL”): Insurance Services Office (“ISO”) Form 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 $2,000,000 per occurrence. If a general aggregate limit applies, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location (ISO Form CG 25 03 or 25 04) or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

2. Automobile Liability: ISO Form CA 0001 covering Code 1 (any auto), with limits no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage.

3. Workers’ Compensation: as required by the State of California, with Statutory Limits, and Employers’ Liability insurance with a limit of no less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.

4. Contractors’ Pollution Legal Liability and/or Asbestos Legal Liability and/or Errors and Omissions (if project involves environmental hazards): with limits no less than $1,000,000 per occurrence or claim, and $2,000,000 policy aggregate, on an annual basis.

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

Self-Insured Retentions
Self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by the City. At the option of the City, either: the Contractor shall cause the insurer shall to reduce or eliminate such self-insured retentions as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers; or the Contractor shall provide a financial guarantee satisfactory to the City guaranteeing payment of losses and related investigations, claim administration, 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.

Other Insurance Provisions
The insurance policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:

1. The City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers 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 Contractor including materials, parts, or equipment furnished in connection with such work or operations and automobiles owned, leased, hired, or borrowed by DocuSign Envelope ID: F8A5ABC9-985B-4C32-86AF-341B47E23550 Agreement for Services v. November 2022 Page 5 of 8
Environmental Services Inc.

January 2023
or on behalf of the Contractor. General liability coverage can be provided in the form of an endorsement to the Contractor’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).

2. For any claims related to this project, the Contractor’s insurance coverage shall be primary insurance coverage at least as broad as ISO CG 20 01 04 13 as respects the City, its officers, officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by the City, its officers, officials, employees, or volunteers shall be excess of the Contractor’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.

3. Each insurance policy required by this clause shall provide that coverage shall not be canceled, except with notice to the City.

4. A copy of the claims reporting requirements must be submitted by Contractor to the City.

5. If the services involve lead-based paint or asbestos identification/remediation, the Contractor’s Pollution Liability policy shall not contain lead-based paint or asbestos exclusions. If the services involve mold identification/remediation, the Contractor’s Pollution Liability policy shall not contain a mold exclusion, and the definition of Pollution shall include microbial matter, including mold.

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

Waiver of Subrogation
Contractor hereby agrees to waive rights of subrogation which any insurer of Contractor may acquire from Contractor by virtue of the payment of any loss. Contractor agrees to obtain any endorsement that may be necessary to affect this waiver of subrogation. The Workers’ Compensation policy shall be endorsed with a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City for all work performed by the Contractor, its employees, agents and subcontractors.

Verification of Coverage
Contractor shall furnish the City with original Certificates of Insurance including an additional insured endorsement and all required amendatory endorsements (or copies of the applicable policy language effecting coverage required by this clause) and a copy of the Declarations and Endorsement Page of the CGL policy listing all policy endorsements to City before work begins.

However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Contractor’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
Contractor shall require and verify that all subcontractors maintain insurance meeting all the requirements stated herein, and Contractor shall ensure that City is an additional insured on insurance required from subcontractors. For CGL coverage subcontractors shall provide coverage with a form at least as broad as CG 20 38 04 13.

Maintenance of Insurance
Maintenance of insurance by Contractor as specified shall in no way be interpreted as relieving DocuSign Envelope ID: F8A5ABC9-985B-4C32-86AF-341B47E23550 Agreement for Services v. November 2022 Page 6 of 8
Environmental Services Inc.

January 2023
Contractor of its indemnification obligations or any responsibility whatsoever and the Contractor may carry, at its own expense, such additional insurance as it deems necessary.

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.

Surety Bonds
Contractor shall provide the following Surety Bonds:

1. Payment bond

2. Performance bond

3. Maintenance bond
The Payment Bond and the Performance Bond shall be in a sum equal to the contract price. If the Performance Bond provides for a one-year warranty, a separate Maintenance Bond is not necessary. If the warranty period specified in the contract is for longer than one year a Maintenance Bond equal to 10% of the contract price is required. Bonds shall be duly executed by a responsible corporate surety, authorized to issue such bonds in the State of California and secured through an authorized agent with an office in California.

DocuSign Envelope ID: F8A5ABC9-985B-4C32-86AF-341B47E23550 Agreement for Services v. November 2022 Page 7 of 8
Environmental Services Inc.

January 2023
Attachment B
DocuSign Envelope ID: F8A5ABC9-985B-4C32-86AF-341B47E23550 Agreement for Services v. November 2022 Page
8 of 8
Environmental Services Inc.

January 2023
DocuSign Envelope ID: F8A5ABC9-985B-4C32-86AF-341B47E23550 City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-135, Version: 1
Appointment to the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency Board of Directors Consider the appointment of one member, and an alternate, to serve on the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency Board of Directors.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 3/1/2023
powered by Legistar™

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT

_________________________________________________________________________________ DATE: March 7, 2023
DEPARTMENT: ADMINISTRATION
FROM: Steven S. Carrigan, City Manager
BY: Jim Pia, Assistant City Manager
Patricia Barajas, City Clerk
TITLE: APPOINTMENT TO THE HITCHCOCK ROAD ANIMAL SERVICES

AGENCY BOARD ESTABLISHED BY THE JOINT EXERCISE OF

POWERS AGREEMENT
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

It is recommended that the City Council consider the appointment of one member, and an alternate, to the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency Board of Directors.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The County of Monterey and the City of Salinas established a Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement in December 2022, with an effective date of January 1, 2023. In the coming weeks, the Board of Directors will have their first meeting, with an appointment from the City Council as well as the City Manager.

BACKGROUND:

In the Fall of 2015, the County of Monterey and City of Salinas retained Management Partners to review the ongoing animal control services functions provided by Monterey County and the City of Salinas at separate locations in very close proximity to one another on Hitchcock Road. Management Partners presented their findings to both the County Board of Supervisors and the City Council on June 28, 2016.

At that time, the County and City agreed to establish an Animal Services Ad Hoc Committee. Appointed members included Supervisors John Phillips and Chris Lopez, and the City’s current members include Mayor Kimbley Craig, and Council Members Carla Gonzalez and Tony Barrera.

In November of 2017, the Salinas City Council and Monterey County Board of Supervisors approved an MOA for a shared Animal Services Administrator (Administrator) position to review options for consolidated animal services between the two entities. The position was filled in May 2018 and a joint effort on animal services operations began.

The Ad Hoc Committee agreed in October of 2019 to have staff explore the additional shared staffing services in the area of Animal Care and Veterinary Services. Discussions then took place with representatives of City and County staff and management and SEIU regarding feasibility and support for shared positions. All parties agreed to move forward, and on February 25, 2020 Amendment No. 2 was approved, thereby modifying the scope to include greater animal care and veterinary services, and adjusting the total funding of the pilot project. Amendment No. 3 was approved in July 2021, extending the terms of the prior Agreement to December 31, 2021. On Monday, November 15, 2021, members of the Ad Hoc Committee met again to discuss possible management options for the operations, including a review of a contract for services and the future possibility of a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA). The Ad Hoc Committee agreed that this Agreement would keep the shared animal services continuing while work on the JPA was completed. This JPA is now complete, and the Council adopted its establishment at the Council meeting of December 13, 2022.

In terms of this appointment to the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency Board, Council needs to make an appointment of a primary and an alternate, with initial discussion perhaps being an appointment from the ranks of the Ad Hoc Committee representatives which included Mayor Craig and Members Gonzalez and Barrera. However, the Council is not bound by this.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

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

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

This report aligns with the City Council’s goal of Effective and Culturally Responsive Government (City of Salinas Strategic Plan 2022-2025) by ensuring the City is represented in and working collaboratively on City/County-wide boards.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

The Administration, Police and City Attorney Departments coordinated on this report.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement

Page 1 of 22 ends

JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT
Establishing the
Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency
THIS JOINT EXERCISE OF POWERS AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) establishing the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency (“Agency”) is made and entered into as of January 1, 2023 (“Effective Date”), by and among the public agencies listed on the attached Exhibit A (collectively referred to as “Member Agencies” and individually as “Member Agency”) for the joint purpose of providing care, shelter, and services to animals.

RECITALS
WHEREAS, California Government Code Title I, Chapter 5, Division 7 (commencing with Section 6500) authorizes the Member Agencies to enter into an agreement for the joint exercise of any power common to them, and by that agreement, to create an entity that is separate from each of the Member Agencies; and
WHEREAS, each of the Member Agencies possess the power to provide Animal Services (defined in Section 1.15), including animal field services and animal shelter services, within their respective Jurisdictional Area (defined in Section 1.16); and WHEREAS, the Member Agencies possess the authority to issue bonds, expend bond proceeds, borrow and loan money for certain public purposes, and handle finances within their Member Agencies pursuant to the California Government Code; and WHEREAS, this Agreement is an appropriate means through which the Member Agencies may provide Animal Services because the Jurisdictional Areas of the Member Agencies are in close proximity to one another and are amenable to being served by the Animal Services and related Joint Facilities (defined in Section 1.20) under common administration and management and with the same equipment, resources, and personnel; and WHEREAS, the Member Agencies desire to share their animal services expertise and to optimize their expenditures in connection with the provision of the Animal Services and related Joint Facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Member Agencies have the mutual goal to provide life-saving aid, care, shelter, and support services for animals and this Agreement is in the best interest of animal welfare, staff safety, and public safety; and
WHEREAS, the Member Agencies of Monterey County and the City of Salinas entered into an emergency Memorandum of Understanding due to California’s COVID-19 state of emergency in April 2020, and said Member Agencies have successfully combined and shared services and staffing temporarily; and
WHEREAS, the separate provision, management, and administration of the Animal Services and related Joint Facilities in each Jurisdictional Area by each of their respective

Page 2 of 22 ends

Member Agencies and use of separate facilities, resources, and personnel may result in duplication of efforts, inefficiencies in administration, and excessive costs; and WHEREAS, in the judgment of the Member Agencies, the duplication of efforts, inefficiencies, and excessive costs can be eliminated or substantially reduced, to the substantial advantage and benefit of the animals, residents and taxpayers of all of the Member Agencies, if the administration and management of the related Joint Facilities, employing common equipment, resources, and personnel, were to be performed by and through a single public entity and the creation of such a single public entity is the purpose of this Agreement; NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the facts stated above, the mutual advantages to be gained, and the mutual covenants contained herein, it is agreed by and among the Member Agencies hereto as follows:

ARTICLE I

DEFINITIONS
Section 1.1. Unless the context otherwise requires, the words and terms defined in this Article shall have the meanings specified.

Section 1.11. Act means Article 1, Article 2, Article 3, and Article 4 (commencing with Section 6500) of California Government Code, Title 1, Chapter 5, Division 7, as it may be amended from time to time.

Section 1.12. Administrative Costs means those costs associated with administration and management of the Animal Services as detailed in Exhibit B. Said costs shall include, but are not limited to, costs associated with the provision of administrative supervisory services, human resources services, financial services, and dispatching services.

Section 1.13. Agency means the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency.

Section 1.14. Agreement means this joint exercise of powers agreement as it now exists or as it may from time to time be amended, supplemented, or as it may be modified by the addition of signatory parties or by any other supplemental agreement or amendment entered into, pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement.

Section 1.15. Animal Services means those services set forth in Exhibit B, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference.

Section 1.16. Area and Jurisdictional Area mean that area within the respective jurisdictions of the Member Agencies.

Section 1.17. Board of Directors means the governing board of the Agency referred to in Section 1.13 and more specifically, described in Section 2.6. Director means an individual member of the Board of Directors.

Page 3 of 22 ends

Section 1.18. Executive Director means the employee of the Lead Agency who is directly responsible to the Board of Directors and who is primarily responsible for the managerial oversight of the operations for the Agency, as further described in Section

3.5. Section 1.19. Fiscal Year means the period from July 1st to and including June 30th of the following year.

Section 1.20. Joint Facilities means the Animal Services facilities, equipment, resources, and property to be owned, leased, managed, and operated by the Agency and, if necessary, any changes thereto.

Section 1.21. Lead Agency means the jurisdiction which is directly responsible to the Board of Directors and which is primarily responsible for the managerial oversight of the operation for the Agency, as further described in Section 3.5.

Section 1.22. Legislative Bodies means the governing bodies over each Member Agency, including but not limited to, City Councils and County of Monterey Board of Supervisors. Legislative Body means any such individual governing body.

Section 1.23. Major Policy Decisions means those issues that materially change either the levels of service or the budget.

Section 1.24. Member Agencies means all of the public agencies who are signatories to this Agreement, which, as of the initial Effective Date of this Agreement, is the City of Salinas and the County of Monterey. Member Agency means any such individual public entity.

Section 1.25. Operational Plan means a plan approved by the Board of Directors, which shall describe in detail the operation of the Agency. Said plan shall include: the anticipated cost of providing the services as described in Exhibit B; the area in which those services shall be provided; the level of service which shall be provided in each of those areas; the anticipated cost for operation and maintenance of the Joint Facilities; the process by which yearly budgets shall be established; the hours of operation; and any other operational, budgetary, and financial process which may be deemed to be necessary or appropriate by the Board of Directors.

Section 1.26. Quorum means the presence of over 50% of the Board of Directors.

Section 1.27. Rules of the Board means the bylaws, rules, regulations, or other directives of the Board of Directors for the conduct of its meetings and affairs as further described in Section 2.9.

ARTICLE II

GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 2.1. Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is to create the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency, which would allow the Member Agencies to exercise their joint powers to

Page 4 of 22 ends

provide more efficient and economical Animal Services within the Area and would: 1) provide for the ownership, management, operation, and maintenance of the Joint Facilities; 2) implement the financing, acquisition, and construction of additions or improvements thereto, if needed; and 3) provide for the ownership, management, operations, and maintenance of any later acquired facilities or properties.

Section 2.2. Creation of Agency. Pursuant to the Act, there is hereby created a public entity to be known as the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency, or Agency, as defined in Section

1.13. The Agency, which shall administer this Agreement, is a public entity separate and apart from the Member Agencies. The debts, liabilities, and obligations of the Agency shall not constitute debts, liabilities, or obligations of any party of this Agreement.

Section 2.3. Member Agencies. The Agency shall be composed of the County of Monterey and the City of Salinas, initially. Any other jurisdiction not named as a party to this Agreement who later wishes to join the Agency, may do so if approved by a vote of three-fourths (3/4) or more, of the Board of Directors of the Agency. Said approval shall be conditioned upon the Joint Facility having sufficient capacity to accommodate the new participant’s needs, and the adoption of a resolution by the new jurisdiction’s governing body authorizing execution of an agreement that shall bind them to fully participate financially in the Agency. The new participants shall also be required to provide a “buy-in” contribution as set forth in Section 2.10.

Section 2.4. Term. This agreement shall become effective on the Effective Date and shall continue in effect thereafter unless terminated pursuant to Article IX.

Section 2.5. Transition Plan. Upon the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Members and the Agency will enter into or extend current service agreements, as applicable, for a Transition Period which will be from the Effective Date through June 30, 2023. The Transition Period may be extended by mutual written agreement of the governing bodies of the Members. The Transition Period is intended to provide the Agency with an opportunity to become fully organized and operational without compromising existing services provided to the Members.

Section 2.6. Governing Board. The Agency shall be governed by a Board of Directors and shall be called the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency Board. Each entity which is a Party to this Agreement shall have representation on the Board as follows:

1. Two members representing the County Board of Supervisors to include the Board of Supervisors and County Administrative Officer, or their designates.

2. Two members representing the City of Salinas to include the Salinas City Council and City Manager, or their designates.

Pursuant to Government Code section 6506, the Agency Board of Directors is designated as the administrator of this Agreement and of the Agency’s affairs and shall perform its duties and responsibilities in accordance with all provisions of this Agreement.

Section 2.6.1. All voting power of the Agency shall reside within the Board of Directors.

Page 5 of 22 ends

Section 2.6.2. Each Legislative Body shall appoint alternate Directors for that Member Agency. The alternate Director may act as a Director in the absence of the Director appointed by that Legislative Body.

Section 2.6.3. All Directors and alternates shall serve four-year (4) terms but serve at the pleasure of the Member Agency that appoints them.

Section 2.6.4. All vacancies on the Board of Directors shall be filled by the respective Legislative Body within thirty (30) days of the effective date of the vacancy or as soon thereafter as the Legislative Body may legally act. Any Director or alternate Director shall cease to be a Director when such person ceases to hold the office or the position within the respective public entity that entitles that Director or alternate Director to a position on the Board of Directors.

Section 2.6.5. Board Committees. The Board may, from time to time, establish one or more standing or ad hoc committees consisting of Directors to assist in carrying out the purposes and objects of the Agency, including but not limited to, a Budget and Finance Committee, Planning Committee, and Executive Committee. The Board shall determine the purpose and need for such committees. Meetings of standing committees shall be subject to the requirements of the Brown Act.

Section 2.6.6. Advisory Committee. The Board shall establish an Advisory Committee that shall be designed to ensure participation and provide input to the Board of Directors from the communities represented within the JPA; additionally, the Advisory Committee may also provide professional guidance in areas not already supported by the Agency.

The Advisory Committee shall serve in an advisory role to the Board of Directors and will consist of nine (9) members and appointment to the Advisory Committee, and governance regarding the Advisory Committee, shall be addressed in the Board of Directors Advisory Committee bylaws.

Section 2.6.7. Bylaws of the Board. The Board shall adopt, and from time to time amend by vote, the Bylaws of the Board as necessary or helpful in order for the Board to foster, facilitate or achieve the purposes expressed within this Agreement. These Bylaws shall govern all proceedings of the Board.

Section 2.7. Meetings of the Board of Directors. All meetings of the Board of Directors shall be public meetings, governed by the Brown Act, unless a specified closed session is held in accordance with the California Government Code.

Section 2.7.1. Regular Meetings. The Board of Directors shall provide for regular meetings (a minimum of four (4) per year) at a date, time, and place fixed by the Bylaws of the Board.

Section 2.7.2. Special Meetings. Special meetings and emergency meetings of the Board of Directors may be called in accordance with the provision of Section 54956, et seq., of the California Government Code, as may be amended from time to time. Special

Page 6 of 22 ends

Meetings may be called by two or more Directors representing two or more jurisdictions.

The meeting must be noticed in accordance with the Brown Act.

Section 2.8. Voting. All members of the Board will vote using weighted voting procedures based on the formula found in Exhibit C relating to the annual contributions to the Annual Budget pursuant to Section 6.3. The total percentage of operational funding for each Member Agency will be divided by the number of Directors representing that Member Agency to determine the percentage vote for each Director. A three-fourths (3/4) vote of the Board shall be required to approve the budget and Major Policy Decision, as defined in Section 1.23. Except as provided elsewhere in this Agreement, any action of the Board shall require a majority weighted vote of the Board.

Section 2.9. Conflict of Interest. The Agency Board shall adopt and thereafter maintain a conflict-of-interest code in compliance with applicable provisions of the Political Reform Act (Government Code Section 87300, et seq.) and the regulation adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission (California Code of Regulations, Section 1870, et seq.).

Section 2.10. New Member Agencies. Subject to the requirements set forth in Section 2.3 above, it is the intent of the Member Agencies to provide, to the extent permitted by law, for the inclusion at a subsequent date of such additional public entities, organized and existing under the Constitution or laws of the State of California, of new parties to this Agreement and members of the Agency. A new Member Agency shall be required to make a “buy-in” contribution in an amount to be determined by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the Board, and pay their share of annual operating costs and other expense pursuant to Section 6.3. For entities joining the Agency at any other date, other than the beginning of the Agency’s fiscal year, cash contributions for operating costs shall be prorated for the reminder of the fiscal year. New agencies who receive all Animal Services described in Exhibit B shall have two (2) members on the Board, and new agencies who receive fewer Animal Services shall have one (1) Board member.

ARTICLE III

ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
Section 3.1. Chairperson and Vice-Chairperson. The Board shall elect a Chairperson and a Vice Chairperson from amongst its members at its first meeting and thereafter, at the first regular meeting of the Board for each calendar year. In the event of the disqualification of permanent inability of the Chairperson to serve the remainder of their term, the Vice Chairperson shall assume the duties of the Chairperson and the Board of Directors shall elect a new Vice Chairperson for the reminder of the that term.

Section 3.1.1. The Chairperson shall be authorized to sign all resolutions of the Board of Directors and all contracts on behalf of the Agency and shall perform such other duties as may be imposed by the Board of Directors, consistent with the terms and provisions of this Agreement and the Bylaws of the Board.

Page 7 of 22 ends

Section 3.1.2. The Vice Chairperson shall be authorized to act as the Chairperson, exercise all of the power of the Chairperson, and perform all of the duties of the Chairperson in the temporary absence of the Chairperson.

Section 3.2. Secretary. The Executive Director shall designate an employee of the Lead Agency to serve as Secretary to the Board of Directors, who shall perform such other duties as may be imposed upon the Secretary by the Board of Directors and cause a copy of this Agreement to be filed with the California Secretary of State and the State of California, pursuant to Section 6503.5 of the Act. Should an Executive Director of the JPA not be in place during the formation of the Board of Directors, the Administrator of the Monterey County Animal Services shall designate a staff member to serve as the interim Secretary.

Section 3.3. Treasurer. The Executive Director shall designate an employee of the Lead Agency to serve as Treasurer of the Agency. Should an Executive Director of the JPA not be in place during the formation of the Board of Directors, the Administrator of the Monterey County Animal Services shall designate a staff member to serve as the interim Treasurer.

Section 3.3.1. The Treasurer shall be the depository and shall have custody of all of the accounts, funds, and money of the agency from whatever source. The Treasurer shall have the duties and obligation set forth in Section 6505 and 6505.5 of the Act, and shall assure that there shall be strict accountability of all funds and reporting of all receipts and disbursement of the Agency.

Section 3.3.2. The books and records of the Agency shall be open to inspection at reasonable times by representatives of the Member Agencies. The Treasurer shall, within ninety (90) days after the close of each fiscal year of within sixty (60) days after the termination of this Agreement, give a complete written report of all financial activities of the fiscal year to the parties thereto.

Section 3.3.3. The Treasurer shall, in accordance with Section 6505 and 6505.6 of the Act, cause the books of account and other financial records of the Agency to be audited annually by an independent public accountant or certified public accountant.

Section 3.4. Officers in Charge of the Property. Pursuant to Section 6505 of the California Government Code, the Treasurer shall oversee, handle, and have access to all accounts, funds, and money of the Agency and all records of the Agency relating to such accounts, funds, and money. The Secretary shall oversee, handle, and have access to all other records of the Agency.

The Executive Director, Animal Services Administrator or the supervisor of the Lead Agency in the absence of the Executive Director, shall oversee, manage, and have access to all physical property of the Agency.

Section 3.5. Management. The regular management of the operations and activities of the Agency shall be vested in the Executive Director, who shall be the Lead Agency’s Animal Services Administrator, unless another is approved by the Board of Directors. Unless otherwise provided by the Bylaws of the Board or resolution of the Board of Directors, the Executive Director shall have the following powers:

Page 8 of 22 ends

Section 3.5.1. To oversee, manage, maintain, and operate a shelter facility and provide animal support services and animal control services, including, but not limited to, food and shelter, veterinary aid, spaying and neutering, and care to animals; County and city licensing; adoption services; ordinance enforcement; community engagement and education; volunteers; animal control services in the field within the respective cities and unincorporated county; impounding of animals; and such other activities and services as deemed necessary or appropriate for animal welfare and public safety, pursuant to California law;
Section 3.5.2. To provide for the planning, design, and construction of any improvements or changes to the Joint Facilities and/or the leasing or remodeling of any existing facilities, or any new facilities to be operated by the Agency, as authorized by the Board of Directors;
Section 3.5.3. Except as otherwise provided in Section 4.2, to execute any contracts for capital costs, costs of special services, equipment, materials, supplies, maintenance, or repair that involve an expenditure by the Agency within the limits and in accordance with procedures to be established by the Agency in the manner provided for local agencies pursuant to Article 7, commencing with Section 54201 of Chapter 5 of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the California Government Code;
Section 3.5.4. To execute contracts in an amount up to a limit set by the Board of Directors;
Section 3.5.5. To appoint, employ, and manage all personnel required by the Agency for maintenance and operation of the Animal Services and the Joint Facilities, and all other employees authorized by the Agency’s budget and by the Board of Directors as either direct employees of the Agency, or if deemed necessary, as employees of the Member Agencies;
Section 3.5.6. To retain any consultants as authorized in the Agency’s budget and by the Board of Directors;
Section 3.5.7. Subject to approval of the Board of Directors, to appoint, employ, and manage all consultants and contractors required to be retained in connection with the design of any changes or improvements to the Joint Facilities or construction of new facilities;
Section 3.5.8. To expend funds of the Agency and enter into contracts whenever required or for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety, subject to the subsequent ratification of the Board of Directors;
Section 3.5.9. To dispose of any personal property of the Agency as may be provided in the Bylaws of the Board of Directors or otherwise authorized by the Board of Directors; Section 3.5.10. To approve and pay bills and expenses for the Agency of $50,000 or less, which are authorized in the Agency’s budget;

Page 9 of 22 ends

Section 3.5.11. To prepare and submit to the Board of Directors in time for revision and adoption by the Agency prior to March 1st of each year, the annual preliminary budget for the next succeeding Fiscal year referred to in Section 6.1; Section 3.5.12. Generally, to supervise the acquisition, construction, management, maintenance, and operation of the Joint Facilities and personnel of the Agency; Section 3.5.13. To perform such other duties as directed by the Board of Directors and report to the Board of Directors at such times and on such matters as the Board of Directors may direct.

