Agenda Packet — Salinas City Council, May 2, 2023 (part 1 of 3)

Tuesday, May 2, 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 May 2, 2023

ZOOM WEBINAR PARTICIPATION
JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81207730000
To participate telephonically, call any number below:

US: +1 669 900 9128 or +1 669 444 9171 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 719 359 4580 or +1 253 205 0468 or +1 360 209 5623 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 Webinar ID: 812 0773 0000
If prompted to enter a participant ID, press #.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

PROCLAMATIONS
National Police Week, May 15-23, 2023
National Building Safety Month, May 2023
Older Americans Month, May 2023
Asian American and Pacific Islander Day Against Bullying and Hate, May 18, 2023

CITY OF CHAMPIONS
District 4 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 City of Salinas Page 2 Printed on 4/26/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 2, 2023
session items, as they are considered.

CONSIDERATION
ID#23-231 An Ordinance Amending Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code - Special Events
Recommendation: Adopt an Ordinance amending Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code related to the revision of the Special Event process.

ID#23-273 2023 California Department of Housing and Community Development Local Housing Trust Fund Application
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing submittal of a Local Housing Trust Fund Program Application to the California Department of Housing and Community Development; and establishment of a Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund and a Salinas LHTF account fund with revenue and expenditure accounts to include the pre-application allocation of Housing Production Fund CIP #9021 ($500,000), and General Funds ($500,000), as required local match and SB2 PLHA ($100,000); and authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to execute all applicable forms, grant-related documents, and subsequent amendments as needed.

ID#23-256 Adoption of the Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update Recommendation: Approve a Resolution adopting the Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update and related Appendices.

ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS
ID#23-298 American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 Update
Recommendation: No action required. This item provides an administrative update on the City's various Council-adopted projects included in the Salinas recovery under the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) of 2021.

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#23-314 Minutes
Recommendation: Approve minutes of April 18, 2023.

ID#23-310 Financial Claims
Recommendation: Approve financial claims report.

ID#23-254 Professional Service Agreement with the Transportation Agency for Monterey County for the Alisal Safe Routes to School Plan Non-Infrastructure Phase
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an Agreement for Professional Services between the City of Salinas and the Transportation Agency for Monterey County for a total compensation amount not to exceed $84,998.80 to for the Alisal Safe Routes to School Plan Non-Infrastructure Phase.

ID#23-262 2021 Chip Seal Project, CIP No. 9981
City of Salinas Page 3 Printed on 4/26/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 2, 2023
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution accepting the 2021 Chip Seal Project, CIP No. 9981 for maintenance and responsibility.

ID#23-266 Agreement with Race Forward to Provide Race Equity Training Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign an agreement with Race Forward to provide race equity training for City staff and elected officials for $237,600.

ID#23-272 City of Salinas and Housing Authority of the County of Monterey Memorandum of Understanding
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the City Manager or designee to execute a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Salinas and the Housing Authority of the County of Monterey for the completion of required U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Environmental Review Records; and the City Manager or designee to approve any future, necessary revisions, amendments and/or modifications.

ID#23-275 Main Street at Lamar Street Pedestrian Enhancements Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the establishment of a new CIP account named "Main Street at Lamar Street Pedestrian Enhancements Project" and authorize the acceptance of Highway Safety Improvement Program Grant funds in the amount of $247,500.00; authorize the establishment of a Measure X appropriation of up to $27,500.00 and use of Measure X fund balance as matching funds; and authorize the Public Works Director to execute all agreements and any required documents with Caltrans for the Grant Program.

ID#23-279 Clean California Grant Application for AMOR Salinas Education and Outreach
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing staff to apply for the Clean California Local Grant Program Cycle 2 funding for up to $750,000 for AMOR Salinas education and outreach and authorizing acceptance of the grant if awarded to the City.

ID#23-280 Organic Materials Direct Service Provider Agreement with Atlas Organics Recommendation: Approve a Resolution to approve an organic materials direct service provider agreement between the City of Salinas and Atlas Organics.

ID#23-282 San Juan Grade Road Sidewalk and Street Light Improvements Project Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the establishment of a new CIP account named, "San Juan Grade Road Sidewalk and Street Light Improvements Project"; and authorize the acceptance of Highway Safety Improvement Program Grant funds in the amount of $1,344,690.00; and authorize the establishment of a Measure X appropriation of up to $149,410.00 and use of fund balance as matching funds.

ID#23-301 FY 22-23 Workforce Allocation Adjustment and Reclassification Recommendation: Approve a Resolution adjusting the workforce allocation for the Community Development Department and Police Department to include a total of three limited term Community Outreach Assistants and the reclassification of one Community Development Analyst to Management Analyst.

ID#23-306 Purchase of Network Systems Equipment
Recommendation: Approve a resolution authorizing the purchase and installation of network firewalls from Cadence Inc., in an amount not to exceed $189,000.

City of Salinas Page 4 Printed on 4/26/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 2, 2023
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#23-313 a. Labor Negotiations - California Government Code Section 54957.6, with its designated labor representatives Steven S. Carrigan, City Manager; Jim Pia, Assistant City Manager; Christopher A. Callihan, City Attorney; Katherine Hogan, Assistant City Attorney; Mark Roberts, Finance Director; Marina Horta-Gallegos, Human Resources Director; Sylvia Enriquez, Senior Human Resources Analyst; Che Johnson, Liebert Cassidy Whitmore, regarding labor relations with Service Employees International Union (SEIU), SEIU Supervisors, Salinas Municipal Employees Association/SEIU, Association of Management Personnel, Police Officers Association, Police Management Association, International Association of Firefighters, Fire Supervisors Association, Confidential Management Employees, Confidential Non-Management Employees, and Department Directors. b. Labor Negotiations - California Government Code Section 54957.6, with its designated labor representatives Steven S. Carrigan, City Manager; Jim Pia, Assistant City Manager; Christopher A. Callihan, City Attorney; Katherine Hogan, Assistant City Attorney; Mark Roberts, Finance Director; Marina Horta-Gallegos, Human Resources Director; Sylvia Enriquez, Senior Human Resources Analyst; and Matt Weatherly, President, Public Sector Personnel Consultants, regarding labor relations with Service Employees International Union (SEIU), SEIU Supervisors, Salinas Municipal Employees Association/SEIU, Association of Management Personnel, Police Officers Association, Police Management Association, International Association of Firefighters, Fire Supervisors Association, Confidential Non-Management Employees, Confidential Management Employees, and Department Directors.

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 City of Salinas Page 5 Printed on 4/26/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final May 2, 2023
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 April 26, 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 6 Printed on 4/26/2023
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-231, Version: 1
An Ordinance Amending Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code - Special Events Adopt an Ordinance amending Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code related to the revision of the Special Event process.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/26/2023
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 2, 2023
DEPARTMENT: LIBRARY & COMMUNITY SERVICES
CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
FROM: KRISTAN LUNDQUIST, DIRECTOR
CHRISTOPHER A. CALLIHAN, CITY ATTORNEY
TITLE: AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE I-C OF CHAPTER 30 OF

THE SALINAS MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO THE REVISION

OF THE SPECIAL EVENT PROCESS
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to adopt an Ordinance amending Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code related to the revision of the Special Event Process.

The proposed Ordinance may be adopted by the City Council at this first reading upon unanimous consent, otherwise the proposed Ordinance will be brought to the City Council’s May 16, 2023 meeting for consideration and adoption. (Salinas Charter Section 11.3) BACKGROUND:

On August 14, 2007, the City Council introduced an ordinance to define and to regulate special events held within the City of Salinas. This ordinance was subsequently adopted on August 21, 2007 following changes requested by the City Council. Article I-C took effect on September 21, 2007 and remained in effect until it was temporarily suspended in September 2019 in order to allow for a thorough review.

Over the last ten years, there have been a variety of concerns raised by event organizers and City staff regarding the process and requirements set forth in Article I-C. Staff began a review of the existing ordinance and requirements for special events occurring within the City limits. After an extensive review, staff recommended the revision of Article I-A and Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code. The originally proposed Ordinance incorporated a new permit requirement into the Municipal Code for filming activities modeled after the California Film Commission’s model ordinance, the ordinance adopted by many jurisdictions across the state.

Page | 2
The major changes included in the revision to Article I-C are listed below:
2007 Adopted Ordinance 2022 Draft Ordinance
Minor Event (less than 50
people) vs. Major Event
150 people or more on or
creating impacts to City
property
All Events Require Special
Event Permit
Exception for existing permit,
lease, or contract
Submittal deadline 30 days in
advance of event
Submittal deadline of 45 days
advance of permit
Other changes include clarification of what information is needed in the special event application, formally establishing no application fee for bona fide non-profit organizations and some other minor clean up items. The goal of revising the ordinance is to streamline the process and encourage community special events while ensuring safety and mitigating any risk to the City.

The attached ordinance revision was distributed to the City’s Special Event Committee for review and feedback at the end of 2021. The City Attorney and Library & Community Services Director reviewed this feedback and incorporated it into the draft ordinance revision. The attached ordinance revision was also distributed to over 90 event organizers who have gone through the special event process since 2019 to seek their feedback.

A virtual community meeting was held on August 16, 2022. Notice for this meeting was included in the email that was sent out to the 90 event organizers. There were ten (10) community members in attendance and no major concerns regarding the ordinance update were brought up. Overall, those in attendance appreciated the opportunity to ask questions and receive clarification on the ordinance language.

We also provided an opportunity for written comments. Written comments were received from representatives of the California Rodeo, Kiddie Kapers Parade, Salinas High School and the Oldtown Salinas Foundation. Below is the list of comments received and staff’s recommendations:

Oldtown Salinas Foundation:

Suggested Changes/Comments City Staff Recommendation
Page | 3
Section 3-12.31a Purpose. In addition to public spaces, streets, and sidewaks, the City also regulates events on private properties through the permitting process. I see an opportunity to use this Municipal Code update to clarify use of private properties for events that can be of benefit the City and its residents. If a non-profit wants to u se a private parking lot for a community event, the Event’s ordinance should be written to allow an event in all zoning categories as a permitted use, subject on to first obtaining an event permit. Currently, an expensive and time-consumint Zoning permit is required. This discourages events that could
otherwise be easily permitted and benefit city groups and our residents and increase activities in our City.

Section 30-12.31.b.2.C Please specifically add farmer’s market to this section.

Staff has added this to the Draft
Ordinance Language
Sections 30-12.31.b.2.c As noted in the first bullet, if events on private properties (e.g.church or commercial parking lots) could be added, please modify language at the end of the paragraph as follows: “…observances conducted on
public or private property.

The Draft Ordinance Update is
intended to focus specifically
on City owned, controlled or
maintained property. Staff
does not recommend including
private property as the
Temporary Use of Land Permit
(TULP) process can be used for
this purpose
Section 30-12.31.c Similarly, adding private property to the “Permit Required” section would, I believe, increase event opportunities in Salinas and provide an opportunity for the City to regulate these events.

The Draft Ordinance Update is
intended to focus specifically
on City owned, controlled or
maintained property. Staff
does not recommend including
private property as the
Temporary Use of Land Permit
(TULP) process can be used for
this purpose
Section 30-12.31.d.3 Permit Application. Based on our
experience, it can take city staff three or more weeks
(sometimes 8-9 months) to review, approve and issue an
event permit. While a 2day turn around Is ambitious, it sets The 2 day turn around for
permit issuance relates to
Expressive Events.

Page | 4
an unreasonable public expectation. It may be that this is intended to read that a permit for an event involving 150 or less people can get a permit in 2 days. Regardless, a 2-day permit turn-around is still not a practical timeframe.

Section 30-12.d.3, A-H I appreciate the City’s efforts to streamline documentation needed for an event and this
sections should serve as a checklist for event organizers.

Clearly there are no clear guidelines, which results in numerous informational follow-up requests by City staff, which slows down the permitting and is frustrating to event organizers.

An event checklist currently
exists and is provided to event
organizers. This document will
be updated to reflect any
changes as a result of the
ordinance update.

Section 30.12-31.d.5 Approval. Referrals to city
Departments or personnel should have a defined timeframe for a written response to staff reviewing the event permit application. As written, this section is open-ended. I would recommend using a 30-day agency/staff review and
comment period, as is similar to Government Code Section 65943.

Staff is always working to
improve internal processes and
we will be reviewing to find
more effective ways of
communication. No
recommended changes to the
Draft Ordinance language.

Section30-12.30.31.d12 Interfering with Activity
Prohibited. This section is particularly important to include in the Ordinance. It will all the City of Salinas Police Services to have a regulatory/legislative basis for
enforcement/. An event on public streets and sidewalks can tend to attract other non-affiliated groups that enter the event space to take advantage of crowds drawn to this particular event/activity. Unwanted groups are a distraction and
disruption to the purpose of the event. This is particularly true when unpermitted conflicting groups using amplified sound enter a permitted event space, including both streets and sidewalks. This provision would allow for the City to lawfully direct an unpermitted group to leave a permitted event space
No recommended changes.

Make sure the final version of the adopted regulations are consistently applied, I would ask that there be no additional information requirements placed on event organizers, other than the information specifically contained in the adopted regulations. Said another way, any updates to the City event permit application or checklist must be consistent with the requirements of the adopted version of the Special Events code. Currently, as City staff processes event applications, informational requests can be inconsistent year to year or be requested without a legislative basis. Only information required by the Code should be requested by City staff.

Staff consistently applies
requirements based on each
event details. In the event an
applicant feels differently, they
can share their concerns with
the LCS Director.

Also suggest that a provision be added to the Code to allow a single permit for recurring events. If an event is executed successfully, can’t permitting allow for more than a single Annual permits allows for a
more consistent review.

Page | 5
year permit? This would minimize costs to the event
organizer and reduce paperwork and staff costs to the city.

While not mentioned in the ordinance, can the City allow an event organizer to only have to obtain a single City business license for multiple events? Said another way, if a single entity does more than one event the City requires payment of a separate business license for each and every event. This approach adds additional volunteer time, fees to be paid, and another hurdle to clear in the event permit review process.

City code allows for a business
license to be purchased on a
quarterly basis.

Also for consideration, how will the City staff formalize a process for priority ranking for use of City streets? In this case I am thinking about weekly events (farmers market) and street use vs. established and/or new events in the downtown.

This would require City
Council direction.

California Rodeo Association:

Suggested Changes/Comments Staff Recommendation
Sec. 30-12.31.2.B change to: Any activity or
event open to the public on City owned,
controlled, or maintained property involving
150 or more persons.

Staff agrees with this recommendation
Sec. 30-12.31.c Add 3. Special events held at
the Salinas Sports Complex, provided the
Salinas Sports Complex is operated by a thirdparty pursuant to a lease specifically authorized by the City Council.

Staff does not recommend exempting all
special events held at the Salinas Sports
Complex. Based on draft language, events
held at the Sports Complex during Big Week
(10 day period provided in the Lease) would be
exempt.

Sec. 30-12.31.d.3 Change the application
submittal deadline from 90 business days to 45
calendar days.

Staff agrees with this recommendation
Staff also received correspondence from the Salinas High School Activities Director who supports changing the deadline to submit the application to 45 days and the Kiddie Kapers Parade who following review of the draft Ordinance didn’t have any concerns as requirements are consistent with the existing ordinance. In addition, staff received comments from other City Department staff with minor clean up language and these items were added to the draft language.

This item was scheduled to go before the Library & Community Services Commission at the regular meeting on August 10, 2022 however, the meeting had to be cancelled due to lack of quorum. It was subsequently presented to the LCS Commission on September 14, 2022 and the Commission was in favor of the revised language.

Following additional review, Article I-A was added in November 2022 to outline a formal process for film permits. Since this section was added following the outreach done over the summer, the Page | 6
draft ordinance was distributed again in mid-December to the 90 event organizers. In addition, the revised draft ordinance, including Article I-A was presented to the LCS Commission on January 11, 2023. During this meeting, several members of the local film, photography and production industries spoke out in opposition of the language in Article I-A. They raised concerns regarding requirements and lack of input on language and process and other regulations. As a result, the LCS Commission voted to table the item until further outreach with stakeholders was completed. A sub-committee of the LCS Commission was also established to work with staff and the stakeholders to address the concerns and recommendations for updates to the language of Article I-A.

On February 2, 2023, LCS staff, the City Attorney and the LCS sub-committee members held a meeting with stakeholders of the film, photography, production, and real estate industries to review the draft language in Article I-A. As a result of the discussion, staff made a commitment to the stakeholders to revise the language to provide clarity as to who Article I-A applies to and to ensure the local film/photography industry would be exempt unless their work involves things like closing a street, etc. On February 24, 2023, a revised draft of Article I-A was distributed to the stakeholders for their review and comment. Staff received questions/comments from 3 members of the Stakeholders group and from the Monterey County Film Commission. The revised language fulfilled the commitment to the local stakeholders group and as such, was placed on the March LCS Commission Agenda.

On March 8, 2023, the LCS Commission received an update from the February stakeholder meeting and staff recommended to the Commission that they recommend the City Council adopt an Ordinance amending Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code related to the revision of the Special Event Process. During this meeting, the Commission received written and in person public comment from the Monterey County Film Commission, the Salinas Valley Chamber of Commerce and one of the local stakeholders recommending that the Commission again table this item. Ultimately, the LCS Commission voted 5-1 to table Article I-A, but move Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code forward to the City Council for adoption. In addition, the Commission also wanted to add to the previously established sub-committee to continue to work on Article I-A relating to the Film Permit Process. The modification to the subcommittee will need to be taken up at a future LCS Commission meeting as this item was not on the March 8, 2023 agenda.

Based on the LCS Commission recommendation, staff is requesting that the City Council adopt Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code related to the revision of the Special Event Ordinance.

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) (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378).

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

Page | 7
The introduction of Ordinance update of Article I-C to Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code (Special Events) supports the City Council’s Goals of:
 Public Safety
 Youth and Seniors
 Effective and Culturally Responsive Government
FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

The draft Ordinance language does specify that bon-a-fide Non-Profit Organizations would be exempt from paying a special event application fee. There are approximately 15-20 applications submitted by Non-Profit Organizations annually. The new provision would result in a loss of revenue of up to $5,460 however provide a community benefit to the Non-Profit Organizations and encourage community focused events.

ATTACHMENTS:
2007 Ordinance
2022 Draft Ordinance Language
Resolution
Comments Received
ORDINANCE NO. _________ (N.C.S.)
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ARTICLE 1-C OF CHAPTER 30 OF THE SALINAS

MUNICIPAL CODE RELATED TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A FILM PERMIT

AND THE REVISION OF THE SPECIAL EVENTS PROCESS
City Attorney Impartial Analysis
The proposed Ordinance incorporates a new permit requirement into the Municipal Code for filming activities and revises and updates the existing requirements for special events that occur within the city. Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code is being revised to require a film permit for certain filming activities that occur within the city. News media, personal/family filming, and studio filming activities are exempt from the permit requirement. Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code is being revised and updated to clarify and to streamline the requirements for special events that occur within the city.

BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALINAS as follows:

SECTION 1. Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code is hereby revised and rewritten in its entirety to read as follows:

Article 1-C.- Special Events
Sec. 30-12.030.- Title.

This article shall be known as the “Special Events Ordinance” Sec. 30-12.031. Special events.
a. Purpose. The purpose of this article is to establish a process to manage competing uses of the City of Salinas’s public spaces, streets, and sidewalks; to assure the preservation of public property and public places; prevent dangerous, unlawful or impermissible uses; protect the safety of persons and property; protection of the environment and control vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and around the venue, while protecting the rights of people to engage in expressive activities in the City’s public places.
b. Definitions. For the purposes of this section, certain words and phrases are defined as follows:

1. “Expressive activity” means conduct, the sole or principal object of which is the expression, dissemination or communication by verbal, visual, literary or auditory means of opinion, views, or ideas. Expressive activity includes, but is not limited to, public oratory and the distribution of literature.

2. “Special event” means:

A. Any organized formation, parade, march, procession, demonstration, run, motorcade, or promenade consisting of persons, animals, or vehicles, or a combination thereof, which is to assemble or travel in unison on any street, sidewalk, park path, or other public rightof-way owned or controlled by the City that does not comply with applicable traffic regulations, laws or controls or that will interfere with the free use of any public way, or will impede or delay normal and usual vehicular or pedestrian traffic; or B. Any activity or event on City owned, controlled, or maintained property involving 150 or more persons.

C. Examples of special events include, but are not limited to, farmers markets, concerts, parades, fairs, festivals, ticketed events, block parties, running events, athletic or sporting events, and community celebrations and observances conducted on public property or public rights-of-way.
c. Permit Required. Except as provided by terms of a permit, lease, or contract that has been specifically authorized by the City Council, no person shall conduct or cause to be conducted, manage, or participate in any special event on any City street, sidewalk, alley, park, way, public place, public property, or public right-of-way which is owned or controlled by the City without first having obtained a permit in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of this section.

The provisions of that section shall not apply to or affect:

1. Activities conducted by a governmental agency acting within the scope of its authority;

2. Expressive activities involving less than 150 people. However, when practicable, the organizers should give notice to the City Manager or his/her designee at least twenty-four hours prior to the event informing the City of the date and time of the event, and provide an estimate of the number of persons who will be participating.

3. Activities that are not open to the general public including, for example, organizational meetings or private events.
d. Issuance of Permits -- Procedure.

1. The issuing authority shall be the City Manager or his/her designee.

2. Permit Fees. Except as otherwise provided by this code, or any other applicable law, rule or regulation, or by the terms of a permit, license, lease or contract which has been specifically authorized by the City Council, the permit application fees and other additional fees and charges for the use of City streets or City owned or controlled property pursuant to this section shall be established by resolution. The permit fee charged is based on the actual costs that a department of the City incurs in connection with activities for which a permit is required, including, but not limited to, costs associated with public safety, fire safety, traffic and/or pedestrian control, stormwater pollution prevention, the closure of streets or intersections, the diverting of traffic, the salaries of City personnel involved in administration or coordination of City services for the event, the cost to the City to provide support personnel, equipment, materials and supplies, and related City costs such as employee overtime. If police protection is provided by the city it shall be limited to what the police department, in its sole discretion, can reasonably supply.

3. Permit Application. Any person desiring to conduct a special event as defined under subsection (b)(2) this section, or a special event as defined under subsection (b)(1) this section for expressive activities involving 150 or more persons, shall make a written application to the City Manager or his/her designee at least two days in advance of the proposed special event. All other special events, including but not limited to recreation events, competition/contests/spectator sports, ticketed events, and sales/auctions/trade shows, shall make a written application to the City Manager or his/her designee at least 45 business days in advance of the proposed special event. Such application shall include the following information:

A. The name, address, email, and telephone number of the person requesting the permit; B. The name, address, email, and telephone number of the person, entity, or organization sponsoring or conducting the proposed special event;
C. A description of the special event, the estimated number of persons to participate and/or to attend, and the manner in which the public property will be utilized; D. The date the special event is to be conducted and the hours the special event will commence and terminate, and the total time, including setup and tear-down time, that the public property is to be utilized for the described special event; E. The street or other public property and the specific area or areas which will be utilized in connection with the proposed special event;
F. Site plan outlining event layout including all event components, locations of storm drains and trash management areas;
G. Such other information as the City Manager or his/her designee may deem necessary in order to properly provide for traffic control, street and property maintenance, administrative arrangements, police and fire protection, storm drain protection and the protection of the public health, safety, and welfare;
H. Certification that the event organizer shall be financially responsible for any City fees, departmental services charges or costs that may lawfully be imposed for the event; and I. Each application shall be accompanied by a nonrefundable permit application fee in an amount established by resolution of the City Council. Non-profit organizations which qualify under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code as a charitable organization are exempt from the permit application fee.

5. Approval. The approving authority shall be the City Manager or his/her designee. The City Manager or his/her designee may refer the application to City departments or personnel as needed to make recommendations regarding approval or disapproval of the application. In deciding whether to approve an application, no consideration may be given to the message of the event, the content of speech, the identity or associational relationships of the applicant, or to any assumptions or predictions as to the amount of hostility which may be aroused in the public by the content of speech or message conveyed by the event. The City Manager or his/her designee shall issue a permit under this section if he or she finds that all of the following criteria have been met:

A. The proposed use of the property is not governed by or subject to any other permit procedures provided elsewhere in this code or other applicable laws, rules, or regulations; B. The preparation for or the conduct of the proposed special event will not unreasonably or unfeasibly burden City resources necessary to preserve the public’s use of the street in the area contiguous to the street or other public property; C. The preparation for or the conduct of the special event will not unduly impede, obstruct, or interfere with the operation of emergency vehicles or equipment in or through the permit area or adversely affect the City’s ability to perform municipal functions or furnish City services in the vicinity of the permit area;
D. The proposed special event of the property does not otherwise present a substantial safety, noise, environmental or traffic hazard;
E. The proposed special event will be of a size appropriate to the proposed venue, location, or site;
F. The proposed special event will not interfere with another special event for which a permit has been granted or with scheduled government functions; G. The proposed special event will not substantially interrupt public transportation or other vehicular and pedestrian traffic in the area of its location, which cannot be effectively mitigated;
H. The proposed special event will not conflict with construction or development in the public right-of-way or at a public facility;
I. The proposed special event will not substantially interrupt the safe and orderly movement of aerial or marine navigation;
J. The proposed special event will not violate any federal, state, or local law; K. The proposed special event will comply with applicable licensure requirements, ordinances, or regulations concerning the sale, offering for sale, or distribution of any goods or services; and
L. The provisions of subsection (d)(8) of this section, if applicable, have been or will be satisfied.

6. Conditions. The City Manager or his/her designee, upon the issuance of the permit, may impose such reasonable requirements concerning the time, place, and/or manner of holding such event as are necessary to coordinate multiple uses of public property, assure the preservation of public property and public places, prevent dangerous, unlawful or impermissible uses, protect the safety of persons and property, and control vehicular and pedestrian traffic in and around the venue. Conditions may include, but are not limited to, the following:

A. The establishment of assembly or disbanding areas for a parade or similar event; B. The accommodation of an event’s pedestrian and vehicular traffic, including restricting events to City sidewalks, portions of a City street, or other public right-of-way; C. Conditions designed to avoid or lessen interference with public safety functions and/or emergency service access;
D. The number and type of vehicles, animals, or structures to be displayed or used during the special event;
E. The provision and use of traffic cones or barricades; F. The provision or operation of first aid stations or sanitary facilities, including handicap accessible sanitary facilities;
G. The provision of a waste management plan, and the cleanup and restoration of the site of the special event;
H. The provision of catch basin protection for stormwater pollution prevention; I. Restrictions on the use of sound amplification equipment; J. The manner of providing notice of permit conditions to event participants and those businesses or residents who may be directly affected by the conduct of the special event; K. The provision or use of emergency services;
L. The reasonable designation of alternate sites, times, dates, or modes for exercising expressive activity;
M. The obtaining of any and all business licenses or other necessary permits for the sale of food, beverages, or other goods or services at the special event; and N. The manner by which alcohol sales and service, if any, shall be conducted at the special event.

7. Hold Harmless. Each permittee shall execute a hold harmless agreement in a form approved by the City agreeing to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City against losses and liabilities incurred from the conduct of permittee or its officers, employees, and agents.

8. Insurance. As a condition precedent to the issuance of the permit, the permittee shall procure and maintain in full force and effect during the term of the permit insurance the City Attorney determines to be necessary and adequate under the circumstances. The insurance requirement set forth in this section shall not be construed to apply to special events involving expressive activity, which enjoy protection under the United States and/or California constitutions.

9. Time for Action on Permit Application. The City Manager or his/her designee shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny an application for a permit within ten (10) business days of receipt of a completed application. An applicant whose permit application has been denied, or whose permit is revoked, shall be immediately notified of the action of denial or revocation, which notification shall contain a statement setting forth the reasons for said denial or revocation, as well as a reference to the appeal provisions set forth in this section. Notification pursuant to this section shall be deemed satisfied when the notice is placed, postage prepaid, for overnight delivery, or when sent by email if an email address is provided on the application.

10. Denial. The City Manager or his/her designee shall deny any application for a permit or revoke any permit if he or she finds any of the following:

A. The application contains incomplete, false, or misleading information or is otherwise materially incomplete;
B. One or more of the approval criteria specified in subsection (d)(5) of this section are not met or is missing; or
C. The applicant fails to comply, or under prior special event permits has previously failed to comply, with conditions of approval including, but not limited to: (i) remittance of fees, charges, or deposits; (ii) submittal of an indemnification agreement and/or proof of insurance to the extent required; or (iii) timely receipt of all required approvals.

11. Appeals. The denial of a permit by the City Manager or his/her designee pursuant to the provisions of this section may be appealed to the City Manager by the applicant. Such appeal shall be in writing and shall be filed with the City Clerk within five business days of the decision of the City Manager or his/her designee. The City Manager shall act upon the appeal within ten (10) business days. The City Manager’s decision shall be in writing and notice of the decision shall be provided to the applicant via overnight mail or email if an email address is provided on the permit application. The City Manager’s decision shall be final except for judicial review.

12. Interfering with Activity Prohibited. It is unlawful for any person to obstruct, impede or interfere with any authorized special event for which a special event permit has been issued.

13. Penalty. Violation of any of the provisions of this section shall constitute a misdemeanor, and shall be punishable by any criminal, civil, or administrative means as set forth in the Salinas Municipal Code.

SECTION 3. CEQA CONSIDERATIONS. CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 includes the general rule that CEQA applies only to activities which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment. Where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment, the activity is not subject to CEQA. Because the proposed action and this matter have no potential to cause any effect on the environment, or because it falls within a category of activities excluded as projects pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15378, this matter is not a project. Any subsequent discretionary projects resulting from this action will be assessed for CEQA applicability.

SECTION 4. SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of any competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The Salinas City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance, and each and every section, subsection, clause and phrase thereof not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect and be in force thirty days from and after its adoption.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk of the City of Salinas is hereby directed to cause a summary of this ordinance to be published by one (1) insertion in a newspaper of general circulation printed, published, and circulated in the city of Salinas and hereby designated for that purpose by the Council of Salinas.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this __________ day of ____________________, 202___, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
_________________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Christopher A. Callihan, City Attorney

RE: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update
Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>
Tue 8/16/2022 3:08 PM
To: 'Kirsty Ryan' <[email protected]>
Great. Thank you.

Kristan
From: Kirsty Ryan <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 2:15 PM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update It does clarify.

We will do Cal Trans in January in hopes they can complete by May so we can get into you 45 days before July 16.

Thank you so much!
Kirsty
On Aug 16, 2022, at 11:42 AM, Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Kirsty,
Yes, it is very similar and not much changes for parades. The one thing I would point out is a type-o regarding the deadline to submit applications. The current deadline is 30 days. The draft indicates 90 however, I had planned to change this to 45 days and this will be my recommendation going forward.

The City Manager has always been the issuing authority but that is delegated to me for final approval of permits. Julia is the collector of information, interfaces with event organizers and coordinates with the special event committee. Julia is in my Department (LCS). This will remain the same going forward. I hope this helps clarify things.

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Kristan
From: Kirsty Ryan <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 11:19 AM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update This all seems to be exactly what we do each year for Kiddie Kapers.

Is the City Manager different than the City Permit Dept (Julia Nix) who we send everything to now? Please help me to understand this.

Kirsty
On Aug 16, 2022, at 8:38 AM, Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> wrote:

Here you go.

Kristan
From: Kirsty Ryan <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 16, 2022 7:18 AM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update Yes, please resend it. I can’t find the 8/3 one.

Thank you,
Kirsty
On Aug 15, 2022, at 8:00 PM, Kristan Lundquist
<[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Kirsty,
Yes, it involves parades. I sent the draft ordinance out with the original email dated 8/3. The one I sent today was just a reminder. If you need me to resend it, I can do so tomorrow morning. Let me know.

Kristan
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Get Outlook for Android
From: Kirsty Ryan <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 15, 2022 7:44:46 PM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update Kristen,
Hi,
I don’t see an attached draft ordinance.

I am just involved with the Kiddie Kaper Parade through Salinas Center once a year.

Does this impact parades?
Thank you for all you do!
Kirsty Ryan
On Aug 15, 2022, at 4:20 PM, Kristan Lundquist
<[email protected]> wrote:

Good Afternoon,
I just wanted to remind you about the Virtual Community Meeting tomorrow evening at 6:00 PM Zoom ID 852 2008
2847 Passcode 949303 RSVP
https://tinyurl.com/SalinasEvents. Written comments on
the draft Special Event Ordinance Update can be submitted through August 23, 2022.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Thank you,
Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director
City of Salinas
200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901
O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
From: Kristan Lundquist
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 4:29 PM
To: A. Olsen, Salinas Steinbeck Rotary Club
<[email protected]>; Aaron Snyder
<[email protected]>; Adan Gomez
<[email protected]>; Adan Gomez
<[email protected]>; Alejandro Chavez, Salinas Bizcom/SUBA <[email protected]>; Alex Carmona,
iHeart Media <[email protected]>; Angie
Connell <[email protected]>; Annalisa Carrillo
<[email protected]>; Anthony Lane
<[email protected]>; Ashley McDonnell,
Salinas Valley Food and Wine
<[email protected]>; Brandon Hill,
Alliance on Ageing <[email protected]>; California
International Airshow <[email protected]>; Cary
Swensen <[email protected]>; Cassy Waggy
<[email protected]>; Cesar Torres
<[email protected]>; Chris Clay
<[email protected]>; Christopher Barrera
<[email protected]>; Ciclovia
<[email protected]>; Crystal Andon, American
Cancer Society <[email protected]>; Crystal
Sanchez <[email protected]>; Danny Garcia,
Salinas PAL Carshow <[email protected]>; Danny
Little, CA Rodeo Carnival <[email protected]>; Dean
Callender <[email protected]>; Edgar De La
Cruz, Sainas Valley Disc Golf
<[email protected]>; Elsa Jimenez
<[email protected]>; Epifanio Nunez & Yolanda
Saldana, Christ the King Church <[email protected]>; Erick Lopez <[email protected]>; Estela Gutierrez, Salinas Valley Recycles, Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority
<[email protected]>; Future Citizens Fiundation
<[email protected]>; Gilbert Chavez, Street Low
<[email protected]>; Harry Wardwell
<[email protected]>; Holly Andrus-Harris
<[email protected]>; Isabel Valtierra, MCOE Head Start <[email protected]>; Jarren Coleman
<[email protected]>; Jason Cook
<[email protected]>; Jason T. Wold, Wold
Amusements, Inc. <[email protected]>;
Jennifer Bunden <[email protected]>;
Jennifer Highland, American Cancer Society
<[email protected]>; Jessica Matias, iHeart
Media Inc. <[email protected]>; Joel Panzer, Old Town Salinas Foundation <[email protected]>; John E.

Arriaga, JEA & Associates <[email protected]>;
John T. Hirasuna, Buddhist Temple of Salinas
<[email protected]>; Johnna Meister, First Baptist,
Streets of Bethlehem <[email protected]>; Jonathan
Green <[email protected]>; Jorge Rojas,
Monterey County Soccer Club <[email protected]>;
Jose Velasquez <[email protected]>;
Karina Ramires <[email protected]>; Kirsty Ryan
<[email protected]>; Krista Hamar
<[email protected]>; Larry Hirahara
<[email protected]>; Lauro Barajas, United Farm Workers
<[email protected]>; Leticia Hernandez
<[email protected]>; Lindsay Ezykowich,
Forbes Media LLC <[email protected]>; Lorisa
McKelvey Day, Event Planner Salinas Rotary Club
<[email protected]>; Lupe Covarrubia,
Monterey County WIC <[email protected]>;
Madonna del Sasso Church <[email protected]>;
Maria CArdenas <[email protected]>; Maria Carrasco,
Empresa De Fuego <[email protected]>; Maria
Ferdin <[email protected]>; Mark Dover
<[email protected]>; Mark Landon, Circo
Caballero <[email protected]>; Mark Rollins
<[email protected]>; Matthew Silvestre, Venture
Church Salinas <[email protected]>; Michael Schleicher, MDA <[email protected]>; Mike L Ann
Miller <[email protected]>; Mitch Massey
<[email protected]>; Monica Gonzalez
<[email protected]>; Nancy Valdez
<[email protected]>; Nick Nelson
<[email protected]>; Nomads Disc Golf
Club <[email protected]>; Orlando Osornio
<[email protected]>; Pete Tavares
<pete@!tavaresfamilycarclub.com>; Pete Tavares, Tavares Family Car Club <[email protected]>; Phillip M. Nava, Church of Christ in the Americas
<[email protected]>; Phillip M. Nava, Church of Jesus Christ in the Amercicas <[email protected]>; Quirino Vazquez <[email protected]>; Ramon Castro,
Wolfhose Radio Group, Inc. <[email protected]>; Ray
Pulver <[email protected]>; Ricky Cabrera, Rotary
Club of Salinas Alisal <[email protected]>; Robert
Blodgett <[email protected]>; Roberto Osorio,
American Crown Circus
<[email protected]>; Roly Cabrera, Salinas
Police Foundation <[email protected]>; Ronald Bitar, The Car Lot <[email protected]>; Sabrina Delk
<[email protected]>; Salinas Juneteenth
<[email protected]>; Salinas Pride
<[email protected]>; Salinas Valley Chamber of Commerce <[email protected]>; Sam
Jenkinson, Salinas Monster Jam
<[email protected]>; Samantha Alvarez, AIDS
Lifecycle <[email protected]>; Seth Short
<[email protected]>; St. Mary of the Nativity Church <[email protected]>; Steinbeck Rotary
<[email protected]>; Stuart Li
<[email protected]>; Todd Farrington, Big Sur Land Trust <[email protected]>; Tony Valenzia, Empresas Azteca <[email protected]>; Tony Virrueta <[email protected]>; Ty Brownfield, CA Rodeo Assoc., Rodeo Events <[email protected]>;
Vicki Law <[email protected]>; Victor Garcia, Caminos del
Arte <[email protected]>; Victor Juarez, Yaocuauhtli <[email protected]>; Yadira Hobby
<[email protected]>
Cc: Julia Nix <[email protected]>; Vivian Salinas <[email protected]>; Ana Ambriz
<[email protected]>
Subject: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update Good Afternoon,
The City has been reviewing Article I-C Sec. 30-12.30 of the Salinas Municipal Code and is recommending an update to the Special Event Ordinance. We are reaching out to you because you have organized a special event within the City of Salinas and gone through the special event process
sometime between 2019 and 2022. Your thoughts on the
process and requirements set forth in the DRAFT Special Event Ordinance is important and we are seeking feedback from you prior to recommending a change to the City
Council. If you wish to provide feedback, please review the attached DRAFT Ordinance and send your feedback to
[email protected] by August 23, 2022.

In addition to this, we will also have two additional
opportunities to provide feedback:

1. Library & Community Services Commission Meeting,
August 10 at 6:00 PM in the City Hall Rotunda, 200
Lincoln Ave.; or

2. Virtual Community Meeting on August 16 at 6:00 PM
Zoom ID 852 2008 2847 Passcode 949303 RSVP
https://tinyurl.com/SalinasEvents
This item will be considered by the City Council on
September 6, 2022.

The purpose of the Special Event Ordinance is to ensure the health and safety of all residents while mitigating impacts to the overall community. We hope the updated DRAFT
Ordinance will assist in supporting an event friendly City.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Thank you,
Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director
City of Salinas
200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901
O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
Re: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update
Mark Dover <[email protected]>
Mon 8/8/2022 3:48 PM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>
Hi Kristan,
I think that is a fair compromise. We will just need to make sure the schools understand that if we are doing a September Parade, you will need it by the first week of August. Usually no one has a Homecoming any earlier than the second or third week of September. Thank you for sharing this with me. I will submit my Application tomorrow. This actually aligns with Caltrans who also require the same 45 days.

Thanks,
Mark
On Mon, Aug 8, 2022 at 3:39 PM Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Mark,
Thank you for the feedback on the time frame for submitting a permit. You parades are part of the fabric of our community and your feedback is critical! I have already contemplated the time frame and actually had planned to list 45 days (current ordinance has a 30 days) and just realized the document I sent out still references 90 days. How do you feel about having to submit an application 45 days in advance?
Do you have any other feedback on the draft ordinance language? Kristan
From: Mark Dover <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, August 8, 2022 2:55 PM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update Hi Kristan,
Thank you for including me in the email for this important topic. I am the Activities Director at Salinas High School. I know that our Homecoming Parade is a small event. I have the paperwork complete and have a question. The 90 day prior to the City manager will be difficult to navigate.

The sports schedules just got finished and will be that way every year. I am looking at October 27 (Thursday) for the parade this year. It could be earlier in subsequent years. This only impacts Salinas High and Alisal as we are the two schools with parades. Will we still be ok.

Thanks,
Mark
On Wed, Aug 3, 2022 at 4:29 PM Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> wrote:

Good Afternoon,
The City has been reviewing Article I-C Sec. 30-12.30 of the Salinas Municipal Code and is recommending an update to the Special Event Ordinance. We are reaching out to you because you have organized a special event within the City of Salinas and gone through the special event process sometime between 2019 and 2022. Your thoughts on the process and requirements set forth in the DRAFT Special Event Ordinance is important and we are seeking feedback from you prior to recommending a change to the City Council. If you wish to provide feedback, please review the attached DRAFT Ordinance and send your feedback to [email protected] by August 23, 2022.

In addition to this, we will also have two additional opportunities to provide feedback:

1. Library & Community Services Commission Meeting, August 10 at 6:00 PM in the City Hall Rotunda, 200 Lincoln Ave.; or

2. Virtual Community Meeting on August 16 at 6:00 PM Zoom ID 852 2008 2847 Passcode 949303 RSVP https://tinyurl.com/SalinasEvents
This item will be considered by the City Council on September 6, 2022.

The purpose of the Special Event Ordinance is to ensure the health and safety of all residents while mitigating impacts to the overall community. We hope the updated DRAFT Ordinance will assist in supporting an event friendly City.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.

Thank you,
Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director
City of Salinas
200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901
O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
--
Mark Dover
Activities Director
Salinas High School
Go Cowboys!!!
resources
FOOD BANK: https://foodbankformontereycounty.org/
MONTEREY COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES: http://mcdss.co.monterey.ca.us/ HOUSING RESOURCE CENTER: http://www.hrcmontereycounty.org/about/ MONTEREY COUNTY CRISIS LINE: (831) 424-HELP (4357)
SUICIDE HOTLINE: 1-800-273-8255
--
Mark Dover
Activities Director
Salinas High School
Go Cowboys!!!
resources
FOOD BANK:
https://foodbankformontereycounty.org/
MONTEREY COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES:
http://mcdss.co.monterey.ca.us/
HOUSING RESOURCE CENTER:
http://www.hrcmontereycounty.org/about/
MONTEREY COUNTY CRISIS LINE: (831) 424-HELP (4357)
SUICIDE HOTLINE:
1-800-273-8255
Proposed Special Events Ordinance
Little, Daniel <[email protected]>
Tue 8/23/2022 4:15 PM
To: SpecialEvents <[email protected]>
Cc: Baldwin, Tim <[email protected]>;Jim Slaten <[email protected]>;Fred Hooker <[email protected]>
Hello,
The California Rodeo offers the following comments on the proposed City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance:

The California Rodeo requests the City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance be revised to explicitly carve out all events held at the Salinas Sports Complex that are organized, sponsored, or held by the California Rodeo or pursuant to a written agreement with the California Rodeo. The stated purpose of the ordinance is to manage competing uses of the City’s public facilities; to assure preservation of public places; to prevent dangerous, unlawful or impermissible uses; to protect the safety of people and property; and to control traffic around public venues. The California Rodeo believes its current and historical practices at the Salinas Sports Complex have achieved and will continue to achieve all of these goals without the need for additional special event permits.

The California Rodeo is well-versed and practiced with hosting special events of a large scale – it has held a lease agreement with the City for the Sports Complex since 1987 and held over 1,000 events since that time without any major incidents. Currently, it is estimated that the Rodeo and the Salinas Sports Complex will hold approximately 100 events a year moving forward that would require a Special Event Permit under the terms of the new ordinance: softball and baseball games and tournaments, high school football and soccer games, weddings, festivals, markets, banquets, meetings and other entertainment events held for the benefit of the Salinas community (Monster Jam, circuses/carnivals, concerts, etc.) The administrative burden and cost on the City and the California Rodeo associated with applying for and issuing a special event permit for each of these events would be enormous. Further, if the proposed ordinance is adopted in its current form, the Rodeo is exempt from paying any permit application fee as a non-profit organization; the City would be without a reimbursement mechanism to recover its costs for events conducted by, caused to be conducted by, managed, or participated in by the California Rodeo at the Sports Complex.

The California Rodeo understands from the public meeting held to discuss the proposed ordinance that:
(1) Big Week events (only) are intended to be excluded from the permitting process, and (2) only events open to the public are intended to be subject to the permitting process. First, the California Rodeo is concerned that the language of the Rodeo’s lease with the City and/or the proposed ordinance could be interpreted in such a way that would require the Rodeo to apply for a special events permit for every event it directly hosts at the Sports Complex – even those held during Big Week. Under the expansive language of the proposed ordinance, the California Rodeo arguably could be considered to “conduct or cause to be conducted, manage, or participate” nearly every other event that occurs at the Sports Complex throughout the year. Big Week’s events are the most notable and largest events in terms of patrons, but as touched on above, are only a handful volume-wise of the estimated 100+ events held at the Sports Complex each year. Second, the Rodeo does not believe the proposed ordinance as currently drafted differentiates in any way between public and private events. As a result, even routine, regularlyoccurring private events of the Rodeo such as the bi-monthly general meetings of the Rodeo’s directors/committee members and stockholders would be implicated by the ordinance and require a special events permit. We believe this is inconsistent with the intent of the lease and the proposed ordinance.

Finally, many of the objectives and requirements of the proposed ordinance are already achieved or met by the existing lease between the City and the Rodeo:
· Permit Fees: Each year the City is entitled to a fee from a surcharge on tickets sold by the Rodeo for Big Week events.
· Maintenance of City Property: The Rodeo is solely obligated to maintain the Sports Complex in good, safe, operable, usable and sanitary conditions.
· Insurance: The Rodeo is required pursuant to the terms of the lease to carry insurance for fire, general liability, automobile, workers compensation, employer’s liability, and such other additional insurance coverage as the City requires. The City is additionally insured under these policies.
· Hold Harmless and Liability: The Rodeo is bound to hold the City harmless, indemnify, and defend the City (and its officers, employees, and agents, etc.) from claims for the Rodeo’s use of the Salinas Sports Complex.

Thank you for your consideration of the California Rodeo’s suggested revisions to the proposed ordinance.

Best,
Danny Little

NOLAND, HAMERLY, ETIENNE & HOSS
A Professional Corporation
333 Salinas Street
P.O. Box 2510
Salinas, CA 93902
(831) 424-1414 ext. 220
(831) 424-1975 (fax)
[email protected]
www.nheh.com
Serving the Central Coast for 90 Years
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information contained in this e-mail message is attorney-client privileged and/or confidential information. It is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, electronic storage or use of this communication is prohibited. If you received this communication in error, please notify me immediately by e-mail, attaching the original message, and delete the original message from your computer. Thank you.

RE: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update to be Considered City Council on January 24, 2023
Little, Daniel <[email protected]>
Fri 1/13/2023 9:03 AM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>;Christopher Callihan <[email protected]> Cc: Jim Slaten <[email protected]>;Baldwin, Tim <[email protected]> Thank you Kristan!
Danny Little

From: Kristan Lundquist [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2023 4:19 PM
To: Little, Daniel; Christopher Callihan
Cc: Jim Slaten; Baldwin, Tim
Subject: RE: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update to be Considered City Council on January 24, 2023 Hi Danny,
Thank you for your email. We agree with your proposed change and will update the draft ordinance accordingly.

Wanted to let you know that we have some additional outreach to do on Article I-A relating to the Film Permit process so this item will not go to Council on January 24 th
. I will let you know when it gets scheduled.

Thank you,
Kristan
From: Little, Daniel <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2023 1:02 PM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>; Christopher Callihan <[email protected]> Cc: Jim Slaten <[email protected]>; Baldwin, Tim <[email protected]> Subject: RE: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update to be Considered City Council on January 24, 2023 Hi Kristan,
We have one comment on the revised proposed Special Events Ordinance at this time.

In Section d(3)(I), the language describing which organizations are exempt from application fee was changed from “Bona fide non-profit organizations” to “Non-profit organizations which qualify under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code as charitable organization…” We believe this language is unnecessarily restrictive as it precludes other non-profit, tax-exempt organizations that qualify under other areas of the IRC (e.g., social welfare organizations qualifying under 501(c)(4)).

We propose revising the ordinance as follows: “Non-profit organizations which qualify as tax-exempt organizations under the Internal Revenue Code…”
Thank you for your consideration.

Best,
Danny Little

From: Kristan Lundquist [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, January 6, 2023 1:58 PM
To: A. Olsen, Salinas Steinbeck Rotary Club; Aaron Snyder; Adan Gomez; Adan Gomez; [email protected]; Alex Carmona, iHeart Media; Angie Connell; Annalisa Carrillo; Anthony Lane; Ashley McDonnell, Salinas Valley Food and Wine; Brandon Hill, Alliance on Ageing; California International Airshow; Cary Swensen; Cassy Waggy; Cesar Torres; Chris Clay; Christopher Barrera; [email protected]; Crystal Andon, American Cancer Society; Crystal Sanchez; Danny Garcia, Salinas PAL Carshow; Little, Daniel; Dean Callender; Edgar De La Cruz, Sainas Valley Disc Golf; Elsa Jimenez; Epifanio Nunez & Yolanda Saldana, Christ the King Church; Erick Lopez; Estela Gutierrez, Salinas Valley Recycles, Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority; Future Citizens Fiundation; Gilbert Chavez, Street Low; Harry Wardwell; Holly Andrus-Harris; Isabel Valtierra, MCOE Head Start; Jarren Coleman; Jason Cook; Jason T. Wold, Wold Amusements, Inc.; Jennifer Bunden; Jennifer Highland, American Cancer Society; Jessica Matias, iHeart Media Inc.; Joel Panzer, Old Town Salinas Foundation; John E. Arriaga, JEA & Associates; John T.

Hirasuna, Buddhist Temple of Salinas; Johnna Meister, First Baptist, Streets of Bethlehem; Jonathan Green; Jorge Rojas, Monterey County Soccer Club; Jose Velasquez; Karina Ramires; Kirsty Ryan; Krista Hamar; Larry Hirahara; Lauro Barajas, United Farm Workers; Leticia Hernandez; Lindsay Ezykowich, Forbes Media LLC; Lorisa McKelvey Day, Event Planner Salinas Rotary Club ; [email protected]; Madonna del Sasso Church ; Maria CArdenas; Maria Carrasco, Empresa De Fuego; Maria Ferdin; Mark Dover; Mark Landon, Circo Caballero; Mark Rollins; Matthew Silvestre, Venture Church Salinas; Michael Schleicher, MDA; Mike L Ann Miller; Mitch Massey; Monica Gonzalez; Nancy Valdez; Nick Nelson; Nomads Disc Golf Club; Orlando Osornio; Pete Tavares; Pete Tavares, Tavares Family Car Club; Phillip M. Nava, Church of Christ in the Americas; Phillip M. Nava, Church of Jesus Christ in the Amercicas; Quirino Vazquez; Ramon Castro, Wolfhose Radio Group, Inc.; Ray Pulver; Ricky Cabrera, Rotary Club of Salinas Alisal; Robert Blodgett; Roberto Osorio, American Crown Circus; Roly Cabrera, Salinas Police Foundation; Ronald Bitar, The Car Lot; Sabrina Delk; Salinas Juneteenth; Salinas Pride; Salinas Valley Chamber of Commerce; Sam Jenkinson, Salinas Monster Jam; Samantha Alvarez, AIDS Lifecycle; Seth Short; St.