Section 3.6. Legal Advisor. The legal advisor of, and provider of legal advice and services to, the Agency, shall be an attorney retained by the Agency for this purpose. The Board of Directors shall choose the attorney to retain and may choose to retain the services of a private attorney; the Board may alternatively choose to retain the County Counsel’s office of Monterey County, or the City Attorney’s office of the City of Salinas, for this purpose.

Section 3.7. Other Services. The Board of Directors shall have the power to appoint and employ such consultants and independent contracts as may be necessary for the purposes of and pursuant to this Agreement.

Section 3.9. Indemnity and Insurance. The Agency shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless each Member Agency to this Agreement and its respective Board of Director members, officers, agents and employees, from all claims, losses, damages, costs, injury, and liability arising out of the Agency’s performance of its obligations under this Agreement. The Executive Director shall obtain, and keep in place, policies of insurance with coverage and limits sufficient to protect the Agency and its Member Agencies from claims for damages arising from the activities of the Agency, its Board of Directors, officers, and employees. The policies of insurance described herein shall include, but shall not be limited to, coverage for automobile liability, comprehensive general liability, workers’ compensation, and excess liability. The Board of Directors shall, from time to time, set the appropriate levels of coverage and shall determine whether additional insurance coverage is appropriate. Each Member Agency shall be named as an “additional insured” on each policy of insurance.

ARTICLE IV

POWERS OF THE AGENCY
Section 4.1. General Powers. In the manner provided herein, the Agency shall exercise the powers common to each Member Agency as authorized by the laws of the California. As authorized by the act, the Agency shall be a public entity separate and distinct from the Member Agencies. The Agency shall have the power to finance, acquire, construct, manage, maintain, and operate the Joint Facilities. The Agency shall have all of the powers provided in Article 2 and Article 4 of the Act, unless specifically prohibited or restricted by the Agreement.

Section 4.2. Specific Powers. The Agency is hereby authorized to do all of the following:

Page 10 of 22 ends

Section 4.2.1. Until such time that the Agency is fiscally able to hire an Executive Director and direct employees, Monterey County may serve as the Lead Agency.

Services shall include, but not be limited to, the hiring and management of staff; the construction, management, maintenance, and operation of the Joint Facility; and the provision of Animal Services as set for in Exhibit B. Any modification to Exhibit B requires a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the Board of Directors.

Section 4.2.2. To make and enter into agreements in the name of the Agency within the limitations established by the Agency budget;
Section 4.2.3. At such time that the Agency is fiscally able, to employ agents or employees;
Section 4.2.4. To acquire, construct, manage, maintain, operate, hold, and convey real and personal property, including leasehold interests;
Section 4.2.5. To incur debts, liabilities, and obligations subject to the provisions of this Agreement, provided that no debt, liability, or obligation shall constitute a debt, liability, or obligation of any Member Agency;
Section 4.2.6. To participate in joint projects and cooperate with other agencies, counties, and local public or nonprofit groups;
Section 4.2.7. To apply for and accept grants, loans, or contributions from any public or private agency or individual, or the United States, the State of California, or any department, instrumentality, or agency thereof, for the purpose of financing the activities of the Agency;
Section 4.2.8. To sue or be sued, in its own name, but not in the name of any Member Agency;
Section 4.2.9. To manage and invest, pursuant to Section 6505.5 of the Act, those funds not needed to fulfill the immediate needs of the Agency, as deemed advisable by the Agency in the same manner and upon the same conditions as local agencies, pursuant to Section 53601 of the California Government Code;
Section 4.2.10. To carry out and enforce all provisions of this Agreement.

Section 4.3. Bonds. The Agency shall have all of the powers provided in Article 4 of the Act, including the power to issue bonds.

Section 4.4. Oversight of the Board of Directors by Member Agencies’ Legislative Bodies. The Agency shall have the responsibility of providing quarterly reports, in a format which will be determined by the Parties, and periodically attend Council or Board meetings as may be requested to provide information on the work of the Agency and to seek input.

ARTICLE V

Page 11 of 22 ends

METHODS OF PROCEDURE
Section 5.1. Delegation of Powers. Each Member Agency hereby delegates to the Agency, the following powers: 1) the power to purchase, maintain, operate, and manage any Animal Services equipment, resources, and real property acquired by, or provided to, the Agency; and 2) the power to employ, contract for, or otherwise acquire the necessary personnel to fulfill the obligations of the Agency under the terms of this Agreement.

Section 5.2. Joint Maintenance and Operation Fund. The Board of Directors shall establish a joint interest-bearing maintenance and operation fund (hereinafter refer to as the “Operating Fund”), which the Agency shall use to pay all administrative and operation expenses of the Agency and the maintenance and operation costs of the Joint Facilities. Each of the Member Agencies shall pay into said Operating Fund, its proportionate amount of the annually budgeted maintenance and operation costs, computed in accordance with the provisions of Section 6.3 of this Agreement.

Section 5.3. Capital Acquisition, Improvement, and Replacement Fund. The Board of Directors may, at its discretion, create an interest-bearing capital acquisition and replacement fund (hereinafter referred to as the “Capital Fund”) which shall be used for any of the following purposes: 1) the acquisition and construction of additional or new Joint Facilities; 2) the improvement or replacement of any other capital improvement owned or controlled by the Agency; or 3) the acquisition or replacement of capital equipment and property of the Agency.

Each Member Agency shall annually pay into said Capital Fund, its proportionate share of capital costs.

ARTICLE VI
BUDGET: MAINTENANCE, OPERATIONAL, AND OTHER COSTS
Section 6.1. Annual Budget. Annually, the Board of Directors shall adopt a budget for maintenance and operation costs, capital costs, costs of special services, and debt service payments. The Board of Directors shall adopt a preliminary budget prior to March 1 of each year and shall adopt a final budget prior to June 30 of each year. The Agency shall operate only under an approved fiscal year budget and may not operate at a deficit.

Section 6.1.1. Prior to the Board of Directors adopting a final budget, each Member Agency shall approve and authorize the contribution of its proportional share of the total preliminary budget, as set forth in Section 6.3.

Section 6.2. Records and Accounts. The Agency shall keep detailed books of accounts, which shall set forth the capital costs; costs of special services and maintenance; operation costs of the Joint Facilities and the provision of the Animal Services; and all financial transactions of the Member Agencies relating to the Joint Facilities and the provisions of the Animal Services. The books of the accounts shall also include any costs, expenses, or charges paid, or to be paid by each of the Member Agencies, and shall be open to inspection, in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.3. of this Agreement.

Page 12 of 22 ends

Section 6.3. Allocation of Costs and Expenses
Section 6.3.1. Annual Estimate. Prior to April 1 of each year, as a part of the preliminary budget, the Agency shall promptly furnish to each of the Member Agencies, an estimate of the total Annual Budget.

Section 6.3.2. Annual Budget. In establishing the Annual Budget and each Member’s proportional share thereof, the Board of Directors shall use a formula for distributing costs among the Members which may consider actual human population and workload statistics, including the number of animals received at any Joint Facility for the shelter portion of each Annual Budget and the number of field contacts made for the patrol portion of each Annual Budget. Prior to approval of the first Annual Budget for the Agency, the Board of Directors shall develop a formula to equitably distribute costs among the Members which shall require the unanimous approval of the Board of Directors. Once developed, the formula shall be reviewed by the Board of Directors every three (3) years. Modification to the formula shall require the unanimous approval of the Board of Directors. This formula shall constitute “Exhibit C” of this Agreement.

Revenue shall accrue to the Agency from: fines and impound fees, spay and neuter and adoption fees, pet licensing fees, boarding fees, and other fees taken in for operations and shall be credited to the Members’ share based on the proportionate share of the total costs.

Donations, both monetary and non-monetary shall be accepted by the Agency and shall be utilized by the Agency as approved by the Board of Directors.

Section 6.3.3. Insurance Costs. The premiums for the insurance policies described in Section 3.9 above, shall be apportioned annually among the Member Agencies using the percentages established above.

Section 6.3.4. Uninsured or Underinsured Claims. Costs associated with the claims not covered by insurance or which exceed the limits of any applicable policy of insurance, shall be apportioned between the Member Agencies using the percentages established above for the year in which the claim is filed. For purposes of this section, “costs” shall include all losses, costs, damages, fees, and expenses incurred during both the claim stage and during litigation, that arise out of or are related to any such claim or lawsuit (including but not limited to, general and special damages, litigation fees and expenses, travel expenses, pre-litigation fees, consultant fees, court costs, attorneys’ fees, mediator fees, discovery expenses, expert witness fees, and appeal costs and fees).

Section 6.4. Payment of Costs. Beginning on the Effective Date of this Agreement, and quarterly thereafter for each Fiscal Year, each Member Agency agrees to pay the Agency its proportional quarterly share of the total estimate annual costs and expenses as set forth in Section

6.3 above.

Section 6.4.1. Prior to January 1, and each year thereafter, a true-up calculation shall be performed wherein the actual expenditures incurred will be compared to the amounts paid

Page 13 of 22 ends

by Member Agencies. Any overpayment shall be credited in a manner determined by the Board of Directors. The amount of any underpayment shall be added to the Member Agency’s January 1 payment.

Section 6.5. Sources of Funds. Each Member Agency shall have discretion to pay the amounts due and owed under the terms of this Agreement from any source legally available to that Member Agency for such purpose.

Section 6.6. Level of Services and Charges to Member Agencies. Each Member Agency may contract with the Agency for a level of service which is greater than that described in Exhibit B to this Agreement. Any Member Agency electing to receive a higher level of service shall pay the contribution set forth in Section 6.3 together with an additional amount, as established by the Board of Directors, which is sufficient to cover all additional costs incurred or encumbered by the Agency to the provision of those additional services. In no event shall any other Member Agency be required to bear the financial burden of any additional services provided in accordance with this provision.

Section 6.7. Animal Services to Other Agencies. The Agency may provide Animal Services to public agencies not a party to this Agreement, but only upon unanimous approval of the Board of Directors. Such Animal Services shall be by contract, executed by the Chair of the Board of Directors. The Board shall establish the amount of charge for the service, which shall be billed and paid quarterly. Charges will be set with the intent of recovering all operational, capital and maintenance costs expended by the Agency in providing the animal services to a particular agency, both annually and for prorated periods thereof.

Section 6.8. Budget Authority for Executive Director. Notwithstanding what is otherwise provided in Section 3.5, or elsewhere in this Agreement, the Executive Director may not exceed the personnel staffing authorized in the budget, either in number, position classification, or salary. In addition, the Executive Director may not alter the capital budget, utilize any reserve contingency, or increase the total amount of the approved expenditure without the prior approval of the Board of Directors. The Executive Director may recommend expenditures for approval separate from the budget process, in which case the approval of the Board of Directors is required prior to any actual expenditure. The Executive Director must seek authorization from the Board of Directors for budgetary transfers or adjustments above $10,000, as necessary.

ARTICLE VII

ENFORCEMENT
Section 7.1. Enforcement by Agency. The Agency is hereby authorized to take any and all legal or equitable actions on behalf of the Agency, including by not limited to, the seeking of an injunction or specific performance, as necessary or permitted by law, to enforce this Agreement.

ARTICLE VIII

WITHDRAWAL OF A MEMBER AGENCY

Page 14 of 22 ends

Section 8.1. Continuation of Agreement. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 9.1, each Member Agency agrees that the withdrawal of a Member Agency pursuant to the provision of this Agreement shall not result in the termination of this Agreement or otherwise affect the ability of the Board of Directors of the remaining Member Agencies to carry out and fulfill the purposes of this Agreement provided that two or more Member Agencies continue to participate.

If, however, the withdrawal results in only one Member Agency continuing to participate, this Agreement shall be deemed to be terminated by mutual agreement and the provisions of Article IX shall apply.

Section 8.2. Withdrawal. A Member Agency may withdraw from the Agency by providing written notice thereof to the Agency. The withdrawal shall become effective on the first day of the fiscal year which is at least six (6) months after service of the notice of withdrawal. Except as provided in Section 8.1. above, the Withdrawal shall in no way affect the rights or obligations of the remaining Member Agencies nor shall it relieve the withdrawing Member Agency of its obligation to pay any amounts due and owing under the terms of this Agreement. In the event that Bonds have been issued, the withdrawing Member Agency shall remain liable for the payment of its proportional share of those Bonds and any interest. Each Member Agency shall retain the right to use its proportionate share of the Joint Facility.

Section 8.3. Waiver of Distribution Upon Withdrawal. Subject to the limitations contained in Section 9.1 below, withdrawal from the Agency shall constitute a waiver of any right which that Member Agency may have to any of the Assets or Cash Reserves of the Agency. Any Member Agency which has withdrawn from the Agency shall likewise waive its right to the distribution of any of the Assets or Cash Reserves of the Agency occasioned by the subsequent dissolution of the Agency.

ARTICLE IX

TERMINATION OF THE AGREEMENT AND DISSOLUTION OF THE AGENCY Section 9.1. Termination. By agreement approved by a vote of three-fourths (3/4) or more of the Board of Directors, the Member Agencies may mutually agree to terminate this Agreement and dissolve the Agency at any time. Upon termination of this Agreement, the debts and obligations of the Agency shall be divided between the Member Agencies based upon the percentages set forth in Section 9.3.

Section 9.2. Effective Date of Termination. The termination of this Agreement shall become effective on the first day of the fiscal year which is at least twelve (12) months after the notice of withdrawal under Section 8.1 or the submission of a written notice of termination submitted to the Board of Directors which has been approved by all of the Legislative Bodies of the current Member Agencies.

Section 9.3. Disposition of Assets. On the effective date of the termination, the Agency shall be dissolved, and each current Member Agency shall, within a reasonable time, receive its proportionate share of the assets of the Agency and contribute its proportionate or otherwise defined share toward the discharge of any enforceable liabilities incurred by the Agency as the same appear on the books of the Agency.

Page 15 of 22 ends

Section 9.3.1. Upon the termination of this Agreement, any assets acquired by the Agency during the period of its existence, which are still on hand, and all unencumbered cash reserves (collectively, “Assets and Cash Reserves”) shall be distributed to the current Member Agencies in the following manner: The total amount of maintenance and operating costs paid by each current Member Agency into the Operating Fund during the entire existence of the Agency shall be added together and the percentage of which each Member Agency’s total is in relation to the whole, shall be determined. (For any Member Agency which has withdrawn prior to termination of the Agreement, the amounts paid by that Member Agency shall be equally divided among the current Member Agencies based upon the above percentage, based on appraised value of the assets as of the effective date of the termination.)
Section 9.3.2. The distribution of assets may be made in kind or assets may be sold and the proceeds thereof distributed to the Member Agencies after discharge of all enforceable liabilities.

Section 9.3.3. In the event the current Member Agencies cannot agree upon an appropriate distribution, the City Managers and County Administrative Officers of all current Member Agencies, or their respective designees, shall meet promptly for the purpose of developing a method for distributing the Assets and Cash Reserves among the current Member Agencies.

Section 9.4. Winding Up the Agency. Following dissolution, the Agency shall remain in existence for the sole purpose of winding up the Agency’s affairs, which shall include, but shall not be limited to, the distribution of the Assets and Cash Reserves and the closing out of business and accounts.

ARTICLE X

MISCELLANEOUS
Section 10.1. Section Headings. All section headings in this Agreement are for convenience of reference only and are not to be construed as modifying or governing language in the section referred to or to define or limit the scope of any provision of this Agreement.

Section 10.2. Consent. Whenever in this Agreement consent or approval is required, the same shall not be unreasonably withheld.

Section 10.3. Law Governing. This Agreement is made under the provision of the California Constitution and laws of the State of California and shall be so construed.

Section 10.4. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended at any time, except as limited by Bond covenants, if any. All amendments to the Agreement must be in writing and must be approved by a three-fourths (3/4) vote of the Board of Directors and approved by the Legislative Bodies of the Member Agencies prior to becoming effective.

Section 10.5. Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement is determined to be illegal or invalid for any reason, all other provisions and articles of this Agreement shall remain

Page 16 of 22 ends

in full force and effect unless and until otherwise determined. The illegality of any provision of this Agreement shall in no way affect the legality and enforceability of any other provisions of this Agreement.

Section 10.6. Successors. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors of the respective Member Agencies. No Member Agency may assign any right or obligation hereunder without the express written consent of the other Member Agencies.

Section 10.7. Notice. Any notice required to be given or delivered by any provision of this Agreement shall be personally delivered or deposited in the U.S. mail, and shall be deemed to have been received by the party receiving the notice upon the earlier of receipt or 72 hours after mailing.

Section 10.7.1. The Parties may agree to e-mail service but up until the Parties come to this agreement, Section 10.7 prevails.

Section 10.8. Counterpart Execution. This Agreement, or any amendment to this Agreement, may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original and said counterparts shall constitute one in the same document which may be sufficiently evidenced by one counterpart.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the date and year first herein written above.
-Signatures on Following Pages-

Page 17 of 22 ends

Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency
Signature Page
COUNTY OF MONTEREY: CITY OF SALINAS:

Chair or designee
Monterey County Board of Supervisors
Mayor
City of Salinas
Dated: Date:

Approved as to Form: Approved as to Form:

Office of the County Counsel City Attorney
___________________________________
City Clerk

Page 18 of 22 ends

Exhibit “A”
Member Agencies
The following public agencies, collectively referred to as “Member Agencies” and individually as “Member Agency” are noted as:

County of Monterey - Effective Date 1/1/2023
City of Salinas - Effective date 1/1/2023

Page 19 of 22 ends

Exhibit “B”
Animal Services
The term “Animal Services” in the Agreement to which this Exhibit “B” is attached means all the following services:

A. Field Services
Field Services means all the following services, including any vehicles, communications equipment, office supplies, field and administrative personnel, and any other personnel, supplies and equipment, reasonably required to perform the following services (the “Field Services”):
 Pick up of confined stray dogs.
 Pick up deceased animals, including wildlife when there is no other local agency providing the service.
 Pick up of injured, sick, or abandoned stray domestic animals including dogs, cats, and other small animals commonly kept as pets, without regard to weight, that are located on public property or readily accessible on private property with the permission of the property owner, occupant, or the property owner’s or occupants authorized agent.
 Respond to emergency calls such as animals requiring rescue, causing a public safety concern, or attacking people during business hours.  Investigating complaints of animal bites or attacks on humans, including the completion of a report that includes the interviewing of parties involved, quarantining animals which have bitten humans, preparing and transporting biting animal specimens for rabies testing, and investigating alleged violations of a quarantine.
 Investigating complaints of potentially dangerous and vicious dogs and provide administrative hearing as required.
 Responding to complaints of animals running at large, to exclude cats and wildlife.
 Responding to complaints of domestic animals causing a nuisance, including noise complaints, to include mailings, additional patrol, referral to a mediation program, and issuing of citations per jurisdictional based ordinance.
 Respond as staffing allows to police assist calls on animal related issues, which service may include taking control of an animal on the scene.  Investigate complaints regarding the lack of proper care, condition, or attention of domestic animals by their owners.
 Investigate compilations regarding exceeding the limit of the maximum number of animals as applicable per jurisdictional based ordinance.

Page 20 of 22 ends

 Investigate complaints regarding animal related unsanitary conditions as applicable per jurisdictional based ordinance.
 Provide responsible pet owner education as it relates to domestic animals.  When staffing allows, provide animal safety training for service workers (i.e., postal employees, meter readers, code enforcement).  Issue administrative and criminal citations as applicable per jurisdictional based ordinance.
 When staffing allows, participate in any related committees or teams as related to public safety.
 Provide an Animal Control Officer on duty for afterhours emergency oncall service for a minimum of 4 days each week when minimum staffing levels are met.

B. Shelter Services.

Shelter Services means all the following services, including shelter facilities, supplies, animal care staff, supervisors and administrative personnel, and any other personnel, supplies, and equipment reasonably required to perform the following services (the “Shelter Services”):
 Shelter of abandoned, impounded, lost or stray domestic animals brought to the shelter by a Member Agency, a Good Samaritan, or shelter personnel.
 Quarantine provision of biting domestic animals that cannot be quarantined at home.
 Provision for surrender and reclaim of abandoned, lost, or stray domestic animals during established business hours.
 Provide adoption program of animals not reclaimed by owners.  Support as able a shelter-neuter-return program and/or feral cat sterilization program for community feral cats.
 Whenever possible, provide live outcomes for healthy or treatable animals through return to owner, placement with rescue partners, or adoption.  Provide humane euthanasia and disposal of unhealthy, untreatable, or otherwise unadoptable domestic animals that fail to meet the health and temperament standards of the shelter.
 Provision for collecting unpaid fees from the public for services provided or rendered.

C. Veterinary Services
Veterinary Services means all the following services, including office facilities, supplies and professional and trained personnel necessary to perform the following services (the “Veterinary Services”) by staff or by contract:

Page 21 of 22 ends

 Provision of regular veterinary services by staff or through contracts to treat and provide regular veterinary care to dogs, cats and other impounded domestic animals as needed.
 Monitor quarantined animals that have bitten or designate staff to monitor animals.
 Operate spay/neuter clinic that includes periodic public opportunities for free or low cost spay/neuter for residents of jurisdictional areas.  Through contract, provision of afterhours emergency veterinary care for injured/sick domestic animals found within member jurisdictions.  Provide additional spay/neuter opportunities for community through related vendors as available and as approved
D. Animal Licensing Services
Animal Licensing Services means all the following services, including any vehicles, office facilities, supplies, equipment and personnel necessary to perform the following services (the “Animal Licensing Services”):
 Computerized animal licensing including up to delinquent notices on licensing renewals and online purchasing capabilities.
 Provide licenses at animal shelter during established business hours.  When able, provide staff/volunteers to include issuing licenses at vaccinations, spay/neuter clinics or other community events, as applicable.  Issue assistance animal identification tags to qualified residents as required by state law.

E. Volunteer and Community Outreach Services
Volunteer and Community Outreach Services means all the following services, including any vehicles, office facilities, supplies, equipment, and personnel necessary to perform the following services (the “Volunteer and Community Outreach Services”):
 Provide regular volunteer opportunities inside the shelter to help support and enrich both care for the animals and programs within the shelter.  Provide volunteer and community outreach opportunities outside in the community to includes offsite adoption events and participation with events held within member agencies.
 Hold community outreach, education, and fundraising events.

F. Other services that may be provided and for which a fee may be charged:
 Pick up owned animals.
 Impound owner surrendered animals.
 Provide humane cat traps to the public to capture sick, injured or nuisance domestic animals, including feral cats.

Page 22 of 22 ends

Exhibit “C”
Voting Formula
RESOLUTION NO. __________________ (N.C.S.)

RESOLUTION APPOINTING A PRIMARY AND ALTERNATE CITY

REPRESENTATIVE TO SERVE ON THE HITCHCOCK ROAD ANIMAL SERVICES

AGENCY BOARD OF DIRECTORS
WHEREAS, in the Fall of 2015, the County of Monterey and City of Salinas retained Management Partners to review the ongoing animal control services functions provided by Monterey County and the City of Salinas; and
WHEREAS, on June 28, 2016 the County and City agreed to establish an Animal Services Ad Hoc Committee and appointed members included Supervisors John Phillips and Chris Lopez, and the City appointed Mayor Kimbley Craig and Council Members Carla Gonzalez and Tony Barrera; and
WHEREAS, on November 2017, the Salinas City Council and Monterey County Board of Supervisors approved a Memorandum of Agreement for shared Animal Services and subsequently approved Amendments No’s 1, 2, and 3; and
WHEREAS, on December 13, 2022 the City and County of Monterey approved the Joint Exercise of Powers Agreement (JPA); and
WHEREAS, the Article II of the JPA calls for the creation of and general provisions for the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency Board; and
WHEREAS, the City of Salinas in accordance with the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency JPA has responsibility for appointing a representative seat and an alternate to represent the City on the JPA Board.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of Salinas that Councilmember _______________________ is hereby appointed to the Hitchcock Road Animal Services Agency JPA Board to represent the City of Salinas with Councilmember __________________ to serve as alternate member.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 7th day of March 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

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#23-161, Version: 1
Minutes
Approve minutes of February 21, 2023.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 3/1/2023
powered by Legistar™
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-158, Version: 1
Financial Claims
Approve financial claims report.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 3/1/2023
powered by Legistar™
Number Date Status Payee Name Transaction Amount
464697 02/21/2023 Open Leadership Monterey County $4,000.00 464698 02/21/2023 Open Roberto Filice $1,052.97
464699 02/21/2023 Open Steven S Carrigan $276.31
464700 02/21/2023 Open ABAG Power Purchasing Pool $18,920.31 464701 02/21/2023 Open Action Target, Inc $1,257.06
464702 02/21/2023 Open Alhambra and Sierra Spring DS Waters of America LP $122.60 464703 02/21/2023 Open All Pets Hospital $557.87
464704 02/21/2023 Open Amazon.Com $523.01
464705 02/21/2023 Open American Supply Company $1,188.91 464706 02/21/2023 Open Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel Group, Inc $634.62 464707 02/21/2023 Open Asap Alisal Signs And Printing $542.39 464708 02/21/2023 Open Assured Aggregates Company Inc $5,476.76 464709 02/21/2023 Open AT&T Mobility $151.04
464710 02/21/2023 Open AT&T Mobility $21.99
464711 02/21/2023 Open AT&T Mobility $150.94
464712 02/21/2023 Open Baker Tilly US, LLP $12,880.00
464713 02/21/2023 Open Breakout Prison Outreach dba California Youth Outr $15,464.99 464714 02/21/2023 Open Brownells Inc $672.18
464715 02/21/2023 Open C3 Engineering, Inc. $10,718.75
464716 02/21/2023 Open California Towing and Transport $3,435.90 464717 02/21/2023 Open California Water Service $443.81 464718 02/21/2023 Open California Water Service $17,077.13 464719 02/21/2023 Open California Water Service $2,400.00 464720 02/21/2023 Open CDW-G $3,550.89
464721 02/21/2023 Open Central Coast Center For Independent $14,485.63 464722 02/21/2023 Open Cintas $1,086.68
464723 02/21/2023 Open CMS Communication Inc $14,321.50 464724 02/21/2023 Open Coast Automotive Warehouse Inc $59.84 464725 02/21/2023 Open Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, PC $364.19 464726 02/21/2023 Open Comcast (Business) $572.32
464727 02/21/2023 Open Comcast (Business) $588.69
464728 02/21/2023 Open Consolidated Electrical Distributors, Inc. $98.33 464729 02/21/2023 Open Dataflow Business Systems Inc $1,709.90 464730 02/21/2023 Open Direct TV LLC $87.99
464731 02/21/2023 Open East Bay Tire Company $3,199.84
464732 02/21/2023 Open Economic & Planning Systems, Inc. $17,706.25 464733 02/21/2023 Open Edges Electrical Group, LLC $208.25 464734 02/21/2023 Open FarrWest Environmental Supply, Inc $24,043.04 464735 02/21/2023 Open Fastenal Company $4,605.13
464736 02/21/2023 Open Ferguson US Hodings, Inc dba Ferguson Enterprises $599.65 464737 02/21/2023 Open First Alarm Wellness A Family Counseling Corporati $400.00 464738 02/21/2023 Open Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service Inc $97.25 464739 02/21/2023 Open Goldfarb and Lipman $272.00
General Account - General Account
Check
City of Salinas
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 2/15/2023 - To Payment Date: 3/1/2023 user: Josephine Fernandez Pages: 1 of 7 Wednesday, March 1, 2023 Number Date Status Payee Name Transaction Amount
General Account - General Account
Check
City of Salinas
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 2/15/2023 - To Payment Date: 3/1/2023 464740 02/21/2023 Open Granite Construction Company $4,891.63 464741 02/21/2023 Open Granite Rock Co $6,781.79
464742 02/21/2023 Open Green Line Liquid Waste Haulers $1,660.00 464743 02/21/2023 Open Green Rubber Kennedy Ag $344.03
464744 02/21/2023 Open Home Depot Credit Services $885.15 464745 02/21/2023 Open Hydro Turf $96.72
464746 02/21/2023 Open Ingram Book Company $351.23
464747 02/21/2023 Open Interim Inc $7,617.93
464748 02/21/2023 Open Johnson Associates $154.97
464749 02/21/2023 Open Johnson Electronics $399.00
464750 02/21/2023 Open Jose Luis Corral dba Salinas Pizza $624.45 464751 02/21/2023 Open Kanco Inc. / Mighty Auto Parts $120.28 464752 02/21/2023 Open Katharine G Bristol dba Kate Bristol Consulting $3,800.00 464753 02/21/2023 Open Kelly-Moore Paint Company $26.21 464754 02/21/2023 Open Kimley Horn And Assoc Inc $6,701.86 464755 02/21/2023 Open Kysmet Security & Patrol $2,198.00 464756 02/21/2023 Open LAZ KARP Associates, LLC $89,353.89 464757 02/21/2023 Open LiftOff, LLC $110.00
464758 02/21/2023 Open Mackay Motor Parts, Inc dba Napa Auto Parts $446.17 464759 02/21/2023 Open Matthew G Norton Co dba NWB Salinas LLC $420.10 464760 02/21/2023 Open MCSI Water Systems Management $405.23 464761 02/21/2023 Open Midwest Tape, LLC dba Midwest Tape $57.68 464762 02/21/2023 Open MNS Engineers, Inc $5,787.50
464763 02/21/2023 Open Monterey County District Attorney $1,534.11 464764 02/21/2023 Open Monterey County Fire Chiefs Assoc $300.00 464765 02/21/2023 Open Monterey County Health Department $4,104.00 464766 02/21/2023 Open Monterey County Sheriffs Office $124,767.14 464767 02/21/2023 Open Monterey County Weekly $297.00
464768 02/21/2023 Open Monterra Ranch Of Monterey Home Owner's Associatio $900.00 464769 02/21/2023 Open Municipal Maintenance Equipment dba MME $1,984.05 464770 02/21/2023 Open My Chevrolet $180.00
464771 02/21/2023 Open O'Reilly Auto Parts $72.93
464772 02/21/2023 Open Office Depot Business Service Division $277.69 464773 02/21/2023 Open Opendatasoft LLC $21,000.00
464774 02/21/2023 Open Pacific Gas and Electric Company $325.31 464775 02/21/2023 Open Pacific Gas and Electric Company $135,076.73 464776 02/21/2023 Open Pacific Premier Bank dba Pacific Premier Trust $12,428.02 464777 02/21/2023 Open Pacific Truck Parts Inc $72.97
464778 02/21/2023 Open Pavement Engineering, Inc $21,057.50 464779 02/21/2023 Open Pedro C Estrada Dba Estrada Janitorial Service $3,300.00 464780 02/21/2023 Open Peninsula Messenger, LLC $210.00 464781 02/21/2023 Open PFM Group Consulting LLC $1,273.90 464782 02/21/2023 Open Place Works Inc $17,936.71
user: Josephine Fernandez Pages: 2 of 7 Wednesday, March 1, 2023 Number Date Status Payee Name Transaction Amount
General Account - General Account
Check
City of Salinas
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 2/15/2023 - To Payment Date: 3/1/2023 464783 02/21/2023 Open PNC Equipment Finance, LLC $125,142.74 464784 02/21/2023 Open PNC Equipment Finance, LLC $124,847.95 464785 02/21/2023 Open Protel Communications, Inc dba Protelesis Corporat $1,672.68 464786 02/21/2023 Open Pure Water $7.75
464787 02/21/2023 Open R3 Consulting Group, Inc. $717.50 464788 02/21/2023 Open Rent-A-Fence.com, Inc $344.14
464789 02/21/2023 Open S & L Investments dba Salinas Valley ProSquad $1,235.54 464790 02/21/2023 Open Safeway Sign Company $3,245.82
464791 02/21/2023 Open Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority $288.00 464792 02/21/2023 Open Same Day Shred $135.00
464793 02/21/2023 Open San Lorenzo Lumber $197.98
464794 02/21/2023 Open Smart and Final Iris $478.40
464795 02/21/2023 Open Smith and Enright Landscaping $5,890.00 464796 02/21/2023 Open South Bay Regional Public Safety $50,216.00 464797 02/21/2023 Open State of California Dept of Food & Agriculture $1,375.00 464798 02/21/2023 Open Sturdy Oil Company $56,772.28
464799 02/21/2023 Open Sunlite Auto Glass, Inc $723.57
464800 02/21/2023 Open Target Pest Control $245.00
464801 02/21/2023 Open U.S. Bank National Association ND $30,374.05 464802 02/21/2023 Open United Parcel Service $32.62
464803 02/21/2023 Open University Corporation at Monterey Bay $174,156.16 464804 02/21/2023 Open Valley Saw Shop $2,135.77
464805 02/21/2023 Open Vals Plumbing and Heating Inc $852.00 464806 02/21/2023 Open Veritiv Operating Company Formerly xpedx $521.25 464807 02/21/2023 Open Verizon Wireless $38.01
464808 02/21/2023 Open Vintage Contractors, Inc $61,253.42 464809 02/21/2023 Open W W Grainger Inc $1,273.53
464810 02/21/2023 Open Wallace Group A California Corporation $55,993.32 464811 02/21/2023 Open WCAF, LLC dba Watsonville Ford $452.56 464812 02/21/2023 Open WCDJR LLC dba Watsonville Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram $1,061.91 464813 02/21/2023 Open Willdan Financial Services $3,125.00 464814 02/21/2023 Open Worldpac $55.65
464815 02/21/2023 Open Ana Suarez $40.00
464816 02/21/2023 Open Danika Mallobox $40.00
464817 02/21/2023 Open Deja Danielle Obrien $10.58
464818 02/21/2023 Open Eduardo Couttolenc $717.12
464819 02/21/2023 Open Elimia Heredia c/o Scudder Roofing Company $176.60 464820 02/21/2023 Open Gloria Romero $40.00
464821 02/21/2023 Open Katrina Robinson $40.00
464822 02/21/2023 Open Krystal Perez $40.00
464823 02/21/2023 Open Manuel Gomez $87.00
464824 02/21/2023 Open Mirna A Hernandez $166.20
464825 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $283.80 user: Josephine Fernandez Pages: 3 of 7 Wednesday, March 1, 2023 Number Date Status Payee Name Transaction Amount
General Account - General Account
Check
City of Salinas
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 2/15/2023 - To Payment Date: 3/1/2023 464826 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $121.60 464827 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $121.60 464828 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $121.60 464829 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $121.60 464830 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $121.60 464831 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $287.80 464832 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $121.60 464833 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $121.60 464834 02/21/2023 Open Rosemarie Radovan c/o Sunrun Installation Services $121.60 464835 02/21/2023 Open Salinas Valley Ford $606.44
464836 02/21/2023 Open Samantha Aguilar c/o Sunrun Installation Services $287.80 464837 02/21/2023 Open Samantha Aguilar c/o Sunrun Installation Services $225.75 464838 02/21/2023 Open Samantha Aguilar c/o Sunrun Installation Services $121.60 464839 02/28/2023 Open Alexis Mejia $237.27
464840 02/28/2023 Open Ana Ambriz $79.91
464841 02/28/2023 Open Ana Jacinto $294.00
464842 02/28/2023 Open Eric Sandoval $570.45
464843 02/28/2023 Open Grant Leonard $72.97
464844 02/28/2023 Open Jonathan Moore $72.97
464845 02/28/2023 Open Jose Andrew Sandoval $20.00
464846 02/28/2023 Open Megan Hunter $322.82
464847 02/28/2023 Open Pacific Library Partnership $900.00 464848 02/28/2023 Open Sergio Ponce $294.00
464849 02/28/2023 Open Ace Hardware $14.78
464850 02/28/2023 Open Acme Car Wash (William Pierce Inc) $1,428.99 464851 02/28/2023 Open Adrian Sanchez $150.00
464852 02/28/2023 Open Alameda Electrical Distributors $752.40 464853 02/28/2023 Open Alco Water $5,800.39
464854 02/28/2023 Open Alhambra and Sierra Spring DS Waters of America LP $144.89 464855 02/28/2023 Open Alhambra and Sierra Spring DS Waters of America LP $293.31 464856 02/28/2023 Open American Supply Company $767.48
464857 02/28/2023 Open Ana Rueda De Vidales dba JAV Language Solutions $380.61 464858 02/28/2023 Open Appraisal Resource Group $600.00 464859 02/28/2023 Open Aramark Uniform & Career Apparel Group, Inc $634.62 464860 02/28/2023 Open AT and T $23,949.24
464861 02/28/2023 Open AT and T $165.96
464862 02/28/2023 Open AT and T $18,277.72
464863 02/28/2023 Open Bear Electrical Solutions Inc $34,629.80 464864 02/28/2023 Open Brianda Palacios $780.00
464865 02/28/2023 Open Cagwin & Dorward, LLC $1,003.00
464866 02/28/2023 Open California Association For Property and Evidence $50.00 464867 02/28/2023 Open California Library Association $1,250.00 464868 02/28/2023 Open California Towing and Transport $250.00 user: Josephine Fernandez Pages: 4 of 7 Wednesday, March 1, 2023 Number Date Status Payee Name Transaction Amount
General Account - General Account
Check
City of Salinas
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 2/15/2023 - To Payment Date: 3/1/2023 464869 02/28/2023 Open California Water Service $519.23 464870 02/28/2023 Open Canon Financial Services Inc $659.18 464871 02/28/2023 Open Canon Solutions America Inc $42.34 464872 02/28/2023 Open Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Monterey $8,126.75 464873 02/28/2023 Open CDW-G $6,564.68
464874 02/28/2023 Open Central Coast Center For Independent $10,444.20 464875 02/28/2023 Open Central Coast Federal Credit Union $8,374.00 464876 02/28/2023 Open Cintas $1,459.86
464877 02/28/2023 Open ClientFirst Consulting Group, LLC dba ClientFirst $633.75 464878 02/28/2023 Open Coast Automotive Warehouse Inc $76.21 464879 02/28/2023 Open Comcast (Business) $2,939.64
464880 02/28/2023 Open Community Homeless Solutions $54,012.01 464881 02/28/2023 Open Community Initiatives $10,000.00 464882 02/28/2023 Open CPS HR Consulting $556.80
464883 02/28/2023 Open Crossroads Software Inc $2,500.00 464884 02/28/2023 Open CSG Consultants $3,516.00
464885 02/28/2023 Open Daniel Aledo $150.00
464886 02/28/2023 Open Dataflow Business Systems Inc $1,570.62 464887 02/28/2023 Open David E. Ramos, MD, Inc $7,200.00 464888 02/28/2023 Open David Hernandez $500.00
464889 02/28/2023 Open Discount School Supply $266.02
464890 02/28/2023 Open Docks and Doors LLC $4,042.15
464891 02/28/2023 Open Don Chapin Inc $425.00
464892 02/28/2023 Open Don Chapin Inc $29,404.38
464893 02/28/2023 Open Downtown Streets, Inc $66,487.43 464894 02/28/2023 Open E2 Consulting Engineers, Inc $246,248.27 464895 02/28/2023 Open Emergency Response Training Inc dba Defibthis Emer $115.00 464896 02/28/2023 Open Emergency Vehicle Specialists, Inc. $13,003.13 464897 02/28/2023 Open Fastenal Company $670.42
464898 02/28/2023 Open Fed Ex $21.74
464899 02/28/2023 Open First Alarm $185.73
464900 02/28/2023 Open First Alarm Security & Patrol Inc dba An Allied Un $1,466.00 464901 02/28/2023 Open Golden State Emergency Vehicle Service Inc $1,673.78 464902 02/28/2023 Open Golden State Truck and Trailer Repair $20,869.22 464903 02/28/2023 Open Granite Rock Co $1,526.24
464904 02/28/2023 Open Green Valley Industrial Supply $569.98 464905 02/28/2023 Open Griffin Structures, Inc $33,873.40 464906 02/28/2023 Open Hazel Jovel Cruz $1,000.00
464907 02/28/2023 Open HD Supply White Cap Construction Supply $463.69 464908 02/28/2023 Open Hero Industries Inc $1,524.00
464909 02/28/2023 Open Hinderliter De Llamas and Associates $55,185.18 464910 02/28/2023 Open Home Depot Credit Services $2,367.67 464911 02/28/2023 Open HROD, Inc $3,500.00
user: Josephine Fernandez Pages: 5 of 7 Wednesday, March 1, 2023 Number Date Status Payee Name Transaction Amount
General Account - General Account
Check
City of Salinas
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 2/15/2023 - To Payment Date: 3/1/2023 464912 02/28/2023 Open Ingram Book Company $1,466.36
464913 02/28/2023 Open Interstate Battery System Inc $1,882.99 464914 02/28/2023 Open Isidoro Medrano $500.00
464915 02/28/2023 Open Jahaira Paola Navarro dba Dance Into Fitness with $601.25 464916 02/28/2023 Open Jet Mulch Inc $218,230.64
464917 02/28/2023 Open Jimenez Autobody Parts, Inc dba C & J Auto Parts $253.41 464918 02/28/2023 Open Johnson Associates $43.65
464919 02/28/2023 Open Kelly-Moore Paint Company $460.97 464920 02/28/2023 Open Kimley Horn And Assoc Inc $3,395.00 464921 02/28/2023 Open Kosmont & Associates, Inc. dba Kosmont Companies $2,111.20 464922 02/28/2023 Open Kysmet Security & Patrol $224.00 464923 02/28/2023 Open Law Offices of Roy C Gunter III $2,044.25 464924 02/28/2023 Open League Of California Cities $300.00 464925 02/28/2023 Open Long Valley Leasing $815.11
464926 02/28/2023 Open M3 Environmental Consulting $13,166.52 464927 02/28/2023 Open Michael Spencer dba Tire & Wheel World $1,644.03 464928 02/28/2023 Open Midwest Tape, LLC dba Midwest Tape $23.10 464929 02/28/2023 Open MIS CORP $6,000.00
464930 02/28/2023 Open MJ Communications, Inc $7,410.45 464931 02/28/2023 Open Monterey County District Attorney $633.90 464932 02/28/2023 Open Monterey County District Attorney $1,345.28 464933 02/28/2023 Open Monterey County District Attorney $2,837.44 464934 02/28/2023 Open My Chevrolet $53.62
464935 02/28/2023 Open National Testing Network, Inc. $500.00 464936 02/28/2023 Open Office Depot Business Service Division $1,109.09 464937 02/28/2023 Open Onesource Wireless Solutions LLC $499.80 464938 02/28/2023 Open Operation Freedom Paws $294.00
464939 02/28/2023 Open Pacific Coast Flag $1,158.42
464940 02/28/2023 Open Pacific Gas and Electric Company $2,290.36 464941 02/28/2023 Open Pacific Truck Parts Inc $569.82
464942 02/28/2023 Open Petsmart $229.40
464943 02/28/2023 Open Pinnacle Medical Group Inc dba Pinnacle Healthcare $665.00 464944 02/28/2023 Open POSM Software LLC $2,000.00
464945 02/28/2023 Open Protel Communications, Inc dba Protelesis Corporat $153.76 464946 02/28/2023 Open Pure Water $27.75
464947 02/28/2023 Open Refrigeration Supplies Distributor $67.40 464948 02/28/2023 Open Republic Services of Salinas $1,264.63 464949 02/28/2023 Open Rexel USA, Inc dba Platt Electric Supply $292.26 464950 02/28/2023 Open Rincon Consultants, Inc. $3,135.00 464951 02/28/2023 Open Russell Auria Pest Control Services $170.00 464952 02/28/2023 Open Russell Branson dba Russ Branson Consulting $11,581.25 464953 02/28/2023 Open Ruth Maria Milla-Leon dba Andersen's Lock & Safe $120.00 464954 02/28/2023 Open S & L Investments dba Salinas Valley ProSquad $2,723.05 user: Josephine Fernandez Pages: 6 of 7 Wednesday, March 1, 2023 Number Date Status Payee Name Transaction Amount
General Account - General Account
Check
City of Salinas
Payment Register
From Payment Date: 2/15/2023 - To Payment Date: 3/1/2023 464955 02/28/2023 Open Salinas Valley Ford Inc $285.00
464956 02/28/2023 Open San Diego Police Equipment Company $2,431.36 464957 02/28/2023 Open San Lorenzo Lumber $575.35
464958 02/28/2023 Open Scudder Roofing Company $30,560.00 464959 02/28/2023 Open Silver and Wright LLP $9,071.31
464960 02/28/2023 Open Smith and Enright Landscaping $72,021.46 464961 02/28/2023 Open Star Sanitation Services $163.24 464962 02/28/2023 Open Stephanie Morales-Bravo Petty Cash Custodian $21.50 464963 02/28/2023 Open Sturdy Oil Company $5,796.48
464964 02/28/2023 Open Sylvia Enriquez $1,000.00
464965 02/28/2023 Open Target Pest Control $415.00
464966 02/28/2023 Open The Bank Of New York Mellon $250.00 464967 02/28/2023 Open Tiffanys Body Shop $1,326.50
464968 02/28/2023 Open Tim Makanani $114.75
464969 02/28/2023 Open Tri County Fire Protection $117.00 464970 02/28/2023 Open U.S. Bank National Association dba U.S. Bank Equip $831.50 464971 02/28/2023 Open U.S. Bank National Association ND $31,988.09 464972 02/28/2023 Open Underground Service Alert $5,406.65 464973 02/28/2023 Open United Parcel Service $66.80
464974 02/28/2023 Open United Site Services $375.10
464975 02/28/2023 Open Vals Plumbing and Heating Inc $6,073.60 464976 02/28/2023 Open Vegetable Growers Supply Company $126.19 464977 02/28/2023 Open Venissa Rosa $47.66
464978 02/28/2023 Open Veritiv Operating Company Formerly xpedx $18.03 464979 02/28/2023 Open Verizon Wireless $8,734.27
464980 02/28/2023 Open Verizon Wireless $1,793.53
464981 02/28/2023 Open Vivian Salinas $281.40
464982 02/28/2023 Open W W Grainger Inc $1,542.00
464983 02/28/2023 Open Walmart c/o Capitol One $257.62
464984 02/28/2023 Open WCAF, LLC dba Watsonville Ford $201.14 464985 02/28/2023 Open WCDJR LLC dba Watsonville Chrysler Dodge Jeep Ram $520.03 464986 02/28/2023 Open William R Price dba Law Offices of William R Price $532.00 464987 02/28/2023 Open Wingfoot Plastic Printing Services, Inc. $3,224.62 464988 02/28/2023 Open Worldpac $476.90
464989 02/28/2023 Open Yvonne St Pierre dba Design Path Studio $281.50 Type Check Totals: $2,555,505.90
General Account - General Account Totals
user: Josephine Fernandez Pages: 7 of 7 Wednesday, March 1, 2023 City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-094, Version: 1
20-Minute Green Zone Designation at 316 Williams Road
Approve a Resolution establishing a total of 25 feet of 20-minute green zone designation located at 316 Williams Road.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 3/1/2023
powered by Legistar™

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 7, 2023
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS, TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION DIVISION FROM: DAVID JACOBS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
BY: ANDREW EASTERLING, TRAFFIC ENGINEER
TITLE: 20-MINUTE GREEN ZONE DESIGNATION AT 316 WILLIAMS ROAD
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to approve a Resolution establishing a total of 25 feet of 20-minute green zone designation located at 316 Williams Road.

BACKGROUND:

Gabriel Lopez Rodriguez, owner of Lopez Market, is requesting 20-minute green zone designation along the frontage of his business property located at 316 Williams Road (Attachment 2).

According to Gabriel Rodriguez Lopez, vehicles parked for extended periods along the business’ frontage limits access for customers. Customers spend an average of 15 to 20 minutes per visit at his business. The requestor is aware that the proposed green zone, if approved, are not for the exclusive use of the requestor. The 20-minute parking restricted spaces are for the public's use.

Enforcement is generally done on a call basis.

The proposed 20-minute parking zone is effective only from 7:00 am to 6:00 pm. of any day except Sundays and holidays (Section 20-74 (4) of the Salinas Municipal Code). After 6:00 pm the green zone is available for general public parking.

Williams Road, between Grandhaven Street and Fairhaven Street, is a four-lane arterial street with a two way left turn lane. The street is approximately 66 feet wide, from curb face to curb face.

Parking is generally permitted on both sides of the street.

The future of Williams Road is not certain. While on street parking is currently generally permitted, it is possible that on street parking will need to be prohibited in the future as traffic increases. During the application process, the applicant has been notified that the on-street parking and green zones may need to be removed in the future, and the City cannot commit to renewing the green zones indefinitely
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION:

The recommendation of 25 feet of 20-minute green zone designation located at 316 Williams Road was presented to the Traffic and Transportation Commission at its February 9, 2023, meeting. The Commission voted (5-0) to recommend City Council approve a Resolution establishing a total of 25 feet of 20-minute green zone designation located at 316 Williams Road. Commissioners Howell, Hernandez, Canseco, Davis, and Cox voted to approve the recommendation, and Commissioner Quigley abstained. The District 4 appointment is currently vacant.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

Designation of parking restrictions on City Streets is exempt under CEQA 15301, Class 1(c) since the actions consists of operation and minor alteration of an existing City street.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

The 20-minute green zone designation support the Council’s goal of “Effective and Culturally Responsive Government”.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:
20-minute green zone designations are installed and maintained by Public Works staff. Parking enforcement is provided in coordination with Parking Enforcement contractor (LAZ) and the Salinas Police Department.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

There is no impact to the General Fund. Gabriel Rodriguez Lopez, authorized representative of 316 Williams Road, has submitted payment to fund the costs and the installation of the 20-minute green zone designation. The applicant will be responsible for paying for annual renewal fees to maintain the green zones.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Attachment 1: Exhibit
Attachment 2: Application
1 RESOLUTION NO. (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION OF THE SALINAS CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A TOTAL OF 25 FEET OF 20-MINUTE GREEN ZONE DESIGNATION AT 316 WILLIAMS RD
WHEREAS, at its meeting of August 9, 2022, the Salinas City Council adopted a Resolution approving the 2022-2023 Special Curb Markings; and WHEREAS, City staff received a request from Gabriel Lopez Rodriguez, the owner of Lopez Market of 316 Williams Road, to install 20-minute green zones designation along the business’ Williams Road frontage; and
WHEREAS, on February 9, 2023, the Traffic and Transportation Commission voted (5- 0) to recommend to Council to approve staff’s recommendation of establishing 25 feet of 20- minute green zone designation to allow for a quick turnaround of parking spaces for customers to have access to businesses located at 316 Williams Road.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council hereby amends Resolution No. 22445 approved on August 9, 2022, by adding an additional 25 feet of 20-minute green zone designation located at 316 Williams Road.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 7th day of March, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
25'

S A L I NA S

C A L I F ORNI A N
GRANDHAVEN ST WILLIAMS RD LEGEND PROPOSED 20 MINUTE GREEN ZONE 316 316 WILLIAMS RD PROPOSED 20 MINUTE GREEN ZONE

City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-095, Version: 1
“No Stopping” Red Zones Along 3 Quail Run Circle
Approve a Resolution establishing a total of 135 feet of “No Stopping” red zones along the driveway of 3 Quail Run Circle.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 3/1/2023
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 7, 2023
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS, TRAFFIC & TRANSPORTATION DIVISION FROM: DAVID JACOBS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
BY: ANDREW EASTERLING, TRAFFIC ENGINEER
TITLE: “NO STOPPING” RED ZONES ALONG 3 QUAIL RUN CIRCLE RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to approve a Resolution establishing a total of 135 feet of “No Stopping” red zones along the driveway of 3 Quail Run Circle.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

Staff received a request to evaluate obstruction from vehicles parked at the driveway along 3 Quail Run Circle. Subsequently, staff conducted a field review and determined sightlines necessary to provide the minimum stopping sight distance and vehicle mobility along Quail Run Circle. Staff is recommending the designation of a total of 135 feet of “No Stopping” red zones along the driveway of 3 Quail Run Circle to provide sufficient sight lines per stopping sight distance criteria and vehicle mobility.