Mary of the Nativity Church; Steinbeck Rotary; Stuart Li; Todd Farrington, Big Sur Land Trust; Tony Valenzia, Empresas Azteca; Tony Virrueta; Ty Brownfield, CA Rodeo Assoc., Rodeo Events; Vicki Law; Victor Garcia, Caminos del Arte; Victor Juarez, Yaocuauhtli; Yadira Hobby
Cc: Vicky Sargent; Vivian Salinas; Ana Ambriz
Subject: City of Salinas Special Event Ordinance Update to be Considered City Council on January 24, 2023 Good Afternoon,
As you are aware, the City of Salinas has been reviewing Article I-C of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code and is recommending an update to the Special Event Ordinance. A prior draft was shared with you in August of 2022 and a Virtual Community Meeting was held on August 16, 2022 allowing for your feedback on the changes.

Due to other competing priorities, there was a delay in taking this item to the City Council. Staff has continued to review the Draft Ordinance and feedback already received. During this review, it was determined that additional information was needed in order to address Film Permits so Article I-A has added.

Attached please find the updated Draft in final form that will be considered by the City Council on January 24, 2023.

If you have any questions, please let me know.

Thank you,
Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director
City of Salinas
200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901
O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
From: Alex Garcia <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 3, 2023 8:21 AM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> Cc: Christopher Callihan <[email protected]>; Vicky Sargent <[email protected]>; Gloria De La Rosa <[email protected]>; joey martinez <[email protected]>; Albert Fong <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code Thank you, feels very safe and I think other small single or small local crew film makers will feel comfortable with this. Thanks again! Alex Garcia Creative Director/Owner
Studio:831-800-7639 x105 Website:www.magonemedia.com
Address:369 Main St. Ste. 201, Salinas, CA 93901
Schedule a Zoom meeting with me
On Mar 2, 2023, at 4:52 PM, Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Alex, Appreciate you responding. The item you are referring to is in the definitions and defines the term Studio. If you look at item 3 under Exemptions, we added “or otherwise wholly indoors” to address the comments you made at the stakeholder meeting. I think you referenced either filming and taking photos of a Hospital Boardmember in his office and your concern that the way Article I-A previously was written would require that you get a permit.

I hope this clarifies your concern.

Kristan
From: Alex Garcia <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 4:00 PM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> Cc: Christopher Callihan <[email protected]>; Vicky Sargent <[email protected]>; Gloria De La Rosa <[email protected]>; joey martinez <[email protected]>; Albert Fong <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code Importance: High
Sorry Kristan I have had my hand and plate full. This is looking great! Thank you for your work on this. This one area isn’t very clear. d.e. “Studio” shall mean a fixed place of business where filming activities are regularly conducted upon the premises.

This line seems like this needs to be in exemptions. Other than this its seems very clear, understandable and reasonable. Anyone else in this email agree? Thank you all Again!
<~WRD0001.jpg>
Alex Garcia Creative Director/Owner
Studio: 831-800-7639 x105 Website: www.magonemedia.com
Address: 369 Main St. Ste. 201, Salinas, CA 93901
<~WRD0001.jpg>
<~WRD0001.jpg>
<~WRD0001.jpg>
<~WRD0001.jpg>
Schedule a Zoom meeting with me
On Mar 2, 2023, at 8:54 AM, Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> wrote:

Good Morning Salinas Film, Media and Production Stakeholders, I hope you have all had an opportunity to review the updated draft language related to Article I-A establishing a film permit process. As a reminder, please send any comments and/or feedback that you may have regarding the draft to me today.

Thank you, Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director City of Salinas 200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901 O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
From: Kristan Lundquist
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2023 11:25 AM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> Cc: Christopher Callihan <[email protected]>; Vicky Sargent <[email protected]>; Gloria De La Rosa <[email protected]>; Mas Arte <[email protected]>; Albert Fong <[email protected]> Subject: Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code Good Morning Salinas Film, Media and Production Stakeholders, Thank you to those of you who attended the meeting on February 2, 2023 regarding draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code which outlines a process for the issuance of Film Permits within the City of Salinas. It was a robust discussion and as you are aware, the City Attorney and I agreed to revise the language to mitigate concerns raised by local stakeholders.

Attached for your review is the updated draft ordinance outlining the changes via track change. The City Attorney and I believe this addresses the concerns raised, however, we are looking for your feedback and comments prior to presenting this item to the LCS Commission. Please submit your comments and/or feedback to me by Thursday, March 2, 2023.

I appreciate your enthusiasm and desire to develop a process that works for Salinas, and I look forward to receiving your feedback on the revised language. If you have any questions and/or concerns, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Thank you, Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director City of Salinas 200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901 O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
Public Comment Received
Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code From: Chris Carpenter <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 24, 2023 7:24 PM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]>; Karen <[email protected]> Cc: Christopher Callihan <[email protected]>; Vicky Sargent <[email protected]>; Gloria De La Rosa <[email protected]>; joey martinez <[email protected]>; Albert Fong <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code Thank you, Kristan for including me on this email. Our university film and risk management departments will review it next week and give you feedback regarding the support for our Cinematic Arts and Technology students.

I also wanted to ensure the Monterey County Film Commissioner, Karen Nordstrom, sees these revised changes. I am extremely worried that the changes do NOT make Salinas a film friendly environment. If you intend not to have big-budget national feature films or commercials shoot in Salinas, this document could be the HUGE Wall you want. I know many local location scouts, and they want to build relationships with city staff. Mostly to see if it will be painful or if the city is willing to work with these large production companies without a lot of time/hassle.

Karen,
In the last in-person meeting, I mentioned to the city staff that they should consult with you and if they did, please disregard this email.

Can you and the county staff review the attachment and advise the Salinas City Staff? We know Monterey and several other local cities have successfully brought many film productions to their respected city limits over the last couple years. I think Salinas hasn't had a major motion film production in their city limits since the late 80's, but I know you can confirm this.

Any feedback you can give them would help greatly. Your decades of being the Monterey County Film Commissioner is invaluable! Regards,
Chris Carpenter
Lecturer / Media Production Specialist III Cinematic Arts & Technology, CSU, Monterey Bay p: 831.582.3772 m: 831.915.3421
a: 100 Campus Center, Bldg. 27, Seaside, CA. 93955 w: csumb.edu e: [email protected] On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 11:24 AM Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> wrote:

Good Morning Salinas Film, Media and Production Stakeholders, Thank you to those of you who attended the meeting on February 2, 2023 regarding draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Municipal Code which outlines a process for the issuance of Film Permits within the City of Salinas. It was a robust discussion and as you are aware, the City Attorney and I agreed to revise the language to mitigate concerns raised by local stakeholders.

Thank you, Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director City of Salinas 200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901 O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code From: Kristan Lundquist
Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 12:50 PM
To: Alfredo Avila <[email protected]> Cc: Albert Fong <[email protected]>; Christopher Callihan <[email protected]>; Gloria De La Rosa <[email protected]>; Vicky Sargent <[email protected]>; joey martinez <[email protected]> Subject: RE: FW: Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code Hi Freddy,
Thank you for the question. If the individual requesting the film permit is a sole proprietor, then they would not be subject to WC insurance requirements however, if the individual requesting the permit has a team of employees working on the shoot, they would be required to provide WC insurance.

Thank you, Kristan
From: Alfredo Avila <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 9:30 AM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> Cc: Albert Fong <[email protected]>; Christopher Callihan <[email protected]>; Gloria De La Rosa <[email protected]>; Vicky Sargent <[email protected]>; joey martinez <[email protected]> Subject: Re: FW: Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code Hi Kristan,
I'm curious of the worker's compenstion implications of a non-major film production that requires a permit. Can you give us an example of how this would work? Grax Freddy
On Thu, Mar 2, 2023 at 8:54 AM Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you, Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director City of Salinas 200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901 O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
--Alfredo Avila, M.A.

Ethnic Studies | Theatre & Cinema Faculty
411 CENTRAL AVENUE | SALINAS, CA 93901
[email protected] |
Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code From: Kristan Lundquist
Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 5:22 PM
To: Karen Seppa Nordstrand <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: MCFC -- Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code Hi Karen,
I’ve worked with a few film permit request in the past and am aware they generally come together fairly quickly so we did not address a deadline to submit (like the 45 days for special events) to give flexibility for a quick turn around. The original draft language was modeled after the California Film Commissions model ordinance and our local folks had lots of concerns. I met with close to 20 or 25 local film makers, photographers and media influencers in early February to discuss their concerns with the initial draft language. Chris Carpenter was there as well. Their biggest concerns was to clearly define who Article I-A was meant to address and exempt our local film, photographers and media influences from a permit process unless otherwise doing something like closing the street. This is what drove the red line changes that you see in the document. Please see my answers to your questions below in red.

Please let me know if you have any additional questions.

Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director City of Salinas 200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901 O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
From: Karen Seppa Nordstrand <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, March 2, 2023 5:04 PM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: MCFC -- Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code Hi Kristan—
I’m reviewing the proposed changes but was hoping some meeting with film industry professionals in the area might be in order to help in the understanding of how the film industry works and the best practices of statewide cities and the California Film Commission. Productions these days come together rather quickly (especially the videos, commercials and still shoots that we most often attract since we don’t have the lure of big tax incentives that studio films often seek first).

I have a couple of questions:

1. Section 30-12 Definitions –(02) – What is the need for (b.) definition? Permits are for all types of Commercial Film Productions. We may have a movie wanting to film just a few days of scenes. The movies may be studios or independent filmmakers. How they are financed and/or distributed should not make a difference, nor if they are for presentation to a mass audience. The wording filming in (a.) seems comprehensive enough and includes “shooting commercial motion pictures” already. How do you define “Major”? Maybe just use the words “Commercial Film Productions” instead of commercial motion pictures? This was included to address concerns from our local film and photography industry. 2. Sec. 30-12 (04) – Again the word major motion picture activity seems unnecessary. Does the rule man that every film applicant needs “approval by Resolution of the City Council”? Or what is the intent of that involvement with City Council? I think that the City Manager would be taking film permit requests and have a system of vetting possibilities with impacted agencies (police if necessary, parking dept., etc.) like City of Monterey does. No, this provides for the City Manager or his designee to issue permits. The City Council does not have to approve any film or special event permit. 3. I don’t see any language about how far out a permit request may need to be submitted to the City Manager. The only deadline I see is 45 days for Special Events, which filming really is not. Is this left to the discretion of the City Manager? Most productions these days—especially the commercials, documentaries, stills and videos that would most likely shoot in Salinas—move more quickly and a film-friendly jurisdiction tries hard to turn around the permit approval in a few days. I do not read the 45 days in the Special Events section as applicable to filming, am I right? Yes, as indicated above, no time frame or deadline to submit is included to allow for flexibility based on my previous experience with film permit requests. You are correct, the 45 days is specifically for special event permits. 4. Big productions (movies, TV series, etc.) do not come often (again incentives are lacking) but will logically start out much earlier in deciding if they can film in a city. Even then, the director over some days may want to change locations and get permitted quickly as the filming gets going. Understood and this isn’t an issue I have heard from several locals in the film industry, and they have sent letters and offers of help to craft the ordinance based on their professional experience with many city film offices. I hope you have received their input. We all want to keep locals employed and create an economic boost from the clean, temporary business of filmmaking for the City of Salinas and staying competitive with the many other places seeking the film business.

I look forward to clarification on the above questions.

Best regards,
Karen Seppa Nordstrand AFCI Certified Film Commissioner Monterey County Film Commission 831-646-0910 / c 831-594-9410 www.FilmMonterey.org
Taking Care of Film Business in Monterey County
From: Kristan Lundquist [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, March 02, 2023 8:54 AM
To: Kristan Lundquist <[email protected]> Cc: Christopher Callihan <[email protected]>; Vicky Sargent <[email protected]>; Gloria De La Rosa <[email protected]>; joey martinez <[email protected]>; Albert Fong <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Film Permit Process- Draft Article I-A of Chapter 30 of the Salinas Municipal Code Importance: High
Good Morning Salinas Film, Media and Production Stakeholders, I hope you have all had an opportunity to review the updated draft language related to Article I-A establishing a film permit process. As a reminder, please send any comments and/or feedback that you may have regarding the draft to me today.

Thank you, Kristan
Kristan Lundquist
Library & Community Services Director City of Salinas 200 Lincoln Ave.

Salians, CA 93901 O: (831) 758-7222
“We Create Community Through People, Parks & Programs”
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-273, Version: 1
2023 California Department of Housing and Community Development Local Housing Trust Fund Application
Approve a Resolution authorizing submittal of a Local Housing Trust Fund Program Application to the California Department of Housing and Community Development; and establishment of a Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund and a Salinas LHTF account fund with revenue and expenditure accounts to include the pre -application allocation of Housing Production Fund CIP #9021 ($500,000), and General Funds ($500,000), as required local match and SB2 PLHA ($100,000); and authorizing the City Manager, or designee, to execute all applicable forms, grant-related documents, and subsequent amendments as needed.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/26/2023
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 2, 2023
DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
FROM: MEGAN HUNTER, DIRECTOR
THROUGH: ROD POWELL, PLANNING MANAGER
BY: LUIS OCHOA, SR. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ANALYST

DAVID VIGIL, HOUSING PRODUCTION VISTA
TITLE: 2023 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT LOCAL HOUSING TRUST FUND

APPLICATION
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to approve a Resolution authorizing:

1. establishment of a Salinas Local Housing Trust; and

2. establishment of a Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund with revenue and expenditure accounts to include pre-application appropriations totaling $1,020,000, including $20,000 from the SB2 PLHA Fund as required, incremental operating revenue, and planned appropriations of $20,000 per year for the upcoming four fiscal years for the SB2 (PLHA) Fund; and

3. transfers from Housing Production Fund CIP #9021 ($500,000), the General Fund ($500,000), and SB2 PLHA Fund ($20,000); and

4. commitment of nine (9) City-owned properties at 921 E. Market St., an easement and 115, 123, 137, 145, 151 Division St., and 37-39 and 34-38 Soledad St. as Salinas LHTF match assets; and

5. submittal of a Local Housing Trust Fund Program Application to the California Department of Housing and Community Development; and

6. the City Manager, or designee, to execute all applicable forms, grant-related documents, and subsequent amendments as needed.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) Local Housing Trust Fund (LHTF) Program provides matching funds to local and regional housing trust funds dedicated to the creation, rehabilitation, or preservation of affordable housing, transitional housing, and emergency shelters. As part of the Program, applicant jurisdictions are required to provide a dollarfor-dollar match of funds and/or property assets to support equivalent funding requests up to five Page | 2
million dollars ($5,000,000). The City of Salinas (City) is considered to be a new applicant to the LHTF Program and, as such, is required to have a minimum LHTF Program application request of at least $500,000 with corresponding match and operating revenues. It is proposed that the City satisfy these requirements with an appropriation of $500,000 from the Housing Production Fund CIP # 9021; $500,000 of General Funds; the appraised valuations of nine (9) owned, undeveloped City-owned properties; and an incremental amount not to exceed $100,000 of SB2 PLHA funds as operating revenues. Each match property would become an affordable housing project beneficiary of awarded LHTF funds.

BACKGROUND:

On December 4, 2018, Council adopted the Salinas Plan (SP). One of the thirty-two (32) recommendations highlighted in the SP was to establish a housing trust fund with local and state resources to support the creation of 2,000 new units of affordable housing. As discussed in SP updates, the City ultimately participated in a regional trust fund through Monterey Bay Economic Partnership (MBEP). Unfortunately, no housing project within Salinas has ever tapped into the MBEP Trust Fund because of funding restrictions. As a result, the City established a Housing Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Fund to serve as a funding source for affordable housing projects. Until last fiscal year, City allocations to the CIP have been minimal.

On March 7, 2023, HCD released a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) announcing the availability of approximately fifty-three million ($53,000,000) in LHTF Program funds to local, compliant jurisdictions. Source funding for HCD’s LHTF Program was established by the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018 (Proposition 1), adopted by California voters on November 6, 2018.

LHTF Program funds must be used to provide construction loans and/or permanent financing loans to pay for predevelopment costs, acquisition, construction, or rehabilitation of affordable rental housing projects, emergency shelters, transitional housing, and permanent supportive housing.

Program funds may also be used to assist income-eligible first time-time homebuyers to purchase homes and to rehabilitate houses owned by income eligible occupants as well as to construct, convert, repair, and rehabilitate accessory dwelling units (ADUs) or junior accessory dwelling units (JADUs).

All funds provided by the LHTF Program must be matched by the applicant on a dollar-for-dollar basis with funds from dedicated sources of funding such as taxes, fees, loan repayments, land donations, or public or private contributions. If land donations/valuations are used as matching funds, that land must be utilized as part of an affordable housing project. Prior to the disbursement of LHTF Program funds, jurisdictions must demonstrate proof of deposit of match funds in a designated LHTF account or provide proof of a legally binding commitment to do so. Funds restricted for housing use by state or federal law, such as funds from HOME, CDBG, HSA, or state housing programs administered by HCD, may not be used as LHTF match funds.

DISCUSSION:

Page | 3
To reach City goals for affordable housing, more funding, especially for gap financing is needed.

The LHTF presents a unique opportunity to essentially double City resources dedicated to housing production. The City would apply as a new LHTF applicant and as such is required to demonstrate sufficient sources of ongoing revenues from public or private sources that will cover operating costs for a minimum of five (5) years from the date of an LHTF Program award. Applicants are also allowed to use up to five percent (5%) of an LHTF Program award to supplement administration and operations of the program. HCD SB2 PLHA funds may be used as a source of ongoing operating revenue to support a new LHTF.

New LHTF Program applicants may request five hundred thousand ($500,000) to five million dollars ($5,000,000) in funding contingent upon the provision of a dollar-for-dollar match of funds and/or property assets. In support of its LHTF application, the City proposes to use a portion of its Housing Production Fund CIP #9021 ($500,000) and new allocation of General Funds ($500,000) towards its match as well as the valuations of seven (7) of its owned parcels on Division and Market Streets and two (2) of its owned parcels on Soledad Street with an approximate value of one million dollars ($1,000,000). In summary, and contingent upon in-progress appraisals of city owned property, the City is seeking to identify and commit a total of two million dollars ($2,000,000) in allowable assets (funds and property) that would effectively result in a total of four million dollars ($4,000,000) towards viable, future affordable housing projects. The City would also commit up to one hundred thousand dollars ($100,000) of its SB2 (PLHA) funds as a required ongoing source of revenues to incrementally support LHTF operations for five (5) years.

LHTFs are of significant value to local jurisdictions seeking to attract new developers or support existing planned projects by enhancing and expanding available local resources and offering supportive funding for emerging affordable housing developments. The City is currently engaged in discussions and/or partnering on various proposed housing projects that could readily benefit from these matching funds.

If awarded, the City’s new LHTF Program would utilize funds for the new construction of multifamily and rental housing that is affordable to extremely low-, very low-, and low-income households, including necessary operating subsidies. While the LHTF Program allows for broader use (i.e., rehabilitation of housing, ownership housing, and moderate-income housing), the additional restrictions listed here enable the City to score more highly in this competitive grant program. Allocation of awarded LHTF funds to the City, would be overseen by the City Council acting as a Salinas LHTF Board of Directors.

Proposed Local Housing Trust Fund Match and Administration Assets Funds: Allocation Amount
Existing Housing Production Fund (CIP 9021) $ 500,000
General Funds $ 500,000
Owned Property Valuations:
921 E. Market Street TBD
appraisals in-progress,
estimated to be
+/- $575,000
115 Division Street
123 Division Street
137 Division Street
Page | 4
145 Division Street
Easement on Division Street
151 Division Street
37-39 Soledad Street $140,000
34-38 Soledad Street $300,000
Ongoing Revenues (To support 5 years of Housing Trust operating costs) SB2 Permanent Local Housing Allocation (PLHA) $100,000
Total Local Funds and Assets Committed TBD +/- $2,100,000 Below is a timeline of anticipated milestones and actions related to the City’s LHTF Program application. To ensure completion of a competitive application inclusive of required operational guidelines and policies within the extremely short 30-day submission period, the City has also enlisted support from an experienced LHTF consultant, Harris and Associates.

Proposed LHTF Program Timeline
HCD 2023 LHTF Program NOFA Release March 7, 2023
LHTF Application Release April 6, 2023
HCD LHTF Application Portal open for submissions April 19, 2023 City Council consideration of City of Salinas LHTF Program May 2, 2023 Internal transfer of local match funds to new LHTF account May 2-5, 2023 LHTF Application Deadline May 17, 2023
HCD LHTF Award Announcements August 2023
2023 LHTF Program applications are due to HCD by no later than May 17, 2023.

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) (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378).

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

Application to the HCD LHTF Program supports the City of Salinas Strategic Plan 2022-2025 Goals and Strategies of Housing/Affordable Housing and Effective and Culturally Responsive Government.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

The City’s Community Development Department Housing and Community Development Division has assumed a primary role in the completion and submission of an HCD LHTF application in consultation with the City Manager, City Attorney and Finance Department. If awarded, the City’s new LHTF will become part of the portfolio of available affordable housing development tools and resources administered by CDD Housing staff.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

Page | 5
HCD’s 2023 LHTF application requires an initial dollar-for-dollar match of allowable funds and/or property as well as an identified source of fund to support operating costs and administration for a minimum of five (5) years. The City’s application will include $500,000 of General Funds, $500,000 of Housing Production Fund CIP #9021, and nine (9) allowable properties currently under appraisal and estimated to be valued at approximately $1,000,000. Originally, staff had requested $500,000 from Measure E for the Housing Production CIP in the FY 23/24 budget.

However, HCD’s LHTF application requires matching funds to be appropriated at time of application. Therefore, it is recommended that City Council approve the $500,000 General Funds appropriation as part of action taken on May 2nd. The $500,000 of Housing Production CIP #9021 funds have been previously appropriated and should be transferred into the Salinas LHTF account.

Per LHTF Guidelines, an additional $100,000 of SB2 (PLHA) funds will also be committed incrementally over a five (5) year period to support the ongoing operations LHTF. Identified match funds and the first increment of LHTF operating revenues ($20,000) must also be transferred to the newly created Salinas LHTF prior to submission of the application.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution HCD Local Housing Trust Fund Application
State HCD Resolution Local Housing Trust Fund Application Salinas LHTF Program Guidelines and Standards
1 RESOLUTION NO. (N.C.S.)

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SALINAS CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING ESTABLISHMENT OF A SALINAS LOCAL HOUSING TRUST FUND;

ESTABLISHMENT OF A SALINAS LHTF ACCOUNT AND TRANSFER OF

IDENTIFIED LOCAL MATCH FUNDS, PROPERTY ASSETS, AND OPERATING REVENUE FUNDS; SUBMITTAL OF A LOCAL HOUSING TRUST FUND PROGRAM

APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT; AND THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO

EXECUTE ALL APPLICABLE FORMS, GRANT-RELATED DOCUMENTS, AND

SUBSEQUENT AMENDMENTS AS NEEDED
WHEREAS, on December 4, 2018, City Council adopted the Salinas Plan including a recommendation to establish a housing trust fund with local and state resources to create 2,000 new units of affordable housing; and
WHEREAS, the City had participated in a regional housing trust fund and established a Housing Production Capital Improvement Fund in the past, but had not generated enough gap financing needed by affordable housing developers; and
WHEREAS, on March 7, 2023, the State of California, Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) issued a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) under its Local Housing Trust Fund (LHTF) Program; and
WHEREAS, HCD is authorized to provide up to $53 million under the LHTF Program from the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018 (Proposition 1) (as described in Health and Safety Code section 50842.2 et seq. (Chapter 365, Statutes of 2017 (SB 3)) (Program); and
WHEREAS, the City is an eligible ‘new’ Local Housing Trust Fund applicant and able to apply for up to $5,000,000 in Program funds to support the creation, rehabilitation, or preservation of affordable housing, transitional housing, and emergency shelter; and WHEREAS, to satisfy LHTF application threshold requirements the City of Salinas (“City”) proposes to establish a Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund; and WHEREAS, per HCD LHTF Application requirements, the City intends to establish a Salinas LHTF account fund prior to submission and appropriate $500,000 from the Housing Production Fund CIP # 9021, $500,000 of General Funds, and $20,000 of SB2 PLHA funds as its applicable match and initial operating revenue; and
WHEREAS, the City intends to commit the appraised values of its 34-38 Soledad St., 37- 39 Soledad St., 921 E. Market St., and 115-151 Division St properties and up to an additional $80,000 of SB2 PLHA funds as additional required Salinas LHTF assets and operating revenue; and
WHEREAS, the City intends to submit its LHTF Program Application to HCD no later than May 17, 2023.
2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council authorizes the establishment of a Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council authorizes establishment of a Salinas LHTF fund with revenue and expenditure accounts to include the pre-application appropriation from the Housing Production Fund CIP #9021 ($500,000), General Funds ($500,000), and SB2 PLHA ($20,000) as required match and operating revenues; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council authorizes the commitment of nine (9) City-owned properties at 921 E. Market St., an easement and 115, 123, 137, 145, 151 Division St., and 37-39 and 34-38 Soledad St. as Salinas LHTF match assets; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council authorizes submittal of a Local Housing Trust Fund Application to the California Department of Housing and Community Development, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council authorizes the City Manager, or designee, to execute all applicable forms, agreements, grant-related documents, and subsequent amendments as needed.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 2
nd day of May 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
_____________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
1 Resolution Number: ________
City of Salinas

AUTHORIZING RESOLUTION
A necessary quorum and majority of the council members of the City of Salinas, a municipality (“Applicant”), hereby consents to, adopts, and ratifies the following resolution:

A. WHEREAS, the State of California (State) Department of Housing and Community Development (“Department”) is authorized to provide up to $53 million under the Local Housing Trust Fund (“LHTF”) Program from the Veterans and Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2018 (Proposition 1) (as described in Health and Safety Code section 50842.2 et seq. (Chapter 365, Statutes of 2017 (SB 3)) (“Program”).

B. WHEREAS, the Department issued a Notice of Funding Availability (“NOFA”) dated 3/7/2023 under the LHTF Program;
C. WHEREAS, the City of Salinas is an eligible Local or Regional Housing Trust Fund applying to the Program to administer one or more eligible activities using Program Funds.

D. WHEREAS, the Department may approve funding allocations for the LHTF Program, subject to the terms and conditions of H&S Code Section 50842.2, the LHTF Program Guidelines, NOFA, Program requirements, the Standard Agreement and other related contracts between the Department and LHTF award recipients.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

1. If the City of Salinas (City) receives an award of LHTF funds from the Department pursuant to the above referenced LHTF NOFA, it represents and certifies that it will use all such funds on Eligible Projects in a manner consistent and in compliance with all applicable state and federal statutes, rules, regulations, and laws, including, without limitation, all rules and laws regarding the LHTF Program, as well as any and all contracts Applicant may have with the Department (“Eligible Project”).

2. The Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund is hereby authorized to act as the manager in connection with the Department's funds to Eligible Projects pursuant to the above described Notice of Funding Availability in an amount not to exceed the sum of $1,000,000 plus an amount equal to the appraised value of nine parcels (the "LHTF Award"). NOTE: Dollar amount must include amount used for administrative costs, pursuant to Section 105(b) of the Guidelines.

3. The City hereby agrees to match on a dollar-for-dollar basis the LHTF Award pursuant to Guidelines Section 104. The City hereby agrees to utilize matching finds on a dollar-for-dollar basis for the same Eligible Project for which Program Funds are used, as required by HSC Section 50843.5(c).

4. Pursuant to Attachment 1 and the Applicant’s certification in this resolution, the LHTF funds will be expended only for Eligible Projects and consistent with all program requirements. 2 5. Nonprofit Housing Trust Funds and Native American Tribe Housing Trust Funds agree to use Program Funds only for Eligible Projects located in cities and counties that submitted an adopted Housing Element that was found by the Department to be in compliance and that have submitted their Housing Element Annual Progress Report (APR) for the current year or prior year by the application due date.

6. The City shall be subject to the terms and conditions as specified in the Standard Agreement, H&S Section 50842.2 and LHTF Program Guidelines

7. The City Manager or designee is authorized to execute the LHTF Program Application, the LHTF Standard Agreement and any subsequent amendments or modifications thereto, as well as any other documents which are related to the Program or the LHTF Award to Applicant, as the Department may deem appropriate.

8. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution, and henceforth and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City of Salinas City Council this 2 nd day of May
2023, by the following vote:

AYES:____________ABSTENTIONS:_________NOES:_________ABSENT:________ Approving Officer: _________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor

CERTIFICATE OF THE ATTESTING OFFICER
The undersigned, Officer of Attesting, Patricia M. Barajas, does hereby attest and certify that the foregoing/attached Resolution is a true, full and correct copy of a resolution duly adopted at a meeting of the City of Salinas City Council which was duly convened and held on the date stated thereon, and that said document has not been amended, modified, repealed or rescinded since its date of adoption and is in full force and effect as of the date hereof.

ATTEST: __________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
3 Attachment 1
City of Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund Program
Expenditure Plan
The City of Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund commits to use Local Housing Trust Fund (“LHTF”) Program Funds and Matching Funds from the 2023 Notice of Funding Availability as follows:
 100% of Program Funds and Matching Funds received will be spent to provide construction/permanent financing loans at simple interest rates of no higher than three percent per annum with deferred payments based on residual receipts, for payment of predevelopment costs, acquisition, or construction of multifamily rental housing serving Lower-Income (80% of Area Median Income (“AMI”)), Very Low-Income (50% of AMI), and Extremely LowIncome Households (30% of AMI).  At least 30% of Program Funds and Matching Funds received will be spent on assistance to Extremely Low-Income Households.
 100% of Program Funds and Matching Funds received will be spent on loans for the new construction of multifamily rental housing developments with average household income restrictions of no more than 60% of AMI.
 No more than 5% of Program Funds and Matching Funds received will be spent on administrative expenses.

Unless expressly permitted otherwise by the State Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”), all activities and projects funded by the LHTF Program Funds and Matching Funds will be located within the City of Salinas.

The source of Matching Funds will be an allocation of Housing Production Fund CIP #9021 ($500,000), General Funds ($500,000), and nine (9) City-owned properties.

Page 1 of 6 ends

SALINAS LOCAL HOUSING TRUST FUND

PROGRAM GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS
Background
The City of Salinas (“City”) is forming a housing trust for the purposes of funding and financing the planning and construction of affordable housing serving extremely-low, very-low, low-, and moderate-income (collectively, “Low- and Moderate-Income”) households and homeless housing (e.g., emergency shelters, permanent supportive housing, transitional housing) in the City. These “Guidelines” provide parameters for the creation and operation of the housing trust.

The Salinas Local Housing Trust (SLHT) will be governed by a Board of Directors consisting of the members of the Salinas City Council. The Board of Directors is responsible for overseeing the activities of the SLHT and administration of the SLHT Fund (SLHTF). The SLHTF provides an ongoing funding source for affordable housing and homeless housing projects located in the City of Salinas.

Applicability
The Guidelines apply to funds that are allocated to the SLHTF – Fund or Account No. ______ and may be amended from time to time. Additional restrictions may apply to certain sources of funds.

Funding Sources & Availability
The City will provide funding available through various funding sources listed below. The SLHT will continuously seek additional capital from public and private sources. Awards will be sized based on number of eligible projects and available funds.  City of Salinas Housing Production Fund
 City of Salinas Measure E funds
 Permanent Local Housing Allocation funds
 Inclusionary Housing In-Lieu Fees
 Land owned by the City of Salinas
 Other sources (to be determined)
The City shall provide funding and support for the operations of the SLHT for a minimum of five years after the date of its first award of funds from the California Local Housing Trust Fund grant program.

Eligible Projects
Projects must be consistent with the SLHT’s purpose of supporting affordable housing. Eligible projects and activities include, but are not limited to, the following:
 Development of new affordable ownership and rental housing  Housing acquisition and/or rehabilitation that creates new or extends existing affordability covenants

Page 2 of 6 ends

 First-time homebuyer assistance
 Property acquisition for the purpose of housing development  Development of accessory dwelling units with affordability covenants  Housing rights education
 Tenant assistance for temporary housing
Projects must be located in the City of Salinas and must be supported by the Board of Directors in order to be eligible for funding.

Types of Assistance
The SLHT will provide financing for the planning and construction of Low- and Moderate-Income housing developments (including multifamily rental, ownership, and predevelopment) in the form of low-interest, deferred loans. The SLHT will provide financing for homeless housing projects, education, and tenant assistance in the form of grants. Assistance for other Eligible Projects (including first-time homebuyer assistance) may be provided as loans or grants. The SLHT may also provide assistance directly to homeowners or tenants.

Eligible Applicants
Eligible applicants include non-profit and for-profit organizations, joint ventures, or partnerships that serve the loan purpose. Applicants for new development, acquisition, or rehabilitation projects must demonstrate sufficient prior experience and current capacity in housing development and management to successfully secure financing and entitlements, construct, complete, and operate the proposed project. Applicants for homebuyer assistance programs, education, tenant assistance, or similar activities must demonstrate sufficient prior experience with and current capacity for the Eligible Project(s) for which they are applying.

Eligible Costs
Eligible Costs for development, predevelopment, acquisition, and rehabilitation include all reasonable and necessary costs associated with:
 Property acquisition (applicants are required to submit a recent appraisal of the project site and any existing improvements as part of the application)  Demolition
 On-site improvements
 Off-site utility connections
 Construction and rehabilitation
 Developing common areas and supportive service spaces serving the residents  Soft costs associated with the development and financing of the project (including environmental review costs)
 Reasonable developer fees
 Operating reserve
 Capitalized replacement reserve

Page 3 of 6 ends

 Relocation costs (Borrowers must provide a relocation plan acceptable to the City demonstrating relocation compliance prior to construction start) Applicants/borrowers must provide project budgets with sufficient itemized detail to evaluate whether the projected costs are sufficient and reasonable, and provide related documentation as needed. Prior to loan closing, the City will request and review documentation such as appraisals, cost estimates, contracts for professional services, and agreements covering reserves with regard to cost reasonableness. Proposed development costs must be sufficient to complete the project proposed and meet property standards, as applicable.

Eligible Costs for other types of Eligible Projects shall allocate no more than 10% of costs for program administration, outreach, and promotion. Applicants for homebuyer assistance programs, education, tenant assistance, or similar activities must demonstrate that at least 90% of program costs provide direct benefits to Low- and Moderate-Income households.

Minimum Affordability
The following minimum affordability requirements apply. The City may refuse to consider applications that cannot meet the following requirements:

1. 100% of SLHT assistance shall support households whose income does not exceed 150% of Area Median Income (AMI) or the creation or preservation of housing affordable to such households.

2. Due to the City’s location in a “high-cost area,” as defined by the Federal Housing Finance Agency and/or the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, these Guidelines define “moderate income” with a maximum of 150% of AMI.

3. SLHT may apply further restrictions based on the requirements of funding sources or programmatic considerations. Borrowers may provide units restricted at deeper levels of affordability than required by the SLHT.

4. Restricted rents will be set based on the rent limit for the applicable income level and unit size published by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC), regardless of whether the project includes tax credit financing.

5. Income and rent restrictions will apply for the full length of the loan term and regulatory agreement, surviving loan repayment.

Equal Housing Opportunity
All developments receiving SLHT funding from governmental revenue sources must comply with applicable Equal Housing Opportunity laws.
__________________________
The remaining portion of the Guidelines applies to the SLHT’s assistance for Projects involving predevelopment, development, and acquisition/rehabilitation of affordable housing. All

Page 4 of 6 ends

requirements apply to multifamily housing Projects. Some may not apply to ownership housing Projects.

Occupancy Requirements
The City’s regulatory agreement or another document will establish occupancy requirements that restrict occupancy of subsidized units to households that meet income and other eligibility criteria.

Annual Recertification of Tenant Income and City Monitoring For multifamily rental housing, borrowers are required to re-examine tenant incomes annually to ensure that tenants continue to meet the income requirements of this and other applicable funding programs. Rent schedules and utility allowances, including any increases, are subject to restrictions in the loan documents. Borrowers will be required to report on compliance with income and rent restrictions on an annual basis, and to make records available for on-site monitoring.

The loan documents will address how over-income tenants will be handled, consistent with the project’s funding sources. An annual compliance monitoring fee will be negotiated during underwriting.

City Loan Terms and Affordability Period
When the SLHT provides assistance in the form of a loan, the loan will be typically structured as a residual receipts loan, except as otherwise approved by the SLHT.

The SLHT can fund three types of loans: predevelopment (short term), acquisition / construction (long term with short term requirements), and development loans (long term). Any requests for forgiveness of these loans will be reviewed and decided by the SLHT Board of Directors upon a recommendation from the staff.

Development loans will be for a term of fifty-five (55) years from the date of Certificate of Occupancy, except as approved by the SLHT. At the time a development proposal is submitted, the applicant must demonstrate that it has, and will maintain until the land is acquired, site control of the property for which funding is being requested. Examples of site control include fee ownership, an option to purchase or enter into a long-term lease dependent only on factors within the applicant’s control, and a long-term lease.

Affordability requirements will be recorded with a Regulatory Agreement executed at closing.

Except as approved by the SLHT Board of Directors, all projects shall be required to maintain the project’s affordability for the term of the restrictive covenant, regardless of whether the loan is fully repaid.

Interest Rate
3% simple interest unless otherwise determined during underwriting.

Page 5 of 6 ends

Origination Fee
An origination fee of 1% may be assessed.

Debt Coverage Ratio
Generally, between 1.10:1 and 1.20:1 for the first year of stabilized operations, unless a senior lender has a higher requirement.

Cash Flow
Borrowers will submit a proforma with their applications showing at least 35 years of cash flow and positive cash flow for at least a 15-year period.

Operating Expenses
Total Operating Expenses shall not be less than those specifically listed in California Code of Regulations, Title 4, Section 10327 as minimum Operating Expenses. An operating reserve shall be funded in an amount equal to three months of estimated operating expenses and debt service under stabilized occupancy. Projects utilizing tax credits must satisfy the operating cost minimums published by CTCAC for the Central Coast Region and the applicable project type and year. In the event that the equity investor and the permanent lender are in place and provide evidence that they have agreed to lesser operating expenses, the SLHT Board of Directors may agree to such lesser operating expenses.

HCD Funded Projects
If HCD funding is utilized in combination with SLHT funding, such as with Local Housing Trust Fund (LHTF) program, the SLHT and Borrower will comply with all HCD regulations and requirements.

Repayment and Monitoring
The loan will be typically structured as a residual receipts loan except as otherwise approved by the SLHT. The loan for the project will be repaid from the Net Operating Income (NOI), if any.

Borrowers will be required to submit rent rolls and operating expenses within one hundred and twenty (120) days after the close of each calendar year.

Due Diligence
Borrowers will be asked to provide due diligence with their applications which may include but is not limited to the following:
 Preliminary Title Report
 Appraisal
 Phase I Environmental Report
 Preliminary development estimate and narrative
 Proposed sources and uses

Page 6 of 6 ends

Disbursement of Funds
Loan funds will be made available at the closing of the predevelopment, the construction, and/or the permanent loans.

Program Documents
Loans will be provided in the form of a Promissory Note, secured by a deed of trust. Regulatory Agreements will be recorded to secure affordability covenants. Borrower and SLHT will enter into a development agreement for construction loans.

Subordination
The City will not subordinate its affordability covenants (typically the regulatory agreement) to the deeds of trust securing other lenders’ financing, with the exception of State, Federal, and County funding sources (subject to City approval and to the ratio of debt to total development cost). The City Manager may review exceptions. The affordability covenants control, among other things, the maximum income of tenants of project units, and the maximum rents allowed for project units. The City deed of trust may be subordinated to other financing on a case-by-case basis.

Exceptions to Underwriting Guidelines
The SLHT may, at its sole discretion, approve a loan that does not conform with the above underwriting guidelines if approving the loan will provide significant benefits to the local community or SLHT. Each loan request is evaluated on its own merits. The SLHT has the authority to approve a loan with one or more waivers and/or exceptions to these guidelines. For development underwriting considerations not covered by these Guidelines (including, but not limited to, replacement reserves, capitalized operating reserves, projected vacancy rates, construction contingency, other lender requirements, and leasehold security requirements), the SLHT will follow the California Uniform Multifamily Regulations.

For additional information, please contact the Housing Trust Fund at:
______________(Name), ______________________ (Title)
City of Salinas Local Housing Trust
______________________ (email address)
2023

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

LOCAL HOUSING TRUST FUND APPLICATION
Megan Hunter, Community Development Director
Community Development Department
May 2, 2023
Background
HCD 2023 LHTF NOFA
o $53 million statewide
o Amounts of $500,00 - $5,000,000
o New and existing LHTFs
o Local and Regional LHTFs
o Requires dollar-for-dollar match
• Non-HCD funds and property assets
o Requires 5 years of ‘ongoing operating
revenue’
LHTF Program Background
Eligible Projects and Activities
o New affordable ownership and rental
housing
o Housing acquisition and/or
rehabilitation
o First-time homebuyer assistance
o Property acquisition for housing
development
o ADUs with affordability covenants
o Housing rights education
o Tenant assistance for temporary
housing
Discussion
• Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund (SLHTF)
o Fund and finance the planning and
construction of affordable housing
o City-wide
o Focus on included match properties
• Board of Directors = City Council
o Responsible for general oversight and
consideration of emerging projects and
developments
• SLHTF Guidelines & Standards
o Required application threshold
Discussion
Proposed Activities
• Affordable Multifamily Rental Housing
o Predevelopment
o Development
o Acquisition
o Rehabilitation
o Preservation
Resident Income Thresholds
• Extremely-low
• Very-low
• Low
• Moderate
Proposed Local Housing Trust Fund Match Assets
Funds: Allocation Amount
General Funds - Housing Production Fund (CIP 9021) $ 500,000 General Funds $ 500,000
Owned Property Assets:
921 E. Market Street TBD
appraisals in-progress, estimated to
be +/- $550,000 - $650,000
115 Division Street
123 Division Street
137 Division Street
145 Division Street
Easement on Division Street
151 Division Street
37-39 Soledad Street $140,000
34-38 Soledad Street $300,000
Operating Revenue (5 years of incremental funding)
Permanent Local Housing Allocation (SB2 PLHA) $100,000
Total Local Matching Funds & Assets TBD +/- $2,100,000
SLHTF Program Application Timeline
HCD
NOFA
Release
March 7,
2023

HCD LHTF
Application
Release
April 6,
2023
HCD Opens
LHTF
Application
Portal
April 19,
2023
City HLUC
Consideration
of LHTF
Application
April 25, 2023
City Council
Consideration
of LHTF
Application
May 2, 2023
Internal
transfer
match
assets to
new SLHTF
account
May 3-5,
2023
Application
Deadline
May 17,
2023
Award
Notifications
August 2023
CEQA Consideration
The City of Salinas has determined that the proposed action is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378) Strategic Plan Goals & Strategies
Fiscal Impact
 Housing/Affordable Housing
 Effective and Culturally Responsive Government
 Dollar-for-dollar match – funds and/or assets
 $500,000 of General Funds
 $500,000 of Housing Production Fund (CIP #9021)
 9 City-owned Parcels
 Potential HCD LHTF award of $2,000,000
Recommended Motion
A motion to approve a Resolution authorizing:

1. establishment of a Salinas Local Housing Trust Fund; and

2. establishment of a Salinas LHTF account fund with revenue and expenditure accounts to include the pre-application allocation of Housing Production Fund CIP #9021 ($500,000) and General Funds ($500,000) as required local match and SB2 PLHA ($100,000) as required, incremental operating revenue; and

3. commitment of nine (9) City-owned properties at 921 E. Market St., an easement and 115, 123, 137, 145, 151 Division St. and 37-39 and 34-38 Soledad St. as Salinas LHTF match assets; and

4. submittal of a Local Housing Trust Fund Program Application to HCD; and

5. the City Manager, or designee, to execute all applicable forms, grant-related documents, and subsequent amendments as needed.

Questions & Comments
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-256, Version: 1
Adoption of the Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update Approve a Resolution adopting the Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update and related Appendices.

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 4/26/2023
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: May 2, 2023
DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS
FROM: DAVID JACOBS, PE, PLS, DIRECTOR
BY: BRIAN FRUS, PE, SENIOR ENGINEER
TITLE: ADOPTION OF THE SALINAS SANITARY SEWER MASTER

PLAN UPDATE
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

A motion to approve a resolution adopting the Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update and related Appendices.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The Draft Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update presents the findings from the development of a calibrated sewer model to create a Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Program. This Program will assist the City in prioritizing both existing and future sewer collection system needs through repair, rehabilitation, replacement, or new sanitary sewer facilities.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Salinas owns and operates a municipal sanitary sewer collection system for the residents and businesses within its service area. The City periodically conducts studies to plan for current and future sanitary sewage collection needs. In February 2021, the City authorized an agreement with Wallace Group to perform the Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan (SSMP) Update (Resolution No. 22051). This report presents an overview of the findings from the Draft SSMP which is a comprehensive update to the City’s 2011 Sewer Master Plan.

The City’s current wastewater service area incorporates approximately 12,430 acres, with over 280 miles of gravity sewer mains and 11 lift stations that convey sewer flow to the wastewater treatment plant, operated by Monterey One Water. The preparation of the Draft Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update included document review and data collection, field survey of 689 sewer manholes, comprehensive lift station assessment, in-line sewer flow monitoring, wastewater flow projections, development and calibration of a hydraulic sewer model to identify collection system deficiencies for existing and future build-out conditions, and development of a Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Program.

Page | 2
Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Program
The Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Program is separated into existing and future projects.

The existing projects are based on system hydraulic deficiencies, operation and maintenance repairs identified by City staff, and lift station upgrades. These projects range from $98-$129 million and include six (6) projects identified as hydraulic deficiencies, twenty-one (21) operation and maintenance repair projects, an ongoing CCTV program, inflow and infiltration evaluation, brick manhole coating/replacement and flushing inlet inspection/replacement. Projects are ranked based on overflow to a water body, hydraulic capacity, maintenance hot spot, and community impact. The estimated cost also includes over $38 million in lift station upgrades that were identified through assessments of each individual location.

Future sewer projects were identified based on impact of future developments per the City’s General Plan. Nine (9) projects were identified as hydraulic deficiencies, with project costs totaling $48.5 million. The timing of these future projects is dependent on when future developments connect to the City’s sewer collection system. These improvements are recommended to be completed prior to or as a part of a development project comes online.

Next Steps
The next step for this Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update is to develop an Impact Fee Nexus Study and Sanitary Sewer Rate Study based on the findings from the Draft Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update. These reports will be prepared under separate cover.

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) (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378).

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

The proposed project and agreement meet the City Council’s Strategic Plan Goals of Infrastructure and Environmental Sustainability and Economic Development.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

Preparation of the SSMP has relied on coordination between the Wastewater, GIS, and Water, Waste and Energy (WWE) divisions in Public Works and the Community Development Department. WWE has coordinated the overall execution of the SSMP, with GIS supporting database update and the Wastewater Division providing valuable input to the SSMP from an operations perspective. Update of the General Plan has fed the development of the SSMP sewer model. The model may be adjusted as needed following completion of the General Plan Update.

Page | 3
FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

Funds for the preparation of the SSMP have already been appropriated. Thus, there are no direct fiscal impacts from the adoption of this report.

Implementation of the recommended capital improvement projects listed in the SSMP which address existing projects, lift station upgrades and improvements needed for future development total some $147 million to $178 million. The current revenue and capital reserves available in the Sanitary Sewer Enterprise Fund are insufficient to cover expenses of this magnitude. The City’s sewer rates were last increased in 2016 and have remained relatively low. The proposed Sanitary Sewer Rate Study will examine capital funding needs identified in the SSMP while minimizing the annual impact on ratepayers. City staff will work closely with the chosen consultant to evaluate financial and rate alternatives, gain input from rate payers, and build consensus for any recommended rate adjustments.