BACKGROUND:

Staff has received a request to evaluate intersection corner sight distances at driveways along Quail Run Circle. Staff conducted a field review and determined sightlines appropriate to make a gap acceptance decision for turning movements from the driveways while providing necessary stopping sight distance for vehicles on Quail Run Circle. Staff is proposing the removal of approximately 135 feet of parking on Quail Run Circle to provide sufficient departure sight triangles.

Staff is recommending stopping sight distance criteria as the design standard for the consideration of red zones. Intersection sight distance criteria is typically longer than stopping sight distance to allow the intersection to operate smoothly. Minor-road vehicle operators can wait at the stop bar until the can adequately evaluate sufficient gaps in traffic so that they are able to proceed safely without forcing a major-road vehicle to stop or unduly interfering with major-road traffic operations. In this specific application stopping sight distance was considered to be the minimum criteria because of the significant impact to on-street parking capacity. Notices were mailed out to the affected areas to inform the community of the consideration of red zones at the driveway of 3 Quail Run Circle.

Page | 2
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION:

The recommendation for the establishment of 135 feet of “No Stopping” red zones along the driveway of 3 Quail Run Circle was presented to the Traffic and Transportation Commission at its February 9, 2023, meeting. The Commission voted (5-1) to recommend City Council to approve a Resolution establishing 135 feet of “No Stopping” red zones along the driveway of 3 Quail Run Circle. Commissioners Howell, Hernandez, Canseco, Davis, and Cox voted to approve the recommendation, and Commissioner Quigley voted against the recommendation.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

Designation of parking restrictions on City street is exempt under CEQA 15301, Class 1(c) since the actions consists of operation and minor alteration of an existing City Street.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

The Quail Run Circle “No Stopping” red zones support the Council’s goal of “Public Safety.” DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

Red zones are installed and maintained by Public Works staff. Parking enforcement is provided in coordination with Parking Enforcement contractor (LAZ) and the Salinas Police Department.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

The estimated labor and material cost to install the proposed “No Stopping” red zones along Quail Run Circle is estimated to be $200. Sufficient funding is available in the current streets budget to fund the installations.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Attachment 1: Exhibit
1 RESOLUTION NO. (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION OF THE SALINAS CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF A TOTAL OF 135 FEET OF “NO STOPPING” RED ZONES ALONG 3 QUAIL RUN CIRCLE.

WHEREAS, staff received request to evaluate obstruction from vehicles parked at the driveway along 3 Quail Run Circle for sight lines; and
WHEREAS, staff conducted a field review and determined sightlines necessary and is recommending a total of 135 feet of “No Stopping” red zones along 3 Quail Run Circle to provide sufficient sight triangles; and
WHEREAS, on February 9, 2022, the Traffic and Transportation Commission voted (5- 1) to recommend to City Council the approval of establishing a total of 135 feet of “No Stopping” red zones along 3 Quail Run Circle; and
WHEREAS, the City of Salinas has determined that the implementing the parking restrictions is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15301, Class 1). The project consists of the operation, repair, or minor alteration of public streets involving no expansion of use. There would be no significant effect on the environment.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council hereby approves the establishment of a total of 135 feet of “No Stopping” red zones along 3 Quail Run Circle.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 7th day of March,, 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
2 ATTEST:
_________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
30' QUAIL RUN CIR
W ROSSI ST 105' PROPOSED "NO STOPPING" RED ZONES QUAIL RUN CIRCLE LEGEND PROPOSED "NO STOPPING" RED ZONES SCALE: 1"=40' 0 40' 80' S A L I NA SC A L I F OR NI A N City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-096, Version: 1
Victor Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan
Approve a Resolution to implement the Victor Street neighborhood traffic calming plan supported by residents.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 3/1/2023
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MARCH 7, 2023
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
FROM: DAVID JACOBS, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
THRU: ANDREW EASTERLING, TRAFFIC ENGINEER
BY: GERARDO RODRIGUEZ, ASSISTANT ENGINEER
TITLE: VICTOR STREET NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC

CALMING PLAN
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to approve a Resolution approving the Victor Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan supported by residents.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

At its June 21, 2022, meeting, City Council approved the 2022-2023 fiscal year priority traffic calming projects, whereas Victor Street ranked the fourth highest priority. Staff held a community meeting and worked with residents of Victor Street to develop a traffic calming plan. As required by the City’s policy, a vote was conducted to gauge community support, and the Victor Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming plan met the support requirements as prescribed by the City’s policy. Therefore, staff recommends the Traffic and Transportation Commission recommend to City Council the approval of the Victor Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan supported by residents for implementation.

BACKGROUND:

In October 2009, the City Council adopted the Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (Attachment 1) to address residential neighborhood traffic concerns. The program was established initially to address concerns from neighborhoods that could not be supported by traffic enforcement since it was impractical at the time to deploy traffic enforcement officers in residential areas. There had been a growing request for speed reduction throughout the City for which the City had no tools to address the residents’ concerns.

Traffic calming devices are generally not considered traffic control devices as defined by the State and Federal Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The City began compiling traffic calming studies in 2002 and found there was very few applications in California. To assist in the development of the City’s policy, the City hired a consultant to help develop the Neighborhood Page | 2
Traffic Management Program based on best practices. The resulting policy contained a toolbox of traffic calming measures that would be used to address neighborhood problems associated with speeds and vehicle volume on residential streets. The adoption of the policy also included the adoption of traffic calming tools that can be provided on City streets. The policy also provided the process for consideration of projects under the program which is important for securing support from residents of a neighborhood who would be affected by traffic calming implementation.

In the development of the City’s policy, City staff met with all affected parties including emergency response providers as well as other service providers such as solid waste collection services and street sweeping. These agencies and providers were all invited in the discussion of the traffic calming policy development. The traffic calming program implementation therefore includes considerations and understanding of the program by potentially affected parties. The City’s policy only applies to city streets that have residential uses.

On September 14, 2017, with an influx of traffic calming requests received, the City approved criteria for prioritizing traffic calming requests based on traffic conditions, collision history, nearby land uses, geometrics and facilities. These criteria provide a transparent way to prioritize requests given the City’s limited resources. Every year, staff presents traffic calming recommended priorities based on the criteria to the City Council. City staff then proceeds with implementation based on Council approved priorities.

Residents of Victor Street submitted a petition requesting the City to investigate speeding issues along Victor Street. Traffic studies were conducted in various locations along the street, and the results confirmed high speeds on Victor Street. Results met the criteria for traffic calming implementation.

The Traffic and Transportation Division held one (1) community meeting on December 14, 2022, to develop a traffic calming plan with residents of the Victor Street neighborhood to address the speeding concerns of the neighborhood. With residents’ input received at this meeting, a neighborhood traffic calming plan was developed and finalized.

In accordance with the City’s policy, the plan was taken to vote to determine support from residents. Ballots with pre-paid envelopes were mailed to residents of Victor Street, and the vote was conducted over a 5-week period. Residents were encouraged to talk to and inform their neighbors. On January 26, 2023, the voting period ended, and the neighborhood met the support vote requirement as prescribed in the City’s policy. The City received ballots from 69% of all applicable households, meeting the 50% return rate requirement. Of the ballots received, 96% were in favor of the Plan, meeting the 67% in favor requirement. Staff is therefore recommending the implementation of the Victor Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan.

The proposed Victor Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan includes the installation of four (4) speed cushions and a raised crosswalk along Victor Street between West Rossi Street and Larkin Street. Speed cushions are vertical traffic calming devices and are similar to speed humps but are made of rubberized material. Speed cushions are designed to have lesser impact on fire department response and are spaced to maintain a speed of approximately 25 mph, which corresponds to the speed limit on residential streets. Raised crosswalks are marked vertical traffic Page | 3
calming devices, similar to speed cushions which also allow pedestrians to cross near sidewalk grade, increasing their visibility to incoming vehicles. Attachment 2 shows the approximate locations of the speed cushions and the raised crosswalk along Victor Street.

TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION:

The Victor Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan was presented to the Traffic and Transportation Commission at its February 9, 2023, meeting. The Commission voted (5-1) recommending City Council approve a Resolution to implement the Victor Street neighborhood traffic calming plan supported by residents. Commissioners Howell, Hernandez, Canseco, Davis and Cox voted in favor of the recommendation and Commissioner Quigley vote against the recommendation.

Commissioner Quigley provided comment that the traffic study showed low speeds and volumes on the southern end of Victor Street and therefore there should be no need for traffic calming devices. The Commissioner did not acknowledge other segments in the traffic study where measured speeds were higher and met the criteria for traffic calming. Commissioner comments also suggested that traffic calming funds would be better spent on roadway maintenance. The Traffic and Transportation Commission was reminded that the City Council approves the appropriation of funds and funds assigned to the traffic calming program cannot be transferred to maintenance without City Council approval.

The District 4 appointment is currently vacant.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

Staff has determined that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15301, Class 1). The project consists of the operation, repair, or minor alteration of public streets involving no expansion of use. There would be no significant effect on the environment.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

The Traffic Calming Policy support Council’s goal of “Public Safety”.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

Public Works staff coordinate with the Salinas Fire Department on the recommendation of the traffic calming plan. Staff also coordinates with the Salinas Police Department if traffic calming enforcement assistance is necessary.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

The estimated total cost of these improvements is $134,670. Using the City’s job order contract program, the cost for installation of the speed cushions is $109,670. Alternatively, in the past the City’s maintenance crews have been able to assist in the installation of speed cushions as overtime Page | 4
work. If the City’s maintenance crews are available to perform this work the estimated cost to install the speed cushions and layout centerline striping is $40,000. The design of the raised crosswalk will be done in house, and the City may use a job order contractor to install the raised crosswalk. The total estimated total cost to design and construct the raised crosswalk is $25,000.

There are sufficient funds available in the Traffic Calming Program budget (CIP 9163) and/or the Street Repair/Traffic Safety budget (8180) to complete this work.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Attachment 1: Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Attachment 2: Victor Street Proposed Traffic Calming Plan Attachment 3: Victor St Traffic Study
RESOLUTION NO. _______ (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION OF THE SALINAS CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE VICTOR

STREET NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN SUPPORTED BY

RESIDENTS
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the City’s Traffic Calming Policy at its October 6, 2009, meeting (Resolution No. 19764) which outlined a process for consideration of traffic calming requests from the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a resolution approving the prioritization strategy for Traffic Calming requests on its November 7, 2017 meeting (Resolution No. 21291) with the support of the Traffic and Transportation Commission; and WHEREAS, at its June 21, 2022, meeting, City Council approved the 2022-2023 fiscal year priority traffic calming project, whereas Victor Street ranked the fourth highest priority; and WHEREAS, staff worked with residents of Victor Street to develop a traffic calming plan and distribute ballots to help determine neighborhood support of the plan. As required by the City’s policy, a vote was conducted to gauge community support, and the Victor Street traffic calming plan received the support votes required as prescribed by the City’s Traffic Calming Policy; and WHEREAS, the Traffic and Transportation Commission at its February 9, 2023, meeting voted unanimously (5-1) to recommend the approval of the Victor Street neighborhood traffic calming plan supported by residents; and
WHEREAS, the City of Salinas has determined that the implementing the traffic calming plan is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15301, Class 1). The project consists of the operation, repair, or minor alteration of public streets involving no expansion of use. There would be no significant effect on the environment.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council approves the Victor Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan supported by residents.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 7th day of March 2023 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

APPROVED:
__________________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk

F EHR & PEERS

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N C O N S U L T A N T S
Final Report
City of Salinas
Neighborhood Traffic Management Program
160 W. Santa Clara St., Ste. 675
San Jose, CA 95113
SJ07-905
November 2008
& P L A N N I N G

T R A N S P O R T A T I O N
Final Report
City of Salinas
Neighborhood Traffic
Management Program
Prepared For:

City of Salinas
Prepared By:

Fehr & Peers
November 2008
SJ07-905

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION PAGE

1. Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................1 Purpose...................................................................................................................................................1 Overview .................................................................................................................................................1 NTMP Development................................................................................................................................2 Funding ...................................................................................................................................................3 How To Use This Document ...................................................................................................................3 Who to Contact .......................................................................................................................................3

2. Process Framework..............................................................................................................................5 Plan Initiation...........................................................................................................................................5 Plan Development...................................................................................................................................9 Neighborhood Support..........................................................................................................................11 Plan Implementation .............................................................................................................................13 Process for Removal.............................................................................................................................14

3. Toolbox ................................................................................................................................................16 Non-Physical Devices ...........................................................................................................................17 Speed Control – Narrowing Devices.....................................................................................................23 Speed Control – Horizontal Devices.....................................................................................................28 Speed Control – Vertical Devices .........................................................................................................34 Volume Control – Devices ....................................................................................................................43

4. Toolbox Guidelines.............................................................................................................................50 Guidelines .............................................................................................................................................50 Effectiveness Comparison ....................................................................................................................51 Placing the Neighborhood Traffic Management Measures...................................................................51

5. New Development Guidelines............................................................................................................59 Suggested Development Review Process............................................................................................59 Development Review Practices ............................................................................................................61 Designing Street Networks ...................................................................................................................61 Designing for Appropriate Speeds ........................................................................................................62 Designing for Local Traffic ....................................................................................................................63 Pedestrian/Vehicle Conflict Areas.........................................................................................................63 Developing a Neighborhood Traffic Management Plan........................................................................64 Appendix A – Design Guidelines ...........................................................................................................A-1 Speed Control – Vertical Measures .................................................................................................... A-1 Horizontal Deflection Measures .......................................................................................................... A-3 Narrowing Measures........................................................................................................................... A-4 Landscaping........................................................................................................................................ A-5 Signage and Striping........................................................................................................................... A-6 Combined Measures........................................................................................................................... A-6 Appendix B – Standard Traffic Calming Templates.............................................................................B-1 Appendix C – City of Salinas Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Devises Policy ...............................C-1 Appendix D – City of Salinas Primary Fire Response Routes............................................................D-1

LIST OF TABLES

SECTION PAGE
Table 1 Applicability of Treatments by Traffic Related Concern........................................................52 Table 2 Applicability of Treatments by Location ................................................................................53 Table 3 Applicability by Street Type...................................................................................................54 Table 4 Quantitative Impacts of Neighborhood Traffic Management Measures ...............................56

LIST OF FIGURES

SECTION PAGE
Figure 1 NTMP Process Framework...........................................................................................................6 Figure 2 NTMP Process For Removal ......................................................................................................15 Figure 3 Estimating Midpoint Speed .........................................................................................................57 Figure 4 New Development Review Process............................................................................................60 Figure 5 Correlation Between Pavement Width, Unimpeded Street Length and Speed..........................63 Figure A-1 Vertical Measure Ramp Profiles ............................................................................................... A-1 Figure A-2 Traffic circles at T-Intersections................................................................................................ A-4 Figure A-3 Common Warning Signs ........................................................................................................... A-7 Figure B-1A Speed Hump – Parabolic Profile............................................................................................... B-2 Figure B-1B Speed Hump – Sinusoidal Profile ............................................................................................. B-3 Figure B-2 Speed Lump.............................................................................................................................. B-4 Figure B-3 Speed Table.............................................................................................................................. B-5 Figure B-4 Raised Crosswalk ..................................................................................................................... B-6 Figure B-5 Raised Intersection ................................................................................................................... B-7 Figure B-6 Vertical Device – Advance Warning Markings.......................................................................... B-8 Figure B-7 Neckdown/Bulbout – Intersection ............................................................................................. B-9 Figure B-8 Neckdown/Bulbout – Midblock................................................................................................ B-10 Figure B-9 Center Island Narrowing ......................................................................................................... B-11 Figure B-10 Two-lane Choker..................................................................................................................... B-12 Figure B-11 Traffic Circle............................................................................................................................ B-13 Figure B-12 Chicane................................................................................................................................... B-14 Figure B-13 Partial Closure......................................................................................................................... B-15 Figure B-14 Diagonal Diverter .................................................................................................................... B-16 Figure B-15 Median Barrier......................................................................................................................... B-17 Figure B-16 Forced Turn Island.................................................................................................................. B-18 Figure D-1 City of Salinas Primary Fire Response Routes......................................................................... D-2

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Robert Russell, P.E. City Deputy/Engineer City Manager, City of Salinas James Serrano, Transportation Planner, Development and Engineering Services Department, City of Salinas Chapter 1 - Introduction Page 1
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

1. INTRODUCTION

PURPOSE
Growth in traffic volumes in Salinas and the broader region has increased the frequency and severity of traffic-related issues on neighborhood streets. Numerous agencies across the nation have confronted these problems using a proven process and tools to address both safety and quality-of-life concerns. The process is known as a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP), which uses traffic calming tools and techniques.

The purpose of this document is to define a NTMP that is customized to the needs and unique characteristics of Salinas residential streets.

OVERVIEW
As defined in an ITE Journal article, “[t]raffic calming is the combination of mainly physical measures that reduce the negative effects of motor vehicle use, alter driver behavior and improve conditions for nonmotorized street users.”1 This definition suggests that the negative effects of vehicle speeds and/or excessive traffic volumes on neighborhood streets can diminish the residential quality of life. While residential life “quality” is subjective, vehicle speeds and traffic volumes can be quantified and compared against adopted community or industry standards. Experiences reinforce this notion as some community residents embrace traffic calming, while others are not so willing to accept the inconveniences of “managed traffic” in lieu of a perceived improvement in residential quality of life.

With this in mind, the Development and Engineering Services (DES) Department has requested assistance with preparation of a comprehensive program that includes a systematic approach to handling neighborhood traffic requests, and applying the most appropriate traffic calming measures for the situation at hand. The NTMP will also engage community residents during the development of individual neighborhood traffic calming plans and determine local support for the plan through neighborhood participation.

The process defined herein is intended solely for use on public streets and is not applicable to non-City maintained roadways (i.e., private roads, or county roadways). However, use of this manual as a guideline for non-City roadways, will require oversight by the Fire Department on the planning, design, and implementation of such features. Eligible City maintained roadways (i.e., public roads) include two-lane local, collector, and some minor arterials located within the City limits.

The terms “local” and “collector” streets refer to the functional classification that denotes a specific level in the transportation network hierarchy and specifies the design according to City of Salinas standards. While the streets may have been designed for a particular purpose, they may function differently in the field than intended. Therefore, it may be difficult to differentiate between the two classifications. Following is a narrative description of each roadway classification:
• Local Streets provide direct access to residential properties and facilitate short neighborhood trips.

Typical local street features include:
− Two-lane 24- to 34-foot travel way width (curb face to curb face) 1 Lockwood, I.M., “ITE Traffic Calming Definition.” ITE Journal, Vol. 67, July 1997, pp. 22-24.

Chapter 1 - Introduction Page 2
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

− Serves fewer than 75 residential units on a through cul-de-sac or street • Collector Streets are secondary roads that connect motorists from surrounding local streets to arterial roadways and freeways and facilitate intermediate trip lengths. Typical collector street features include:
− 34- to 40-foot travel way
− Connects local streets to arterials
− May or may not include front-on housing
The underpinnings of the NTMP are based on a combination of parallel strategies, known collectively as the “Three E’s”:
• Education – Providing information and raising awareness; targeting drivers, pedestrians, and cyclists about the safest and best ways to share the road.
• Engineering – Physical measures constructed to lower speeds, improve safety, or otherwise reduce the impacts of automobiles, on residents and other transportation modes. • Enforcement – Targeted enforcement by the City of Salinas Police Department to reinforce the emphasis on education and engineering aspects of the program.

This document focuses on the engineering aspects of neighborhood traffic calming, though education and enforcement play an important role in any engineering strategy. This document and informational flyers provide education, while the City of Salinas Police Department, Monterey County Sheriff Department, and California Highway Patrol conduct targeted speed enforcement. Although targeted speed enforcement provides a positive influence on neighborhood streets, the demand for this service can easily outstrip the resources of any enforcement agency. Therefore, neighborhood traffic calming is a viable alternative that is typically self-enforcing and minimizes operating costs.

This program also considers the roadway network and design of new developments. Developers, with guidance from DES staff, can reduce the need for future traffic calming by designing new streets that discourage speeding and cut-through traffic. To supplement these design principles, developers can incorporate traffic calming concepts and measures as part of the initial development.

NTMP DEVELOPMENT
This manual was adapted to meet the needs of the City of Salinas. An advisory committee composed of representatives from City of Salinas Planning, Engineering, and Traffic Divisions; Salinas Fire Districts, Salinas Police Department; Monterey Salinas Transit; City Council Districts, and local agencies and interested parties convened to review material and provide input on specific aspects of the NTMP process framework and toolbox.

The material presented to the TAC was based on a 2004 national survey conducted of 21 leading jurisdictions’ traffic calming practices. The survey provided insight into the evolution of the traffic calming field since the last in-depth report2
almost a decade ago. The various approaches, policies, and uses of traffic 2 Ewing, R. Traffic Calming State-of-the-Practice. Washington, D.C., USA: Institute of Transportation Engineers /Federal Highway Administration, 1999.

Chapter 1 - Introduction Page 3
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
calming devices reported in this survey provided a menu of alternatives to develop a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program unique to the City of Salinas.

FUNDING
Funding for the Salinas NTMP will likely come from the City’s limited street funding, which will compete annually for funding amongst other programs. Funding will go towards staff time (operating cost) and construction costs (capital cost) of standard devices. As DES identifies needs in the next fiscal budget, City staff and decision-makers may recognize that other funding sources may be necessary to maintain the program or meet the anticipated demand. To offset the public demand and stretch the funding, residents will be required to contribute 75 percent of the costs for speed humps (or other vertical devices). Additional cost sharing may be necessary depending on annual funding and level of public demand. The need and proportional share to residents will be determined annually.

In the absence of funding or to expedite treatment, residents may elect to fund a local traffic calming plan.

The neighborhood must prove the financial ability to fund 100 percent of the anticipated costs, which include plan development, engineering drawings, and construction. Upon proof of financial ability, DES can elect to authorize the neighborhood’s request to develop a traffic calming plan. Regardless of resident contributions, physical measures will be implemented only if warranted through an engineering study or as part of another City sponsored project (e.g., a streetscape plan).

In addition, residents could voluntarily elect to fund aesthetic upgrades to the standard devices. Such aesthetic upgrades could include landscaping or use of decorative materials.

HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT
This document provides guidelines, not rigid requirements. These guidelines are primarily intended for DES staff and residents to help develop an appropriate NTMP, and for builders and staff to create and review new subdivision plans.

This manual will likely evolve as staff and community members work through the program; and identify more efficient or different methods of implementing the program and better ways of disseminating information. DES staff may also revise the design guidelines and cost estimates to ensure updated material is presented.

WHO TO CONTACT
To find out more information about the Neighborhood Traffic Management Program or whether your street is eligible for traffic calming, please contact:
• The Traffic and Transportation Division of the Development and Engineering Services Department at (831) 758-7241 or [email protected].

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 1 - Introduction Page 4

HOW TO USE THIS DOCUMENT
If you are a Resident, you should focus on the
following chapters:

Chapter 2, Process Framework, to find out how to
request traffic calming on your street and the steps
necessary to implement a traffic calming plan.

Chapter 3, Toolbox, to discover what particular traffic calming devices are available and the advantages and
disadvantages of each.

If you are an Engineer/Planner involved in the
development of a new subdivision, you should focus on
the following chapters:

Chapters 3 and 4, Toolbox and Toolbox Guidelines, to
discover what devices you can incorporate into your
development.

Chapter 5, New Development Guidelines, for techniques
to minimize the potential for future speeding and trafficrelated concerns.

DES staff members should focus on the above Chapters as well as the following appendices:

Appendix A – Design Guidelines provides recommended design features to minimize design issues once implemented.

Appendix B – Standard Traffic Calming Templates provides standard designs templates that can be easily modified to fit specific roadways.

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 5

2. PROCESS FRAMEWORK
The Neighborhood Traffic Management Program is a partnership between the City and its residents.

Participation begins with the initial petition filing, continues with the development of a neighborhood traffic calming plan, then moves to the final step of determining neighborhood support. The process framework identifies the steps by which the Development and Engineering Services (DES) staff and community members interact and participate in the NTMP. Figure 1 on the following page graphically illustrates the NTMP process framework. The accompanying text below provides greater detail.

The process framework is comprised of four key elements that focus on specific tasks and conclude with the implementation of a traffic calming plan.

Each step of the
Process Framework
is numbered and
corresponds with
Figure 1.
• Plan Initiation – Is my street eligible for traffic calming consideration? • Plan Development – Who develops the traffic calming plan? • Plan Support – What are the requirements for neighborhood support? • Plan Implementation – How are the supported traffic calming measures installed?
This chapter also includes a “Process for Removal”. This process presents the framework for removal of neighborhood calming devices in the event residents wish to have certain aspects of the implemented plan removed.