ATTACHMENTS:

Resolution
Final Draft - Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update Appendices - Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
RESOLUTION NO. _______(N.C.S.)
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY COUNCIL’S ADOPTION OF THE

SALINAS SANITARY SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
WHEREAS, the City of Salinas owns and operates a municipal sanitary sewer collection system for the residents and businesses within its service area and periodically conducts studies to plan for current and future sanitary sewage collection needs; and WHEREAS, on February 16, 2021, the City authorized an agreement with Wallace Group to perform he Sanitary Sewer Master Plan (SSMP) Update (Resolution No. 22051); and WHEREAS, the SSMP Update will serve to assist the City in prioritizing both existing and future sewer collection system needs through repair, rehabilitation, replacement, or implementation of new facilities; and
WHEREAS, the information and findings from the SSMP Update will assist in the development of an Impact Fee Nexus Study and a Sanitary Sewer Rate Study based on Draft Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update; and
WHEREAS, the City of Salinas has determined the SSMP Update is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALINAS, that the Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update and related appendices attached hereto as Attachment A are hereby adopted.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 2nd day of May 2023, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
_______________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
Final Draft
City of Salinas
Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
City of Salinas
Final Draft Sanitary Sewer
Master Plan Update
April 2023
Submitted by:
201 John Street. STE H
Salinas, CALIFORNIA 93901
T 831 772-5260
www.wallacegroup.us

C E R T I F I C A T I O N
In accordance with the provisions of Section 6735 of the Business and Professions Code of the State of California, this report was prepared by or under the direction of the following Civil Engineer, licensed in the State of California:

ENGINEER IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE:
_______ _____________________________________________________________________ Kari Wagner, PE C66026 Expiration: 6/30/2024 Date

DRAFT FOR REVIEW
Page i

T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
E X E C U T I V E S U M M A R Y .........................................................................................................................................1-1 C H A P T E R 1 I N T R O D U C T I O N .............................................................................................................................1-1 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ....................................................................................................................................................1-1 AUTHORIZATION AND SCOPE OF WORK................................................................................................................................1-1 Task 1. Document Review and Data Collection .................................................................................................................1-1 Task 2. Field Effort & GIS Update.......................................................................................................................................1-1 Task 3. Wastewater Flow Characteristics and Projections ................................................................................................1-2 Task 4. Develop and Calibrate Sewer Model .....................................................................................................................1-2 Task 5. Develop Capital Improvement Program ................................................................................................................1-3 Task 6. Develop Capital Improvement Program ................................................................................................................1-3 Task 7. Draft and Final Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update.............................................................................................1-3 C H A P T E R 2 L A N D U S E A N D P O P U L A T I O N ................................................................................................2-1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................................................2-1 Existing Wastewater Service Area .....................................................................................................................................2-1 Study Area .........................................................................................................................................................................2-1 LAND USE...............................................................................................................................................................................2-2 Land Use: Existing Wastewater Service Area.....................................................................................................................2-2 Study Area: Future Land Use .............................................................................................................................................2-3 POPULATION .........................................................................................................................................................................2-7 Existing Population ............................................................................................................................................................2-7 Population Densities..........................................................................................................................................................2-7 Future Population ..............................................................................................................................................................2-8 C H A P T E R 3 C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M O V E R V I E W ........................................................................................3-1 COLLECTION SYSTEM OVERVIEW ..........................................................................................................................................3-1 Gravity Sewer Mains..........................................................................................................................................................3-1 Manholes ..........................................................................................................................................................................3-2 Lift Stations........................................................................................................................................................................3-3 Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS) .....................................................................................................................................3-4 Inverted Siphons ................................................................................................................................................................3-4 Industrial Wastewater Diversion .......................................................................................................................................3-4 Reclamation Ditch Diversion..............................................................................................................................................3-4 HIGH PRIORITY AREAS ...........................................................................................................................................................3-5 City Manhole Monitors......................................................................................................................................................3-5 2017 Mark Thomas CCTV Evaluation.................................................................................................................................3-7 O&M Repairs .....................................................................................................................................................................3-7 C H A P T E R 4 W A S T E W A T E R F L O W S ................................................................................................................4-1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................................................4-1 WASTEWATER FLOW MONITORING......................................................................................................................................4-1 Flow Meters.......................................................................................................................................................................4-1 Flow Monitoring Summary ................................................................................................................................................4-2 SALINAS AREA PUMP STATION AVERAGE DAILY FLOWS........................................................................................................4-5 WATER USE DATA..................................................................................................................................................................4-6 EXISTING WASTEWATER FLOWS ...........................................................................................................................................4-6 PEAKING FACTOR ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................................................4-9 Average Daily Flow (ADF) ..................................................................................................................................................4-9 Page ii
Maximum Day Dry Weather Flow (MDDWF).....................................................................................................................4-9 Peak Hour Dry Weather Flow (PHDWF).............................................................................................................................4-9 Peak Hour Wet Weather Flow (PHWWF) ..........................................................................................................................4-9 INFILTRATION AND INFLOW................................................................................................................................................4-10 Historical Rainfall Dependent Infiltration and Inflow ......................................................................................................4-10 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan RDII Peak Unit Flow Rates .........................................................................................4-11 FUTURE WASTEWATER FLOWS ...........................................................................................................................................4-13 C H A P T E R 5 L I F T S T A T I O N E V A L U A T I O N ...................................................................................................5-1 LIFT STATION BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................................5-1 PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION.........................................................................................................................................................5-3 Airport (Moffett) Lift Station..............................................................................................................................................5-3 Carpenter Hall Lift Station .................................................................................................................................................5-4 De La Torre Lift Station ......................................................................................................................................................5-4 Harkins Road Lift Station ...................................................................................................................................................5-5 Lake Street Lift Station.......................................................................................................................................................5-5 Las Casitas Lift Station.......................................................................................................................................................5-6 Mill Lake Lift Station ..........................................................................................................................................................5-6 Santa Rita Lift Station........................................................................................................................................................5-7 Spicer Lift Station...............................................................................................................................................................5-7 TP2 Lift Station...................................................................................................................................................................5-8 Vista Nueva Lift Station .....................................................................................................................................................5-8 Harris Road Lift Station......................................................................................................................................................5-9 HYDRAULIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION – EXISTING CONDITIONS...................................................................................5-10 Force Main Hydraulic Evaluation.....................................................................................................................................5-10 Existing Lift Station Inflow ...............................................................................................................................................5-13 Pumping Capacity Evaluation..........................................................................................................................................5-13 Wet Well Capacity Evaluation .........................................................................................................................................5-16 Emergency Response Time Evaluation ............................................................................................................................5-21 HYDRAULIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION - FUTURE CONDITIONS .....................................................................................5-26 Future Wastewater Flows and Recommendations..........................................................................................................5-26 Airport (Moffett) Lift Station............................................................................................................................................5-26 Carpenter Hall Lift Station ...............................................................................................................................................5-26 De La Torre Lift Station ....................................................................................................................................................5-26 Harkins Road Lift Station .................................................................................................................................................5-27 Lake Street Lift Station.....................................................................................................................................................5-27 Las Casitas Lift Station.....................................................................................................................................................5-27 Mill Lake Lift Station ........................................................................................................................................................5-27 Santa Rita Lift Station......................................................................................................................................................5-27 Spicer Lift Station.............................................................................................................................................................5-28 TP2 Lift Station.................................................................................................................................................................5-29 Vista Nueva Lift Station ...................................................................................................................................................5-29 SITE INVESTIGATION SUMMARY & OVERALL RECOMMENDATIONS ...................................................................................5-31 Airport (Moffett)..............................................................................................................................................................5-32 Carpenter Hall..................................................................................................................................................................5-33 De La Torre.......................................................................................................................................................................5-34 Harkins Road....................................................................................................................................................................5-35 Lake Street.......................................................................................................................................................................5-36 Las Casitas .......................................................................................................................................................................5-37 Mill Lake ........................................................................................................................................................................5-38 Santa Rita ........................................................................................................................................................................5-39 Spicer ........................................................................................................................................................................5-40 TP2 ........................................................................................................................................................................5-41 Page iii
Vista Nueva......................................................................................................................................................................5-42 C H A P T E R 6 C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M A N A L Y S I S ..........................................................................................6-1 INTRODUCTION.....................................................................................................................................................................6-1 COLLECTION SYSTEM ANALYSIS CRITERIA .............................................................................................................................6-1 COLLECTION SYSTEM MODEL DEVELOPMENT ......................................................................................................................6-2 Flow Allocation ..................................................................................................................................................................6-2 Model Calibration ..............................................................................................................................................................6-3 System Conditions Analyzed ..............................................................................................................................................6-3 COLLECTION SYSTEM MODEL RESULTS – EXISTING FLOW CONDITIONS ...............................................................................6-4 Deficient System Capacity..................................................................................................................................................6-4 Low Pipe Velocity ...............................................................................................................................................................6-7 COLLECTION SYSTEM MODEL RESULTS – FUTURE FLOW CONDITIONS .................................................................................6-7 Deficient System Capacity..................................................................................................................................................6-7 C H A P T E R 7 C A P I T A L I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M ...................................................................................7-1 BASIS OF CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM COSTS ...........................................................................................................7-1 Sewer Main Upgrade Unit Costs........................................................................................................................................7-1 CIP RANKING..........................................................................................................................................................................7-3 Lift Station CIPs..................................................................................................................................................................7-3 TIMING OF RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS......................................................................................................................7-4

A P P E N D I C E S
APPENDIX A: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT TABLES
APPENDIX B: 2017 MARK THOMAS CCTV SANITARY SEWER ANALYSIS APPENDIX C: CITY SEWER REPAIR ATLAS MAP
APPENDIX D: LIFT STATION PUMP CURVES
APPENDIX E: FRM LIFT STATION CONDITION ASSESSMENT
APPENDIX F: EXHIBIT 1 EXISTING AND FUTURE CIPS
APPENDIX G: SEWER MODEL RESULTS
Page iv

L I S T O F T A B L E S
TABLE 2-1 CITY EXISTING LAND USE .......................................................................................................................... 2-2 TABLE 2-2. COUNTY BORONDA AREA EXISTING LAND USE ....................................................................................... 2-3 TABLE 2-3 SPECIFIC PLAN DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY ................................................................................................ 2-5 TABLE 2-4 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY........................................................................................................... 2-6 Table 2-5. RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES ............................................................................................................................ 2-7 TABLE 3-1. GRAVITY SEWER INVENTORY BY DIAMETER............................................................................................ 3-2 TABLE 3-2. MANHOLE MONITORING LOCATIONS ..................................................................................................... 3-6 TABLE 3-3. PACP AND MACP GRADING TABLE .......................................................................................................... 3-7 TABLE 3-4. O&M REPAIRS .......................................................................................................................................... 3-8 TABLE 3-5. CCTV COSTS ........................................................................................................................................... 3-10 TABLE 3-6. ANNUAL CCTV PROGRAM...................................................................................................................... 3-10 TABLE 4-1. FLOW MONITORING SUMMARY.............................................................................................................. 4-3 TABLE 4-2. SAPS DOMESTIC WASTEWATER FLOWS .................................................................................................. 4-5 TABLE 4-3. WATER USE .............................................................................................................................................. 4-6 TABLE 4-4. EXISTING FLOW FACTORS ........................................................................................................................ 4-6 TABLE 4-5. EXISTING AVERAGE DAILY FLOWS BY SEWERSHED ................................................................................. 4-7 TABLE 4-6. EXISTING FLOW FACTORS ........................................................................................................................ 4-7 TABLE 4-7. PEAK WET WEATHER FLOW FOR 10-YEAR, 6-HOUR STORM................................................................. 4-12 TABLE 4-8. ADDITIONAL FUTURE AVERAGE DAILY FLOWS BY GROWTH AREA ....................................................... 4-13 TABLE 4-9. EXISTING AND FUTURE FLOW SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 4-13 Table 5-1. LIFT STATION SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 5-2 TABLE 5-2. FORCE MAIN EVALUATION SUMMARY.................................................................................................. 5-12 TABLE 5-3. EXISTING LIFT STATION INFLOW BY LAND USE...................................................................................... 5-14 TABLE 5-4. LIFT STATION FLOW COMPARISON SUMMARY ..................................................................................... 5-15 TABLE 5-5. WET WELL CYCLE TIMES ........................................................................................................................ 5-20 TABLE 5-6. LIFT STATION EMERGENCY RESPONSE TIMES ....................................................................................... 5-25 TABLE 5-7. LIFT STATION FUTURE FLOW SUMMARY............................................................................................... 5-30 TABLE 5-8. SUMMARY OF LIFT STATION UPGRADES BASED UPON VISUAL INSPECTION........................................ 5-31 TABLE 6-1. HYDRAULIC CRITERIA FOR EXISTING SYSTEMS ........................................................................................ 6-2 TABLE 7-1. SEWER MAIN CONSTRUCTION UPGRADE UNIT COSTS............................................................................ 7-2 TABLE 7-2. EXISTING HYDRAULIC AND MAINTENANCE REPAIR CIP RANKING MATRIX............................................. 7-5 TABLE 7-3. EXISTING LIFT STATION CIP RANKING MATRIX ........................................................................................ 7-7 TABLE 7-4. CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP).................................................... 7-8 TABLE 7-5. CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING LIFT STATIONS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) ......................... 7-12 TABLE 7-6. CITY OF SALINAS FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP).................................................... 7-13 Page v

L I S T O F F I G U R E S
FIGURE 2-1: EXISTING SEWER SERVICE AREA ............................................................................................................ 2-9 FIGURE 2-2: EXISTING LAND USE ............................................................................................................................. 2-10 FIGURE 2-3: CITY GROWTH AREAS........................................................................................................................... 2-11 FIGURE 2-4: FOCUSED GROWTH AREAS LAND USE ................................................................................................. 2-12 FIGURE 2-5: FUTURE GROWTH AREAS LAND USE ................................................................................................... 2-13 FIGURE 2-6: NORTH BORONDA FGA SPECIFIC PLANS.............................................................................................. 2-14 FIGURE 3-1: EXISTING PIPE DIAMETER FIGURE 3-2: BRICK MANHOLES & FLUSHING INLETS ................................. 3-11 FIGURE 3-3: LIFT STATIONS AND SIPHONS .............................................................................................................. 3-13 FIGURE 3-4: CITY MANHOLE MONITORING LOCATIONS ......................................................................................... 3-14 FIGURE 3-5: CCTV ANALYSIS FINDINGS.................................................................................................................... 3-15 FIGURE 4-1: FLOW MONITORING LOCATIONS & SEWERSHEDS .............................................................................. 4-15 FIGURE 4-2: POPULATION DENSITY HEATMAP........................................................................................................ 4-16 FIGURE 4-3: DIURNAL CURVES................................................................................................................................. 4-17 FIGURE 4-4: SEWERSHED 1 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-18 FIGURE 4-5: SEWERSHED 2 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-19 FIGURE 4-6: SEWERSHED 3 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-20 FIGURE 4-7: SEWERSHED 4 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-21 FIGURE 4-8: SEWERSHED 5 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-22 FIGURE 4-9: SEWERSHED 6 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ........................................................................... 4-23 FIGURE 4-10: SEWERSHED 7 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ......................................................................... 4-24 FIGURE 4-11: SEWERSHED 8 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ......................................................................... 4-25 FIGURE 4-12: SEWERSHED 9 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ......................................................................... 4-26 FIGURE 4-13: SEWERSHED 10 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-27 FIGURE 4-14: SEWERSHED 11 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-28 FIGURE 4-15: SEWERSHED 12 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-29 FIGURE 4-16: SEWERSHED 13 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-30 FIGURE 4-17: SEWERSHED 14 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-31 FIGURE 4-18: SEWERSHED 15 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-32 FIGURE 4-19: SEWERSHED 16 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-33 FIGURE 4-20: SEWERSHED 17 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-34 FIGURE 4-21: SEWERSHED 18 AVERAGE DAILY MONITORED FLOW ....................................................................... 4-35 FIGURE 4-22: FEBRUARY 2017 DRY WEATHER VS WET WEATHER FLOW ............................................................... 4-36 FIGURE 5-1: EXISTING LIFT STATION TRIBUTARY AREA MAP .................................................................................. 5-43 FIGURE 5-2: FUTURE LIFT STATION TRIBUTARY AREA MAP .................................................................................... 5-44 FIGURE 6-1: WASTEWATER MODEL OVERVIEW MAP ............................................................................................. 6-10 FIGURE 6-2: FUTURE FLOW ALLOCATIONS .............................................................................................................. 6-11 FIGURE 6-3: EXISTING CAPACITY DURING PEAK CONDITIONS................................................................................. 6-12 FIGURE 6-4: EXISTING SEWER UPGRADES ............................................................................................................... 6-13 FIGURE 6-5: LOW PIPE VELOCITIES DURING ADF .................................................................................................... 6-14 FIGURE 6-6: FUTURE CAPACITY DURING PEAK CONDITIONS .................................................................................. 6-15 FIGURE 6-7: FUTURE PIPE UPGRADES ..................................................................................................................... 6-16 FIGURE 7-1 EXISTING CIP: CESAR CHAVEZ PARK...................................................................................................... 7-15 FIGURE 7-2 EXISTING CIP: UPSTREAM TP2 DIVERSION ........................................................................................... 7-16 FIGURE 7-3 EXISTING CIP: NORTHRIDGE MALL ....................................................................................................... 7-17 FIGURE 7-4 EXISTING CIP: CHEROKEE DRIVE ........................................................................................................... 7-18 FIGURE 7-5 EXISTING CIP: NOICE DRIVE/TYLER STREET .......................................................................................... 7-19 FIGURE 7-6 EXISTING CIP: NATIVIDAD ROAD OR ALTERNATIVE NATIVIDAD CONSOLIDATION............................... 7-20 FIGURE 7-7 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): LAKE STREET LIFT STATION .............................................................. 7-21 FIGURE 7-8 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): SANTA RITA LIFT STATION................................................................ 7-22 FIGURE 7-9 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): SPICER LIFT STATION........................................................................ 7-23 Page vi
FIGURE 7-10 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): MILL LAKE LIFT STATION ................................................................ 7-24 FIGURE 7-11 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): CARPENTER HALL LIFT STATION..................................................... 7-25 FIGURE 7-12 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): DE LA TORRE LIFT STATION............................................................ 7-26 FIGURE 7-13 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): VISTA NUEVA LIFT STATION ........................................................... 7-27 FIGURE 7-14 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): HARKINS LIFT STATION................................................................... 7-28 FIGURE 7-15 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): LAS CASITAS LIFT STATION............................................................. 7-29 FIGURE 7-16 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): TP2 LIFT STATION........................................................................... 7-30 FIGURE 7-17 EXISTING CIP (BY LIFT STATION): AIRPORT LIFT STATION................................................................... 7-31 FIGURE 7-18 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): CONTROLLER UPGRADES AND STANDARDIZATION .............................. 7-32 FIGURE 7-19 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): INSTALL EMERGENCY BYPASS AND WASHDOWN WATER .................... 7-33 FIGURE 7-20 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): SAFETY/FALLING HAZARD CONCERN..................................................... 7-34 FIGURE 7-21 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): GENERATOR REPLACEMENT.................................................................. 7-35 FIGURE 7-22 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): ONSITE STANDBY GENERATOR.............................................................. 7-36 FIGURE 7-23 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): POWER RECEPTACLE ............................................................................. 7-37 FIGURE 7-24 EXISTING CIP (BY PROJECT): PAINTING/COATING MAINTENANCE..................................................... 7-38 FIGURE 7-25 FUTURE CIP: SAN JUAN GRADE........................................................................................................... 7-39 FIGURE 7-26 FUTURE CIP: NORTH DAVIS ROAD ...................................................................................................... 7-40 FIGURE 7-27 FUTURE CIP: WEST LAUREL DRIVE ...................................................................................................... 7-41 FIGURE 7-28 FUTURE CIP: VICTOR STREET .............................................................................................................. 7-42 FIGURE 7-29 FUTURE CIP: FREEDOM PARKWAY ..................................................................................................... 7-43 FIGURE 7-30 FUTURE CIP: NATIVIDAD CREEK PARK ................................................................................................ 7-44 FIGURE 7-31 FUTURE CIP: EAST ALISAL STREET....................................................................................................... 7-45 FIGURE 7-32 FUTURE CIP: ABBOTT STREET ............................................................................................................. 7-46 FIGURE 7-33 FUTURE CIP: SOUTH SANBORN ROAD ................................................................................................ 7-47 Page vii

L I S T O F A C R O N Y M S
ABS Acrylonitrile Butadiene Styrene
ADF Average Daily Flow
AMBAG Association of Monterey Bay Area Government
CASP Central Area Specific Plan
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
cfs Cubic feet per second
CIMIS California Irrigation Management Information System CIP Capital Improvements Project
City City of Salinas
CIWQS California Integrated Water Quality System Project County Monterey County
d/D Depth over Diameter
DOF Department of Finance
du/ac Dwelling Units per Acreage
EDE Economic Development Element
E.I.T. Engineer in Training
EIR Environmental Impact Reports
ENR Engineering New Record
ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute
FAR Floor Area Ratio
FGA Future Growth Area
FOG Fats, Oils, and Grease
FPS Feet per Second
FRM Fluid Resource Management
Ft Feet
Ft/Sec Feet per Second
GIS Geographic Information System
GISP Geographic Information System Professional
gpapd Gallons per acre per day
GPD Gallons Per Day
GPM Gallons Per Minute
HDPE High Density Polyethylene
I/I Infiltration and Inflow
IWCCS Industrial Waste Water Collection and Conveyance System LAFCO Monterey County Local Area Formation Commission
LF Linear Feet
MACP Manhole Assessment and Certification Program
MDDWF Maximum Day Dry Weather Flow
MGD Million Gallons Per Day
min Minute
MRWPCA Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency M1W Monterey One Water
NA Not Applicable
NAD North American Datum
NASSCO National Association of Sewer Service Companies
Page viii
NAVD North American Vertical Datum
ND Negative Declarations
O&M Operations and Maintenance
PACP Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program
P.E. Professional Engineer
P.L.S. Professional Land Surveyor
PF Peaking Factor
PHDWF Peak Hour Dry Weather Flow
PHWWF Peak Hour Wet Weather Flow
PVC Polyvinyl Chloride
RDII Rainfall-Dependent Infiltration and Inflow
RDWWTP Regional Domestic Wastewater Treatment Plant
SAPS Salinas Area Pump Station
S.F. Square Foot
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SSMPU Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
SSO Sanitary Sewer Overflow
US3 USCubed
VCP Vitrified Clay Pipe
VFD Variable Frequency Drive
WASP West Area Specific Plan
w/ With
1-1
CH AP TER 1

IN TROD UC TION
This report presents the Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update (SSMPU) for the City of Salinas (City). Preparation of the SSMPU will assist the City of Salinas in prioritizing both existing and future collection system needs through repair, rehabilitation, replacement, or new facilities.

E N V I R O N M E N T A L R E V I E W
In accordance with Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Chapter 3, Article 18 (Statutory Exemptions), this SSMPU is considered a planning study and therefore adoption of this document is exempt from the requirements to prepare Environmental Impact Reports (EIR) or Negative Declarations (ND). However, on a project-specific basis, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) must be satisfied for any major capital improvement projects described in this report that will be implemented by the City in the future, through the preparation of an appropriate EIR or ND.

A U T H O R I Z A T I O N A N D S C O P E O F W O R K
In March 2021, the City authorized Wallace Group to prepare a comprehensive Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update. The scope of work is as follows:

Task 1. Document Review and Data Collection
We will review the existing 2011 Sanitary Sewer System Master Plan and City documents, including but not limited to the Sanitary Sewer Management Plan (SSMP), the Sewer Rate Study, the Salinas General Plan, and the Economic Development Element. Data collection will include review of the City’s sanitary sewer records, future development plans, CCTV inspection videos, and maintenance records.

Task 2. Field Effort & GIS Update
Task 2.1 Survey Sanitary Sewer Manholes
Wallace Group, in conjunction with Fluid Resource Wallace Group will survey the rim elevations of each sewer manhole to be modeled (based on 1,025 manholes) and dip the manhole to obtain the invert elevation (invert in and invert out) of the flow lines. Wallace Group will also take pictures of each of the manholes, which would then be included in the GIS database. Based on photos and visual observation from ground surface, we will ascertain pipe material.

Task 2.2 Lift Station Assessment
Wallace Group, in conjunction with Fluid Resource Management (FRM), will conduct evaluations of the City’s eleven lift stations. FRM will provide a Cal-OSHA confined space entry permit, and perform such confined space entry to evaluate the wet well for visible signs of corrosion and “wear and tear”, and will make recommendations if a structural investigation of the wet well is warranted based on observation. We will evaluate the condition of piping and internal components, document the size of the wet well/pumping station, approximate depth and size of inverts, perform a pump draw down test and determine approximate flow from each pump, perform full load amperage and Meg-ohm readings on each motor, verify automation of controls, evaluate the electrical system for possible deficiencies/code violations, document the pumps and motors make/model 1-2
number, pull and inspect the pumps for signs of wear and tear including inspecting pump seals and fittings, electrical components for code violations, evaluate the pump seals, fittings, and overall condition, and perform a pump test to determine approximate flow, and measure amperage/power draws to check for signs of pump motor concerns. We will evaluate the system’s ability to meet existing and future demands based on the pumping capacity and will provide the City with lift station upgrade recommendations.

Task 2.3 In-Line Flow Monitoring
Wallace Group will develop a flow monitoring program (FMP) in support of calibrating the hydraulic model of the sanitary sewer system. The flow data will evaluate average flow rates and representative diurnal flow patterns throughout the City including in/out of all pump stations, and to assist in the review/identification of average flow rates for residential (single and multi-family), commercial, hotel/motel, and apartment land uses.

As part of the FMP, we will work with US3 to review site conditions of the potential monitoring sites, assuring they are hydraulically suitable for accurate flow monitoring measurements. The FMP is based on an assumed total number of 16 monitoring stations, with a total duration of 60 calendar days at each location. It is envisioned the winter monitoring will extend 45 calendar days, and the dry weather monitoring will extend 15 calendar days.

Task 2.4 Update GIS Database
Based on data collected, Wallace Group will update the City’s GIS database. Wallace Group will also utilize data collected to incorporate any new developments and upgraded sewer mains that are not already included in the GIS database.

Task 3. Wastewater Flow Characteristics and Projections We will develop unit flow factors in order to better project wastewater flows from future developments and calibrate the sewer model using existing wastewater flows. These unit factors will be developed for development types including residential, multi-family, commercial, industrial, hotels and other factors. We will request from Cal Water, water meter records/bills that will be used to evaluate usage from the various types of developments.

Using actual water use data will provide the most accurate projection of wastewater generation unit factors, especially for residential and hotel units. Water demand data will be evaluated for a minimum of 12 months in order to assess indoor water demands (which generate wastewater flows) versus outdoor water demands (which do not generate wastewater flows). We will also use population and density information from the City’s General Plan, Specific Plans, and other planning documents provided by the City, to project future build-out (15-year planning horizon) population and wastewater flows. We will compile all the information reviewed and gathered under Tasks 1, 2, and 3 and prepare a Preliminary Findings Memorandum stating our findings.

Task 4. Develop and Calibrate Sewer Model
We will utilize survey data collected in Task 1 and 2, and the updated GIS database for use in the Innovyze sewer modeling program (InfoSWMM). We will model the collection system under dry and wet weather conditions for the existing and future loadings. We typically will only model the trunk sewer mains (typically 10-inch and larger), with some exceptions. Using flow data collected in the Field Investigations, we will model simulations for dry and wet weather flow conditions for existing and future (build-out) development scenarios. We will use the model results to identify locations in the wastewater system that have hydraulic capacity constraints under existing and future flow conditions, peak dry weather and wet weather flow conditions, based on the criteria developed for the 2011 report. Based on the flow monitoring data obtained, we will provide the City with general observations 1-3
of tributary areas exhibiting signs of I/I. Based on this observation, we will recommend areas for further I/I investigation.

Task 5. Develop Capital Improvement Program
Using data collected during Field Investigations, and the modeling efforts of Task 4, we will develop a Sanitary Sewer Capital Improvement Program (CIP) recommending short-term (5-year) and long-term (15-year) improvements necessary to maintain a desired level of service for the City’s sanitary sewer assets such as mainlines, manholes, and pump stations. We will also provide one additional Program focused on Development induced improvement recommendations. These upgrades are required to be completed when development occurs, which the timing may not be known.

Task 6. Develop Capital Improvement Program
Wallace Group will team with DTA to complete a Sanitary Sewer Development Impact Fee Nexus Study.

This Task will not start until after the completion of Task 7. This Study will be completed under separate cover.

Task 7. Draft and Final Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update Upon completion of Tasks 1-5, we will submit five (5) printed copies and 1 digital copy in pdf format of a draft Sanitary Sewer Master Plan report to the City for review and comment.

Upon receiving written comments from the City for the draft Sanitary Sewer Master Plan report and discussion at the City Council, Wallace Group will prepare the Final Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update. 1-4

A C K N O W L E D G E M E N T S
The City of Salinas Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update (SSMPU) is prepared by Wallace Group on behalf of the City of Salinas. Wallace Group gratefully acknowledges the City of Salinas, Monterey One Water, Utility System Science & Software (US3), and Fluid Resource Management (FRM) for their efforts, involvement, and assistance in preparing the City of Salinas SSMPU.

City of Salinas
Adriana Robles, P.E., City Engineer
Brian Frus, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
Gary Gabriel, Wastewater Manager
Ray Lerma, Maintenance Supervisor
Doyle McFarland, Pump Mechanic
Monterey One Water
Jennifer Gonzalez, P.E., Engineering Manager
Alison Imamura, P.E., Principal Engineer
Utility System Science & Software (US3)
Darlene Szczublewski, P.E., Project Engineer
Cari Campbell, Engineer
Fluid Resource Management (FRM)
Mike Ellison
Jason Molinari
The City of Salinas SSMPU was completed with the efforts of many Wallace Group team members. They include:

Kari Wagner, P.E., Principal/Director of Water Resources Rick Riedl, P.E., Principal Engineer
Steve Tanaka, P.E., Principal Engineer
Valerie Huff, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer
Andrea Kingsbury, P.E., Civil Engineer
Alexandra Cass, E.I.T, Associate Engineer
2-1
CH AP TER 2

LA ND US E AN D P OP U LATION
This Chapter presents the land use and existing and future population forecasts for the City’s SSMPU study area.

The purpose of establishing the existing population and land use is to better understand the existing wastewater flow characteristics throughout the City’s collection system, which provides a framework to forecast the wastewater flows that may be contributed in the future by vacant or under-utilized land. All figures are located at the end of this chapter.

I N T R O D U C T I O N
The City of Salinas is the largest city in Monterey County and serves as the County seat. The City has a long heritage as the financial and industrial center of Monterey County. US Route 101 bisects the City, while California State Route 68 heads west to Monterey and California State Route 183 runs northwest to Castroville. The City was incorporated in 1874 and is known as the “Salad Bowl of the World” for its large agricultural industry.

Existing Wastewater Service Area
The City’s current wastewater service boundary incorporates approximately 12,455 acres. Sewer facilities within the existing service area are owned and operated by the City. Bolsa Knolls is a rural neighborhood just outside of City limits. There is a small portion of Bolsa Knolls near Rogge Road that is also served by the City through a special assessment district. The remaining area of Bolsa Knolls is planned for future connection to the City’s collection system.

Study Area
One major purpose of this SSMPU is to evaluate the impacts that potential developments and future growth areas will have on the sewer collection system. The sphere of influence is defined as the territory outside the city limits which the Monterey County Local Area Formation Commission (LAFCO) recognizes as the appropriate and probable future jurisdictional boundary and service area of the City. Figure 2-1 displays City limits, the existing service area, and the SSMPU Study Area.

The study area for this SSMPU includes this sphere of influence, including the following areas:
❖ Future Growth Areas (FGA) include the North Boronda FGA, East FGA, Southeast FGA, and West Boronda FGA
❖ Target Areas, as identified by City’s Economic Development Element (EDE) ❖ County Boronda Area is currently tied to the City’s collection system, however, the sewer facilities are owned and operated by Monterey County
❖ Bolsa Knolls is an area in the County planned for future connection to the City’s collection system ❖ Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
2-2

L A N D U S E
The following sections discuss the existing and future land uses within the study area. The existing land uses are based on the City’s GIS database and General Plan Land Use Map.

Land Use: Existing Wastewater Service Area
The City is comprised of 12,455 acres of land, zoned for residential, commercial, industrial, agricultural, and public facilities. Table 2-1 summarizes the different land uses in the City’s boundary and includes the special assessment district in Bolsa Knolls since it is part of the City’s existing service area. Land use data shown on Figure 2-2 is a combination of GIS data provided by the City and the General Plan Land Use Map.

T A B L E 2 - 1 C I T Y E X I S T I N G L A N D U S E

N U M B E R
O F

P A R C E L S

A R E A
( A C R E S )
% O F S E R V I C E

A R E A
L O W D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 18,253 3,003 24.1% M E D I U M D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 6,906 929 7.5% H I G H D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 2,007 635 5.1% M O B I L E H O M E 9 116 0.9%
C O M M E R C I A L 1,397 1,297 10.4%
I N D U S T R I A L 306 814 6.5%
H O T E L 34 34 0.3%
S C H O O L 59 752 6.0%
P U B L I C / S E M I - P U B L I C 232 1,294 10.4%
O P E N S P A C E 4 31 0.2%
A G R I C U L T U R E 51 3,261 26.2%
V A C A N T 324 289 2.3%
T O T A L 29,482 12,455 100%
2-3
As discussed, the County Boronda Area flows into the City’s collection system. Table 2-2 breaks down the land use for the County Boronda Area, also shown on Figure 2-2.

T A B L E 2 - 2 . C O U N T Y B O R O N D A A R E A E X I S T I N G L A N D U S E N u m b e r o f
P a r c e l s
A r e a
( A c r e s )
C O M M E R C I A L 35 63
L O W D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 358 111
H O T E L 2 7
O P E N S P A C E 1 1
S C H O O L 1 6
P U B L I C / S E M I - P U B L I C 7 4
T O T A L 404 192
Study Area: Future Land Use
One major purpose of the SSMPU is to forecast the wastewater flows that will be contributed by growth areas in the future, both within and outside City limits. Both the City’s General Plan and Economic Development Element (EDE) were used as the sources to evaluate future land use and development capacity. The EDE is the most recent document, dated September 2017, and is the eighth element of the 2002 City’s General Plan. The EDE provides amendments to the City’s General Plan that reflects the goals, policies, and actions outlined in the EDE. Table LU3 of the Proposed General Plan Amendments (attached in Appendix A) was used to project future dwelling units and non-residential building capacities for the City’s focused growth areas and future growth areas. Additional development capacities, known as Target Areas, are identified in Table LU-ED-1 (attached in Appendix A).

Although most of these Target Areas fall outside the City boundary, they are included in the SSMPU study area.

Focused Growth Areas, Future Growth Areas, and Target Areas are shown on Figure 2-3.

The development capacities found in the General Plan and the EDE provide the most conservative projections for City buildout in the Year 2045. However, it is important to note that these numbers are based on planning projections and preliminary locations around the City. As future developments enter final engineering and design, it is recommended that the City re-evaluate the sewer model based on more accurate flow projections, engineering plans, and sewer main tie-in locations.

Focused Growth Areas
The General Plan identifies (5) Focused Growth Areas to accommodate new developments. The Focused Growth Areas are:
❖ Laurel Drive at North Main Street
❖ North Main Street/Soledad Street
❖ East Alisal Street/East Market Street
❖ Abbott Street
❖ South Main Street
2-4
According to the General Plan, these areas of existing developments would “benefit from redevelopment or revitalization, change of land uses, and/or the incorporation of mixed-use residential uses.” Wastewater flows for these focused growth areas will be modeled based on the future land use designation; however, the impact to the City’s collection system is likely marginal since most focused growth areas already contribute existing wastewater flows. Additional modeling may be necessary in the event more intensification of use, such as a hotel, is incorporated. These Focused Growth Areas and the future land uses per the City’s General Plan are shown on Figure 2-4.

Bolsa Knolls Septic Conversion
As discussed, a small portion of the Bolsa Knolls area is currently served by the City through a special assessment district. The remaining Bolsa Knolls area is on septic tanks. As part of the future analysis for this SSMPU, this remaining Bolsa Knolls area is included in the hydraulic model as a future connection to the City’s collection system.

Future Growth Areas
Four (4) Future Growth areas (FGA) were identified in the City’s General Plans as areas outside the City limits where new growth will occur on land that is currently used for agricultural production. The Future Growth Areas are:
❖ North Boronda FGA
❖ East FGA
❖ Southeast FGA
❖ West Boronda FGA
The Future Growth Areas and future land uses associated per the City’s General Plan are shown on Figure 2-5. In 2008, the North Boronda FGA was annexed into the City. Prior to development, Future Growth Areas are subject to the adoption of Specific Plans by the City Council. The North Boronda FGA was split into three (3) Specific Plans: West Area, Central Area, and East Area, shown on Figure 2-6. In December 2019, the West Area Specific Plan (WASP) was approved by City Council, and in 2020, the Draft Central Area Specific Plan (CASP) was made public for review. Table 2-3 summarizes the development capacities identified in the WASP and CASP. The East Area Specific Plan has not been made public and is not included in Table 2-3. These Plans specify the ultimate distribution, location, and intensity of land uses. Unsewered areas such as open space and parks are not included in this table as they do not contribute wastewater base flow. 2-5
T A B L E 2 - 3 S P E C I F I C P L A N D E V E L O P M E N T C A P A C I T Y

W E S T A R E A C E N T R A L A R E A

D W E L L I N G

U N I T S

N O N -

R E S I D E N T I A L
( S F )

D W E L L I N G

U N I T S

N O N -

R E S I D E N T I A L
( S F )

L O W D E N S I T Y
R E S I D E N T I A L 1,361
–
1,367
–

M E D I U M

D E N S I T Y
R E S I D E N T I A L 1,803
–
1,359
–

H I G H D E N S I T Y
R E S I D E N T I A L 1,085
–
1,185
–

C O M M E R C I A L /
M I X E D U S E 91 571,500
–
489,700
T O T A L 4,340 571,500 3,911 489,700
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
The Salinas Ag-Industrial Center, within City limits, is a 257-acre area planned for agriculturalrelated businesses. Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar and Associates prepared the Sanitary Sewer System Analysis Report & Calculations for the Salinas-Ag Industrial Center, dated November 2021. The proposed sewer system will connect to the City’s existing system at Abbott Street, Burton Avenue, and Dayton Street. Projected square footage of these industrial buildings is based on the average floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.3 for general industrial land uses, as identified in Table LU-3 of the City’s General Plan.

Target Areas
With the adoption of the EDE, the City amended the General Plan to include Economic Opportunity Target Areas to provide additional land capacity for new economic development. Five of the six Target Areas are currently outside of the City’s Sphere of Influence but have been included in the SSMPU study area to account for future wastewater flows. The sixth target area, Target Area V, shown on Figure 2-3, is within Carr Lake, inside City limits. Table LU-ED-1 (attached in Appendix A) summarizes the land use and building capacities for these Target Areas.

Table 2-4 summarizes the total projected dwelling units and projected non-residential area, as shown in Table LU3 of the proposed General Plan amendments. These numbers include the units identified in the CASP and WASP.

The land uses and development capacities for the Target Areas are also shown on Table 2-4. Inaccurate totals for Focused Growth Area acres, Future Growth Area acres, and Future Growth Area projected non-residential square feet were corrected on Table LU-3 in Appendix A. The City’s General Plan land use areas in GIS were used to allocate projected dwelling units and non-residential areas to the Focused Growth Area and Future Growth Areas.

The GIS areas did not match the projected areas, so a multiplier was used to scale the GIS areas to match each designated land use shown in Table 2-4.
2-6
T A B L E 2 - 4 . F U T U R E D E V E L O P M E N T C A P A C I T Y

A C R E S

P R O J E C T E D

D W E L L I N G U N I T S P R O J E C T E D N O N - R E S I D E N T I A L ( S F )

L A N D
U S E

F O C U S E D

G R O W T H

A R E A

F U T U R E

G R O W T H

A R E A

T A R G E T

A R E A S

S A L I N A S A G - I N D U S T R I A L

C E N T E R

F O C U S E D

G R O W T H

A R E A

F U T U R E

G R O W T H

A R E A

F O C U S E D

G R O W T H

A R E A

F U T U R E

G R O W T H

A R E A

T A R G E T

A R E A S

S A L I N A S A G - I N D U S T R I A L

C E N T E R
O P E N S P A C E 4 696 -- -- 0 0 5,000 420,000 -- --

L O W D E N S I T Y

R E S I D E N T I A L
9 1,042 -- -- 57 6,771 0 0 -- --

M E D I U M

D E N S I T Y

R E S I D E N T I A L
43 515 -- -- 507 6,052 0 0 -- --

H I G H D E N S I T Y

R E S I D E N T I A L
9 160 -- -- 153 2,680 0 0 -- --
C O M M E R C I A L 148 183 201 -- 0 9 4,361,000 208,000 2,193,478 -- M I X E D U S E 212 120 -- -- 989 360 10,891,000 2,613,000 -- -- I N D U S T R I A L 73 995 218 257 0 0 950,000 10,773,000 3,073,158 3,361,743

P U B L I C /

S E M I - P U B L I C
58 247 -- -- 0 0 636,000 2,799,000 -- --
T O T A L 556 3,958 419 257 1,706 15,872 16,843,000 16,813,000 5,266,636 3,361,743 2-7

P O P U L A T I O N
Population for the SSCSMP is comprised of the City population within the study area. Three sources of information were utilized to determine existing and future population for the study area:

1. 2015 City of Salinas Housing Element

2. 2020 Census

3. Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) Final 2020 Regional Growth Forecast Memorandum
Existing Population
The City’s existing population and historic population growth are important factors to understand past trends and project future wastewater flows. Figure 2-7 shows the City’s population growth forecast as shown in the City’s Housing Element, with a projected 2021 population of 157,805.

F I G U R E 2 - 7 : C I T Y P O P U L A T I O N G R O W T H According to the 2020 Census, the total population for the City of Salinas is 163,542. For the purposes of this SSMPU, 163,542 persons will be used for the current 2021 population.

Population Densities
The following Table 3 summarizes the average number of residential units per land use according to the 2014 Economic Development Element.

T a b l e 2 - 5 . R E S I D E N T I A L D E N S I T I E S

U N I T S / A C R E
L O W D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 6.5
M E D I U M D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 11.75
H I G H D E N S I T Y R E S I D E N T I A L 16.75
1 4 2 , 6 8 5 1 4 6 , 5 6 3 1 5 0 , 4 4 1 1 5 3 , 6 1 7 1 5 6 , 7 9 3 2021, 1 5 7 , 8 0 5
1 6 1 , 8 5 3 1 6 6 , 9 1 2 1 7 2 , 4 9 9
-
5 0 , 0 0 0
1 0 0 , 0 0 0
1 5 0 , 0 0 0
2 0 0 , 0 0 0
2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035

P O P U L A T I O N

Y E A R
2-8
Future Population
In August 2019, AMBAG staff met with City staff to review the forecasts for future growth. Information collected from this meeting was presented to the AMBAG Board of Directors in the Final 2020 Regional Growth Forecast Memorandum. Based on the findings, 175,358 persons is projected to be the City’s future population in the Year 2040.

According to the City’s General Plan, the buildout population projected beyond 2035 for the City is 213,063 persons. This is based on the General Plan’s Development Capacity table which considers projected populations for the City’s focused growth and future growth areas. As part of the City’s 2017 Economic Development Element, amendments to the General Plan were proposed; however, the projected buildout population remained the same.

For the purposes of this SSMPU, 213,063 persons will be used for the City’s buildout population.

County Boronda
Bolsa Knolls
North
Boronda FGA
East FGA
North
Boronda FGA
East FGA
West Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Ag-Industrial
Legend Center
City Boundary
SSMPU Study Area
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
Target Areas
Existing Sewer Service Area
Future Growth Area
Bolsa Knolls
County Boronda Area
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-1

EXISTING SEWER SERVICE AREA

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Legend
City Boundary
SSMPU Study Area
Agriculture
Commercial
High Density Residential
Hotel
Industrial
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Mobile Home
Open Space
Parking/Roads
Public & Semi-public
School
Vacant
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-2

EXISTING SERVICE AREA

LAND USE

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
North Boronda FGA
East FGA
West Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Abbott Street
South Main Street
EastAlisal Street/
EastMarket Street
Laurel Drive at
North Main Street
North MainStreet/
Soledad Street
Target Area B
Target Area N
Target Area V
Target Area L
Target Area K
Target Area F
Bolsa Knolls
Industrial
FGA
Legend
City Boundary
SSMPU Study Area
Bolsa Knolls
Industrial FGA
Focused Growth Area
Abbott Street
East Alisal Street/East Market Street
Laurel Drive at North Main Street
North Main Street/Soledad Street
South Main Street
Future Growth Area
East FGA
North Boronda FGA
Southeast FGA
West Boronda FGA
Target Areas
Target Area B
Target Area F
Target Area K
Target Area L
Target Area N
Target Area V
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-3

CITY GROWTH AREAS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
South Main Street
Abbott Street
East Alisal Street/
East Market Street
Laurel Drive at
North Main Street
North Main Street/
Soledad Street
Legend
GPLU
Commercial
High Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
Industrial
Mixed Use
Open Space
Public/Semipublic
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-4

FOCUSED GROWTH AREAS

LAND USE

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 2,000 feet
North Boronda FGA
East
FGA
West Boronda
FGA
Southeast
FGA
Industrial
FGA
Legend
Industrial
Commercial
Mixed Use
Open Space
Public/Semi-Public
High Density Residential
Low Density Residential
Medium Density Residential
SSMPU Study Area
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-5

FUTURE GROWTH AREAS

LAND USE

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Bolsa Knolls
East Area
Specific Plan
West Area
Specific Plan
Central Area
Specific Plan
Legend
Central Area Specifc Plan
East Area Specific Plan
West Area Specific Plan
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 2-6

NORTH BORONDA

FGA SPECIFIC PLANS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 3,000 feet
3-1
CH AP TER 3

COLLEC TION SYSTEM OV ERVIEW
This Chapter provides an overview of the existing domestic wastewater collection system for the City. All figures are located at the end of this chapter.

C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M O V E R V I E W
The City operates two sewer collection systems, the municipal collection system, which collects wastewater from residential, commercial, institutional, and industrial users throughout the City; and the Industrial Wastewater Collection and Conveyance System (IWCCS), which collects wastewater from industrial users located mostly within the southeastern portion of the City. This report is for the municipal sewer collection system and does not consider the industrial system.

The City’s municipal sewer collection system is comprised of approximately 292 miles of gravity pipes, which vary in diameter from 6-inch to 54-inches, ten (10) City-owned lift stations, one (1) City-maintained lift station, and two (2) miles of force mains. According to the California Integrated Water Quality System Project (CIWQS), 70% of the City’s collection system was constructed before 1980, with 41% of the system constructed between 1960-1979.

The remaining 30% of the system was constructed from 1980 to present.

The sewer collection system conveys the City’s wastewater to the Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS) located at the southwest corner of the City near Blanco Road and Davis Road. SAPS is owned and operated by Monterey One Water (M1W), formerly Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA).

Gravity Sewer Mains
Table 3-1 breaks down the City’s gravity sewer inventory. According to the City’s GIS database, 9.6% of the sewer collection system has an unknown diameter. Most of these unknown diameters are at upstream portions of the primary collection system and are assumed to be of smaller diameter (likely 6- or 8-inch) that will not significantly affect the sewer modeling of the main trunk lines. Figure 3-1 displays the City’s gravity sewers by diameter.

Most of the existing collection system buried piping material is Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP). Although Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) pipe would have likely been installed with newer construction from 1980 to present. Hydraulic modeling of the sewer lines assumes that the pipe material is VCP unless the pipe material was visually verified by the survey work performed for this SSMPU.
3-2
T A B L E 3 - 1 . G R A V I T Y S E W E R I N V E N T O R Y B Y D I A M E T E R

D I A M E T E R
( I N )

L E N G T H
( M I L E S )
% O F S E W E R

S Y S T E M
U N K N O W N 27.5 9.6%
6 - I N C H 61.3 21.4%
8 - I N C H 124.0 43.2%
10 - I N C H 19.9 6.9%
12 - I N C H 14.2 5.0%
15 - I N C H 10.1 3.5%
18 - I N C H 9.2 3.2%
21 - I N C H 4.4 1.5%
24 - I N C H 3.8 1.3%
27 - I N C H 2.6 0.9%
30 - I N C H 2.6 0.9%
33 - I N C H 1.2 0.4%
36 - I N C H 0.5 0.2%
42 - I N C H 1.8 0.6%
48 - I N C H 1.2 0.4%
54 - I N C H 2.4 0.9%
T O T A L 286.7 100%
Manholes
Based on the City’s GIS database, the existing wastewater collection system contains 3,462 sewer manholes. There are both concrete and brick manholes throughout the collection system. It is estimated that approximately 5-10% of the manholes are brick manholes, which no longer meets City standards. Brick manholes can be a source of infiltration of water and sand and can potentially fail if bricks are offset. Additionally, the City’s collection system contains 1,403 flushing inlets/cleanouts. These can often limit access for operation and maintenance (O&M) staff to inspect and clean the sewer mains.

It is recommended to complete annual manhole inspections as part of the CCTV program to identify manholes in poor condition and replace or rehabilitate as required. This may include concrete manholes that have severe hydrogen sulfide corrosion, brick manholes that are cause of significant infiltration or are failing, and broken flushing inlets. As on-going improvements to extend the life of the sewer collection system are made, it is recommended that all brick manholes be either replaced with new manholes, or at minimum install a coating or lining. Flushing inlets should be replaced with 8-inch inspection ports or new manholes. These are low-priority upgrades, but should be considered as an on-going operations and maintenance project to continue improving operations and reducing infiltration of sand and water and potential for failures. Figure 3-2 shows the locations of brick manholes and corroded manholes (74 total) identified by field survey and all the City’s flushing inlets. 3-3
Lift Stations
The City owns and operates ten (10) lift stations located throughout the collection system. The City also maintains the Vista Nueva Lift Station under an assessment district. Recently, tenants at Harris Place Industrial Park have requested that the City assume operations and maintenance of the privately-owned Harris Lift Station. The City is currently preparing a study to determine the feasibility of operating this lift station under separate cover and therefore, Harris Lift Station is not included in this report. Chapter 5 provides a detailed description of the lift stations and recommended improvements. The following is a list of the 11 City owned and/or operated lift stations:
❖ Airport (Moffett) ❖ Mill Lake
❖ Carpenter Hall ❖ Santa Rita
❖ De La Torre ❖ Spicer
❖ Harkins Road ❖ TP2
❖ Lake Street ❖ Vista Nueva
❖ Las Casitas
All lift station force mains tie into the City’s gravity system for conveyance to SAPS. City staff conducts regular maintenance of the City’s lift stations. In 2018, staff initiated a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) program to monitor all lift stations. This SCADA program tracks flows and motor run times and offers an alarm system that calls staff directly if there are any operational issues at the lift stations.

In addition to the City-owned and operated lift stations, the City also receives wastewater flows from ten (10) private lift stations located throughout the City. These lift stations service commercial complexes and industrial facilities that discharge directly into the City’s gravity system. The locations of these lift stations are listed below:
❖ Oregon and Sanborn Street ❖ Natividad Hospital
❖ 11 Harris Place ❖ 58 Natividad Road
❖ 1121 Alamo Way ❖ Northridge Mall
❖ 115 San Juan Grade Road ❖ Salinas Adult School
❖ 150 Sherwood Drive ❖ Sherwood Hall
All City-owned, County-owned, and private lift stations are shown on Figure 3-3. 3-4
Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS)
As stated above, wastewater collected in the City’s municipal sewer system flows to the Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS), operated by Monterey One Water (M1W). SAPS feeds into a 36-inch forcemain from Salinas to the regional wastewater treatment plant operated by M1W near the City of Marina. Here the wastewater is treated and then used for beneficial re-use or discharged to the ocean via a 60-inch diameter outfall. SAPS is shown in the southwestern corner of the City on Figure 3-3.

Inverted Siphons
The City has four (4) known inverted siphon locations within the sewer collection system. These inverted siphons are used to carry wastewater flows under creeks and highways. Inverted siphons often present hydraulic issues and require periodic flushing during low flows. The known inverted siphon locations are shown on Figure 3-3 and are modeled according to record drawings provided by the City.

Industrial Wastewater Diversion
As stated above, the City owns and operates a separate collection system which receives only industrial wastewater that flows to the City owned Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility (IWTF). Although the industrial wastewater collection system is not part of this SSMPU, it is important to note that a concrete shunt structure allows the diversion of produce wash water and winter stormwater discharges from this industrial wastewater conveyance system to enter the City’s wastewater collection system at the SAPS location, just upstream of the flow totalizer. M1W monitors and operates this industrial wastewater diversion and has provided the daily diversion flows from May 5, 2016 to June 30, 2018. Since the SAPS location is the most downstream point in the City’s collection system, these diverted flows do not affect the City’s collection system and are not considered in the sewer model.

Reclamation Ditch Diversion
This diversion structure was recently constructed and brought on-line in 2018. It is located in the existing Reclamation Ditch near the intersection of Davis Road and West Market Street/Highway 183 in Salinas. According to the State Water Resources Control Board Permit 21377, this project allows for up to 6 cubic feet per second (cfs) by direct diversion from the Reclamation Ditch and pumped into the City’s collection system. M1W owns and operates this reclamation ditch diversion. These reclamation ditch diversion flows were considered in the hydraulic model since they feed into the main 54-inch trunk line that conveys flow along Davis Road to SAPS. 3-5

H I G H P R I O R I T Y A R E A S
According to the City’s 2019 Sanitary Sewer Collection System Annual Performance Report, City staff perform high-priority and routine line cleaning, manhole inspections, and lift station inspections each business day. In 2019, wastewater staff cleaned 116 miles of pipe, which is an increase of 93 miles from the year before. In the same year, approximately 48,075 linear feet of CCTV inspections were performed to identify damages or causes of blockages in City sewer lines. The City has not provided an inspection report for these videos; therefore, the results of this inspection are not included in this SSMPU.

City Manhole Monitors
The City installed fifty-six (56) manhole monitors at locations with either historical surcharging or sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) issues. In 2021, staff responded to eighteen (18) manhole monitoring alarms indicating sewer surcharging. This avoided potential SSOs from the sewer system and helped the Wastewater Division meet its goal of having five or less overflows on the City main line per year. Over the last few years, the City has met this goal with the following SSOs per year: four (4) in 2018, two (2) in 2019, two (2) in 2020, and five (5) in 2021. Table 3-2 summarizes the location of all the monitors and Figure 3-4 shows high priority sewer mains as identified by the City and past locations of SSO manholes.
3-6
T A B L E 3 - 2 . M A N H O L E M O N I T O R I N G L O C A T I O N S

MH - ID L O C A T I O N
M5 - 020 JOHN ST. & GRIFFIN ST.

M5 - 009 500 JOHN ST.

M5 - 012 599 JAMES ST.

M5 - 013 105 NORTH WOOD ST.

L5 - 033 481 E. MARKET ST.

L5 - 020 127 CARR AVE.

L6 - 016 700 ELTON PLACE
M3 - 050 500 LINCOLN AVE.

M3 - 036 602 RIKER ST.

L3 - 020 210 CAPITOL ST.

L3 - 013 142 W MARKET ST.

L2 - 014 33 VILLA ST.

K4 - 0 5 2 177 SHERWOOD DR.

I4 - 029 1149 SHERWOOD DR.

G4 - 0 2 9 223 N FIRST ST.

I3 - 056 119 SHERMAN DR.

G3 - 0 2 8 447 COMANCHE WAY
G4 - 0 3 4 1502 WHEELER DR.

G4 - 0 2 3 44 JULIA AVE.

G5 - 0 1 2 55 KIP DR.

F4 - 015 472 REGENCY CIRCLE
D4 - 064 13278 JACKSON ST.

D4 - 001 13170 LOUISE ST
D4 - 030 18601 COOLIDGE
H7 - 075 1619 MARSHFIELD CT.

I8 - 039 1205 NOGAL DR.

MH - ID L O C A T I O N
J8 - 004 1002 DEL MONTE AVE.

J7 - 041 1035 ATLANTIC ST.

K8 - 0 2 4 1116 CORTEZ ST.

H4 - 015 1020 E. LAUREL DR.

L8 - 028 183 DENNIS AVE.

L8 - 031 176 AFTON RD.

N7 - 014 1340 MERCER WAY
G8 - 0 1 1 1166 ROCKHAVEN CT.

J9 - 014 1044 BISON WAY
I5 - 036 77 SAINT FRANCIS WAY
L3 - 029 26 STONE ST.

G6 - 0 1 8 744 SAUCITO AVE
N6 - 013 9 MAYFAIR DR.

D4 - 028 18588 NORTHRIDGE DR.

D5 - 001 18807 LENNY ST.

M8 - 016 200 TAMPA ST.

M7 - 016 15 PALOMA AVE.

O3 - 0 1 1 321 WOODSIDE DR.

G6 - 0 0 9 1538 MARIN AVE.

I4 - 001 939 HEATHER CIRCLE
N2 - 020 432 WOODSIDE DR.

K4 - 0 2 3 146 LAKE ST.

H3 - 043 805 W LAUREL DR.

H6 - 014 1515 LOS ALTOS WAY
H3 - 043 805 W LAUREL DR.

L6 - 036 30 CENTER ST.
3-7
2017 Mark Thomas CCTV Evaluation
In 2017, Mark Thomas Engineering performed a CCTV sanitary sewer analysis of approximately 5,300 linear feet, or approximately 0.3%, of sanitary sewer mains and twenty-three (23) manhole structures in the southeast corner of the City. The report used the National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO) Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program (PACP) and Manhole Assessment and Certification Program (MACP). The condition of the pipes and manholes were graded based upon observed structural and operations and maintenance defects.

Table 3-3 below summarizes this grading system used and Figure 3-5 displays the CCTV analysis findings with notes about each manhole and pipe condition. All recommended pipe and manhole repairs from this CCTV evaluation are listed and prioritized as existing CIPs and discussed further in Ch. 7 of this SSMPU. The full evaluation report can be found in Appendix B of this SSMPU.

T A B L E 3 - 3 . P A C P A N D M A C P G R A D I N G T A B L E

G R A D E

D E S C R I P T I O N

S T R U C T U R A L A N D

O & M D E F I N I T I O N

G E N E R A L D E T E R I O R A T I O N

D E F I N I T I O N
5 Immediate
Action
Defects requiring immediate
attention
Failed or will likely fail within
the next 5 years
4 Poor
Sever defects that will
become Grade 5 defects
within the foreseeable
future
Probably fail in 5-10 years
3 Fair Moderate defects that will
continue to deteriorate May fail in 10-20 years
2 Good Defects that have not begun
to deteriorate
Unlikely to fail for at least 20
years
1 Excellent Minor defects Unlikely in the foreseeable
future
O&M Repairs
The City has a list of known operations and maintenance (O&M) problem areas throughout the City. The nature of the problem areas ranges from pipe sags/joints and pipe damage to manhole repairs to hydrogen sulfide corrosion and fats, oils, and grease (FOG) build-up. Table 3-4 summarizes these City identified locations and groups repair projects together based on priority, repair type, and location. All City identified repairs are listed and prioritized as existing CIPs and discussed further in Ch. 7 of this SSMPU. All repair projects are detailed in the City’s Sewer Repair Atlas Map in Appendix C.

Additionally, the City should prioritize their CCTV program to inspect the entire collection system every five years.

This would mean the City should complete an average of 58 miles per year, a significant increase from the 14.7 miles inspected in 2021 and 8.1 miles inspected in 2020. Table 3-5 assumes the cost of cleaning and CCTV based on similar work performed in Monterey County. In order to account for a 3% inflation rate each year, Table 3-6 summarizes the cost per year that should be budgeted by the City. This ongoing CCTV program is included as an existing CIP in Ch. 7 of this SSMPU.
3-8
T A B L E 3 - 4 . O & M R E P A I R S

C O M B I N E D O & M P R O J E C T C I T Y L O C A T I O N A T L A S I D

A C A C I A , B A U T I S T A ,

W O O D S I D E R E P A I R S

ACACIA CIRCLE NORTH
WOODSIDE DR.

BAUTISTA DR.

WEST ACACIA ST.

C O M A N C H E , P O L K , A N D

N O R T H F I R S T R E P A I R S

COMANCHE WAY
POLK ST.

NORTH 1ST ST.

G3, I3, H4

D E L M O N T E A N D M A E

R E P A I R S
726 MAE AVE. AND C ST.

DEL MONTE AVE.

MAE AVE.

K8
D O N N E R W A Y R E P A I R DONNER WAY G6

E L A U R E L A N D W I L L I A M S

R E P A I R S
E. LAUREL DR.

WILLIAMS RD.

K7, L7

E A S T M A R K E T A N D

U P S T R E A M O F L A K E

S T R E E T R E P A I R S

YORKSHIRE WAY

LONGBOW WAY
SUN ST.

E MARKET ST.

N MADEIRA AVE.

K5
H O O V E R S T R E P A I R 1885 HOOVER ST. C5
J O H N S O N P L A C E R E P A I R S JOHNSON PLACE (FIRE STATION #3) O5 K A T H E R I N E A V E . &
P A J A R O S T . R E P A I R S
KATHERINE AVE.

PAJARO ST.

O4
K I N G S T R E E T R E P A I R S KING ST. L5

L O U I S E A N D V A N B U R E N

S T R E E T R E P A I R S
LENNY ST. AND LOUISE ST.

VAN BUREN AVE.

M A L A R I N S T A N D

W I L G A R T W A Y R E P A I R S

WILGART WAY
WORK ST AND BRUNKEN AVE.

LOS PALOS DR. AND FAIRMONT DR.

O4, N5
N M A I N S T H W Y 1 0 1

U N D E R P A S S B U N K E R

R E P A I R
N. MAIN ST. UNDERPASS BUNKER
HWY 101
J4
R I K E R S T R E E T R E P A I R 555 RIKER STREET M3

R O M I E L A N E R E P A I R S &

R E C O N F I G U R A T I O N

A N A L Y S I S

ROMIE LANE BETWEEN LOS PALOS

AND PAJARO
O4
S A N M I G U E L A V E R E P A I R PAJARO ST./SAN MIGUEL AVE. O4 S H E R W O O D D R R E P A I R S SHERWOOD DR. K4
3-9

C O M B I N E D O & M P R O J E C T C I T Y L O C A T I O N A T L A S I D

U P P E R C A R R L A K E

R E P A I R S
LAUREL DR. BIKE TRAIL
J6

W E S T M A R K E T A T D A V I S

O V E R C R O S S I N G
W. MARKET ST. AND DAVIS

OVERCROSSING
K2

W E S T M A R K E T S T R E E T

R E P A I R S
10 VILLA ST.

W. MARKET ST. NEAR MARKET
CAPITOL ST. TO 10 CAPITOL ST.

CAPITOL ST.

W O O D S T R E E T

R E C O N F I G U R A T I O N

A N A L Y S I S
WOOD ST.

L5
3-10
T A B L E 3 - 5 . C C T V C O S T S

D I A M E T E R
( I N )

L E N G T H
( F T )

C L E A N I N G & C C T V
C O S T ( $ / L F ) T O T A L C O S T
6 - 1 2 I N C H E S 1,303,314 $5.00 $6,516,570
15 - 2 7 I N C H E S 158,931 $10.00 $1,589,310
30 - 5 4 I N C H E S 51,498 $13.00 $669,475
T O T A L 1,513,776 $8,775,355
T A B L E 3 - 6 . A N N U A L C C T V P R O G R A M
Y E A R B U D G E T 1
Y E A R 1 $1,769,000
Y E A R 2 $1,822,000
Y E A R 3 $1,877,000
Y E A R 4 $1,933,000
Y E A R 5 $1,991,000
T O T A L $9,392,000
1 Th e annu al b udget in cludes a 3% es calation rate p er year.

Legend
Unknown Diameter
8-inch or less
10-inch
12-inch
15-inch
18-inch
21-inch
24-inch
27-inch
30-inch
33-inch
36-inch
42-inch
48-inch
54-inch
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-1

EXISTING PIPE DIAMETER

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
)"
)" )")"
)"
)" )" )"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")")"
)")")")"
)"
)"
)")"
)" )"
)"
)" )"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)")"
")" )")
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)" )" )"
)" )" )" )"
)" )"
)")")" )")" )" )"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)" )")" )"
)"
)" )" )")"
)"
)"
)" )")"
)"
)"
)" )")")")"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)")"
)")" )" )" )"
)" )"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)" )")"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )")"
)"
)"
)" )"
)")")"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)" )" )")"
)"
)")"
)")"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)")"
)")" )"
)"
)"
)"
)")")"
)")"
)")" )"
)"" )" ) )"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")" )"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)" )"
)"
))""
)" )")"
)"
)" )"
)"
)" )")"
)")"
)"
)" )"
)")")")"
)"
)"
)" )")" )"
)")"
")" )
)"
)"
)"
)" )")" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )")"
)"
)"
)")"
)")"
)" )")"
)"
)")" )" )"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)")" )")" )"
)"
)" )"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )" )")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)")")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)")"
)"
)"
)")" )"
)")"
)"
)"
)")"
)" )"
)"
)"
)" )")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)")"
)" )" )"
)" )"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)" )"
))"" ))"" ))""
)"
)" )")" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
))""))"" )"
)"
)"
)" )")")"
)"
)" )"
)"
)")"
)")")"
)"
)")" )"
)"
)" )" ))""
)"
)")")"
)")")" )" )" )")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)" )" )")"
)" ))"")")"
)"
)"
" )" ) )"
)")" )"
))"" )"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)" )"
)" )" )")"
)"
)")")" )" )"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)" )" )"
)"
)" )")"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
))
"" )"
)")")"
)")"
)")"
)"
)"
))"" )"
)"
)"
)")")")"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)" )"
)")"
)"
)"
))""
)"
)"))""
)")")")" )")")" )"
)"
)")" )" )"
)" )" )"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)" )"
)" )")"
)")"
)"
)" )")"
)"
)")" )")" ))""
)")"))""
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )")"
)")"
))""
)"
)" )"
)")" )")"
)" )" )"
)"
)" )"
)")" ))"")"
)" )")" )" )" )"
)")")")"
)" )"
)"
)" )" )"
)"
)" )")")"
)"
" )")" ))"
)")" )"
)"
)"
)")")" )")" )"
)"
)")" )"
)" )" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)")" )" )"
)")"
)"
))"" )" )")"
)"
)")" )" )" )" )"
)")" )")")")"
)")" )" )"
)")"
)")
)"
")")"
)")")"
)"
)")"
)"
)" )" )")"
)")")")" )" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)")"
)")"
)"
)")"
)" )"
)" )" )"
)" )"
)" )"
)")"
)")"
)")")"
)" )")" )")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)" ))"" )")" )")"
)" )"
)" ))""
)")"
)"
)"
)")"
)")"
)"
)" )")" )" )"
))""
)""
)" )")" )" )" )"
)"
)"
)" )")"
)")" )")"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)" )"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"))""
)"
)")"))"")"
)")"
)")"
)" )"
)" )")"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)")")"
)"
)"
)")"
)" )" )")")" )" )")"
)")"
)"
)" )")" )")"
)"
)"
)"
)")" )" )"
)")"
)"
)")")" )" )" )")")"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)" )" )" )"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)")")")" )")")"
))""
)" )")"
)"
)")"
)"
))""
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")")"
)"
)" )"
)"
))""
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")" )" )"
)")" )"
)" )" )"
)"
)"
)")")"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)" )"
)" )" )" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)" )")"
)"
)" )" )")"
)")"
)")" )")" )")"
)"
)" )"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)")"
)"
)" )"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)")"
)"
)"
)")" )")" ))"" )"
)" )" )"
)" )"
)"
)" ))"" )")"
)"
)")"
)"
)")" )"
)"
)" )")" )")" )" )"
)"
)")"
)"
)" )")")"
)")" )")"
)" )")" )" )" )")"
)" )"
)"
)"")" )
)")" )")" )" )" )" )" )"
)"
)"
)"
)" )"
)" )"
)" )")"
)")"
)"))""
)")" )"
)"
)")"
)")"
)" ))""
)" )"
)"
)")")" )"
)" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )" )"
)"
)" )" )")"
)"
)")" )" )" )" )")")"
)")" )"
)"
)")" )"
)"
)" )")"
)")")"
))""
)"
)"
)"
)")" )")" )")" " )" ) )"
)")" )")")" )")"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)")")"
))"" ))"")" )"
)" )"
)" )"
)"
)"
)")")" )" )"
)")"
)" )" ))""
)"
)"
)")"
))"" ))""
))""
)"
)" )"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
))""
)")"
)" )" )" )" )")" )"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")" )")"
)" )" )")" )")")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)" )")"
)"
)"
)" )" )")" )"
)"
)" )")" )"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)"
)"
)"
)")"
)" )"
)""
)"
)")"
)"
)"
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!!2! 2!
!2!
!!2!!2!2!! 2!
!2!!2! !2!
!2!2!!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
! !2! 2!
! !2! 2!
!2!2
!!!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!2!!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2! !2!
! !2! 2! !2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2! !2! !2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2
!!2
!!2!! !2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2! !2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
!2!
Legend
!2! Surveyed Brick Manholes
!2! Surveyed Corroded Manholes
)" Flushing Inlets
Sewer Mains
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-2

LOW PRIORITY REPLACEMENTS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
TP2
Carpenter
Hall
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
Boronda No.2
Boronda No.1
Boronda No.4
Legend
Ú3 Salinas Area Pump Station
Ú3 City Lift Stations
Ú3 County Lift Stations
Ú3 Private Lift Stations
Sewer Mains
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-3

LIFT STATIONS & SIPHONS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Industrial Wastewater
Diversion
Inverted Siphon
Inverted Siphon
Inverted Siphon
Reclamation Ditch &
Inverted Siphon
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*
#*#*
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!! 2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!! 2!!
2!! 2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
MH-D4-001
MH-D5-001
MH-F4-015
MH-I4-001
MH-J8-004
MH-M5-009
MH-M5-012
MH-M5-013
MH-K4-023
MH-M8-016
MH-L8-028
MH-L8-031
MH-L5-020
MH-L6-016
MH-N6-013
MH-M7-016
MH-K8-024
MH-J7-041
MH-G8-011
MH-G6-009
MH-L6-036
MH-L3-013
MH-H3-043
MH-G3-028
MH-H6-014
MH-G6-018
MH-H4-015
MH-G5-012
MH-G4-023
MH-D4-028
MH-D4-030
MH-O3-011
MH-L3-020
MH-L3-029
MH-M3-036
MH-L5-033
MH-M5-020
MH-I8-039
MH-N2-020
MH-L2-014
MH-I4-029
MH-I5-036
MH-G4-029
MH-G4-034
MH-H7-075
MH-J9-014
MH-N7-014
MH-K4-052
MH-D4-064
MH-I3-056
MH-M3-050
Legend
2!! Manhole Monitoring Locations
#* SSO Locations
High Priority Sewer Mains
Sewer Mains
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-4

CITY MANHOLE MONITORING LOCATIONS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
2!! 2!!
!2!! 2!
2!!
2!!
!2!! 2!
2!!
2!!2!
2!! 2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
2!!
MH Repair:New Frame
& Cover. Lining
interior of manhole
MH Repair:New Frame
& Cover. Lining
interior of manhole
MH Repair:Relining
manhole, new bench,
and rechannelize
MH Repair:New
Frame & Cover
MH Repair:New
Frame&Cover; reline;
new bench&channelize
MH Repair:New
manhole
MH Repair:New Frame&Cvr
w PCC collar;
line in 5 yrs
MH Repair:New Frame&Cvr
w PCC collar;
line in 5 yrs
MH Repair:New
Frame&Cvr;
install marker
MH Repair:New
Frame&Cvr;
install marker
MH Repair:Expose
& raise manhole.

Currently buried
MH Repair:New Frame
& Cover. Lining
interior of manhole
MH Repair:New Frame
& Cover. Lining
interior of manhole
MH Repair:Reline
manhole in 2 years
MH Repair:Expose
and Raise Manhole
to Grade; buried
MH Repair:No
work.

MH Repair:

Expose and Raise
Manhole to Grade;
buried
MH Repair:PCC collar
to prevent I/I; new
bench&rechannelize
MH Repair:Rplc
Frame&Cover w PCC
collar; reline
MH Repair:New
Frame & cover
MH Repair:New
chimney; PCC collar;
regrout or line
MH Repair:Rplc
Frame&Cover w PCC
collar; install marker
MH Repair:Rplc
Frame&Cover; install
ecc. cone for fence
MH Repair:Rplc
Frame&Cover w PCC
collar; install marker
Pipe Repair: Great condition
Pipe Repair:

Broken condition; Broken
pipe, encrustations
Pipe Repair:

Good condition; d/D
of 0.85
Pipe Repair:

Great condition; WLS
of 0.35, root
ball at SSMH 7
Pipe Repair:

Good condition; d/D of

0.75, grease
deposits
Pipe Repair:

Great condition; WLS of

0.25, grease
deposits
Pipe Repair:

Fair condition; d/D of

0.6, partial
grease block
Pipe Repair:

Fair condition; WLS
of 0.6,
encrustations
Pipe Repair:

Fair condition; WLS 0.25,
d/D of 0.9,
grease deposits
Pipe Repair:

Good condition; cracks,
grease deposits
1 i
On = 2,000 Feet

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT.

MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 3-5

MARK THOMAS CCTV FINDINGS
Legend
Inspected Pipes
Structural Grade 1
Structural Grade 2
Structural Grade 3
Structural Grade 4
Structural Grade 5
Misc. (See Note)
Inspected Manholes
2!! Grade 3
2!! Grade 4
2!! Grade 5
2!! Misc. (See Note)
4-1
CH AP TER 4

WA STEWATER F LOWS
This Chapter presents the results of the sewer flow monitoring and the development of the wastewater flow characteristics used for the analysis of the collection system for the City. All figures are located at the end of this chapter.

I N T R O D U C T I O N
Wastewater flows were evaluated from three sources described in the following sections:
❖ Temporary flow meters installed in the City’s sewer system ❖ Wastewater flow records provided by Monterey One Water ❖ Water use records provided by the City’s water purveyors: California Water Service and Alco Water Service

W A S T E W A T E R F L O W M O N I T O R I N G
To develop a better understanding of the existing wastewater flows, in-line flow monitoring was conducted at eighteen (18) different locations on main trunk lines throughout the City. Temporary sewer flow monitoring locations were selected based upon downstream locations for sewersheds of similar land uses that could be calibrated for the proposed sewer model development. The locations of the flow meters and their corresponding tributary areas are depicted on Figure 4-1.

Flow meter locations 1-15 were installed by USCubed (US3) on March 5-6, 2021. For redundancy in calculating the total flow of the system, meter locations 16-18 just upstream of SAPS were installed by US3 on March 30, 2021.

These three additional monitoring locations were selected after anomalies were discovered in the SAPS flow data.

All meters were removed April 20-21, 2021. Locations 1-15 were monitored for a total of 45 days and locations 16-18 were monitored for a total of 21 days. After review of locations 16 and 17, it was discovered that the 54- inch line conveying most of the western portion of the City’s flow was not monitored due to inaccurate GIS data; therefore, these flow monitoring results were not used as a check against the SAPS total flow data.

Flow Meters
FLO-DAR® flow meters were used for the wastewater flow monitoring. These flow meters are mounted to the manhole wall, above the flow where they should not encounter any potential debris or grease that would affect readings. A digital Doppler radar is used to measure the velocity and direction of flow every 15 minutes.

Additionally, the flow level is measured by ultrasonic pulse echo and recorded as well.

Since sewer flow monitoring does not continuously record flow, it is unable to record transient events of very short duration, in this case of less than 15 minutes. The flow monitoring does, however, provide an estimate of the amount of wastewater generated by various sewersheds during the monitoring event. This provides useful information about the diurnal sewer flow patterns for each sewershed and can also potentially show the impacts of inflow and infiltration. The following provides a summary of the benefits and the potential problem with sewer flow monitoring:
4-2
Benefits
❖ Provides hourly and daily wastewater flow averages for various sewersheds within the community. This can be used to help differentiate between the amount of wastewater flow coming from residential versus commercial development. ❖ Evaluates diurnal trends within the community, which will help estimate the peaking factors that are required to size the collection system and evaluate the remaining capacity within the existing collection system
❖ May help evaluate the potential impacts of inflow and infiltration if the monitoring event spans both dry weather and wet weather events.

Potential Drawback
❖ The flow meters read every 15 minutes, providing only an average of the flow over the 15-minute period. The averages are then totaled for the day to get total daily flows. There are possibilities that the flow meter could miss higher peaks that may come through the collection system between readings.

Flow Monitoring Summary
The goal of flow monitoring is to record wastewater flows and establish diurnal trends that will be used to calibrate the sewer model. The following Table 4-1 provides a summary of the results from each of the flow monitoring stations.
4-3
T A B L E 4 - 1 . F L O W M O N I T O R I N G S U M M A R Y

L O C A T I O N

P R I M A R Y

L A N D U S E

A V E R A G E

D A I L Y F L O W
( G P D )

M O N I T O R I N G

N O T E S
1 S U C R E
Residential-65%
Commercial15%534,842
Three lines entering from the east,
west, and south. Downstream 15-
inch line was monitored.
2 H A R D E N
Residential-70%
Commercial22%190,354
Three lines entering from the east,
north, and south. Downstream 32-
inch line was monitored.
3 L A U R E L
Residential-60%
School-25% 198,404
Two lines entering from the east
and north. Downstream 8-inch line
was monitored.
4 C O N S T I T U T I O N
Residential-73%
Public/SemiPublic-15%414,180
No laterals. Upstream 24-inch line
was monitored. Levels and
velocities began dropping to zero
during 4/8-4/13 of the study. No
issue was found with the
equipment, but those days were
not included in the Average Daily
Flow total.
5 R A N C H V I E W
Residential-42%
School-40% 386,611
No laterals. Upstream 21-inch line
was monitored. US3 notes levels
and velocities began dropping to
zero during the last three days of
the study. No issue was found with
the equipment, but those days
were not included in the Average
Daily Flow total.
6 A L I S A L
Residential-74%
School-40% 291,616
Two lines entering from the
northeast and southwest.

Downstream 15-inch line was
monitored.
7 E U C A L Y P T U S
Residential-71%
School-14% 777,840
Two lines entering from the east
and north. Downstream 18-inch
line was monitored.
8 D A V I S
Residential-52%
Commerical29%1,715,731
Two lines entering from the north
and west. Downstream 24-inch line
was monitored.
4-4
T A B L E 4 - 1 . F L O W M O N I T O R I N G S U M M A R Y ( C O N T . )

L O C A T I O N

P R I M A R Y

L A N D U S E

A V E R A G E

D A I L Y F L O W
( G P D )

M O N I T O R I N G

N O T E S
9 E L R A N C H O
Residential-89%
Hotel-8% 46,255 No laterals. Upstream 8-inch line was monitored. 1 0 M A D I S O N
Commercial-57%
Residential-33% 291,616
Two lines entering from the east and
one line from the west. Downstream
10-inch line was monitored.
1 1 C H E R O K E E
Residential-67%
Commercial-19% 1,881,437
Two lines entering from the north and
west. Downstream 18-inch line was
monitored.
1 2 L A K E S T 2 4
Residential-70%
Public/SemiPublic -10%583,734
No laterals. Upstream 24-inch line was
monitored. US3 notes this site had
sediment in the line and program
parameters were used to reduce issues
due to the poor hydraulics.
1 3 L A K E S T 3 0
Residential-55%
Commercial-21% 1,884,712
No laterals. Upstream 30-inch line was
monitored. US3 notes levels and
velocities dropped to zero somewhere
between 3-8am almost every day
during the study.
1 4 B R I D G E
Residential-58%
Public/SemiPublic-19%1,717,329
No laterals. Upstream 36-inch line was
monitored. US3 notes this site has
sediment in the line and program
parameters were used to reduce issues
due to the poor hydraulics.
1 5 S A N B O R N
Residential-33%
Commercial-29% 1,428,913
Two lines entering from the north and
west. Downstream 24-inch line was
monitored.
1 6 & 1 7

H I T C H C O C K
Residential- 48%
Commercial-18% 1,364,436
No laterals. Downstream 24-inch line
was monitored. US3 notes that
program parameters were used at Site
17 to reduce issues due to the poor
hydraulics.
1 8 H I T C H C O C K
Residential-40%
Industrial-26% 1,892,455
No laterals. Downstream 36-inch line
was monitored. US3 notes program
parameters were used to reduce issues
due to the poor hydraulics.
4-5

S A L I N A S A R E A P U M P S T A T I O N A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W S Monterey One Water provided total daily flows at SAPS from January 20, 2015 to June 30, 2018 for historical use.

They also provided January through May 2021 to compare total flows during the same time period as the flow monitoring. Flows in the latter half of 2018 through 2020 were not provided due to several anomalies such as large jumps and dips that are not typical to total sewer flows, thus the data was unreliable. M1W reports that anomalies may be due to the flow meter needing calibration, cleaning, or repairs.

Table 4-2 presents the average daily flow for the years 2015-2017. These values represent domestic wastewater in the City’s system. Industrial wastewater flows that were diverted to SAPS during these years were subtracted from the total metered wastewater flow at SAPS to determine the actual flows from the domestic sewer collection system.

T A B L E 4 - 2 . S A P S D O M E S T I C W A S T E W A T E R F L O W S

Y E A R A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W ( M G D )
2 0 1 5 11.32
2 0 1 6 10.12
2 0 1 7 9.94
A V E R A G E 10.46
It should be noted that the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan notes an average daily flow of 12.5 MGD from 2002-2007. Although the population has increased since this time, the decrease in sewer flows can be attributed to significant water conservation efforts that occurred during the statewide drought water conservation mandates which included more water efficient water fixtures installed subsequent to 2007.

To further this point, a draft of the West Area Specific Plan states that conservation effort decreased M1W Plant flows from 21 MGD in 2014 to 16 MGD in 2016. Of the 16 MGD, the City of Salinas contributed 12 MGD. This number is the total flow from SAPS to M1W Regional Treatment Plant, including the industrial wastewater diversion flow. The average daily flow for 2016 in Table 4-2 subtracts this metered industrial wastewater diversion, which is approximately 2.7 MG for the months of May-October, to provide total domestic flows entering the SAPS. 4-6

W A T E R U S E D A T A
Wastewater flows were also calibrated by comparing the estimated wastewater flows to water use records. Water use records for the year 2020 were provided by the City’s water purveyors: California Water Service and Alco Water Service. In order to compare water use records to wastewater flow, it is important to identify outdoor versus indoor water use that would contribute flow to the wastewater system. Known irrigation accounts were identified and removed from the data provided in order to estimate indoor water use. The 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan estimates sewer flows as 85% of the lowest monthly average water consumption or as 75% of the annual average water consumption. Table 4-3 provides a summary of sewer flows using these ratios.

T A B L E 4 - 3 . W A T E R U S E

W A T E R
U S E
( M G D )

R E T U R N T O

S E W E R

R A T I O

D O M E S T I C

W A S T E W A T E R
( M G D )
M A R C H 2 0 2 0 ( L O W E S T M O N T H ) 11.95 0.85 10.16 2 0 2 0 A N N U A L A V E R A G E 15.58 0.75 11.69

E X I S T I N G W A S T E W A T E R F L O W S
After analyzing the average daily sewer flows via flow monitoring results, the 2015-2017 SAPS influent flow data, and the City’s domestic water use records, for the purposes of this report and model calibration, the average daily flow for the City of Salinas is 10,460,000 gallons. Based on the calculated average daily flow for various sewersheds and land uses, the wastewater flow factors for various existing land uses within the City were developed and are presented in Table 4-4.

T A B L E 4 - 4 . E X I S T I N G F L O W F A C T O R S

Q U A N T I T Y U N I T

F L O W F A C T O R
( G P D / U N I T )

E X I S T I N G

A V E R A G E

F L O W ( G P D )
R E S I D E N T I A L 159,143 Persons 54.5 8,673,200
M O B I L E H O M E 4,399 Persons 30 131,900
H O T E L 649 Rooms 19.5 12,600
C O M M E R C I A L 16,289,742 SF 0.08 1,221,700
I N D U S T R I A L 7,087,044 SF 0.04 248,000
S C H O O L 38,365 Students 4.5 172,600
E X I S T I N G A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W S 10,460,000 4-7
The quantity of persons is based on the existing population of 163,542. The number of students was based on the City’s GIS data, and the number of hotel rooms was based on the hotels within the existing service area. In order to compare hotel flows to flow monitoring that was performed during the COVID-19 California Stay Home Order, it was assumed that hotels were operating at half capacity. The City provided a dataset of the building footprints within the City, which was used to quantify the total area for both commercial and industrial facilities.

Table 4-5 summarizes the estimated flows for the sewersheds. These flows are estimates based on the wastewater flow factors shown in Table 4-4. Table 4-5 also summarizes the percent difference of the estimated flows to the flow monitoring average values. Population densities per household and number of units per acre were classified into three categories (low, average, and high) based on 2020 Census Tract data. Certain areas of the City have higher population densities per household than other areas of the City, as shown as a heatmap on Figure 4-2.

Classifying the population densities into three categories allowed the flow projections for each sewershed to more accurately match what was measured during flow monitoring. Table 4-6 summarizes the breakdown of population and housing unit densities and the sewersheds where these densities were applied.

T A B L E 4 - 5 . E X I S T I N G A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W S B Y S E W E R S H E D T A B L E 4 - 6 . E X I S T I N G F L O W F A C T O R S

L O W A V E R A G E H I G H
L O W D E N S I T Y 4.5 UNITS/ACRE 6.5 UNITS/ACRE 8.0 UNITS/ACRE A V E R A G E D E N S I T Y 8.0 UNITS/ACRE 11.75 UNITS/ACRE 15 UNITS/ACRE H I G H D E N S I T Y 15 UNITS/ACRE 16.75 UNITS/ACRE 24 UNITS/ACRE H O U S E H O L D S I Z E 2.7 PERSONS/HOUSEHOLD 3.2 PERSONS/HOUSEHOLD 5.8 PERSONS/HOUSEHOLD S E W E R S H E D S 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, & 18 5, 7, 8, 10, 14, 15, 16, & 17 6, 11, 12, 13, & 14 For sewersheds that saw higher flow monitoring values than what was predicted, it is likely representative of groundwater infiltration or minimal amounts of rainfall dependent inflow or infiltration. Since the rainfall event during the flow monitoring period was not significant, it is likely that these higher values can be attributed to groundwater infiltration. Based on the City’s observation, this is likely in Sewershed 12 & 13 since it is known that Carr Lake experiences inflow and infiltration. Sewersheds 14 and 15 may be seeing infiltration from upstream inverted siphons and crossings at the reclamation ditch.

Before review of the flow monitoring results, it was assumed that Sewershed 11 was upstream of Sewershed 8 based on the City’s GIS data; however, the flow monitoring data was much higher than what was estimated for Sewershed 8. The survey data confirmed that flows from Sewershed 11, and upstream Sewersheds 1 and 2, are conveyed into the 24-inch line on Davis Road just upstream of the flow monitoring location 8. Therefore, the flows from Sewershed 8 include upstream Sewersheds 1, 2, and 11.

Sewersheds 16 & 17 were combined based on the two 24-inch parallel lines conveying flow through the agricultural fields south of Blanco Road and into SAPS. Additionally, Sewersheds 12 & 13 were combined since they are both upstream of Lake Street Lift Station.

Table 4-5. Existing Average Daily Flows By Sewershed
Tributary Area
Low Density
Residential
Housing (acres)
Medium Density
Residential Housing
(acres)
High Density
Residential
Housing (acres)
Number of
Mobile Home
Units Housing Units
Estimated
Residential
Population
Density
Estimated
Residential
Population Density
(Mobile Homes)
Estimated
Residential
Population gpd
Estimated # of
Hotel Rooms gpd Estimated # of Students gpd
Commercial
Facilities
(minus schools
& hotels)
(sq. ft) gpd
Industrial Facilities
(sq. ft) gpd
SubTotal
Average
Estimated
Flow (gpd)
Average Flow
Monitoring (gpd)
Individual
Sites
Percent
Difference
from Flow
Monitoring
Combined Sites
Percent
Difference from
Flow Monitoring
Site 01: Sucre 66 19 92 454 2,643 6,929 1,243 8,172 414,835 23 449 2,621 11,795 255,160 19,137 42,762 1,497 447,712 534,842 -16% -16% Site 02: Harden 136 20 17 0 1,002 2,667 0 2,667 145,299 0 0 550 2,475 515,409 38,656 0 0 186,430 190,354 -2% -2% Site 03: Laurel 134 0 26 0 973 2,591 0 2,591 141,180 0 0 3,097 13,937 155,585 11,669 770 27 166,812 198,404 -16% -16% Site 04: Constitution 193 139 16 0 2,133 5,679 0 5,679 309,448 0 0 2,586 11,637 148,599 11,145 570 20 332,250 414,180 -20% -20% Site 05: Ranch View 112 38 23 0 1,554 4,918 0 4,918 267,958 0 0 5,237 23,567 186,581 13,994 0 0 305,518 368,611 -17% -17% Site 06: Alisal 77 50 0 0 1,303 7,555 0 7,555 411,614 0 0 1,647 7,412 16,359 1,227 785 27 420,280 291,616 44% 44% Site 07: Eucalyptus 269 23 45 0 2,759 8,731 0 8,731 475,735 0 0 2,863 12,884 386,979 29,023 8,507 298 517,939 486,224 7% 21% Site 08 Davis 42 4 8 0 452 1,430 0 1,430 77,919 0 0 250 1,125 1,270,016 95,251 573 20 174,315 369,136 -53% 9% Site 09: El Rancho 76 0 0 0 338 900 0 900 49,057 56 1,092 0 0 11,288 847 0 0 50,995 46,255 10% 10% Site 10: Madison 35 0 0 0 226 714 0 714 38,930 0 0 0 0 323,801 24,285 0 0 63,215 67,699 -7% -7% Site 11: Cherokee 42 72 70 113 3,117 17,423 655 18,079 968,982 0 0 0 0 1,253,670 94,025 10,655 373 1,063,381 1,156,241 -8% -10% Site 12+13: Lake St 24 + Lake St 30 322 178 62 320 6,773 37,427 1,856 39,283 2,094,949 146 2,837 5,487 24,692 407,446 30,558 116,108 4,064 2,157,100 2,468,446 -13% 13% Site 14: Bridge 401 31 30 0 4,162 24,140 0 24,140 1,315,270 0 0 3,265 14,693 670,740 50,306 11,116 389 1,380,657 1,518,925 -9% -10% Site 15: Sanborn 121 42 12 0 1,475 4,667 0 4,667 254,306 134 2,603 595 2,678 2,835,674 212,676 4,166,874 145,841 618,103 651,073 -5% 9% Site 16 + Site 17: Hitchcock 372 145 54 0 5,007 15,846 0 15,846 863,389 138 2,691 6,731 30,290 3,910,339 293,275 887,713 31,070 1,220,714 1,364,436 -11% -11% Site 18: Hitchcock 220 54 57 0 2,211 5,885 0 5,885 320,639 14 273 1,190 5,355 1,344,877 100,866 1,237,867 43,325 470,458 463,542 1% 7% Not Monitored 385 115 123 255 4,614 11,605 679 12,284 652,687 139 2,711 2,923 13,154 2,597,219 194,791 602,744 21,096 884,438 Not Monitored N/A N/A System Total 3,003 930 635 1,142 44,153 159,109 4,433 163,542 8,802,197 649 12,656 39,042 175,689 16,289,742 1,221,731 7,087,044 248,047 10,460,000 4-8
4-9

P E A K I N G F A C T O R A N A L Y S I S
The following section defines some of the terminology commonly used to describe and analyze wastewater flows.

Average Daily Flow (ADF)
ADF is the average daily wastewater flow in a collection system. For this study, the ADF is based on the mean of the daily flows to the Salinas Area Pump Station (SAPS) for the years 2015-2017, as shown in Table 4-2. Based on this data, the ADF for the City is 10.46 MGD.

Maximum Day Dry Weather Flow (MDDWF)
MDDWF reflects the maximum day flow rate typically seen during the peak summer months. The City of Salinas peak flows in the summer are likely influenced due to the increase in population of farm workers in the area.

According to the Draft April 2018 Farmworker Housing Study and Action Plan for Salinas Valley and Pajaro Valley, agricultural employment increases over an eight-month period of April through November. This same study found that approximately 20% of the total population for the Salinas and Pajaro Valleys are migrant, non-permanent residents. Assuming the City’s population increases by 20% during these peak harvesting months would mean an increase of approximately 31,600 people. Using a flow factor of 54.5 gallons per person per day (see Table 4-4), wastewater flows would increase by approximately 1,722,200 GPD, for a total domestic average flow during these peak months of 12.2 MGD. The historical MDDWF recorded in the SAPS data provided was 13.9 MGD on April 24, 2015. This results in a multiplier to increase the ADF, or peaking factor, of 1.33.

The 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master plan also used historical SAPS data to calculate a dry weather peaking factor of

1.6, with the assumption that the peaking factor would approach 1.5 as flows increase in the future. For the purposes of this study, a peaking factor of 1.5 will be used to calculate MDDWF. This is also consistent with California Title 22 Drinking Water Regulations recommendation of using 1.5 as a multiplier to average daily water usage to calculate the maximum day demand. The MDDWF for the City is 15.69 MGD.

Peak Hour Dry Weather Flow (PHDWF)
An important design consideration for wastewater collection system facilities is the PHDWF. PHDWF is important to understand as it may govern the design of pump stations and sewer mains. Hourly measurements at SAPS were unavailable for this peak flow analysis; therefore, peak flow was estimated based on flow monitoring that was conducted March 5-6, 2021 to April 20-21, 2021. Since there was little to no rain during this time, the PHDWF would not include rainfall dependent inflow and infiltration flow contributions to the collection system. Figure 4- 3 shows the relative residential and commercial hourly flows, or diurnal curves, for the collection system during the flow monitoring period described above. The diurnal curves in Figure 4-3 show the average dry weather peaking factor is 2.0 and 1.9 for collection systems serving residential and commercial areas, respectively. The PHDWF factor during max day, dry weather flow is equal to the diurnal peaking factor multiplied by the MDDWF factor, which equates to 3.0 for residential and 2.9 for commercial.

Peak Hour Wet Weather Flow (PHWWF)
PHWWF is the maximum flow rate that occurs in a single hour during wet weather, which is defined as a significant rain event. Similar to PHDWF, PHWWF can also govern the design of the sewage collection system as it may represent the maximum flow rate that the collection system must convey. PHWWF is calculated by multiplying the ADF by the diurnal peaking factor and adding the wet weather flow component typically found during flow monitoring conducted during one or more significant rainfall events. Since the flow monitoring conducted for this study did not occur during any significant rain events, the PHWWF cannot be accurately calculated. The following section summarizes the peak unit rainfall dependent infiltration and inflow (RDII) flow factors that were analyzed to approximate the peak wet weather flow for this study. 4-10

I N F I L T R A T I O N A N D I N F L O W
Infiltration and Inflow (I/I) can cause significant issues in collection systems and wastewater treatment plants. The I/I of surface and ground water into a sewer system can result in peak flows that exceed dry weather flow conditions. For the purposes of this study, these terms are defined as follows:

Infiltration is the water entering a sewer system and service connections from groundwater, through such means as defective pipes, pipe joints, connections, or manhole walls. Infiltration does not include inflow and is relatively constant over a period of days, weeks, or even months as high groundwater conditions persist.

Inflow is the water discharged into a sewer system and service connections from such sources as roof drains, cellars, yard and area drains, foundation drains, cooling water discharges, drains from springs and swampy areas, manhole covers, cross connections from storm sewers, catch basins, storm water, surface water runoff, or drainage. Inflow does not include infiltration. Inflow occurs and may vary more rapidly than infiltration with rainfall conditions. Sewer collection flows rising and falling within minutes or hours of a severe storm events are typically associated to the occurrence of inflow.

In order to check for rainfall-dependent I/I (RDII) during the flow monitoring period, rain data was obtained through weather stations monitored by the California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS). CIMIS Station 116 Salinas North was identified as the closest rain gauge to the City. Over the entire duration of the flow monitoring performed for this study (48 days), a total of 1.17 inches were recorded in the first 14 days with a maximum of less than 0.3 inches per day at Station 116. This is considered to be less than the one-year recurrence interval storm event. Graphs of the daily flow at each monitoring location versus daily rain totals are also provided on Figures 4-4 to 4-21.

The rainfall recorded during the sewer flow monitoring does not provide enough information to determine wet weather peaking factors from the flow monitoring period. Therefore, historical rainfall events and the wet weather peaking factors from the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan were reviewed and summarized in the following sections.

Historical Rainfall Dependent Infiltration and Inflow
M1W provided instantaneous flow at SAPS for February 2017. Data for this month is valuable because a total of

2.15 inches fell over a 24-hour period on February 20, 2017 and several rainfall events occurred on the days prior, increasing the potential for infiltration into the sewer based on the rain saturating the ground. The instantaneous flow at SAPS showed a max reading of 31.5 MGD on February 20, 2017. Figure 4-22 graphs the instantaneous reading at SAPS for the wet weather day (February 20, 2017), the hourly precipitation on the wet weather day, and the instantaneous readings on February 27, a similar weekday with no rainfall events on or leading up to the day.

By comparing the maximum recorded flow at SAPS, 31.5 MGD, to the average daily flow of 10.46 MGD, a PHWWF peaking factor of 3.0 was determined for this storm event. Although this information confirms the City’s collection system does experience RDII, it does not provide insight into where RDII is occurring because the monitoring location at SAPS is at the most downstream point of the collection system. Additionally, this data does not provide the extent to which RDII may be occurring because it is only one data point. Therefore, this study will also use the wet weather flow parameters described in the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. 4-11
2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan RDII Peak Unit Flow Rates The 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan used the flow monitoring data and measured rainfall events occurring during January to February 2007 and 2008 to develop wet weather parameters for different sewersheds. As described above, the portion of the sewer flow attributed to each rainfall event was calculated as the measured sewer flow minus the dry weather base flow. With this data, linear regression equations were used to determine; (1) the percentage of storm volume that reaches the sewer collection system; (2) the RDII peak flow to RDII volume ratio; and (3) the runoff coefficient for RDII in each sewershed. These wet weather parameters were applied to the 5- year, 6-hour storm and 10-year, 6-hour storm to calculate peak RDII factors. Discussion of the methods used are available in Appendix B of the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan.

These three wet weather parameters were not verified since the sewer flow monitoring was not provided during the 2007-2008 monitoring period; however, the peak RDII unit flows from these parameters were correlated to the sewersheds in this study and used to determine the peak wet weather flow.

Table 4-7 provides the peak RDII unit flow rates and total flow estimates for the 10-year, 6-hour design storm.

Sewersheds that were not part of the 2007 and 2008 metered data were assigned an RDII unit flow of 2,000 gpapd for the 10-year, 6-hour storm, based on the 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan recommendations.

Since these values were developed in 2007-2008, it is still recommended that the City complete an in-depth I/I evaluation of the entire collection system. Unfortunately, it is difficult to determine the best time to complete this evaluation as most California counties, including Monterey County, are experiencing extreme drought conditions.

The I/I evaluation would also include an update to the wet weather flow scenarios used in the hydraulic model and an evaluation of any additional CIPs. This recommended I/I evaluation is included as an existing CIP in Ch. 7 of this report and the timing of the project will be dependent on a significant wet weather year. 4-12
T A B L E 4 - 7 . P E A K W E T W E A T H E R F L O W F O R 1 0 - Y E A R , 6 - H O U R S T O R M

S E W E R S H E D

C O N T R I B U T I N G

S E W E R A R E A

P E A K R D I I

U N I T F L O W
( G P A P D )

P E A K R D I I

F L O W
( G P D )

P E A K W E T

W E A T H E R

F L O W ( G P D )
1 373 1,200 447,600 895,320
2 224 2,000 448,500 634,930
3 245 2,000 490,600 657,420
4 453 2,000 905,600 1,237,850
5 274 2,000 547,500 853,020
6 151 2,000 301,200 721,490
7 440 2,100 923,500 1,441,440
8 195 1,200 234,400 408,720
9 85 2,000 170,800 221,800
10 101 2,000 201,400 264,620
11 329 1,200 394,400 1,457,790
1 2 & 1 3 840 2,900 1,427,300 3,584,410
14 590 3,000 1,770,600 3,151,260
15 870 2,100 1,826,000 2,444,110
1 6 & 1 7 1,037 2,000 2,074,500 3,295,220
18 591 2,000 1,181,700 1,652,160
N o t
M o n i t o r e d
975 2,000 1,949,500 2,833,940
T O T A L 7,773 15,295,100 25,755,500
4-13

F U T U R E W A S T E W A T E R F L O W S
T A B L E 4 - 8 . A D D I T I O N A L F U T U R E A V E R A G E D A I L Y F L O W S B Y G R O W T H A R E A Projection of wastewater flow is tied closely to population projections and anticipated development discussed in Chapter 2. Table 4-8 provides a summary of the future flows for each growth area. Although it is assumed that water conservation measures will be taken, such as low flow plumbing fixtures for future developments, the future flows are determined by using the existing flow factors identified in Table 4-4. The total additional future flow to the system is estimated to be 7.3 MGD.

Since there are large industrial areas projected for the City, a conservative value of 0.10 gallons/day/square feet is used to account for future industrial flows. This unit is based on historical water use data seen for high industrial users. Note, the industrial flows are for the domestic flows from industrial facilities, not industrial wastewater from industrial facilities, such as wash water. The industrial wastewater is anticipated to flow to the industrial wastewater treatment facility via the industrial sewer collection system.

As discussed in Chapter 2, Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar and Associates prepared the Sanitary Sewer System Analysis Report & Calculations for the planned Salinas-Ag Industrial Center. The sewer flow calculations for this analysis used the conservative value of 2,000 gpapd, identified in the City’s 2011 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan for future industrial developments. Based on discussions with the City, the sewer flows modeled for the Salinas-Ag Industrial Center in this SSMPU are based on the above value of 0.10 gallons/day/building square feet.

The peaking factors noted in this chapter were used to estimate future maximum day and peak hour wet weather flows for the future condition. City standards recommend a peak Rainfall-Dependent Infiltration and Inflow (RDII) unit flow of 500 gallons per acre per day (gpapd), based on new plastic sewer pipes. This RDII unit flow was applied to the total growth area of 4,960 acres to calculate the additional peak wet weather flow from future conditions.

Table 4-9 provides a summary of the collection system’s existing and future flows.