PLAN INITIATION
This component describes how to initiate the NTMP and determine eligibility. 1 –Assess DES Workload and Determine Number of Areas to be Treated Before initiating a local traffic calming plan, staff will review the number of areas that can be treated in given year based on the city’s traffic calming budget and workload. This assessment is important to balance the resources of the department due to the close oversight and required level of staff involvement. 2 – Citizen Request
The process is initiated when a resident(s) submits a request to DES staff to investigate speeding, traffic volumes, or traffic-related safety concerns within their neighborhood. Requests for City-maintained streets should provide sufficient detail for staff to understand the traffic-related concern and magnitude. The action initiates the dialogue between the resident(s) and DES staff. Requests can be submitted via letter or e-mail.

Requests in writing from City Council will also initiate the process.

NTMP PROCESS FRAMEWORK
Figure 1 November 2008 SJ07-905
DES identifies number of areas that can be treated in given year based on the city's traffic calming budget and workload.

1. Plan Initiation
Citizen Request (also via City Council): Stating perceived problem and affected area via calls, e-mail, or through Web site.

Community Meeting:- Noticing to neighborhood- Overview of process- Review of issues- Define desired outcome- Tutorial by Staff- Form Neighborhood Traffic Committee (NTC)- Review annual capital budget allocation and local contributions
- Petition sent to citizens
Plan Development (3):- Identify physical traffic calming devices to treat issues according to street type, subject to device eligibility guidelines. - Review annual capital budget allocation and local contributions.- Funding commitment required- Solicit affected agency inputNeighborhood Meeting:- Notify residents of meeting- Review draft plan- Gather final input- Educate attendees on survey process- Refine plan as appropriate Determine plan
support. (4)
Level of Support required for Phase 2 or 3
devices:
- Minimum Response Rate = 50%- Minimum Approval Rate = 67%Tally Survey Results:- Staff tallies neighborhood support.- General public responses noted separately.- Identify neighborhood support for traffic calming plan and finding plan.

Design and Consultation:- Develop final designs and review with affected agencies (Fire, Police, Transit Agency, School District). - Conduct field tests of devices, as appropriate.

Construct
temporary or
permanent
devices as
appropriate (5)
Monitoring and
Evaluation
Revise as Needed (6)
Problem resolved?
(1) A response is sent to every citizen who made a request informing them of the course of action. (2) Study area to include all streets that may experience a significant change in traffic due to treatment and will generally be bounded by arterials, freeways, rivers, etc. (3) First round of plan development will focus on speed control devices, if Development and Engineering Services (DES) implementation of non-physical measures in Step 3a/3b. (4) Surveys distributed within study area. Multi Unit Dwellings' responses do not count toward the minimum response rate. Survey includes three questions: (a) Do you support the proposed plan? (b) Would you oppose a traffic calming device adjacent to your property? (c) Would you contribute to neighborhood funding of the proposed traffic calming measures? (5) Temporary devices are constructed at staff discretion based on previous experience. Temporary devices can be converted to permanent devices after 6 months of acceptable performance. (6) If non-physical and speed control devices are found to be ineffective, DES may initiate volume control plan.

2. Plan Development 3. Plan Support 4. Plan Implementation DES
Staff to
Assess Issues:

Treatment
required?
Concern warrants DES action,
such as Phase 1 non-physical
traffic calming devices,
enforcement, maintenance,
traffic operations, or other
action.

Concern warrants education,
such as the city's STREETS
SMARTS Program or
distribution of flyers.

Problem
resolved?
Pursue physical traffic calming
measures.

DES Staff Defines Study
Area (2) and Collect Initial
Traffic Data on Identified Streets
Neighborhood
Support?
No
No
Traffic concern
remedied.

Yes
DES
Conceptual
Approval & Verification
of Project
Funding
Yes
1 3
3a
3b
4 3c
56 7
8 9
10 12
16 17
18 13
2 11
Traffic and Transportation
Commission Consideration/
Recommendations to Council
City Council
Approval of Traffic Calming
and Funding Plans
No Yes
14 15
DES sends letter to citizen
indicating request is on a waiting
list for future evaluation.

Review completed.

Resident notified.(1)
No
Yes
Yes
No
Traffic concern
remedied.

Refine
plan
once
Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 7
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
3 – Assess Traffic
DES staff will review the petition and determine the appropriate course of action. Certain traffic concerns may be remedied through methods other than physical traffic calming devices (3a). For instance, staff may initially install non-physical traffic calming devices (see Chapter 3) that utilize signs and roadway striping, conduct landscaping maintenance (e.g., trees blocking a stop sign), request targeted speed enforcement by the Salinas Police Department, or provide other engineering related improvements. Additionally, DES staff may distribute or assist residents with distribution of educational flyers reminding local residents of the rules of the road and safe neighborhood driving habits (3b). Following these actions, staff will determine whether the treatments remedied the cited concern based on technical documentation (3c).

The City will send a response letter to the individual who submitted the original request, indicating the initial action City staff intends to undertake. If the non-physical traffic calming measures or other actions do not eliminate the concern, staff may recommend physical traffic calming treatments. 4 – Traffic Calming Issue
Upon receipt of the request or determination that previous non-physical traffic calming actions did not address the cited concerns, DES staff may elect to pursue a traffic calming plan with local residents. 5 – Citizen Notified of Course of Action
Staff will send a letter to those residents indicating that their request is on a waiting list for future evaluation pending available City resources. If the number of requests exceeds staff resources, staff will select requests first on a safety priority basis (i.e., locations with a higher than expected number of collisions, higher pedestrian/bicycle concentration locations such as schools, community centers, or libraries) and second on a first-come-first-served basis. The remaining locations will be placed on a waiting list.

To provide residents with another avenue for treatment, neighborhoods can elect to fund the analysis and construction of traffic calming devices to consider expedited neighborhood treatment. The neighborhood must prove the financial ability to fund 100 percent of the anticipated costs, which include field analysis, plan development, engineering drawings, and construction. Upon proof of financial ability, the City can elect to authorize the neighborhood’s request to develop a traffic calming plan. 6 – DES Defines Study Area and Collect Initial Traffic Data Upon notification to proceed, DES staff will initially define the study area, which may be a specific street or much larger area such as a neighborhood. The size of the study area depends on the extent of the trafficrelated concerns and should include any streets that could serve as an alternative route to the treated street.

The study area may also include streets that have their only access to the treated street (e.g., cul-de-sac).

Boundary lines can also follow geographic features such as a creek, hillside, open space, or an arterial roadway. The study area may later be refined with resident input.

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 8
If the necessary signatures are attained, the City of Salinas Development and Engineering Services (DES) Division will initiate a neighborhood meeting to discuss neighborhood traffic issues and begin development of a traffic calming plan.

Printed Name Signature Address Phone No.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

9. 10.

To verify local support, please provide the names, signatures, and contact information of at least 10 residents and/or property owners 18 years and older (from separate households) who support requesting that this neighborhood be considered for selection in the next NTMP cycle.

City of Salinas
Neighborhood Traffic Calming Petition Form
Name of Person Submitting Petition form: __________________________________________ Date: ______________________________________________________________________ Phone Number: ______________________________________________________________ Address: ____________________________________________________________________ Your street or neighborhood is being considered for participation in the City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP). This program addresses neighborhood speeding and traffic volume concerns through the use of traffic calming devices. Individual neighborhood plans will partially or completely be funded by the City of Salinas Development and Engineering Services (DES) Division; however, a percentage of the costs may be borne by the neighborhood.

Initial Description of Problem: ___________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 9
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Based on the study area, DES staff will collect traffic data on streets identified as a concern. Traffic data collection will include the following:
• Street width and length
• Traffic speeds
• Traffic volumes
• Collision history
Traffic speeds and volumes should be collected for a minimum of 48 hours using a mechanical traffic counter or other appropriate device. Staff may elect to conduct a radar speed surveys to verify traffic speeds or conduct a time specific speed survey. Surveys should be collected on all potentially affected streets to insure a comprehensive set of base data for comparison purposes.

PLAN DEVELOPMENT
The plan development component is a collaborative effort between DES staff and a Neighborhood Traffic Calming Committee (NTC). They will work together to develop a traffic calming plan by completing the following steps:
7 – Neighborhood Kick-off Meeting
For those requests selected by DES staff, they will send a petition to the individual who initially requested the investigation. The petition requires a minimum of 10 signatures in support of pursuing a traffic calming plan.

The signatures must be from individuals 18 years and older and from separate households. If the requesting individual cannot attain the minimum required 10 signatures, the request will be terminated. For streets or street segments with fewer than 10 residential units, the City may elect to accept the signatures from a majority of household residents.

Staff will notify study area residents, property owners, and business owners of a neighborhood meeting to learn more about the selection of their neighborhood area to participate in the NTMP. DES staff will host a neighborhood meeting to provide an overview of the NTMP and the process to develop, approve, and implement a neighborhood traffic calming plan. At this meeting, staff will accomplish the following:
• Review traffic-related issues – Discuss the type of issue(s), location(s), and time of occurrences.

Collect any additional information regarding traffic-related issues. • Refine Study area (if necessary) – Staff will refine the study area based on street(s) affected by the traffic-related issues or that may be potentially affected by development of a neighborhood traffic management plan.
• Review traffic data – Review the initial data collected and determine whether additional data collection is necessary.
• Neighborhood traffic management tutorial – Present an overview of available neighborhood traffic calming devices.
• Discuss Funding – The DES will identify the available funding sources and the anticipated amount of funding to be borne by the neighborhood for the construction of traffic calming devices. In addition, residents will be informed of the opportunity to fund enhanced aesthetic features, such as landscaping.

Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 10
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
DES staff will provide interested residents the opportunity to volunteer and participate on the NTC. The NTC will meet with DES staff to review and develop a plan for their neighborhood. Although all residents have the opportunity to provide input and receive updates as the plan develops, the NTC is more actively involved, committing the time and effort necessary to develop a comprehensive plan. 8 – Plan Development
The NTC and DES staff will develop a short list of traffic calming devices to most appropriately treat the traffic concerns. Staff will provide guidance on the selection and placement of the devices. The Toolbox Guideline Tables 1-3 (see Chapter 4) can help to determine the most appropriate devices. The NTC will ultimately present the proposed plan to residents of the study area for public review and comment.

Following implementation on non-physical devices in the initial phase (step 3), Staff will use the following types of physical traffic calming measures to treat the traffic related concerns (see Toolbox chapter for more information):
• Vertical Devices – Speed humps, speed lumps, speed tables, etc. • Narrowing Devices – Bulbouts, chokers, center island narrowings, etc. • Horizontal Devices – Traffic circles, chicanes, lateral shifts, etc.

Because volume control measures (e.g., partial closures or forced turn islands) intentionally divert traffic to another street, new issues are likely to occur as a result. The City strongly promotes connectivity in and between neighborhoods to distribute traffic and minimize all modes of travel. For these reasons, volume control devices should be reserved until all other options have proven ineffective at reducing the traffic-related impacts.

Once DES staff and NTC have developed a plan that will adequately address the neighborhood concerns and finalized the committed funding sources, staff will solicit feedback from local service providers that may be affected by the plan. The intent is to identify concerns and develop viable alternatives to strike a balance between goals of the NTMP and the needs of other agencies. The following service providers should be included as appropriate when coordinating the plan review. • City of Salinas Fire District
• City of Salinas Police Department
• Ambulance Service Providers
• Monterey Salinas Transit
• Local School District / Bus Service
• Solid waste collection companies

Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 11
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
9 – Proposed Plan Neighborhood Meeting
DES staff will notify the study area residents of a neighborhood meeting to review the Proposed Plan.

Residents will have the opportunity to review and provide input on the proposed plan. At this meeting, the NTC will present a map of the proposed plan, describe the types and locations of devices proposed, and discuss the estimated construction costs. If applicable, the NTC will also discuss the aesthetic improvements to gauge resident support. Changes to the proposed plan can be made as necessary.

The DES will also inform residents of the approval process and ballots they will receive once the proposed plan is refined.
10 – DES Conceptual Approval and Verification of Project Funding Prior to determining neighborhood support, DES staff will conceptually approve the plan and verify placement of all proposed traffic calming devices. Staff will also verify the residents’ financial responsibility for the proposed plan. The residents’ financial responsibility may include a portion of the construction costs and any costs for aesthetic upgrades.

NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORT
The neighborhood support component assesses the amount of local neighborhood support for the proposed plan in the form of mail-in ballots. DES staff will mail the ballots to the study area residents, property owners, and applicable business owners.
11 – Determine Plan Support
Before distributing ballots, staff will inform residents in the study area regarding the pending vote with an informational brochure. The combination of this step and the neighborhood meeting (Step 9) will help to ensure that residents of the study area are properly informed.

Ballots will be distributed to study area residents, property owners, apartment units, and businesses owners (if applicable). The ballots will include a description and map of the proposed plan indicating the type and location of devices being proposed. The ballot will also include a mail-back postcard with three questions for residents to respond to:
• Do you support the proposed plan?
• Would you oppose traffic calming devices along your property frontage? • Would you contribute to neighborhood funding for the construction of the proposed traffic calming measures?
The mail-back postcard will also provide a space for residents to write comments regarding the proposed plan.

In addition to determining the local neighborhood support, staff will provide the opportunity for residents living outside of the immediate study area to voice their opinions, such as posting a neighborhood sign with city contact information or accepting comments through e-mail or a Web site. The magnitude of support by the general public will also be considered in the plan approval, but safety issues should govern the final decision for implementation.

Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 12
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
12 – Minimum Neighborhood Support
A minimum response rate and approval rate must be obtained before staff can construct the proposed plan.

At least 50 percent of all ballots must be returned with at least 67 percent of returned ballots in favor. For example, if 100 ballots are mailed out, at least 50 must be returned with 34 in favor of the proposed plan.

Apartments present a unique situation because residents may be less likely to respond. For this reason, ballots from apartment units are not counted toward the minimum response rate, but will be counted in favor or against the proposed plan.

DES staff will count all received ballots and determine whether the minimum response rate and approval rate are satisfied. Staff will also tally the general public input. 13 – Neighborhood Support
If the minimum response rate and approval rate is satisfied, the DES will approve the proposed plan and submit the project for funding consideration.

If staff does not receive the minimum number of ballots, staff can assist the NTC in reminding neighborhood residents to submit their mail-back postcards in order to meet the minimum response rate. NTC members are encouraged to solicit input from their neighbors.

If the minimum response rate is met but the approval rate is not satisfied, the NTC has one opportunity to revise the plan. The DES staff and NTC will identify the aspects of the plan not favored by the neighborhood residents. Modifying the plan may also require soliciting a second review by the local service providers, holding a public meeting to present the revised plan, and redistributing ballots to the affected area. Before supplemental work, the DES will need to assess the department’s workload and financial needs to revise the plan.

If the minimum response rate and approval rate are satisfied, then the plan continues to the final component of the process.
14 – TTC Consideration/Recommendation to City Council
DES staff will present to the Traffic and Transportation Commission (TTC) a map of the community approved plan, describe the types and locations of devices proposed, and summarize the estimated construction costs.

If applicable, DES staff will also discuss the aesthetic improvements provided by selected measures. The TTC will make its recommendation to the City Council based on this presentation. 15 – City Council Approval of Traffic Calming and Funding Plans Similar to the TTC public meeting, DES staff will present a map of the community approved plan, describe the types and locations of devices proposed, summarize the estimated construction costs, and discuss the recommendation from the TTC. The City Council will either approve the traffic calming and funding plans to initiate construction, or recommend additional improvements and modifications to the plan – requiring a return to step 8.

Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 13
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
The final component consists of preparing the design plans, constructing, and monitoring the approved traffic calming devices.
16 – Design and Consultation
Upon approval of the proposed plan, DES staff will prepare the necessary design plans for each traffic calming device and consult with local service providers if necessary. The DES may conduct field tests to verify that local service providers’ vehicles can navigate through or around the proposed designs. DES will make modifications to the approved devices as necessary. 17 – Construction
Before constructing the traffic calming devices, the DES will inform the public and local service providers of the pending traffic calming devices. The DES will also provide education materials to inform local residents how to negotiate unfamiliar devices, as necessary.

The DES or a City contractor will construct the approved traffic calming devices. The staff may decide to construct temporary devices based on previous experience. DES staff will incorporate aesthetics into the design and construction of temporary devices where possible, but these devices may not be visually appealing due to cost limitations. Aesthetics will be a higher priority for permanent devices. 18 – Monitoring and Evaluation
The DES will monitor the effectiveness and neighborhood perception of the constructed devices for three to six months. Following the monitoring period, the DES will collect traffic speed and volume data for the treated streets and quantitatively determine the effects of the plan.

After constructing the approved plan, the DES will rely on the NTC and community members for feedback on the constructed devices. Based on the NTC and/or community members’ feedback, the DES will determine the next steps. For example, the approved plan may have produced reasonable and satisfactory results, and, therefore, no further action is required.

If the approved plan has not produced reasonable and satisfactory results, the DES can recommend one of the following:
• Collect additional traffic data as deemed appropriate • Modify constructed devices as deemed appropriate
• Construct additional speed control devices as deemed appropriate If the DES determines that additional speed control devices will not adequately address the traffic-related concern, the DES can recommend the use of alternative measures or programs.

Before supplemental work begins, the DES will assess the department’s workload and financial needs to revise the plan.

Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 14
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

PROCESS FOR REMOVAL
The DES recognizes that after devices are approved and implemented, residents may wish to remove these devices. Historically, once installed, most traffic calming devices remain due to local support. This section provides guidelines for a systematic removal process.

Similar to the process for implementing neighborhood traffic calming devices, the removal process is resident-driven. The process requires that the same affected area be involved in the decision process for the removal of devices. As detailed below, greater neighborhood support is also required to verify that the neighborhood truly wants the devices removed. Residents must bear the costs for removal.

The removal process is described below, and the flowchart in Figure 2 outlines the removal process. Each step below is numbered and corresponds to the flowchart on Figure 2. 1 – Citizen Petition for Removal of Device(s)
To initiate the removal process, a resident living in the neighborhood where the device removal is being considered must submit a petition. The petition cannot be submitted within the first year of operation. The petition must be submitted with a minimum of 10 signatures from separate households. The petition must also state the location(s) of device(s) and reason for removal.

Once DES staff receives the petition, they will organize and distribute ballots for the removal process. 2 – Distribute Ballots
Ballots will be distributed to those residents, property owners, and business owners from the original study area. Although tenants or property owners may have changed, the same addresses will be provided the opportunity to participate in the approval process. The ballots will contain descriptions and maps of devices and locations proposed for removal. The ballot will also include a mail-back postcard that residents can use to indicate their support for or against the proposed removal. The ballot will also provide a space for residents to write comments regarding the removal.
3 – Required Neighborhood Support
A higher minimum response rate and approval rate must be met by those households on the treated street. A minimum of 75 percent of all ballots must be returned with at least 75 percent of all ballots received in favor of removal.

Similar to the installation process, apartment units do not count toward the minimum response rate. If the minimum response or approval rates are not met, residents must wait three years before refiling the petition (3a).
4 – Approval by DES
If the neighborhood support meets the minimum response and approval rates, the DES will calculate the estimated removal cost. The neighborhood must prove the ability to fund 100 percent of the anticipated costs.

Upon proof of financial ability, the DES can elect to authorize the removal of the specified devices (4a). A letter will be sent to all local service providers (e.g., Fire Department) indicating the location of device(s) to be removed (4b). If the full cost or removal is not provided, residents must wait three years before refiling the petition (4c).

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 2 – Process Framework Page 15
Figure 2 NTMP Process For Removal
Citizen Petition for Removal of Devices:

Stating devices to be removed and supporting signatures of 10 residents Distribute ballots: Ballots must be distributed to the same affected area and addresses that originally voted on the implementation of the plan.

Petition for
removal cannot
be resubmitted
for three years.

Approval
by DES
Required Neighborhood
Support:

Response Rate – 75%
Approval Rate – 75%
1 2
No
3a 3
Yes
No
4c 4
Yes
Removal of
Device(s) 4a
Notify Local
Service Providers
of Removal
4b
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 16
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

3. TOOLBOX
This chapter of the NTMP summarizes the “toolbox” of devices that are available to the City of Salinas and community members when developing neighborhood traffic calming plans. The “toolbox” contains 31 different devices that address neighborhood traffic related concerns such as speeding vehicles, high traffic volumes, cut-through traffic, or collisions at neighborhood intersections. The devices vary in their ability to treat various traffic related concerns. For this reason, Chapter 4, “Toolbox Guidelines,” provides guidance on selecting the most appropriate devices given the type of specific traffic-related concern and street being treated.

The “toolbox” of neighborhood traffic management devices can be grouped into three categories:
• Non-Physical devices
• Speed Control
− Narrowing devices
− Horizontal devices
− Vertical devices
• Volume Control devices
For each device in the “toolbox,” the following information relating to each device is provided:
• Description of the measure
• Photograph and/or schematic
• List of advantages and disadvantages
• Data sheet indicating speed, volume, or collision reduction potential • Estimated costs
Cost approximations are based on 2006 costs and are provided for information purposes only. Actual costs depend on many factors, including dimensions of device, construction materials, and actual construction costs.

Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 17
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

NON-PHYSICAL DEVICES
Description
Non-physical devices include any measures that do not require physical changes to the pavement section or curbs. Non-physical devices are intended to increase drivers’ awareness of surroundings and influence driver behavior without physical obstructions. DES staff will initially implement non-physical devices to treat traffic related concerns. However, these devices are not self enforcing and may have limited effectiveness as standalone devices. This category includes the following devices:
• Targeted Speed Enforcement
• Speed Radar Trailers
• Speed Feedback Sign
• Centerline/Edgeline Lane Striping
• Optical Speed Bars
• Signage
• Speed Legend
• Centerline/Edgeline Reflectors
• High Visibility Crosswalks
• Angled Parking
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 18
Targeted Speed Enforcement
City Staff or NTC members can identify locations for temporary targeted enforcement, based on personal observations and survey comments. A request can be submitted to the Salinas Police Department (SPD) for the desired enforcement. Because of limited SPD resources, the duration of the targeted enforcement may be limited. Targeted enforcement
may also be used in conjunction
with new neighborhood traffic
management devices to help
drivers become aware of the
new restrictions.

Advantages
• Inexpensive if used
temporarily
• Does not physically slow
emergency vehicles or
buses
• Quick implementation
Disadvantages
• Expensive to maintain
an increased level of
enforcement
• Effectiveness may be
temporary Approximate Cost: No additional cost.

Speed Radar Trailers
A radar trailer is a device that measures each approaching vehicle’s speed and displays it next to the legal speed limit in clear view of the driver. They can be easily placed on a street for a limited amount of time then relocated to another street, allowing a single device to be effective in many locations. Advantages • Portable
• Does not physically slow
emergency vehicles or
buses
• Quick implementation
Disadvantages
• Effectiveness may be
temporary
• Drivers may divert to
alternate streets due to
uncertainty of device
implications
• Subject to vandalism
Approximate Cost: No direct cost. (Purchase $6,000 - $12,000) City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 19
Speed Feedback Signs
Speed feedback signs perform the same functions as radar trailers but are permanent. Real-time speeds are relayed to drivers and flash when speeds exceed the limit. Speed feedback signs are typically mounted on or near speed limit signs. • Subject to vandalism
• Long-term effectiveness
uncertain
• Only effective for one
direction of travel
• May require power
source
Disadvantages
• Permanent installation
• Does not physically slow
emergency vehicles or
buses
• Real-time speed
feedback
Advantages
Approximate Cost: $7,500 - $10,000
Centerline/Edgeline Lane Striping
Lane striping can be used to create formal travel lanes, bicycle lanes, parking lanes, or edge lines. As a neighborhood traffic management measure, they are used to narrow the travel lanes for vehicles, thereby inducing drivers to lower their speeds. The past evidence on speed reductions is, however, inconclusive. • Requires regular
maintenance
• Has not been shown to
significantly reduce
travel speeds
Disadvantages
• Does not slow
emergency vehicles
• Can be used to create
bicycle lanes or
delineate on-street
parking
• Inexpensive
Advantages
Approximate Cost: $2.00 per linear foot
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 20
Optical Speed Bars
Optical speed bars are a series of pavement markings spaced at decreasing distances. They have typically been used in construction areas to provide drivers with the impression of increased speed. They do not provide long-term speed reduction benefits.

Disadvantages
• Long-term effects in
residential area
unknown
• Increases regular
maintenance
Advantages
• Inexpensive
• Does not physically slow
emergency vehicles or
buses
Approximate Cost: $1.00 per linear foot
Signage
Various signs may also be useful in alerting driver of certain conditions.

Examples include:
• Inexpensive
• Truck restrictions can
reduce through truck
traffic
• Does not slow
emergency vehicles or
buses
Disadvantages
• Requires regular
maintenance
• Speed limit signs are not
applicable because they
do not necessarily
change driver behavior
• If speed limits are set
unreasonably low,
drivers are more likely
to exceed it
Advantages
• “Cross Traffic Does Not Stop” Signs
• Truck Restriction Signs
Approximate Cost: $150 - $500 per sign
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 21
Speed Legend
Speed legends are numerals painted on the roadway indicating the current speed limit in miles per hour. They are usually placed near speed limit signposts. Speed legends can be useful in reinforcing a reduction in speed limit between one segment of a roadway and another segment.

They may also be placed at major entry points into a residential area.

Approximate Cost: $75 per location
Centerline/Edgeline Reflectors
Reflectors (also known as Botts dots or “raised pavement markers”) are small bumps lining the centerline or edgeline of a roadway. They are often used on curves where vehicles have a tendency to deviate outside of the proper lane, risking collision. Raised reflectors improve the nighttime visibility of the roadway edges and provide a low impact physical reminder to drivers if driven over.
• Helps reinforce a
change in speed limit
• Does not slow
emergency vehicles
Disadvantages
• Has not been shown to
significantly reduce
travel speeds
• Requires regular
maintenance
Advantages
• Inexpensive
• Does not physically slow
emergency vehicles or
buses
• Can help keep drivers in
the appropriate travel
lane on curves and
under low-visibility
conditions
Disadvantages
• Noise caused by tire
impact
• Requires regular
maintenance
• Has not been shown to
significantly reduce
travel speeds
Advantages
• Inexpensive
Approximate Cost: $4.50 per marker
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 22
High Visibility Crosswalks
High-visibility crosswalks use special marking patterns and raised reflectors to increase the visibility of a crosswalk. A “triple-four” marking pattern is created by painting two rows of four-foot wide rectangles, separated by four feet of unpainted space across the roadway. Raised reflectors are placed at the approach edges of these rectangles. The unpainted space along the center of the crosswalk provides an untreated path for wheelchair users and foot traffic, as markings may become slippery in rainy/wet conditions. See Appendix C for the City of Salinas Pedestrian Safety
Enhancement Devices
Policy, which
describes the City
accepted standards of
high visibility crosswalks in school zones.

Approximate Cost: $1,600 per location
Angled Parking
Angled parking reorients on-street parking spaces to a 45-degree angle, increasing the number of parking spaces and reducing the width of the roadway available for travel lanes. Angled parking is also easier for vehicles to maneuver into and out of than parallel parking.

Consequently, it
works well in
areas with high
parking demand
and turnover
rates, and where
street widths are
wider than normal
50 foot or greater
cross-sections.
• Requires more
maintenance than
normal crosswalks
Advantages
• Reduces speeds by
narrowing the travel lanes
• Increases the number of
parking spaces
• Provides for easier parking
maneuvers that take less
time than parallel parking
• Favored by businesses and
multi-family residences
Disadvantages
• Precludes the use of bike
lanes (unless roadway is
wider than 58 feet)
• Ineffective on streets with
frequent driveways
• Potential for collisions when
backing out
Advantages
• Increased visibility of
crosswalk
• Focus crossing
pedestrians at a single
location
Disadvantages
• May give pedestrians a
false sense of security,
causing them to pay less
attention to traffic
Approximate Cost: Dependent on amount of parking
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 23
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
SPEED CONTROL – NARROWING DEVICES
Description
Narrowing devices use raised islands and curb extensions to physically narrow the travel lane for motorists.

The narrowing devices in the toolbox include:
• Neckdown/Bulbout
• Center Island Narrowing/Pedestrian Refuge
• Two-Lane Choker
• One-Lane Choker
Each narrowing device is illustrated and described on the following pages.

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 24
Neckdown/Bulbout
Neckdowns/bulbouts are raised curb extensions that narrow the travel lane at intersections or midblock locations. Neckdowns/bulbouts “pedestrianize” intersections by shortening the crossing distance and decreasing the curb radii, thus reducing turning vehicle speeds. Both of these effects increase pedestrian comfort and safety at the intersection.

The magnitude of speed reduction is dependent on the spacing of neckdowns between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56).

On average, neckdowns achieve a 7 percent reduction in speeds.

Approximate Cost: $6,000 – $12,000 per corner
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -7% Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day -10%
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

NEW CONSTRUCTION

RETROFIT
Disadvantages
• Effectiveness is limited by
the absence of vertical or
horizontal deflection
• May slow right-turning
emergency vehicles
• Potential loss of on-street
parking
• May require bicyclists to briefly
merge with vehicular traffic
Advantages
• Reduces pedestrian crossing
distance and exposure to
vehicles
• Through and left-turn
movements are easily
negotiable by large vehicles
• Creates protected on-street
parking bays
• Reduces speeds (especially
right-turning vehicles) and
traffic volumes
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 25
Center Island Narrowing/Pedestrian Refuge
Center island narrowings are raised islands located along the centerline of a street that narrow the travel lanes at that location. Placed at the entrance to a neighborhood, and often combined with textured pavement, they are often called “gateways." Fitted with a gap to allow pedestrians to walk through at a crosswalk, they are often called “pedestrian refuges.” They can also be landscaped to increase visual aesthetics.

The magnitude of speed reduction is dependent on the spacing of center island narrowings between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56). On average, center island narrowings achieve a 7 percent reduction in speed.

Approximate Cost: $10,000 - $15,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -7% Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day -10%
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

UPGRADED AESTHETICS

FITTED WITH PEDESTRIAN REFUGE
• Aesthetic upgrades can
have positive aesthetic
value
• Reduces traffic volumes
if alternative routes are
available
Disadvantages
• Effect on vehicle speeds
is limited by the absence
of any vertical or
horizontal deflection
• Potential loss of onstreet parking
Advantages
• Can increase pedestrian
safety
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 26
Two-Lane Choker
Chokers are curb extensions at midblock that narrow a street. Chokers leave the street cross section with two lanes that are narrower than the normal cross section.

The magnitude of speed reduction is dependent on the spacing of twolane chokers between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56). On average two-lane chokers achieve a 7 percent reduction in speed.

Approximate Cost: $7,000 - $8,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -7% Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day -10%
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.
• Easily negotiable by
emergency vehicles and
buses
• Can have positive
aesthetic value
• Reduces both speeds
and volumes
Disadvantages
• Effect on vehicle speeds
is limited by the absence
of any vertical or
horizontal deflection
• May require bicyclists to
briefly merge with
vehicular traffic
• Loss of on-street parking
• Build-up of debris in
gutter
Advantages

RETROFIT WITH UPGRADED

AESTHETICS (COMBINED WITH HUMP)

NEW CONSTRUCTION
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 27
One-Lane Choker
One-lane chokers narrow the roadway width such that there is only enough width to allow travel in one direction at a time. They operate similarly to one-lane bridges, where cars approaching on one side must wait until all traffic in the other direction has cleared before proceeding.

The magnitude of speed reduction is dependent on the spacing of onelane chokers between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56).

On average, one-lane chokers achieve a 14 percent reduction in speed.

Approximate Cost: $8,000 - $9,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -14% Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day -20%
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

Advantages
• Maintains two-way
vehicle access, except
at choker
• Very effective in
reducing speeds and
traffic volumes
Disadvantages
• Perceived as unsafe
because opposing traffic
is vying for space in a
single lane
• Can be used only on
low-volume, low speed
roads
• Loss of on-street parking

RETROFIT WITH

UPGRADED AESTHETICS
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 28
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
SPEED CONTROL – HORIZONTAL DEVICES
Description
Horizontal deflection devices use raised islands and curb extensions to physically eliminate straight-line paths along roadways and through intersections. The horizontal deflection devices in the toolbox include:
• Traffic Circle
• Roundabout (Single-Lane)
• Chicane
• Lateral Shift
• Realigned Intersection
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 29
Traffic Circle
Traffic circles are raised islands, placed in intersections, around which traffic circulates. Stop signs or yield signs can be used as traffic controls at the approaches of the traffic circle. Circles prevent drivers from speeding through intersections by impeding the straight-through movement and forcing drivers to slow down to yield. Depending upon the size of the intersection and circle, trucks may be permitted to turn left in front of the circle.

Traffic circles are raised islands, placed in intersections, around which traffic circulates. Stop signs or yield signs can be used as traffic controls at the approaches of the traffic circle. Circles prevent drivers from speeding through intersections by impeding the straight-through movement and forcing drivers to slow down to yield. Depending upon the size of the intersection and circle, trucks may be permitted to turn left in front of the circle.

The magnitude of speed reduction is dependent on the spacing of traffic circles between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56). On average, traffic circles achieve an 11 percent reduction in speeds and a dramatic 71 percent decrease in collisions.

Approximate Cost: $10,000 - $25,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Impacts Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -11% Volume Impacts Reduction in Vehicles per Day -5%
Safety Impacts Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions -71% Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

Disadvantages
• If not designed properly,
difficult for emergency
vehicles or large trucks
to travel around
• Must be designed so
that the circulating traffic
does not encroach on
crosswalks
• Potential loss of onstreet parking
Advantages
• Very effective in
moderating speeds and
improving safety
• Can have positive
aesthetic value

STANDARD RIVER ROCK TREATMENT

WITH UPGRADED AESTHETICS AESTHETICS
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 30
Roundabout (Single-Lane)
Like traffic circles, roundabouts require traffic to circulate counterclockwise around a center island. But unlike circles, roundabouts are used on higher volume streets to allocate right-of-way among competing movements. They are found primarily on collector streets, often substituting for traffic signals. They are larger than neighborhood traffic circles, have raised splitter islands to channel approaching traffic to the right, and do not have stop signs. Due to large amount of required right-of-way and construction costs, roundabouts may be most appropriate for new developments.

Roundabouts have an insignificant effect in reducing traffic speeds, but serve to allocate right-of-way at an intersection similar to a traffic signal.

On average, roundabouts can reduce the average number of accidents up to 33 percent when compared to a signalized intersection.

Approximate Cost: Varies by intersection and whether new construction or a retrofit.

Measured Effectiveness
Speed Impacts Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D Volume Impacts Reduction in Vehicles per Day I/D
Safety Impacts Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions -15% to -33% Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Roundabouts: An Informational Guide, 2000.

Advantages
• Enhanced vehicle safety
compared to a traffic signal or
stop sign
• Minimizes queuing at
approaches to the intersection
• Less expensive to operate
than traffic signals
• Can have positive aesthetic
value
• Shorter pedestrian crossing
distance
Disadvantages
• May require major
reconstruction of an existing
intersection
• Loss of on-street parking
• Continuous flow of traffic limits
opportunity for pedestrians to
cross (compared to signal)
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 31
Chicane
Chicanes are curb extensions that alternate from one side of the street to the other, forming S-shaped curves. Chicanes can also be created by alternating on-street parking between one side of the road and the other.

Each parking bay can be created either by restriping the roadway or by installing raised center islands at each end, creating a protected parking area. Chicanes have limited effectiveness in reducing traffic speeds and volumes as compared to other devices. Little data has been collected to predict the reduction in speed, traffic volumes, or collisions, and use of this device may not result in significant decreases. Resources permitting, DES staff can collect before and after data to determine the effectiveness of chicanes.

Approximate Cost: $8,000 - $14,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Impacts Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D Volume Impacts Reduction in Vehicles per Day I/D
Safety Impacts Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient data to predict reduction effect. • Must be designed carefully
to discourage drivers from
deviating out of the
appropriate lane
• Curb realignment and
landscaping can be costly,
especially if there are
drainage issues
• Loss of on-street parking
Advantages
• Discourages high speeds
by forcing horizontal
deflection
• Easily negotiable by
emergency vehicles and
buses
Disadvantages

RETROFIT WITH

STANDARD TREATMENT

RETROFIT WITH

UPGRADED AESTHETICS
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 32
Lateral Shift
Lateral shifts are curb extensions on otherwise straight streets that cause a shift in the travel. Lateral shifts, with just the right degree of deflection, can be effective. However, lateral shifts have had limited use in the United States, and, consequently, insufficient data prevents accurate prediction of speed reduction and traffic volumes.

Approximate Cost: Dependent on size of offset and length of transition
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day I/D
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect. • Must be designed carefully
to discourage drivers from
deviating out of the
appropriate lane
Advantages
• Can accommodate higher
traffic volumes than many
other neighborhood traffic
management measures
• Easily negotiable by large
emergency vehicles and
buses
Disadvantages
• Potential for loss of onstreet parking
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 33
Realigned Intersection
Realigned intersections provide deflection on an otherwise straight approach of a T-intersection. By providing deflection in the form of a curb extension or realignment, drivers are required to slow through the intersection or come to a stop before turning.

Little data has been collected to predict the reduction in speed, traffic volumes, or collisions, and use of this device may not result in significant decreases. Resources permitting, DES staff can collect before and after data to determine the effectiveness of realigned intersections.

Approximate Cost: $15,000 - $30,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day I/D
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect. • Modifying curbs or
drainage can be costly
• Acquiring additional rightof-way can be costly
Disadvantages
Advantages
• Can be effective at
reducing speeds at
T-intersections
• Can be effective in
increasing safety at
T-intersections
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 34
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
SPEED CONTROL – VERTICAL DEVICES
Description
Vertical deflection devices use variations in pavement height and alternative paving materials to physically reduce travel speeds. The design speeds for these devices are approximately 15 to 20 mph depending on the device. The vertical deflection devices in the toolbox include:
• Speed Hump
• Speed Lump
• Speed Cushion
• Speed Table
• Raised Crosswalk
• Raised Intersection
• Textured/Colored Pavement
• Rumble Strip
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 35
Speed Hump
Speed humps are rounded raised areas placed across the road. They are generally 12 feet long (in the direction of travel), 3 to 3 ½ inches high, parabolic in shape, and have a design speed of 15 to 20 mph. They are usually constructed with a taper on each side to allow unimpeded drainage between the hump and curb. When placed on a street with rolled curbs or no curbs, bollards are placed at the ends of the speed hump to discourage vehicles from veering outside of the travel lane to avoid the device.

The magnitude of reduction in speed is dependent on the spacing of speed humps between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56).

On average, speed humps achieve a 22 percent reduction in speeds.

Approximate Cost: $2,000 - $3,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Impacts Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -22% Volume Impacts Reduction in Average Daily Traffic -18%
Safety Impacts Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions -13% Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.
• Signs may be
unwelcome by adjacent
residents
• Increased noise for
nearby residents
• Relatively easy for
bicyclists to cross
• Very effective in slowing
travel speeds
Disadvantages
• Causes a “rough ride”
for drivers, and can
discomfort people with
certain skeletal
disabilities
• Slows emergency
vehicles and buses
• Aesthetics
Advantages
• Relatively inexpensive
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 36
Speed Lump
The speed lump is a variation on the speed hump, adding two wheel cutouts designed to allow large vehicles, such as emergency vehicles and buses, to pass with minimal impedance. The design limits passenger cars and most SUVs from fully passing through the cut-outs, but allows one set of wheels to pass through the cut-out while the other set is required to travel over the lump.

The magnitude of speed reduction is dependent on the spacing of speed lumps between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56). Speed lumps have a similar reduction in speeds when compared to speed humps.

Approximate Cost: $2,000 - $3,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points Volume Reduction Reduction in Average Daily Traffic
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D, but
comparable to
speed humps
Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect. • Passenger vehicles with
wide wheel base can
pass through the lump
using the wheel cut-outs
• Aesthetics
• Signs may be
unwelcome by adjacent
residents
• Increased noise for
nearby residents
Disadvantages
Advantages
• Effective in reducing
speeds
• Maintains rapid
emergency response
times
• Relatively easy for
bicyclists to cross
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 37
Speed Cushion
Speed cushions are constructed from durable recycled rubber and are a variation of the speed lump. These prefabricated devices consistently have a more uniform shape than asphalt humps. Speed cushions provide wheel gaps for emergency vehicles and buses, and can be arranged to fit any street width. They can also be easily relocated if needed.

The magnitude of speed reduction is dependent on the spacing of speed cushions between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56). On average, speed cushions achieve a 14 percent reduction in speeds.

Approximate Cost: $4,500 - $6,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -14% Volume Reduction Reduction in Average Daily Traffic
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions Comparable
to Speed
Lumps
Source: City of Portland, Rubber Speed Bump Research, 1995.

Advantages
• Provides a more
consistent ride than
asphalt humps
• Can be used as a
temporary device during
a testing phase
• Reduces impacts to
emergency vehicles due
to cut-outs
• Easily accommodates
street resurfacing
Disadvantages
• Aesthetics
• Signs may be
unwelcome by adjacent
residents
• Increased noise for
nearby residents
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 38
Speed Table
Speed tables are flat-topped speed humps approximately 22 feet long. They are typically long enough for the entire wheelbase of a passenger car to rest on top. Their long, flat fields, plus ramps that are more gently sloped than speed humps, give speed tables higher design speeds than humps, and, thus, may be more appropriate for streets with higher ambient speeds. Brick or other textured materials improve the appearance of speed tables, draw attention to them, and may enhance safety and speed reduction.

The magnitude of speed reduction is dependent on the spacing of speed tables between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56). On average, speed tables achieve an 18 percent reduction in speeds.

Approximate Cost: $4,000 for basic treatment
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Impacts Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -18% Volume Impacts Reduction in Vehicles per Day -12%
Safety Impacts Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions -45% Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.
• Signs may be
unwelcome by adjacent
residents
• Increased noise for
nearby residents
Advantages
• Smoother on large
vehicles (such as fire
trucks) than speed
humps
• Effective in reducing
speeds, though not to
the extent of speed
humps
Disadvantages
• Aesthetics
• Textured materials, if
used, can be expensive

STANDARD TREATMENT

UPGRADED AESTHETICS

UPGRADED AESTHETICS
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 39
Raised Crosswalk
Raised crosswalks are speed tables striped with crosswalk markings and signage to channelize pedestrian crossings, providing pedestrians with a level street crossing. Also, by raising the level of the crossing, pedestrians are more visible to approaching motorists.

The magnitude of speed reduction is dependent on the spacing of raised crosswalks between points that require drivers to slow (see page 56). On average, raised crosswalks achieve an 18 percent reduction in speeds.

Approximate Cost: $5,000 for basic treatment
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Impacts Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -18% Volume Impacts Reduction in Vehicles per Day -12%
Safety Impacts Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions -45% Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

STANDARD TREATMENT

UPGRADED AESTHETICS
• Textured pavement can
increase noise to
adjacent residents
• Signs may be
unwelcome by adjacent
residents
Advantages
• Improve safety for both
vehicles and pedestrians
• Aesthetic upgrades can
have positive aesthetic
value
• Effective in reducing
speeds, though not to
the extent of speed
humps
Disadvantages
• Textured materials, if
used, can be expensive
• Impact to drainage
needs to be considered

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 40
Raised Intersection
Raised intersections are flat raised areas covering entire intersections, with ramps on all approaches. They usually rise to sidewalk level, or slightly below, to provide a “lip” for the visually impaired. By modifying the level of the intersection, the crosswalks are more readily perceived by motorists to be a pedestrian area. They are particularly useful where loss of on-street parking due to other traffic calming devices is considered unacceptable. Raised intersections are ineffective at reducing traffic speeds or volumes.

Approximate Cost: Varies based on size of intersection
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -1% Volume Reduction Reduction in Average Daily Traffic I/D Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

UPGRADED AESTHETICS
• Expensive, particularly
as a retrofit
• Textured pavement can
increase noise to
adjacent residents
Advantages
• Can improve safety for
pedestrians and
motorists
• Aesthetic upgrades can
have positive aesthetic
value
• Can treat two streets at
once
Disadvantages
• Less effective in
reducing vehicle speeds
than speed humps and
speed tables

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 41
Textured/Colored Pavement
Textured colored pavement includes the use of stamped pavement (asphalt) or alternate paving materials to create an uneven surface for vehicles to traverse. Textured pavement may have limited effectiveness as a standalone device and should be used to supplement other devices such as raised crosswalks or center median islands. Little data has been collected to predict the reduction in speed, traffic volumes, or collisions, and use of this device may not result in significant decreases. Resources permitting, DES staff can collect before and after data to determine the effectiveness of textured pavement.

Approximate Cost: $8.00 per square foot
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D Volume Reduction Reduction in Average Daily Traffic I/D Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect. • Can be uncomfortable
for bicyclists or
handicapped.
• Textured pavement can
increase noise to
adjacent properties
Advantages
• Can reduce vehicle
speeds
• Aesthetic upgrades can
have positive value
• Placed at an
intersection, it can slow
two streets at once
Disadvantages
• Expensive, varying by
materials used
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 42
Rumble Strip
Rumble strips are closely spaced raised pavement markers at regular intervals on the roadway that create noise and vibration to the vehicle. Rumble strips can be used to warn drivers of a change in speed limit, leading up to a residential or school area, and upcoming stop sign or intersection. Rumble strips should be used only in areas where the noise impact would be minimal. Little data has been collected to predict the reduction in speed, traffic volumes, or collisions, and use of this device may not result in significant decreases.

Resources permitting, DES staff can collect before and after data to determine the effectiveness of rumble strips.

Approximate Cost: $500 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D Volume Reduction Reduction in Average Daily Traffic I/D Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect. • Maintenance of raised
pavement markers
• Aesthetics
• Uncomfortable for
motorcyclists and
bicyclists
Advantages
• Relatively inexpensive
• Can be effective in
slowing travel speeds in
specific locations
Disadvantages
• Raised pavement
markers can be slippery
when wet
• Increased noise in
vicinity of rumble strips
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 43
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
VOLUME CONTROL – DEVICES
Description
Diversion devices use raised islands and curb extensions to physically preclude particular vehicle movements, such as left-turn or through movements, usually at an intersection. These devices can be considered only after all other devices have been attempted and failed to resolve the traffic problem. The diversion devices in the toolbox include:
• Full Closure
• Partial Closure
• Diagonal Diverter
• Median Barrier
• Forced Turn Island
• Turn-Movement Restriction
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 44
Full Closure
Full street closures are barriers placed across a street to close the street completely to through traffic, usually leaving only sidewalks or bicycle paths open. The barriers may consist of landscaped islands, walls, gates, side-by-side bollards, or any other obstructions that leave an opening smaller than the width of a passenger car. Emergency vehicles can be accommodated via removable bollards or similar devices.

Approximate Cost: $50,000 - $100,000 per location (dependent on size and treatment)
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day -44%
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.
• Able to maintain
pedestrian and bicycle
connectivity
Disadvantages
• Requires statutory actions
for public street closures
• Causes circuitous routes
for local residents
• Diverts traffic to another
street
• Delays for emergency
services unless through
access is provided
• May limit access to
businesses
• Cost
Advantages
• Very effective in reducing
cut-through traffic volumes
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 45
Partial Closure
Half street closures are barriers that block travel in one direction for a short distance on otherwise two-way streets. Half closures are the most common volume control measure after full street closures. Half closures are often used in sets to make travel through neighborhoods with a grid street pattern circuitous rather than direct.

Approximate Cost: $5,000 - $7,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -19% Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day -42%
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

STANDARD TREATMENT

WITH BICYCLE LANE
• Able to maintain two-way
bicycle access
• Effective in reducing traffic
volumes
Disadvantages
• Causes circuitous routes
for local residents
• May limit access to
businesses
• Drivers can bypass the
barrier
Advantages

UPGRADED TREATMENT

WITHOUT BICYCLE LANE
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 46
Diagonal Diverter
Diagonal diverters are barriers placed diagonally across an intersection, blocking through movement. Like half closures, diagonal diverters are usually staggered to create circuitous routes through neighborhoods.

Approximate Cost: $20,000 - $25,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points -4% Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day -35%
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

STANDARD TREATMENT

WITH MINOR LANDSCAPING TREATMENT
• Able to maintain full
pedestrian and bicycle
access
• Reduces traffic volumes
Disadvantages
• Causes circuitous routes
for local residents
• Delays for emergency
services
• May be expensive
• May require reconstruction
of corner curbs
Advantages

UPGRADED AESTHETICS
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 47
Median Barrier
Median barriers are raised islands that are located along the centerline of a street and continue through an intersection so as to block through (and left-turn) movement at a cross street.

Approximate Cost: $15,000 - $20,000 per 100 feet (dependent on length and width)
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D% Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day -31%
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

STANDARD TREATMENT

UPGRADED AESTHETICS
Disadvantages
• Requires available street
width on the major street
• Limits turns to and from
the side streets and
driveways for local
residents and emergency
services
Advantages
• Can improve safety at an
intersection of a local
street and a major street
by prohibiting critical
through or left-turn
movements
• Can reduce traffic volumes
on a cut-through route that
crosses a major street
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 48
Forced-Turn Island
Forced turn islands are raised islands that prohibit certain movements on approaches to an intersection.

Approximate Cost: $3,000 - $5,000 per location
Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D% Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day -31%
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Source: Traffic Calming: State of the Practice, 2000.

BASIC TREATMENT • If designed improperly,
drivers can maneuver
around the island to make
an illegal movement
• May divert a traffic
problem to a different
street
Advantages
• Can improve safety at an
intersection by prohibiting
critical turning movements
• Reduces traffic volumes
Disadvantages

STANDARD TREATMENT
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 3 – Toolbox Page 49
Turn-Movement Restrictions
Turn movement restrictions involve the use of signs to prevent undesired turning movements without the use of physical devices. The restrictions may generally apply to turning movements in or out of a residential street to a larger street. The turn movement restrictions may be permanent or only during peak commute hours.

Measured Effectiveness
Speed Reduction Reduction in 85th Percentile Speeds between Slow Points I/D Volume Reduction Reduction in Vehicles per Day I/D
Safety Reduction Reduction in Average Annual Number of Collisions I/D Note: I/D = Insufficient Data to predict reduction effect.

Approximate Cost: $150 per sign (enforcement may be necessary to be effective) Disadvantages
• Restrictions apply to
resident and non-residents
• Requires enforcement
during time of restriction to
be effective
• May divert a traffic
problem to another street
Advantages
• Can reduce cut-through
traffic at specific times of
day
• Can increase safety at an
intersection by prohibiting
certain turning movements
• Low cost
Chapter 4 – Toolbox Guidelines Page 50
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

4. TOOLBOX GUIDELINES
This section provides guidance on selecting the most appropriate neighborhood traffic management measure for a specific problem. This involves narrowing the toolbox of neighborhood traffic management measures to those that will most closely target the key traffic issue; are appropriate for the existing street characteristics; and are compatible with the traffic volumes, geometrics, and adjacent land uses near the given location.