T A B L E 4 - 9 . E X I S T I N G A N D F U T U R E F L O W S U M M A R Y

F L O W C O N D I T I O N

E X I S T I N G

F L O W ( G P D )

F U T U R E

F L O W ( G P D ) N O T E S

A V E R A G E D A I L Y

F L O W ( A D F )
10,460,000 17,715,200
Additional Future
Flow=7,255,160 gpd
(see Table 4-8)

M A X I M U M D A Y

D R Y W E A T H E R

F L O W ( M D D W F )
15,690,000 26,572,800
Based on MDDWF
peaking factor of 1.5

P E A K H O U R W E T

W E A T H E R F L O W
( P H W W F ) 1 0 - Y R ,
6 - H R S T O R M
25,755,500 35,605,300
Based on peak RDII unit
factors for the 10 year, 6-
hour storm event for
existing; Based on 500
gpapd for future areas
Table 4-8. Additional Future Average Daily Flows By Growth Area City Growth Area
Low Density
Residential
Dwelling Units
Medium Density
Residential
Dwelling Units
High Density
Residential
Dwelling Units
Mixed Use
Residential
Dwelling Units gpd
Commercial &
Mixed Use
Facilities (sq. ft) gpd
Industrial
Facilities (sq. ft) gpd
Estimated #
of Students gpd
SubTotal
Estimated Future
Flow (gpd)
Focused Growth: Abbott Street 24 109 -- 242 74,791 3,425,027 256,877 819,724 81,972 -- 0 413,640 Focused Growth: East Alisal Street/East Market Street -- 227 91 -- 63,518 2,327,648 174,574 -- 0 -- 0 238,090 Focused Growth: Laurel Drive at North Main Street -- -- -- 262 52,336 3,212,100 240,907 -- 0 -- 0 293,240 Focused Growth: North Main Street/Soledad Street 33 171 62 202 93,130 2,554,430 191,582 130,276 13,028 -- 0 297,740 Focused Growth: South Main Street -- -- -- 283 56,434 4,373,795 328,035 -- 0 -- 0 384,470 Focused Growth Subtotal 57 507 153 989 340,208 15,893,000 1,191,975 950,000 95,000 0 0 1,627,180 Future Growth: Central Area Specific Plan 1,367 1,359 1,185 -- 779,927 489,700 36,728 -- 0 4,033 18,149 834,800 Future Growth: West Area Specific Plan 1361 1,803 1,085 91 865,477 571,500 42,863 -- 0 2,354 10,593 918,930 Future Growth: East Area Specific Plan 2,699 1,669 263 121 947,786 2,898,291 217,372 -- 0 -- 0 1,165,160 Future Growth: East Area 1,305 1,221 147 157 564,215 1,493,396 112,005 4,997,912 499,791 -- 0 1,176,010 Future Growth: Southeast Area -- -- -- -- 0 -- 0 4,672,741 467,274 -- 0 467,270 Future Growth: West Boronda FGA 39 -- -- -- 7,770 587,113 44,033 1,102,347 110,235 -- 0 162,040 Future Growth Subtotal 6,771 6,052 2,680 369 3,165,175 6,040,000 453,000 10,773,000 1,077,300 6,387 28,742 4,724,210 Target Area B -- -- -- -- 0 87,120 6,534 1,502,820 150,282 -- 0 156,820 Target Area F -- -- -- -- 0 87,120 6,534 -- 0 -- 0 6,530 Target Area K -- -- -- -- 0 250,470 18,790 1,570,338 157,030 -- 0 175,820 Target Area L -- -- -- -- 0 620,730 46,550 -- 0 -- 0 46,550 Target Area N -- -- -- -- 0 337,590 25,320 -- 0 -- 0 25,320 Target Area V -- -- -- -- 0 810,448 60,780 -- 0 -- 0 60,780 Target Area Subtotal 0 0 0 0 0 2,193,478 164,508 3,073,158 307,312 0 0 471,820 Bolsa Knolls 625 -- -- -- 90,651 68,418 5,130 -- 0 -- 0 95,780 Salinas Ag-Industrial Center -- -- -- -- 0 -- 0 3,361,743 336,174 -- 0 336,170 System Total 7,453 6,559 2,833 1,358 3,596,034 24,194,896 1,814,613 18,157,901 1,815,786 6,387 28,742 7,255,160 4-14
*#
*#
*#
*#
*#
*# *#
*#*#
*#
*#
*#*#*#
*#
*#
*#
#1
#2
#3
#4
#5
#7 #6
#8
#9
#10
#11
#12 #14 #13
#15
#16
#17
#18
Legend
*# Monitoring Location
Not Monitored
10 11
12 13
14 15
16 17
18 1
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 4-1

FLOW MONITORING

LOCATION & SEWERSHEDS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Legend
City Boundary
Population Density
0 0-2.7 persons/household

2.7-3.2 persons/household

3.2-5.8 persons/household
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 4-2

POPULATION DENSITY HEATMAP

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
4-17

0.00 0.25

0.50 0.75

1.00 1.25

1.50 1.75

2.00 2.25
12:00 AM
1:00 AM2:00 AM3:00 AM4:00 AM5:00 AM6:00 AM7:00 AM8:00 AM9:00 AM 10:00 AM11:00 AM12:00 PM
1:00 PM2:00 PM3:00 PM4:00 PM5:00 PM6:00 PM7:00 PM8:00 PM9:00 PM 10:00 PM11:00 PM12:00 AM

P E A K I N G F A C T O R

T I M E
F I G U R E 4 - 3 . D I U R N A L C U R V E

R E S I D E N T I A L

A V E R A G E

C O M M E R C I A L
4-18

A V E R A G E
5 3 4 , 8 4 2 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 400,000
420,000
440,000
460,000
480,000
500,000
520,000
540,000
560,000
580,000
600,000
3/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/21 Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 4 . S E W E R S H E D 1 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W RAIN
FL OW

AV ERAGE FL OW
4-19

A V E R A G E
1 9 0 , 3 5 4 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
220,000
240,000
260,000
280,000
3/6/213/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/21 Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 5 . S E W E R S H E D 2 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-20

A V E R A G E
1 9 8 , 4 0 4 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
220,000
240,000
260,000
280,000
300,000
3/6/213/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/21 Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 6 . S E W E R S H E D 3 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-21

A V E R A G E
4 1 4 , 1 8 0 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 300,000
320,000
340,000
360,000
380,000
400,000
420,000
440,000
460,000
480,000
500,000
3/6/213/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/21 Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 7 . S E W E R S H E D 4 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-22

A V E R A G E
3 6 8 , 6 1 1 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 260,000
280,000
300,000
320,000
340,000
360,000
380,000
400,000
420,000
440,000
460,000
3/6/213/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/21 Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 8 . S E W E R S H E D 5 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-23

A V E R A G E
2 9 1 , 6 1 6 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 200,000
220,000
240,000
260,000
280,000
300,000
320,000
340,000
360,000
380,000
400,000
3/6/213/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 9 . S E W E R S H E D 6 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-24

A V E R A G E
7 7 7 , 8 4 0 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 700,000
720,000
740,000
760,000
780,000
800,000
820,000
840,000
860,000
880,000
900,000
3/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 0 . S E W E R S H E D 7 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F LO W 4-25

A V E R A G E
1 , 7 1 5 , 7 3 1 G P D
0 0.5
1 1,400,000
1,500,000
1,600,000
1,700,000
1,800,000
1,900,000
2,000,000
3/6/213/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 1 . S E W E R S H E D 8 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F LO W 4-26

A V E R A G E
4 6 , 2 5 5 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
3/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 2 . S E W E R S H E D 9 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F LO W 4-27

A V E R A G E
6 7 , 6 9 9 G P D
0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1
0 10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
110,000
120,000
130,000
140,000
150,000
3/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 3 . S E W E R S H E D 1 0 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-28

A V E R A G E
1 , 8 8 1 , 4 3 7 ( G P D )
0 0.25

0.5 0.75
1 1,600,000
1,650,000
1,700,000
1,750,000
1,800,000
1,850,000
1,900,000
1,950,000
2,000,000
3/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 4 . S E W E R S H E D 1 1 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-29

A V E R A G E
5 8 3 , 7 3 4 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
550,000
600,000
650,000
700,000
750,000
800,000
3/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 5 . S E W E R S H E D 1 2 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-30

A V E R A G E
1 , 8 8 4 , 7 1 2 G P D
0 0.25

0.5 0.75
1 1,600,000
1,700,000
1,800,000
1,900,000
2,000,000
2,100,000
2,200,000
2,300,000
2,400,000
3/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 6 . S E W E R S H E D 1 3 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-31

A V E R A G E
1 , 7 1 7 , 3 2 9 G P D
0 0.25

0.5 0.75
1 1,500,000
1,550,000
1,600,000
1,650,000
1,700,000
1,750,000
1,800,000
1,850,000
1,900,000
3/6/213/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 7 . S E W E R S H E D 1 4 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-32

A V E R A G E
1 , 4 2 8 , 9 1 3 G P D
0 0.25

0.5 0.75
1 1,100,000
1,200,000
1,300,000
1,400,000
1,500,000
1,600,000
1,700,000
1,800,000
1,900,000
3/6/213/7/213/8/213/9/21
3/10/213/11/213/12/213/13/213/14/213/15/213/16/213/17/213/18/213/19/213/20/213/21/213/22/213/23/213/24/213/25/213/26/213/27/213/28/213/29/213/30/213/31/21 4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 8 . S E W E R S H E D 1 5 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-33

A V E R A G E
4 2 8 , 6 8 9 G P D
0 0.25

0.5 0.75
1 250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
450,000
500,000
550,000
600,000
650,000
3/31/21
4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 1 9 . S E W E R S H E D 1 6 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-34

A V E R A G E
9 3 5 , 7 4 7 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 840,000
860,000
880,000
900,000
920,000
940,000
960,000
980,000
1,000,000
1,020,000
1,040,000
3/31/21
4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 2 0 . S E W E R S H E D 1 7 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-35

A V E R A G E
1 , 8 9 2 , 4 5 5 G P D
0 0.1

0.2 0.3

0.4 0.5

0.6 0.7

0.8 0.9
1 500,000
1,000,000
1,500,000
2,000,000
2,500,000
3,000,000
3,500,000
3/31/21
4/1/214/2/214/3/214/4/214/5/214/6/214/7/214/8/214/9/21
4/10/214/11/214/12/214/13/214/14/214/15/214/16/214/17/214/18/214/19/214/20/21 W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu W Th F Sa Su M Tu

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( G P D )
F I G U R E 4 - 2 1 . S E W E R S H E D 1 8 A V E R A G E D A I LY M O N I T O R E D F L O W 4-36
0 0.05

0.1 0.15

0.2 0.25

0.3 0.00

5.00 10.00

15.00 20.00

25.00 30.00

35.00 12:00:06 AM12:36:43 AM
1:07:47 AM1:40:42 AM2:11:35 AM2:42:19 AM3:14:12 AM3:54:23 AM4:28:02 AM4:56:52 AM5:26:38 AM5:57:35 AM6:36:14 AM7:15:20 AM7:39:32 AM8:06:43 AM8:30:18 AM8:51:46 AM9:14:41 AM9:37:47 AM 10:00:18 AM10:23:57 AM10:46:48 AM11:10:00 AM11:36:25 AM 12:01:11 PM12:24:17 PM12:48:59 PM
1:11:52 PM1:35:05 PM2:02:05 PM2:26:44 PM2:48:52 PM3:10:27 PM3:31:38 PM3:54:58 PM4:17:19 PM4:41:24 PM5:04:56 PM5:29:54 PM6:03:48 PM6:32:59 PM7:02:12 PM7:36:22 PM8:08:26 PM8:41:00 PM9:10:31 PM9:38:34 PM 10:08:24 PM10:36:39 PM11:03:32 PM11:34:14 PM

R A I N ( I N )

F L O W ( M G D )

T I M E
F I G U R E 4 - 2 2 . F E B R U A R Y 2 0 1 7

D R Y W E AT H E R V S W E T W E AT H E R F L O W

R A I N
R A I N D A Y ( 0 2 / 2 0 / 2 0 1 7 )
D R Y D A Y ( 2 / 2 7 / 2 0 1 7 )
5-1
CH AP TER 5

LIF T STATION EVA LUATION
This Chapter presents the evaluation of the City’s lift stations for their ability to meet existing and future wastewater flow demands. All figures are located at the end of this chapter.

L I F T S T A T I O N B A C K G R O U N D
The City owns and operates ten (10) lift stations located throughout the collection system. The City also maintains the Vista Nueva Lift Station under an assessment district. All lift station force mains tie into the City’s gravity system for conveyance to SAPS. City staff conducts regular maintenance of the City’s lift stations. In 2018, staff initiated a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) program to monitor all lift stations. This SCADA program monitors motor run times and sends an alarm to staff directly if there are any operational issues at the lift stations. City staff are unable to operate the lift stations from the SCADA system, only monitor.

The tenants at Harris Place Industrial Park have requested that the City assume operations and maintenance of the privately-owned lift station. The City is currently preparing a separate study to determine the feasibility of operating the Harris Place Lift Station. The review of this lift station is being completed under a separate report.

Fluid Resource Management (FRM), a sub-consultant to Wallace Group, conducted evaluations of the City’s eleven lift stations and the lift station at Harris Place. Very little information is available or was able to be collected by FRM during their site inspection of the Harris Place Lift Station. Table 5-1 provides a summary of each lift station.

Additional information for each lift station is discussed below. All lift stations are shown on Figure 5-1.

As discussed in Ch. 3, the City also receives wastewater flows from ten (10) private lift stations located throughout the City and shown on Figure 3-3. These private lift stations are not part of this lift station evaluation.

Table 5-1. Lift Station Summary
Airport (Moffett) Carpenter Hall De La Torre Harkins Road Lake Street4. Las Casitas5. Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 Vista Nueva

5. Submersible Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Dry Pit Submersible Flygt Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless ITT Flygt Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless Smith/Loveless ITT Flygt 2 2 2 2 3 2 2 2 2 2 2
10 30 5 5 30 10 15 30 7.5 10 3
Date Constructed 1981 Unknown 1964 Unknown 1967 1971 1964 Unknown 1967 Unknown 1990 Pump Model # 3127.090-181044,
3127.090-5766
MU237600-03/10-
01, MU237600-
03/10-02
6412746, 6412763 66N40657,
66N40658
9080091,
980150
122190009,
122190011
3Y6579005A13
DQ
7907700L-1,
791170C-1
67541123,
67541125
99-1024B-2, 99-
1024B-1
9640005,
9640095
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
208 230 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240 240
Speed (rpm) 1740 1175 1165 870 860 1200 1760 1200 1155 1300 1740 Across the line
contactor VFD Altivar 660 Across the line
contactor
Across the line
contactor VFD 1Y1261 Soft Start Soft Start Across the line contactor Across the line
contactor
VFD, hand
mode uses
contactor
Across the line
contactor
gpm 550 2,250 200 350 2,600 150 500 1,530 400 400 175
TDH (ft) --- --- 37 18 --- 50 58 433 32 50 54
Rated 550 2,250 200 350 2,400 150 500 1,530 400 400 175 Measured 467 1,600 342 228 2,400 357 --- 1,489 195 564 220 Rated 550 2,250 200 350 2,600 150 500 1,530 400 400 175 Measured 448 1,600 354 281 2,600 345 --- 1,661 218 491 79 Rated --- --- --- --- 2,800 --- --- --- --- --- ---
Measured --- --- --- --- 2,800 --- --- --- --- --- ---
yes yes no no yes yes yes yes no yes no
yes no yes unsafe yes yes yes yes unsafe yes yes
yes no no no yes no no no no no yes, 4"
no peeling no no yes no no yes no yes no
6 7 4 4 5.25 4 4 8 4 6 6
--- --- --- --- 25 --- --- --- --- --- ---
Wet Well Surface Elevation (ft) 63.3 50.8 55.8 61.4 54.8 53.2 42.0 78.8 55.4 56.1 51.0

48.30 20.8 41.3 43.42 14.75 32.2 20 59.3 30.4 21.57 35
15 30 14.5 18 40.00 21 22 19.5 25 34.5 16
Est. Wet Well Capacity (gallons)6. 3,170 10,898 1,372 1,692 26,247 1,410 1,879 6,388 2,350 5,285 3,382 Low Alarm Not listed 1.0 0.8 1.0 1.1 Not listed 0.4 1.5 0.1 0.2 Not listed Off 3.0 2.0 1.7 2.0 1.8 1.6 1.5 3.5 1.8 1.3 1.0
Lead On 4.0 5.6 3.5 4.0 2.5 3.5 3.0 6.5 4.5 3.3 5.0
Lag On 4.5 6.0 3.8 4.3 3.2 4.1 3.5 7.0 5.0 3.5 7.0
Last On --- --- --- --- 4.2 --- --- --- --- --- ---
High Alarm 13.5 8.0 5.5 5.0 6.0 5.8 4.0 8.5 6.0 4.5 7.0 211 1,036 169 188 687 179 141 1,128 254 423 846
3,170 2,015 442 376 4,811 1,410 338 2,632 555 909 #VALUE! 8 12 6 6 12 8 6 10 6 6 4

PVC DI DI DI DI AC DI DI DI DI PVC
3,706 47 588 300 167 1,035 920 1,128 386 82 378

55.2 25.8 49.3 48.4 37.08 36.49 27.50 71.80 45.00 26.57 48.80

59.3 40.3 58.4 56.9 41.00 88.23 49.07 88.19 54.78 46.73 62.00

8.0 17.5 15.4 11.5 24.5 54.4 27.6 25.4 22.6 23.9 26.0
Lift Station
Type
Voltage
Horsepower (HP), each
Number of Pumps
Force Main Total Static Head (feet)
Force Main End Elevation (feet)
Wet Well Width (ft)
Wet Well Set Points
(feet)1
Wet Well Bottom Elevation (ft)
Flow (pump3) (GPM)
Wet Well Operating Volume (gal)2
Wet Well Maximum Volume (gal)3
Wet Well Depth (ft)
Wet Well Diameter or Length (ft)
Portable Generator Power Receptacle
Force Main Material
Force Main Start Elevation (feet)
Phase
Motor Controller/VFD
Flow (pump1) (GPM)
Flow (pump2) (GPM)
Pump Manufacturer
Permanent Standby Generator
Pump Design Point
Bypass Capabilities
Wet Pit Coating
Force Main Diameter (inches)
Force Main Length (feet)
Table Notes:

NA - Not Available

1. Information provided by FRM site visit conducted 4/9/2021.

2. Wet well operating volume calculated based on operating range from Pump Off to Lead On.

3. Wet well maximum volume calculated based on maximum desired operating range (Low Alarm to High Alarm).

4. Lake Street has two discharge force mains. Pump #1 is connected to 12" dia. FM. Pumps #2 and #3 discharge to 14" dia. FM. All three pumps have same sized motors and pumps even though they all have different serial/model numbers (Personal Communication Doyle McFarland 5/5/2022).

5. Wet well high level alarm setting provided by Gary Gabriel email 5/12/2022 for Las Casitas and Vista Nueva.

6. Wet well estimated capacity from station-specific ERP. 5-2
5-3

P H Y S I C A L D E S C R I P T I O N
Information regarding the physical characteristics of the eleven lift stations was provided by FRM and City staff, and some of the above ground features were visually reviewed by Wallace Group during site visits.

Airport (Moffett) Lift Station
Airport Lift Station is located in the northwest corner of the property at 730 La Guardia Street near the Municipal Airport and serves approximately 584 acres. This lift station collects flow from the commercial and industrial area south of the airport. This is a duplex lift station with submersible Flygt pumps each rated at 550 gpm. At over 3,700 lineal feet, the force main for this station has the longest run of the stations in the Salinas collection system. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch and bypass capabilities. 5-4
Carpenter Hall Lift Station
Carpenter Hall Lift Station is located near the center of the sewer collection system behind the building at 512 North Main Street. There is an access road off North Main Street near 422 North Main Street that leads to the lift station. This lift station collects flow from approximately 508 acres of residential, commercial, industrial properties, and schools in the area. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 2,250 gpm located in a dry pit. The pumps are controlled by VFDs. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch but no power receptacle or bypass capabilities. This is the City’s second largest lift station.

De La Torre Lift Station
De La Torre Lift Station is located in the southwest corner of the property adjacent to 1222 De La Torre Street near the Municipal Airport. This lift station collects flow from approximately 10 acres of commercial properties and hotels in the area west of the airport. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 200 gpm located in a dry pit. This lift station has facilities to connect a portable backup generator but has no permanent electrical generator or bypass capabilities.
5-5
Harkins Road Lift Station
Harkins Road Lift Station is located near the southern boundary of the sewer collection system between Harkins Road and the railroad tracks. This lift station collects flow from approximately 146 acres of commercial and industrial properties in the area. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 350 gpm located in a dry pit. This lift station has no permanent electrical generator and an unsafe or transfer switch to connect a portable backup generator. It also has no bypass capabilities.

Lake Street Lift Station
Lake Street Lift Station is located near the center of the sewer collection system near Carr Lake at 146 East Rossi Street. This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from a large upstream area of approximately 4,108 acres. This is a triplex lift station with Flygt pumps each rated at approximately 2,800 gpm located in a dry pit. The pumps are controlled by VFDs. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch and bypass capabilities. This is the City’s largest lift station. 5-6
Las Casitas Lift Station
Las Casitas Lift Station is located near the eastern edge of the sewer collection system in a residential area at 721 Las Casitas Drive. This lift station collects flow from approximately 38 acres of residential properties and schools in the area. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 150 gpm located in a dry pit.

This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch but does not have bypass capabilities.

Mill Lake Lift Station
Mill Lake Lift Station is located near the western edge of the sewer collection system in a residential area at 81 Gardenia Drive. This lift station collects flow from approximately 43 acres of residential and commercial properties in the area. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 500 gpm located in a dry pit.

This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch but does not have bypass capabilities.
5-7
Santa Rita Lift Station
Santa Rita Lift Station is located near the northern edge of the sewer collection system in a commercial and residential area at 2021 Sucre Court. This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from the upstream area of approximately 348 acres, including a small portion of flows through the Bolsa Knolls special assessment district. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 1,530 gpm located in a dry pit. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch but does not have bypass capabilities. This is the City’s third largest lift station.

Spicer Lift Station
Spicer Lift Station is located in a commercial and industrial area at 59 Spicer Street. This lift station collects flow from approximately 79 acres of residential, commercial, industrial properties, and hotels in the area. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 400 gpm located in a dry pit. This lift station cannot have a dedicated backup generator and currently does not have a safe receptacle for a transfer switch and no bypass capabilities.
5-8
TP2 Lift Station
TP2 Lift Station is located near Spicer Lift Station in a commercial and industrial area at 650 Elvee Drive. This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from the upstream area of approximately 136 acres. This is a duplex lift station with Smith & Loveless pumps each rated at 400 gpm located in a dry pit. The pumps are controlled by VFDs set at 48 Hertz maximum output to control vibration. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch but no bypass capabilities.

Vista Nueva Lift Station
Vista Nueva Lift Station is located near the western edge of the collection system in a residential area at 704 Garner Avenue. This lift station collects flow from the approximately 6 acres of residential properties in the area.

This is a duplex lift station with submersible Flygt pumps each rated at 175 gpm. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator but does have receptacle and transfer switch for a portable generator and bypass capabilities.
5-9
Harris Road Lift Station
Harris Lift Station is a private lift station located in the industrial area south of the sewer collection system at 1 Harris Place. This lift station collects flow from the industrial in the area. This is a duplex lift station with submersible pumps (manufacturer unknown) rated at approximately 100 to 140 gpm. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator or bypass capabilities, but does have a receptacle and transfer switch for a portable generator..
5-10
H Y D R A U L I C P E R F O R M A N C E E V A L U A T I O N – E X I S T I N G C O N D I T I O N S The hydraulic characteristics of each lift station and deficiencies are noted below. Design criteria that apply to the lift stations and force mains are summarized as follows:

1. Force main velocities should be greater than 2 feet per second to maintain self-cleansing properties but less than 5 feet per second to minimize head loss and potential for water hammer.

2. Lift stations should be sized to convey peak flows with the largest pump out of service. Station “capacity” is therefore calculated with the largest pump out of service. This means that the lift station should be capable of operating with only one pump for a duplex station or two pumps for a triplex station.

3. Lift station wet wells should be sized to have adequate emergency storage.

4. Control settings within the wet well should be set to limit the number of pump starts per hour to acceptable limits as defined by the pump manufacturer. Larger lift stations may require a variable frequency drive to meet this requirement, especially those that receive direct discharge from other lift stations.

5. Lift stations should have a means of conveying peak flow during a power outage.

Force Main Hydraulic Evaluation
Force main friction loss was calculated to estimate total pump head and identify pump operating points based on manufacturer’s pump curves, data provided by City staff, and observed pumping rates. Pump curves for those lift stations which the City had available are included in Appendix D. The following items are of interest:
❖ Airport LS is based on manufacturer's pump curves because the flow was measured when there were potential problems with the pump motors. However, the measured flow rate is approximated by derating the pump to 52% design rpm which could be caused by the worn motors. ❖ Carpenter Hall LS is based on manufacturer's pump curves. However, the measured flow rate is approximated by derating the pump to 62% design rpm which could be caused by the VFD. ❖ Pump curve for De La Torre is assumed similar to Harkins Rd. pump since manufacturer's data is unavailable and are adjusted to 125% to match the measured flows. ❖ Pump curve for Harkins Road is based on manufacturer's pump curves because the flow was measured when there were noted problems with the check valves.
❖ TP2 based upon VFD set at 48 Hz maximum by City staff to prevent excessive vibration in the pumps.

Operating the pumps at full capacity would result in higher force main flow velocities and system losses.
❖ Pump curve for Vista Nueva is extrapolated from calibration data from City staff since manufacturer's data is unavailable.

The force mains and pumps were evaluated for hydraulic capacity. The physical condition of the lift station pumps and appurtenances was visually inspected by FRM with recommendations for follow up actions, which are provided in Appendix E.
5-11
Force main velocities were calculated based on estimated operating point of the lift station pumps. Calculated velocities are summarized in Table 5-2. As noted above, force main velocities should be greater than 2 feet per second to maintain self-cleansing properties but less than 5 feet per second to minimize head loss and the potential for water hammer. It is recommended that lift stations with force main velocities greater than 5 feet per second should be evaluated further as part of any lift station upgrades. Based on the calculated velocities identified in Table 5-2, the velocities within the force mains for about half of the lift station are within acceptable ranges. However, the calculated velocities in the force mains for the following lift stations is of concern:
❖ Carpenter Hall Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes without speed reduction from the VFDs causes the force main velocity to be 8.5 and 14.8 feet per second, respectively. Reducing the pump output to 62% approximates the measured flow but still causes excessive force main velocity of 8.2 feet per second in duplex mode
❖ Harkins Road Lift Station operating in duplex mode causes the force main velocity to be 5.2 feet per second, the upper limit of recommended maximum velocity. ❖ Lake Street Lift Station is the only triplex lift station in the system. Lake Street Pump #1 is connected to 12" dia. force main. Pumps #2 and #3 discharge to 14" dia. force main. Operating the lift station in simplex, duplex, and triplex modes without speed reduction from the VFDs causes the force main velocities to be 7.4 feet per second for the 12” dia. force main, and 6.1 and 9.7 feet per second, respectively, for the 14” dia. force main.
❖ Las Casitas Lift Station pumps have a design rating of 150 gpm at 50 feet Total Dynamic Head (TDH).

However, the calculated and measured pumping rates are 395 gpm and 350 gpm, respectively. The force main flow velocity at the design pumping rate of 150 gpm is 1.5 fps. Although this is lower than the recommended minimum flow rate of 2 fps, the flow rate at 395 gpm is 2.5 fps, which is acceptable. ❖ Mill Lake Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes causes the force main velocity to be 5.8 and 7.1 feet per second, respectively.
❖ Santa Rita Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes causes the force main velocity to be 5.8 and 7.1 feet per second, respectively.
❖ TP2 Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes without speed reduction from the VFDs causes the force main velocity to be 8.4 and 11.9 feet per second, respectively. Reducing the pump output to 80% approximates the measured flow but still causes excessive force main velocity of 6.3 and 9.2 feet per second in simplex and duplex modes, respectively. ❖ Vista Nueva Lift Station operating in simplex and duplex modes causes the force main velocity to be

5.4 and 6.4 feet per second, respectively.

Table 5-2 Force Main Evaluation
Lift Station
Airport
(Moffett)2.

Carpenter
Hall3. De La Torre4. Harkins Road5.

Lake Street
Simplex6.

Lake Street
Duplex6. Las Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP27. Vista Nueva

8. Force Main Properties
Force Main Diameter inches 8 12 6 6 12 14 8 6 10 6 6 4
Hazen Williams C -- 140 110 110 110 110 110 130 110 110 110 110 140 Force Main Length1. feet 3,821 163 703 415 282 282 1,150 1,035 1,243 501 197 493 Elevation Head feet 8.0 17.5 15.4 11.5 24.5 24.5 54.4 27.6 25.4 22.6 23.9 26.0 Design Flows
Simplex Flow gpm 550 2,250 200 350 2,600 2,600 150 500 1,530 400 400 175 Velocity ft/sec 3.5 6.4 2.3 4.0 7.4 5.4 1.0 5.7 6.2 4.5 4.5 4.5 Estimated Pump Capacity
Simplex Flow gpm 640 1,600 345 370 2,600 -- 395 510 1,420 205 555 210 Velocity ft/sec 4.1 4.5 3.9 4.2 7.4 -- 2.5 5.8 5.8 2.3 6.3 5.4 Friction Loss1
ft 26.7 1.3 9.9 6.7 5.7 -- 3.8 30.1 20.0 2.7 6.7 12.8
Total Pump Head ft 34.7 18.8 25.3 18.2 30.2 -- 58.2 57.7 45.4 25.3 30.6 38.8 Duplex Flow gpm 780 2,900 395 455 -- 2,950 560 630 1,740 260 810 250 Velocity ft/sec 5.0 8.2 4.5 5.2 -- 6.1 3.6 7.1 7.1 3.0 9.2 6.4 Friction Loss1
ft 38.5 4.0 12.8 9.8 -- 3.4 7.2 44.6 29.1 4.2 13.5 17.7 Total Pump Head ft 46.5 21.5 28.1 21.3 -- 27.9 61.6 72.1 54.6 26.8 37.4 43.7 Triplex Flow gpm -- -- -- -- -- 4,650 -- -- -- -- -- -- Velocity ft/sec -- -- -- -- -- 9.7 -- -- -- -- -- --
Friction Loss1
ft -- -- -- -- -- 7.9 -- -- -- -- -- --
Total Pump Head ft -- -- -- -- -- 32.4 -- -- -- -- -- --

1. Minor losses are
included in the friction
loss calculations for all
lift stations as an
assumed equivalent
length of 115 LF. This is
Minor Losses for assumed LS FM
item size equivalent pipe length quantity total length
90d elbow 8 9.8 3 29.4
check valve 8 74 1 74
gate valve 8 2.7 1 2.7
tee 10 4.6 2 9.2
TOTAL 115.3
Table Notes
na - Not Available

1. Minor losses are included in the friction loss calculations for all lift stations as an assumed equivalent length of 115 LF. This approximates losses for 1 check valve, 3 elbows, 2 tees, and 1 gate valve in the force main.

2. Airport LS is based on manufacturer's pump curves because the flow was measured when there were potential problems with the pump motors. However, the measured flow rate is approximated by derating the pump to 52% design rpm which could be caused by the worn motors.

3. Carpenter Hall LS is based on manufacturer's pump curves. However, the measured flow rate is approximated by derating the pump to 62% design rpm which could be caused by the VFD.

4. Pump curve for De La Torre is assumed similar to Harkins Rd. Pump since manufacturer's data is unavailable and are adjusted to 125% to match the measured flows.

5. Pump curve for Harkins Road is based on manufacturer's pump curves because the flow was measured when there were noted problems with the check valves.

6. Lake Street Pump #1 is connected to 12" dia. FM. Pumps #2 and #3 discharge to 14" dia. FM. All three pumps have same sized motors and pumps even though they all have different serial/model numbers (Personal Communication Doyle McFarland 5/5/2022).

7. TP2 based upon VFD set at 48 Hz maximum by city staff to prevent excessive vibration in the pumps.

8. Pump curve for Vista Nueva is from calibration data from city staff since manufacturer's data is unavailable. 5-12
5-13
Existing Lift Station Inflow
Table 5-3 provides a summary of existing flows for each lift station based on the unit flow factors for contributing land uses as described in Chapter 4. The calculated flows for each lift station represent gravity flow to the lift station from its tributary area. Lake Street Lift Station also receives flow from the Las Casitas and Vista Nueva Lift Stations. These flows are added to the calculated land-based gravity flows in Table 5-3 in the row labeled “w/ Simplex Flow.”
Pumping Capacity Evaluation
Lift stations should be sized to convey peak hour dry weather (PHDW) flows with the largest pump out of service.

Station “firm capacity” is therefore calculated with the largest pump out of service. This means that the lift station should be capable of operating with only one pump for a duplex station or two pumps for a triplex station.

Table 5-4 provides a comparison of lift station flows with the largest pump not operating, that is simplex operation for all lift stations except Lake Street Lift Station which is shown for duplex operation since this is the only triplex lift station in the system. The middle row in Table 5-4 shows how well the lift stations are matched to the existing PHDW inflow. It shows that many of the lift stations are oversized. Lake Street will require the third pump to assist under existing PHDW conditions, which is a deficiency.

Lift stations should also be sized to convey peak hour wet weather (PHWW) flows with all the pumps operating.

Table 5-4 provides a comparison with all the pumps operating for all lift stations. The bottom row in Table 5-4 shows how well the lift stations can handle PHWW flow. All of the lift stations have adequate excess capacity, except Lake Street which shows marginal excess capacity under PHWW flow conditions. The capacity of Lake Street Lift Station during rain events could be adversely affected by RDII due to the submerged manholes at Carr Lake.

Table 5-3 Existing Lift Station Inflow by Land Use
Lift Station Existing Flow Rates (gpd)
Airport
(Moffett)
Carpenter
Hall De La Torre
Harkins
Road Lake Street Las Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 Vista Nueva 0 563,915 0 0 2,562,149 64,040 59,173 306,498 0 97,621 19,830 25,570 21,816 1,139 43,425 142,320 0 4,330 5,048 37,051 35,858 0 4,936 195 0 24,548 14,869 91 0 1,500 12,260 75 0
0 0 2,386 0 2,781 0 0 358 652 113 0
0 3,832 0 0 58,479 1,562 0 8,762 0 2,195 0

NA NA NA NA
Las Casitas
Vista Nueva NA NA NA NA NA NA
gpd 30,506 589,757 3,525 67,973 2,780,598 65,693 63,503 322,166 49,963 135,862 19,830 gpm 21 410 2 47 1,931 46 44 224 35 94 14
w/ Simplex LS1. NA NA NA NA 2,536 NA NA NA NA 299 NA
Peaking Factor 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 gpd 45,759 884,636 5,288 101,960 4,170,897 98,539 95,255 483,248 74,945 203,793 29,745 gpm 32 614 4 71 2,896 68 66 336 52 142 21
w/ Simplex LS1. NA NA NA NA 3,501 NA NA NA NA 347 NA
Residential
Diurnal Factor 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Residential
Peaking Factor 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Commercial
Diurnal Factor 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Commercial
Peaking Factor 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 gpd 86,942 1,765,395 10,046 193,723 8,309,027 196,830 189,860 964,146 142,395 401,850 59,490 gpm 60 1,226 7 135 5,770 137 132 670 99 279 41
w/ Simplex LS1. NA NA NA NA 6,375 NA NA NA NA 484 NA
Peak Hour
Wet Weather
Flow
gpm 192 2,000 19 90 6,109 107 312 975 156 775 32
Peak Hour
Dry Weather
Flow
Maximum
Day Dry
Weather Flow
Total Average
Daily Flow
Schools (gpd)
Upstream Lift Station
Residential (gpd)
Commercial (gpd)
Hotel Rooms (gpd)
Industrial (gpd)
Table Notes:

1. Flow is calculated with upstream lift station(s) operating in simplex mode. 5-14
Table 5-4 Lift Station Flow Comparison Summary
Lift Station
Airport
(Moffett)
Carpenter
Hall
De La
Torre
Harkins
Road
Lake
Street1.2.

Las
Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 Vista Nueva
Operating Mode
Across the
line
contactor
VFD Altivar
660
Across the
line
contactor
Across the
line
contactor
VFD
1Y1261 Soft Start Soft Start
Across the
line
contactor
Across the
line
contactor
VFD, hand
mode uses
contactor
Across the
line
contactor
Existing Peak Hour Dry
Weather Flow by Land Use
(gpm)
60 1,226 7 135 6,375 137 132 670 99 279 41
Average Flow by Simplex
Pump1. 640 1,600 345 370 5,550 395 510 1,420 205 555 210 Percent Difference 960% 31% 4845% 175% -13% 189% 287% 112% 107% 99% 408% Existing Peak Hour Wet
Weather Flow by Land Use
(gpm)
192 2,000 19 90 6,109 107 312 975 156 775 32
Average Flow by Duplex
Pumping2. 780 2,900 395 455 7,250 560 630 1,740 260 1,050 250 Percent Difference 306% 45% 1979% 406% 19% 423% 102% 78% 67% 35% 681%

1. Flow at Lake Street Lift Station is for duplex operation since this is the only triplex lift station in the system.

2. Flow at Lake Street Lift Station is for triplex operation. 5-15
5-16
Wet Well Capacity Evaluation
To determine the adequacy of the wet well capacity under existing conditions, each lift station was evaluated under three different operating conditions, as follows:

1. Worst Case Scenario – this is when the flow coming into the lift station is exactly half of the flow rate of the pump

2. Average Daily Flows

3. Peak Hour Dry Weather Flows
Pump run times were calculated based on the lift station operating volumes and estimated pump flows. Lift station pumps should typically cycle not more than 10 times per hour to limit pump starts. Smaller horsepower pumps may be able to cycle up to 25 times per hour. This recommendation, however, should be based on actual pump manufacturer’s recommendations. It is recommended that lift stations should cycle at minimum once per day and preferably two to three times per day to minimize potential for odor. Table 5-5 summarizes the wet well cycle time calculations without the VFD operational. As Table 5-5 notes, Carpenter Hall, Lake Street, and TP2 have VFDs that could greatly limit the amount of pump cycling on and off.

Table 5-5 shows that most of the lift stations wet well operating volumes are undersized. Increasing the operating volumes for Harkins Road, Lake Street, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, Santa Rita and TP2 could improve pump performance, reduce the need for VFDs, and as shown below, increase the amount of time available for potential pumping failures.

Airport Lift Station
The Airport Lift station receives approximately 21 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 60 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 6 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 15 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.

Based on these pump cycling times the wet well has adequate capacity for existing flows and therefore, this lift station is not required to be upgraded due to hydraulic constraints.

Carpenter Hall Lift Station
The Carpenter Hall Lift Station receives approximately 410 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 1,226 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station pumps are controlled by VFDs.

In the event that the VFDs were disengaged, the pumps would cycle approximately 18 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 17 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow. Although not required, the wet well operating volume, estimated as 1,000 gallons, could be increased in the event that the VFDs are disengaged.

De La Torre Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 2 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 7 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately once per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 2 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow. Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is adequate for existing flows and therefore, this lift station is not required to be upgraded due to hydraulic constraints. However, the lift station appears to be cycling infrequently, with average residence time approximately 70 5-17
minutes, which may lead to odor issues during the hot summer months. The lift station pump appears to be substantially oversized with the pump on cycle time lasting for only about 30 seconds during average daily flow. Reducing the pump flow rate could help reduce operating costs and potential issues with extended wet well residence times. However, the force main size would also need to be decreased to ensure minimum velocities in the main.

Harkins Road Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 47 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 135 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 13 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 27 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.

Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is marginal for existing flows.

The wet well operating volume is estimated at 190 gallons. Depending upon the configuration of the influent piping, this could be increased since the estimated total wet well volume is 1,700 gallons.

This lift station is not required to be upgraded due to existing hydraulic constraints. The lift station pump appears to be substantially oversized for existing conditions, with the pump on cycle lasting for only about 30 seconds during average daily flow. However, Harkins Road is expected to receive future flows, discussed later in this chapter.

Lake Street Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 1,930 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 6,375 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station operates in simplex or triplex mode under average and peak flows, respectively. The lift station pumps are controlled by VFDs. In the event that the VFDs were disengaged, the pumps would cycle approximately 100 times per hour under average flow and peak hour dry weather flow. Although not required, the wet well operating volume, estimated as 690 gallons, could be increased in the event that the VFDs are disengaged. This is based on estimated pump cycling times without VFDs and the estimated total wet well volume of 26,000 gallons. Also, the pumps and force mains appear to be undersized based upon the high pumping times, high sewage inflow rate, and high velocities in the force mains.
5-18
Las Casitas Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 46 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 137 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 14 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 30 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.

Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is marginal for existing flows.

The lift station pump appears to be oversized with the pump on cycle lasting for only about 30 seconds during average daily flow. The wet well operating volume is estimated at 180 gallons.

Depending upon the configuration of the influent piping, this could be increased because the estimated total wet well volume is 1,400 gallons.

Mill Lake Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 44 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 132 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 17 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 40 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.

Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is inadequate for existing flows. The lift station pump appears to be oversized with the pump on cycle lasting for only about 18 seconds during average daily flow. The wet well operating volume is estimated at 140 gallons.

Depending upon the configuration of the influent piping, this could be increased because the estimated total wet well volume is 1,900 gallons and the pumping rate could be decreased thereby reducing pumping cycling and operating costs.

Santa Rita Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 224 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 670 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 10 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 19 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow.

Under average flow conditions, this lift station is right at the recommended 10 cycles per hour.

The lift station pump appears to be oversized for existing conditions with the pump on cycle lasting for only about 1 minute during average daily flow. However, Santa Rita Lift Station is expected to receive future flows, discussed later in this chapter.

Spicer Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 35 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 100 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately 7 times per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 12 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow. Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is adequate for existing flows and no upgrades are recommended based upon hydraulic considerations. 5-19
TP2 Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 94 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 280 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station pumps are controlled by VFDs. In the event that the VFDs were disengaged, the pumps would cycle more than 11 times per hour under average flow conditions and more than 20 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow1. Although not required, the wet well operating volume, estimated at 420 gallons, could be increased in the event that the VFDs are set at 60 Hz maximum. This is based on estimated pump cycling times without VFDs and the estimated total wet well volume of 5,290 gallons. Also, the pumping rate could be decreased thereby reducing pumping cycling and operating costs. Reducing the pumping rate would also reduce the high velocities in the force main.

Vista Nueva Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 14 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 41 gpm under peak flow conditions. Based on these inflows it is anticipated that this station always operates in simplex mode. The lift station is cycling approximately once per hour under average flow conditions and approximately 2 times per hour under peak hour dry weather flow. Based on these pump cycling times, the wet well operating volume is adequate for existing flows and therefore, this lift station is not required to be upgraded due to hydraulic constraints. However, the lift station appears to be cycling infrequently, with average residence time approximately 60 minutes, which may lead to odor issues during the hot summer months. 1 TP2 cycle times in Table 5-5 are based upon VFD set at 48 Hz maximum by city staff to prevent excessive vibration in the pumps. Allowing the pumps to run without VFDs at 60 Hz would increase the simplex flow rate from 555 gpm to 740 gpm.

Table 5-5 Lift Station Cycle Times
Lift Station
Airport
(Moffett)
Carpenter
Hall De La Torre Harkins Road Lake Street1,2 Las Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 Vista Nueva Operating Mode Across the
line contactor
VFD Altivar
660
Across the
line contactor
Across the
line contactor VFD 1Y1261 Soft Start Soft Start Across the line contactor Across the
line contactor
VFD, hand
mode uses
contactor
Across the
line contactor
Wetwell Operating
Volume gallons 211 1,036 169 188 687 179 141 1,128 254 423 846 Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation1gpm 640 1,600 345 370 5,550 395 510 1,420 205 555 210 Estimated Duplex
Pump Operation2gpm 780 2,900 395 455 7,250 560 630 1,740 260 810 250 Design Simplex
Pump Operation gpm 550 2,250 200 350 5,200 150 500 1,530 400 400 175 Worst Case Number of Pump Cycles per Hour (Flow In = One-half Pump Rate) minutes 1.3 2.6 2.0 2.0 0.5 1.8 1.1 3.2 5.0 3.0 16.1
Cycles per Hour 45.4 23.2 30.6 29.5 121.1 33.2 54.3 18.9 12.1 19.7 3.7 minutes 1.5 1.8 3.4 2.1 0.5 4.8 1.1 2.9 2.5 4.2 19.3
Cycles per Hour 39.0 32.6 17.7 27.9 113.5 12.6 53.2 20.3 23.6 14.2 3.1 Existing Average Daily Flow
minutes 10.3 3.4 69.6 4.6 0.5 4.4 3.5 6.0 8.8 5.4 65.7
Cycles per Hour 5.8 17.6 0.9 13.1 109.9 13.6 17.1 10.0 6.8 11.1 0.9 minutes 10.4 3.1 70.0 4.6 0.6 5.6 3.5 5.9 8.0 5.9 66.7
Cycles per Hour 5.8 19.4 0.9 13.0 106.0 10.7 17.1 10.2 7.5 10.2 0.9 Peak Hour Dry Weather Flow
minutes 3.9 3.6 24.8 2.2 0.6 2.0 1.4 3.2 5.0 3.0 25.5
Cycles per Hour 15.5 16.6 2.4 27.3 102.8 30.0 41.6 18.8 12.1 19.7 2.4 minutes 3.9 1.9 25.1 2.3 0.6 14.7 1.5 3.0 3.4 5.0 26.8
Cycles per Hour 15.2 32.3 2.4 26.4 102.8 4.1 41.3 20.0 17.6 12.0 2.2 Pump On (min) 0.3 0.9 0.5 0.6 0.1 0.5 0.3 0.9 1.5 0.9 4.3 Pump Off (min) 10.0 2.5 69.1 4.0 0.4 3.9 3.2 5.0 7.3 4.5 61.4 Pump On (min) - - - - 0.5 - - - - - -
Pump Off (min)
- - - -

0.1 - - - - - -
Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation
Design Simplex
Pump Operation
Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation
Average Daily Flow
Estimated Triplex
Pump Operation
Peak Hour Dry
Weather Flow
Design Simplex
Pump Operation
Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation
Design Simplex
Pump Operation
Estimated Simplex
Pump Operation
Table Notes:

1. Simplex flow at Lake Street Lift Station is for duplex operation.

2. Duplex flow at Lake Street Lift Station is for triplex operation. 5-20
5-21
Emergency Response Time Evaluation
Another critical factor for lift station design is the emergency response time that is available to an operator before a sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) occurs in the event of total pump failure, such as due to power outage or other anomaly. Standby generators are on site at many of the City’s lift stations, including Airport, Carpenter Hall, Lake Street, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, Santa Rita, and TP2 which will reduce the risk of a SSO due to a power failure. Of those stations not provided with a standby generator, Harkins Road and Spicer, have emergency power receptacles for portable generators that are unsafe to use. Carpenter Hall has a permanent standby generator but is the only lift station without a power receptacle for a portable generator. It is recommended that all lift stations, at a minimum, have an emergency power receptacle with transfer switch to connect a portable generator in the event of a power outage. Power failures are not the only cause of emergencies, total pump failure can occur and therefore, having adequate emergency response time for operators to respond prior to a sanitary sewer overflow is critical.

Emergency response time was evaluated for each lift station, as summarized in Table 5-6. Per discussions with City Operation’s Staff, a minimum of 30-minute response time is desired. Response time was calculated based on the amount of time between high water alarm and overflow. None of the lift stations appear to have a dedicated overflow line that gravity flows into the collection system. The overflow location is based on upstream topography and is shown in the station-specific emergency response plans (ERPs). Additional storage capacity was calculated using the volume of the upstream manholes that did not exceed the hydraulic grade line of the ERP-identified overflow location. Additional storage in upstream manholes was not calculated for Carpenter Hall, De La Torre, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, and Vista Nueva lift stations. These locations did not have sufficient as-built or survey of the upstream manholes to determine additional storage.

The response time for a lift station can be increased by increasing available storage in the wet well or providing an overflow to additional emergency storage. Alternatively, the need for immediate response can be eliminated by installing permanent stand-by generators. Results for each lift station are provided as follows:

Airport Lift Station
The Airport Lift station receives approximately 21 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 60 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 2,115 gallons. Additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station-specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 3,220 gallons with emergency response times of 152 minutes and 53 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in La Guardia Street approximately 320 feet away. From there the SSO would travel approximately 1,200 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch that is 50 feet away.

Carpenter Hall Lift Station
The Carpenter Hall Lift Station receives approximately 410 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 1,226 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the highlevel alarm and overflow is estimated at 6,334 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 15 minutes to 5 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, 5-22
respectively. The emergency response times could be increased by installing an emergency overflow tank.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole immediately adjacent to the lift station. From there the SSO would travel approximately 800 LF in a surface ditch prior to entering a drainage ditch.

De La Torre Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 2 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 7 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 846 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 346 minutes to 121 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in De La Torre Street approximately 1,000 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO would travel approximately 300 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch approximately 30 feet away.

Harkins Road Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 47 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 135 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,222 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 26 minutes to 9 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station-specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 6,514 gallons with emergency response times of 138 minutes and 48 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.

Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Dayton Street approximately 1,600 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO would travel less than 20 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch approximately 5,000 feet away.

Lake Street Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 1,900 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 5,800 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 5,506 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 3 minutes to 1 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station-specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 45,077 gallons with emergency response times of 23 minutes and 8 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.

The emergency response times could be increased by installing an emergency overflow tank. 5-23
The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO locations during lift station failure would be a manhole in Carr Lake approximately 6,300 feet from the lift station and a manhole on N Madeira across from Chavez Park. From the Carr Lake location the SSO would travel less than 20 LF to a drainage ditch. At the other location the SSO would travel less than 100 LF to a drainage ditch.

Las Casitas Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 46 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 137 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,426 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 31 minutes to 10 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. The emergency response times could be increased further by installing an emergency overflow tank.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Ranchero Road located approximately 300 feet away. From there the SSO would travel approximately 600 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch located less than 20 feet away.

Mill Lake Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 44 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 132 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,692 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 38 minutes to 13 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. The emergency response times could be increased by installing an emergency overflow tank.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Heather Circle located 300 feet away. From there the SSO would travel less than 50 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch located approximately 600 feet away.

Santa Rita Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 224 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 670 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 4,136 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 15 minutes to 5 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station-specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 7,533 gallons with emergency response times of 34 minutes and 11 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.

The emergency response times could be increased by installing an emergency overflow tank.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in North Main Street near Massa Street approximately 760 feet away. From there the SSO would travel approximately 60 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch located approximately 600 feet away. 5-24
Spicer Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 35 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 100 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,786 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 51 minutes to 18 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station-specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 3,691 gallons with emergency response times of 106 minutes and 37 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.

Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Brunken Avenue approximately 850 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO would travel approximately 600 LF in the street prior to entering a storm drain inlet that leads to a drainage ditch located 300 ft away.

TP2 Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 94 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 280 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 6,346 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 67 minutes to 23 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times did not meet the minimum time criteria, additional storage was estimated in the manholes between the lift station and the low point manhole noted in the lift station-specific ERPs. The available storage including these manholes is estimated at 11,246 gallons with emergency response times of 119 minutes and 40 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively.

Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a remote manhole in a field approximately 750 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO could travel approximately 90 LF across the field prior to entering a drainage ditch. It is recommended to install a manhole monitor upstream of the lift station to increase awareness of potential SSOs.

Vista Nueva Lift Station
This lift station receives approximately 14 gpm under average daily flow conditions, and 41 gpm under peak flow conditions. The available volume between the high-level alarm and overflow is estimated at 1,904 gallons. Based on these inflows and the available volume, response times from high-level alarm is 138 minutes to 46 minutes for ADF and PHDW flows, respectively. Since these response times are greater than 30 minutes, there are no modifications recommended to increase response times under existing conditions.

The ERP for this lift station notes that the SSO location during lift station failure would be a manhole in Garner Avenue approximately 750 feet from the lift station. From there the SSO would travel less than 50 LF in the street prior to entering a drain inlet that would flow to a water body at Carr Lake located less than 100 feet away.

Table 5-6 Lift Station Emergency Response Time
Lift Station
Airport
(Moffett) Carpenter Hall De La Torre Harkins Road Lake Street Las Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP2 Vista Nueva High Water Alarm (ft) 5 8 5.5 5 6 5.83 4 8.5 6 4.5 7
Overflow (ft) 15 30 15 18 40 21 22 20 25 35 16
Overflow Location/ MH O8-003 Wet well No GIS ID Q6-005 K5-003, J6-016 I7-019 J4-020 D4-026 N5-014 M5-034 J7-038 Storage Volume (gal) 3,220 6,334 846 6,514 5,506 1,426 1,692 7,533 3,691 11,246 1,904 ADF Inflow without
Upstream LS (gpm) 21 410 2 47 1,931 46 44 224 35 94 14
ADF Response Time
(min) 152 15 346 138 3 31 38 34 106 119 138
ADF Inflow with
Upstream LS (gpm) NA NA NA NA 2,326 NA NA NA NA NA NA
ADF Response Time
(min) NA NA NA NA 2 NA NA NA NA NA NA
PHDWF Inflow without
Upstream LS (gpm) 60 1,226 7 135 5,770 137 132 670 99 279 41 PHDWF Response Time
(min) 53 5 121 48 1 10 13 11 37 40 46
PHDWF Inflow with
Upstream LS (gpm) NA NA NA NA 6,165 NA NA NA NA NA NA
PHDWF Response Time
(min) NA NA NA NA 1 NA NA NA NA NA NA
NA= Not Applicable
5-25
5-26

H Y D R A U L I C P E R F O R M A N C E E V A L U A T I O N - F U T U R E C O N D I T I O N S It is critical to understand what upgrades are required to meet estimated future flows in addition to correcting existing deficiencies. The following sections analyze each lift station for future wastewater flows under the same criteria as existing wastewater flows.

Future Wastewater Flows and Recommendations
Future flow for each lift station was calculated based on planned developments and future development in accordance with the City’s General Plan land use, as described in detail in Chapters 2 and 4. Due to variability in wastewater generation from different industrial and commercial users, it is difficult to accurately predict future flow conditions for this type of development. As development occurs, flow contributions will need to be addressed on a case-by-case basis and additional modeling may be required. Note, the future flow estimates are based on the wastewater flowing to each lift station by gravity. If the proposed future development includes any lift stations, this will increase the point flow to the downstream collection system and existing lift stations that may impact the recommendations noted in this chapter and the collection system chapter.

The following summarizes anticipated future flow contribution to each lift station and are shown in Table 5-7.

Future lift station tributary area boundaries are depicted on Figure 5-2.

Airport (Moffett) Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the commercial and industrial area south of the airport. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of commercial development in the Southeast FGA is estimated to be minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows. This is contrary to the findings reported in the previous master plan. Based on ground level topography in the future expansion area for commercial development near De La Torre Lift Station, it is anticipated that only minimal future flows would be routed to this lift station. As commercial development is proposed in this region, this will need to be verified.

Carpenter Hall Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, and schools in the area. Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in North Boronda FGA and Target Growth Areas K and V are estimated to increase by 5 percent. Since the future PHDW flow of 1,286 gpm is less than the simplex pumping capacity of 1,600 gpm, the existing lift station has sufficient excess capacity to manage future flows.

De La Torre Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the commercial and hotels in the area west of the airport. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of commercial development in a portion of Southeast FGA is estimated to be more than 6,000 percent increase.

The existing average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow are estimated to be 2 gpm and 7 gpm, respectively.