When the list has been narrowed, devices should be considered that are likely supported by affected residents. Finally, the selected devices need to be placed in a manner that will produce the desired results.

GUIDELINES
Step 1 – Identify Traffic Related Concern
The first task when selecting the most appropriate traffic calming device is to narrow the field of devices to those that address the primary traffic concern. The most common traffic related concerns are:
• Speeding – motor vehicle speeds are too high
• Traffic Volumes – motor vehicle usage levels (all trips or non-local trips only) are too high • Safety – locations with higher occurrences of collisions, higher concentrations of bicyclists and pedestrians, or potential hazards (e.g., sight distance limitations) Each device in the toolbox is appropriate to a different subset of the above traffic-related concerns. Table 1 summarizes the appropriateness of each device.

Non-Physical Measures
The first solutions to consider should be non-physical measures, such as signs and markings, since these can devices increase driver awareness, are relatively inexpensive, and are the least intrusive to residents.

Speed Control Measures
Speed control measures can address any of the major problem types:
• Narrowing Measures – Narrowing devices, such as neckdowns, center island narrowings, or chokers, are less obtrusive than other devices and can be more aesthetically pleasing if residents opt to fund upgraded landscaping and assume the maintenance cost and responsibilities. • Horizontal Measures – Horizontal deflection devices, such as chicanes and traffic circles, are more intrusive but also more effective than narrowings because they force vehicles to navigate horizontally around physical objects. Residents can also elect to fund upgraded landscaping. • Vertical Measures – Vertical deflection devices provide the greatest speed reduction, and consequently have the greatest potential to slow emergency response vehicles, buses, and trucks.

Therefore, the placement of these devices should be carefully considered, especially to limit any potential impact on emergency vehicles or transit access.

Chapter 4 – Toolbox Guidelines Page 51
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Volume Control Measures
If speed-control measures fail to produce desired results, then diversion measures, such as street closures or forced turns may be considered. These devices redirect traffic to an adjacent street, and, therefore, should be considered after all other measures fail to produce the desired results. Volume control measures limit through traffic or turning movements at specific locations for both residents and non-residents. The full effect of the traffic diversion should be investigated before device implementation.

Step 2 – Identify Location Type
The appropriate device for a given problem is a function of the location (midblock or at an intersection).

Special consideration will be given to streets used by the City of Salinas Fire Department or ambulance services as primary emergency response routes. Appendix D presents the City of Salinas Primary Fire Response routes with functional roadway classifications. Generally, traffic calming of emergency response routes is limited to non-physical treatments on major arterials; however, there are certain conditions for which traffic calming measures may be appropriate on emergency response routes classified as minor arterials and collectors.

Table 2 indicates the location(s) where each type of traffic calming measure is applicable.

Step 3 – Consider Street Classification, Location, and Other Constraints The third step in determining the most appropriate device is to consider how each device is compatible with the street classification, traffic volumes, posted speeds, and special roadway users. Table 3 illustrates where each device is appropriate with certain constraints.

EFFECTIVENESS COMPARISON
When more than one traffic calming device is available, decision-makers should understand the levels of effectiveness for each device to better determine which device will have the greatest effect in meeting the specified objective(s). Table 4 summarizes the effectiveness data (including excluded devices) that have been compiled for each of the neighborhood traffic management measures in the toolbox. These data are averages and the actual effectiveness will vary based on site-specific circumstances, such as proximity to major roads and the availability of alternate routes.

PLACING THE NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEASURES
Strategies for the specific placement of devices differ depending on whether the concern is speed-control, volume-control, or safety related. The placement of devices is described below.

Placing Speed-Control Measures
Where feasible, neighborhood traffic management measures should be spaced in such a way to achieve the following two design speeds:
• Slow-Point 85th Percentile Design Speed: the speed that 85 percent of vehicles are traveling less than, when they are crossing a neighborhood traffic management device; the target slow-point speed is defined as 5 mph below the posted speed limit.
• Midpoint 85th Percentile Design Speed: the speed that 85 percent of vehicles are traveling less than, when they are halfway between a traffic calming device or other roadway feature that requires Chapter 4 – Toolbox Guidelines Page 52
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
significant slowing (e.g., stop sign or curve). The target midpoint speed is defined as 5 mph above the posted speed limit.

Figure 3 illustrates how to estimate the midpoint speed.

TABLE 1

APPLICABILITY OF TREATMENTS BY TRAFFIC RELATED CONCERN
Type of Traffic Related Concern
Types of Measures Speeding Traffic
Volume
Vehicle
Collisions
Pedestrian
Safety
Noise
Non-Physical Control Measures
Targeted Speed Enforcement z {
Speed Radar Trailer z { { {
Speed Feedback Sign z { { {
Centerline/Edgeline Lane Striping z { { { {
Optical Speed Bars { { { {
Signage z { {
Speed Legend z { { { {
Centerline/Edgeline Reflectors { { z {
High Visibility Cross Walks { { z {
Angled Parking z { { {
Speed Control – Narrowing Measures
Neckdown/Bulbout z { z {
Center Island Narrowing/
Pedestrian Refuge z z {
Two-Lane Choker z { { {
One-Lane Choker z { { {
Speed Control - Horizontal Measures
Traffic Circle z z {
Roundabout (Single-Lane) z { z
Chicane z { { {
Lateral Shift { { {
Realigned Intersection z { {
Speed Control – Vertical Measures
Speed Hump z z ³
Speed Lump z z ³
Speed Cushion z z ³
Speed Table z ³
Raised Crosswalk z z ³
Raised Intersection z z ³
Textured/Colored Pavement { { ³
Rumble Strips { { { ³
Volume Control Measures
Full Closure z z { { {
Partial Closure z z { { {
Diagonal Diverter z z { { {
Median Barrier { z { {
Forced Turn Island { z { {
Turn-Movement Restriction { z { {
Key: z = Strongly Appropriate ³ = Inappropriate/Counterproductive = Moderately Appropriate { = Indifferent
Chapter 4 – Toolbox Guidelines Page 53
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
TABLE 2

APPLICABILITY OF TREATMENTS BY LOCATION
Type of Measure MidBlock Intersection
Study
Perimeter Collectors
Transit
Routes
Non-Physical Control Measures
Targeted Speed
Enforcement z z z z z
Speed Radar Trailer z z z z z
Speed Feedback Sign z z z z z
Centerline/Edgeline Lane
Striping z ³ ³ z z
Optical Speed Bars z ³ ³ z z
Signage z z z z z
Speed Legend z z z z z
Centerline/Edgeline
Reflectors
On
Curves ³ ³ z z
High Visibility Crosswalks z Unsignalized
Intersections
Unsignalized
Intersections
z z
Angled Parking z ³ ³ z {
Speed Control – Narrowing Measures
Neckdown/Bulbout ³ z z z z
Center Island Narrowing/
Pedestrian Refuge z z z z z
Two-Lane Choker z ³ ³ z* z
One-Lane Choker z ³ ³ ³ ³
Speed Control – Horizontal Measures
Traffic Circle ³ z { z z
Roundabout (Single-Lane) ³ { { z z
Chicane z ³ ³ z z
Lateral Shift z ³ ³ z z
Realigned Intersection ³ Unsignalized
Intersections
Unsignalized
Intersections z z
Speed Control – Vertical Measures
Speed Hump z ³ ³ {* ³
Speed Lump z ³ ³ { z
Speed Cushion z ³ ³ { z
Speed Table z ³ ³ { {
Raised Crosswalk z { { { {
Raised Intersection ³ z z { {
Textured/Colored Pavement z z z z z
Rumble Strips z z { z z
Volume Control Measures
Full Closure ³ z z {* ³
Partial Closure ³ z z z z
Diagonal Diverter ³ z ³ {* ³
Median Barrier ³ { z {* ³
Forced Turn Island ³ { z { {
Turn-Movement Restriction ³ { z { {
Key: * Not generally acceptable for Primary Fire Response Routes – See Appendix D for specific streets. ³ = Never applicable. { = Seldom, except in some cases. z = Generally applicable.

Chapter 4 – Toolbox Guidelines Page 54
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
TABLE 3

APPLICABILITY BY STREET TYPE
Roadway Classification Types of Measures Local Collector Other Considerations Non-Physical Control Measures
Targeted Speed Enforcement
Speed Radar Trailer
Speed Feedback Sign No
Centerline/Edgeline Lane
Striping
Optical Speed Bars No Limitations with respect to ADT or Speed None Signage
Speed Legend
Centerline/Edgeline Reflectors
High Visibility Crosswalks
Angled Parking ADT <4,000; Width ≥48 feet: Speed Limit
≤30 mph
Speed Control – Narrowing Measures
Neckdown/Bulbout
Center Island Narrowing/
Pedestrian Refuge
Two-Lane Choker
ADT ≤ 20,000; Speed Limit ≤ 35 None
One-Lane Choker ADT ≤ 3,000;
Speed Limit ≤ 30 No DES must review sight distance.

Speed Control – Horizontal Measures
Traffic Circle Daily Entering Volume <10,000; Speed Limit ≤ 35 mph
Roundabout (Single-Lane) No
Daily Entering
Volume <16,000;
Speed Limit ≤ 45 mph
Grades ≤ 4%
Chicane No ADT ≤ 5,000; Speed
Limit ≤ 35 Grades ≤ 8%
Lateral Shift No ADT ≤ 20,000; Speed
Limit ≤ 35
Realigned Intersection Daily Entering Volume <5,000; Speed Limit ≤ 35 mph
None
Speed Control – Vertical Measures
Speed Hump
Speed Lump
Speed Cushion
ADT<4,000;
Speed Limit ≤ 30mph
Speed Table 1
Raised Crosswalk ADT<7,500: Speed Limit 30 mph or 35 mph Raised Intersection No
Grades ≤ 8%
Textured/Colored Pavement 2 No Yes Noise impact to adjacent residential units
Rumble Strips 2 Yes Yes Noise impact to adjacent
residential units
Notes: 1 Not appropriate for streets without curbs, gutter, or sidewalks. 2 Use of this device should be limited to locations where noise impacts would be minimal.

Chapter 4 – Toolbox Guidelines Page 55
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
TABLE 3 (CONTINUED)

APPLICABILITY BY STREET TYPE
Roadway Classification Types of Measures Local Collector Other Considerations Volume Control Measures
Full Closure No
Partial Closure
Diagonal Diverter
Median Barrier
Forced Turn Island
Turn-Movement Restriction
≥ 25% non-local traffic.

Evaluation should be conducted to
determine effects of
diverted traffic to alternate routes
None
Chapter 4 – Toolbox Guidelines Page 56
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
TABLE 4

QUANTITATIVE IMPACTS OF NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT MEASURES Effectiveness
85th Percentile Change Vehicles
Per Day
Average Annual Collisions
Types of Measures
Before After Change Percent
Change Change Percent
Change Before After Change Percent
Change
Non-Physical Measures
All Non-Physical
Measures Limited Effectiveness as stand alone device
Speed Control – Vertical Measures
Entry Feature I/D I/D I/D
Speed Hump 35.0 27.4 -7.6 -22% -355 -18% 2.62 2.29 -0.33 -13% Speed Lump Comparable to speed hump but I/D
Speed Cushion1 Comparable to speed
hump but I/D
-14% Comparable to speed hump but I/D
Split Speed Hump 37 32 -5 -14% I/D I/D
Speed Table
Raised Crosswalk 36.7 30.1 -6.6 -18% -415 -12% 6.71 3.66 -3.05 -45% Raised Intersection 34.6 34.3 -0.3 -1% Ineffective
Textured Pavement Limited Effectiveness as stand alone device Rumble Strips I/D and Limited Effectiveness
Speed Control – Narrowing Measures
Neckdown/Bulbout
Center Island
Narrowing
Two-Lane Choker

34.9 32.3 -2.6 -7% -293 -10%
One-Lane Choker I/D -14% I/D -20%
I/D
Speed Control – Horizontal Measures
Traffic Circle 34.2 30.3 -3.9 -11% -293 -5% 2.19 0.64 -1.55 -71% Roundabout
(Single-Lane) Insignificant Speed Effects Insignificant Volume Effects Not Recorded -15%
to -
33%
Chicane I/D and Limited Effectiveness
Lateral Shift Ineffective
Realigned
Intersection I/D I/D I/D
Volume Control Measures
Full Closure I/D I/D I/D I/D -671 -44% I/D
Partial Closure 32.3 26.3 -6.0 -19% -1,611 -42% I/D
Diagonal Diverter 29.3 27.9 -1.4 -4% -501 -35% I/D
Median Barrier
Forced Turn Island
Turn-Movement
Restrictions

I/D I/D I/D
Stop Signs
Stop Signs I/D I/D I/D
Notes: I/D = Insufficient Data
Source: Traffic Calming State-of-the Practice (Ewing, 1999) 1City of Portland, Rubber Speed Bump Research, 1995
Chapter 4 – Toolbox Guidelines Page 57
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Figure 3 Estimating Midpoint Speed
In mathematical terms, the following exponential function gives the relationship between midpoint speed and spacing of slow points:
85th
midpoint (mph) = 85thslow point (mph) + (85thstreet (mph) –85thslow point (mph)) * 0.56 * (1 – e –0.004 * spacing (ft.)) where;
85th
midpoint = resulting 85th percentile speed at midpoint after treatment; 85th
slow point = estimated 85th percentile speed at the slow point after treatment; 85th
street = 85th percentile speed of street before treatment; spacing = distance in feet between two devices.

When placing speed-control measures, use the above formula to test proposed spacings to determine whether the estimated midpoint speeds would meet the targeted midpoint speed.

Example (speed humps on street with starting speed of 32 mph):

Where spacing is 350 feet:
85th
midpoint (mph) = 15 mph + ((32 mph – 15 mph) * 0.56 * (1 – e –0.004 * 350 feet)) 85th
midpoint (mph) = 22 mph
Where spacing is 750 feet:
85th
midpoint (mph) = 15 mph + ((32 mph – 15 mph) * 0.56 * (1 – e –0.004 * 750 feet)) 85th
midpoint (mph) = 24 mph
The spacing of neighborhood traffic management measures directly affects the midpoint speeds: the farther apart they are, the higher the midpoint speed. In general, speed control measures placed 350 to 750 feet from another slow-point can result in speed reductions similar to those indicated in Table 4. Measures placed at intervals of less that 350 feet can become a nuisance to drivers, and measures placed greater than 750 feet apart decrease the ability to slow speeds to the target midpoint speed. In addition, vertical measures should be place a minimum of 250 feet from an adjacent intersection.

Placing Volume-Control Measures
Neighborhood traffic management devices intended to divert traffic can be located either external or internal to the neighborhood.
• Gateway Measures – Volume-control measures placed at entrances or gateways to neighborhoods can be more effective in reducing volumes because drivers encounter these devices upon entering a neighborhood, which may deter future use. However, these measures can also cause local traffic to take more circuitous paths than internal measures would. • Internal Measures – When placed within a neighborhood, measures have a less direct effect on nonlocal traffic. First-time attempts to travel through the neighborhood will occur more frequently, and drivers will seek alternative routes within the neighborhood. However, this type of placement can cause less of an inconvenience to local traffic.

Chapter 4 – Toolbox Guidelines Page 58
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Placing Safety Measures
The placement of safety-oriented neighborhood traffic management devices is dependent on the particulars of the traffic-related concern and on the characteristics of the selected neighborhood traffic management device.

For example, if the traffic related concern involves pedestrian safety, then the solution – a raised crosswalk, for example – should be placed at a location where it is likely to be heavily used by pedestrians.

Chapter 5 – New Development Guidelines Page 59
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

5. NEW DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
Proposed developments can benefit from neighborhood traffic management strategies. Developers can anticipate and prevent concerns about speeding and traffic volumes by reviewing neighborhood plans and proposing refinements to reduce or avoid future traffic-related concerns. In addition, neighborhood traffic management measures incorporated with project construction often receive greater acceptance than a retrofit approach. Traffic calming measures can be included as off-site mitigation measures for infill or redevelopment projects that are surrounded by existing developments that may be impacted by project traffic.

This information in this chapter is a tool for staff and project designers to identify potential problem areas and suggested remedies. Anticipating future problems and remedies is a subjective activity, not conducive to absolute standards. However, it may be appropriate to incorporate general language into City documents regarding the role of staff in identifying potential neighborhood traffic problems and suggesting remedies.

In most cases, staff and the developer’s representatives should be able to identify mutually acceptable neighborhood traffic management features, which are then incorporated into the proposed plans. However, in some cases, staff may need to develop conditions-of-approval that can be discussed, modified, and/or approved by the relevant governing bodies.

SUGGESTED DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS
As part of the City of Salinas development review process, City staff may consider the need for neighborhood traffic management measures within the proposed development or off-site. New development and redevelopment projects may be required to design, build, and maintain traffic calming features as part of the development project through the subdivision improvement agreement, development agreement, homeowners’ association, and other development-related mechanisms.

The City’s process of reviewing new residential subdivisions varies and is dependent on the decision type.

Information contained in the development application determines the permit type and subsequent process.

Although the processes differ, they all require staff review after the submission of the plans. At this point, City staff may recommend or condition the inclusion of traffic calming measures.

The toolbox and application guidelines contained in other sections of this document should provide staff and developer representatives with both ideas and guidance on selecting the most appropriate treatments for the identified problem.

The following flowchart is a suggested approach for City staff during the development review process.

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 5 – New Development Guidelines Page 60
Figure 4 New Development Review Process
Receipt of Developer Plans
Are projectgenerated
neighborhood
issues likely?
(speeding, volume or
pedestrian conflicts)?
Use street guidelines or traffic
calming toolbox to recommend
appropriate solutions.

Recommend changes to address
issues.

Are
reductions in
conflict
areas
acceptable?
Continue Standard
Review Process
Submit to local service providers
(Fire, Police, Transit, Schools) for
review.

Are changes
acceptable
to local
service
providers?
Yes
No
No
Yes No
Chapter 5 – New Development Guidelines Page 61
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PRACTICES
During the development review process, staff should review the street network and intersection traffic controls to determine areas of potential speeding, excessive volume on residential streets, or pedestrian conflict areas. Where appropriate, developers should be required to incorporate traffic calming measures into their development plan. The process for reviewing street and lot plans for new developments and prescribing refinements may include the following, at staff discretion:
• Traffic Volumes – Estimate the average daily traffic (ADT) on residential roadways within and surrounding the proposed project.
− If traffic volumes on residential streets are projected to be less than 1,500 vehicles per day (vpd), then no action is needed, nor will it be taken.
− If the projected traffic volume on a residential street is 1,500 - 3,000 vpd, then consider traffic calming treatments depending upon the context (such as area history, resident expectations, or magnitude of change).
− For projected volumes of above 3,000 vpd on a residential street, consider as a priority incorporate traffic calming measures to lessen the impact. • Traffic Speeds – Identify potential speeding concerns on new streets and adjacent existing streets.

Potential problem areas may include:
− Streets with unimpeded block lengths (i.e. slow points) greater than 600 feet between traffic control or traffic calming devices, or as determined by staff. − Areas where roadway grades may increase the potential for speeding, as determined by staff. − Areas with potential pedestrian/vehicle conflicts, such as schools, parks, or community centers. − Areas with design attributes that encourage speeding, such as wide travel lane width, absence of on-street parking lane, absence of a bike lane, and long block lengths. • Street Layout – Staff may request street design and layout modifications if an area is likely to experience cut-through traffic.
• Adjacent Neighborhoods – Consider traffic calming measures in new developments where adjacent neighborhoods include traffic calming, as determined by staff. • Traffic Calming Plan – Based on the size and nature of the proposed development, staff will determine if a traffic calming plan is necessary. As described above, a traffic calming plan should be developed when the proposed street layout cannot be modified in such a way that will eliminate foreseeable traffic problems. The applicant’s representative should develop the traffic calming plan with DES oversight.

DESIGNING STREET NETWORKS
Neighborhood traffic management measures have traditionally been installed as retrofit measures in existing neighborhoods in response to a particular traffic concern. The guidelines below describe some common street design features and their propensity to lead to neighborhood traffic management concerns such as speeding and cut-through traffic. The guidelines should assist developers in laying out streets in new residential developments and staff in reviewing them pursuant to the process described above. This chapter Chapter 5 – New Development Guidelines Page 62
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008

is by no means comprehensive on the layout of new residential streets. For detailed information on street design and layout, refer to the following City of Salinas documents:
• City of Salinas General Plan, September 2002
• City of Salinas City Code – Section 31-804.5, November 2006 • Standard Specifications, Design Standards, and Standard Plans – Standard Plan No. 3, 2004 The following documents provide supplemental readings on the subject of designing residential streets.

These are guidance documents only:
• Residential Street Design and Traffic Control, Homburger, Deakin, Bosselmann, Smith, and Beukers (Institute of Transportation Engineers), 1989
• Residential Streets, 3rd Edition, American Society of Civil Engineers, Institute of Transportation Engineers, National Association of Home Builders, and the Urban Land Institute, 2001 • Traditional Neighborhood Development: Street Design Guidelines, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1999

DESIGNING FOR APPROPRIATE SPEEDS
The design of residential streets can often influence vehicles speeds. Residential streets that are wide, long, straight, and have few uninterrupted blocks have been shown to have a positive correlation to higher vehicle speeds. To minimize vehicle speeds, consider the following attributes when designing residential streets:
• Travel Lane Width – Current City standards for street width varies depending on the adjacent land use, and presence of on-street parking. Figures C-1 through C-4 of the Salinas General Plan specify standard cross-sections for new and existing streets. Provisions for on-street parking are also provided within these standards. Figure 5 shows a positive correlation between pavement width and increased traffic speeds.3

New streets should not exceed the current City standards. However, if additional width is provided in anticipation of high on-street parking demand, the roadway should be treated with appropriately spaced chokers, center median islands or other neighborhood traffic calming devices. • Block Length – Some street networks leave excessively long blocks with few side street intersections. Drivers who travel distances 600 feet or greater, as illustrated in the chart below, without being required to slow or stop by traffic control or neighborhood traffic management devices, tend to travel at speeds higher than the posted limit. To minimize this effect, the street network can be designed such that street blocks are frequently interrupted by streets of sufficient traffic volumes to warrant a traffic control device (e.g., stop sign) or a traffic calming device. Shorter block lengths also facilitate pedestrian movement throughout the neighborhood. The chart shows the correlation between unimpeded block length and travel speed.

Acceptable block lengths for urban local streets should not exceed 600-800 feet, while urban collector street block lengths should not exceed 1,000 feet.
3 Ballard, Andrew J. and Haldeman, David M. “Low Speed Design Criteria for Residential Streets.” ITE Journal December 2002: 44-46.

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Chapter 5 – New Development Guidelines Page 63
• Parking Lanes – In circumstances where adjacent land uses generate low on-street parking demand (such as large-lot subdivisions or collectors without fronting uses) the street can function as if it were wider than intended. If the parking demand can be accommodated elsewhere, the parking lanes should be eliminated or restricted to one side of the street and the street width reduced accordingly.

Figure 5 Correlation Between Pavement Width, Unimpeded Street Length and Speed

DESIGNING FOR LOCAL TRAFFIC
Some residential collector streets can become cut-through routes, or routes used by non-local motorists as a means of bypassing congested or circuitous arterial roads. In these cases, the residential collector should be modified in one of two ways:
• The collector can be designed with a deviating path so that the overall distance by collector is greater than the distance by arterial.
• The residential roadway network can be designed such that traffic-controlled intersections interrupt the parallel collector route sufficiently that the travel time by collector is greater than the travel time by arterial.

PEDESTRIAN/VEHICLE CONFLICT AREAS
Some elements of residential areas, such as schools, parks, community centers, or other high pedestrian generators, have particularly high potential for vehicle and pedestrian conflicts. The major pedestrian routes to school should be identified and traffic controls should be structured so that the number of crossings at uncontrolled cross-streets is minimized and pedestrians are directed to the most appropriate crossing locations. For both schools and parks, entrances tend to focus pedestrian street crossings at particular locations. These entrances can be made safer by combining them with roadway intersections, so that the intersection’s traffic control can also allocate right-of-way to pedestrians.

If a pedestrian-oriented land use is located in an area where speeding or high traffic volumes are unavoidable, then select neighborhood traffic management measures that accommodate and provide benefit to pedestrians. For example, at an intersection, bulbouts or center island narrowings should be given some preference over other measures, such as intersection realignment or speed humps. While a realigned intersection or speed hump may slow traffic in the area, a bulbout or center island narrowing assists Chapter 5 – New Development Guidelines Page 64
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
pedestrians by creating a shorter crossing distance and physical roadway narrowing, thereby reducing driver speed.

DEVELOPING A NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN
When a proposed street layout cannot be modified in such a way that will eliminate foreseeable potential traffic problems, the City should require preparation of a neighborhood traffic management plan (NTMP).

Follow the procedure for developing an NTMP as described in the Toolbox Chapter, with the following exceptions:
• For speed-related problems, existing travel speed data will not be available. Consequently, a response to anticipated speeding problems must rely on roadway geometry. For example, if a block length is greater than 600 feet, then the developer could use neighborhood traffic management measures to divide the block into segments that are each shorter than 600 feet. • For volume-related problems, traffic volume data will be available only in the form of traffic forecasts, and these will typically be limited to the major roads. The City or developer may need to prepare manual traffic volume estimates using land use quantities and trip generation rates for the proposed development.
• Anticipated safety problems will likely revolve around land uses that generate pedestrian activity, such as schools, parks, and community centers. For these land uses, consider the planned locations of walkways, gates, and building entrances when placing neighborhood traffic management devices (such as raised crosswalks or bulb-outs). Likewise, land use planning should consider existing and future traffic safety features.
• For some neighborhood traffic management measures, particularly those involving modified curbs, the developer can achieve significant cost-savings by constructing them concurrent with roadway construction. Consequently, when selecting a type of neighborhood traffic management measure, additional preference should be given to measures that take advantage of these cost-savings.