Assuming future flows from expansion of commercial development in the Southeast FGA is routed to this lift station, flows are estimated to increase average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow to 165 gpm and 469 gpm, respectively. The lift station should be upgraded before the peak hour dry weather flow exceeds the estimated simplex flow of approximately 350 gpm.
5-27
Harkins Road Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the commercial and industrial areas in the area. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from the Salinas Ag-Industrial Center is estimated to be more than 118 percent increase.

The existing average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow are estimated to be 47 gpm and 135 gpm, respectively. Based on the Salinas Ag-Industrial Center sewer connections per the Ruggeri-Jensen-Azar and Associates Sanitary Sewer System Analysis Report, future flows to Harkins Road Lift Station are estimated to increase average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow to 103 gpm and 563 gpm, respectively. This report did identify that a localized sanitary sewer pump station will be needed to connect sewer flows from the development to the City’s existing system at Dayton Street. The report did not size this pump station, so an assumed 270 gpm point flow was included in the model based on the peaking factors identified in this SSMPU.

This assumption will need to be verified once the sizing of this localized lift station is complete.

Based on the above assumptions, Harkins Road lift station should be upgraded before the peak hour dry weather flow exceeds the estimated simplex flow of approximately 370 gpm.

Lake Street Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from a large upstream area. Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in North Boronda FGA and Target Growth Area V are estimated to increase by 96 percent. Since this lift station is undersized for existing conditions, it should be upgraded as soon as possible.

This lift station is undersized for existing conditions and should be upgraded prior to any future development in North Boronda FGA and Target Growth Areas K and V. The existing average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow are 1,931 gpm and 6,375 gpm, respectively. The future average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow are 3,777 gpm and 11,847 gpm, respectively. The maximum duplex and triplex pumping rates are 5,550 gpm and 7,250 gpm, respectively. Since the duplex pumping rate is less than PHDW for both existing and future conditions, this lift station should be upgraded to meet both existing and future needs.

Las Casitas Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the residential properties in the area with no anticipated significant development proposed. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of residential development is expected to be minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows.

Mill Lake Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the residential and commercial in the area with no anticipated significant development proposed. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of residential development is expected to be minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows.

Santa Rita Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from the upstream area.

Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in Target Growth Areas K and the septic conversion from Bolsa Knolls are estimated to increase by 81 percent. Since the future PHDW flow of 1,198 gpm 5-28
is less than the simplex pumping capacity of 1,575 gpm, the existing lift station has sufficient excess capacity to manage future flows.

Spicer Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, and hotels in the area with no anticipated significant development proposed. Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of commercial and industrial development is minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows.
5-29
TP2 Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from residential, commercial, industrial, hotels, and schools from the upstream area.

Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in the upstream Focused Growth Area and East FGA are estimated to increase by approximately 110 percent. The lift station would need to be upgraded to accommodate the expected increase in future flows.

The existing average daily flow and peak hour dry weather flow are 94 gpm and 484 gpm, respectively. Future flows to this lift station from the proposed developments in the upstream Focused Growth Area and East FGA are estimated to increase the ADF and PHDW flows from 94 gpm to 198 gpm and from 279 gpm to 580 gpm, respectively. The estimated future flows are based upon implementing the proposed CIP upgrade at SSMH M6- 012 at East Alisal and South Sanborn that addresses an existing deficiency and reroutes flow away from TP2 to South Sanborn. Therefore, only 12 percent of the flow from potential future development in East FGA would contribute to TP2. The lift station should be upgraded before the peak hour dry weather flow exceeds the estimated simplex flow of approximately 550 gpm.

Vista Nueva Lift Station
This lift station collects flow from the residential in the area with no anticipated significant development proposed.

Future flows to the domestic wastewater collection system from expansion of residential development is minimal and the lift station would have sufficient capacity for anticipated future flows.

Table 5-7 Summary of Future Lift Station Wastewater Flows Lift Station Future Flow Rates (gpd)
Airport
(Moffett)
Carpenter
Hall De La Torre Harkins Road Lake Street Las Casitas Mill Lake Santa Rita Spicer TP21. Vista Nueva 0 563,915 0 0 4,583,023 64,040 59,173 392,939 0 152,462 19,830 25,570 52,207 234,779 43,425 779,671 0 4,330 180,872 37,051 130,195 0 4,936 195 0 104,694 14,869 91 0 1,500 12,260 75 0
0 0 2,386 0 2,781 0 0 358 652 113 0
0 3,832 0 0 58,479 1,562 0 8,762 0 2,195 0

NA NA NA NA
Las Casitas
Vista Nueva NA NA NA NA NA NA
gpd 30,506 620,148 237,165 148,119 5,438,824 65,693 63,503 584,431 49,963 285,040 19,830 Percent Increase2. 0% 5% 6628% 118% 96% 0% 0% 81% 0% 110% 0% gpm 21 431 165 103 3,777 46 44 406 35 198 14
w/ Simplex LS1 NA NA NA NA 4,382 NA NA NA NA NA NA
Peaking Factor 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 1.5 gpd 45,759 930,222 355,748 222,179 8,158,235 98,539 95,255 876,647 74,945 427,559 29,745 gpm 32 646 247 154 5,665 68 66 609 52 297 21
w/ Simplex LS1 NA NA NA NA 5,820 NA NA NA NA NA NA
Residential Diurnal
Factor 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
Residential
Peaking Factor 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 Commercial
Diurnal Factor 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Commercial
Peaking Factor 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 2.9 gpd 86,942 1,852,010 675,920 422,139 16,188,101 196,830 189,860 1,724,569 142,395 835,232 59,490 gpm 60 1,286 469 563 11,242 137 132 1,198 99 580 41
w/ Simplex LS2. NA NA NA NA 11,847 NA NA NA NA NA NA
gpm 192 2,045 313 398 9,498 107 312 1,430 156 913 32
Percent Increase3. 0% 2% 1547% 342% 55% 0% 0% 47% 0% 18% 0% Total Average
Daily Flow
Maximum Day
Dry Weather
Flow
Hotel Rooms
Residential (gpd)
Commercial (gpd)
Peak Hour Dry
Weather Flow
Schools
Industrial (gpd)
Upstream Lift Station
Peak Hour Wet
Weather Flow
Table Notes:

1. For TP2, only 12% of the future flows from East FGA is contributing to TP2 with a proposed weir constructed at SSMH M6-012 at East Alisal and South Sanborn (see CIP for existing deficiencies).

2. Flow is calculated with upstream lift station(s) operating in simplex mode.

3. Percent increase in future flow rate versus existing flow rate. 5-29
5-31

S I T E I N V E S T I G A T I O N S U M M A R Y & O V E R A L L R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S Based on the hydraulic analysis and discussion provided, the following is a summary of recommendations for the City’s eleven lift stations. The following table provides an overview of the recommendations for upgrades based upon the visual inspection of the lift stations. All of the lift stations should be upgraded such that a spare pump (motor and pump) is available for each lift station. Many of the lift stations, except Airport, Lake Street, and Vista Nueva, should be upgraded with emergency bypass piping systems and receptacles and/or transfer switches for a portable generator. The discussion below gives detailed recommendations for each lift station.

T A B L E 5 - 8 . S U M M A R Y O F L I F T S T A T I O N U P G R A D E S B A S E D U P O N

V I S U A L I N S P E C T I O N
Recommended Lift Station
Capital Improvements
Location
Repair/Replace Pump/Motor
Replace Control Panel/MCC
Repair Control Panel Disconnects
Install/Upgrade Generator Receptacle & Transfer
Switch
Move Control Panel to Above Grade
Evaluate Generator Upgrade
Upgrade Level Controller/SCADA
Coat Wet Well / Dry Well
Install Emergency Bypass
Install Emergency Overflow
Provide Washdown Water
Address Safety/Falling Hazard Concerns
Airport X X X X X X
Carpenter X X X X X X X X
De La Torre X X X X X X X X X
Harkins Rd X X X X X X X X
Lake Street X X X X X X X X
Las Casitas X X X X X X X X
Mill Lake X X X X X X
Santa Rita X X X X X X X X
Spicer X X X X X X X
TP2 X X X X X X X X
Vista Nueva X X X X X X
5-32
Airport (Moffett)
Airport is a duplex lift station with 10 hp submersible Flygt pumps with an estimated simplex flow rate of 640 gpm which is more than the rated and measured flow of approximately 550 gpm and 470 gpm, respectively. Inspection of the pumps revealed that the motors need to be rebuilt which could restore pump performance to its rated capacity. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator on an automatic transfer switch, a receptacle for a portable generator, and bypass capabilities.

Existing and future PHDW flows into this lift station are estimated at only 60 gpm. Therefore, the pumps could be downsized instead of rebuilt. However, to maintain self-cleaning velocities in the forcemain, the wastewater flows must be at least 320 gpm. It is recommended to evaluate the condition of force main and determine if the main could be downsized by lining or other means. This would only be recommended if the forcemain needs to be replaced. Otherwise, it would be cost prohibitive.

The overall condition of this lift station is mixed. That is, some of the equipment is working, but the site inspection was unable to determine if it is working as engineered. The two pump motors are rated as good and poor, respectively. The wet well is rated as operational. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install overloads on load side of contactors for motor protection b. Replace breaker disconnect handles for pumps 1 and 2 and install proper disconnect hardware
c. Proper labeling for the line voltage on the cabinet and the back-up manual transfer switch lever positions
d. Provide wiring diagram at station
e. Replace Sch 40 pipe with proper electrical conduit
f. Install XP fittings/seals on conduits
g. Upgrade to standardized SCADA
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Replace pumps and motors
b. Move check valves into a vault located outside of the wet well 3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Replace wet well coating
c. Relocate wet well vent
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
e. Determine extent of corrosion on discharge piping and rehabilitate as needed 4) Additional Studies
a. N/A
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Replace LCD screen for the automatic transfer switch b. Paint the generator enclosure
c. Replace the handle to wet well
5-33
Carpenter Hall
Carpenter Hall is a duplex lift station with 30 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator but no receptacle for a portable generator or bypass capabilities. The generator should be evaluated for replacement since the generator has required extensive repairs. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 3,000 gpm which is more than the measured flow of about 1,600 gpm due to the pumps operating on VFDs.

Existing and future PHDW flows into this lift station are estimated at less than 1,300 gpm. The existing pumps are oversized to meet existing and future flows. In addition, the pumps are not operating at their best efficiency point at the reduced flow rate. It is recommended that the City replace the pumps, when needed, with pumps that better fit the needs of the existing and future demands. Note, the force main velocities should be considered if the pump flows are reduced to ensure 2 fps cleaning velocity is maintained.

The overall condition of this lift station is operational because the equipment is working, but unable to determine if it is working as engineered. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Label electrical cabinets with line voltage
b. Repair or replace motor to pump #1
c. Install disconnect switches for each pump at the bottom of the dry pit. d. Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator 2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Replace flow meter
b. Install emergency bypass system
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Repair or replace wet well access lid
c. Repair piping/penetration from dry well to wet well
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. Evaluate generator for replacement
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Grease seal for Pump #1
b. Grease mechanical seal for Pump #2
5-34
De La Torre
De La Torre is a duplex lift station with 5 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator or bypass capabilities but does have a receptacle for portable generator. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 345 gpm which is more than the pumps’ rated performance but approximates the measured flows of 342 gpm and 354 gpm, respectively. The pumps are over-sized to manage the existing flows and undersized for the anticipated future flows of 469 gpm. Therefore, the pumps and possibly the force main would need to be upsized sometime in the future to accommodate development. It is recommended that this be re-evaluated when the future development is in the planning stages.

The overall condition of this lift station, including both pumps, are currently in poor condition. This lift station is undersized to meet future development needs and will require an upgrade. It is unknown if the existing dry well is capable of housing upsized pumps and electrical. It is recommended that a study be completed to determine if the lift station should be completely replaced or can simply be upgraded.

In addition to this study, the proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install a receptacle and transfer switch for portable electrical generator b. Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
c. Replace the overload reset buttons for the contactors d. Install new control panel above ground
e. Upgrade Level Controller system
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Repair motors or replace complete pump and motor
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Install fencing around lift station
c. Provide on-site water for wash down
d. Install emergency bypass system
e. Coat wet well and recoat the dry well floor
4) Additional Studies
a. Perform study to determine if lift station is required to be replaced or is capable of being upsized to meet future demands
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Replace the isolation valves and check valves
b. Remove the debris in discharge pipe wye
5-35
Harkins Road
Harkins is a duplex lift station with 5 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator or bypass capabilities. The receptacle for a portable generator is unsafe and should be upgraded as soon as possible. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 370 gpm which is comparable to the pumps’ rated performance and greater than the measured flows of 228 gpm and 281 gpm, respectively. Inspection of the pumps revealed that they are in poor condition and the check valves may be faulty. Repairing the pumps and check valves could restore pump performance to their rated capacities.

The pumps are over-sized to manage the existing flows and undersized for the anticipated future flows of 563 gpm. Therefore, the pumps and possibly the force main would need to be upsized sometime in the future to accommodate development. It is recommended that this be re-evaluated when the future development is in the planning stages. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator b. Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
c. Replace the overload reset buttons for the contactors d. Label control panel with line voltage
e. Install new control panel above ground
f. Upgrade Level Controller system
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Repair motors or replace complete pump and motor
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Install fencing around lift station
c. Provide on-site water for wash down
d. Install improved emergency bypass system
e. Repair leak in the 6" force main downstream of the wye 4) Additional Studies
a. N/A
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Replace or repairing the isolation valves and check valves 5-36
Lake Street
Lake Street is a triplex lift station with 30 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps connected to two separate force mains – one pump routes flows to a 12-inch diameter main and the other two pumps route flow to a 14-inch diameter main. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator and receptacle for portable generator. The generator should be evaluated for replacement since the generator has required extensive repairs. Bypass capabilities were recently added with the Lake Street Emergency Sewer Replacement Project. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 2,600 gpm which approximates the pumps’ design rating and measured flow of about 2,600 gpm. The pumps’ estimated duplex flow rate is 5,500 gpm. Existing and future PHDW flows into this lift station are estimated to be 5,770 gpm and 11,242 gpm, respectively.

This lift station has significant deficiencies including insufficient wet well storage, undersized pumps, aged force mains, ongoing clogging/ragging issues, and outdated controls and electrical system. This lift station also poses a safety/falling hazard to operators working at this lift station. It is recommended to completely replace this lift station and force mains in lieu of rehabilitation. This is an immediate need, thus, the deficiencies noted below should only be completed to keep the lift station operational until a new lift station is constructed.

The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Provide arc flash protection at pump contactors
b. Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
c. Upgrade Level Controller system
d. Replace galvanized conduit with PVC conduit
e. Label control panel with line voltage
f. Install supports for conduits
g. Replace MCC cabinet.
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Upsize pumps
b. Relocate ventilation intake
c. Install a higher flow sump pump
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Replace floor and sink drain pipes
c. Provide on-site water for wash down
d. Provide restroom with hot water
e. Install alarm system and video surveillance
4) Additional Studies
a. Preliminary Design Report for upgraded lift station. Potentially relocate lift station across the street on the east side of West Rossi Street. b. Evaluate generator for replacement
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Install a guard for the drive belt on ventilation system 5-37
Las Casitas
Las Casitas is a duplex lift station with 10 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator but does not have bypass capabilities or a receptacle for portable generator. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 395 gpm which is more than the pumps’ rated performance but approximates the measured flows of 357 gpm and 345 gpm, respectively. The pumps are over-sized compared to the existing flows and the anticipated future PHDW flow of 137 gpm, however, due the forcemain size, the pumps cannot be downsized without also reducing the forcemain diameter which would be cost prohibitive.

The overall condition of this lift station, including both pumps, are currently in good to operational condition. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install a new control panel above ground
b. Repair or replace the breaker disconnects
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. N/A
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Install emergency bypass system
c. Coat bottom of dry well and entire wet well
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. N/A
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Repair or replace Pump #2. Perform investigation to determine source of high pitch noise. Pull Pump 2 and install spare pump to see if this reveals the source. b. Replace the LCD screen to automatic transfer switch
c. Spot repairs to generator enclosure
d. Remove debris from wye
e. Clean out and installing a blind flange at bottom of wye to facilitate cleaning f. Perform an investigation upstream of this location to determine source of grease build-up (aka Fats, Oil, and Grease, or FOG investigation) 5-38
Mill Lake
Mill Lake is a duplex lift station with 15 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator but does not have bypass capabilities. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 510 gpm which approximates the pumps’ rated performance and the measured flows of 500 gpm. The pumps are over-sized compared to the existing flows and the anticipated future PHDW flow of 132 gpm. It is recommended that when the pumps are to be replaced, the pumps be replaced with smaller pumps but still maintain cleaning velocities.

This will reduce the City’s operational costs over time.

The overall condition of this lift station, including both pumps, are less than satisfactory condition. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install control cabinet above grade
b. Replace control panel breaker disconnects and overload reset buttons c. Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
d. Repair broken conduit between dry and wet well
e. Seal all penetrations into the dry well
f. Upgrade Micro-Mac control system
g. Move conduit underground
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. N/A
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency bypass system
b. Install emergency overflow tank
c. Repair wet well coating
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. Evaluate generator for replacement
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Repair rust on generator enclosure
5-40
Spicer
Spicer is a duplex lift station with 7.5 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station does not have a dedicated backup generator or bypass capabilities. The receptacle for the portable generator is unsafe and should be upgraded as soon as possible. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 205 gpm which is less than the pumps’ rated performance and comparable to the measured flows of 195 gpm and 218 gpm, respectively. Inspection of the pumps revealed that they are in poor condition. Repairing the pump impellers could improve the pump performance2. Prior to implementing the following recommended upgrades, a study should be performed to determine if the wet well could be relocated outside of the street. If not, a study should be conducted to determine if an emergency overflow tank is required or if the gravity system has enough capacity to add sufficient response time in case of lift station failure. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Install cabinet above grade
b. Installing a transfer switch for emergency back-up generator c. Replace control panel breaker disconnects and overload reset buttons d. Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
e. Replace conduit in wet well
f. Upgrade the SCADA control system
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. N/A
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency overflow tank
b. Repair leak in the 6" force main in the dry well
a. Install removeable bollards at the dry well
a. Install emergency bypass system
b. Coat the wet well
c. Repair coating on the floor of the dry well
b. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. Perform study to determine if the wet well can be relocated outside of the street.
5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. N/A
2 The pump impellers were replaced on May 18, 2022 with non-clog impellers. The pumps performance should be evaluated to confirm that the new impellers are operating adequately. 5-41
TP2
TP2 is a duplex lift station with 10 hp dry-pit Smith & Loveless pumps. This lift station has a dedicated backup generator but does not have bypass capabilities. The pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate is 555 gpm with the pumps operating at 48 Hz. This is greater than the pumps’ rated performance but approximates the measured flows of 565 gpm and 491 gpm. This pumping rate is based upon the VFDs set at 48 Hz maximum to mitigate vibrations in the pumps that may be due to the use of no clog impellers. The source of the vibrations could be investigated by rebalancing or replacing the impellers. If the VFDs were set to allow the pumps to operate at 60 Hz maximum, the pumps’ estimated simplex flow rate would increase to 740 gpm, which would be sufficient to meet future PHDW flow of 580 gpm and the lift station would not need to be upsized.

The overall condition of this lift station, including both pumps, are rated less than satisfactory condition. The configuration of the lift station also poses a safety/falling risk to operators. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Replace splice box in wet well
b. Install a main breaker with disconnect and disconnects for both pumps on the outside of the cabinet
c. Label the cabinet with the voltage
d. Install GFI protection for air compressor
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. Investigate vibration issue at 60 Hz. If vibrations persist, lift station upgrades will be required to meet future flows.
b. Install on-site flow meter
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Install emergency bypass system
b. Install emergency overflow tank
c. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. The condition of the generator should be evaluated for possible repair or replacement
b. Investigate how to mitigate safety risks to operators 5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. N/A
5-42
Vista Nueva
Vista Nueva is a duplex lift station with 7.5 hp submersible Flygt pumps3. This lift station has a receptacle for a portable generator and bypass capabilities but does not have a dedicated backup generator. The estimated simplex flow rate is 210 gpm which approximates the measured flow of 200 gpm for the pump that is in good condition. Inspection of the pumps revealed that one of the motors needs to be rebuilt which could restore pump performance to its rated capacity. The pumps appear to be over-sized for the future flows, but no upgrades are recommended.

The overall condition of this lift station is mixed with one of the pumps and wet well rated as good and operational, respectively, and the other pump rated poor. The configuration of the lift station also poses a risk to the safety of operators. The proposed CIP program includes the following upgrades based on field inspection report and hydraulic evaluation:
1) Electrical Upgrades
a. Seal the conduits leading to the electrical cabinet
2) Mechanical Upgrades
a. N/A
3) Site and Piping Upgrades
a. Replace vault cover
b. Coat wet well
c. Install emergency overflow tank
d. Provide on-site water for wash down
4) Additional Studies
a. Conduct a study to determine source of moisture into the electrical cabinet b. Investigate ways to mitigate safety risks to operators 5) Maintenance Upgrades
a. Repair or replace level indicator lights on control panel b. Replace Pump #2 volute
3 Pump curve data and force main size and location are provided by Doyle McFarland in emails dated May 5, 2022.

Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
TP2
Carpenter
Hall
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
Legend
Ú3 City Lift Stations
Ú3 Salinas Area Pump Station
Modeled Sewer Pipes
Lift Station Tributary
Airport
Carpenter Hall
De La Torre
Harkins
Lake Street
Las Casitas
Mill Lake
Santa Rita
Spicer
TP2
Vista Nueva
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 5-1

LIFT STATION

EXISTING TRIBUTARY AREAS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
Target Area K
Southeast FGA
East FGA
West
Boronda
FGA
East Area
Specific Plan
West Area
Specific Plan
Central Area
Specific Plan
TP2
Carpenter
Hall
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
F
B
B
N
V
V
L
Ag-Industrial
Center
Legend
Ú3 City Lift Stations
Ú3 Salinas Area Pump Station
Modeled Sewer Pipes
Target Growth Areas
Future Growth Areas
Lift Station Tributary
Airport
Carpenter Hall
De La Torre
Harkins
Lake Street
Las Casitas
Mill Lake
Santa Rita
Spicer
TP2
Vista Nueva
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 5-2

LIFT STATION

FUTURE TRIBUTARY AREAS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
6-1
CH AP TER 6

COLLEC TION SYSTEM AN ALYS IS
This Chapter presents the analysis of the domestic wastewater collection system for the City. Refer to Chapter 5 for a detailed evaluation of the City’s eleven (11) lift stations and corresponding force mains. All figures are provided at the end of this chapter.

I N T R O D U C T I O N
As discussed in Chapter 3, the City’s collection system is comprised of approximately 292 miles of gravity pipes, which vary in diameter from 6-inch to 54-inch, eleven (11) City-owned lift stations, and two (2) miles of force mains. The main trunk sewer system (typically 10-inch and larger, with some exceptions) was analyzed using Innovyze InfoSWMM Version 14.7 sewer modeling program to evaluate performance of the wastewater collection system under both existing and future flow conditions. Figure 6-1 provides an overview of the existing gravity wastewater collection system, lift stations, and force mains that were included in the hydraulic model.

C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M A N A L Y S I S C R I T E R I A The City’s Public Works Department’s Standard Specifications and Design Standards, updated March 2017, and the December 2019 City Sewer System Management Plan, were used as the basis to update the City’s hydraulic criteria shown in Table 6-1. These standards were applied in the analysis of the trunk sewer collection system model to identify deficiencies and recommended improvements.

One of the performance criteria for gravity sewer lines is the maximum allowable flow depth, often expressed as the d/D ratio. The variables used in this ratio include the depth of flow in a pipe, d, divided by the diameter of the pipe, D. The maximum d/D criteria defined in the Sewer System Management Plan is 0.90 for all existing pipes and

0.75 for new developments. Based on discussion and review with the City, the maximum allowable flow depth criteria is based on pipe diameter ranges, consistent with industry standards that typically have varying levels of d/D ratios for various pipe sizes. Refer to Table 6-1 for the allowable d/D for all pipe sizes.

Another performance criteria to note are the forcemain hydraulics. The City standards currently state a minimum velocity of 3.5 ft/s and maximum velocity of 6.0 ft/s. As discussed in Ch. 5, forcemain velocities should be greater than 2.0 ft/s to maintain self-cleansing properties but less than 5.0 ft/s to minimize head loss and potential for water hammer. These update criteria are shown in Table 6-1. 6-2
T A B L E 6 - 1 . H Y D R A U L I C C R I T E R I A F O R E X I S T I N G S Y S T E M S

S T A N D A R D C R I T E R I A

V E L O C I T Y
Minimum: 2.0 ft/s for peak flows; 1.75 ft/s at average
rate of flow
Maximum: 8.0 ft/sec

M I N I M U M S L O P E
6-inch: 1.0%
8-inch: 0.40%
10-inch: 0.26%
12-inch & above: 0.20%

F R I C T I O N F A C T O R
Manning’s n (gravity)=0.013 for Vitrified Clay Pipe (VCP)

0.011 for Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC)
Hazen-Williams C (pressure)=100 to 120 depending on
pipe size, material, and age
M I N I M U M P I P E S I Z E 8-inch

M A X I M U M

A L L O W A B L E F L O W

D E P T H
10-inch or less: d/D=0.67
12-inch to 24-inch: d/D=0.80
27-inch or greater: d/D=0.90

S U R C H A R G I N G
Allowed as long as the Hydraulic Grade Line (HGL)
remains at least 5-Feet Below the rim elevation

F O R C E M A I N

H Y D R A U L I C S
Minimum: 2.0 ft/s
Maximum: 5.0 ft/s

C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M M O D E L D E V E L O P M E N T A hydraulic model of the sewer collection system was developed by Wallace Group with the Innovyze InfoSWMM Version 14.7 sewer modeling program. InfoSWMM utilizes Manning’s Equation for open channel flow (gravity pipes), Dynamic Wave analysis for flow routing through the collection system, and the Hazen-Williams Equation for pressurized flow conditions (force mains). Model results were evaluated for pipeline capacity, flow velocity, and maximum d/D ratio under various flow conditions.

Flow Allocation
Existing and future flows were analyzed in the sewer model for dry and wet weather conditions. As discussed in Chapter 4, peaking factors were obtained during flow monitoring and flow rates were derived on a per-parcel basis by land use. These wastewater flows were allocated to individual sewer manholes based on the closest manhole to the land use parcel. Each tributary area represents the total residential, hotel, commercial, and institutional customers contained within the tributary boundary.

Future flows were allocated to the model based on most probable connection location of the Future Growth Areas, Focused Growth Areas, and Target areas. Refer to Figure 6-2 for the future flow allocations.

Any deficiencies identified in this SSMPU are based on these assumed connections and the wastewater flows (by gravity, not pumped) discussed in Ch. 4. Additional modeling should be performed during the planning and design phases for each of these future developments should wastewater flows, tie-in 6-3
locations to the City’s collection system, or timing of future developments be different than what is shown on Figure 6-2.

Model Calibration
Approximately six weeks of sewer flow data was collected in support of the hydraulic model development, as described in Chapter 4 of this report. Representative data for each flow monitoring location was compared to the model results. Through this process, both the land use flow factors and the diurnal curves were adjusted to represent the system flows as recorded through the flow monitoring.

The City provided pump curves for each of the eleven lift stations. The lift stations were calibrated based on FRM’s measured flows during their lift station evaluation. If FRM noted worn impellers, poor pumping conditions, etc., the pump curve was adjusted to represent FRM’s measured pumping rate.

System Conditions Analyzed
The hydraulic model was utilized to analyze dry and wet weather system flows for both existing and future flow conditions. Within the model, multiple scenarios were developed that represent these various conditions. Existing and future scenarios were utilized to identify system upgrades required in order to meet performance criteria and to identify areas recommended for high priority maintenance operations.

Scenarios developed consist of the following:
❖ Existing ADF Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under existing, average dry weather flow conditions.
❖ Future ADF Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under future, average dry weather flow conditions with all future development connecting to the existing collection system.
❖ Existing MDDW Flow Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under existing, maximum dry weather flow conditions. This scenario includes peak hour dry weather flow (PHDWF).
❖ Existing MDDW Flow + Reclamation Ditch Diversion: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under existing, maximum dry weather flow conditions plus 6 cfs diversion coming from the reclamation ditch, since this diversion happens during the dry weather season only. ❖ Future MDDW Flow Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under future, maximum dry weather flow conditions, with all future development connecting to the existing collection system. This scenario includes PHDWF.
❖ Future MDDW Flow + Reclamation Ditch Diversion: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under future, maximum dry weather flow conditions plus the 6 cfs diversion coming from the reclamation ditch, since this diversion happens during the dry weather season. ❖ Existing PHWW Flow Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under existing, peak hour wet weather flow conditions.
❖ Future PHWW Flow Scenario: This scenario represents the trunk sewer system under future, peak hour wet weather flow conditions, with all future development connecting to the existing collection system.
6-4
C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M M O D E L R E S U L T S – E X I S T I N G F L O W

C O N D I T I O N S
Deficient System Capacity
The following locations were identified through the analysis as having insufficient capacity to meet the City’s performance standards while conveying existing population wastewater flows. Figure 6-3 shows a system-wide map of available capacity under existing worst case peak conditions. Pipes with available capacity are shown in green, marginal capacity (within 10% of exceeding the maximum allowable hydraulic capacity) are shown in yellow, and above the maximum allowable hydraulic capacity are shown in red. Refer to Figure 6-4 for an overall map of the recommended areas for pipe upgrades.

Where improvements are recommended to the collection system, worst case d/D values are provided for reference. These d/D values represent a snapshot of the system under either: a) existing conditions, or b) proposed conditions with all improvements in place. In many cases, recommended upgrades would increase downstream maximum d/D, exceeding the City’s standards, if the downstream recommended improvements were not constructed. Through the digital sewer model, maximum d/D was analyzed for the system, ensuring that recommended upgrades did not trigger additional downstream improvements.

Cesar Chavez
This segment receives a large amount of flow from the Alisal community, a dense part of the City. A majority of the flow comes from residential lots, but there are also several commercial lots along N Sanborn Road, and several schools.

The Cesar Chavez Park Existing CIP project proposes to upsize approximately 2,100 feet of 15-inch vitrified clay pipe (VCP) to 18-inch polyvinyl chloride (PVC) pipe from MH-J7- 007 near Garner Ave to MH-K7-017 near E Laurel Dr. These pipe segments have d/D values ranging from 0.66 to 0.95 full during existing peak flow conditions. Upsizing would decrease the d/D to a range of 0.38 to 0.58.

This project also proposes upsizing approximately 3,000 ft of 21-inch VCP to 24-inch PVC pipe from MH-K7-017 near E Laurel Dr to MH-L6-001 near Circle Dr. These pipe segments have d/D values of 0.39 to 1 during existing peak conditions. Four (4) manholes are also surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in this section. Upsizing would decrease d/D values to a range of 0.29 to 0.66.

An additional 3,500 ft of 24-inch VCP should be upgraded to 27-inch PVC from manhole L6-001 near Circle Dr to manhole K5-007 near Longbow Way. These pipe segments have d/D values from 0.60 to 0.85 during existing peak flow conditions. Upsizing this pipe will reduce d/D values to within 0.48 and 0.61.

In addition to the pipe replacements, it is also proposed to construct approximately 70 ft of new 24-inch pipe from MH-K5-007 to MH-K5-014, to split flow between 24-inch and 30-inch parallel mains.

City maintenance crews have noted that CCTV evaluation recorded pipe encrustations and manholes condition repairs for the pipe segment between K5-001 and K5-003. 6-5
Cherokee Dr
This segment of pipe is an important collector for the northern portion of Salinas. It receives a large amount of residential flow from the Santa Rita neighborhoods as well as commercial flows from the Northridge Mall and Santa Rita Plaza.

The Cherokee Dr. Existing CIP project proposes to replace approximately 1,600 feet of 18- inch VCP with 24-inch PVC pipe on Cherokee Dr from Seminole Way (MH-G3-008) to Tulane St (MH-H3-009). Cherokee Dr has insufficient capacity for existing conditions, with pipes segment d/D values between 0.67 and 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Four (4) of the twelve (12) manholes in this section are also surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition. Upsizing these segments will reduce d/D values to between 0.34 and 0.48.

Upstream TP2
The Upstream TP2 Diversion Existing CIP project proposes to divert flows along East Alisal to South Sanborn Road by increasing the invert at MH-M6-012 by 0.35 ft. This can be done by constructing a weir within the existing manhole. The weir will cause the 18-inch along East Alisal to act as an overflow line, lessening the flow just downstream of TP2, which currently has a d/D value of 0.91 to 1.0 under existing peak conditions and two (2) surcharging manholes within 5 ft of the manhole rim.

It should be noted that future flows will affect this CIP, causing a need for upsizing the pipes along South Sanborn Rd.

Noice Dr/ Tyler St
The Noice Dr./Tyler Street existing CIP consists of two sections of pipe: one on Noice Drive and one on Tyler Street. These two sections are connected on West Laurel Drive and consist of VCP with diameters of 12-inches or less.

Noice Drive receives mostly residential flow, but also some commercial flow from N Main St, as well as flow from the North Salinas High School. For this section the Noice Dr/ Tyler St Existing CIP project proposes to replace approximately 2,100 feet of 8-inch VCP to 12- inch PVC pipe from MH-G4-015 at Chaparral St to MH-H4-011 at E Laurel Dr. This pipe segment has a d/D of 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Seven (7) of the nine (9) manholes on this segment are also surcharging to within 5 ft of the manhole rim during peak conditions. Upsizing would bring d/D values at peak condition down to 0.43 to 0.53.

Based on survey of this area, the downstream invert at MH-H4-012 is higher than the upstream invert at MH-H4-011. As part of this CIP, it is recommended to reconstruct MHH4-012 to match inverts and change the flow direction from MH-H4-011 to MH-H4-012.

Additionally, it is recommended that approximately 170 ft of new 12-inch PVC pipe be constructed to connect MH-H4-006 to MH-H4-001 at West Laurel Drive and North Main Street. This new pipe will relieve the parallel 8-inch lines along North Main St that exceeds capacity under existing peak flow conditions.
6-6
Tyler Street also receives mostly residential flows with some commercial flow, and flow from one school, Kamman Elementary. It is recommended that approximately 3,300 feet of 12-inch VCP along West Laurel Dr. and Tyler St. from MH-H3-023 to MH-I3-001 should be upsized to 15-inch PVC. The d/D value for this section is 1.0 and nine (9) of the eleven (11) manholes are surcharging to within 5 ft of the manhole rims in the existing PHWWF condition. Upsizing would bring d/D values down to 0.43 to 0.70.

Natividad Rd or Alternative Natividad Consolidation
Natividad Road is a principal arterial in Salinas and this segment of pipe collects flow mostly from residential lots, with portions coming from commercial, and a few schools.

The Natividad Rd CIP project proposes to replace approximately 2,700 feet of 12-inch VCP to 15-inch PVC pipe from MH-G6-002 to MH-H6-003. These pipe segments have a d/D value of 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Upsizing would reduce d/D values to a range of 0.31 to 0.68. This project also recommends an overflow weir be constructed 0.5 ft above MH-H6-003 invert to make the 12-inch parallel an overflow pipe. Approximately 3,600 ft of 15-inch VCP should be replaced with 18-inch PVC pipe from MH-H6-003 to MHI5-007. These pipe segments have d/D values of 0.85 to 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions.

At Sherwood Dr, approximately 305 ft of 12-inch VCP from MH-J5-003 to MH-J5-005 should be upsized to 15-inch PVC pipe. An additional 2,000 ft of 15-inch VCP should be upsized to 18-inch PVC from MH-J5-005 to MH-J4-010. These segments of pipe have d/D values of 0.99 to 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Eighteen (18) of the manholes are also surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.

Upsizing would bring down the d/D values to between 0.39 and 0.54.

As an alternative project, the Natividad Consolidation CIP proposes to abandon the parallel 12-inch overflow and upsize the approximately 7,400 ft of 15-inch pipe to 21-inch from MH-H6-003 to MH-I5-011 and 24-inch from MH-I5-011 to MH-J4-022, as well as upsize approximately 1,100 feet of 21-inch line to 30-in line from MH-J4-022 to MH-K4- 002. Note, the last segment of this CIP proposes to upsize the 21-inch line under HWY 101.

Northridge Mall
This segment of pipe runs on North Main Street from East Boronda Road to just past San Juan Grade Road. This pipe receives mostly residential flows, in addition to commercial flows from Northridge Mall and Santa Rita Plaza, as well as flows from three schools.

The Northridge Mall Existing CIP project proposes the upsizing of approximately 2,300 ft of 15-inch VCP to 18-inch PVC pipe from MH-E4-007 to MH-F4-011 along N Main St. These pipe segments have a d/D of 1.0 during existing peak flow conditions. Upsizing will reduce the d/D to a range of 0.31 to 0.80.

It is also recommended to connect the 18-inch pipe to the 27-inch pipe at MH-F4-031, abandoning 1,800 feet of the parallel 12-inch line along North Main Street from MH-F4- 6-7
031 to MH-G4-005. With current conditions, six (6) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.

Low Pipe Velocity
Low pipe velocity results in the increased likelihood for solids to settle out of wastewater flow, leading to pipe backups and blockages. The City’s design standards specify a minimum pipe velocity of 2.0 ft/s at peak conditions in order to “flush” out the line and maintain solids in suspension. A total of 325 modeled pipes were identified with a velocity below 2.0 ft/s under existing max day conditions. It is recommended that pipes identified with a maximum velocity of less than 2.0 ft/s be flushed on a regular basis that corresponds with the City’s maintenance schedule. Total length of pipe running with a max day velocity less than 2.0 ft/s is 23 miles. Figure 6-5 depicts the pipes identified with low pipe velocities. Note, these recommendations are only for sewer mains modeled. It is anticipated that there are more sewer mains within the City’s sewer collection system that have low velocities, thus a good sewer cleaning program is imperative to minimize risk of sanitary sewer overflows.

C O L L E C T I O N S Y S T E M M O D E L R E S U L T S – F U T U R E F L O W

C O N D I T I O N S
As discussed, Figure 6-2 depicts the flow allocations that were used to analyze the future flow conditions in the model. It is important to understand that some of these deficient areas are due to a combination of multiple future developments. As stated previously, additional modeling should be performed during the planning and design phases of these future developments should wastewater flows, tie-in locations to the City’s collection system, or timing of future developments be different than what is shown on Figure 6-2.

Deficient System Capacity
The following locations were identified through the analysis as having insufficient capacity to meet the City’s performance standards while conveying future wastewater flows. The future flow scenarios assume that all existing CIPs identified by the sewer model have been constructed. Figure 6-6 shows a systemwide map of available capacity under future worst case peak conditions. Pipes with available capacity are shown in green, marginal capacity (within 10% of exceeding the maximum allowable hydraulic capacity) are shown in yellow, and above the maximum allowable hydraulic capacity are shown in red. Refer to Figure 6-7 for an overall map of the recommended areas for future pipe upgrades.

San Juan Grade
This section of pipe receives flow from the most northern part of the City, mainly from the residences of the Bolsa Knolls neighborhood. This pipe also receives some commercial flow, and flow from two schools.

The San Juan Grade Future CIP project upsizes approximately 3,800 ft of 8-inch and 10- inch VCP to 12-inch PVC pipe from MH-C5-008 to MH-D4-055. These pipe segments have d/D values of 0.33 to 1.0 during future peak flow conditions. Ten (10) of the MHs are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the future PHWWF condition. Upsizing would bring the d/D values down to a range between 0.24 to 0.60. 6-8
North Davis Road
The North Davis Road Future CIP recommends upsizing approximately 240 ft of 18-inch to 24-inch from MH-H3-009 to MH-H3-013, 1,700 ft. of 24-inch to 30-inch from MH-H3- 013 near Cherokee Dr to MH-H2-002 at Calle del Adobe, and 3,400 ft. of 30-inch to 32- inch from MH-H2-002 to MH-J2-047 at N Davis Rd. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 43-100% full due to future flows. A majority of the future flows (81%) can be attributed to the West Area Specific Plan, with Target Area K contributing 15%, and Target Areal L contributing 4%.

It should be noted that this project assumes Existing Cherokee Drive CIP, and Existing Northridge Mall CIP have been constructed.

West Laurel Drive
The West Laurel Drive Future CIP recommends upsizing approximately 1,550 ft. of 12-inch to 15-inch from MH-H4-001 at N Main St to MH-H3-023 near Laurel Park. Under peak future conditions, this segment on West Laurel Drive runs 66-88% full. All future flows driving this project are from the Laurel Drive at North Main Street Focused Growth Area.

It should be noted that this project assumes Existing Noice Dr/Tyler Street CIP has been constructed.

Victor Street
The Victor Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 1,600 ft. of 15- inch to 18-inch from MH-J3-012 at Ashbury Way to MH-J2-007 at W Rossi St. Under peak future conditions, this segment along Victor St runs 73-98% full. All future flows driving this project are from the Laurel Drive at North Main Street Focused Growth Area.

It should be noted that this project assumes Existing Noice Dr/Tyler Street CIP has been constructed and Future West Laurel Dr. CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.

Freedom Parkway
The Freedom Parkway Future CIP project recommends the upsize of approximately 2,025 ft of 10-inch pipe to 15-inch from MH-J9-005 at Estrella Way to MH-J9-001 at N Sanborn Rd. An additional 2,725 ft of 12-inch pipe from MH-J9-001 to MH-I8-013 at Nogal Dr should be upsized to 18-inch. Under peak future conditions, this segment on Freedom Parkway runs 50-100% full and eight (8) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft. of the manhole rims. All future flows driving this project are from the East Area Specific Plan.

Natividad Creek Park
The Natividad Creek Park Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 230 ft of 18-inch to 21-inch from MH-H8-012 to MH-H8-004 and approximately 3,800 ft of 24- inch to 27-inch from MH-H8-004 at Freedom Pkwy to MH-I7-005 at the Twin Creeks Golf Course. Under peak future conditions, this segment through Natividad Creek Park runs 76-100% full. The future flows driving this project are split between the East Area Specific Plan at 58% and Central Area Specific Plan at 42%.
6-9
It should be noted that this project assumes Future Freedom Pkwy CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.

East Alisal Street
The East Alisal Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 5,400 ft. of 15-inch to 18-inch from MH-M8-010 near Bardin Rd to MH-M7-009 at Williams Rd.

Additionally, approximately 2,200 ft of 18-inch should be upsized to 21-inch from MHM7-009 to MH-M6-012 at N Sanborn Rd. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 67-100% full and fourteen (14) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rims.

All future flows driving this project are from the East Future Growth Area.

Abbott Street
The Abbot Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 1,300 ft of 12- inch to 15-inch from MH-Q7-001 at Harris Rd to MH-Q7-004. An additional 850 ft. of 12- inch pipe from MH-P6-015 to MH-P6-006 at Harkins Rd should be upsized to 15-inch, and 700 ft of 15-inch to 18-inch from MH-P6-006. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 66-100% full. Under future max day flows three (3) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim. The future flows driving this project are the East Future Growth Area at 59%, Target Area B at 39%, and Target Area F at 2%.

South Sanborn Road
In order to avoid upgrades at both South Sanborn and downstream of TP2, the South Sanborn Future CIP project proposes to increase the overflow elevation at MH-M6-012 to

65.09 ft in elevation (an additional 0.65 ft from Existing CIP Upstream TP2 Diversion). This hydraulic change would send future flows primarily down South Sanborn Road. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 66-100% full and MH-N6-004 is surcharging. All future flows driving this project are from the East Future Growth Area.

This project proposes to upsize approximately 4,365 ft of 18-inch to 21-inch from MHM6-012 at E Alisal St to MH O6-006 at Pellet Ave, 500 ft of 21-inch to 24-inch from MH O6-006 to MH O6-008 at Industrial St, and 1,500 ft of 24-inch to 27-inch from MH O6-008 to MH 05-002 near Abbott St. Since the overflow weir will send more flows down South Sanborn, these pipe upgrades will need to be constructed before the overflow elevation weir, ensuring that there is enough capacity to accommodate the flows down South Sanborn.

It should be noted that there is a concrete "weir" at MH N6-003 to stop South Sanborn Rd. flows from backing into Mayfair Dr. Detailed design for this project should consider raising the slope/invert on Mayfair Dr or increasing the slope along South Sanborn to prevent further backwater effects.

It should also be noted that this project assumes Future East Alisal CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.

Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
TP2
Carpenter
Hall
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Legend
Ú3 City Lift Stations
Modeled Sewer Pipes
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-1

WASTEWATER MODEL

OVERVIEW MAP

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
^_
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
Abbott
Street
South Main
Street
East Alisal
Street/East
Market Street
Laurel Drive
at North
Main Street
North Main
Street/Soledad Street
East FGA
West
Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Southeast FGA
Ag-Industrial
Center
F
B
B
N
V
V
L
K
K
Bolsa Knolls
Legend
^_ Future Flow Allocation
Ú3 City Lift Stations
Modeled Sewer Pipes
City Boundary
Bolsa Knolls
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
Future Growth Area
Focused Growth Area
Target Area
North Boronda FGA
Central Area Specifc Plan
East Area Specific Plan
West Area Specific Plan
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-2

FUTURE FLOW ALLOCATION

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Target Area K: 122 gpm
Target Area L: 32 gpm
West Boronda FGA:
113 gpm
Laurel Dr at North Main St:
168 gpm
West Area
Specific Plan: 638 gpm
Central Area
Specific Plan: 253 gpm
Central Area Specific Plan: 327 gpm
East Area Specific Plan: 405 gpm
East Area Specific
Plan: 405 gpm
East Area FGA: 409 gpm
East Area FGA: 409 gpm
East Alisal St/East
Market St: 27 gpm (each)
Target Area V:
21 gpm (each)
North Main St/Soledad St:
88 gpm (each)
Abbott St:
101 gpm (each)
South Main St:
150 gpm
Target Area N:
18 gpm
Southeast Area FGA: 162 gpm
Target Area B: 109 gpm
Target Area F: 5 gpm
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center: 36 gpm
Southeast Area FGA: 162 gpm
Salinas Ag-IndustrialCenter:

19.9 gpm
270 gpm (Lift Station)
Bolsa Knolls: 67 gpm
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
W Market St
Davis Rd
Legend
Ú3 City Lift Stations
Available Capacity
Exceeds Capacity
Marginal Capacity
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-3

EXISTING CAPACITY DURING

PEAK CONDITIONS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
"/ UPSTREAM TP2

FLOW DIVERSION
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station

NATIVIDAD RD OR ALTERNATIVE
TYLE
R
ST
N
O
RT
H
RID
G
E
MALL
N
O
CI E
D
R

CESAR CHAVEZ PARK

CHEROKEE
DR
Legend
Existing Sewer Upgrades
Modeled Sewer Pipes
"/ Upstream TP2 (M6-012)
Ú3 City Lift Stations
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-4

EXISTING SEWER

UPGRADE PROJECTS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
W Market St
Davis Rd
Legend
Does Not Meet Minimum Velocity Criteria
Meets Minimum Velocity Criteria
Ú3 City Lift Stations
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED MAY 2022.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-5

LOW PIPE VELOCITY

DURING PEAK FLOW CONDITIONS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station
Abbott
Street
South Main
Street
East Alisal
Street/East
Market Street
Laurel Drive
at North
Main Street
North Main
Street/Soledad
Street
North
Boronda FGA
East FGA
West
Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Southeast FGA
F
B
B
N
V
V
L
K
K
Ag-Industrial
Center
Bolsa Knolls
Legend
Ú3 Salinas Area Pump Station
Ú3 City Lift Stations
Available Capacity
Marginal Capacity
Exceeds Capacity
Bolsa Knolls
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
Future Growth Area
Focused Growth Area
Target Area
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-6

FUTURE CAPACITY DURING

PEAK CONDITIONS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3
Ú3 Ú3
Ú3
Ú3

SAN JUAN
GRADE
TP2
Lake Street
Santa Rita
Spicer
Harkins Rd
De La Torre
Airport
Las Casitas
Mill Lake Vista Nueva
Salinas Area
Pump Station

NATIVIDAD
CREEK
PARK

EAST ALISAL ST

VICTOR ST
WEST

LAUREL DR
NORTH
DAVIS
RD

ABBOTT ST

FREEDOM
PKWY
SOUTH

SANBORN
RD
Abbott
Street
South Main
Street
East Alisal
Street/East
Market Street
Laurel Drive
at North
Main Street
North Main
Street/Soledad Street
North
Boronda FGA
East FGA
West
Boronda
FGA
Southeast FGA
Southeast FGA
W Market St
Davis Rd
F
B
B
N
V
V
L
K
K
Ag-Industrial
Center
Bolsa Knolls
Legend
Future Sewer Upgrades
Modeled Sewer System
Future Growth Area
Focused Growth Area
Target Area
Bolsa Knolls
Salinas Ag-Industrial Center
Ú3 Salinas Area Pump Station
Ú3 City Lift Stations
NOTES:

ESRI BASEMAP.

WALLACE GROUP DID

NOT PERFORM BOUNDARY

SURVEY SERVICES FOR THIS
MAP. NOT A LEGAL DOCUMENT. O MAP PRODUCED FEBRUARY 2023.

SALINAS SEWER MASTER PLAN UPDATE
FIGURE 6-7

FUTURE SEWER

UPGRADE PROJECTS

CIVIL ENGINEERING

CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT

LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE

MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

PLANNING

PUBLIC WORKS ADMINISTRATION

SURVEYING/GIS SOLUTIONS

WATER RESOURCES
612 CLARION COURT
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA 93401
T 805 544-4011 F 805 544-4294
www.wallacegroup.us
1 inch = 5,000 feet
7-1
CH AP TER 7

CA P ITA L IMPROVEMENT PROG RA M
This Chapter presents the proposed Capital Improvement Program (CIP), with a brief description of the proposed projects and a preliminary cost estimate for each. Also included in the CIP recommendations are general timelines for the improvements. The Mark Thomas 2017 CCTV Evaluation and O&M projects discussed in Chapter 3, I/I Evaluation discussed in Chapter 4, and Lift Station improvements discussed in Chapter 5 are included in the CIP.

B A S I S O F C A P I T A L I M P R O V E M E N T P R O G R A M C O S T S The CIP costs were developed based on engineering judgment, confirmed bid prices for similar work in Monterey County, consultation with vendors and contractors, established budgetary unit prices for the work, and other reliable sources. Hard construction costs are typically escalated by a factor of 1.4 to allow budget for “soft costs” that include preliminary engineering, engineering, administration, construction management and inspection costs. All CIP costs are express in Year 2022 dollars, using the McGraw-Hill Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index of 13004 (May 2022). Actual project costs will vary depending on economic conditions at the time of construction and should be escalated to the year or years schedule for the work.

Sewer Main Upgrade Unit Costs
Table 7-1 provides costs for the recommended capital improvement projects. The unit cost for replacement of gravity sewers includes the proposed pipelines, lateral re-connections, sewer bypassing, and traffic control.

Construction methods such as pipe bursting and trenching were determined for different segments of each project depending on pipe conditions (existing sags, joint offsets, etc.) and number of lateral re-connections. Trenching was assumed for all new sewer main construction. Additionally, the City provided a GIS overlay of the known streets with concrete in the roadway. If the project required trenching in these roads, a unit cost was applied to account for removal and replacement of concrete in the roadway.

For the manhole condition assessment performed by the 2017 Mark Thomas CCTV Evaluation, the cost estimates for manhole repairs presented in Table 4 of the evaluation were escalated to Year 2022 dollars and used. The Mark Thomas CCTV Evaluation can be found in Appendix B of this SSMPU. 7-2
T A B L E 7 - 1 . S E W E R M A I N C O N S T R U C T I O N U P G R A D E

U N I T C O S T S

C O N S T R U C T I O N T Y P E U N I T C O S T / L I N E A L F E E T 6 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $380
6 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $400
8 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $420
8 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $450
10 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $460
10 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $500
12 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $510
12 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $560
15 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $590
15 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $660
18 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $690
18 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $780
21 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $800
21 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $920
24 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $930
24 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $1,090
27 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $1,080
27 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $1,280
30 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $1,250
30 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $1,510
32 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $1,390
32 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $1,690
36 - I N C H B U R S T I N G $1,690
36 - I N C H T R E N C H I N G $2,100
C O N C R E T E I N R O A D W A Y $65
M A N H O L E R E P L A C E M E N T $16,000 EACH
C O A T M A N H O L E $4,000 EACH
I N S P E C T I O N P O R T $3,500 EACH
7-3

C I P R A N K I N G
The existing capital improvement projects were ranked to determine what priority the existing recommended projects should be constructed. These projects include those identified through the hydraulic model, lift station evaluation, Mark Thomas 2017 CCTV Evaluation, and the O&M repairs noted by City operations and maintenance crews.

Table 7-2 evaluates each of the projects in five categories: overflow to a water body of the State, if it meets design criteria, if it is identified by the City as a maintenance hot spot, its community impact, and if it is near a City manhole monitor that alerts crews if a manhole is surcharging. With input from the City, each category was provided a weighted importance factor based on the relative importance of the category. The importance factor is multiplied by the score of the project received and then added together to determine its final score.

It is recommended that the City review these projects periodically to determine if any substantial changes have occurred that may re-prioritize a project to a higher ranking. The future capital improvement projects were not ranked since they are determined by construction of the future developments that were identified for this SSMPU.

Lift Station CIPs
Lift Station CIPs have been categorized in two separate ways: one based on improvements needed at each lift station as a whole and the other based on improvement project type for all lift stations. Table 7-3 ranks each individual lift station based on eight categories: overflow to a water body, inspection frequency, existing pumping capacity deficiencies, peak hour emergency response time, if bypassing capabilities are needed, if an onsite generator with automatic transfer switch is needed, if control system upgrades are needed, and potential impact to the community. Although not included in the scoring, Table 7-3 also shows if the lift station would be impacted by future development. This criterion is important to consider if the lift station is being considered for upgrade and the likelihood of the upgrade being impacted by future development.

The other categorization of lift station improvements is based on project type. The following projects have been grouped together and ranked by City staff. See cutsheets at the end of this chapter for the lift stations that these projects apply to.

1. Controller Upgrades and Standardization

2. Install Emergency Bypass and Washdown Water

3. Safety/Falling Hazard Concerns

4. Generator Replacement

5. Onsite Standby Generator

6. Power Receptacle

7. Painting/Coating Maintenance
Depending on timing of full replacement of the lift stations, it may be recommended to upgrade lift station components that will aid in operation and maintenance, which are the Projects #1-7 noted above. This will allow time for the City to develop a funding plan for full replacement. This excludes Lake Street Lift Station, which needs full replacement immediately.

7-4

T I M I N G O F R E C O M M E N D E D I M P R O V E M E N T S The existing capital improvement projects are triggered by existing deficiencies, while the future capital improvement projects are triggered by one or more future developments connecting to the City’s collection system. All projects identified as existing deficiencies based on the hydraulic model or O&M and are detailed out in Table 7-4. These existing projects are due to existing wastewater flows, but it is also important for these projects to be completed to accommodate future wastewater flows. All lift station existing CIP projects are detailed in Table 7-5. These existing projects are recommended to be completed within the next 1-7 years. The last four projects are unranked but are still considered existing deficiencies to be addressed by the City. The Inflow/Infiltration evaluation should be performed during a significant wet weather year in the next 1-5 years. The CCTV Inspection program should evaluate the entire collection system every 5 years or approximately 20% of the system per year. The brick manhole and flushing inlet replacements are considered lower priority due to the ongoing nature of the projects as the City performs continuous inspection of these area. Over the next 15 years, all brick manholes should be coated or replaced and all flushing inlets should be replaced with an 8-inch inspection port or new manhole.

The future capital improvement projects are triggered by potential future development. Since the timing of these projects and wastewater flow projections have not been finalized, it is recommended that additional modeling be performed during the planning and design phases of these future developments. The future projects presented in Table 7-6 assume the future wastewater flow allocations shown in Figure 6-2.

Recommended projects have not been evaluated for potential environmental impacts as a part of this study.

Projects will be subject to the requirements of CEQA prior to approval and funding.

Following the tables, Figures 7-1 to 7-33 are project description sheets are provided for the sewer projects identified by sewer modeling (both existing and future) and the lift station upgrades (by lift station or project type). These description sheets can be used by City staff in the planning for each project and for inclusion in fiscal year budget requests.

Exhibit 1 in Appendix F shows all sewer upgrade projects and the sewer repairs noted by City crews.

TABLE 7-2

CITY OF SALINAS SSMPU

EXISTING HYDRAULIC AND MAINTENANCE REPAIR CIP RANKING MATRIX Importance Factor 5 4 3 2 1
Overflow to Water
Body of the State Design Standard Maintenance Hot Spot Community Impact Near City Manhole Monitor Impacted By Future Development Yes - 10
No - 0
Meets Design Standard - 0
Doesn't Meet Design Standards - 2
Surcharging - 5
Overflowing - 10
Not Critical - 0
Yearly Check - 5
Weekly or Monthly Checks - 10
< 5,000 - 0
5,001 to 10,000 - 5
>10,000 - 10
Yes-5
No-0 Yes/No
Cesar Chavez Park
(includes North Madeira Avenue Repairs) Hydraulic Deficiency 10 5 5 10 0 Yes, East Alisal Redevelopment 105 1 Upper Carr Lake Repairs O&M 10 0 10 10 0 Yes, North Boronda FGA 100 2 Upstream TP2 Diversion Hydraulic Deficiency 10 5 0 10 0 No 90 3 Northridge Mall Hydraulic Deficiency 10 5 0 10 0 Yes, Target area K 90 4 East Market and Upstream of Lake Street Repairs O&M 10 0 5 5 0 No 75 5 Louis & Van Buren Repairs O&M 10 0 5 0 5 No 70 6
West Market at Davis Overcrossing O&M 10 0 5 0 0 Yes, West Boronda FGA 65 7 Cherokee Dr Hydraulic Deficiency 0 5 0 10 5 Yes, Target Area K 45 8 Malarin St and Wilgart Way Repairs O&M 0 5 5 5 0 No 45 9 Romie Lane Repairs & Reconfiguration Analysis O&M 0 0 10 5 0 No 40 10 King Street Repairs O&M 0 0 10 0 5 No 35 11
Del Monte and Mae Repairs O&M 0 0 10 0 5 No 35 12
Riker Street Repair O&M 0 0 10 0 5 No 35 13
West Market Street Repairs O&M 0 0 10 0 5 No 35 14
Johnson Place Repairs O&M 0 5 5 0 0 No 35 15
N Main St Hwy 101 Underpass Bunker Repair O&M 0 0 10 0 0 Yes, Target area V 30 16 Donner Way Repair O&M 0 0 10 0 0 No 30 17
San Miguel Ave Repair O&M 0 0 10 0 0 No 30 18
Noice Drive/Tyler Street Hydraulic Deficiency 0 5 0 5 0 No 30 19 Natividad Rd or Alternative Natividad Consolidation Hydraulic Deficiency 0 5 0 5 0 Yes, Target area V, north boronda FGA 30 20 Acacia, Bautista, Woodside Repairs O&M 0 0 5 0 5 No 20 21 Comanche, Polk, and North First Repairs O&M 0 0 5 0 5 Yes, Target area K 20 22 Sherwood Dr Repairs O&M 0 0 5 0 5 Yes, Target area V 20 23 East Laurel and Williams Repairs O&M 0 0 5 0 0 No 15 24 Hoover Street Repair O&M 0 0 5 0 0 No 15 25
Project Name
Score =
Importance
Type of Project Factor X Points Ranking
7-5
TABLE 7-2

CITY OF SALINAS SSMPU

EXISTING LIFT STATION CIP RANKING MATRIX
Importance Factor 5 4 3 3 2 2 2 1
Overflow to Water
Body of the State Inspection Frequency
Existing Pumping
Capacity Deficiencies
Peak Hour Emergency Response
Time Bypass Required?
Onsite Generator with Automatic
Transfer Switch Required?
Critical Control/Electronic
Upgrades Required? Community Impact
Impacted By Future
Development
Yes - 10
No - 0
Emergency Callouts-10
Daily Inspections-5
Weekly Inspections-0
Yes-10
No-0
0-15 minutes-10
15-30 minutes-5
Greater than 30 minutes-0
Yes-5
No-0
Yes-5
Replace Generator-3
No-0
Yes-5
No-0
< 5,000 - 0
5,001 to 10,000 - 5
>10,000 - 10 Yes/No
Lake St Lift Station 10 10 10 10 0 3 5 10
Yes, Target Area V, East
Alisal Street/East Market
Street, Central Area and
East Area Specific Plans,
and East Area FGA
Pumps must be upsized
for future flows.
176 1
Santa Rita Lift Station 10 10 0 10 5 3 5 5
Bolsa Knolls Septic
Conversion & Target Area
K 151 2
Carpenter Hall Lift Station 10 5 0 10 5 3 0 10
Yes, North Boronda FGA
and Targe Areas K & V 126 3
De La Torre Lift Station 10 10 0 0 5 5 5 0
Possible, Southeast FGA
Pumps may need to be
upsized for future flows 120 4
Spicer Lift Station 10 10 0 0 5 5 5 0 No 120 5
Mill Lake Lift Station 10 5 0 10 5 0 5 0 No 120 6
Vista Nueva Lift Station 10 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 No 90 7
Las Casitas Lift Station 10 0 0 10 0 0 5 0 No 90 8
TP2 Lift Station 10 0 0 0 5 3 0 10
Yes, East Alisal
Street/East Market Street
and East FGA.

Pumps must be upsized
for future flows.
76 9
Harkins Lift Station 0 10 0 0 5 5 5 0
Yes, Salinas AgIndustrial Center
Pumps must be upsized
for future flows
70 10
Airport Lift Station 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Yes, Southeast FGA 50 11 Project Name
Score =
Importance
Factor X Points Ranking
7-7
TABLE 7-4.

1.1 Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Minor defects, needs new frame and cover, lining
interior of manhole (Garde:10) (K5-001); Visible
agregate and broken frame, needs new frame & cover,
lining interior of manhole (Grade: 3) (K5-003); Pipe
(Grade:4),WLS of 0.6, encrustations
Lake St 380 24 24 N Madeira Ave
N Madeira north of
Cesar Chavez park
between St Helen Way
and Terrace St
K5-001 K5-003 $438,000 $175,200 $613,200
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
New MH frame and cover, install marker (Grade:5)
(MH I6-004); expose and raise MH- curently buried
(Grade:10) (I6-006); New MH frame and cover, install
marker (Grade:10) (I6-005); (I6-004 to I6-006) Pipe
WLS =0.35, root ball, (Grade: 3); (I6-006 to I6-005)
(Grade:2)
Lake St 410 21 21 Laurel Dr. Bike Trail Near
Veteran's Way I6-004 I6-005 $396,500 $158,600 $555,100
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
New MH frame & cover w/ PCC collar, line in 5 yrs
(Grade:3) (J6-001); New frame & cover w/ PCC collar,
line in 5 yrs (Grade:3) (J6-002);Pipe d/D: 0.75, grease deposits (Grade: 10)
Lake St 300 27 27 Trail around Upper
Carr Lake
Off of E Laurel Dr near
Veteran's Way J6-001 J6-002 $406,000 $162,400 $568,400
$802,500 $321,000 $1,123,500
3 Upstream TP2 Diversion Weir Construction TP2 -- -- -- East Alisal St South Sanborn Rd M6-012 -- $45,000 $18,000 $63,000 Upsize sewer main -- 2,300 15 18 North Main St
From East Boronda
Road to San Juan
Grade Road
E4-007 F4-011
Sewer Main Connection/Realignment -- 320 -- 18 North Main St From Big 5 Sporting Goods to Harden Pkwy F4-007 F4-031
4 Northridge Mall
Upper Carr Lake Repairs
$1,916,000
Upsize sewer main Cesar Chavez Park
$766,400 $2,682,400
2 1 $8,369,000 $3,347,600 $11,716,600
CCTV evaulation noted pipe encrustations and manholes need new frames, covers, and lining in a portion of the Cesar Chavez Park CIP. These repairs are noted below and should be replaced if Cesar Chavez Park CIP is not constructed in the near term.

Total Repair Project Costs
7-8
TABLE 7-4.

CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Project # Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project Cost
($)**
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Expose and raise MH to grade, buried (Grade:10) (K5-
008)
Lake St -- -- -- Yorshire Way
Yorkshire Way, between
Longbow Way and
Doncaster Pl
K5-008 -- $5,900 $2,360 $8,260
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Expose and raise MH to grade, buried (Grade:10) (K5-
010); Pipe broken, encrustations (Grade:5)
Lake St 150 24 24 Longbow Way Long bow Way and Kern
St K5-009 K5-010 $169,400 $67,760 $237,160
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Replace frame & cover w PCC collar, reline, Corroded
frame & chimney (Grade: 10) (K5-012); Replace
Frame & cover w PCC collar, install marker, corrosion,
grease and surcharge (Grade:10) (K5-021); Pipe
cracks, grease deposits, (Grade:3); Replace frame &
cover w PCC collar, install marker, corroded frame and
aggregate (Grade:3) (K5-019); Replace frame & cover,
install ecc. Cone for fence, corroded frame & heavy
grease & surch. (Grade:10) (K5-020); Pipe WLS:

0.25,d/D:0.9, grease deposits (Grade:2)
Lake St 840 24 & 30 24 & 30 East of Sun St Between Sun St and HWY 101 K5-012, K5-019 K5-020, K5-021 $1,125,100 $450,040 $1,575,140 Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
New frame & cover, lining interior of manhole
(Grade:10) (L4-002 and L4-004)
Lake St -- -- -- E Market St E Market St, between
Sun St and Peach Dr L4-002 L4-004 $23,800 $9,520 $33,320 $1,324,200 $529,680 $1,853,880
Pipe sags, surcharging manholes Santa Rita 260 8 8 Louise St Louise St, between Lenny St and Louise Ct D5-001 D4-003 $149,000 $59,600 $208,600 Pipe sags, surcharging manholes Santa Rita 70 8 8 Van Buren Ave near East Bolivar St D4-007 D4-055 $63,500 $25,400 $88,900 $212,500 $85,000 $297,500
7 West Market at Davis
Overcrossing Bunker doors on Large Trunk line need replacement -- -- -- -- West Market St N Davis Road Overcrossing J2-045 K2-038 $13,350 $5,340 $18,690
8 Cherokee Drive Upsize sewer main -- 1,600 18 24 Cherokee Dr From Seminole Way to Tulane Street G3-008 H3-009 $1,920,000 $768,000 $2,688,000 Pipe issue joints, roots -- 380 8 8 Wilgart Way Wilgart Way, E Romie Ln to FI O4-050 O4-011 $171,000 $68,400 $239,400
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Heavy corrosion, reline manhole (Grade:4) -- -- -- -- Near Railroad Between Work St and
Brunken Ave, near
railroad
N5-003 -- $9,300 $3,720 $13,020
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Grease deposits and surcharging, recommend PCC
collar to prevent I/I, new bench and rechannelize
(Grade:10)
-- -- -- -- Los Palos Dr
Near intersection of Los
Palos Dr and Fairmont
Dr
O5-019 -- $6,300 $2,520 $8,820
$186,600 $74,640 $261,240
10 Romie Lane Repairs &
Reconfiguration Analysis
Hydrogen Sulfide damage, MH rings and lids need
replacement. Concrete in roadway. Recommended
reconfiguration analysis before repairs.
4,030 18 18 Romie Lane Near Los Palos Drive to
South Main Street O4-007 N3-002 -- $100,000 $100,000
11 King Street Repairs Major pipe sags TP2 1,170 8 10 King St King St, E Market to E Alisal L5-033 L5-039 $585,000 $234,000 $819,000
Trough pipe missing in MH Lake St -- -- -- C Street On C St, Galindo St to Mae Ave -- K8-012 $16,000 $6,400 $22,400
Pipe sags, needs replacement Lake St 820 8 8 Del Monte Ave Del Monte Ave, Mae
Ave to Green St K8-011 J8-020 $369,000 $147,600 $516,600 Total Louise and Van Buren St Repair Project Costs
5 9
The Louis and Van Buren maintenance repairs are along the future San Juan Grade CIP. These segments should be replaced if the future San Juan Grade CIP is not constructed in the near term. 12 Del Monte and Mae Repairs
Total Repair Project Costs
East Market and Upstream
of Lake Street Repairs
Total Repair Project Costs
Louise and Van Buren
Street Repair 6
Malarin St and Wilgart Way
Repairs
7-9
TABLE 7-4.

Concrete in roadway. -- 450 8 8 Villa Street At Villa St and Kirkwood Ave L2-016 K3-016 $231,750 $92,700 $324,450 Both F.I.'s are blown out -- -- -- -- West Market St Near El Cerrito Market L3-043 L3-010 $32,000 $12,800 $44,800 Pipe sags. Concrete in roadway. -- 840 6 6 Capitol St Capitol St, W Market St to Archer St L3-013 L3-040 $336,000 $134,400 $470,400
Pipe sags. Concrete in roadway. Replace F.I. with new
manhole. -- 710 6 6 Capitol St Capitol St, Archer St to F.I. L3-041 F.I $346,150 $138,460 $484,610 $945,900 $378,360 $1,324,260
15 Johnson Place Repairs Pipe damage, sags, spidering under tracks, ongoing backups, MH O5-005 has settled, always surcharging -- 1,470 12 12 Johnson Pl Johnson Pl Abbott Pl to railroad tracks N5-011 O5-005 $839,200 $335,680 $1,174,880 16 N Main St Hwy 101
Underpass Bunker Repair
Bunker damage to pipe, pipe missing at bunker on
both sides, clogging -- 50 10 10 N Main St N Main St at Hwy 101 J4-012 J4-013 $25,000 $10,000 $35,000 17 Donner Way Pipe damages, sags, etc. Carpenter Hall 280 8 8 Donner Way Truckee Way to
Emerald Dr G6-037 G6-060 $126,000 $50,400 $176,400
18 San Miguel Ave Repair Pipe Damage; broken pipe 10-feet from manhole -- 10 8 8 Pajaro St Pajaro St and San Miguel 04-025 O3-038 $4,500 $1,800 $6,300
Upsize sewer main -- 2,100 8 12 Noice Dr From Chaparral Street to East Laurel Drive G4-015 H4-011
Reconstruct manhole -- -- -- -- E Laurel Dr East Laurel Drive near N Main Street H4-012 --
New sewer main -- 60 -- 12 E Laurel Dr East Laurel Drive to North Main Street H4-006 H4-001
Upsize sewer main -- 3,300 12 15 Tyler Street West Laurel Drive down to HWY 101 H3-023 I3-001
Upsize sewer main Carpenter Hall 2,700 12 15 Natividad Rd From near Sausal Drive
to East Alvin Drive G6-002 H6-003
Weir Construction Carpenter Hall -- -- -- Natividad Rd East Alvin Drive H6-003 -- Carpenter Hall 3,600 15 18 Natividad Rd East Alvin Drive to near East Laurel Drive H6-003 I5-007
Carpenter Hall 305 12 15 Off of Sherwood Dr
From Sherwood Drive
toward East Bernal
Drive
J5-003 J5-005
Carpenter Hall 2,000 15 18 Parallel to E Bernal
Dr and N Main St
From near Sherwood Dr
to Santa Clara Ave J5-005 J4-010
-- 2,400 15 21 Natividad Rd East Alvin Drive to
Pacheco St H6-003 I5-011
-- 5,000 15 24 Natividad Rd to Sherwood Park on
East Bernal Drive I5-011 J4-022
-- 1,100 21 30 Easement Portion along Alpine Dr J4-022 J4-011 -- 620 21 30 J4-011 K4-002
Total Repair Project Costs
14 $3,400,000 $4,760,000
West Market Street Repairs
Under Highway 101
$9,120,000 Alternative Natividad
Consolidation Upsize sewer main
Upsize sewer main
$6,090,000 $2,436,000 $8,526,000
20 19 Noice Drive/Tyler Street $1,360,000
$3,648,000 $12,768,000
Natividad Rd
Total Repair Project Costs
7-10
TABLE 7-4.

CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Project # Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project Cost
($)**
Pipe Sags, replace F.I. with new manhole -- 130 8 8 Acacia Circle North W Acacia St F.I. N3-039 $74,500 $29,800 $104,300 Pipe Sags -- 280 8 8 Woodside Dr Woodside Dr, Teakwood
Pl to Riker St O3-016 O3-015 $126,000 $50,400 $176,400
Pipe Sags -- 490 8 8 Bautista Dr Bautista Dr, W Romie
Ln to Orange Dr N3-014 N3-060 $220,500 $88,200 $308,700 Pipe issue joints, roots, offsets, replace F.I. with new manhole -- 230 8 8 Bautista Dr Bautista Dr, F.I to W Acacia F.I N3-029 $119,500 $47,800 $167,300 $540,500 $216,200 $756,700
Pipe issue, joints, replace F.I. with new manhole -- 690 6 6 Comanche Way Shawnee Way to Cherokee Dr F.I. G3-010 $292,000 $116,800 $408,800
Pipe issue joints, roots, replace F.I. with new manhole -- 490 8 8 Polk St Polk St, Monroe St to W Laurel Dr F.I. I3-045 $236,500 $94,600 $331,100
Pipe sags -- 640 8 8 N 1st St N 1st St, Boeing Ave, W
Curtis St H4-061 H4-054 $288,000 $115,200 $403,200
$816,500 $326,600 $1,143,100
23 Sherwood Dr Repairs Pipe cracks at 220-ft mark downstream from K4-052.

Obstruction (possibly old water line) in K4-076 Lake St 840 12 12 Sherwood Dr Near Sioux Dr to E Rossi St K4-052 K4-076 $486,400 $194,560 $680,960 Pipe sags, broken pipe -- 450 10 10 Easement E Laurel Dr at 105 Oregon St K7-011 K7-014 $225,000 $90,000 $315,000
Pipe sags -- 1,080 8 8 Williams Rd Williams Rd, E Market St to Quilla St L7-009 M7-006 $486,000 $194,400 $680,400 $711,000 $284,400 $995,400
25 Hoover Street Repair F.I. repair blown out Santa Rita -- -- -- Hoover Street 1885 Hoover Street -- -- $16,000 $6,400 $22,400 Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Exposed aggregate & heavy corrosion,fiberglass
peeling, weld cover, recommend reline manhole, new
bench, and rechannelize (Grade:10) (O4-001);
Welded/broken cover, recommend new frame & cover
(Grade:10), (O4-002); Pipe d/D 0.85 (Grade: 1)
-- -- -- -- Katherine Ave Katherine Ave and
Alameda Ave O4-001 O4-002 $16,800 $6,720 $23,520
Mark Thomas 2017 Findings
Corrosion, broken cover, rechannel, needs new
manhole (Grade:10)
-- -- -- -- Pajaro St Pajaro St near Katherine
Ave O4-006 NA $14,600 $5,840 $20,440
$31,400 $12,560 $43,960
27 Wood Street
Reconfiguration Analysis
Pipe sags, always plugs, can't CCTV
Entire area needs reconfiguration Lake St 1,820 -- -- Easement Between Wood and Roosevelt Street L5-029 L5-034 -- $50,000 $50,000
-- CCTV Program CCTV inspection of 20% (approximately 58 miles) of the collection system each year All -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- $9,392,000 $9,392,000 --
Inflow/Infiltration
Evaluation
Conduct full I/I evaluation of the entire collection
system (during significant wet weather year) and
update the sewer model
All -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- $140,000 $140,000
Coat: $432,000 Coat: $172,800 Coat: $604,800
New Manhole: $1,728,000 New Manhole: $691,200 New Manhole: $2,419,200 Inspection Port: $4,910,500 Inspection Port: $1,964,200 Inspection Port: $6,874,700 New Manhole: $22,448,000 New Manhole: $8,979,200 New Manhole: $31,427,200 EXISTING SEWER PROJECT CIP TOTAL COSTS $59-$90 million
Total Repair Project Costs
Total Repair Project Costs
-- --
-- --
--
Brick Manhole Inspection &
Coat/New Manhole
Replacement
Inspect and replace brick manholes
(108 based on field survey and City input) All -- -- -- -- -- --
Flushing Inlet (Cleanout)
Inspection & Port/New
Manhole Replacement
Inspect and replace flushing inlets/cleanouts
(1,403 based on City GIS) All -- --
Acacia, Bautista, Woodside
Repairs 21
-- -- --
*Soft costs include a 40% escalation of the construction costs for planning, engineering, CM, legal/admin. **All CIP costs are expressed in May 2022 dollars, using McGraw-Hill ENR Construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

East Laurel and Williams
Repairs 24
Total Repair Project Costs
Total Repair Project Costs
26 Katherine Ave & Pajaro St
Repairs
22 Comanche, Polk, and North
First Repairs
7-11
TABLE 7-5.

CITY OF SALINAS EXISTING LIFT STATIONS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Project # Title Description Tributary
Area (Acres)
PHDW
Flow
(gpm)
Firm
Capacity Street Location Upstream Manhole Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction
Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project
Cost
($)**
1 Lake Street Lift Station Full lift station replacement/relocation, see cutsheet for summary 4,108 6,375 -13% 146 East Rossi Street Intersection of E Lake St
and E Rossi St across
from Monterey County
Housing Alliance
K4-022 K4-019 9,500,000 3,800,000 13,300,000
2 Santa Rita Lift Station Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for summary
348 670 112% 2021 Sucre Court Behind the parking lot of Salinas Valley Motel D4-019 -- 3,500,000 1,400,000 4,900,000 3 Spicer Lift Station Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for summary
79 99 107% 59 Spicer St On Spicer street near A
& S Metals N5-009 N5-007 2,200,000 880,000 3,080,000
4 Mill Lake Lift Station Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for summary
43 132 287% 81 Gardenia Dr Off of Heather Circle J4-020 I3-001 2,750,000 1,100,000 3,850,000 5 Carpenter Hall Lift
Station
Lift station rehabilitation, see cutsheet for
summary
508 1,226 31% 516 North Main St Behind the Coast Auto
Insurance parking lot J4-011 K4-002 1,050,000 420,000 1,470,000 6 De La Torre Lift
Station
Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for
summary
10 7 4845% 1200 De La Torre
St
Across De La Torre St
from Inns of California
Salinas
O7-001 N7-009 1,200,000 480,000 1,680,000
7 Vista Nueva Lift
Station
Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for
summary
6 41 408% 704 Garner Ave Off Garner Ave near
Natividad Creek J7-034 J7-014 2,200,000 880,000 3,080,000 8 Harkins Road Lift
Station
Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for
summary
146 135 175% 1200 Harkins Rd Intersection of Dayton St
and Harkins Rd Q6-001 Q6-009 1,300,000 520,000 1,820,000 9 Las Casitas Lift
Station
Lift station rehabilitation, see cutsheet for
summary
38 137 189% 721 Las Casitas Dr
Near intersection of
Ranchero Dr and Las
Casitas Dr
I7-001 -- 650,000 260,000 910,000
10 TP2 Lift Station Full lift station replacement, see cutsheet for summary
136 279 99% 650 Elvee Dr Across Alisal Creek from
Fleet Service Center N5-006 N5-022 2,500,000 1,000,000 3,500,000 11 Airport Lift Station Lift station rehabilitation, see cutsheet for summary
584 60 960% 730 La Guardia St
South west corner of the
Ramco Enterprise LP
parking lot
O8-004 O8-005 800,000 320,000 1,120,000
EXISTING LIFT STATION CIP TOTAL PROJECT COSTS 38,710,000 *Soft costs include a 40% escalation of the construction costs for planning, engineering, CM, legal/admin. **All CIP costs are expressed in May 2022 dollars, using McGraw-Hill ENR Construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work. 7-12
TABLE 7-6.

CITY OF SALINAS FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction
Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project
Cost
($)**
San Juan Grade Upsize sewer main Santa Rita 3,800 8 and 10 12 San Juan Grade Road From Russell Rd to Van Buren Ave C5-008 D4-055 $2,370,000 $948,000 $3,318,000
-- 240 18 24 Tulane Street Between Cherokee Dr
and US HWY 101 H3-009 H3-013
-- 1,700 24 30 N Davis Rd HWY 101 to Calle del
Adobe H3-013 H2-002
-- 3,400 30 32 Parallel to N Davis Rd
Calle del Adobe to
intersect with N Davis
Rd near Rossi Rico
Parkway
H2-002 J2-047
West Laurel Drive Upsize sewer main -- 1,550 12 15 W Laurel Dr From N Main St to near Laurel Park H4-001 H3-023 $1,020,000 $408,000 $1,428,000 Victor Street Upsize sewer main -- 1,600 15 18 Victor St From Ashby Way to W Rossi St J3-012 J2-007 $1,250,000 $500,000 $1,750,000
Lake St 2,025 10 15 Freedom Parkway From Estrella Way to N Sanborn Rd J9-005 J9-001
Lake St 2,725 12 18 Freedom Parkway From N Sanborn Rd to Nogal Dr J9-001 I8-013
Lake St 230 18 21 Natividad Creek Park
Crossing Freedom
Parkway to Natividad
Creek Park
H8-002 H8-004
Carpenter Hall 3,800 24 27 Natividad Creek Park
Natividad Creek Park to
Twin Creeks Golf
Course
H8-004 I7-005
-- 5,400 15 18 E Alisal St From Bardin Rd to
Williams Rd M8-010 M7-009
Part in TP2 2,200 18 21 E Alisal St From Williams Rd to S Sanborn Rd M7-009 M6-012
-- 1,300 12 15 Abbott St From Harris Rd Q7-001 Q7-004
-- 850 12 15 Abbott St To Harkins Rd P6-015 P6-006
-- 700 15 18 Harkins Rd From Abbot St toward
Schilling Pl P6-006 after P6-003
(no City ID)
$1,836,000
$768,000
East Alisal Street Upsize sewer main $2,312,000
North Davis Road
Freedom Parkway Upsize sewer main
Upsize sewer main $8,430,000 $3,372,000 $11,802,000
$3,280,000 $1,312,000 $4,592,000
$2,688,000
Natividad Creek Park Upsize sewer main $4,590,000 $6,426,000 $5,780,000
Abbott Street Upsize sewer main $1,920,000
$8,092,000
7-13
TABLE 7-6.

CITY OF SALINAS FUTURE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Title Description Tributary
Area
Length
(Ft)
Old
Diameter
(in)
New
Diameter
(in)
Street Location Upstream Manhole
Number
Downstream Manhole
Number
Construction
Cost
($)
Soft
Cost
($)*
Total Project
Cost
($)**
Increase Overflow
Elevation TP2 -- -- 65.09 ft (elevation) S Sanborn Rd S Sanborn at E Alisal St -- M6-012 -- 4,365 18 21 S Sanborn Rd From E Alisal St to
Pellet Ave M6-012 O6-006
-- 500 21 24 S Sanborn Rd From Pellet Ave to
Industrial St O6-006 O6-008
-- 1,500 24 27 S Sanborn Rd From Industrial St to
near Abbott St O6-008 O5-002
$48,468,000
*Soft costs include a 40% escalation of the construction costs for planning, engineering, CM, legal/admin. **All CIP costs are expressed in May 2022 dollars, using McGraw-Hill ENR Construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work. $2,392,000
Upsize Sewer Main
South Sanborn Road $5,980,000 $8,372,000
7-14
Existing CIP Project #1: Cesar Chavez Park
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $8,369,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $3,347,600 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $11,716,600 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Cesar Chavez Park Existing CIP project proposes to upsize approximately 2,100 feet of 15-inch pipe to 18-inch pipe from MH-J7-007 near Garner Ave to MH-K7-017 near E Laurel Dr. These pipe segments run 66% to 95% full during existing peak flow conditions. This project also proposes upsizing approximately 3,000 ft of 21-inch pipe to 24-inch from MH-K7-017 near E Laurel Dr to MH-L6-001 near Circle Dr. These pipe segments run 39% to 100% full during existing peak conditions. Four (4) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in this section. An additional 3,500 ft of 24- inch should be upgraded to 27-inch from manhole L6-001 near Circle Dr to manhole K5-007 near Longbow Way. These pipe segments run at 60% to 85% full during existing peak flow conditions. The existing 21-inch and 24-inch pipe sizes are based on as-built records and should be field verified before upsizing.

In addition to the pipe replacements, it is also proposed to construct approximately 70 ft of new 24-inch pipe from MHK5-007 to MH-K5-014 to split flow between 24-inch and 30-inch parallel mains.

It should be noted that CCTV evaluation recorded pipe encrustations and manholes condition repairs for the pipe segment between K5-001 and K5-003.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing CIP Project #1: Cesar Chavez Park

SEE BELOW, TOP RIGHT
Existing CIP Project #3: Upstream TP2 Diversion
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $45,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $18,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $63,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Upstream TP2 Diversion Existing CIP project proposes to divert flows along East Alisal to South Sanborn Rd. by increasing the invert at MH-M6-012 by 0.35 ft. This will cause the 18-inch along East Alisal to act as an overflow line, lessening the flow just downstream of TP2 which currently runs at 91-100% full under existing peak conditions.

It should be noted that future flows will affect this CIP, causing a need to upsize along South Sanborn Rd (see Future CIP South Sanborn Road).

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing CIP Project #3: Upstream TP2 Diversion
Existing CIP Project #4: Northridge Mall
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,916,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $766,400 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $2,682,400 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Northridge Mall Existing CIP project proposes the upsizing of approximately 2,300 ft of 15-inch pipe to 18-inch from MH E4-007 to MH F4-011 along N Main St. These pipe segments run 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. It is also recommended to connect the 18-inch pipe at F4-007 to the 27-inch pipe at MH F4-031, abandoning 1,800 feet of the parallel 12-inch line along North Main Street from MH F4-031 to G4-005. This connection will require trenching in a roadway where concrete has been identified. A cost per lineal foot to remove and replace the concrete has been added to the construction cost. With current conditions, six (6) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing CIP Project #4: Northridge Mall
Existing CIP Project #8: Cherokee Drive
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,920,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $768,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $2,688,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description

1. Construction costs AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Cherokee Dr Existing CIP project proposes to replace approximately 1,600 feet of 18-inch pipe with 24-inch pipe on Cherokee Dr from Seminole Way (MH-G3-008) to Tulane St (MH-H3-009). Cherokee Dr has insufficient capacity for existing conditions. These pipes segments run 67% to 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. Four (4) of the twelve (12) manholes in this section are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing CIP Project #8: Cherokee Drive
Existing CIP Project #19: Noice Drive/Tyler Street
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $3,400,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,360,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $4,760,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Noice Dr/ Tyler St Existing CIP project proposes to replace approximately 2,100 feet of 8-inch pipe to 12-inch pipe on Noice Dr from MH-G4-015 at Chaparral St to MH-H4-011 at E Laurel Dr. This pipe segment runs 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. It is also recommended to reconstruct MH-H4-012 to match inverts and change the flow direction from MH-H4-011 to MH-H4-012. Additionally, it is recommended that approximately 60 ft of new 12-inch pipe be constructed to connect MH-H4-006 to MH-H4-001 at West Laurel Dr and North Main St. This new pipe will relieve the parallel 8-inch lines along North Main St that exceeds capacity under existing peak flow conditions. Finally, approximately 3,300 feet of 12-inch pipe along West Laurel Dr. and Tyler St. from MH-H3-023 to MH-I3-001 should be upsized to 15-inch. Sixteen (16) of the twenty (20) manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing CIP Project #19: Noice Drive/Tyler Street
Existing CIP Project #20: Natividad Rd or Alternative Natividad Consolidation City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $6,090,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $2,436,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $8,526,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
The Natividad Rd CIP project proposes to replace approximately 2,700 feet of 12-inch to 15-inch from MH-G6-002 to MH-H6-003. These pipe segments run 85% to 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. This project recommends an overflow weir be constructed 0.5 ft in MH-H6-003 to make the 12-inch parallel an overflow pipe. Approximately 3,600 ft of 15-inch pipe should be replaced with 18-inch from MH-H6-003 to MH-I5-007. These pipe segments run 100% full during existing peak flow conditions. At Sherwood Dr, approximately 305 ft of 12-inch pipe from MH-J5-003 to MHJ5-005 should be upsized to 15-inch and approximately 2,000 ft of 15-inch to 18-inch from MH-J5-005 to MH-J4-010.

These segments of pipe are running at 100% full at existing peak flow conditions. Eighteen (18) of the manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the existing PHWWF condition.

As an alternative, the Natividad Consolidation CIP proposes to abandon the parallel 12-inch overflow and upsize the approximately 7,400 ft of 15-inch pipe to 21-inch from MH-H6-003 to MH-I5-011 and 24-inch from MH-I5-011 to MH-J4- 022, as well as upsize approximately 1,100 feet of 21-inch line to 30-in line from MH-J4-022 to MH-K4-002. Note, the last segment of this CIP proposes to upsize 620 feet of 21-inch to 30-inch under HWY 101.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing CIP Project #20: Natividad Rd or Alternative Natividad Consolidation City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Lift Station
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$9,500,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $3,800,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $13,300,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Lake Street Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Lake Street City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
Relocate lift station across the street on the east side of West Rossi Street. The costs are for a full lift station replacement. Costs include replacement of forcemain. Costs do not include any land acquisition.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$3,500,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,400,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $4,900,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Santa Rita Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Santa Rita City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.

Electrical Upgrades
Install control cabinet above grade
Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Replace control panel breaker disconnects and overload reset buttons Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
Repair broken conduit between dry and wet well
Seal all penetrations into the dry well
Upgrade Micro-Mac control system
Move conduit underground
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency bypass system
Install emergency overflow tank
Repair wet well coating
Provide on-site water for wash down
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $2,200,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $880,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,080,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Spicer

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Spicer
City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.

Electrical Upgrades
Install cabinet above grade
Installing a transfer switch for emergency back-up generator Replace control panel breaker disconnects and overload reset buttons Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
Replace conduit in wet well
Upgrade the SCADA control system
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Repair leak in the 6" force main in the dry well
Install removeable bollards at the dry well
Install emergency bypass system
Coat the wet well
Repair coating on the floor of the dry well
Provide on-site water for wash down
Additional Studies
Perform study to determine if the wet well can be relocated outside of the street.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$2,750,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,100,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,850,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Mill Lake
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Mill Lake
City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.

Electrical Upgrades
Move control cabinet above ground
Replace control panel breaker disconnects
Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Provide label for voltage on the cabinet
Move electrical conduit underground
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Install fencing around dry well
Coat wet well
Install emergency bypass system
Provide on-site water for wash down
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$1,050,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $420,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,470,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Carpenter Hall Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Carpenter Hall City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
Costs provided are for the upgrades provided below. This lift station is anticipated to only be rehabilitated, not a full replacement.

Electrical Upgrades
Label electrical cabinets with line voltage
Repair or replace motor to pump #1
Install disconnect switches for each pump at the bottom of the dry pit.

Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Mechanical Upgrades
Replace flow meter
Install emergency bypass system
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Repair or replace wet well access lid
Repair piping/penetration from dry well to wet well
Provide on-site water for wash down
Additional Studies
Evaluate generator for replacement
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,200,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $480,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,680,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): De La Torre

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): De La Torre City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
Recommend minor upgrades as needed to maintain the lift station for existing uses and then full replacement of the lift station to meet future demands. Costs included on this cut sheet are for a full replacement of this lift station but do not include property acquisition if required. Does not include forcemain replacement.

Electrical Upgrades
Install a receptacle and transfer switch for portable electrical generator Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
Replace the overload reset buttons for the contactors
Install new control panel above ground
Upgrade Level Controller system
Mechanical Upgrades
Repair motors or replace complete pump and motor
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Install fencing around lift station
Provide on-site water for wash down
Install emergency bypass system
Coat wet well and recoat the dry well floor
Additional Studies
Perform study to determine if lift station is required to be replaced or is capable of being upsized to meet future demands
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$2,200,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $880,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,080,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Vista Nueva Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Vista Nueva City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.

Electrical Upgrades
Seal the conduits leading to the electrical cabinet
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Replace vault cover
Coat wet well
Install emergency overflow tank
Provide on-site water for wash down
Additional Studies
Conduct a study to determine source of moisture into the electrical cabinet City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,300,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $520,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,820,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Harkins Road

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Harkins Road City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
Recommend minor upgrades as needed to maintain the lift station for existing uses and then full replacement of the lift station to meet future demands. Costs included on this cut sheet are for a full replacement of this lift station but do not include property acquisition if required. Does not include forcemain replacement.

Electrical Upgrades
Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Replace the control panel breaker disconnects
Replace the overload reset buttons for the contactors
Label control panel with line voltage
Install new control panel above ground
Upgrade Level Controller system
Mechanical Upgrades
Replace pumps with smaller pumps when required (NIC)
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Install fencing around lift station
Provide on-site water for wash down
Install improved emergency bypass system
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$650,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $260,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $910,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Las Casitas Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Las Casitas City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
Costs provided are for the upgrades provided below. This lift station is anticipated to only be rehabilitated, not a full replacement.

Electrical Upgrades
Install a receptacle & transfer switch for portable electrical generator Install a new control panel above ground
Repair or replace the breaker disconnects
Mechanical Upgrades
N/A
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Install emergency bypass system
Coat bottom of dry well and entire wet well
Provide on-site water for wash down
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $2,500,000
Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,000,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,500,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): TP2
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): TP2
City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
It is recommended to do a full replacement of this lift station as it is in less than satisfactory condition. The costs provided are for full replacement. Costs do not include land acquisition if required. Costs do not include replacement of the forcemain.

Electrical Upgrades
Install receptacle and transfer switch for portable generator Replace splice box in wet well
Install a main breaker with disconnect and disconnects for both pumps on the outside of the cabinet Label the cabinet with the voltage
Install GFI protection for air compressor
Mechanical Upgrades
Investigate vibration issue at 60 Hz. If vibrations persist, lift station upgrades will be required to meet future flows.

Install on-site flow meter
Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency bypass system
Install emergency overflow tank
Provide on-site water for wash down
Additional Studies
The condition of the generator should be evaluated for possible repair or replacement City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction
City of Salinas
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$800,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $320,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,120,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Airport (Moffett)

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY LIFT STATION): Airport (Moffett) City
Upgr
New
Upgr
Upgr
Insu
Insu
Exis
Cons
Reha
Repl
Insp
Exis
Futu
Costs provided are for the upgrades provided below. This lift station is anticipated to only be rehabilitated, not a full replacement.

Electrical Upgrades
Install overloads on load side of contactors for motor protection Replace breaker disconnect handles for pumps 1 and 2 and install proper disconnect hardware Proper labeling for the line voltage on the cabinet and the back-up manual transfer switch lever positions
Provide wiring diagram at station
Replace Sch 40 pipe with proper electrical conduit
Install XP fittings/seals on conduits
Mechanical Upgrades
Replace pumps and motors
Move check valves into a vault located outside of the wet well Site and Piping Upgrades
Install emergency overflow tank
Replace wet well coating
Relocate wet well vent
Provide on-site water for wash down
Determine extent of corrosion on discharge piping and rehabilitate as needed City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Station Priority
City of Salinas 1. Lake St, Vista Nueva, Carpenter Hall, Santa Rita

2. Spicer, Harkins, TP2, Harris Rd.

Project Components 3. Mill Lake, Las Casitas, Airport
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $410,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $164,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $574,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Controller Upgrades and Standardization
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Controller Upgrades and Standardization
All of the lift stations need new and standardized controllers to improve O&M.

The lift station with the highest priority for controller replacement is Lake Street. Lake St has had a controls failure that lead to an overflow/spill. The next priority lift stations are Vista Nueva, Carpenter Hall, and Santa Rita.

Mill Lake, Las Casitas, and Aiport lift stations are lowest priority because the controllers were replaced relatively recently. However, it has already become difficult to find replacement pieces for these controllers and updates to match the other lift stations will be necessary eventually.

Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline Washdown Water:

New Gravity Pipeline All Lift Stations
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $500,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $200,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $700,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Emergency Bypass and Washdown Water
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Emergency Bypass and Washdown Water
Santa Rita, Carpenter Hall, De La Torre, Harkins, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, Spicer, TP2
An emergency bypass provides operations' staff the ability to bypass wastewater flows if/when the pumps or power go out at the lift station. Having an emergency bypass would greatly improve operations and maintenance. Santa Rita, Carpenter Hall, De La Torre, Harkins, Las Casitas, Mill Lake, Spicer, and TP2 currently do not have emergency bypass capabilities and thus require other means and methods, which often are costly, to pump down the lift stations if there are issues with the pumps or the facility loses power. This CIP will install a new bypass at each of the identified lift station sites.

Wash water is also needed at each of the lift stations and would improve operations. This CIP will install a hose bib connection that would allow operator's to connect a hose for washing hands or down the facility.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Stations
City of Salinas Lake Street, TP2, Vista Nueva
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $600,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $240,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $840,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Safety/Falling Hazard Concerns
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Safety/Falling Hazard Concerns
Some of the lift stations have unsafe configurations for operations and maintenance. These lift stations put the operators at risk for falls and injuries. This CIP will provide for a technical study to evaluate what safety features can be installed to increase the safety of the operators. This CIP has also provided an assumed construction budget ($200,000 each) to allow for improvements to be installed. This budget will need to be re-evaluated once the technical study has been completed.

2. Lake Street
Project Components 3. Santa Rita, Carpenter Hall
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,100,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (30%) $330,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,430,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Generator Replacement
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Generator Replacement
Having a generator onsite at the lift stations is essential in case of an emergency. Some of the generators require replacement. TP2, Lake Street, Santa Rita, and Carpenter Hall will all need generator replacements in the near future.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Stations
City of Salinas De La Torre, Harkins, Vista Nueva
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $600,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (30%) $180,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $780,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Onsite Standby Generator
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Onsite Standby Generator
In case of an emergency having a backup generator at the lift stations is extremely important. The lift stations that do not currently have generators are the goal of this CIP while the ones that need replacement are a seperate CIP. Note the Spicer Lift Station site does not currently have a back up generator, but due to site constraints it will need to remain only using a portable generator.

2. Harkins Rd, Spicer
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $155,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (25%) $38,750 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $193,750 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Power Receptacle
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Power Receptacle
A power receptacle capable of connecting a portable generator to the lift stations is necessary in case of emergencies. Carpenter Hall is the highest priority because it is the only lift station without a receptacle. The next priority would be the lift stations that have unsafe hook ups that need replacement.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2023 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Jurisdiction Lift Station Priority
City of Salinas All Lift Stations
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $900,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (20%) $180,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,080,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: KEW
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Painting/Coating Maintenance
Existing Lift Station CIP (BY PROJECT):

Painting/Coating Maintenance
To extend the life of the lift stations and reduce infiltration and inflow (I &I) of additional water into the system, fresh coatings are required. It is prudent to budget for coating the interior of wet wells, piping, underground facilities, etc every few years to extend the life of the facility. This CIP budget is a total dedicated budget to coating but can be spread out over several years.

Future CIP Project: San Juan Grade
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
Bolsa Knolls 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $2,370,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $948,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $3,318,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The San Juan Grade Existing CIP project upsizing approximately 3,800 ft of 8-inch and 10-inch pipe to 12-inch from MH C5- 008 to D4-055. These pipe segments run 33% to 100% full during future peak flow conditions. Ten (10) of the MHs are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim in the future PHWWF condition.

It should be noted that City maintanence crews have recorded pipe sags and surcharging manholes along pipe segments D5-001 to D4-003 and D4-007 to D4-055.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Future CIP Project: San Juan Grade
Future CIP Project: North Davis Rd.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
West Area Specific Plan 74%
Target Area K 14%
Target Area L 4%
Bolsa Knolls 8%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $8,430,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $3,372,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $11,802,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The North Davis Road Future CIP recommends upsizing approximately 240 ft of 18‐inch to 24‐in from MH‐H3‐009 to MH‐H3‐ 013, 1,700 ft. of 24‐inch to 30‐inch from MH‐H3‐013 near Cherokee Dr to MH‐H2‐002 at Calle del Adobe, and 3,400 ft. of 30‐ inch to 32‐inch from MH‐H2‐002 to MH‐J2‐047 at N Davis Rd. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 43‐100% full.

Note: This project assumes Existing Cherokee Drive CIP and Existing Northridge Mall CIP have been constructed.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Future CIP Project: North Davis Rd.

Future CIP Project: West Laurel Dr.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
Laurel Drive at N. Main Street FGA 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$1,020,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $408,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,428,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The West Laurel Drive Future CIP recommends upsizing approximately 1,550 ft. of 12-inch to 15-inch from MH-H4-001 at N Main St to MH-H3-023 near Laurel Park. Under peak future conditions, this segment on West Laurel Drive runs 66-88% full.

Note: This project assumes Existing Noice Dr/Tyler Street CIP has been constructed.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Future CIP Project: West Laurel Dr.

Future CIP Project: Victor St.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
Laurel Drive at N. Main Street FGA 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$1,250,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $500,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $1,750,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Victor Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 1,600 ft. of 15-inch to 18-inch from MH-J3-012 at Ashbury way to MH-J2-007 at W Rossi St. Under peak future conditions, this segment along Victor St runs 73-98% full.

Note: This project assumes Existing Noice Dr/Tyler Street CIP has been constructed and Future West Laurel Dr. CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Future CIP Project: Victor St.

Future CIP Project: Freedom Pkwy
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Area Specific Plan 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$3,280,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,312,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $4,592,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Freedom Parkway Future CIP project recommends the upsize of approximately 2,025 ft of 10-inch pipe to 15-inch from MH-J9-005 at Estrella Way to MH-J9-001 at N Sanborn Rd. An additional 2,725 ft of 12-inch pipe from MH-J9-001 to MH-I8-013 at Nogal Dr should be upsized to 18-inch. Under peak future conditions, this segment on Freedom Parkway runs 50-100% full and 8 manholes are surcharging within 5 ft. of the manhole rims.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Future CIP Project: Freedom Pkwy
Future CIP Project: Natividad Creek Park
City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Area Specific Plan 58%
Central Area Specific Plan 42%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $4,590,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $1,836,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $6,426,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Natividad Creek Park Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 230 ft of 18‐inch to 21‐inch from MH‐H8‐ 002 to MH‐H8‐004 and approximately 3,800 ft of 24‐inch to 27‐inch from MH‐H8‐004 at Freedom Pkwy to MH‐I7‐005 at the Twin Creeks Golf Course. Under peak future conditions, this segment through Natividad Creek Park runs 76‐100% full.

Note: This project assumes Future Freedom Pkwy CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Future CIP Project: Natividad Creek Park
Future CIP Project: East Alisal St.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Future Growth Area 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$5,780,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $2,312,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $8,092,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The East Alisal Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 5,400 ft. of 15-inch to 18-inch from MH-M8- 010 near Bardin Rd to MH-M7-009 at Williams Rd. Additionally, approximately 2,200 ft of 18-inch should be upsized to 21- inch from MH-M7-009 to MH-M6-012 at N Sanborn Rd. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 67-100% full and 14 manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rims.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Future CIP Project: East Alisal St.

Future CIP Project: Abbott St.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Future Growth Area 32%
Target Area B 21%
Target Area F 1%
Salinas Ag‐Industrial Center 46%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1 $1,920,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $768,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $2,688,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
The Abbot Street Future CIP project recommends upsizing approximately 1,300 ft of 12‐inch to 15‐inch from MH‐Q7‐001 at Harris Rd to MH‐Q7‐004. Between MH Q7‐004 and P6‐015, there is an exisitng 15‐inch pipe that does not need to be upsized. An additional 850 ft. of 12‐inch pipe from MH‐P6‐015 to MH‐P6‐006 at Harkins Rd should be upsized to 15‐inch, and 700 ft of 15‐inch to 18‐inch from MH‐P6‐006 to the manhole after P6‐003 (no City ID). Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 66‐100% full. Under future max day flows seven of the manholes are surcharging within 5 ft of the manhole rim.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Future CIP Project: Abbott St.

Future CIP Project: South Sanborn Rd.

City of Salinas Capital Improvement Project Information Sheet 2022 Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update
Project Trigger
Existing Condition
Future Condition
Future Flows
East Future Growth Area 100%
Project Components
Upgrade Gravity Pipeline
New Gravity Pipeline
Upgrade Lift Station
Upgrade Force Main
Rehabilitation/Repair
Inspection and/or analysis
Replace Manhole
Project Need Project Cost Breakdown
Insufficient capacity for existing flow Construction Cost1$5,980,000 Insufficient capacity for future flow Planning, Engineering, CM, Legal/Admin (40%) $2,392,000 Existing condition limits O&M Total Project Cost $8,372,000 Consolidate parallel sewer mains
Project Description
PREPARED BY: AC & AK
Wallace Group
www.wallacegroup.us
San Luis Obispo, CA
In order to avoid upgrades at both South Sanborn and downstream of TP2, the South Sanborn Future CIP project proposes to increase the overflow elevation at MH-M6-012 to 65.09 ft in elevation (an additional 0.65 ft from Existing CIP Upstream TP2 Diversion). This hydraulic change would send future flows primarily down South Sanborn Road. Under peak future conditions, this segment runs 66-100% full and MH-N6-004 is surcharging. This project proposes to upsize approximately 4,365 ft of 18-inch to 21-inch from MH-M6-012 at E Alisal St to MH-O6-006 at Pellet Ave, 500 ft of 21-inch to 24-inch from MH O6-006 to MH O6-008 at Industrial St, and 1,500 ft of 24-inch to 27-inch from MH-O6-008 to MH-05-002 near Abbott St.

It should be noted that there is concrete "weir" at MH N6-003 to stop South Sanborn Rd. flows from backing into Mayfair Dr. Detailed design for this project should consider raising the slope/invert on Mayfair Dr or increasing the slope along South Sanborn to prevent further backwater effects.

Note: This project assumes Future East Alisal CIP has been constructed or will be constructed concurrently.

1. Construction costs are expressed in Year 2022 dollars, using an ENR construction Cost Index of 13004, and will need to be escalated to the year or years scheduled for the work.

Future CIP Project: South Sanborn Rd.

A P PE ND I CES
A P P E N D I X A : E c o n o m i c D e v e l o p m e n t E l e m e n t T a b l e s Table LU-3 Development Capacity
Assumptions Acres Projected
Dwelling Units/Households
Projected Non-Residential
Square Feet (thousands)
Projected
Population
Maximum
Du/Acre FAR
Average
Du/Acre FAR
Focused
Growth
Areas
Remaining
City
Future
Growth
Areas
Total Focused
Growth
Areas
Remaining
City
Future
Growth
Areas
Total Focused
Growth
Areas
Remaining
City
Future
Growth
Areas
Total Focused
Growth
Areas
Remaining
City
Future
Growth
Areas
Total
Open Space Land Use Designations
agr Agriculture 0.1 0 22 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
opn Open Space 0.05 2 106 503 611 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 pks Parks 0.2 0.05 2 1,077962 193 1,272157 0 0 0 0 5 2,3462,096 420 2,7712,521 0 0 0 0 Residential Land Use Designations
rld Residential Low Density 8 6.5 9 2,942 1,042 3,992 57 19,121 6,771 25,950 0 0 0 0 211 70,174 24,850 95,235 rmd Residential Medium Density 15 11.75 43 856 515 1,414 507 10,060 6,052 16,619 0 0 0 0 1,859 36,922 22,210 60,991 rhd Residential High Density 24 16.75 9 658 160 827 153 11,013 2,680 13,846 0 0 0 0 560 40,419 9,837 50,816 Commercial/Office Land Use Designation
ret Retail
Citywide 10 0.4 0.5 0.25 56 477592 16 549664 28 119 8 155 609 5,196 6,006 178 5,9846,793 103 438 30 570 Central City
Outside Existing Sphere of Influence
18 3

0.4 1.5 1.5

0.25 9 0
0 0
164
9 164
13 0 0 13 586 0 0
1,383
586
1,383
49 0 0 49
off Office
Citywide 10 0.4 0.5 0.25 41 83 3 126 20 21 1 42 442 898 30 1,371 74 76 5 155 Central City 22 3 1.5 1.5 42 0 0 42 63 0 0 63 2,724 0 0 2,724 230 0 0 230 East Romie Lane Corridor 10 1 0.5 0.5 0 47 0 47 0 24 0 24 0 1,030 0 1,030 0 87 0 87 Light Industrial/Industrial Land Use Designations
bus Business Park 0.4 0.35 0 230 0132 230362 0 0 0 0 0 3,303 11,571 3,5035,073 0 0 0 0 gco Gen. Comm/Lt. Ind. 0.4 0.3 73 540 46 659 0 0 0 0 950 7,057 599 8,607 0 0 0 0 gin General Industrial 0.5 0.3 0 641 670817 1,311 0 0 0 0 0 8,376 8,670 10,173
17,136
18,639
0 0 0 0
Public/Semipublic Land Use Designations
psp Public/Semipublic 0.4 0.25 58 925 247 1,241 0 0 0 0 636 10,078 2,799 13,513 0 0 0 0 Salinas Municipal Airport 0.2 0.05 0 620 0 620 0 0 0 0 0 1,351 0 1,351 0 0 0 0 Other Land Use Designations
mix Mixed Use
Citywide 10 1 3 0.5 111 0 120 231 332 0 360 692 2,413 0 2,613 5,026 1,220 0 1,321 2,541 Central City varies varies 5.5 3 62 0 0 62 339 0 0 339 8,056 0 0 8,056 1,244 0 0 1,244 art Arterial Frontage det
plan

0.3 5 0.25 39 24 0 62 194 118 0 312 422 258 0 679 711 434 0 1,145 TOTAL 888 9,248 3,525
3,968
13,328
13,771
1,706 40,377 15,873 58,055 16,844 40,092
40,752
15,401
19,857
72,337
77,343
6,261 148,549 58,253 213,063
1 household = 1 dwelling unit; 3.67 persons per household; FAR = floor area ratio.

EMC PLANNING GROUP INC. 23
Table LU-ED-1 Additional Economic Development Element Development Capacity Target Area Land Use Land Demand
(gross acres)
Land Demand
(net acres)
Building Capacity
(square feet)
B Industrial 147 115 1,502,820
Subtotal 147 115 1,502,820
B Retail 10 8 87,120
F Retail 10 8 87,120
K Retail 30 23 250,470
L1/L1 Retail 74 57 620,730
N Retail 40 31 337,590
V Retail 115 74 810,448
Subtotal 279 201 2,193,478
K Business Park 132 103 1,570,338
Subtotal 132 103 1,570,338
Total 558 419 5,255,959
The Land Demand (Net Acres) column reflects the gross acreage minus acreage required for infrastructure, roadways, etc.
24 EMC PLANNING GROUP INC.

A P P E N D I X B : 2 0 1 7 M a r k T h o m a s C C T V S a n i t a r y S e w e r A n a l y s i s

CCTV SANITARY SEWER ANALYSIS
Prepared For:

City of Salinas
Submitted by: Mark Thomas
Date: December 7, 2017
CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
1 Contents
I. Introduction 3
II. Site and Project Description 3
III. Assessment Standards for Gravity Sewer System 4

1. Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program (PACP) 4

2. PACP Condition Grading System 4

3. PACP Pipe Inspections 5

4. Manhole Assessment and Certification Program (MACP) 6

5. PACP Results 6
a. SSMH 1 to SSMH 2 6
b. SSMH 3 to SSMH 4 7
c. SSMH 6 to SSMH 7 7
d. SSMH 7 to SSMH 8 7
e. SSMH 9 to SSMH 10 8
f. SSMH 11 to SSMH 12 8
g. SSMH 13 to SSMH 14 8
h. SSMH 15 to SSMH 16 8
i. SSMH 17 to SSMH 18 9
j. SSMH 19 to SSMH 20 9
k. SSMH 23 to SSMH 24 9

6. MACP Results 9
a. SSMH 1 10
b. SSMH 2 10
c. SSMH 3 10
d. SSMH 4 & 5 10
e. SSMH 6 10
f. SSMH 7 11
g. SSMH 8 11
h. SSMH 9 11
i. SSMH 10 11
j. SSMH 11 12
k. SSMH 12 12
CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
2 l. SSMH 13 12
m. SSMH 14 12
n. SSMH 15 12
o. SSMH 16 13
p. SSMH 17 13
q. SSMH 18 13
r. SSMH 19 13
s. SSMH 20 14
t. SSMH 21 14
u. SSMH 22 14
v. SSMH 23 14
w. SSMH 24 15
x. SSMH 25 15
y. SSMH 26 15
IV. Results and Recommendations 15

1. PACP Results 15

2. PACP Repair Cost Estimate 16

3. MACP Results 17

4. MACP Repair Cost Estimates 18
V. Appendix 21

1. Appendix A: Location Maps 21

2. Appendix B: Cost Estimate 23

3. Appendix C: PACP & MACP Reports 23
CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
3 Introduction
This report presents the results of our Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV) inspections performed to address the conditions of sanitary sewer mains and manholes in various locations throughout the City of Salinas.

The CCTV inspections were conducted on large diameter sewer mains ranging from 12” to 30” diameter pipes and were completed using Pipeline Assessment Certification Program (PACP) standards.

The City of Salinas retained Mark Thomas to inspect and analyze the condition of approximately 5,300 linear feet of sanitary sewer mains and 23 manhole structures.

The purpose of this report is to discuss existing sanitary sewer conditions. In addition, this report provides a detailed analysis of the pipeline conditions as well as an estimated cost for the recommended repairs.

Site and Project Description
The City of Salinas owns, maintains, and operates approximately 290 miles of sanitary sewer pipes ranging from 6 to 72 inches in diameter, 11 pump stations, and 7 flow split structures. The City’s sewer waste ultimately flows to the Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency’s (MRWPCA’s) treatment plant.

In 2011, the City of Salinas retained CDM Smith consultants to develop a city-wide master plan for the city’s sanitary sewer system. Within this master plan, areas of concern were addressed due to capacity limitations based on the projected growth of the City and surrounding areas. The master plan analyzed and located various manholes and mains that exhibited high surcharge levels. In an effort to follow up on the recommendations from the master plan, the City retained Mark Thomas to inspect mains and manholes that are of concern to the City. The manholes and mains that Mark Thomas was asked to inspect are located throughout the City of Salinas. The following segments were chosen for inspection by the City:
• 30” sanitary sewer upstream of Lake Street Pump station. Mains and manholes are located at the intersection of Sherwood Drive & East Rossi Street and Calle Cebu • 24” & 30” mains in agricultural easements near Kern Street and North Madeira Avenue • 30” main crossing East Laurel Drive south of Monterey County Parks Department offices • 21” main in easement just west of Monterey County Parks Department offices • Various manholes on Katherine Avenue and East Romie Lane Mark Thomas inspectors and CCTV operators were unable to complete the project per the original scope due to discrepancies between the maps provided by the City and actual on site conditions. For example, several of the manholes in agricultural easements had been buried 6-feet deep to allow for the mixing of the top 4-feet of soil after harvest seasons. In other instances, the manholes had been paved over from asphalt overlays, or the operators encountered unmarked manholes in the middle of segments they were asked to investigate. Due to these issues that were encountered while performing inspections, Mark Thomas operators met with staff from the City to obtain new direction in scope. Appendix A shows maps with assigned manhole names and their locations.

CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
4 Assessment Standards for Gravity Sewer System

1. Pipeline Assessment and Certification Program (PACP) The National Association of Sewer Service Companies (NASSCO), along with the assistance of the Water Research Centre (WRC), has developed a national certification program to establish a viable solution to standardize the identification, categorization, evaluation, and prioritization ofsanitary sewer or storm sewer infrastructure through CCTV investigations. This standardized certification program was used to ensure consistent record‐keeping when compiling CCTV reports into a common database that can then be used for operation and maintenance (O&M) activities as well as pipe rehabilitation and replacement.

A NASCCO PACP standard was used to conduct CCTV investigations and document findings. The PACP defect descriptions are organized into the following general categories:
• Structural Defect Coding: This group includesthe type of defects where the pipe is considered to be damaged ranging from a minor case defect to a more severe case, depicted as pipe failure. The Structural Defect Coding group includes defects described as: cracks, fractures, broken pipe, holes, deformities, collapsed pipes, joint defects, surface damage defects, weld failures, point repair codes, brickwork defects, and lining failures. • Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Coding: This group includesthe various codesthat involve the spectrum of defects that may impede the operation and maintenance of the sewer piping system. The Operation and Maintenance Coding group includes defects comprised of roots, infiltration, deposits and encrustations, obstacles/obstructions, and vermin. • Construction Features Coding: This group includes the various codes associated with the typical construction of the sewer piping system. The Construction Features Coding group includes taps, intruding seal material, pipe alignment codes, and access points. • Miscellaneous Features Coding: This group includes observation codes such as water levels (detection of sags), pipe material changes, and dye testing notes.

2. PACP Condition Grading System
The tables below describe the grading system for structural and O&M defects, and general guidelines regarding deterioration rates. Each defect can be scored with a grade ranging from 1 to 5, where a grade 5 has the greatest potential for pipe failure.

CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
5 Table 1 – Structural and O&M Defects Grading Table
Grade Grade Description Grade Definition
5 Immediate Attention Defects requiring immediate attention 4 Poor Severe defects that will become Grade 5 defects within the foreseeable future
3 Fair Moderate defects that will continue to deteriorate 2 Good Defects that have not begun to deteriorate
1 Excellent Minor defects
Table 2 – General Guidelines Regarding Deterioration Rates Grade Grade Definition
5 Pipe has failed or will likely fail within the next 5 years 4 Pipe will probably fail in 5 to 10 years
3 Pipe may fail in 10 to 20 years
2 Pipe unlikely to fail for at least 20 years
1 Failure unlikely in the foreseeable future

3. PACP Pipe Inspections
Close Circuit Television (CCTV) video inspections were performed to assess the condition of the sanitary sewer mains to confirm the location and magnitude of structural defects, points of inflow and infiltration, lateral locations, undocumented/illegal connections, existing pipe lining, and blockages within the system.

CCTV inspections were conducted in accordance with NASSCO PACP standards. Personnel performing CCTV inspections were PACP‐certified and completed all inspections using standard PACP codes for all defects and observations during the inspection. The CCTV data was recorded using GraniteXP, PACP‐compliant software. CCTV inspections were recorded in color using a pan and‐tilt, radial‐viewing, inspection to allow videos and images to be sufficiently clear to easily observe the sewer line defects and features.

The gravity sewer mains and manholes were cleaned prior to conducting CCTV inspections.

Cleaning consisted of hydraulic jet cleaning to facilitate the internal CCTV inspection.

The inspections were conducted from the upstream manhole towards the downstream manhole in the direction of flow to minimize splashing onto the camera and for smoother movement of the CCTV equipment. During the CCTV inspection, the CCTV camera was temporarily stopped at each observed defect or feature in order to obtain a clear still picture and video image.

The camera inspections were performed between September 12 and September 25, 2017. It is necessary for the inspections to be performed during lower flow conditions to allow the camera CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
6 lenses to sit above the flow line within the pipe. Roto Rooter Plumbers, Mark Thomas contractor from San Jose, California, was on site and vacuumed out water to allow our camera lenses to have a clear view and to be able to capture the defects of the pipe whenever the flow of the water was too high. If the water had not been vacuumed out by our contractor’s vacuum truck, the flow would have been at approximately 75% of the total pipe capacity, and we would not have been able to view and capture the defects.

4. Manhole Assessment and Certification Program (MACP)
Sanitary sewer manhole inspections are an important component of the gravity sewer system assessment due to the susceptibility of manholes to structural defects and/or Inflow/Infiltration which may contribute to SSOs. Manhole inspection not only provide valuable information on the physical condition of the manholes, but also an opportunity to observe pipe diameters, inverts, and surcharging within mainline gravity sewers. Prior to conducting inspections of manhole components, a non-entry (topside) manhole inspection was conducted to determine the overall condition of the manhole as viewed from the ground surface. The surrounding area was observed and noted if manholes located in areas that are conducive to flooding or ponding that allows water to enter the sanitary sewer system. Alongside PACP assessments, NASSCO has also developed a program for rating and assessing defects within manholes. This system is called the Manhole Assessment and Certification Program, or MACP. There are two inspection protocols, or procedures, when conducting MACP inspections.

Level 1 MACP inspections provide basic condition assessment information of the manhole.

Level 2 MACP inspections provide full documentation of defects and conditions of the manhole, similar to a PACP inspection. Since Level 2 MACP inspections are similar to a PACP inspection, they use the established coding system required while performing PACP inspections.

For this project, Mark Thomas inspector used Level 2 MACP inspection procedure and form to document the defects and condition for all 23 manholes. See the PACP section above for information regarding O&M and structural coding, and attached photographs of the above ground location of each manhole in Appendix for result assessment and recommendation.

5. PACP Results
As stated in Section 3, pipe segments that were inspected differ from pipe segments that were in the original scope. Manholes for the project were not assigned with ID or any names by the City.

Our operators had to coordinate with City’s staff to come up with naming convention for each manhole that was assessed.

Below we will discuss the findings for each of these pipe segments. a. SSMH 1 to SSMH 2
Segment SSMH 1 to SSMH 2 is located on North Madeira Avenue just to the north of the Cesar Chavez Community Park. The segment is 24” diameter VCP pipe and is approximately 321- feet in length. This segment was part of the original project scope.

There are seven (7) structural defects and ten (10) O&M defects in this section of pipe. A defect rated 4 is the highest defect out of the seven structural defects. This defect was a water CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
7 level sag (MWLS) that caused a water depth to pipe diameter ratio (d/D) of 60%. Several of the other defects were additional d/D sags ranging between 25% and 45%. All of the O&M defects were small encrustations that were found on the walls of the pipe. b. SSMH 3 to SSMH 4
Segment SSMH 3 to SSMH 4 is located on the north end of Kern Street. SSMH 3 is located on Kern Street, while SSMH 4 is paved over and is located in the Holiday Inn Express & Suites hotel parking lot. This segment is approximately 126-feet of 24” diameter VCP pipe. The original scope consisted of inspecting this segment along with a parallel 30” main, but the manholes for the 30” line are buried 6 feet deep in an agricultural easement just north of the Sherwood Lake mobile home park.

Our investigation found one (1) structural defect and one (1) continuous O&M defect. The structural defect is located right at SSMH 3 and is a broken pipe, which is rated as a 5. Similar to segment SSMH 1 to SSMH 2, the O&M defect was encrustation attached to the walls of the pipe.
c. SSMH 6 to SSMH 7
Segment SSMH 6 to SSMH 7 is located in a bike trail just to the west of the Monterey County Parks Department on East Laurel Drive. It is approximately 264-feet of 21” diameter VCP pipe.

The original scope of work asked Mark Thomas to inspect segment SSMH 7 to SSMH 8. SSMH 7 is paved over or buried, so the City instructed Mark Thomas to survey from SSMH 6 which is located further upstream. Since SSMH 7 is buried, Mark Thomas operators inspected from SSMH 6 to SSMH 7, and then continued onto SSMH 8 to complete the segment from the original scope.

Our CCTV finding of this pipe segment consisted of three (3) structural defects and six (6) O&M defects. The most severe structural defect was a water level sag of 35% which was rated a 3. Overall this segment was in great condition. There was one O&M defect that should be addressed, and that is a root ball that was found at the farthest downstream portion of the main, at SSMH 7. With an increase in routine maintenance, this root ball can be easily addressed.
d. SSMH 7 to SSMH 8
Segment SSMH 7 to SSMH 8 is located in a bike trail just to the west of the Monterey County Parks Department on East Laurel Drive. It is approximately 553-feet of 21” diameter VCP pipe.

Entrance to SSMH 7 can only be accessed via the upstream segment by entering into SSMH 6 due to the lid to SSMH 7 being buried or paved over. As stated above, this segment is part of the original scope.

The inspection found nine (9) structural defects, which were all rated 2, and six (6) O&M defects, which were also all rated 2. Similar to segment SSMH 6 to SSMH 7, this segment is also in great condition.

CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
8 e. SSMH 9 to SSMH 10
Segment SSMH 9 to SSMH 10 is located in an easement between Sun Street and Highway 101.

This segment is a 30” diameter VCP pipe and is approximately 377-feet long. This segment was not in the original scope and was included as an alternate segment for inspection.

The inspection found only one (1) structural defect and one (1) O&M defect. The structural defects were multiple cracks which are rated 3. The one O&M defect present in the main was due to grease deposited along the walls of the pipe .This defect spanned the entire length of the pipe.
f. SSMH 11 to SSMH 12
Segment SSMH 11 to SSMH 12 is located in an easement between Sun Street and Highway 101. This segment is a 24” diameter VCP pipe and is approximately 385-feet long. Similar to the segment above, this segment was not in the original scope and was included as an alternate segment for inspection.

The inspection found two (2) structural defects and ten (10) O&M defects. Both structural defects were due to water level sags at 25%, which are rated 2. The O&M defects of most concern were two water mark levels of 90%. This water marks indicated that the water levels in the pipe at peak hour sometimes get up to 90%. Grease deposits were also found throughout the segment. Other than water mark and grease deposits, this segment of the pipe is in fair condition at the present time.
g. SSMH 13 to SSMH 14
Segment SSMH 13 to SSMH 14 is located alongside Natividad Creek to the south of the intersection of Freedom Parkway and Constitution Boulevard. It is a 24” diameter VCP pipe and is approximately 425-feet long. The original scope consisted of the next segment downstream from SSMH 13 to SSMH 14. Mark Thomas and the City were unable to locate the downstream manhole from SSMH 14, so the City allowed SSMH 13 to SSMH 14 to be used as an alternate segment to prevent difficulties removing the transponder in case it became stuck.

The inspection found one (1) structural defect and four (4) O&M defects. The only structural defect was due to a water level sag of 25%, which are rated as a 2. The O&M defects are not critical. There are grease deposits all throughout the pipe segment. Other than these cases, the pipe is in great condition.
h. SSMH 15 to SSMH 16
Segment SSMH 15 to SSMH 16 is located on a bike trail just to the south of the Monterey County Parks Department that is located on East Laurel Drive. It is a 27” VCP diameter pipe and is approximately 318-feet long.

There were no structural defects within this main and four (4) O&M defects. The O&M defects consisted of water level marks at 75%, encrustation, and grease deposits.

CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
9 i. SSMH 17 to SSMH 18
Segment SSMH 17 to SSMH 18 is located in the parking lot between the buildings at 597 and 607 Brunken Avenue. The original scope consisted of surveying segments that are located farther downstream from this location on Malarin Street. The manholes were located but the channels of the manholes did not allow access into the pipe with the CCTV transporter. The pipes protruded far into the manholes and only had a gap of about 1 foot from pipe to pipe, instead of the 4 feet in a normal manhole channel. Due to the tightness in the channel, the City allowed us to inspect segment SSMH 17 to SSMH 18 as an alternate. This alternate segment is an 18” diameter polyethylene pipe that is approximately 350 feet long.

This segment has three (3) structural defects, all of which are 35%, 45% and 55% water level sag, one of which is rated a 4. There were five (5) O&M defects within this segment. The most severe was the level of the flow within the pipe. At one point, the camera became submerged.

Our contractor had to pump out the water as we inspected to accurately inspect the main. j. SSMH 19 to SSMH 20
Segment SSMH 19 to SSMH 20 is located on East Romie Lane between Los Palos Drive and Wilgart Way in front of the Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital. The original scope was to inspect from SSMH 19 downstream to a manhole just east of Alameda Avenue that the City thought was the next downstream manhole. While performing the CCTV inspection, our operator found an unmarked manhole, which we are now naming SSMH 20. We attempted to inspect that newly found “segment” but were unable to open the lid to SSMH 20 due to the lid being welded shut by the City due to the deterioration of the frame. This alternate segment, SSSMH 19 to SSMH 20, is an 18” diameter polyethylene pipe that is approximately 435-feet long.

There is only one (1) structural defect and three (3) O&M defects within this segment. The defect of most concern is a water level mark that shows that the pipe segment reaches 85% flow.
k. SSMH 23 to SSMH 24
Segment SSMH 23 to SSMH 24 is located on East Market Street between Sun Street and Peach Drive. It is a 12” diameter VCP main and is approximately 359-feet long. It was included as part of the original scope.

This segment had three (3) structural defects, which were all rated 3. Another thing to note is that this segment had eight laterals that had full or partial grease blockages. This segment also had five (5) O&M defects that all had to do with the high water level marks on the pipe.

The highest water level mark was shown at 60% and is rated a 4.

6. MACP Results
As part of the sewer conditional assessments, Mark Thomas performed 23 MACP inspections on manholes throughout the City of Salinas. Some of the manholes that were inspected were manholes that were also part of the PACP inspections. Similar to the PACP results, some manholes that were part of the original scope were not accessible, which resulted in the City assigning CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
10 different manholes for Mark Thomas to inspect.

Below we will discuss the findings for each of these manholes. a. SSMH 1
SSMH 1 is located on North Madeira Ave just to the north of the Cesar Chavez Community Park. It is directly in front of the home at 259 North Madeira Avenue. The manhole is approximately 9-feet deep from rim to invert.

This manhole showed minor structural defects on the chimney, cone, and walls. The highest rated structural defect was visible aggregate on the chimney near the frame and cover of the manhole. The only defect of concern is the corroded and cracked frame & cover. Overall the interior structure of this manhole is in good condition. b. SSMH 2
SSMH 2 is located on North Madeira Ave just to the north of the Cesar Chavez Community Park. It is the next downstream manhole from Manhole 1. It is located on the shoulder in the dirt area of North Madeira Ave, near the reclamation ditch. The manhole is approximately 14- feet deep from rim to invert.

This manhole showed minor structural defects on the chimney, cone, and walls. The highest rated structural defect was visible aggregate on the chimney, cone, and walls which is rated as a defect 3. Similar to SSMH 1, SSMH 2 had issues with the frame. The frame was broken, but the cover and the seal between the frame and cover appeared to be sound. Overall this manhole is in fair condition.
c. SSMH 3
SSMH 3 is located on the northern end of Kern Street near the Holiday Inn Express & Suites.

The manhole is approximately 14-feet deep from rim to invert.

This manhole has no structural or operational defects. It is in good condition. d. SSMH 4 & 5
SSMH 4 & SSMH 5 were included in the original scope and were inaccessible due to the covers being paved over with asphalt. SSMH 4 is located under the Holiday Inn Express & Suites parking lot, and SSMH 5 is under the asphalt at the intersection of Longbow Drive & Greenleaf Way within the Sherwood Lake Mobile Home Park.

Due to the operator’s inability to access the manhole, a condition assessment was not performed.
e. SSMH 6
SSMH 6 is located on a bike trail to the northwest of the Monterey County Parks Department CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
11 on East Laurel Drive. It is approximately 22-feet deep from rim to invert.

The concrete collar around the frame and cover is broken all around the manhole lid. The only structural defect within the manhole is a Hole, Soil Visible, which is rated as a 5. This defect is located where the manhole frame meets the concrete of the manhole. Other than the issues with the frame and cover, the manhole interior is in fair condition. f. SSMH 7
SSMH 7 is located on a bike trail to the northwest of the Monterey County Parks Department on East Laurel Drive. It is the next downstream manhole from SSMH 6.

Our operators and the City could not locate the manhole due to it possibly being buried next to the bike trail or paved over under the trail. Due to the operator’s inability to access the manhole, a condition assessment was not completed.
g. SSMH 8
SSMH 8 is located on a bike trail to the northwest of the Monterey County Parks Department on East Laurel Drive. It is the next downstream manhole from SSMH 7. SSMH 8 is approximately 14-feet deep from rim to invert.

Half of the concrete collar on the outside of the manhole frame and cover is broken. There is another break on the inner wall of the chimney where the grade rings are located. The frame and cover are cracked and corroded. Other than the issues near the frame and cover, the manhole interior walls and bench are in great condition. h. SSMH 9
SSMH 9 is located on the eastern corner of the Expo Grounds on Sun Street. The manhole’s rim to invert elevation is approximately 18-feet deep.

Both the frame and cover for SSMH 9 are heavily corroded and loose-fitting. The other structural defect present inside the manhole is the visible aggregate in the concrete of the manhole walls. This is only given a rating of 3. Other than the visible aggregate, the manhole is in good structural condition.
i. SSMH 10
SSMH 10 is located just to the south of the baseball diamond in the Expo Grounds on Sun Street. The manhole’s rim to invert depth is approximately 20-feet deep.

The frame for SSMH 10 is heavily corroded and bubbling. Other than the issues with the frame, the manhole is structurally sound. On the other hand, there is evidence of surcharging and heavy grease inside the manhole. The walls show evidence of surcharging up 16 feet from the invert. Also, there are heavy debris deposits on the bench due to possible surcharging.

CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
12 j. SSMH 11
SSMH 11 is located on the eastern corner of the Expo Grounds on Sun Street. It is just south of SSMH 9. The manhole’s rim to invert elevation is approximately 16-feet deep.

The frame and chimney area for SSMH 10 are both heavily corroded. Other than the issues with the chimney area, the manhole is structurally sound. k. SSMH 12
SSMH 12 is located just to the south of the baseball diamond on the Expo Grounds on Sun Street. It is slightly to the south of SSMH 10. The manhole’s rim to invert elevation is approximately 18-feet deep.

The frame and chimney area for SSMH 12 are both heavily corroded. Other than the issues with the chimney area, the manhole is structurally sound. There are apparent O&M defects within the manhole. There is evidence of grease and surcharging inside the manhole. The walls show surcharging marks and there are also deposits on the bench. l. SSMH 13
SSMH 13 is located in the sidewalk on the south corner of the intersection between Constitution Boulevard and Freedom Parkway. The manhole’s rim to invert elevation is approximately 25-feet deep.

The frame for SSMH 13 is heavily corroded and there is a break in the wall of the grade rings.

Other issues present are roots at the joints where the pipes connect to the invert of the manhole.
m. SSMH 14
SSMH 14 is located in the landscaped area between Constitution Boulevard and Natividad Creek Park. It is near the intersection of Constitution Boulevard and Cape Cod Way. The manhole’s rim to invert elevation is approximately 12-feet deep. The manhole’s concrete collar has eroded away and has left the lid and frame exposed. The manhole is on a sloped surface which results in part of the manhole frame and cover being raised off the grade.

Unlike the other manholes that have been inspected, the frame and cover for this manhole is in good condition. The issues within the manhole are within the chimney where the grade rings are located. There is a crack on one of the grade ring joints and there is a hole visible to the outside. Not only is there a crack at this joint, the other joints do not have any proper grouting and are not sealed correctly. This hole is located on the side where the manhole chimney is exposed due to the concrete collar deteriorating away. There is exposed steel reinforcement bars at the location of the crack.
n. SSMH 15
SSMH 15 is located in an unpaved area adjacent to a bike trail that is located south of the CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
13 Monterey County Parks Department offices on East Laurel Drive. The manhole is rather shallow and is approximately 5.5-feet deep from rim to invert.

The frame for the manhole is heavily corroded. The top surface of the concrete has corroded away inside the manhole which results in the aggregate being exposed. This is rated as a defect level 3.
o. SSMH 16
SSMH 16 is located in an unpaved area adjacent to a bike trail that is located south of the Monterey County Parks Department offices on East Laurel Drive. SSMH 16 is downstream to SSMH 15. The manhole is approximately 9-feet deep from rim to invert.

The frame for the manhole is heavily corroded. The top surface of the concrete has corroded away inside the manhole which results in the aggregate being exposed. This is rated as a defect level 3. Exposed aggregate is also present on the bench and channel. p. SSMH 17
SSMH 17 is located in the parking lot between the buildings at 597 and 607 Brunken Avenue.

The manhole elevation is 9.5-feet from rim to invert.

Aggregate is exposed from the rim all the way down into the bench and channel. There is also exposed rebar in the upper wall of the channel at the downstream invert. The rebar is not protruding into the channel, but the concrete has eroded away and has made the rebar visible. The level of exposed aggregate and rebar is coded as a rating of 4. q. SSMH 18
SSMH 18 is located in the parking lot between the buildings at 597 and 607 Brunken Avenue.

Manhole 18 is the next downstream manhole from SSMH 17. The manhole elevation is 10.5- feet from rim to invert.

The walls of this manhole have areas where the aggregate in the concrete is not only exposed but also missing, which is rated as a defect 4. Also, it appears that the manhole had been lined at one point, but the lining has detached in several locations throughout the manhole.

Another issue with the manhole is that the channel is not completely opened. At one point, a pipe was inserted into the manhole and the pipe was left within the channel and was not cut correctly to fit up against the inner wall of the manhole. r. SSMH 19
SSMH 19 is located on East Romie Lane in front of Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital. The manhole is approximately 13.5 feet deep.

This manhole has exposed aggregate within the concrete of the rings and has a corroding frame. Due the condition of the frame, the cover has to be welded onto the frame by the City in order for the cover to sit flush within the frame. The manhole had been rehabilitated in the CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
14 past with a fiberglass liner that is now peeling off of the walls. Also, the concrete bench has large chunks of concrete missing, which is rated as a defect 4. s. SSMH 20
SSMH 20 is located on the intersection of East Romie Lane and Alameda Avenue. The manhole is approximately 11-feet deep. This manhole is two manholes downstream from SSMH 19.

Similar to SSMH 19, SSMH 20 has a broken frame which requires the cover to be welded onto it to prevent rocking and knocking. Each time the City wants to access the manhole, they need to break the welds and reweld it when placing the cover back on. The interior of the manhole is in great condition.
t. SSMH 21
SSMH 21 is located on East Romie Lane in front of 106 East Romie Lane. The manhole is approximately 7-feet deep.

Similar to SSMH 19 & SSMH 20, SSMH 21 has a broken frame which requires the cover to be welded onto it to prevent rocking and knocking. The surface of the frame where the cover sits is extremely rusted and corroded. Each time the City wants to access the manhole, they need to break the welds and re-weld it when placing the cover back onto the frame. The chimney area of the manhole has exposed aggregate in the concrete. It appears that this manhole has been lined with fiberglass. The areas that are lined are in great condition but the exposed concrete has been badly damaged. This is evident in the chimney as well as on the bench. The bench has missing concrete and should be rechanneled. There is also a piece of pipe that is protruding far into the manhole channel and should be cut back. u. SSMH 22
SSMH 22 is located on Katherine Avenue at the intersection of Katherine Avenue and Pajaro Street in front of 110 Katherine Avenue. It is the next downstream manhole from SSMH 21.

The manhole is approximately 6.5-feet deep.

Similar to SSMH 19, 20, & 21, SSMH 22 has a broken frame that requires the cover to be welded onto it to prevent rocking and knocking. The surface of the frame where the cover sits is extremely rusted and corroded. Each time the City wants to access the manhole, they need to break the welds and reweld it when placing the cover back onto the frame. The concrete within this manhole is completely deteriorating and the walls of the chimney have missing chunks of concrete. The walls are lined with fiberglass but the exposed concrete is breaking away in the chimney and the bench.
v. SSMH 23
SSMH 23 is located at the intersection of Sun Street and East Market Street. The manhole is approximately 12.5-feet deep. This manhole is constructed of brick instead of concrete, which makes it dissimilar from the manholes that have been described above.

CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
15 The frame of the manhole is heavily corroded. Some of the joints between the bricks are missing mortar from the chimney all the way to the bench. Other than this defect, the manhole is in great condition.
w. SSMH 24
SSMH 24 is located at the intersection of Peach Drive and East Market Street. The manhole is approximately 13.5-feet deep. SSMH 24 is also constructed out of brick instead of concrete.

This manhole is the next downstream manhole from SSMH 23.

The frame of the manhole is heavily corroded. Some of the joints between the bricks are missing mortar from the chimney all the way to the bench. Other than this defect, the manhole is in great condition.
x. SSMH 25
SSMH 25 is located on Malarin Street in front of the driveway to 590 Brunken Avenue at the intersection of Brunken Avenue and Malarin Street. The manhole is approximately 11.5-feet deep.

The manhole has been lined with a fiberglass material. The liner seems to have not been installed correctly on the manhole cone and it appears to be detaching from the manhole walls on the cone.
y. SSMH 26
SSMH 26 is located on Sierra Street on the grass of Maple Park. The manhole is approximately 13-feet deep.

The manhole has been lined with a fiberglass material. Grease deposits high up on the manhole wall show evidence of surcharging within this manhole. There is also missing aggregate in the concrete of the channel.

Results and Recommendations
The goal of sewer system condition assessments is to create a plan of action for long term as well as ongoing rehabilitation and maintenance. This plan of action is later developed into a Capital Improvement Program (CIP) that sets the structure for future rehabilitation projects. The following is a brief summary of the key findings.

1. PACP Results
Overall the mains that were inspected were in great condition. Most of the structural defects that were observed were rated as 2 or 3 per PACP ratings. These are of minor to moderate concern and shall be repaired within 10 years. Operational & Maintenance related defects were more common than structural defects in these mains.

CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
16 The most common issue with the pipes was that several had evidence of grease deposits as well as high water marks. Since grease floats above water, there was evidence of grease deposits high up on the walls of the mains. These issues can be addressed by implementing a more rigorous Fats, Oils, & Grease (FOG) program throughout the City. A FOG program can be beneficial in educating the public about what can and cannot go down their drains. Not only was grease a problem in these mains, but the operators also discovered some lateral tie-ins that were completely blocked by grease. These blockages cannot be cleared during a mainline flushing and require a flushing of the laterals themselves. If the grease continues to build up in the laterals, they can lead to blockages which can lead to sewer overflows. The segment that had the most issues with lateral blockages was SSMH 23 to SSMH 24. Other segments with FOG issues were SSMH 9 to 10, SSMH 13 to 14, & SSMH 15 to 16. Implementing a new FOG program would aid in reducing the amount of grease entering the sewer system which will lead to a reduction in maintenance costs. Until the FOG program is implemented and is deemed effective, routine lateral cleaning can be conducted by the City to remove roots and grease from the laterals throughout the City. There were only two segments where our operator encountered high flow levels. These segments are SSMH 17 to SSMH 18 and SSMH 19 to SSMH 20. This segment had flow levels of up to 90% while our inspectors were conducting the inspections. The flow was so high that in order to complete the inspection, a contractor had to vacuum out the water near the CCTV transponder to prevent the camera lens from being submerged. We recommend performing a flow study in this area to see the required size for the pipes in this basin. Additional segments had water level marks up to 90%. These marks were most likely left behind from rainfall events where the flow within the system peaked by three or four times.

Fortunately most of the mains are in great structural condition. There are only two pipeline repairs that are of concern. One defect was a broken pipe on segment SSMH 3 to SSMH 4. The break occurs just downstream of SSMH 3 and is at the connection of pipe to SSMH 3. This repair will require installing approximately 8-feet of new pipe and reconnecting to SSMH 3. The other repair of importance is due to infiltration at a joint in segment SSMH 11 to SSMH 12. The defect is occurring at a joint 45-feet downstream of SSMH 11 and there is evidence of water infiltrating into the system at this location. The inspection showed water infiltrating into the pipe even though there had not been any rain events for months. Since this segment is located near a soccer field, perhaps the source is from water that is used to irrigate the lawn for the field. This defect will be an access point for even more water during rain seasons, which will increase the flow during these times.

2. PACP Repair Cost Estimate
Below is a table showing the costs for performing the two suggested repairs. See Appendix B for cost breakdown. Cost estimate includes labor and installation.

Table 3 – Recommended Repair Cost Estimate
Manhole
Location
Pipe Total Amount
Upstream Downstream
Length
(LF)
Diameter
(in)
Type
3 4 Kern Street 8 24 PVC SDR26 $14,600
CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
17 Table 3 – Recommended Repair Cost Estimate
Manhole
Location
Pipe Total Amount
Upstream Downstream
Length
(LF)
Diameter
(in)
Type
11 12 Sun Way 8 24 PVC SDR26 $13,800

3. MACP Results
The MACP inspections found many minor defects throughout the manholes. The most common issue was the corrosion and deterioration of the frames and covers. Other issues were the deterioration of the channel and walls. In one severe case, we recommend that one entire manhole be replaced. In other cases, Mark Thomas, along with the City maintenance workers, were unable to find manholes that were part of the original scope. The manholes were found via the PACP inspections, but the entry points were not found because they were overlaid with asphalt or buried in agricultural fields. Since the areas of concern all overlap with the manholes, please see Table 4 below for the recommended repairs for each of the manholes from the project.

A lot of the frames and chimney areas of the manholes have heavy corrosion and rust that should be replaced within the next two to three years. In some severe cases, the frame is so corroded that the City maintenance workers weld the lids onto the frame so the cover will sit flush against the frame. This means that every time the manhole needs to be accessed for inspection or maintenance, a crew needs to cut the welds and then re-weld the lid onto the frame. In other instances, it took Mark Thomas operators and City staff a long time to locate manholes in unpaved areas. Mark Thomas recommends installing markers to facilitate the locating of manholes.

Several manholes showed cases of deterioration, and one was so severe that we recommend completely replacing the existing manhole with a new manhole. The area of concern was the area downstream of Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital. There were 4 manholes inspected in this area and they all had issues with the deterioration of the concrete within the structure. These manholes are SSMHs 19, 20, 21, and 22. Salinas Valley Memorial and a medical office on the corner of East Romie Lane and Pajaro Street discharge into these segments. All four of these manholes were rehabilitated in the past with an epoxy or fiberglass lining. SSMH 22 is the most severe out of the four. All of the concrete is chipping and large chunks break off simply from the removal and replacement of the manhole cover.

Mark Thomas recommends performing a chemical analysis of the waste water discharge from the hospital and the medical offices to see if their waste had high concentration solution which produced heavy gas concentration caused these manholes deterioration so severely. Another possibility could be chemical runoff from the agricultural fields that is damaging the concrete in the system. Since our investigation only covered a small area and a small sample size, we can assume that the cause may be from the medical facilities or from agricultural runoff that is located upstream of these deteriorated manholes.

CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
18 4. MACP Repair Cost Estimates
Below is a table showing the costs and the recommended repairs for each of the manholes from these inspections. See Appendix B for cost breakdown. Cost estimate includes labor and installation.

CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
19 Table 4 – Manhole Repair & Cost Estimate
Manhole
# Description of Repair & Recommendation Amount ($)
1 New Frame & Cover. Lining interior of manhole $9,800
2 New Frame & Cover. Lining interior of manhole $9,800
3 No Work $0
4 Expose and Raise Manhole to Grade. Manhole is currently buried $4,800 5 Expose and Raise Manhole to Grade. Manhole is currently buried $4,800 6 New Frame & Cover with PCC collar slope away from MH lid to prevent I/I and install marker. $5,800
7 Expose and Raise Manhole to Grade. Manhole is currently buried $4,200 8 New Frame & Cover with PCC collar slope away from MH lid to prevent I/I and install marker $5,800
9 New Frame & Cover with PCC collar and install marker. Lining interior of manhole $9,000
10 New Frame & Cover, replace exist cone with eccentric cone to avoid the conflict with the existing fence $6,500
11 New Frame & Cover with PCC collar slope away from MH lid to prevent I/I and install marker $5,800
12 New Frame & Cover with PCC collar slope away from MH lid to prevent I/I and install marker $5,800
13 New Frame & Cover $4,500
14 New Chimney area (3” grade rings”), PCC collar slope away from MH lid to prevent I/I, and Grouting of bricks, or lining, and install marker $9,000 15 New Frame & Cover with PCC collar slope away from MH lid to prevent I/I and install marker. Lining interior of manhole in 5 years $9,000 16 New Frame & Cover with PCC collar slope away from MH lid to prevent I/I and install marker. Lining interior of manhole in 5 years $9,000 17 Relining manhole in 2 years $7,600
18 Relining manhole, new bench, and re-channelize $8,500 19 Relining manhole, new bench, and re-channelize $8,500 20 New Frame & Cover $5,300.
21 New Frame & Cover. Relining manhole, new bench, and rechannelize, or (New Manhole) $12,500 22 New Manhole $12,000
23 New Frame & Cover. Lining interior of manhole $9,800 24 New Frame & Cover. Lining interior of manhole $9,800 CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
20 25 No Work $0
26 PCC collar slope away from Manhole lid to prevent I/I, New bench and re-channelize $5,200
CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
21 Appendix

1. Appendix A: Location Maps
Segments colored in yellow were part of the original project scope. Inability to locate or access manholes resulted in change of scope per City’s direction.

Figure 1
Figure 2
CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
22 Figure 3
Figure 4
CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
23 Figure 5
Figure 6
CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
24 2. Appendix B: Cost Estimate
SSMH 3 to SSMH 4
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Total
Amount
24” PVC SDR25 8 LF $975 $7,800
24” Plastic to Clay Coupling 1 EA $2,800 $2800
Reconnect Pipe to MH 1 EA $2,000 $2,000
Temporary Bypass 1 LS $2,000 $2,000
TOTAL $14,600
SSMH 11 to SSMH 12
Item Description Quantity Unit Unit Price Total Amount
24” PVC SDR25 8 LF $775 $6,200
24” Plastic to Clay Coupling 2 EA $2,800 $5,600
Temporary Bypass 1 LS $2,000 $2,000
TOTAL $13,800
Manhole Rehabilitation Cost Estimate
Item Description Total Amount
New Frame & Cover $5,300
Lining Interior of manhole $7,600
Expose and Raise to Grade $4,200
New Bench & Re-channelize $5,200
New Chimney $4,000
New Manhole $12,000
CCTV Sanitary Sewer Analysis
On-Call Services
City of Salinas
25 3. Appendix C:

PACP & MACP Reports
1 to 2 9/12/2017
10:36:31 AM
Salinas CCTV Project Justin Young
1 2
Pipeline segment
ref: Project Name: Start date/time:

Upstream manhole No: Downstream manhole No:

Weather: Surveyed by:

Additional info:

Total length:

Observation Report with Still Images and Scores
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Depth US: Depth DS: Extra:

Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Rating Category Comment Observations

0.0 START WITH
FLOW
No /

0.0 AMH No / Start of inspection.

0.0 MWL No /
Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 1 of 10

0.0 DAE No 3 5 / O&M

0.0 DAE No 7 9 / O&M

5.0 MWLS No / Structural
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 2 of 10

13.6 MWLS No / Structural

61.7 MWLS No / Structural

66.9 MCU No / O&M
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 3 of 10

66.9 MWLS No / Structural

98.6 MWL No /
105.7 MWL No /
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 4 of 10 172.2 MWL No /
174.7 DAE No 3 5 / O&M
174.8 DAE No 7 9 / O&M
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 5 of 10 174.8 DAE No 7 4 / O&M
200.9 DAE No 7 4 / O&M
200.9 DAGS No 3 / O&M
200.9 DAGS No 9 / O&M
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 6 of 10 230.1 MWL No /
230.1 LL No / O&M
241.7 JSM No / Structural
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 7 of 10 277.9 JSM No / Structural
302.0 CC No 7 5 / Structural
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 8 of 10 302.0 IS No 9 12 /
302.0 IS No 1 3 /
309.8 MWL No /
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 9 of 10 320.5 AMH No / End of inspection.
320.5 DAGS No 3 / O&M
320.5 DAGS No 9 / O&M
320.5 STOP No /
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:31 PM Page 10 of 10 3 to 4 9/12/2017
12:46:37 PM
Salinas CCTV Project Justin Young
3 4
Pipeline segment
ref: Project Name: Start date/time:

Upstream manhole No: Downstream manhole No:

Weather: Surveyed by:

Additional info:

Total length:

Observation Report with Still Images and Scores
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Depth US: Depth DS: Extra:

Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Rating Category Comment Observations

0.0 START WITH
FLOW
No /

0.0 AMH No / Start of inspection

0.0 MWL No /
Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 1 of 2

0.0 B No 7 5 / Structural @ USMH

0.0 DAE No 7 5 / O&M
126.2 AMH No / End of inspection.
126.2 DAE No 7 5 / O&M
126.2 STOP No /
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 2 of 2 6 to 7 9/13/2017
9:27:46 AM
Salinas CCTV Project Justin Young
6 7
Pipeline segment
ref: Project Name: Start date/time:

Upstream manhole No: Downstream manhole No:

Weather: Surveyed by:

Additional info:

Total length:

Observation Report with Still Images and Scores
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Depth US: Depth DS: Extra:

Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Rating Category Comment Observations

0.0 START WITH
FLOW
No /

0.0 AMH No / Start of inspection.

0.0 MWL No /
Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 1 of 6

9.4 DAE No 10 / O&M

17.6 DAE No 3 / O&M

18.9 DAE No 10 / O&M
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 2 of 6

72.5 MWLS No / Structural

98.7 MWL No /
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 3 of 6 177.4 DAGS No 12 / O&M
198.0 MWLS No / Structural
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 4 of 6 238.3 MWLS No / Structural
244.3 DAGS No 3 / O&M
244.3 DAGS No 9 / O&M
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 5 of 6 261.0 RBC No 7 5 / O&M @ DSMH Connection
264.2 AMH No / End of inspection.
264.2 DAGS No 12 / O&M
264.2 DAGS No 3 / O&M
264.2 DAGS No 9 / O&M
264.2 STOP No /
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 6 of 6 7 to 8 9/13/2017
1:36:39 PM
Salinas CCTV Project Justin Young
7 8
Pipeline segment
ref: Project Name: Start date/time:

Upstream manhole No: Downstream manhole No:

Weather: Surveyed by:

Additional info:

Total length:

Observation Report with Still Images and Scores
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Depth US: Depth DS: Extra:

Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Rating Category Comment Observations

0.0 START WITH
FLOW
No /

0.0 AMH No / Start of inspection

0.0 MWL No /
Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 1 of 9

0.9 DAGS No 5 / O&M

0.9 DAGS No 7 / O&M

32.7 MWLS No / Structural
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 2 of 9

63.6 SSS No 9 / Structural

81.4 MWL No /

93.6 MWLS No / Structural
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 3 of 9 104.5 CL No 3 / Structural
117.0 MWL No /
170.9 MWLS No / Structural
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 4 of 9 262.1 SSS No 2 / Structural
301.2 MWL No /
372.9 DAE No 9 3 / O&M
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 5 of 9 376.2 MWLS No / Structural
399.8 SSS No 3 / Structural
400.0 RPR No Pipe looks to be
replaced.
/
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 6 of 9 410.0 DAGS No 10 3 / O&M
416.7 STOP No /
426.8 DAGS No 10 3 / O&M
461.2 RPR No looks like a point
repair
/
472.1 MWLS No / Structural
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 7 of 9 507.7 MWL No /
553.0 DAGS No 5 / O&M
553.0 DAGS No 7 / O&M
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 8 of 9 553.0 AMH No / END OF INSPECTION
Rating Category
CUES, Inc.
3600 Rio Vista Avenue
Orlando, FL 32805
Phone: 407-849-0190
Fax: 407-425-1569
Distance Length Code Reversed Clock Pos. Severity Comment Observations with Still Images and Scores Wednesday, December 31, 2008 11:33 PM Page 9 of 9 9 TO 10 9/18/2017
8:03:34 AM
Salinas CCTV Project Justin Young
9 10
Pipeline segment
ref: Project Name: Start date/time:

Salinas City CouncilMay 2, 2023

Salinas City Council
May 2, 2023