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Appendix A – Design Guidelines Page A - 1
APPENDIX A – DESIGN GUIDELINES
This section describes the guiding design principles relating to various physical traffic calming devices. The design guidelines are based on recommended designs published in Traffic Calming State-of-the Practice4 and Canadian Guide to Traffic Calming5
. Appendix B contains standard engineering design templates for the most common traffic calming devices.

SPEED CONTROL – VERTICAL MEASURES
Ramp Profiles
Ramp profile describes the angle or approach of the vertical measure that a vehicle would traverse. Vertical measures (e.g., speed humps) should use Parabolic profiles on the approach and departure ramps to the device. Parabolic profiles have consistently been used in other programs around the nation and are a recommended design according to Institute of Transportation Engineers: Guidelines for the Design & Application of Speed Humps (ITE, 1993). Figure A-1 shows three commonly used profiles, and a description of each follows below:
• Sinusoidal profiles have slightly less reduction effects on speed than circular and parabolic profiles but higher comfort levels for vehicles and bicyclists and are typically more difficult and expensive to construct due to the slope of the profile. • Circular profiles have moderate reduction effects on speeds (compared to the two other profiles) and comfort levels for vehicles and bicyclists.
• Parabolic profiles have the greatest reduction effects on speeds but have the lowest comfort levels for vehicles and bicyclists due to the greater rise in the slope of the profile.

Figure A-1 Vertical Measure Ramp Profiles

4 Ewing, R. (1999). Traffic Calming: State of the Practice. Washington, DC: Institute of Transportation Engineers/Federal Highway Administration.
5 Canadian Guide to Neighbourhood Traffic Calming, (1998) Ottawa, Canada: Transportation Association of Canada.

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Appendix A – Design Guidelines Page A - 2
Edge Tapers
The edge taper refers to the transition area between a vertical measure at its full height and the edge of the device. Edge tapers on vertical measures (e.g., speed humps and excluding raised crosswalks) should extend to the edge of the pavement (i.e., not into the gutter) to prevent blocking the gutter drainage.

On streets without vertical curbs, the edge taper should extend the full length of the pavement width to discourage drivers from straddling or driving around the vertical measure. In addition, an advisory sign (or other barrier) should be placed on either approach of the vertical device to prevent drivers from driving around the device.

Example: Bollards and advisory
sign encourage drivers to travel
over speed hump.

Edge Tapers – Parking and Bikeways
Vertical devices should extend across any parking or bike lane to prevent drivers from veering into the bike lane. Consequently, bicyclists
will traverse the even section
(as opposed to the tapered
portion) of the device. In
addition, vehicles parking on
the street will have the option to
park on a portion of the device
or avoid the device entirely.

Example: Speed lump extends to the edge of pavement across bike lane.

Raised Crosswalk Tapers
Example: Unimpeded drainage.

Raised crosswalks should always be designed to a height equal to the curb height, but not fully extend to the curb, as this will impede drainage. To bridge the gap between the sidewalk and raised crosswalk, a metal connector plate or other approved device may be used to allow unimpeded flow of the gutter. The design should also include truncated dome plates to indicate the entrance to the crosswalk from the sidewalk. Raised crosswalks may not be appropriate where curbs do not exist.

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Appendix A – Design Guidelines Page A - 3

HORIZONTAL DEFLECTION MEASURES
Traffic Circle Center Island Profile
Example: Vertical inner curb and mountable
apron.

Traffic circles should be designed with both a vertical inner curb and a mountable apron. The vertical inner curb prevents vehicles from driving over the circle. The apron is a shallowsloped curb extending out from the bottom of a vertical curb; the apron has a low lip at its pavement-side edge. This apron effectively reduces the diameter of the center island for large vehicles, facilitating easier turns. The lip at the apron’s edge discourages vehicles from using it unnecessarily.

Traffic Circle Turn Operations
All vehicles should circulate around the center island on leftturns. However, an exception can be made for large trucks and buses in some cases if geometric constraints require it. If a specific intersection has a high proportion of trucks and/or bus traffic, alternative treatments may provide similar results without impact to trucks or busses. All traffic circles should be designed using the appropriate truck turning templates from Caltrans Highway Design Manual (Caltrans, 2006). Software packages such as AutoCAD or AutoTURN may also be used
to identify whether emergency response vehicles and buses can maneuver around the circle.

Example: Truck turning radius using
mountable apron.

City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Appendix A – Design Guidelines Page A - 4
Traffic Circles at T-Intersections
Traffic circles should have deflection on all approaches if implemented at a T-intersection. This can be implemented in both existing neighborhoods in retrofit situations and in new neighborhood. First, a raised island can be placed at the right side of the un-deflected approach to the traffic circle to artificially introduce deflection, as shown in Figure A-2 (a). In new neighborhoods, the street curbs can be modified to allow the center island to be located at the center of the intersection, as shown in Figure A-2 (b).

Figure A-2 Traffic circles at T-Intersections

NARROWING MEASURES
Drainage
Narrowing measures, such as chokers, should be constructed to minimize or avoid blocking gutter flow, as illustrated in the photo. Modifying the drainage can be cost prohibitive and could require regular maintenance to clear debris from the modified gutter.

Example: Retrofit design with unimpeded
drainage.
(a) Existing Neighborhoods (b) New Neighborhoods
City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Appendix A – Design Guidelines Page A - 5
Neckdowns/Bulbouts
Narrowing measures, such as neckdowns or chokers, should not be constructed wider than the approximate width of a parked vehicle. Extension of these devices any further than the width of a parked vehicle could present potential safety issues to other drivers.

LANDSCAPING Example: Neckdown at intersection.

The standard treatment for all neighborhood traffic management devices will be hardscape (i.e., grouted cobblestone). Residents may fund aesthetic upgrades to neighborhood traffic calming devices such as landscaping or stamped and colored concrete (i.e., simulated brick work). Aesthetics upgrades not only improve the aesthetic quality of the device but increase the visual presence of the device. Landscaping should be limited to low-lying shrubs and plants. Trees planted on center islands must allow adequate sight distances for motorists.

Example: Standard treatment Example: Upgraded aesthetics City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
Appendix A – Design Guidelines Page A - 6

SIGNAGE AND STRIPING
Signage
Signage should be provided at or near traffic calming devices advising motorists of the device. Signage should be visible to both motorists and bicyclists. The signs should be comprised mostly of symbols and be easily understandable to motorists. Figure A-3 illustrates examples of several common warning signs.

The warning sign for a traffic circle or roundabout shown on Figure A-3 should be the standard used at such intersections. The warning sign is clear and concise, showing drivers the route around and turning options of the upcoming traffic circle or roundabout.

Special signing specific to bicyclists may be used as determined by Public Works staff. Examples of this signing include advising motorists not to pass bicyclists through narrow traffic calming devices or informing bicyclists of proper maneuvering of devices. This signage should be used when the travel rights of bicyclists warrant emphasis.

Striping
Pavement markings assist in warning motorists and bicyclists of traffic calming devices in the roadway.

Vertical devices should always include pavement markings on the device and may also include advanced warning legends (see Figure C-6). In certain situations, vertical devices may be unmarked, such as revitalization or beautification plans in a given area. In such cases, the device must be designed to provide a clear contrast with the surrounding environment.

The example image to the right illustrates the preferred striping option for vertical devices, such as speed lumps. This marking option is compliant with the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (FHWA, 2003).

Example: Recommended striping.

COMBINED MEASURES
Some measures from the toolbox can be combined to increase the combined effect on traffic volumes and speeds. For example, a raised crosswalk may be combined with neckdowns, the effect being a crosswalk that is both shortened and raised above the level of the roadway. Motorists must then react to both a vertical deflection and a narrowing. In assessing the suitability of combined measures, the guidelines in Tables 1, 2, and 3 should be applied for both devices.

Appendix B – Standard Traffic Calming Templates Page B -1 City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
APPENDIX B – STANDARD TRAFFIC CALMING TEMPLATES
Standard neighborhood traffic management device designs are provided for the following measures.

Measures that do not have standard designs should be designed according to each situation specific to the roadway and traffic conditions.

Measure Figure
Speed Hump – Parabolic Profile ..........................................................................................................B-1A Speed Hump – Sinusoidal Profile.........................................................................................................B-1B Speed Lump ........................................................................................................................................... B-2 Speed Table ........................................................................................................................................... B-3 Raised Crosswalk................................................................................................................................... B-4 Raised Intersection................................................................................................................................. B-5 Vertical Device – Advance Warning Markings ....................................................................................... B-6 Neckdown/Bulbout – Intersection........................................................................................................... B-7 Neckdown/Bulbout – Midblock ............................................................................................................... B-8 Center Island Narrowing......................................................................................................................... B-9 Two-lane Choker .................................................................................................................................. B-10 Traffic Circle.......................................................................................................................................... B-11 Chicane................................................................................................................................................. B-12 Partial Closure ...................................................................................................................................... B-13 Diagonal Diverter.................................................................................................................................. B-14 Median Barrier ...................................................................................................................................... B-15 Forced Turn Island................................................................................................................................ B-16

Appendix C – City of Salinas Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Devises Policy Page C -1 City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
APPENDIX C – CITY OF SALINAS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

ENHANCEMENT DEVISES POLICY
For reference, this appendix presents the City of Salinas Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Devises Policy near schools.

Exhibit A
The City of Salinas
Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Devices Policy
Policy adopted on ___________________________. Resolution No. ___________________ The Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices states that “…uniformity means treating similar situations in a similar way. The use of uniform traffic control devices does not, in itself, constitute uniformity. A standard device used where it is not appropriate is as objectionable as a nonstandard device; in fact, this may be worse, because such misuse might result in disrespect at those locations where the device is needed and appropriate.” To be consistent with appropriate use of traffic control devices and in response to increasing requests for traffic safety enhancements at school locations, the City has approved policy with criteria for when to install Pedestrian Safety Enhancements on City Streets. More specifically, this policy restricts the installation of these enhancements to specific locations at school zones only. The specific safety enhancement installations that are governed by this policy are:
1) High visibility crosswalks with an integrated Pedestrian LOOK pavement/sidewalk marking,
2) In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Sign
The City of Salinas is committed to the installation of the appropriate and the required traffic control devices on City Streets, including locations along school zones. However, the effectiveness of these and any traffic control device requires an appropriate amount of enforcement for violators of the control devices and appropriate education for users of these devices (motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists). Without appropriate enforcement and education, any installation of traffic control devices will not be as effective.

In response to budget constraints that prevent more frequent enforcement of traffic control devices at school zones, the City will consider the installation of traffic safety enhancements at school zones. This policy will provide the criteria for the use of a High Visibility Crosswalk and an integrated Pedestrian “LOOK” sign at school zones and the In-Street Pedestrian Crossing Sign. These enhancements supports pedestrian crossings at school zones.

I. Application. In order to receive consideration under this policy, an applicant must submit a written request to the City of Salinas Development and Engineering Services Department, ATTN: Traffic Section, 200 Lincoln Avenue, Salinas, California 93901. A letter from the School and the School District must accompany the request stating the school’s and the district’s concurrence with the request.

II. Consideration. Effective on the adoption of this policy, requests for High Visibility Crosswalks and the integrated Pedestrian LOOK Sign shall be subject to the following criteria:

1. School Zone Criteria. Said Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Devices will be located at an existing school crosswalk adjacent to the school property, and along the suggested route to school; and

2. No installations at Controlled Intersections. Said Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Devices shall not be installed at intersections where ALL WAY STOPS or a Traffic Signal is already present; and

3. Installation only on two lane streets. Said Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Devices shall only be installed on two-lane streets. (Existing studies support installation on two-lane streets but results are mixed on multi-lane streets. It is not clear if these crosswalks increase yielding of motor vehicles to pedestrians on multi-lane streets); and

4. School Pedestrian Warrant.
a) At least 40 school pedestrians are crossing the uncontrolled street during each of any two hours (not necessarily consecutive) of a normal school day; and b) The vehicle volume through the crossing exceeds 500 vehicles per hour during the same hour the students are going to and/or from school during normal school hours; or
c) The number of pedestrians that are crossing the uncontrolled street in 4.a multiplied by the vehicle volume through the crossing during the same hour students are going to and/or from school during normal school hours exceeds 32,000.

This Policy provides a technically-based and uniform process for the recommendation of the above Pedestrian Safety Enhancements. However, each location requested for high visibility crosswalk will have its unique characteristics that may not be addressed by these criteria.

Other criteria that may have to be considered include unique street configuration, sight visibility requirements, other heavy uses of the street that are not school related, and other equally important considerations.

The decision to use a particular traffic control device at a particular location should be made on the basis of either an engineering study or the application of engineering judgment. Thus while the MUTCD, the California Supplement or this Policy provides standards, guidance or options for design and application of a traffic control device, the MUTCD, California Supplement or this Policy should not be considered a substitute for sound engineering judgment.

At the City Engineer’s discretion, traffic studies may be conducted to examine other considerations not part of this Policy’s criteria. Results of these studies may become the basis to support or oppose recommendation resulting from previously considered criteria.

III. Commission Consideration City staff will bring its recommendation to the Traffic and Transportation Commission (T&TC). The meeting of the T&TC provides a public forum for the applicant or any impacted party to support or protest City staff’s recommendation. The Traffic and Transportation Commission may recommend approval or denial of the applicant’s request based on the criteria above for these Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Devices.

IV. Council Consideration. The City Council makes the final decision regarding the request for a school high visibility crosswalk. The meeting of the City Council provides another public forum to appeal decisions of the T&TC made following the application of this policy.

I:\PWTra\Reports to Traffic and Transportation Commission\Crossing guards and other School Issues\School Traffic Safety Enhancements Policy-HVC and PLOOK Sign.doc
Exhibit C
I:\PWTra\Reports to Traffic and Transportation Commission\Crossing guards and other School Issues\University Park\T&TC 07 0510 RPT EnhancedXwalkUniversity.doc Appendix D – City of Salinas Primary Fire Response Routes Page D -1 City of Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program November 2008
APPENDIX D – CITY OF SALINAS PRIMARY FIRE RESPONSE
ROUTES
For reference, this appendix presents the City of Salinas Primary Fire Response Routes figure. #*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*

N MAIN ST

ABBOTT ST

E BORONDA RD

E ALISAL ST

JOHN ST

N DAVIS RD

E LAUREL DR

TOWT ST

E MARKET ST

WILLIAMS RD

N SANBORN RD

DAVIS RD

PAJARO ST

NATIVIDAD RD

W ALISAL ST

E ALVIN DR

RIDER AVE

RIKER ST

W BLANCO RD

WORK ST

W ACACIA ST

E BLANCO RD

W ROSSI ST

E ROMIE LN

CENTRAL AVE

FREEDOM PKY

CONSTITUTION BLVD

W MARKET ST

HARKINS RD

S SANBORN RD

SHERWOOD DR

MARYAL DR

RUSSELL RD

HARDEN PKWY

CHAPARRAL ST

N MADEIRA AVE

GARNER AVE

DEL MONTE AVE

ALISAL ST

CALIFORNIA ST

W LAUREL DR

KERN ST

MOFFETT ST

LARKIN ST

PALMA DR

TYLER ST

SAN JUAN GRADE RD

MAPLE ST

IVERSON ST

BARDIN RD

NAVAJO DR

AIRPORT BLVD

SAN MIGUEL AVE

EL DORADO DR

RICO ST

VILLA ST

MCKINNON ST

NANTUCKET BLVD INDEPENDENCE BLVD

CLAY ST
N 1ST ST

IRIS DR

MAIN ST

FRONT ST

LINWOOD DR

CIRCLE DR

VICTOR ST

SALINAS ST

MONTEREY ST

LINCOLN AVE

FREEDOM PKWY

E BERNAL DR

ELVEE DR

PESCADERO DR

UNIVERSITY AVE

S MAIN ST

PALOMA AVE

CAPITOL ST

VAN BUREN AVE

BUCKHORN DR

W CURTIS ST

VERTIN AVE

MONTE BELLA BLVD

E ACACIA ST

TERVEN AVE

GRIFFIN ST

QUILLA ST

MADRID ST

ARCADIA WAY

KLAMATH DR

BRUNKEN AVE

NACIONAL ST

W ALVIN DR

CHEROKEE DR

SCHILLING PL

SKYWAY BLVD

CASENTINI ST

BEACON HILL DR

LOS COCHES AVE

ACOSTA PLZ

W ROMIE LN

E BOLIVAR ST

FAIRVIEW AVE

DAYTON ST

ST EDWARDS AVE

NISSEN RD

LAS CASITAS DR

PIAZZA DR

SYCAMORE RD

CLARK ST

LITTLE RIVER DR

SWANER AVE

CHARDONNAY DR

HOMESTEAD AVE

EISENHOWER ST

PALERMO DR

BORONDA RD

LESLIE DR

AUTO CENTER CIR

POST DR

S WOOD ST

BRIDGE ST

LEXINGTON DR

EMERALD DR
SUN ST

ALAMEDA AVE

TUSCANY BLVD

ADAMS ST

HANSEN ST

BURTON AVE

WESTMINSTER DR

PENNSYLVANIA DR

LOS OLIVOS DR

BROADWAY DR

S HEBBRON AVE

DECLARATION ST

CLEVELAND AVE

JOHNSON AVE

WESTRIDGE PKWY

SPICER ST

N N DAVIS RD

INGLEWOOD ST

RIANDA CIR

VICTORIA AVE

LUTHER WAY

S MAIN ST

ELVEE DR

E MARKET ST

CHEROKEE DR
City of Salinas
Primary Fire Response Routes I:\InfoSys\GIS_Projects\Public_Works\Traffic\FireRoutes\FireResponseRoutes.mxd N
0 0.25 0.5 Miles
City of Salinas
Information Systems
Station 1
Station 3
Station 4
Station 5
Station 2
Station 6
Major Arterial
Salinas City Limits
Minor Arterial
Collector

S A L I NA SC A L I F OR NI A N VICTOR ST DETAIL A MCALLISTER STW ROSSI ST ADOBE DR GOUGH WY GENEVA WY VAN NESS CT ASHBURY WY VICTOR CIR

VAN NESS CT

LARKIN ST
POTRERO WY DETAIL B stop stop stop stop stop stop stop stop stop stop stop DETAIL A LEGEND PROPOSED SPEED CUSHION PROPOSED RAISED CROSSWALK stop EXISTING STOP SIGN PROPOSED VICTOR ST TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN PLAN PROPUESTO DE MODERACIÓN DE TRAFICO EN LA CALLE VICTOR DETAIL B 0 65' 130' SCALE: 1"=65' VICTOR ST 85TH PERCENTILE: NB: 24 MPH SB: 22 MPH COMBINED: 23 MPH ADT: 1,284 VICTOR CIR 85TH PERCENTILE NB: 37 MPH SB: 33 MPH COMBINED: 35 MPH ADT: 1,056 GENEVA WAY S A L I NA SC A L I F OR NI A N POTERO WAY ADOBE DR ASHBURY WAY LARKIN ST VAN NESS CT STEVENSON ST MCALLISTER ST 659 625 517 539 W ROSSI ST VICTOR STREET TRAFFIC STUDY APRIL 9-11, 2019 (WEEKDAY) 0 250' 500' SCALE: 1"=250' City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-097, Version: 1
Iverson Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan
Approve a Resolution authorizing the implementation of the Iverson Street neighborhood traffic calming plan supported by residents.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 3/1/2023
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

CALMING PLAN
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to approve a Resolution to approve the Iverson Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan supported by residents.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

At its June 21, 2022, meeting, City Council approved the 2022-2023 fiscal year priority traffic calming projects, whereas Iverson Street ranked the third highest priority. Staff met with residents from the neighborhood and worked with the community to develop a traffic calming plan. As required by the City’s policy, a vote was then conducted to gauge community support, and the Iverson Street traffic calming plan met the support requirements as prescribed by the City’s policy.

Therefore, staff recommends that City Council approve the implementation of the Iverson Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan.

BACKGROUND:

Traffic calming devices are generally not considered traffic control devices as defined by the State and Federal Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The City began compiling traffic calming studies in 2002 and found there was very few applications in California. To assist in the development of the City’s Policy, the City hired a consultant to help develop the City’s traffic calming policy based on best practices. The resulting policy contained a toolbox of traffic calming measures that would be used to address neighborhood problems associated with speeds and vehicle Page | 2
volume on residential streets. The adoption of the policy also included the adoption of traffic calming tools that can be provided on City streets. The policy also provided the process for consideration of projects under the program which is important for securing support from residents of a neighborhood who would be affected by traffic calming implementation.

In the development of the City’s traffic calming policy, City staff met with all affected parties including emergency response providers as well as other service providers such as solid waste collection services and street sweeping. These agencies and providers were all invited in the discussion of the traffic calming policy development. The traffic calming program implementation therefore includes considerations and understanding of the program by potentially affected parties.

The City’s policy only applies to city streets that have residential uses.

On September 14, 2017, with an influx of traffic calming requests received, the City approved criteria for prioritizing traffic calming requests based on traffic conditions, collision history, nearby land uses, geometrics and facilities. These criteria provide a transparent way to prioritize requests given the City’s limited resources. Every year, staff presents traffic calming recommended priorities based on the criteria to the City Council. Public works staff proceeds with implementation based on Council approved priorities.

Residents of Iverson Street submitted a petition requesting the City to investigate speeding issues along Iverson Street. Traffic studies were conducted in various locations along the street, and the results confirmed high speeds on Iverson Street. Results met the criteria for traffic calming implementation.

The Traffic and Transportation Division held one (1) community meeting on December 1, 2022, to develop a traffic calming plan with residents of the Iverson Street neighborhood to address the speeding concerns of the neighborhood. With residents’ input received at the meeting, a neighborhood traffic calming plan was developed and finalized.

In accordance with the City’s Neighborhood Traffic Management Program, the plan was taken to vote to determine support from residents. Ballots with pre-paid envelopes were mailed to residents of Iverson Street, and the vote was conducted over a 5-week period. Residents were encouraged to talk to and inform their neighbors. On January 12, 2023, the voting period ended, and the neighborhood met the support vote requirement as prescribed in the City’s policy. The City received ballots from 61% of all applicable households, meeting the 50% return rate requirement.

Of the ballots received, 90% were in favor of the plan, which met the 67% in favor requirement.

Staff is therefore recommending the implementation of the Iverson Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan.

The proposed Iverson Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan includes the installation of three (3) speed cushions along Iverson Street between West Blanco Road and Clay Street. Speed cushions are vertical traffic calming devices and are similar to speed humps but are made of rubberized material. Speed cushions are designed to have lesser impact on fire department response and are spaced to maintain a speed of approximately 25 mph, which corresponds to the speed limit on residential streets. Attachment 2 shows the approximate locations of the speed cushions along Iverson Street.

Page | 3
TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION:

The Iverson Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan was presented to the Traffic and Transportation Commission at its February 9, 2023, meeting. The Commission voted (5-0) recommending City Council approve a Resolution to implement the Iverson Street neighborhood traffic calming plan supported by residents. Commissioners Howell, Hernandez, Canseco, Davis, and Cox voted in favor of the item, and Commissioner Quigley abstained. The District 4 appointment is currently vacant.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

The Traffic Calming Policy support Council’s goal of “Public Safety”.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

The estimated total cost of these improvements is $82,250 using the City’s job order contract program. Alternatively, in the past the City’s maintenance crews have been able to assist in the installation of speed cushions as overtime work. If the City’s maintenance crews are available to perform this work the estimated cost to install the speed cushions is $30,000. There are sufficient funds available in the Traffic Calming Program budget (CIP 9163) and/or the Street Repair/Traffic Safety budget (8180) to complete this work.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Attachment 1: Salinas Neighborhood Traffic Management Program Attachment 2 Iverson Street Proposed Traffic Calming Plan RESOLUTION NO. _______ (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION OF THE SALINAS CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE

IVERSON STREET NEIGHBORHOOD TRAFFIC CALMING PLAN

SUPPORTED BY RESIDENTS
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted the City’s Traffic Calming Policy at its October 6, 2009, meeting (Resolution No. 19764) which outlined a process for consideration of traffic calming requests from the community; and
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a resolution approving the prioritization strategy for Traffic Calming requests on its November 7, 2017 meeting (Resolution No. 21291) with the support of the Traffic and Transportation Commission; and WHEREAS, at its June 21, 2022, meeting, City Council approved the 2022-2023 fiscal year priority traffic calming project, whereas Iverson Street ranked the third highest priority; and WHEREAS, staff worked with residents of Iverson Street to develop a traffic calming plan and distribute ballots to help determine neighborhood support of the plan. As required by the City’s policy, a vote was conducted to gauge community support, and the Iverson Street traffic calming plan received the support votes required as prescribed by the City’s Traffic Calming Policy; and WHEREAS, the Traffic and Transportation Commission at its February 9, 2023, meeting voted (5-0) recommending City Council approve a Resolution approving the Iverson Street neighborhood traffic calming plan supported by residents; and WHEREAS, the City of Salinas has determined that the implementing the traffic calming plan is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines (Section 15301, Class 1). The project consists of the operation, repair, or minor alteration of public streets involving no expansion of use. There would be no significant effect on the environment NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council approves the Iverson Street Neighborhood Traffic Calming Plan supported by residents is hereby approved; and PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of March 2023, by the following vote: