Agenda Packet — Salinas City Council, October 24, 2023 (part 1 of 28)

Tuesday, October 24, 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 Jim Pia, Interim City Manager
Christopher A. Callihan, City Attorney
City Clerk’s Office: (831) 758-7381
Meeting Agenda - Final
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final October 24, 2023

ZOOM WEBINAR PARTICIPATION
JOIN THE ZOOM WEBINAR TO PARTICIPATE LIVE AT:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/84416408034
To participate telephonically, call any number below:
+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 +1 507 473 4847 or +1 564 217 2000 or +1 646 558 8656 or +1 646 931 3860 or +1 689 278 1000 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 305 224 1968 or +1 309 205 3325 or +1 312 626 6799 or +1 360 209 5623 or +1 386 347 5053 Webinar ID: 844 1640 8034
If prompted to enter a participant ID, press #.

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

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

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

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

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

ID#23-655 Blue Zones Project Monterey County

PUBLIC HEARINGS
ID#23-641 Reconsider General Plan Amendment 2022-002 and Rezone 2022-002; Amend the General Plan to change the General Plan designation of five (5) City of Salinas Page 2 Printed on 10/19/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final October 24, 2023
sites to Mixed Use and Rezone the same five (5) sites to Mixed-use (MX) Recommendation: Approve a Resolution rescinding Resolution No. 22797 (N.C.S.), approved by the City Council on September 26, 2023; and affirming the findings, adopting the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopting General Plan Amendment (GPA 2022-002) changing the General Plan Land Use Designations of five (5) "Project sites"; Alisal Marketplace, Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets, Foods Co Shopping Center, Laurel West Shopping Center, and Sears (Northridge Mall) (portion) from Commercial Retail (CR) and/or Industrial General Commercial (IGC) to Mixed Use (MX); and Adopt an Ordinance to Rezone the same five (5) "Project sites" from Commercial Retail (CR) and/or Industrial General Commercial (IGC) to Mixed Use (MX) (RZ 2022-002).

ID#23-627 Zoning Code Amendment 2022-004; Amend Zoning Code Section 37-50.620 (On-Site Sign Regulations) of Chapter 37 of the Salinas Municipal Code (Zoning Code) to allow consideration of public service information, marquee, changeable copy, and other signs for public/private school uses
Recommendation: Consider finding Zoning Code Amendment 2022-004 categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15305 and adopting an Ordinance amending Chapter 37 of the Salinas Municipal Code (Zoning Code) to allow consideration of public service information, marquee, changeable copy, and other signs for public/private school uses.

CONSIDERATION
ID#23-631 Resolution of Intention to Form an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) and Agreement for Professional Services with Kosmont & Associates to support EIFD Formation
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution directing staff to prepare a Resolution of Intention (ROI) to Form an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) to fund backbone infrastructure at the Salinas Ag Industrial Center (SAIC); and authorizing the Mayor to execute an Agreement for Professional Services (Agreement) between the City of Salinas and Kosmont & Associates Inc, ("Kosmont") for a total compensation amount not to exceed $129,000.00 for the Enhanced Infrastructure Finance District ("EIFD") Formation Advisory for the Salinas Ag-Industrial Center Specific Plan ("SAIC").

ID#23-648 Rent Stabilization and Tenant Protection
Recommendation: Receive a report regarding rent stabilization and tenant protection and consider directing staff to return to the City Council with strategies and alternatives available to the City Council.

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#23-654 Minutes
Recommendation: Approve minutes of October 10, 2023.

ID#23-651 Financial Claims
Recommendation: Approve financial claims report.

City of Salinas Page 3 Printed on 10/19/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final October 24, 2023
ID#23-607 2022-2023 Pavement Maintenance Project, CIP No. 9981, 9120, 9080 Recommendation: Approve a Resolution approving Contract Change Order No. 1 to Granite Construction Company for the 2022-2023 Pavement Maintenance Project, CIP No. 9981, 9120, 9080 in the amount of $430,678.35; and approving Contract Change Order No. 2 to Granite Construction Company for the 2022-2023 Pavement Maintenance Project, CIP No. 9981, 9120, 9080 for an amount not to exceed $250,000.00; and authorizing the Interim City Manager to execute all necessary documents related to Contract Change Order No. 1 and No. 2 and authorize a 10% of the new contract amount for construction contingencies ($881,868.50) for the 2022-2023 Pavement Maintenance Project, CIP No. 9981, 9120, 9080.

ID#23-620 Professional Services Agreement with Harris & Associates for the Gabilan Creek Restoration Design
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution approving an addendum to the Master Services Agreement with Harris & Associates for the design work related to the Gabilan Creek Restoration Project in an amount not to exceed $90,640.50.

ID#23-622 Purchase and Sales Agreement for 443 West Market Street (El Rey Motel) Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Purchase and Sales Agreement (PSA) in the amount of $3,640,000 for the purchase of a 26 room motel located at 443 West Market St in the City of Salinas utilizing the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding for the purchase.

ID#23-626 New Traffic Signal at East Alisal Street and JD Alvarado Circle (formerly Murphy Street), CIP No. 9094
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution accepting the New Traffic Signal at East Alisal Street and JD Alvarado Circle, CIP No. 9094, for maintenance and responsibility.

ID#23-628 Agreement Amendment No. 1 with Smith & Enright Landscaping, Inc for Landscape Maintenance Services for City Parks and Facilities Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the Interim City Manager to execute an Agreement Amendment No. 1 with Smith & Enright Landscaping, Inc. for Landscape Maintenance Services for City parks and facilities to include an additional amount not to exceed $50,000 for general irrigation repairs.

ID#23-630 Annual Maintenance Service Agreement with EnvisionWare, Inc. for Library Automated Self-Checkout System
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the Interim City Manager to enter into a service agreement with EnvisioinWare, Inc. for annual maintenance of the Library Automated Self-Checkout System in the amount of $33,219.97.

ID#23-632 Journal Fund Transfer of Family Homeless Challenge Funds to the American Rescue Plan Act Affordable Housing Production Fund Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing an administrative journal transfer of $690,000 of California Interagency Council on Homelessness Family Homeless Challenge grant fund to the American Rescue Plan Act Affordable Housing Production fund.

ID#23-633 Purchase and Sales Agreement for 414 Crescent Way Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the Mayor to execute a Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA), and all other documents necessary to effectuate the property transfer to the City with private property owner for the purchase of a single-family residence located at 414 Crescent Way in the City of Salinas, for a price of $650,000.

City of Salinas Page 4 Printed on 10/19/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final October 24, 2023
ID#23-635 Amendment to Professional Services Agreement with Harris & Associates for the Salinas Creeks Maintenance and Enhancement Plan Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the Interim City Manager to amend the agreement with Harris and Associates for the Salinas Creeks Maintenance and Enhancement Plan project to increase the total compensation by $278,139, for a maximum not to exceed $363,868.

ID#23-639 Alisal Safe Routes to School Project, CIP No. 9360 Recommendation: Approve a Resolution awarding a contract to FBD Vanguard construction, Inc. for the Alisal Safe Routes to School Project; and authorizing an increase of $155,000 to CIP 9360 appropriation and use Measure G fund balance for construction.

ID#23-647 Emergency Rotunda HVAC System Replacement
Recommendation: Approve a Resolution authorizing the emergency replacement of the Rotunda HVAC system as part of the existing on-call service contract with Environmental Systems Inc. (ESI) for $139,660 to include a 20% ($27,932) contingency for a total cost not to exceed $167,592; and authorize the Interim City Manager to execute all necessary documents related to the HVAC System Replacement.

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#23-645 a. Labor Negotiations - California Government Code Section 54957.6, with its designated labor representatives Jim Pia, Interim City Manager; 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. Performance Evaluation and Labor - California Government Code Section 54957(b)(1) and 54957.6, public employee performance evaluation and labor relations with unrepresented employee (City Attorney). c. Public Employee Appointment - California Government Code Section 54957(b)(1), City Manager.
d. Pending Litigation - California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), conference with legal counsel regarding, Santa Rita Union High School District, et al. v. City of Salinas et al., Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 20CV000242.

City of Salinas Page 5 Printed on 10/19/2023
City Council Meeting Agenda - Final October 24, 2023
e. Pending Litigation - California Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(1), conference with legal counsel regarding, Alisal Union School District, et al. v. City of Salinas, et al., Monterey County Superior Court Case No. 20CV00340.

ADJOURNMENT
_____________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk

AGENDA MATERIAL / ADDENDUM
Any addendums will be posted within 72 hours of regular meetings or 24 hours of special meetings and in accordance with Californian Government Code Section 54954.2 and 54956. City Council agenda reports and other writings distributed to the legislative body may be viewed at the Salinas City Clerk’s Office, 200 Lincoln Avenue, Salinas, and are posted on the City’s website at www.cityofsalinas.org in accordance with California Government Code section 54597.5. The City Council may take action that is different than the proposed action reflected on the agenda.

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

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION
This agenda was posted on October 19, 2023 in the Salinas Rotunda and City's website.

Meetings are streamed live at https://salinas.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx, televised live on Comcast Channel 25 and on http://www.youtube.com/thesalinaschannel at 4:00 p.m. on the date of the regularly scheduled meeting and will be broadcast throughout the day on Friday, Saturday, Monday and Wednesday following the meeting. For the most up-to-date Broadcast Schedule for The Salinas Channel on Comcast 25, please visit or subscribe to our Google Calendar located at http://tinyurl.com/SalinasChannel25. All past 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 10/19/2023
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-655, Version: 1
Blue Zones Project Monterey County
City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/19/2023
powered by Legistar™
Blue Zones Project Monterey County
Salinas City Council – October 24, 2023
Blue Zones Project — Privileged and Confidential 9/20/18 Page 3 3 Blue Zones® Longevity Hot Spots
People
Places
Policy
Blue Zones Project Focus - Life RadiusTM
BZP Monterey County
Project Launches
 Salinas 2018
 County 2020
 Peninsula Cities 2020
 Gonzales/King City 2021

SALINAS CERTIFICATION TIMELINE
6 June 2024
Certification
Decision
1 5
Develop Salinas
Roadmap for
Certification &
Sustainability
2 4
7 June 1, 2023
Celebrate Y4
May 2024
Certification report
content finalized +
Meet w/ LLC
July/August 2024
Sponsor
Announcements
News Release
3 8
Certification
documentation &
Sustainability plans
Week of April 22, 2024
On-site visit w/ Central
Late August 2024
Salinas
Community Event
Community Engagement
• 16,381 individuals to-date in Salinas
• CHISPA Senior Walks and Loteria
• Creekside Trails Hikes w/Clean-ups
• Clean-ups and Zumba at Soccer Complex
Grocery Stores & Restaurants
• 27 Restaurants Approved in Salinas
• 3 Grocery Stores and 1 Corner Store Approved
• Created Cooking Demo Toolkit for Salinas Libraries
• Creating BZPMC Cookbook (restaurants and resident
recipes)
• Grocery Tours, Focusing on Diabetes Education
Schools
• 20 Schools Approved in Salinas
• Support Walking School Bus Programs
• Nutrition Education for Students/Parents (Re-Think Your Drink) • Provide Capacity Building for School Gardens
• Support School Leaders in Sustainable Change
Worksites
• 27 Worksites Approved in Salinas
• Encouraging Worksites to Think About Life Radius:

Employee Volunteers at Community Gardens, Zumba
Classes at Soccer Complex, Clean-ups, etc.
• Empowering Employee-Led Well-Being Advisory
Committees
• With Partners (SVH/Montage), Provide Education.,
Classes, etc.

Food Policy
• La Michoacana corner store transformation;
partnership with ALBA growers
Double Up Food Bucks
(DUFB)
• $1,000,000 grant from CDFA; in partnership with
Aspire
• Over $600,000 in nutrition incentives available
• Soft launch at La Princesa locations (Williams Rd. and Alisal) in November 2023
• Compliments the Market Match at Farmer’s Markets
Built Environment
• Safe Routs to School Planning, Vision Zero, and Active Transportation Planning
• With community partners, working to create ParkRx program in Monterey County
• In partnership with TAMC, creating a county-wide traffic safety campaign
• Continuing to find opportunities to support activating spaces for people to gather
Partnership with Salinas
Regional Soccer Complex
Tobacco Control Policy
• Advocacy county-wide to expand smoking control
ordinances including the county’s flavor ban
• In collaboration with Sun Street Centers/STEPS,
created youth advocacy campaign for Take Down
Tobacco Day
• Continue to organize tobacco-litter clean ups
Grant Impacts for Partners:
$81 Million +
Since 2019, BZP has provided over 75 letters of support for partner organization grants county-wide.

Projects include:
• MST SURF! Bus Line (CA state and Federal funding)
• Active Transportation Grants for TAMC, benefiting
multiple communities (including Salinas)
• NMCUSD Farm to Cafeteria Program (USDA)
• Closter Park, Salinas (CA Prop 68)
• King City Downtown Streetscape Project
• City of Salinas East Alisal Beautification Project
Q&A
City of Salinas
Legislation Text
200 Lincoln Ave., Salinas,
CA 93901
www.cityofsalinas.org
File #: ID#23-641, Version: 1
Reconsider General Plan Amendment 2022-002 and Rezone 2022-002; Amend the General Plan to change the General Plan designation of five (5) sites to Mixed Use and Rezone the same five (5) sites to Mixed-use (MX)
Approve a Resolution rescinding Resolution No. 22797 (N.C.S.), approved by the City Council on September 26, 2023; and affirming the findings, adopting the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopting General Plan Amendment (GPA 2022-002) changing the General Plan Land Use Designations of five (5) “Project sites”; Alisal Marketplace, Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets, Foods Co Shopping Center, Laurel West Shopping Center, and Sears (Northridge Mall) (portion) from Commercial Retail (CR) and/or Industrial General Commercial (IGC) to Mixed Use (MX); and Adopt an Ordinance to Rezone the same five (5) “Project sites” from Commercial Retail (CR) and/or Industrial General Commercial (IGC) to Mixed Use (MX) (RZ 2022-002).

City of Salinas Page 1 of 1 Printed on 10/19/2023
powered by Legistar™
Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2023
DEPARTMENT: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FROM: LISA BRINTON, DIRECTOR
THROUGH: GRANT LEONARD, PLANNING MANAGER
BY: OSCAR RESENDIZ, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
TITLE: RECONSIDER GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2022-002 AND
REZONE 2022-002; AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE
THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION OF FIVE (5) SITES TO
MIXED USE AND REZONE THE SAME FIVE (5) SITES TO

MIXED-USE (MX)
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

It is recommended that the City Council take the following two actions:

1. Approve a resolution:
a. rescinding Resolution No. 22797 (N.C.S.), approved by the City Council on September 26, 2023; and
b. affirming the findings, adopting the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and adopting General Plan Amendment (GPA 2022-002) changing the General Plan Land Use Designations of five (5) “Project sites”; Alisal Marketplace, Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets, Foods Co Shopping Center, Laurel West Shopping Center, and Sears (Northridge Mall) (portion) from Commercial Retail (CR) and/or Industrial General Commercial (IGC) to Mixed Use (MX); and

2. Adopt an Ordinance to Rezone the same five (5) “Project sites” from Commercial Retail (CR) and/or Industrial General Commercial (IGC) to Mixed Use (MX) (RZ 2022-002).

PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE FOR RECONSIDERATION:

Upon review of the public hearing notice for the September 26, 2023, City Council meeting at which these items were first considered by the City Council, it was discovered that the notice of Page | 2
public hearing was not properly provided. Consequently, the City Council’s prior action must be rescinded, and the City Council must hold a second public hearing to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone for all five (5) “project sites”: Alisal Marketplace, Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets, Foods Co Shopping Center, Laurel West Shopping Center, and Sears (Northridge Mall) (portion). Notice of this public hearing has been properly provided.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City of Salinas is proposing General Plan Amendment (GPA) 2022-002 and Rezone (RZ) 2022-002 to change the land use designations and zoning districts of five (5) “Project sites”: Alisal Marketplace, Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets, Foods Co Shopping Center, Laurel West Shopping Center, and Sears (Northridge Mall) (portion). The purpose of the GPA and RZ is to facilitate the production of housing, consistent with the City’s General Plan. The GPA and RZ would facilitate the development of up to approximately 2,513 housing units and 727,089 square feet of commercial uses. An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for each of the five (5) “Project sites” (ER 2022-10) and are provided as Exhibit 1 to the Resolution and Ordinance.

The Project does not involve construction or other physical changes to the site because there are currently no development proposals. The Project is intended to encourage future housing development that would provide new housing consistent with the Salinas General Plan. This Project is being partially funded by Senate Bill 2 (SB 2) grant funding for the purpose of increasing housing production in the City.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Salinas is facing an ongoing housing crisis with a low supply of units, rising rents and home prices, overcrowding, and a significant population of unhoused residents. Like many cities in California, housing affordability challenges have steadily increased in Salinas in recent years and were exacerbated further during the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to these challenges, the City of Salinas has focused on advancing housing production and establishing programs to support residents with their housing needs. In December 2019, the City accepted an SB 2 grant award from the state Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) in the amount of $310,000.

The SB 2 grant was awarded to cities for the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans that streamline housing development approval and accelerate housing production. The SB 2 grant award enabled the City to undertake the planning and environmental study and analysis required to prepare the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone for five (5) identified sites summarized in Table 1 and are shown in Exhibit A – Project Locations.

Table 1. Project Sites and Location Summary
Page | 3
Project Site Location Project Location Map Area
Alisal Marketplace Adjacent to East
Alisal Street
between Front
Street and Griffin
Street

12.1 acres
Edge of
Downtown/Front
and John Streets
Adjacent to John
Street between
Abbott Street and
Front Street

3.7 acres
Foods Co Shopping
Center
Southeast corner
of East Alisal
Street and South
Sanborn Road

13.5 acres
Laurel West
Shopping Center
East of North
Davis Road
between West
Laurel
Drive/Calle Del
Adobe and Larkin
Street

16.2 acres
Page | 4
Sears (Northridge
Mall) (portion)
Northwest corner
of North Main
Street and Madrid
Street

8.41 acres
of the 10.2
acre site is
proposed
to be
changed as
shown in
red.

The Project sites were identified as having the capability to provide more housing and mixed-use development consistent with the 2002 General Plan. The proposed General Plan Amendments and Rezones are shown in Exhibit B, and summarized in Table 2, below:

Table 2. Proposed Land Use Designation and Zoning District Changes Site General Plan
Land Use Designation
Zoning District
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
Alisal Marketplace Retail /
General
Commercial/
Light
Industrial
Mixed Use Commercial
Retail
(CR)/Industrial
General
Commercial
(IGC)
Mixed Use (MX)
Edge of Downtown Retail /
Residential
Low Density
Mixed Use Commercial
Retail (CR) /
Residential Low
Density (R-L) /
Central City
(CC)
Mixed Use (MX) /
Central City (CC)
Laurel West
Shopping Center
Retail Mixed Use Commercial
Retail (CR)
Mixed Use (MX)
Foods Co Shopping
Center
Retail Mixed Use Commercial
Retail (CR)
Mixed Use (MX)
Sears (Northridge
Mall) (portion)
Retail Mixed Use* Commercial
Retail (CR)
Mixed Use (MX)*
*Note: 1.79 acres of the site will remain Retail and CR – Commercial Retail A more detailed discussion of the Project sites and the current and proposed uses is included in Exhibit C – Summary of Project Sites and Proposed Changes. Additionally, Chapter 37 of the Page | 5
City’s Zoning code contains a detailed list of allowed uses per zone, including what is allowed and not allowed under Mixed Use that can be reviewed here.

DISCUSSION:

General Plan Amendment
Per the 2002 Salinas General Plan, the Mixed-Use land use designation allows for development including a mixture of retail, office, and residential uses in the same building, on the same parcel or in the same area. The intent of this designation is to create activity centers with pedestrianoriented uses in certain portions of the City. The maximum intensity/density of development is 1.0 floor area ratio plus 10 dwelling units per acre throughout the City and a maximum intensity/density of development of 4.0 floor area ratio + 80 dwelling units per acre (for a total maximum allowable floor area ratio of 6.0) for projects within the Central City.

The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with General Plan Policies. The proposed General Plan Amendment would change the existing designations for the Project sites and amend the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Policy Map to align with the proposed rezoning of each site to Mixed Use (MX). The General Plan Amendment would be compatible with the General Plan land use designation of the adjacent sites of each subject site.

The proposed “Mixed Use” land use designation for the five (5) Project sites is consistent with General Plan Goal H-1, by providing a range of housing opportunities to adequately address existing and projected needs to Salinas. The proposed project also complies with General Plan Policy H-1.3, by identifying adequate sites to facilitate and encourage housing production for the existing and projected housing needs of the City. In addition, the project complies with General Plan Goal H-2, by maintaining and improving existing neighborhoods and housing stock.

Rezone
Per Zoning Code Section 37-30.230, the Mixed Use (MX) zoning district “provides opportunities for mixed use, office, public and semipublic uses, and commercial uses that emphasize retail, entertainment, and service activities.” Medium and high-density residential uses are encouraged within MX districts to facilitate pedestrian-oriented activity centers. The proposed zoning district would be consistent with the proposed land use designation, Mixed Use. Future development would follow development regulations and design standards of the MX District, by:
 Promoting and providing development opportunities for integrated, complementary housing and employment opportunities in the same building, on the same parcel or within the same block.
 Supporting transit use and providing a buffer between busy streets and residential Page | 6
neighborhoods and providing new housing opportunities in the city.  Promoting compact development that is intended to be pedestrian-oriented with buildings close to and oriented to the sidewalk.
 Promoting residential development that is appropriate in an urban setting in mixed-use buildings by providing incentives, as well as standards and regulations to minimize conflicts between different types of uses.

CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS
Chapter 37, Article VI, Divisions 12 and 14 provides for a process whereby all General Plan and Zoning Code amendments are brought before the Planning Commission for a recommendation to the City Council for consideration and a final decision. On September 6, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to review the proposed Amendments and approved the attached Exhibit G, Planning Commission Resolution 2023-08 recommending that the City Council adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, approve General Plan Amendment 2022-002 and Rezone 2022-002 (see attached Exhibit F- September 6, 2023, Planning Commission Staff Report, and draft Planning Commission minutes) with some reservations.

The City Council may approve the proposed Amendments if all of the findings set forth in the attached City Council Resolution and Ordinance are established. Per Zoning Code Section 37-

60.930(d), an affirmative vote of not less than four (4) votes of the City Council is required for the Council to approve the General Plan Amendment. Prior to acting on the proposed Amendments, the City Council will need to affirm environmental impacts of the project have been analyzed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Consistency with Other Planning Efforts
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is consistent with previously approved plans, as well as current planning efforts. The City has actively pursued policies that support infill, mixeduse development and has incorporated these policies into community plans like the Alisal Vibrancy Plan, as well as citywide plans like the Economic Development Element and the forthcoming Active Transportation Plan. Furthermore, regional planning efforts by Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) and the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) promote sustainable, transit-oriented development that would be facilitated under the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone. The Proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is also consistent with the City’s Draft 2023-2031 Housing Element that is scheduled for adoption in December 2023, as well as the Draft Place Types that are being proposed as part of the Visión Salinas 2040 General Plan Update.

Summary of Comments Received
Page | 7
During the Public Comment Period for the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for General Plan Amendment and Rezoning, the City received one (1) written comment from Monterey-Salinas Transit (Exhibit D), and comments from the public during the September 6, 2023, Planning Commission meeting, along with comments from the Planning Commissioners.

The comments from MST relate to clarifying transit services routes and requesting that future developments include mitigation measures for Green House Gas (GHG) emission and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) reductions. The City’s response to MST’s comments is included in Exhibit E.

The comments received at the Planning Commission focused on the Foods Co. and Sears sites and are summarized below.

Foods Co. Site Sears Site
Change may lead to increased traffic in an
already congested neighborhood.

Change may limit business opportunities at the
site because Mixed Use zoning restricts certain
uses.

Change may lead to increased parking
demands along adjacent residential streets that
already experience heavy parking demands.

Following the presentation, public comments, and Commission discussion, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of all five (5) Initial Studies and Mitigated Negative Declarations and recommended approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezone of the Alisal Market Place, Edge of Downtown, Laurel West Shopping Center, and the Sears sites. The Commission did not recommend approval of the Foods Co. Site General Plan Amendment and Rezone. The Commission also wanted to note that they had concerns about the proposed change in land use and zoning limiting future uses at the Sears site. Staff has considered the public and Planning Commissioner comments and has prepared the following analysis:

Foods Co. Comments:

Included in the CEQA analysis for this site is a comparison of traffic generated by existing allowed uses and uses that will be allowed if the property is rezoned. Because the Foods Co. site is a large shopping center, it currently generates considerable traffic, estimated to be up to 5,996 trips per day between all the uses - Foods Co, restaurants, bank, and other services. Alternatively, a mixeduse building with ground floor commercial and multifamily housing with between four (4) and ten (10) floors of residential living space is estimated to generate 1,982 trips per day, which is significantly lower than the current use.

The question of parking on adjacent streets is speculative at this point because no project is yet proposed. If a future project is proposed, the amount of parking needed to meet its commercial and residential needs would be determined during the planning and design process for the development. In general, development along commercial corridors with high quality transit and bicycle and pedestrian amenities, such as Alisal Street, requires less parking because residents have access to alternative transportation. Recently completed project examples include the Page | 8
Rabobank and the Bruhn Building apartments in Downtown, and Moon Gate Plaza in Chinatown.

Sears Comments:

The concerns about reducing business opportunities were raised by representatives of the current property owner who is seeking to reestablish commercial tenants at the Sears site. With the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone, certain uses would not be permitted under Mixed Use land use and zoning that are permitted under the current Commercial Retail zoning. However, new uses, such as housing, would be permitted under Mixed Use zoning, along with most retail uses, restaurants, and entertainment uses.

The primary area of change from the current Commercial Retail use would be the loss of vehicle service-related uses. The former Sears had an automotive maintenance center, and that use would not be allowed under Mixed Use zoning. However, if a vehicle services-related use is established within 180 days of the Rezone going into effect, then that use would be allowed to continue to operate and would become a legal, non-conforming use subject to Salinas Zoning Code Section 37-50.160. The General Plan Amendment and Rezone would, therefore, create a 180-day timeframe for a vehicle service-related use to be established at the Sears site before such a use would not be allowed.

It should be noted that when the City received the SB2 grant in 2019, the former owner of the Sears site was receptive to the proposed land use and rezone and was interested in developing housing at the site. As such, it is possible that a future owner could be interested in pursuing housing on the site or other uses allowed under the Mixed-Use zoning.

Alisal Marketplace Comments:

On October 3, 2023, staff met with multiple property owners from the Alisal Marketplace project area. The property owners were supportive of additional opportunities for housing within the City, but they had concerns regarding their properties being rezoned and how the change would impact their business and tenants. They raised concerns regarding the notification process and stated that they had not received any notification. Additionally, they commented that changing the zoning for that area would affect their properties in the following ways:

1. Current uses would become legal-non-conforming. Many of the current uses within their properties are not permitted in Mixed Use (MX), and this could affect their properties if there is another recession because businesses could close, and they could have a hard time leasing any space and 180-days to continue the use could expire.

2. The square-footage cost/profit for Industrial/Commercial uses has more value than housing. The value of their property could go down in value or have zero value after the change.

3. They voiced their concerns with mixed-use developments using the example of Tynan Village Apartments and how it’s been difficult for the first-floor commercial space to be leased.

4. They mentioned that they are also small businesses and have been hit with recent recessions (COVID-19 closures), and that they have limited resources compared to Page | 9
big corporations to adjust to a loss of lease revenue or to facilitate redevelopment of the site.

At the meeting, Staff explained the background of the SB-2 Grant and the outreach that was done by former Community Development Director and former Housing Manager. Staff explained legalnon-conforming status, the 180-days to re-establish a use, and went into specifics about one of the properties that is governed by Site Plan Review (SPR) and a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). In addition, staff explained the General Plan update and the conversion to Place Types. With the General Plan update, the Alisal Market Place would be a new Place Type and the land use and zoning designations would become Mixed-Use Village, like what is being proposed with the SB2 GPA/RZ.

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

The environmental impacts of the project have been analyzed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Initial Study (one (1) per site, five (5) total ISMNDs) was prepared to evaluate the potential impacts associated with the project. Based upon review of the Initial Study, the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment because the mitigation measures outlined in the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been included in the project (Exhibit C). The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declarations were routed to responsible agencies on August 18, 2023, and posted at the County Clerk’s Office on August 18, 2023; the deadline for comments was September 6, 2023. The State Clearinghouse received the document on August 18, 2023; the deadline for Clearinghouse comments was September 6, 2023 (SCH Numbers 2023080480). Only one (1) comment letter was received from MST. Both the comment letter and city response are provided as Exhibits D and E.

On June 14, 2022, the City of Salinas, pursuant to AB 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014) and SB 18 (Chapter 905, Statutes 2004) sent via certified mail notification letters to 9 California Native American Tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. The letter was sent to representatives of the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe, Esselen Tribe of Monterey County, Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan, Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation, Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, Xolon-Salinan Tribe, and Runsen Am:a Tur:ataj Ohlone. Consultation for AB 52 ended on July 14, 2022, and consultation for SB 18 ended on September 12, 2022.

Chairperson Louise Miranda-Ramirez of the Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation requested formal consultation on September 13, 2022. Formal consultation was held by telephone on June 21, 2023.

Nine (9) mitigation measures were requested through the formal consultation. The requested mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Page | 10
Reporting Program for the project (Exhibit 2 to the Resolution and Ordinance). No requests for additional consultation were received.

It is noted that the circulated Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Sears (Northridge Mall) site incorrectly shows the proposed land use designation and zoning district applying to the total acreage of the site. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration shows the proposed land use designation of Retail and zoning district of CR – Commercial Retail for the entire 10.2-acre site; however, the proposed land use designation and zoning district would only apply to 8.41 acres. The remaining 1.79 acres would maintain the current land use designation and zoning district. The final ordinance for City Council consideration reflects the correct acreage.

The removal of the 1.79 acres does not affect the analysis contained in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration because the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration analyzed the maximum buildout of the entire 10.2 acres with mixed-use buildings. Therefore, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration analyzed the “worst-case scenario” for development of the site with higher intensity uses.

STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATIVE:

The proposed Amendments support the City of Salinas Strategic Plan 2022-2025 goal of Housing/Affordable Housing by creating opportunities for future housing development. By establishing land use and zoning designations to align the land use approval process to facilitate development of higher residential density that would create more housing opportunities.

DEPARTMENTAL COORDINATION:

Community Development Department Advanced Planning and Plan and Project Implementation (APPI) division is leading the implementation of the SB2 grant, managed the preparation of the Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declarations and drafted the Amendments in coordination with other CDD divisions (Current Planning and Housing), Public Works, Economic Development staff and the City Attorney’s office.

FISCAL AND SUSTAINABILITY IMPACT:

There are no additional fiscal impacts to the City’s General Fund associated with the approval of the Amendments. Staff time for managing the SB2 grant and managing the preparation of CEQA documents was fully funded with SB 2 grant. Staff time dedicated to preparing the Amendments and this report is already incorporated in the 2022-2023 Community Development APPI division budget.

Page | 11
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Exhibit A – Project Locations

2. Exhibit B – Existing and Proposed Land Use and Zoning

3. Exhibit C – Summary of Project Sites and Proposed Changes

4. Exhibit D - Letter from Monterey-Salinas Transit District, from Emma Patel, Planning Manager, Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) Dated August 31, 2023

5. Exhibit E - City Response to MST Comments

6. Exhibit F - Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 6, 2023- Packet with exhibits.

7. Exhibit F - Unofficial Planning Commission Minutes for September 6, 2023

8. Exhibit G - Planning Commission Resolution 2023-08 - Exhibits for PC Resolution

9. Draft City Council Resolution for GPA 2022-002 and Mitigated Negative Declaration with the following Exhibits:

Reso Exhibit 1: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND), dated August 2023 (Revised September 2023)
Reso Exhibit 2: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Reso Exhibit 3: Proposed General Plan Amendment 2022-002 (GPA 2022- 002) Map and Proposed Rezone 2022-002 (RZ 2022-002)
Map

10. Draft Rezone Ordinance for Rezone 2022-002 with following Exhibits:

Ord Exhibit 1: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND), dated August 2023 (Revised September 2023)
Ord Exhibit 2: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Ord Exhibit 3: Proposed General Plan Amendment 2022-002 (GPA 2022- 002) Map and Proposed Rezone 2022-002 (RZ 2022-002)
Map
1 RESOLUTION NO. (N.C.S.)
RESOLUTION BY THE SALINAS CITY COUNCIL RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 22797 (N.C.S.) AND ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION,

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM AND APPROVING AN

AMENDMENT TO THE SALINAS GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION TO MIXED USE OF FIVE (5) “PROJECT SITES” (GPA 2022- 002 RELATED TO RZ 2022-002
WHEREAS, on September 26, 2023, the City Council approved a Resolution affirming the findings, adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and adopted the General Plan Amendment (GPA) changing the General Plan Land Use Designations of five (5) “project sites” from Commercial Retail and/or Industrial General Commercial to Mixed Use; and
WHEREAS, upon review of the public hearing notice, it was discovered that an error had been made in the notice of public hearing and would require re-noticing and rescheduling of the public hearing for reconsideration of GPA 2022-002 and RZ 2022-002; and WHEREAS, on October 24, 2023, the Salinas City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to reconsider General Plan Amendment 2022-002 and related Rezone 2022-002 of five (5) “Project sites” as described in more detail below:

1. General Plan Amendment 2022-002 (GPA 2022-002) changes the General Plan Land Use designation of five (5) “Project sites” from Commercial Retail (CR) and/or Industrial General Commercial (IGC) to Mixed Use (MX) as described below:
a. RZ 2022-002-A: Alisal Marketplace, located adjacent to East Alisal Street between Front Street and Griffin Street, consisting of 18 parcels that total

12.1 acres;
b. RZ 2022-002-B: Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets, located adjacent to John Street between Abbott Street and Front Street, consisting of 8 parcels that total 3.7 acres;
c. RZ 2022-002-C: Foods Co Shopping Center, located on the southeast corner of East Alisal Street and South Sanborn Road, consisting of 8 parcels that total 13.5 acres;
d. RZ 2022-002-D: Laurel West Shopping Center, located east of North Davis Road between West Laurel Drive/Calle Del Adobe and Larkin Street, consisting of 6 parcels that total 16.2 acres; and
e. RZ 2022-002-D: Sears (Northridge Mall), located on the northwest corner of North Main Street and Madrid Street, consisting of 1 parcel that totals

8.41 acres (portion of a 10.2 acre parcel); and

2. The related Rezone (RZ 2022-002) changes the zoning designation of five (5) “Project sites” from Commercial Retail (CR) and/or Industrial General Commercial (IGC) to Mixed Use (MX) to align with GPA 2022-002.
2 WHEREAS, the City, in accordance with requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines prepared an Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration [one (1) per site, five (5) total ISMNDs], for General Plan Amendment 2022-002 and related Rezone 2022-002 herein incorporated by reference and included as Exhibit “1”; and WHEREAS, the City completed and filed a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration with the Monterey County Clerk on August 18, 2023 which commenced a 20-day local public review period starting on August 18, 2023 and ended on September 6, 2023; and posted the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration in locations throughout the City of Salinas City Hall and administrative offices on August 25, 2023; and WHEREAS, the City submitted the Mitigated Negative Declaration to the State Clearinghouse on August 18, 2023, which commenced a 20-day local public review period starting on August 18, 2023, and ending on September 6, 2023 (SCH Number 2023080480); and WHEREAS, on September 6, 2023, the Salinas Planning Commission, held a duly noticed public hearing to consider GPA 2022-002 and related Rezone 2022-002; and WHEREAS, at that meeting, the Planning Commission considered the Mitigated Negative Declarations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs (MMRPs) prepared for the proposed GPA 2022-002 and related RZ 2022-002 and independently determined that all impacts were adequately addressed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission also weighed the evidence presented at said public hearing, considered the staff report, determined that positive findings could be established for approval of the General Plan Amendment 2022-002 (GPA 2022-002) and approved Resolution No. 2023-08 recommending that the City Council approve a resolution adopting the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for all “five (5) projects sites” and approving GPA 2022-002 for only “four (4) project sites” removing “one (1) project site” that being “Foods Co Shopping Center”; and WHEREAS, on October 24, 2023, the City Council weighed the evidence presented at the public hearing, including the staff presentation and the Staff Report which is on file at the Salinas City Clerk’s Office and the Community Development Department, and all public testimony and documentary evidence introduced and received at the public hearing, together with the record of environmental review; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Salinas City Council herby approves a resolution:
a. Rescinding Resolution No. 22797 (N.C.S.);
b. Adopting the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration. c. Adopting the Mitigated Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) contained in Exhibit “2”;
d. Approving General Plan Amendment 2022-002; and
e. Adopting the following findings as the basis for its determination, and that the 3 foregoing recitations are true and correct, and are included herein by reference as findings:

For the Mitigated Negative Declaration:

The City Council hereby finds that a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared with respect to the project in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of 1970, as amended, and the guidelines promulgated thereunder. Further, this Council has independently reviewed and considered the information contained in the Initial Study and related environmental documents, together with the comments received during the public review process. On the basis of the whole record before it, the Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the Amendments will have a significant effect on the environment as the mitigation measures outlined in the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program reduce future project related impacts to less than significant level (see Exhibit “2” of attachment 1) and that the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the Council’s independent judgment and analysis. On this basis, the City Council adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

The environmental impacts of the project have been analyzed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Initial Study (one (1) per “Project site”, five (5) total ISMNDs) was prepared to evaluate the potential impacts associated with the project. Based upon review of the Initial Study, the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment because the mitigation measures outlined in the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs have been included in the project (Exhibit 2). The Initial Studies and Mitigated Negative Declarations were routed to responsible agencies on August 18, 2023, and posted at the County Clerk’s Office on August 18, 2023; the deadline for comments was September 6, 2023. The State Clearinghouse received the document on August 18, 2023; the deadline for Clearinghouse comments was September 6, 2023 (SCH Numbers 2023080480).

On June 14, 2022, the City of Salinas, pursuant to AB 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014) and SB 18 (Chapter 905, Statutes 2004) sent via certified mail notification letters to nine (9) California Native American Tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. The letter was sent to representatives of the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe, Esselen Tribe of Monterey County, Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan, Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation, Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, XolonSalinan Tribe, and Runsen Am:a Tur:ataj Ohlone. Consultation for AB 52 ended on July 14, 2022, and consultation for SB 18 ended on September 12, 2022.

Chairperson Louise Miranda-Ramirez of the Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation requested formal consultation on September 13, 2022. Formal consultation was held by telephone on June 21, 2023. Nine (9) mitigation measures were requested through the formal consultation. The requested mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project (Exhibit 2). No requests for 4 additional consultation were received.

It is noted that the circulated Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Sears (Northridge Mall) site incorrectly shows the proposed land use designation and zoning district applying to the total acreage of the site. The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration shows the proposed land use designation of Retail and zoning district of CR - Commercial Retail changing to Mixed Use for the entire 10.2-acre site; however, the proposed land use designation and zoning district would only apply to 8.41 acres. The remaining 1.79 acres would maintain the current land use designation and zoning district.

The final ordinance for City Council consideration reflects the correct acreage.

Further, removal of the 1.79 acres does not affect the analysis contained in the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration because the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration analyzed the maximum buildout of the entire 10.2 acres with mixed-use buildings. Therefore, the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration analyzed the “worst-case scenario” for development of the site with higher intensity uses.

For the General Plan Amendment 2022-002:

1. That the proposed General Plan Amendment is in conformance with all other goals, policies, programs, and land uses of the Salinas General Plan.

The proposed Amendment is consistent with Salinas General Plan Policies. The proposed General Plan Amendment would change the existing designation for the project site and amend the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Policy Map to align with the proposed rezoning of the site to Mixed Use. The Amendment would be consistent with the General Plan land use designation of the adjacent sites of the subject site. The proposed “Mixed Use” land use designation for the five Project sites is consistent with General Plan Goal H1, by providing a range of housing opportunities to adequately address existing and projected needs to Salinas. The proposed project also complies with General Plan Policy H-1.3, by identifying adequate sites to facilitate and encourage housing production for the existing and projected housing needs of the City. In addition, the project complies with General Plan Goal H-2, by maintaining and improving existing neighborhoods and housing stock and complies with General Plan Policy H-2.6, by encouraging the retention, rehabilitation, and new construction of high-density, well-designed housing in the Central City and other targeted areas, as discussed in the Land Use and Community Design Element.

2. That the proposed General Plan Amendment promotes the public necessity, convenience, and general welfare.

The General Plan Amendment promotes the public necessity, convenience, and general welfare because the proposal will create additional housing units the City of Salinas.

PASSED AND APPROVED this 24
th day of October 2023, by the following vote:
5 AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
______________________________
Kimbley Craig, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Patricia M. Barajas, City Clerk
Attachments:

Reso Exhibit 1: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND), dated August 2023
Reso Exhibit 2: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Reso Exhibit 3: Proposed General Plan Amendment 2022-002 and Rezone 2022- 002 Map

EXHIBIT A

PROJECT LOCATION

ALISAL MARKETPLACE

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT A

EDGE OF DOWNTOWN/FRONT AND JOHN STREETS

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT A

FOODS CO SHOPPING CENTER

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT A

LAUREL WEST SHOPPING CENTER

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT A

SEARS (NORTHRDIGE MALL)

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 1 of 10 ends

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING CODE DESIGNATIONS

ALISAL MARKETPLACE

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 2 of 10 ends

ALISAL MARKETPLACE

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 3 of 10 ends

EDGE OF DOWNTOWN/FRONT AND JOHN STREETS

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 4 of 10 ends

EDGE OF DOWNTOWN/FRONT AND JOHN STREETS

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 5 of 10 ends

FOODS CO SHOPPING CENTER

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 6 of 10 ends

FOODS CO SHOPPING CENTER

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 7 of 10 ends

LAUREL WEST SHOPPING CENTER

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 8 of 10 ends

LAUREL WEST SHOPPING CENTER

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 9 of 10 ends

SEARS (NORTHRIDGE MALL)

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 10 of 10 ends

SEARS (NORTHRIDGE MALL)

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION
Exhibit C
Summary of Project Sites and proposed changes.

Alisal Marketplace
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the redevelopment of 18 parcels (12.1 acres) adjacent to East Alisal Street between Front Street and Griffin Street (“Alisal Marketplace”) into a new mixed-use neighborhood that integrates housing and services with public open space and educational and civic buildings, including a new police station. The site is currently occupied by mostly light-industrial uses and big-box retail buildings.

The City considers the Project site to have significant redevelopment potential and proposes to change the land use designation and zoning district to facilitate future mixed-use development.

The Project site is also within a Federal Opportunity Zone (ID 06053014500) with access to public transit.

GPA No. 2022-002 includes a land use change from Retail and General Commercial/Light Industrial to Mixed-Use. Rezone No. 2022-002 includes a rezone from CR – Commercial Retail and IGC – Industrial General Commercial to MX – Mixed Use, consistent with the proposed land use designation. There are existing commercial uses such as adult entertainment facilities, vehicle sales and services, among other uses, which are not permitted in the MX zoning district per Salinas Zoning Code Section 37-30.240 and would become legal, non-conforming uses subject to Salinas Zoning Code Section 37-50.160. Other existing uses, such as service stations, may require a Conditional Use Permit for any proposed expansions or changes to use.

Although the Project does not involve construction or physical changes to the site, the land use and zoning district changes could facilitate the development of up to 515 housing units and 131,406 square feet of commercial uses based on MX development standards.

The Project site is generally surrounded by a mix of commercial and industrial uses. As referenced in Table 3, all properties to the north, south, east, and west are planned and zoned for commercial and industrial uses. A segment of Union Pacific Railroad is located adjacent to the west of the site.

Table 3. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Alisal Marketplace Direction
from the
Project
site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District
North
Industrial (San Juanita Tostada
Factory), Services (Republic Services),
and Commercial (wholesale, used
appliance store, and golf cart dealer)
General Industrial,
General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Industrial
General,
Industrial
General
Commercial
South
Public (Salinas Police Department),
Service (PG&E), and Commercial
(auto care, gas station, tire shop)
General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Industrial
General
Commercial
East
Commercial (laundromat, window
installation service)
General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Industrial
General
Commercial
West Railroad – Union Pacific
General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Industrial
General
Commercial
Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the redevelopment of 8 parcels (3.7 acres) adjacent to John Street between Abbott Street and Front Street (“Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets”) into a new mixed-use neighborhood that provides higher density housing opportunities. The site is currently occupied by a mix of retail and office uses (KSBW television station). The City considers the Project site to have significant redevelopment potential. The land use and zoning district changes would extend the mixed-use land use designation and zoning of the parcels west of the site that front John Street, providing a greater opportunity for lot assemblage to make higher density housing projects economically feasible.

GPA 2022-002 includes a land use change from CR – Commercial Retail and Residential Low Density to Mixed-Use. Rezone 2022-002 includes a rezone from CR – Commercial Retail and RL – Residential Low Density to MX – Mixed Use, consistent with the proposed land use designation. The proposed land use and zoning changes are shown in Exhibit B. The site is also located in the Downtown Neighborhood Area of the CC – Central City Overlay Zone District. No change is proposed to the Overlay. On the Project site, all existing uses are permitted in the MX zoning district per Salinas Zoning Ordinance Section 37-30.240; however, some existing uses, such as parking lots and structures, may require a Conditional Use Permit for any proposed changes to use.

Although the Project does not involve construction or physical changes to the site, the land use and zoning district changes could facilitate the development of up to 296 housing units and 161,172 square feet of commercial uses based on MX development standards.

The Project site is generally surrounded by a mix of retail, residential, commercial, and industrial uses. As referenced in Table 4, properties to the north and east are planned and zoned for commercial and light industrial uses. Properties south and west are planned and zoned for residential and mixed uses. Abbott Street, a six-land major arterial, serves as a defining line between the residential and mixed-use parcels and the commercial and light industrial parcels.

Table 4. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Edge of Downtown Direction from
the Project site Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District North
Green Space/Park, Industrial
(building materials supplier) and
Commercial (garden equipment
store)
Park, General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Park,
Industrial
General
Commercial
South
Single-Family and Multi-Family
Residences, Commercial (motel)
Residential Low
Density, Mixed Use
Residential
Low
Density,
Mixed Use
East
Commercial (auto repair shop, auto
body shop), Industrial (storage)
General Commercial/
Light Industrial,
Office
Industrial
General
Commercial,
Commercial
Office
West
Commercial (auto repair shop, gas
station), Single-Family and MultiFamily Residences
Residential Medium
Density, Residential
Low Density, Mixed
Use
Residential
Medium
Density,
Residential
Low
Density,
Mixed Use
Foods Co Shopping Center
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the development of 8 parcels (13.5 acres) on the southeast corner of East Alisal Street and South Sanborn Road (“Foods Co Shopping Center”) into mixed-use villages with critically needed housing units. The site is currently developed with big-box retail buildings, including Foods Co, Fallas Discount Store, and smaller retail and commercial services. Recently, several big box retail establishments either declared bankruptcy or were at risk of declaring bankruptcy. In consideration of these conditions, the Advance Planning and Project Implementation and Housing staff reviewed conditions for the appropriate moment to re-imagine these properties.

GPA 2022-002 includes a land use change from CR – Commercial Retail to Mixed-Use. Rezone 2022-002 includes a rezone from CR – Commercial Retail to MX – Mixed Use, consistent with the proposed land use designation. The proposed land use and zoning changes are shown in Exhibit B. On the Project site, there are existing restaurant and financial services with drive-through uses and vehicle related sales and service uses, among other uses, that are not permitted in the MX zoning district per Salinas Zoning Code Section 37-30.240 and would become legal, nonconforming uses subject to Salinas Zoning Code Section 37-50.160. Other existing uses, such as service stations, may require a Conditional Use Permit for any proposed changes to use. Although the Project does not involve construction or physical changes to the site, the land use and zoning district changes could facilitate the development of up to 576 housing units and 147,015 square feet of commercial use based on MX development standards.

The Project site is generally surrounded by a mix of commercial and residential uses. As referenced in Table 5, properties to the south, east, and west are planned and zoned for residential uses, and properties to the north and west are planned and zoned for retail uses. El Sausal Middle School is located north of the Project site across from East Alisal Street.

Table 5. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Foods Co Shopping Center Direction
from the
Project site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District
North
Commercial (auto parts store,
shopping mall), Services (loan
agency, tax preparation service),
School (El Sausal Middle
School)
Retail,
Public/Semipublic
Commercial Retail,
Public/Semipublic
South
Apartments, Single-Family
Residences
Residential High
Density,
Residential Low
Density
Residential High
Density,
Residential Low
Density
East
Religious (Vineyard Christian
Fellowship), Single-Family
Residences
Residential High
Density,
Residential Low
Density
Residential High
Density,
Residential Low
Density
West
Commercial (supermarket,
grocery), Services (ATM),
Single-Family Residences
Retail, Residential
Low Density
Commercial Retail,
Residential Low
Density
Traffic- Foods Co Shopping Center
Concerns about increased parking and traffic were raised at the Planning Commission hearing for the proposed rezone request. Included in the CEQA analysis for this rezone application is a comparison of traffic generated by existing allowed uses and uses that will be allowed when the property is rezoned. This analysis is described below.

Existing Trip Generation. Table 6 below provides the land uses and size of all existing structures on the Project site, as well as the trip generation of each use. ITE land use code 820 – Shopping Center was used to describe the site’s existing commercial uses, including Foods Co, restaurants, bank, and other services. The existing operations of the Project site are estimated to generate 5,996 Average Daily Trips (ADT).

Table 6. Existing Trip Generation
ITE Land Use
Commercial
(Square
Footage)
Trip Generation
(ADT)
Trip Generation
(ADT)
820 - Shopping Center (>150k) 162,019 37.01 5,996
Trip Generation of Proposed Project. Table 7 below provides the Project trip generation anticipated with max buildout of the site if rezoned. The ITE land use that was used for this analysis is the Mid Rise with Ground Floor Commercial land use (ITE Code 231, 10th Edition). A Mid Rise with Ground Floor Commercial is a mixed-use multifamily housing building with between four and 10 floors of residential living space and commercial space open to the public on the ground level. The proposed Project is anticipated to generate 1,982 ADT.

Table 7 Trip Generation of Proposed Project
ITE Land Use Residential
(DU)
Trip Generation
(ADT)
Trip Generation
(ADT)
231- Mid Rise with Ground Floor
Commercial 576 3.44 1,982
As demonstrated above, full buildout under the implementation of the proposed Project will generate 4,014 less ADT than existing operations on the Project site. Thus mixed use projects developed under the proposed zoning will result in less traffic generated from shopping center uses within the footprint of the existing buildings.

Laurel West Shopping Center
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the development of 6 parcels (16.2 acres) east of North Davis Road between West Laurel Drive/Calle Del Adobe and Larkin Street (“Laurel West Shopping Center”) into mixed-use villages with critically needed housing units. The site is currently developed with big-box retail buildings, including Kmart (permanently closed), and smaller retail and commercial services. Recently, several big box retail establishments either declared bankruptcy or were at risk of declaring bankruptcy. In consideration of these conditions, the Advance Planning and Project Implementation and Housing staff reviewed conditions for the appropriate moment to re-imagine these properties.

GPA 2022-002 includes a land use change from Retail to Mixed-Use. Rezone 2022-002 includes a rezone from CR – Commercial Retail to MX – Mixed Use, consistent with the proposed land use designation. The proposed land use and zoning changes are shown in Exhibit B. On the Project site, there are existing restaurant and financial services with drive-through uses and service station with vehicle washing uses, among other uses, which are not permitted in the MX zoning district per Salinas Zoning Code Section 37-30.240 and would become legal, non-conforming uses subject to Salinas Zoning Code Section 37-50.160. Other existing uses, such as service stations, may require a Conditional Use Permit for any proposed changes to their use.

Although the Project does not involve construction or physical changes to the site, the land use and zoning district changes could facilitate the development of up to 691 housing units and 176,418 square feet of commercial uses based on MX development standards.

The Project site is generally surrounded by a mix of residential, commercial, and service uses. As referenced in Table 8, all properties to the north are planned and zoned for retail. Properties south and east are planned and zoned for residential uses, and properties west of the Project site are planned and zoned for a mix of retail, public/semipublic, and residential uses.

Table 8. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Laurel West Shopping Center Direction
from the
Project site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District
North Ponding Basin Retail Commercial Retail
South Single-Family Dwellings Residential Medium
Density
Residential
Medium Density
East Single-Family Dwellings Residential Medium
Density
Residential
Medium Density
West
Commercial (IHOP, Carl’s
Jr.), Service (US Postal
Service), Apartments
Retail,
Public/Semipublic,
Residential Medium
Density
Commercial
Retail,
Public/Semipublic,
Residential
Medium Density
Sears (Northridge Mall)
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the development of 1 parcel (8.41 acres; portion) on the northwest corner of North Main Street and Madrid Street (“Sears (Northridge Mall)”) into mixed-use villages with critically needed housing units. The site is currently developed with a big-box retail building. Recently, the big box retail establishment on site had declared bankruptcy and is permanently closed. In consideration of these conditions, the Advance Planning and Project Implementation and Housing staff reviewed conditions for the appropriate moment to re-imagine these properties.

1.79 acres would maintain the Retail land use and CR – Commercial Retail zoning designation.

Although the Project does not involve construction or physical changes to the site, the land use and zoning district changes could facilitate the development of up to 435 housing units and 111,078 square feet of commercial uses based on MX development standards.

The Project site is generally surrounded by a mix of residential and retail uses. As referenced in Table 9 all properties to the north and east are planned and zoned for retail, and properties to the south and west are planned and zoned for residential uses.

Table 9. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Sears (Northridge Mall) Direction
from the
Project site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District
North Retail (Northridge Mall) Retail Commercial
Retail
South Apartments Residential High
Density
Residential
High Density
East Retail, Restaurants Retail Commercial
Retail
West Apartments Residential High
Density
Residential
High Density
At the Planning Commission hearing for the proposed rezone request, concerns were raised concerning existing retail type uses that would no longer be permitted in the MX zone district that are currently permitted in the existing CR zone district. It should be noted that new drive-through uses and vehicle service-related uses such as vehicle washing uses and repair shops, among others, would not be permitted in the MX zone district per Salinas Zoning Code Section 37-30.240.

However, all existing uses would be allowed to continue to operate and would become legal, nonconforming uses subject to Salinas Zoning Code Section 37-50.160. It should be noted that the MX zone district allows most retail uses, restaurants and entertainment uses (CUP).

August 31, 2023
Oscar Resendiz
City of Salinas
65 West Alisal Street, 2nd Floor
Salinas, CA 93901
RE: City of Salinas General Plan Amendment No. 2022-002 and Rezone No. 2022-002 for Alisal Marketplace
Dear Mr. Resendiz:

Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) provides public transportation throughout Monterey County and operates an extensive bus network in the City of Salinas. MST has reviewed the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the City of Salinas General Plan Amendment and Rezone Project for Alisal Marketplace and would like to make the following comments.

MST serves, operates, and maintains six (6) stops within the project’s vicinity with four (4) routes: Lines 23, 41, 42, and 96. Bus Stop No. 3401 (Alisal / Work) serves lines 41 and 42 in the eastbound direction.

Bus Stop No. 3467 (E Alisal / Work) serves lines 41 and 42 in the westbound direction. Both stops are adjacent to the project site and provide service every 15 minutes on weekdays and every 30 minutes on weekends.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)
The VMT reduction column under Table 4-8 Scoping Plan Reduction Measures Consistency Analysis mentions that the project site has 6 bus stops within 1000 feet of the project site. Please provide the full list of stops and a vicinity map with all 6 bus stops:

1. Alisal / Work (Stop ID: 3401)

2. E. Alisal / Work (Stop ID: 3467)

3. E. Alisal / California (Stop ID: 6094)

4. E. Alisal / Front (Stop ID: 6085)

5. E. Alisal / Soledad (Stop ID: 6082)

6. E. Alisal / Soledad (Stop ID: 6097)
MST also recommends that future developers incorporate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure along the project site that are in accordance with AMBAG’s 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (MTP/SCS) plan. The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixeduse can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

Transportation
Although no development is proposed at this time, the future development of the project site could result in an increase in traffic and demand for transportation alternatives. Access to adequate transit services can help mitigate both the environmental and transportation related impacts of new developments. Therefore, it is crucial for future developers to incorporate transit into their plans, including bus stop infrastructure improvements and enrolling in MST’s Group Discount Program.

Please make the following corrections:
• Page 129: There is one (1) bus stop adjacent to the site (“East Alisal/Work” Stop ID: 3467) on East Alisal Street and Work Street for Route Line 41 – Salinas-Alisal-Northridge and Line 42 – Salinas-Alisal operated by the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) with service every 15 minutes on weekdays and every 30 minutes on weekends.
• Page 138: Page 129: There is one (1) bus stop adjacent to the site (“East Alisal/Work” Stop ID:
3467) on East Alisal Street and Work Street for Route Line 41 – Salinas-Alisal-Northridge and Line 42 – Salinas-Alisal operated by the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) with service every 15 minutes on weekdays and every 30 minutes on weekends.

Closing
As this project moves forward, and a development is proposed, we ask that the City of Salinas continue to collaborate with MST to ensure that adequate transit service is available to this site. If you have any questions about the above comments, please do not hesitate to contact me at [email protected] or 831-264- 9288.

Sincerely,
Emma Patel
Planning Manager
August 31, 2023
Oscar Resendiz
City of Salinas
65 West Alisal Street, 2nd Floor
Salinas, CA 93901
RE: City of Salinas General Plan Amendment No. 2022-002 and Rezone No. 2022-002 for Edge of Downtown/ Front and John Streets
Dear Mr. Resendiz:

Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) provides public transportation throughout Monterey County and operates an extensive bus network in the City of Salinas. MST has reviewed the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the City of Salinas General Plan Amendment and Rezone Project for Edge of Downtown/ Front and John Streets and would like to make the following comments.

MST serves, operates, and maintains three (3) stops within the project’s vicinity, with hourly service on Line 96.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)
The VMT reduction column under Table 4-8 Scoping Plan Reduction Measures Consistency Analysis mentions that the project site has three (3) bus stops within 1000 feet of the project site. Please provide the full list of stops and a vicinity map with all three (3) bus stops:

1. Front / Summer (Stop ID: 3794)

2. Abbott / John Street (Stop ID: 2341)

3. Abbott / Maple (Stop ID: 3789)
MST also recommends that future developers incorporate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure along the project site that are in accordance with AMBAG’s 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (MTP/SCS) plan. The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixeduse can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) provides public transportation throughout Monterey County and operates an extensive bus network in the City of Salinas. MST has reviewed the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the City of Salinas General Plan Amendment and Rezone Project for Foods Co and would like to make the following comments.

MST serves, operates, and maintains five (5) bus stops within the project’s vicinity, which currently serve Lines 41 and 42 with service every 15 minutes on weekdays and every 30 minutes on weekends.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG)
The VMT reduction column under Table 4-8 Scoping Plan Reduction Measures Consistency Analysis mentions that the project site has five (5) bus stops within 1000 feet of the project site. Please provide the full list of stops and a vicinity map with all five (5) bus stops:

1. E Alisal / Towt (Stop ID: 3416)

2. E Alisal/ Towt (Stop ID: 3452)

3. E Alisal/ Sanborn (Stop ID: 3413)

4. E Alisal/ Felice (Stop ID: 3458)

5. E Alisal / Felice (Stop ID: 3410)
MST also recommends that future developers incorporate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure along the project site that are in accordance with AMBAG’s 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (MTP/SCS) plan. The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixeduse can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) provides public transportation throughout Monterey County and operates an extensive bus network in the City of Salinas. MST has reviewed the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the City of Salinas General Plan Amendment and Rezone Project for Laurel West Shopping Center and would like to make the following comments.

MST serves, operates, and maintains five (5) bus stops within the project’s vicinity, which currently serve Line 44 with hourly service daily.

1. Davis / Post (Stop ID: 3250)

2. Larkin / Davis (Stop ID: 3281)

3. Larkin / Davis (Stop ID: 3288)

4. Larkin / Larkin Circle (Stop ID: 3291)

5. Larkin / Larkin Circle (Stop ID: 3278)
MST also recommends that future developers incorporate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure along the project site that are in accordance with AMBAG’s 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (MTP/SCS) plan. The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixeduse can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

Sincerely,
Emma Patel
Planning Manager
August 31, 2023
Oscar Resendiz
City of Salinas
65 West Alisal Street, 2nd Floor
Salinas, CA 93901
RE: Sears (Northridge Mall) General Plan Amendment and Rezone Project (General Plan Amendment No. 2022-002 and Rezone No. 2022-002)
Dear Mr. Resendiz:

Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) provides public transportation throughout Monterey County and operates an extensive bus network in the City of Salinas. MST has reviewed the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Sears General Plan Amendment and Rezone Project and would like to make the following comments.

MST serves, operates, and maintains two (2) stops within the project’s vicinity, which currently serve Lines 41, 48, 49 and 95. The Northridge Mall stop (Stop ID: 0011) is located north of the project site (Planet Fitness entrance) and is serviced every 30 minutes and 1.5 hours by Lines 41, 48, and 95. The N Main / Big 5 Sporting Goods Store stop (Stop ID: 6043) is east of the project site and is serviced by Line 49 and Line 95 every 30 minutes. Most importantly, both stops have some of the highest ridership in the City of Salinas (Note: Salinas has a total of 265 bus stops). The Northridge stop is ranked 4thfor the highest ridership with an average of 142 daily boardings and 124 alightings. The Big 5 Sporting Goods Store stop is ranked 18th with 27 daily average boardings and 4 alightings. Please visit MST’s website for more information regarding routes and schedules: https://mst.org/.

Transportation
Although no development is proposed at this time, the future development of the project site could result in an increase in traffic and demand for transportation alternatives. Access to adequate transit services can help mitigate both the environmental and transportation related impacts of new developments. Therefore, it is crucial for future developers to incorporate transit into their plans by allowing MST to service the Northridge Mall stop and have access to both driveways (vehicle entrance and exit) on Madrid Street.

1. Northridge Mall (Stop ID: 0011)

2. N Main / Big 5 Sport Store (Stop ID: 6043)

3. N Main / Madrid (Stop ID: 6033)

4. Harden / East Entrance to Shopping Center (Stop ID: 3152)

5. Harden / Entrance to Target Lot (Stop ID: 3149)

6. N Main / Firestone Svc Stn (Stop ID: 6040)
MST also recommends that future developers incorporate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure along N.

Main Street and Madrid Street that are in accordance with AMBAG’s 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (MTP/SCS) plan. The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixed-use can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

Sincerely,
Emma Patel
Planning Manager
Exhibit E:

Comments Received and Responses
Comments Received at the September 6, 2023 Planning Commission Agency Responses:

Public comment was received via email from Emma Patel, Planning Manager, Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) on August 31, 2023. Comments and response to comments are provided below and are also provided in the revised Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declarations as attachments to this report.

Alisal Marketplace
Minor changes to this IS/MND were made in September 2023 in response to a comment letter received via email from the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) on August 31, 2023 during the 20-day public review period. The MST comments include the following:

1. Alisal / Work (Stop ID: 3401)

2. E. Alisal / Work (Stop ID: 3467)

3. E. Alisal / California (Stop ID: 6094)

4. E. Alisal / Front (Stop ID: 6085)

5. E. Alisal / Soledad (Stop ID: 6082)

The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixed-use can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

Transportation
Although no development is proposed at this time, the future development of the project site could result in an increase in traffic and demand for transportation alternatives.

Access to adequate transit services can help mitigate both the environmental and transportation related impacts of new developments. Therefore, it is crucial for future developers to incorporate transit into their plans, including bus stop infrastructure improvements and enrolling in MST’s Group Discount Program.

Please make the following corrections:

Page 129 ends

on East Alisal Street and Work Street for Route Line 41 – Salinas-Alisal-Northridge and Line 42 – Salinas-Alisal operated by the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) with service every 15 minutes on weekdays and every 30 minutes on weekends.

Page 138 ends

Stop ID: 3467) on East Alisal Street and Work Street for Route Line 41 – Salinas-AlisalNorthridge and Line 42 – Salinas-Alisal operated by the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) with service every 15 minutes on weekdays and every 30 minutes on weekends.

MST’s comments have been addressed through minor changes to this IS/MND. The minor changes are indicated by red underlined text within the document and include in-text changes to SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION (current section), SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS and addition of Appendix G (Public Review Comment Letter). The in-text changes are summarized as follows:
 Page 9: Addition of Appendix G and Section 1.4. Document Revisions  Page 85: Clarification of MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 87: Addition of figure showing MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 88: Addition of complete streets language
 Page 131: Clarification of MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 132: Addition of language describing the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
 Page 141: Clarification of MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity Recirculation of this IS/MND is not required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 because the requested changes by MST do not constitute a “substantial revision” whereby a “substantial revision” means: 1) a new, avoidable significant effect is identified, and mitigation measures or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect of insignificance, or 2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required.

The requested changes by MST do not introduce new avoidable significant effects or mitigation measures. Therefore, recirculation pursuant to CEQA guidelines is not required.

Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets
Minor changes to this IS/MND were made in September 2023 in response to a comment letter received via email from the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) on August 31, 2023 during the 20-day public review period. The MST comments include the following:

1. Front / Summer (Stop ID: 3794)

2. Abbott / John Street (Stop ID: 2341)

The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixed-use can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

Transportation
Although no development is proposed at this time, the future development of the project site could result in an increase in traffic and demand for transportation alternatives.

MST’s comments have been addressed through minor changes to this IS/MND. The minor changes are indicated by red underlined text within the document and include in-text changes to SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION (current section), SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS and addition of Appendix G (Public Review Comment Letter). The in-text changes are summarized as follows:
 Page 9: Addition of Appendix G and Section 1.4. Document Revisions  Page 82: Clarification of MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 84: Addition of figure showing MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 85: Addition of complete streets language
 Page 127: Addition of language describing the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
Recirculation of this IS/MND is not required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 because the requested changes by MST do not constitute a “substantial revision” whereby a “substantial revision” means: 1) a new, avoidable significant effect is identified, and mitigation measures or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect of insignificance, or 2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required.

The requested changes by MST do not introduce new avoidable significant effects or mitigation measures. Therefore, recirculation pursuant to CEQA guidelines is not required.

Foods Co Shopping Center
Minor changes to this IS/MND were made in September 2023 in response to a comment letter received via email from the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) on August 31, 2023 during the 20-day public review period. The MST comments include the following:

1. E Alisal / Towt (Stop ID: 3416)

2.E Alisal/ Towt (Stop ID: 3452)

3.E Alisal/ Sanborn (Stop ID: 3413)

4.E Alisal/ Felice (Stop ID: 3458)

The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixed-use can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

Transportation
Although no development is proposed at this time, the future development of the project site could result in an increase in traffic and demand for transportation alternatives.

MST’s comments have been addressed through minor changes to this IS/MND. The minor changes are indicated by red underlined text within the document and include in-text changes to SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION (current section), SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS and addition of Appendix G (Public Review Comment Letter). The in-text changes are summarized as follows:
 Page 9: Addition of Appendix G and Section 1.4. Document Revisions  Page 85: Clarification of MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 88: Addition of figure showing MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 89: Addition of complete streets language
 Page 131: Addition of language describing the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
Recirculation of this IS/MND is not required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 because the requested changes by MST do not constitute a “substantial revision” whereby a “substantial revision” means: 1) a new, avoidable significant effect is identified, and mitigation measures or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect of insignificance, or 2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required.

The requested changes by MST do not introduce new avoidable significant effects or mitigation measures. Therefore, recirculation pursuant to CEQA guidelines is not required.

Laurel West Shopping Center
Minor changes to this IS/MND were made in September 2023 in response to a comment letter received via email from the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) on August 31, 2023 during the 20-day public review period. The MST comments include the following:

1. Davis / Post (Stop ID: 3250)

2. Larkin / Davis (Stop ID: 3281)

3. Larkin / Davis (Stop ID: 3288)

4. Larkin / Larkin Circle (Stop ID: 3291)

The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixed-use can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

Transportation
Although no development is proposed at this time, the future development of the project site could result in an increase in traffic and demand for transportation alternatives.

MST’s comments have been addressed through minor changes to this IS/MND. The minor changes are indicated by red underlined text within the document and include in-text changes to SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION (current section), SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS and addition of Appendix G (Public Review Comment Letter). The in-text changes are summarized as follows:
 Page 9: Addition of Appendix G and Section 1.4. Document Revisions  Page 84: Clarification of MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 86: Addition of figure showing MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 87: Addition of complete streets language
 Page 130: Addition of language describing the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
Recirculation of this IS/MND is not required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 because the requested changes by MST do not constitute a “substantial revision” whereby a “substantial revision” means: 1) a new, avoidable significant effect is identified, and mitigation measures or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect of insignificance, or 2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required.

The requested changes by MST do not introduce new avoidable significant effects or mitigation measures. Therefore, recirculation pursuant to CEQA guidelines is not required.

Sears (Northridge Mall)
Minor changes to this IS/MND were made in September 2023 in response to a comment letter received via email from the Monterey-Salinas Transit District (MST) on August 31, 2023 during the 20-day public review period. The MST comments include the following:

Transportation
Although no development is proposed at this time, the future development of the project site could result in an increase in traffic and demand for transportation alternatives.

Access to adequate transit services can help mitigate both the environmental and transportation related impacts of new developments. Therefore, it is crucial for future developers to incorporate transit into their plans by allowing MST to service the Northridge Mall stop and have access to both driveways (vehicle entrance and exit) on Madrid Street.

1. Northridge Mall (Stop ID: 0011)

2. N Main / Big 5 Sport Store (Stop ID: 6043)

3. N Main / Madrid (Stop ID: 6033)

4. Harden / East Entrance to Shopping Center (Stop ID: 3152)

5. Harden / Entrance to Target Lot (Stop ID: 3149)

6. N Main / Firestone Svc Stn (Stop ID: 6040)
MST also recommends that future developers incorporate pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure along N. Main Street and Madrid Street that are in accordance with AMBAG’s 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategies (MTP/SCS) plan. The implementation of complete streets in areas with mixed-use can mitigate the project’s potential increase in GHG emissions.

MST’s comments have been addressed through minor changes to this IS/MND. The minor changes are indicated by red underlined text within the document and include in-text changes to SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION (current section), SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS and addition of Appendix G (Public Review Comment Letter). The in-text changes are summarized as follows:
 Page 9: Addition of Appendix G and Section 1.4. Document Revisions  Page 81: Clarification of MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 83: Addition of figure showing MST bus stops/lines serving the Project vicinity  Page 84: Addition of complete streets language
 Page 125: Addition of language describing the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy
Recirculation of this IS/MND is not required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5 because the requested changes by MST do not constitute a “substantial revision” whereby a “substantial revision” means: 1) a new, avoidable significant effect is identified, and mitigation measures or project revisions must be added in order to reduce the effect of insignificance, or 2) the lead agency determines that the proposed mitigation measures or project revisions will not reduce potential effects to less than significance and new measures or revisions must be required.

The requested changes by MST do not introduce new avoidable significant effects or mitigation measures. Therefore, recirculation pursuant to CEQA guidelines is not required.

Page | 1

CITY OF SALINAS

PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 6, 2023
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: LISA BRINTON, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
THROUGH: GRANT LEONARD, PLANNING MANAGER
BY: OSCAR RESENDIZ, ASSOCIATE PLANNER
TITLE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2022-002 AND REZONE 2022-002;

AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION OF FIVE (5) “PROJECT SITES” TO MIXED USE AND REZONE THE SAME FIVE (5) “PROJECT SITES” TO MIXED-USE (MX)

1. ALISAL MARKETPLACE;

2. EDGE OF DOWNTOWN/FRONT AND JOHN STREETS;

3. FOODS CO SHOPPING CENTER;

4. LAUREL WEST SHOPPING CENTER; AND

5. SEARS (NORTHRIDGE MALL) (PORTION)
RECOMMENDED MOTION:

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission affirm the findings and approve the attached Resolution recommending that the City Council: 1) adopt the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Programs; 2) approve a General Plan Amendment changing the General Plan Land Use Designations of five (5) “Project sites” to Mixed Use; and 3) adopt an Ordinance to rezone the same five (5) “Project sites” to Mixed Use (MX).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The City of Salinas is proposing General Plan Amendment (GPA) 2022-002 and Rezone (RZ) 2022-002 to change the land use designations and zoning districts of 5 “Project sites”: Alisal Marketplace, Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets, Foods Co Shopping Center, Laurel West Shopping Center, and Sears (Northridge Mall) (portion). An Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration have been prepared for each of the five (5) “Project sites” [five (5) total ISMNDs, Attachment D], which are known as ER 2022-010. The purpose of the GPA and RZ is to facilitate Page | 2
the production of housing, consistent with the City’s General Plan. The GPA and RZ would facilitate the development of up to approximately 2,513 housing units and 727,089 square feet of commercial uses.

DISCUSSION:

Background:

In December 2019, the City accepted an SB 2 grant award from the state Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) in the amount of $310,000. The SB 2 grant is awarded to cities for the preparation, adoption, and implementation of plans that streamline housing development approval and accelerate housing production. Grant funds are to be used to facilitate the production of housing by undertaking the necessary planning and environmental studies and analyses to consider changing land use and zoning designations of identified opportunity sites to allow for higher density residential or mixed-use development. This SB 2 grant award enabled the City to undertake the planning and environmental study and analysis required to prepare the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone for 5 identified sites summarized in Table 1 and are shown in Exhibit A – Project Location.

Table 1. Project Sites and Location Summary
Project Site Location Project Location Map Area
Alisal Marketplace Adjacent to East
Alisal Street
between Front
Street and Griffin
Street

12.1 acres
Page | 3
Edge of
Downtown/Front
and John Streets
Adjacent to John
Street between
Abbott Street and
Front Street

3.7 acres
Foods Co Shopping
Center
Southeast corner
of East Alisal
Street and South
Sanborn Road

13.5 acres
Laurel West
Shopping Center
East of North
Davis Road
between West
Laurel
Drive/Calle Del
Adobe and Larkin
Street

16.2 acres
Sears (Northridge
Mall) (portion)
Northwest corner
of North Main
Street and Madrid
Street

8.41 acres
of the 10.2
acre site is
proposed
to be
changed
as shown
in red.

The Project sites were identified as having the capability to provide more housing and mixed-use development consistent with the General Plan. The proposed General Plan Amendments and Rezones are shown in Exhibit B, and summarized in Table 2, below:

Page | 4
Table 2. Proposed Land Use Designation and Zoning District Changes Site General Plan
Land Use Designation
Zoning District
Existing Proposed Existing Proposed
Alisal Marketplace Retail /
General
Commercial/
Light
Industrial
Mixed Use Commercial
Retail
(CR)/Industrial
General
Commercial
(IGC)
Mixed Use (MX)
Edge of Downtown Retail /
Residential
Low Density
Mixed Use Commercial
Retail (CR) /
Residential Low
Density (R-L) /
Central City
(CC)
Mixed Use (MX) /
Central City (CC)
Laurel West
Shopping Center
Retail Mixed Use Commercial
Retail (CR)
Mixed Use (MX)
Foods Co Shopping
Center
Retail Mixed Use Commercial
Retail (CR)
Mixed Use (MX)
Sears (Northridge
Mall) (portion)
Retail Mixed Use* Commercial
Retail (CR)
Mixed Use (MX)*
*Note: 1.79 acres of the site will remain Retail and CR – Commercial Retail Alisal Marketplace
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the redevelopment of 18 parcels (12.1 acres) adjacent to East Alisal Street between Front Street and Griffin Street (“Alisal Marketplace”) into a new mixed-use neighborhood that integrates housing and services with public open space and educational and civic buildings, including a new police station. The site is currently occupied by mostly light-industrial uses and big-box retail buildings.

The City considers the Project site to have significant redevelopment potential and proposes to change the land use designation and zoning district to facilitate future mixed-use development.

The Project site is also within a Federal Opportunity Zone (ID 06053014500) with access to public transit.

Page | 5
Although the Project does not involve construction or physical changes to the site, the land use and zoning district changes could facilitate the development of up to 515 housing units and 131,406 square feet of commercial uses based on MX development standards.

Table 3. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Alisal Marketplace Direction
from the
Project
site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District
North
Industrial (San Juanita Tostada
Factory), Services (Republic Services),
and Commercial (wholesale, used
appliance store, and golf cart dealer)
General Industrial,
General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Industrial
General,
Industrial
General
Commercial
South
Public (Salinas Police Department),
Service (PG&E), and Commercial
(auto care, gas station, tire shop)
General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Industrial
General
Commercial
East Commercial (laundromat, window
installation service)
General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Industrial
General
Commercial
West Railroad – Union Pacific
General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Industrial
General
Commercial
Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the redevelopment of 8 parcels (3.7 acres) adjacent to John Street between Abbott Street and Front Street (“Edge of Downtown/Front and John Streets”) into a new mixed-use neighborhood that provides higher density housing opportunities. The site is currently occupied by a mix of retail and office uses (KSBW television station). The City considers the Project site to have significant redevelopment potential. The land use and zoning district changes would extend the mixed-use land use designation and zoning of the parcels west of the site that front John Street, providing a greater opportunity for lot assemblage to make higher density housing projects economically feasible.

GPA 2022-002 includes a land use change from CR – Commercial Retail and Residential Low Density to Mixed-Use. Rezone 2022-002 includes a rezone from CR – Commercial Retail and RL – Residential Low Density to MX – Mixed Use, consistent with the proposed land use designation. The proposed land use and zoning changes are shown in Exhibit B. The site is also located in the Downtown Neighborhood Area of the CC – Central City Overlay Zone District. No Page | 6
change is proposed to the Overlay. On the Project site, all existing uses are permitted in the MX zoning district per Salinas Zoning Ordinance Section 37-30.240; however, some existing uses, such as parking lots and structures, may require a Conditional Use Permit for any proposed changes to use.

Table 4. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Edge of Downtown Direction from
the Project site Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District North
Green Space/Park, Industrial
(building materials supplier) and
Commercial (garden equipment
store)
Park, General
Commercial/ Light
Industrial
Park,
Industrial
General
Commercial
South Single-Family and Multi-Family
Residences, Commercial (motel)
Residential Low
Density, Mixed Use
Residential
Low
Density,
Mixed Use
East Commercial (auto repair shop, auto
body shop), Industrial (storage)
General Commercial/
Light Industrial,
Office
Industrial
General
Commercial,
Commercial
Office
West
Commercial (auto repair shop, gas
station), Single-Family and MultiFamily Residences
Residential Medium
Density, Residential
Low Density, Mixed
Use
Residential
Medium
Density,
Residential
Low
Density,
Mixed Use
Foods Co Shopping Center
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the development of 8 parcels (13.5 acres) on the southeast corner of East Alisal Street and South Sanborn Road (“Foods Co Shopping Center”) into mixed-use villages with critically needed housing units. The Page | 7
site is currently developed with big-box retail buildings, including Foods Co, Fallas Discount Store, and smaller retail and commercial services. Recently, several big box retail establishments either declared bankruptcy or were at risk of declaring bankruptcy. In consideration of these conditions, the Advance Planning and Project Implementation and Housing staff reviewed conditions for the appropriate moment to re-imagine these properties.

Table 5. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Foods Co Shopping Center Direction
from the
Project site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District
North
Commercial (auto parts store,
shopping mall), Services (loan
agency, tax preparation service),
School (El Sausal Middle
School)
Retail,
Public/Semipublic
Commercial Retail,
Public/Semipublic
South Apartments, Single-Family
Residences
Residential High
Density,
Residential Low
Density
Residential High
Density,
Residential Low
Density
East
Religious (Vineyard Christian
Fellowship), Single-Family
Residences
Residential High
Density,
Residential Low
Density
Residential High
Density,
Residential Low
Density
West
Commercial (supermarket,
grocery), Services (ATM),
Single-Family Residences
Retail, Residential
Low Density
Commercial Retail,
Residential Low
Density
Page | 8
Laurel West Shopping Center
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the development of 6 parcels (16.2 acres) east of North Davis Road between West Laurel Drive/Calle Del Adobe and Larkin Street (“Laurel West Shopping Center”) into mixed-use villages with critically needed housing units. The site is currently developed with big-box retail buildings, including Kmart (permanently closed), and smaller retail and commercial services. Recently, several big box retail establishments either declared bankruptcy or were at risk of declaring bankruptcy. In consideration of these conditions, the Advance Planning and Project Implementation and Housing staff reviewed conditions for the appropriate moment to re-imagine these properties.

The Project site is generally surrounded by a mix of residential, commercial, and service uses. As referenced in Table 6, all properties to the north are planned and zoned for retail. Properties south and east are planned and zoned for residential uses, and properties west of the Project site are planned and zoned for a mix of retail, public/semipublic, and residential uses.

Table 6. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Laurel West Shopping Center Direction
from the
Project site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District
North Ponding Basin Retail Commercial Retail
South Single-Family Dwellings Residential Medium
Density
Residential
Medium Density
East Single-Family Dwellings Residential Medium
Density
Residential
Medium Density
West
Commercial (IHOP, Carl’s
Jr.), Service (US Postal
Service), Apartments
Retail,
Public/Semipublic,
Residential Medium
Density
Commercial
Retail,
Public/Semipublic,
Residential
Medium Density
Page | 9
Sears (Northridge Mall)
The purpose of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Rezone is to facilitate the development of 1 parcel (8.41 acres; portion) on the northwest corner of North Main Street and Madrid Street (“Sears (Northridge Mall)”) into mixed-use villages with critically needed housing units. The site is currently developed with a big-box retail building. Recently, the big box retail establishment on site had declared bankruptcy and is permanently closed. In consideration of these conditions, the Advance Planning and Project Implementation and Housing staff reviewed conditions for the appropriate moment to re-imagine these properties.

1.79 acres would maintain the Retail land use and CR – Commercial Retail zoning designation.

The Project site is generally surrounded by a mix of residential and retail uses. As referenced in Table 7 all properties to the north and east are planned and zoned for retail, and properties to the south and west are planned and zoned for residential uses.

Table 7. Land Uses and Zoning Districts Adjacent to Sears (Northridge Mall) Direction
from the
Project site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District
North Retail (Northridge Mall) Retail Commercial
Retail
South Apartments Residential High
Density
Residential
High Density
East Retail, Restaurants Retail Commercial
Retail
West Apartments Residential High
Density
Residential
High Density
Analysis:

General Plan Amendment
Per the 2002 Salinas General Plan, the Mixed-Use land use designation allows for development including a mixture of retail, office, and residential uses in the same building, on the same parcel or in the same area. The intent of this designation is to create activity centers with pedestrianoriented uses in certain portions of the City. The maximum intensity/density of development is 1.0 Page | 10
floor area ratio plus 10 dwelling units per acre throughout the City and a maximum intensity/density of development of 4.0 floor area ratio + 80 dwelling units per acre (for a total maximum allowable floor area ratio of 6.0) for projects within the Central City.

The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with General Plan Policies. The proposed General Plan Amendment would change the existing designations for the project sites and amend the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Policy Map to align with the proposed rezoning of each site to Mixed Use (MX). The General Plan Amendment would be compatible with the General Plan land use designation of the adjacent sites of each subject site.

The proposed “Mixed Use” land use designation for the five Project sites is consistent with General Plan Goal H-1, by providing a range of housing opportunities to adequately address existing and projected needs to Salinas. The proposed project also complies with General Plan Policy H-1.3, by identifying adequate sites to facilitate and encourage housing production for the existing and projected housing needs of the City. In addition, the project complies with General Plan Goal H2, by maintaining and improving existing neighborhoods and housing stock.

The proposed rezoning would be consistent with the Mixed-Use land use designation and CC Overlay District. Future development would comply with the development regulations and design standards of the MX District, by:
 Promoting and providing development opportunities for integrated, complementary housing and employment opportunities in the same building, on the same parcel or within the same block.
 Supporting transit use and providing a buffer between busy streets and residential neighborhoods and providing new housing opportunities in the city.  Promoting compact development that is intended to be pedestrian-oriented with buildings close to and oriented to the sidewalk.
 Promoting residential development that is appropriate in an urban setting in mixed use buildings by providing incentives, as well as standards and regulations to minimize conflicts between different types of uses.

FINDINGS:

Mitigated Negative Declaration:

Page | 11
Prior to recommending approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezone, the Planning Commission will need to determine that the proposed Mitigated Negative Declarations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs (ER 2022-010) are adequate for the proposed project by approving the attached Resolution.

General Plan Amendment/Rezone:

The Planning Commission may recommend approval of a General Plan Amendment and Rezone, if all the findings set forth in the attached Planning Commission Resolution are established. Per Zoning Code Section 37-60.920(d)(2), an affirmative vote of a majority (no less than four (4) votes) of the Planning Commission is required for the Commission to make a recommendation of the General Plan Amendment to the City Council. A draft ordinance for Rezone is provided for reference as an attachment to this staff report.

Time Consideration:

The proposed project includes a General Plan Amendment and Rezone, which are legislative acts and not subject to the Permit Streamlining Act (PSA).

CEQA CONSIDERATION:

The environmental impacts of the project have been analyzed in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). An Initial Study (one (1) per site, five (5) total ISMNDs) was prepared to evaluate the potential impacts associated with the project. Based upon review of the Initial Study, the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment because the mitigation measures outlined in the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been included in the project (Exhibit C). The Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declarations were routed to responsible agencies on August 18, 2023, and posted at the County Clerk’s Office on August 18, 2023; the deadline for comments is September 6, 2023. The State Clearinghouse received the document on August 18, 2023; the deadline for Clearinghouse comments is September 6, 2023 (SCH Numbers 2023080480).

Chairperson Louise Miranda-Ramirez of the Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation requested formal consultation on September 13, 2022. Formal consultation was held by telephone on June 21, 2023.

Nine (9) mitigation measures were requested through the formal consultation. The requested Page | 12
mitigation measures have been incorporated into the proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project (Exhibit C). No requests for additional consultation were received.

Agency Responses:

At the time that this Staff Report was written, no public comment was received. Any comments received will be addressed and included in the Planning Commission hearing and/or with the council staff report and Council hearing.

Alternatives Available to the Commission:

The Planning Commission has the following alternatives:

1. Affirm the findings set forth in the attached Resolution, recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve General Plan Amendment 2022-002, and Rezone 2022-002 with modifications; or

2. Find that the proposed applications are not appropriate and establish findings at the public hearing recommending that the City Council deny General Plan Amendment 2022-002 and Rezone 2022-002.

Conclusion:

The project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code. The project is intended to encourage future higher density development that would provide new housing consistent with the Salinas General Plan. The project does not involve construction or other physical changes to the site because there are currently no development proposals.

Page | 13
ATTACHMENTS:

Exhibit "A" Project Location
Exhibit "B" Existing Zoning District
Exhibit "C" Proposed General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map Exhibit “D” Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND), dated August 2023 Exhibit “E” Mitigated Monitoring and Reporting Programs Proposed Planning Commission Resolution, including the following exhibits:

Exhibit 1: Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program Exhibit 2: Proposed General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map

EXHIBIT A

PROJECT LOCATION

ALISAL MARKETPLACE

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT A

EDGE OF DOWNTOWN/FRONT AND JOHN STREETS

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT A

FOODS CO SHOPPING CENTER

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT A

LAUREL WEST SHOPPING CENTER

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT A

SEARS (NORTHRDIGE MALL)

PROJECT LOCATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 1 of 10 ends

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING CODE DESIGNATIONS

ALISAL MARKETPLACE

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 2 of 10 ends

ALISAL MARKETPLACE

EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 3 of 10 ends

EDGE OF DOWNTOWN/FRONT AND JOHN STREETS

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 4 of 10 ends

EDGE OF DOWNTOWN/FRONT AND JOHN STREETS

EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 5 of 10 ends

FOODS CO SHOPPING CENTER

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 6 of 10 ends

FOODS CO SHOPPING CENTER

EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 7 of 10 ends

LAUREL WEST SHOPPING CENTER

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 8 of 10 ends

LAUREL WEST SHOPPING CENTER

EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 9 of 10 ends

SEARS (NORTHRIDGE MALL)

EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT B

Page 10 of 10 ends

SEARS (NORTHRIDGE MALL)

EXISTING ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 1 of 10 ends

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AND ZONING CODE DESIGNATIONS

ALISAL MARKETPLACE

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 2 of 10 ends

ALISAL MARKETPLACE

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 3 of 10 ends

EDGE OF DOWNTOWN/FRONT AND JOHN STREETS

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 4 of 10 ends

EDGE OF DOWNTOWN/FRONT AND JOHN STREETS

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 5 of 10 ends

FOODS CO SHOPPING CENTER

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 6 of 10 ends

FOODS CO SHOPPING CENTER

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 7 of 10 ends

LAUREL WEST SHOPPING CENTER

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 8 of 10 ends

LAUREL WEST SHOPPING CENTER

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 9 of 10 ends

SEARS (NORTHRIDGE MALL)

PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION

EXHIBIT C

Page 10 of 10 ends

SEARS (NORTHRIDGE MALL)

PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION
City of Salinas General Plan Amendment No. 2022-002 and Rezone No. 2022-002 for Alisal Marketplace
INITIAL STUDY – MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AUGUST 2023
Prepared for
City of Salinas
Community Development Department
65 West Alisal Street, 2nd Floor
Salinas, CA 93901

SALINAS
RICH lN .LANO . IOCH lN VALugs

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 2 Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................... 8

1.1 Regulatory Information................................................................................................................. 8

1.2 Purpose of the Initial Study........................................................................................................... 8

1.3 Document Format......................................................................................................................... 9 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM.................................................................................................. 10

2.1 Project Title................................................................................................................................. 10

2.2 Lead Agency Name and Address................................................................................................. 10

2.3 Contact Person and Phone Number ........................................................................................... 10

2.4 Study Prepared By....................................................................................................................... 10

2.5 Project Location .......................................................................................................................... 10

2.6 Latitude and Longitude ............................................................................................................... 10

2.7 General Plan Designation............................................................................................................ 16

2.8 Zoning ......................................................................................................................................... 16

2.9 Description of Project ................................................................................................................. 21

2.10 Project Setting and Surrounding Land Uses................................................................................ 22

2.11 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required................................................................... 23

2.12 Consultation with California Native American Tribes.................................................................. 23 3 DETERMINATION................................................................................................................................ 28

3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ............................................................................... 28

3.2 Determination............................................................................................................................. 28 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .................................................................................... 30

4.1 AESTHETICS................................................................................................................................. 30

4.1.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 30

4.1.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 34

4.1.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 35

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES ................................................................................ 36

4.2.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 36

4.2.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 37

4.2.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 38

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 3

4.3 AIR QUALITY................................................................................................................................ 39

4.3.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 39

4.3.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 43

4.3.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 46

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES............................................................................................................. 47

4.4.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 48

4.4.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 56

4.4.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 58

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 59

4.5.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 59

4.5.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 63

4.5.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 67

4.6 ENERGY ....................................................................................................................................... 68

4.6.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 68

4.6.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 69

4.6.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 71

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................................................................. 72

4.7.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 73

4.7.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 78

4.7.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 80

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS ................................................................................................... 81

4.8.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 81

4.8.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 82

4.8.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 86

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL ...................................................................................... 87

4.9.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 87

4.9.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 91

4.9.3 Mitigation Measures........................................................................................................... 93

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY ............................................................................................ 94

4.10.1 Environmental Setting ........................................................................................................ 95

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 4

4.10.2 Impact Assessment............................................................................................................. 98

4.10.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 102

4.11 LAND USE PLANNING................................................................................................................ 104

4.11.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 104

4.11.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 104

4.11.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 106

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES ............................................................................................................... 107

4.12.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 107

4.12.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 107

4.12.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 108

4.13 NOISE ........................................................................................................................................ 109

4.13.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 109

4.13.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 113

4.13.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 116

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING .................................................................................................... 117

4.14.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 117

4.14.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 118

4.14.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 119

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES....................................................................................................................... 120

4.15.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 120

4.15.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 123

4.15.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 125

4.16 RECREATION ............................................................................................................................. 126

4.16.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 126

4.16.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 127

4.16.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 128

4.17 TRANSPORTATION .................................................................................................................... 129

4.17.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 129

4.17.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 137

4.17.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 139

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 5

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................................................. 140

4.18.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 140

4.18.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 140

4.18.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 141

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.............................................................................................. 142

4.19.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 142

4.19.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 144

4.19.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 148

4.20 WILDFIRE................................................................................................................................... 149

4.20.1 Environmental Setting ...................................................................................................... 149

4.20.2 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 151

4.20.3 Mitigation Measures......................................................................................................... 151

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE ............................................................................... 152

4.21.1 Impact Assessment........................................................................................................... 152 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM................................................................. 154 6 REPORT PREPARATION..................................................................................................................... 166 7 APPENDICES ..................................................................................................................................... 167

7.1 Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files......................................................................................... 167

7.2 Appendix B: CNDDB Occurrence Report................................................................................... 168

7.3 Appendix C: CHRIS Search Record............................................................................................. 169

7.4 Appendix D: NAHC SLF Results Letter ....................................................................................... 170

7.5 Appendix E: Noise Assessment ................................................................................................. 171

7.6 Appendix F: Trip Generation Memo.......................................................................................... 172 Figures
Figure 2-1 Alisal Marketplace Project Location........................................................................................................ 11 Figure 2-2 Alisal Marketplace Project Aerial ............................................................................................................ 12 Figure 2-3 Alisal Marketplace APN Map................................................................................................................... 13 Figure 2-4 City of Salinas General Plan Land Use Designation Map for Alisal Marketplace (Existing)...................... 17 Figure 2-5 City of Salinas General Plan Land Use Designation Map for Alisal Marketplace (Proposed)................... 18

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 6 Figure 2-6 City of Salinas Zone District Map for Alisal Marketplace (Existing) ......................................................... 19 Figure 2-7 City of Salinas Zone District Map for Alisal Marketplace (Proposed) ...................................................... 20 Figure 4-1 Visual features within the Project Vicinity .............................................................................................. 31 Figure 4-2 Mountain Ranges to the East.................................................................................................................. 32 Figure 4-3 Water Features in Project Vicinity .......................................................................................................... 50 Figure 4-4 CNDDB Species Occurrences .................................................................................................................. 52 Figure 4-5 Vegetation Communities in the City of Salinas....................................................................................... 55 Figure 4-6 County of Monterey Archeological Sensitivity Map................................................................................ 62 Figure 4-7 City of Salinas, General Plan, Seismic Hazard Zones............................................................................... 74 Figure 4-8 Monterey County HMP, Liquefaction Susceptibility in the City of Salinas.............................................. 75 Figure 4-9 Web Soil Survey Soil Map for Project Site............................................................................................... 77 Figure 4-10 Hazardous Sites..................................................................................................................................... 90 Figure 4-11 Salinas District Location and PWS Boundaries...................................................................................... 97 Figure 4-12 Flood Zone Map.................................................................................................................................. 103 Figure 4-13 Future Noise Contour and Impact Areas............................................................................................. 112 Figure 4-14 High Injury Network Map.................................................................................................................... 132 Figure 4-15 City of Salinas High-Quality Transit Corridors ..................................................................................... 135 Figure 4-16 City of Salinas VMT Screening Map - Residential VMT per Capita ...................................................... 136 Figure 4-17 Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones Surrounding the City of Salinas ............................................... 150 Tables
Table 2-1 Project Site Attribute Summary: APN, Address, Acreage, Land Use, Zoning............................................ 14 Table 2-2 Existing Uses, General Plan Designations, and Zone Districts of Surrounding Properties........................ 23 Table 4-1 Criteria Air Pollutants Thresholds of Significance..................................................................................... 40 Table 4-2 Operational Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants, Unmitigated................................................................. 43 Table 4-3 Construction Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants, Unmitigated ............................................................... 43 Table 4-4 Special-Status Species Occurrences within 5-mile radius of Project site ................................................. 53 Table 4-5 Essential Habitats and Potential Existence of Special-Status Species on Site........................................... 53 Table 4-6 Project Energy Consumption.................................................................................................................... 70 Table 4-7 Consistency with General Plan Energy Conservation Policies.................................................................. 70

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 7 Table 4-8 Scoping Plan Reduction Measures Consistency Analysis.......................................................................... 84 Table 4-9 Existing versus Future Potable Water Demand........................................................................................ 99 Table 4-10 Discussion on Land Use Policies in the General Plan for Mixed Use Development.............................. 105 Table 4-11 Exterior Noise Standards (General Plan Table N-2).............................................................................. 110 Table 4-12 Noise/ Land Use Compatibility Matrix.................................................................................................. 111 Table 4-13 Maximum Noise Standards.................................................................................................................. 113 Table 4-14 Receptors and Baseline Analyzed in the RCNM ................................................................................... 115 Table 4-15 Estimated Wastewater Flow by Land Use............................................................................................ 146

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 8 1 INTRODUCTION
Precision Civil Engineering, Inc. (PCE) has prepared this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) on behalf of the City of Salinas (City) to address the environmental effects of the proposed City of Salinas General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 2022-002 and Rezone No. 2022-002 for Alisal Marketplace (“Project” or “proposed Project”). GPA No. 2022-002 requests a land use change from Retail and General Commercial/Light Industrial to Mixed-Use. Rezone No. 2022-002 requests a rezone from CR – Commercial Retail and IGC – Industrial General Commercial to MX – Mixed Use, consistent with the proposed land use designation. The Project site consists of 18 parcels that total approximately 12.1 acres. The purpose of the GPA and Rezone is to provide additional opportunities for housing and mixed-use development, in line with the goals contained in the General Plan and Housing Element. This Project is funded by SB 2 grant funding for the purpose of increasing housing production in the city. This document has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq. The City of Salinas is the Lead Agency for this proposed Project. The site and the proposed Project are described in detail in SECTION 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM.

1.1 Regulatory Information
An Initial Study (IS) is a document prepared by a lead agency to determine whether a project may have a significant effect on the environment. In accordance with California Code of Regulations Title 14 (Chapter 3, Section 15000, et seq.), also known as the CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064 (a)(1) states that an environmental impact report (EIR) must be prepared if there is substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the proposed Project under review may have a significant effect on the environment and should be further analyzed to determine mitigation measures or project alternatives that might avoid or reduce project impacts to less than significant levels.

A negative declaration (ND) may be prepared instead if the lead agency finds that there is no substantial evidence considering the whole record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment. An ND is a written statement describing the reasons why a proposed Project, not otherwise exempt from CEQA, would not have a significant effect on the environment and, therefore, why it would not require the preparation of an EIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15371). According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15070, a ND or mitigated ND shall be prepared for a project subject to CEQA when either:
a. The IS shows there is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed Project may have a significant effect on the environment, or b. The IS identified potentially significant effects, but:

1. Revisions in the project plans or proposals made by or agreed to by the applicant before the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study is released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur is prepared, and

2. There is no substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the agency, that the proposed Project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment.

1.2 Purpose of the Initial Study
This Project is funded by SB 2 grant funding for the purpose of providing additional opportunities for housing and mixed-use development, in line with the goals contained in the General Plan and Housing Element. Currently, the site is occupied by mostly light-industrial uses and big-box retail buildings collectively identified as “Alisal

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 9 Marketplace.” A 2010 proposal envisioned a transformation of Alisal Marketplace into a new mixed-use neighborhood integrating housing and services with public open space and educational and civic buildings, including a new police station. The city considers the Project site to have significant redevelopment potential and proposes to change the land use designation and zone district for 18 parcels that total approximately 12.1 acres to facilitate future mixed-use development.

Although no physical development is proposed by the Project, this Initial Study analyzes the potential buildout of the Project site at a programmatic level, using reasonable assumptions so that future development of the site can tier from this Initial Study pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(1) and 15168(d) for evaluations of environmental issues associated with later activities/subsequent projects. However, depending on the final design of future physical development, additional project specific CEQA review may be required as determined by the City through the entitlement review and approval process.

1.3 Document Format
This IS/MND contains five (5) chapters plus appendices. SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION provides bases of the IS/MND’s regulatory information and an overview of the Project. SECTION 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM provides a detailed description of Project components. SECTION 3 DETERMINATION concludes that the Initial Study is a mitigated negative declaration, identifies the environmental factors potentially affected based on the analyses contained in this IS, and includes with the Lead Agency’s determination based upon those analyses. SECTION 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS presents the CEQA checklist and environmental analyses for all impact areas and the mandatory findings of significance. A brief discussion of the reasons why the Project impact is anticipated to be potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation incorporated, less than significant, or why no impacts are expected is included. SECTION 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM presents the mitigation measures recommended in the IS/MND for the Project. The CalEEMod Output Files, CNDDB Occurrence Report, CHRIS Search Record, NAHC SLF Results Letter, Noise Assessment, and Trip Generation Memo are provided as Appendix A, Appendix B, Appendix C, Appendix D, Appendix E, and Appendix F respectively, at the end of this document.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 10 2 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
This section describes the components of the proposed Project in more detail, including project location, project objectives, and required project approvals.

2.1 Project Title
Alisal Marketplace General Plan Amendment and Rezone Project (General Plan Amendment No. 2022-002 and Rezone No. 2022-002)

2.2 Lead Agency Name and Address
City of Salinas
Community Development Department
65 West Alisal Street, 2nd Floor
Salinas, CA 93901

2.3 Contact Person and Phone Number
Lead Agency/Applicant
City of Salinas
Community Development Department
Attn. Oscar Resendiz, Associate Planner
[email protected]
(831) 775-4259

2.4 Study Prepared By
Precision Civil Engineering
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 449-4500

2.5 Project Location
The Project site is in the jurisdiction of the City of Salinas, Monterey County, California (Figure 2-1). The site is generally located adjacent to East Alisal Street between Front Street and Griffin Street (“Alisal Marketplace”), consisting of 18 parcels that total approximately 12.1 acres (Figure 2-3). The site is identified by the Monterey County Assessor as Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 003-051-082-000, 003-051-083-000, 003-051-065-000, 003- 051-054-000, 003-051-055-000, 003-051-008-000, 003-052-001-000, 003-052-002-000, 003-052-018-000, 003- 052-019-000, 003-052-023-000, 003-052-032-000, 003-052-017-000, 003-052-031-000, 003-041-029-000, 003- 041-031-000, 003-041-001-000, 003-041-028-000. The site is a portion of Township 14 South, Range 3 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian. Site attributes are summarized in Table 2-1. It should be noted that the Project site is within a Federal Opportunity Zone (ID 06053014500).

2.6 Latitude and Longitude
The centroid of the Project site is 36.67497450062506, -121.64417025816442.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 11 Figure 2-1 Alisal Marketplace Project Location
Source: City of Salinas

0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6
- - Miles - - CITY OF SALINAS - General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace .PRECJ510 tv -• VIL (NG' !IP ~G. I ,_
Created 10/7/2022

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 12 Figure 2-2 Alisal Marketplace Project Aerial
003 o.oe 0.1 2
CITY OF SALINAS· General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Aisal Marketplace

0.18 I.lies
•• ••
--- - -- . !..-~~ff~!::'·~ .. ·----........ -,;_. ----·· Created 4/ 19/ 2023

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 13 Figure 2-3 Alisal Marketplace APN Map
003-04 1-031
c::J Project Site

0.03 0.06 0.12
CITY OF SALINAS- General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Aisal Marketplace

0.18 -
•• ••
Created 4/19/2023

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 14

Table 2-1 Project Site Attribute Summary: APN, Address, Acreage, Land Use, Zoning APN Site Address Acreage Existing Land Use General Plan Land Use (Existing) Zone District (Existing) 003-041-001-000 268 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.35 Fernando's Auto Repair General Commercial/Light Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-041-028-000 20 Murphy St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.07 Cul-de-sac General Commercial/Light
Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-041-029-000
278 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901
10 Murphy St, Salinas, CA 93901
14 Murphy St, Salinas, CA 93901
18 Murphy St, Salinas, CA 93901

0.59 Low-Cost Interlock
Audio Express
Works Autobody
Jamie’s Auto Services
Tolos Body Shop
General Commercial/Light
Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-041-031-000 282 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901
310 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.84 Car Wash and Pet Wash General Commercial/Light
Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-051-008-000
225 Prader St, Salinas, CA 93901
285 Prader St, Salinas, CA 93901
285 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901

0.24 Rojas Auto Care &
Towing
Rock Boxing Gym
Rent A Wheel
General Commercial/Light
Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-051-054-000 270 Rianda St, Salinas, CA 93901
283 Rianda St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.60 Knights of Columbus Auditorium General Commercial/Light
Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-051-055-000 283 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.35 First Class Fumigation General Commercial/Light Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-051-065-000 260 Rianda St # A, Salinas, CA 93901 0.67 Tri County Fire General Commercial/Light Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-051-082-000 251 Rianda Circle, Salinas, CA 93901 0.34 Truck Parking General Commercial/Light Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-051-083-000 250 Rianda Circle, Salinas, CA 93901 0.43 Truck Parking General Commercial/Light Industrial
Industrial -General
Commercial
003-052-001-000 301 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.55 Los Dos Potrillos Retail Commercial Retail 003-052-002-000 311 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.31 Pacific Coast Battery Services Inc Retail Commercial Retail
003-052-017-000 385 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.46 ampm, Arco Gas Retail Commercial Retail 003-052-018-000 314 Rianda St, Salinas, CA 93901
315 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.67 Church (Iglesia)Mountain Mike’s Pizza Retail Commercial Retail •• ••

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 15 003-052-019-000 320 Rianda St, Salinas, CA 93901
323 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.49 Mecánico auto repair shop Retail Commercial Retail 003-052-023-000 341 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901
335 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901 1.82 Alisal PlazaLas Palmas Furniture Retail Commercial Retail 003-052-031-000 260 Griffin St, Salinas, CA 93901
258 Griffin St, Salinas, CA 93901 0.51 Kelly-Moore Paints Retail Commercial Retail 003-052-032-000 347 E Alisal St, Salinas, CA 93901
235 Kern St, Salinas, CA 93905 2.80 CVS PharmacyAloha Motel Retail Commercial Retail Total Acreage 12.1
•• ••

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 16

2.7 General Plan Designation
The Project site has a City of Salinas General Plan (General Plan) land use designation of Retail and General Commercial/Light Industrial (Figure 2-4). According to the General Plan, the Retail land use designation “provides for a variety of retail uses such as retail stores, restaurants, hotels, personal services, business services and financial services. The maximum intensity of development is a floor area ratio of 0.4.” The General Commercial/Light Industrial land use designation “provides for uses such as automobile dealerships and repair shops, building materials sales, light manufacturing, distribution, warehousing and wholesaling that would generally not be appropriate in more restrictive designations because of potential nuisance factors. The maximum intensity of development is a floor area ratio of 0.4. Residential development (e.g., Single Room development is a floor area ratio of 0.4 + 10 units per acre).”
The City of Salinas (Applicant) proposes General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 2022-002 to change the land use designation from Retail and General Commercial/Light Industrial to Mixed Use (Figure 2-5). The purpose of the GPA is to provide additional opportunities for housing and mixed-use development, in line with the goals contained in the General Plan and Housing Element. According to the General Plan, the Mixed-Use land use designation “allows for development including a mixture of retail, office and residential uses in the same building, on the same parcel or in the same area. The intent of this designation is to create activity centers with pedestrian-oriented uses in certain portions of the City.” This land use designation allows for a maximum residential density of 80 units per acre.

2.8 Zoning
The Project site is in the CR – Commercial Retail and IGC – Industrial General Commercial zoning districts (Figure 2-6). According to Section 37-30.190 of the Salinas Municipal Code (SMC), the CR zoning district “allows a wide range of retail stores, restaurants, hotels and motels, commercial recreation, personal services, business services, offices, financial services, mixed use residential, and/or limited residential uses.” SMC Section 37-30.300 indicates that the IGC zone district “provides for a range of retail, wholesale, and service businesses not generally suitable in commercial districts because they attract heavy automobile and truck traffic or have certain adverse impacts; and to provide opportunities for certain limited manufacturing uses that have impacts comparable to those of retail and service.”
The City of Salinas (Applicant) proposes Rezone No. 2022-002 to change the zoning district from CR and IGC to MX – Mixed Use (Figure 2-7). The Review Memo dated May 24, 2022, states that they are to be rezoned MX – Mixed Use. The purpose of the Rezone is to provide additional opportunities for housing and mixed-use development, in line with the goals contained in the General Plan and Housing Element. According to SMC Section 37-30.230, the MX zone district “provides opportunities for mixed use, office, public and semipublic uses, and commercial uses that emphasize retail, entertainment, and service activities.” Medium and high-density residential uses are encouraged within MX districts to facilitate pedestrian-oriented activity centers. The proposed zoning district would be consistent with the land use designation, MX – Mixed Use.

On the Project site, there are existing commercial uses such as adult entertainment facilities and vehicle sales and services, among other uses, which are not permitted in the MX zoning district per SMC Section 37-30.240 and would become legal, non-conforming uses subject to SMC Section 37-50.160. Other existing uses, such as service stations, may require a Conditional Use Permit for any proposed changes to their use.

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 17 Figure 2-4 City of Salinas General Plan Land Use Designation Map for Alisal Marketplace (Existing) c:JProjectSite WL Mixed Use
General Plan Land Use Designat ion (Existing) - General Industrial - Retail - General Commercial/Light Industrial

0.03 0.06 0.12
CITY OF SALINAS - General Plan Amendm ent & Rezone· Alsal M arketplace

0.18 Uiles
•• ••
-
-
~#-------- ~ECIS--,Ot·,,i - -.~ .. ~~ ..

Created 4/ 19/ 2023

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 18 Figure 2-5 City of Salinas General Plan Land Use Designation Map for Alisal Marketplace (Proposed) WL'.2 M ixed Use .
11 dustnal . I - Genera n . i ht lndustria
D
• ct Site . (Proposed)
1 Pm)" ,. Commerc1al/ L g 0 ,.;gMtoon - Gen em I
Gene~ ~,n L,nd U •• -
- Retail 0.12
•• ••

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 19 Figure 2-6 City of Salinas Zone District Map for Alisal Marketplace (Existing) c::J Project Site
Zoning Dist rict (Exist ing) - Industrial- General
- Commercia l Retail - Industrial-General Commercial
o.oe 0.12
CITY OF SALINAS• General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Aisal Marketplace

0.18 I.Illes
•• ••
Created 4/ 19/ 2023

INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
August 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 20 Figure 2-7 City of Salinas Zone District Map for Alisal Marketplace (Proposed) _ m Mixed Use c:J Project Site
I
d stria I-Gen era I
Zoning District (Proposed) - nd u strial- General Commercia l - Commercia l Reta1 •1 In u 0 0 0.03 0.06 0.12
CITY OF SALINAS · General Plan A m endment .& Rezon e· .Alsal Marketplace •• ••
Created 4/ 19/ 2023
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 21

2.9 Description of Project
General Plan Amendment (GPA) No. 2022-002 and Rezone No. 2022-002 are filed by the City of Salinas (Applicant) and pertain to 18 parcels that are generally located adjacent to East Alisal Street between Front Street and Griffin Street (“Project site”) and total approximately 12.1 acres. The site is identified by the Monterey County Assessor as APNs 003-051-082-000, 003-051-083-000, 003-051-065-000, 003-051-054-000, 003-051-055-000, 003-051-008- 000, 003-052-001-000, 003-052-002-000, 003-052-018-000, 003-052-019-000, 003-052-023-000, 003-052-032- 000, 003-052-017-000, 003-052-031-000, 003-041-029-000, 003-041-031-000, 003-041-001-000, 003-041-028- 000. GPA No. 2022-002 requests a land use change from Retail and General Commercial/Light Industrial to MixedUse. Rezone No. 2022-002 requests a rezone from CR – Commercial Retail and IGC – Industrial General Commercial to MX – Mixed Use, consistent with the proposed land use designation. No physical development is proposed.

Project Assumptions
This Project is funded by SB 2 grant funding for the purpose of providing additional opportunities for housing and mixed-use development, in line with the goals contained in the General Plan and Housing Element. Currently, the site is occupied by mostly light-industrial uses and big-box retail buildings collectively identified as “Alisal Marketplace.” A 2010 proposal envisioned a transformation of Alisal Marketplace into a new mixed-use neighborhood integrating housing and services with public open space and educational and civic buildings, including a new and already existing police station. The city considers the Project site to have significant redevelopment potential and proposes to change the land use designation and zone district for 18 parcels that total approximately

12.1 acres to facilitate future mixed-use development.

For the purposes of the analysis contained in this Initial Study, the vision for the Project site is mixed-use development containing mixed use buildings, whereby a “mixed use building” is defined as “a structure containing both residential and pedestrian-oriented commercial uses (including retail, restaurants, offices, services, and similar uses deemed compatible with residential uses)” pursuant to SMC Section 37-10.370. In mixed-use buildings, the commercial use or uses are typically located on the ground floor of the structure with the residential dwellings predominantly located on the second or higher floors.

Therefore, the assumed “project” to be analyzed in this Initial Study is a mixed-use development containing four (4)-story mixed use buildings with commercial uses located on the ground floor and residential dwellings on the second and higher floors on a Project site that totals approximately 12.1 acres, or 525,625 square feet (sf.) of site area. The following Project assumptions are consistent with the development standards contained in SMC Section 37-30.250.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 22 • The estimated commercial buildout potential is approximately 131,406 sf. of ground floor commercial, which is based on a 0.25 floor area ratio (FAR) to allow for the maximum residential density permitted in the MX Zone District (calculation: 525,625 sf. multiplied by 0.25 FAR = 131,406 sf.). • The estimated residential buildout potential is approximately 515 residential dwelling units, which is based on three (3) floors of multi-family residential dwelling units (calculation: 525,625 sf. multiplied by 0.25 FAR = 131,406 sf.; 525,625 sf. minus 131,406 sf. = 394,219 sf.; 394,219 sf./1,000 sf. = 394 units; plus 10 units to the acre: 12.1 acres multiplied by 10 units = 121 units; 121 units plus 394 units = 515 units). 1 The resulting residential density is 42.7 dwelling units per acre (calculation: 515 dwelling units divided by 12.1 acres = 42.6). • Based on buildout assumptions of commercial sf. and residential units, an estimated 843 parking stalls would be required pursuant to SMC Section 37-50.360 (calculation: 131,406 sf. divided by 400 sf. equals 328 plus 515 dwelling units = 843 parking stalls).

2.10 Project Setting and Surrounding Land Uses
Project Setting
The Project site is currently fully developed and paved, containing existing structures and on- and off-site improvements including drive approaches, curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, utilities, and landscaping. There are approximately 23 existing structures on the site that predominately consist of commercial and industrial uses (Table 2-1). The ariel image of the Project site is shown in Figure 2-2. Street frontage includes East Alisal Street, a four (4)- lane east-west major arterial in addition to two (2)-lane local streets, Rianda Circle, JD Alvarado Circle, Prader Street, and Griffin Street. A segment of Union Pacific Railroad islocated adjacent to the Project site to the west. The existing biotic conditions and resources of the site can be defined primarily as urban landscaping with heavy alteration and disturbance given the existing commercial and industrial uses. There are existing trees and shrubs throughout the site and along the East Alisal Street rights-of-way. No water features are present.

Surrounding Land Uses
The Project site is generally surrounded by a mix of commercial and industrial uses. As referenced in Table 2-2, all properties to the north, south, east, and west are planned and zoned for commercial and industrial uses. A segment of Union Pacific Railroad is located adjacent to the Project site to the west. 1 Pursuant to SMC Section 37-30.250, mixed use developments shall have a maximum commercial FAR of 1.0 plus ten dwelling units per net acre. Further, as described in Section 37-30.260, within a mixed-use building providing commercial uses of at least 0.25 FAR, allowable floor area may be substituted for residential dwelling units at a ratio of one dwelling unit for each one thousand square feet of allowable floor area to the maximum FAR of 1.0. For example, the maximum development potential of a one-acre lot is forty-three thousand five hundred sixty square feet of commercial floor area plus ten dwelling units. A proposed mixed-use building providing at least 10,890 sq. ft. of commercial floor area could also include forty-three dwelling units as follows: 43,560 sq. ft. × 0.25 = 10,890 sq. ft.; 43,560 sq. ft. - 10,890 sq. ft. = 32,670 sq. ft./1,000 sq. ft. = 33 dwelling + 10 dwelling units = 43 dwelling units.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 23 Table 2-2 Existing Uses, General Plan Designations, and Zone Districts of Surrounding Properties Direction
from the
Project site
Existing Land Use Planned Land Use Zone District
North
Industrial (San Juanita Tostada Factory),
Services (Republic Services), and Commercial
(wholesale, used appliance store, and golf cart
dealer)
General Industrial,
General Commercial/
Light Industrial
Industrial General,
Industrial General
Commercial
South
Public (Salinas Police Department), Service
(PG&E), and Commercial (auto care, gas
station, tire shop)
General Commercial/
Light Industrial
Industrial General
Commercial
East
Commercial (laundromat, window installation
service)
General Commercial/
Light Industrial
Industrial General
Commercial
West Railroad – Union Pacific General Commercial/
Light Industrial
Industrial General
Commercial

2.11 Other Public Agencies Whose Approval is Required
The Project would require approval by the City of Salinas City Council. No permits would be required from other agencies for approval of the Project. However, future redevelopment of the Project site would require review, permits, and/or approvals, such as grading, building, encroachment, and sign permits. Other approvals may be required as identified through the entitlement review and approval process.

2.12 Consultation with California Native American Tribes The State requires lead agencies to consider the potential effects of proposed projects and consult with California Native American tribes during the local planning process for the purpose of protecting Traditional Tribal Cultural Resources through the CEQA Guidelines. Pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1, the lead agency shall begin consultation with the California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographical area of the proposed project. Such significant cultural resources are either sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a tribe which is either on or eligible for inclusion in the California Historic Register or local historic register, or, the lead agency, at its discretion, and support by substantial evidence, choose to treat the resources as a Tribal Cultural Resources (PRC Section 21074(a)(1-2)).

According to the most recent census data, California is home to 109 currently recognized Indian tribes.

Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See PRC Section 21083.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per PRC Section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that PRC Section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality.

A consultation list of tribes with traditional lands or cultural places located within Monterey County was requested and received from the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on April 8, 2022. The listed tribes include Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe, Esselen Tribe of Monterey County, Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan, Ohlone/Costanoan- CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 24 Esselen Nation, Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, Xolon-Salinan Tribe, and Runsen Am:a Tur:ataj Ohlone.

The NAHC also conducted a Sacred Lands File (SFL) search which was positive.

The City of Salinas conducted formal tribal consultation pursuant to AB 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014) and SB 18 (Chapter 905, Statutes 2004) on June 14, 2022, utilizing the consultation list of tribes received from the NAHC. The same nine (9) tribes listed above were included in the formal consultation. Consultation for AB 52 ended on July 14, 2022, and consultation for SB 18 ended on September 12, 2022. Chairperson Louise Miranda-Ramirez of the Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation requested formal consultation on September 13, 2022. Formal consultation was held by telephone on June 21, 2023. Nine (9) mitigation measures were requested through the formal consultation, as listed below and incorporated in Section 4.5 and Section 4.18. No response was received from the other tribes.

CUL-1 Historical Resources Identification and Treatment Plan Prior to permit approval for development on the Project site, a historical resources evaluation shall be completed for that individual site to confirm if existing buildings and/or structures withing these sites qualify as historical resources as defined by Section 15064.5(a) of CEQA Guidelines. The evaluation shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (PQS) in architectural history or history. The qualified architectural historian or historian shall conduct an intensive-level evaluation in accordance with the guidelines and best practices promulgated by the State Office of Historic Preservation to identify any potential historical resources within the proposed project area. All properties 45 years of age or older shall be evaluated within their historic context and documented in a report meeting the State Office of Historic Preservation guidelines. All evaluated properties shall be documented in the Department of Parks and Recreation Series 523 Forms. The report shall be submitted to the City for review and concurrence.

Any relocation, rehabilitation, or alteration of the resource shall be implemented consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatments of Historic Properties (Standards). In accordance with CEQA, a project that has been determined to conform with the Standards generally would not cause a significant adverse direct or indirect impact to historical resources (14 CCR Section 15126.4[b][1]). Application of the Standards shall be overseen by a qualified architectural historian or historic architect meeting the PQS. In conjunction with any development application that may affect the historical resource, a report identifying and specifying the treatment of characterdefining features and construction activities shall be provided to the City for review and concurrence, in addition to the historical resources evaluation.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 25 CUL-2 Phase I Cultural Resources Study
Prior to the issuance of any grading or construction permits for each individual site, a Phase I cultural resources study shall be performed by a qualified professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI’s) Professional Qualification Standards (PQS) for archaeology (National Park Service 1983). The Phase I cultural resources study shall include a pedestrian survey of the project site when appropriate and sufficient background research and field sampling to determine whether archaeological resources may be present. Archival research shall include a records search of the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) no more than two years old and a Sacred Lands File search with the NAHC. The Phase I technical report documenting the study shall include recommendations that shall be implemented prior to and/or during construction to avoid or reduce impacts to archaeological resources.

Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, archaeological construction monitoring, sensitivity training, or additional testing and mitigation (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-3 through CUL-7). The report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of any grading or construction permits.

The City shall include recommendations in the Phase I technical report as Conditions of Approval to be implemented throughout all ground disturbance activities. The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

CUL-3 Extended Phase I Testing
If recommended by the Phase I study for each individual site (Mitigation Measure CUL-2), the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to conduct an Extended Phase I (XPI) study to determine the presence/absence and extent of archaeological resources on the project site. XPI testing shall include a series of shovel test pits and/or hand augured units and/or mechanical trenching to establish the boundaries of archaeological site(s) on the project site.

If the boundaries of the archaeological site are already well understood from previous archaeological work, an XPI will not be required. All archaeological excavation shall be conducted by a qualified archaeologist(s) under the direction of a principal investigator meeting the SOI’s PQS for archaeology (National Park Service 1983). If an XPI report is prepared, it shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of a grading or construction permit. Recommendations therein shall be implemented for all ground disturbance activities.

Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, site avoidance, Phase II Site Evaluation, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-4, CUL5, CUL-7, and CUL-8). The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

CUL-4 Archaeological Site Avoidance
Any identified archaeological sites (determined after implementing Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and/or CUL-3) or archaeological resources encountered during ground-disturbing activities shall be avoided by project-related construction activities, where feasible. A barrier (temporary fencing) and flagging shall be placed between the work location and any resources within 60 feet of a work location to minimize the potential for inadvertent impacts. If the resource cannot be avoided, Mitigation Measure CUL-5 shall be implemented.

CUL-5 Phase II Site Evaluation
evaluation shall include any necessary archival research to identify significant historical associations and mapping of surface artifacts, collection of functionally or temporally diagnostic tools and debris, and excavation of a sample of the cultural deposit. The sample excavation would be carried out to characterize the nature of the site(s), define the artifact and feature contents, determine horizontal and vertical boundaries, and retrieve representative samples of artifacts and other remains.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 26 If the archaeologist and, if applicable, a Native American monitor or other interested tribal representative determine it is appropriate, cultural materials collected from the site shall be processed and analyzed in a laboratory according to standard archaeological procedures. The age of the materials shall be determined using radiocarbon dating and/or other appropriate procedures; lithic artifacts, faunal remains, and other cultural materials shall be identified and analyzed according to current professional standards. The significance of the site(s) shall be evaluated according to the criteria of the CRHR and if applicable, NRHP. The results of the investigations shall be presented in a technical report following the standards of the California Office of Historic Preservation publication “Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Content and Format (1990 or latest edition).” Recommendations in the Phase II report shall be implemented for all ground disturbance activities. Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, Phase III Data Recovery, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-6 through CUL-8). The report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of any grading or construction permits. The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

CUL-6 Phase III Data Recovery
Should the results of the Phase II site evaluation for each individual site (Mitigation Measure CUL-5) yield resources that meet CRHR significance standards and if the resource cannot be avoided by project construction in accordance with CUL-4, the project applicant shall ensure that all feasible recommendations for mitigation of archaeological impacts are incorporated into the final design and approved by the City prior to construction. Any necessary Phase III data recovery excavation, conducted to exhaust the data potential of significant archaeological sites, shall be carried out by a qualified archaeologist meeting the SOI’s PQS for archeology (National Park Service 1983). Data recovery shall be conducted in accordance with a research design reviewed and approved by the City, prepared in advance of fieldwork, and using the appropriate archaeological field and laboratory methods consistent with the California Office of Historic Preservation Planning Bulletin 5 (1991), Guidelines for Archaeological Research Design, or the latest edition thereof. If the archaeological resource(s) of concern are Native American in origin, the qualified archaeologist shall confer with the City and local California Native American tribe(s).

As applicable, the final Phase III Data Recovery reports shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any grading or construction permit. Recommendations contained therein shall be implemented throughout all ground disturbance activities. Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-7 and CUL-8). The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC upon completion.

CUL-7 Cultural Resources Monitoring
If recommended by Phase I, XPI, Phase II, or Phase III studies for each individual site (Mitigation Measures CUL-2, CUL-3, CUL-5, and/or CUL-6), the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor project-related, ground-disturbing activities which may include the following but not limited to: grubbing, vegetation removal, trenching, grading, and/or excavations. The archaeological monitor shall coordinate with any Native American monitor as required. Monitoring logs must be completed by the archaeologist daily. Cultural resources monitoring may be reduced for the project if the qualified archaeologist finds it appropriate to reduce the monitoring efforts.

Upon completion of ground disturbance for the project, a final report must be submitted to the City for review and approval documenting the monitoring efforts, cultural resources finding, and resource disposition. The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 27 CUL-8 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources
If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work within 50 feet shall be halted and the project archaeologist meeting the SOI’s PQS for archeology (National Park Service 1983) shall immediately to evaluate the find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of a treatment plan and archaeological testing for CRHR eligibility. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA and cannot be avoided by the project, additional work may be warranted, such as data recovery excavation, to mitigate any significant impacts to significant resources. If the resource is of Native American origin, implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR-1 may be required. Any reports required to document and/or evaluate unanticipated discoveries shall be submitted to the City for review and approval and submitted to the NWIC after completion. Recommendations contained therein shall be implemented throughout the remainder of ground disturbance activities.

TCR-1 Inadvertent Discoveries During Construction
In the event that cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during grading or construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find; an appropriate Native American representative, based on the nature of the find, is consulted; and mitigation measures are put in place for the disposition and protection of any find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If the City, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with local Native American group(s) prior to continuation of any earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find. The plan shall include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, shall outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the appropriate local Native American tribal representative and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist. Examples of appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural resources include, but are not limited to, protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 28 3 DETERMINATION

3.1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics
Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources
Cultural Resources
Energy
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation
Tribal and Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems
Wildfire

For purposes of this Initial Study, the following answers have the corresponding meanings:
“No Impact” means the specific impact category does not apply to the project, or that the record sufficiently demonstrates that project specific factors or general standards applicable to the project will result in no impact for the threshold under consideration.
“Less Than Significant Impact” means there is an impact related to the threshold under consideration, but that impact is less than significant.
“Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporation” means there is a potentially significant impact related to the threshold under consideration, however, with the mitigation incorporated into the project, the impact is less than significant. For purposes of this Initial Study “mitigation incorporated into the project” means mitigation originally described in the GP PEIR and applied to an individual project, as well as mitigation developed specifically for an individual project.
“Potentially Significant Impact” means there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant related to the threshold under consideration.

3.2 Determination
On the basis of this initial evaluation (to be completed by the Lead Agency):

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

□
DI find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR) is required.

D I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An EIR is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

D I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Approved By:

Oscar Resendiz, Associate Planner Date
City of Salinas, Community Development Department
CITY OF Si\LINAS- General Plan Amendment & Rezone: i\llsal Marketplace I 29 CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 30 4 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

4.1 AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources
Code Section 21099, would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on
a scenic vista? X
b) Substantially damage scenic
resources, including, but not limited
to, trees, rock out-croppings, and
historic buildings within a state
scenic highway?
X
c) In non-urbanized areas,
substantially degrade the existing
visual character or quality public
views of the site and its
surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from
publicly accessible vantage point).

If the project is in an urbanized area,
would the project conflict with
applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic
quality?
X
d) Create a new source of substantial
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the
area?
X

4.1.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is currently fully developed and paved, containing existing structures and on- and off-site improvements including drive approaches, curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, utilities, and landscaping (see Figure 4-1 and Figure 4-2). There are approximately 23 existing structures on the site that predominately consist of lowrise buildings that are mostly contemporary with uniform massing, non-descript facades, with parking lots between the structures and surrounding street frontage. Street frontage includes East Alisal Street, a four (4)-lane east-west major arterial in addition to two (2)-lane local streets, Rianda Circle, JD Alvarado Circle, Prader Street, and Griffin Street. A segment of Union Pacific Railroad is located adjacent to the Project site to the west. The Project site is generally surrounded by a mix of commercial and industrial uses. A thin horizontal line of the Coastal Mountain Ranges can be seen to the east, but the view is obstructed by Highway 101, the flat topography of the site, and intervening development.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 31 Figure 4-1 Visual features within the Project Vicinity
East Alisal Street, looking west. Source: Google Earth, 2022 CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 32 Figure 4-2 Mountain Ranges to the East
East Alisal Street, looking east (cross street: Prader Street). Source: Google Earth 2022 ____ _,,/
;,
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 33 General Plan
The Salinas General Plan Community Design Element helps to protect and enhance the image and identity of Salinas by addressing the visual improvement of the major entrances to the community, the maintenance of sharply defined urban/agricultural edges, and the preservation and enhancement of view corridors from Highway 101.

Highway 101 is the primary “view corridor” identified by the General Plan. The primary views from Highway 101 include: agricultural views, views of Northridge Shopping Center, Auto Center, and Westridge Shopping Center, and Carr Lake. No other vista points or resources are identified.

General Plan policies applicable to the visual appearance and character of the city include:

Policy CD-1.10: Require a balance of housing types and designs to avoid both monotony and visual chaos.

Policy CD-2.1: Maximize a strong sense of neighborhood identity and harmony by implementing architectural design and community layout techniques, such as building location and spacing, landscaping features, and lighting that create distinct neighborhoods, encourage interactions among residents, and facilitate safe street life.

Policy CD-2.2: Minimize potential light and sound impacts of new development on surrounding areas.

Policy CD-2.3: Require infill development to be consistent with the scale and character of existing neighborhoods.

Policy CD-2.6: Preserve architecturally important historic buildings that are capable of being adapted for viable use.

Policy CD-2.7: Minimize the use and visual effect of sound attenuation walls.

Policy CD-2.8: Avoid large un-landscaped parking areas and blank building walls facing streets or adjoining properties.

Municipal Code
Salina Municipal Code (SMC) Section 37.50.480 – Outdoor Lighting contains enforceable requirements for all new development intended to prevent light and glare impacts. (a) Outdoor lighting shall employ cutoff optics that allows no light emitted above a horizontal plane running through the bottom of the fixture. Parking lots shall be illuminated to no more than an average maintained two and four-tenths footcandles at ground level with uniform lighting levels. All building-mounted and freestanding parking lot lights (including the fixture, base, and pole) shall not exceed a maximum of twentyfive feet (a maximum of forty feet in the IG district) in height in all districts. Illumination at an R or NU (NE, NG-1, and NG-2) district property line shall not exceed one-half footcandle maximum. Lighting adjacent to other property or public rights-of-way shall be shielded to reduce light trespass. No portion of the lamp (including the lens and reflectors) shall extend below the bottom edge of the lighting fixture nor be visible from an adjacent property or public right-of-way. A point to point lighting plan showing horizontal illuminance in footcandles and demonstrating compliance with this section shall be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 34 (e) Lighting in the focused growth overlay district, central city overlay (downtown core area) district, mixed use (MU), and new urbanism (NU) districts shall be supplemented by the lighting standards and regulations specified for these districts.

California Scenic Highway Program
The California Scenic Highway Program was established in 1963 with the purpose of protecting and enhancing the natural scenic beauty of California highways and adjacent corridors, through special conservation treatment. A highway may be designated scenic depending upon how much of the natural landscape can be seen by travelers, the scenic quality of the landscape, and the extent to which development intrudes upon the traveler's enjoyment of the view. There are no officially designated State Scenic Highways in the City of Salinas, inclusive of the Project area. However, State Route 68 (SR 68) is an eligible State Scenic Highway, located approximately 0.23 miles south of the Project area.
2 4.1.2 Impact Assessment
Except as provided in PRC Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? No Impact. The Project site is located to the west of Highway 101. Because the site is located to the west of Highway 101, visibility of scenic vistas such as the Coastal Mountain Ranges from Highway 101 are not impacted. A thin horizontal line of the Coastal Mountain Ranges can be seen to the east of the Project site, but the view is obstructed by Highway 101, the flat topography of the site, existing structures on the site, and intervening development.

Furthermore, the General Plan does not identify or designate scenic vistas or views within the general vicinity of the Project site. As a result, the Project would not adversely affect scenic vistas and no impact would occur because of the Project.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No Impact. According to the California State Scenic Highway Program, there are no officially designated State Scenic Highways in the City of Salinas. SR 68 is an eligible State Scenic Highway but is located approximately 0.23 miles south of the Project site and would not be impacted by the Project. As such, the proposed Project would not damage scenic resources, including trees, rock out-croppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway and no impact would occur as a result of the Project.
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is in an urbanized area surrounded by existing development. Although no physical development is proposed, future development of the Project site would be subject to the entitlement 2 Caltrans. California State Scenic Highway System Map. Accessed on October 11, 2022, https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=465dfd3d807c46cc8e8057116f1aacaa CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 35 review and approval process through the City of Salinas. Through this process, future development would be subject to compliance with applicable policies and regulations that govern scenic quality including but not limited to the General Plan, SMC, and California Building Code. Compliance would ensure that future development of the site would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Less than Significant Impact. Generally, lighting impacts are associated with artificial lighting in evening hours either through interior lighting from windows or exterior lighting (e.g., street lighting, parking lot lighting, landscape lighting, cars, and trucks). Although no physical development is proposed, future development of the Project site would incrementally increase the amount of light from streetlights, exterior lighting, and vehicular headlights. Such sources could create adverse effects on day or nighttime views in the area. Future development would be subject to site development standards contained in SMC Section 37-50.480 – Outdoor Lighting, specifically sub-section (a) which contains specific, enforceable requirements intended to prevent light and glare impacts, and sub-section (e) which refers to additional lighting standards for MX zone districts. In addition, future development would be required to comply with Title 24 lighting requirements which would also reduce impacts related to nighttime light.

The Title 24 lighting requirements cover outdoor spaces including regulations for mounted luminaires (i.e., high efficacy, motion sensor controlled, time clocks, energy management control systems, etc.). As such, conditions imposed on future development by the City pursuant to the SMC and Title 24 would reduce light and glare impacts to a less than significant impact.

4.1.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 36

4.2 AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farm-land), as shown
on the maps prepared pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to nonagricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract?
X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or
cause rezoning of, forest land (as
defined in Public Resources Code
section 12220(g)), timberland (as
defined by Public Resources Code
section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined
by Government Code section
51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to nonforest use? X
e) Involve other changes in the
existing environment which, due to
their location or nature, could result
in conversion of Farmland, to nonagricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
X

4.2.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within the Salinas city limits and is planned and zoned for industrial and commercial uses.

The Project site is currently fully developed and paved, containing existing structures and on- and off-site improvements including drive approaches, curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, utilities, and landscaping. There are approximately 23 existing structures on the site that predominately consist of commercial and industrial uses.

Street frontages includes East Alisal Street, a four (4)-lane east-west major arterial in addition to several two (2)- lane local streets, Rianda Circle, JD Alvarado Circle, Prader Street, and Griffin Street. A segment of Union Pacific Railroad is located adjacent to the Project site to the west. The existing biotic conditions and resources of the site can be defined primarily as urban landscaping with heavy alteration and disturbance given the existing commercial and industrial uses. There are existing trees and shrubs throughout the site and along the East Alisal Street rights- CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 37 of-way. No water features are present. Lastly, the Project site does not contain any agricultural or forestry resources such as agricultural land, forest land, or timberland.

Farmland Monitoring and Mapping Program
The California Department of Conservation manages the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) that provides maps and data for analyzing land use impacts to farmland. The FMMP produces the Important Farmland Finder as a resource map that shows quality (soils) and land use information. Agricultural land is rated according to soil quality and irrigation status, in addition to many other physical and chemical characteristics. The highest quality land is called “Prime Farmland” which is defined by the FMMP as “farmland with the best combination of physical and chemical features able to sustain long term agricultural production. This land has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields. Land must have been used for irrigated agricultural production at some time during the four years prior to the mapping date. 3 Maps are updated every two years. According to the FMMP, California Important Farmland Finder, the Project site, and all properties in its immediate vicinity are classified as “Urban and Built-Up Land.” 4 California Land Conservation Act
The California Land Conservation Act of 1965 (i.e., the Williamson Act) allows local governments to enter contracts with private landowners to restrict parcels of land agricultural or open space uses. In return, property tax assessments of the restricted parcels are lower than full market value. The minimum length of a Williamson Act contract is 10 years and automatically renews upon its anniversary date; as such, the contract length is essentially indefinite. The Project site is not subject to the Williamson Act.

4.2.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
No Impact. According to the FMMP, the Project site is designated as “Urban and Built-Up Land.” As such, the Project site is not located on lands designated as “Prime Farmland,” “Unique Farmland,” or “Farmland of Statewide Importance.” Therefore, the Project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use and no impact would occur. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The Project site is not zoned for agricultural use and is not subject to the Williamson Act. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract and no impact would occur.
3 California Department of Conservation. Important Farmland Categories. Accessed on July 28, 2022, https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Pages/Important-Farmland-Categories.aspx 4 California Department of Conservation. (2018). California Important Farmland Finder. Accessed on October 11, 2022, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 38 c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? No Impact. The Project site does is not planned or zoned for forest land or timberland. Further, the Project site would not cause the rezoning of forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production. As a result, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land, timberland, or timberland zoned Timberland Production and no impact would occur.
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The Project site does not contain forest land and is not planned or zoned for forest land or forest uses.

Implementation of the Project would therefore not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. As a result, no impact would occur.
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No impact. The Project site is planned and zoned for urban uses and does not contain agricultural or forestry uses or resources. The properties in the vicinity of the Project site are also planned and zoned for urban uses and do not contain agricultural or forestry uses or resources. According to the FMMP, California Important Farmland Finder, the Project site and the properties in its immediate vicinity are classified as “Urban and Built-Up Land.” Therefore, future development of the Project site with mixed use development would be generally consistent with the existing environment of the surrounding, urbanized and non-agricultural or forestry uses. As a result, the Project would not involve other changes in the existing environment that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur because of the Project.

4.2.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 39

4.3 AIR QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan?
X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable
net increase of any criteria pollutant
for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to
substantial pollutant concentrations? X
d) Result in other emissions (such as
those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of
people?
X

4.3.1 Environmental Setting
The proposed Project is located within the North Central Coast Air Basin (NCCAB), which is formed by the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD). The Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD) oversees air quality regulations across Monterey, Santa Cruz, and San Benito counties. The NCCAB is in nonattainment status for the State ozone (O3) and inhalable particulates (PM10) pollutants, and in attainment for all other state and federal pollutants. The MBARD developed CEQA Air Quality Guidelines to assist local jurisdictions and lead agencies in complying with the requirements of CEQA regarding potential impacts to air quality. 5 This guidance document also
includes recommended thresholds of significance to be used for the evaluation of short-term construction, longterm operational, odor, toxic air contaminant, and cumulative air quality impacts. The MBARD also adopted an Air Quality Management Plan 6(AQMP) focused on achieving the State’s ozone standard, and updating air quality trends analysis, emission inventory, and mobile source programs.

Thresholds of Significance
Accordingly, the MBARD-recommended thresholds of significance (i.e., CEQA Air Quality Guidelines) are used to determine whether implementation of the proposed Project would result in a significant air quality impact. Projects that exceed these recommended thresholds would be considered to have a potentially significant impact on human 5 Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District. (2008). CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. Accessed March 24, 2022, https://www.mbard.org/files/0ce48fe68/CEQA+Guidelines.pdf 6 Monterey Bay Air Resources District. (2017). 2012 – 2015 Air Quality Management Plan. Accessed on April 19, 2022, https://www.mbard.org/files/6632732f5/2012-2015-AQMP_FINAL.pdf CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 40 health and welfare. Section 5.6 of the guidelines determines a less than significant impact is appropriate if all following criteria are met:
(1) Under Criteria Air Pollutants thresholds:
(2) No violation of any other State or national AAQS;
(3) Consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan;
(4) No other significant adverse impacts (e.g., create objectionable odors; alter air movement, moisture, temperature, or climate).

Each of these criteria is further described as follows. (1) Criteria Air Pollutants: The MBARD-adopted thresholds of significance for criteria air pollutants are shown in Table 4-1. The thresholds of significance are based on a per day basis. These thresholds are utilized in the impact assessment to determine whether the proposed Project would result in significant impacts. The following summarizes these thresholds:

Short-Term Emissions of Particulate Matter (PM10): Construction impacts would be considered less than significant if the project emits less than 82 lb/day of PM10 or will not cause a violation of PM10 AAQS at existing receptors; and the equipment used is” typical construction equipment”.

Long-Term Emissions of Particulate Matter (PM10): Operational impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered less than significant if the project directly emits less than 82 lb/day of PM10 on-site or will not cause a violation of PM10 AAQS or contribute 82 lb/day to an existing or projected violation at existing or reasonably foreseeable receptors.

Long-Term Emissions of Ozone Precursors (ROG and NOX): Operational impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered less than significant if the project directly emits less than 137 lb/day of VOC or NOx.

Long-Term Emissions of Carbon Monoxide (CO): Operational impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered less than significant if the project directly emits less than 550 lb/day of CO or will not cause a violation of CO AAQS at existing or reasonably foreseeable receptors.

Long-Term Emissions of Sox: Operational impacts associated with the proposed Project would be considered less than significant if the project directly emits less than 150 lb/day of SOx or will not cause a violation of SO2 AAQS at existing or reasonably foreseeable receptors.

Table 4-1 Criteria Air Pollutants Thresholds of Significance Pollutant
Significance Threshold
Construction Emissions (lbs/day) Operational Emission (lbs/day) CO N/A 550
NOX N/A 137
ROG N/A 137
SOX N/A 150
PM10 82 82
PM2.5 N/A N/A
Source: MBARD, CEQA Air Quality Guidelines, 2008
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 41 (2) Conflict with or Obstruct Implementation of Applicable Air Quality Plan: Due to the region’s nonattainment status for ozone and PM10, if the project-generated emissions of either of the ozone precursor pollutants (i.e., ROG and NOx) or PM10 would exceed the MBARD’s significance thresholds, then the project would be considered to conflict with the attainment plans. In addition, if the project would result in a change in land use and corresponding increases in population generation, housing, or employment growth exceeding 2015 AQMP forecasts, the project may conflict with the AQMP. Consistency with population forecasts is based on countywide forecasts and not individual cities. Further, the AQMP utilizes forecasts adopted by the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG).
(3) Odors: The intensity of an odor source’s operations and its proximity to sensitive receptors influences the potential significance of odor emissions. Specific land uses that are considered sources of undesirable odors include landfills, transfer stations, composting facilities, sewage treatment plants, wastewater pump stations, asphalt batch plants and rendering plants. MBARD’s Guidelines identify pollutants associated with objectionable odors to include sulfur compound and methane. Typical sources of odors include landfills, rendering plants, chemical plants, agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, and refineries. 7 Odor impacts would be significant if the project emits pollutants in substantial amountsthat cause nuisance or endanger the public’s health and safety, thus analysis should assess impacts on existing or foreseeable sensitive receptors. (4) Toxic Air Contaminants (TACs): The California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) provides guidance on CEQA and health risk assessments for projects. According to the CAPCOA Guidance document titled “Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects,” there are two types of land use project that have the potential to cause long-term public health risk impacts. 8 These project types are as follows:
• Type A: Land use projects with toxic emissions that impact receptors, and • Type B: Land use project that will place receptors in the vicinity of existing toxics sources.

In this Guidance document, Type A projects examples are (project impacts receptors):
• combustion related power plants,
• gasoline dispensing facilities,
• asphalt batch plants,
• warehouse distribution centers,
• quarry operations, and
• other stationary sources that emit toxic substances.

Similarly, MBARD’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines established criteria for significance for TACs. A project would have a significant impact if it were located near a sensitive receptor near an unregulated source of TAC emission, such as diesel-fuel fueled vehicles parking, gas stations, and dry cleaners. For construction, equipment or processes that emit non-carcinogenic TACs could result in significant impacts and emissions of carcinogenic TAC that can result in 7 Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District. (2008). CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. Accessed October 12, 2022, https://www.mbard.org/files/0ce48fe68/CEQA+Guidelines.pdf 8 CAPCOA. (2009). Health Risk Assessments for Proposed Land Use Projects. Accessed October 12, 2022, http://www.capcoa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/with-stamp_CAPCOA_HRA_LU_Guidelines_8-6-09-min.pdf CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 42 a cancer risk greater than one incident per 100,000 population are considered significant. For operational equipment and processes, impacts would be less than significant if it complies with Rule 1000.

Methodology
MBARD’s Guidelines recommend using the CalEEMod software program to calculate project emissions. CalEEMod is a statewide model designed to provide a uniform platform for government agencies, land use planners, and environmental professionals to quantify potential criteria pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from land use projects. The model quantifies direct emissions from construction and operation (including vehicle use), as well as indirect emissions, such as emissions from energy use, solid waste disposal, vegetation planting and/or removal, and water use. The model also identifies mitigation measures to reduce criteria pollutant and GHG emissions. The Project’s construction and operational emissions were estimated using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), version 2020.4.0.
(1) CalEEMod Assumptions: Although no specific development project is currently proposed, short-term construction and long-term operational GHG emissions for the Project were estimated using CalEEModTM (v.2020.4.0) (See Appendix A for output files) with the following assumptions:
• The Project site is 12.1 acres, or 525,625 sf.
• The estimated commercial buildout potential is approximately 131,406 sf. of ground floor commercial, which is based on a 0.25 floor area ratio (FAR) to allow for the maximum residential density permitted in the MX Zone District (calculation: 525,625 sf. multiplied by 0.25 FAR = 131,406 sf.). In CalEEMod, this use is modeled as the “Strip Mall” land use, which is a use that contains a variety of retail shops and specializes in quality apparel, hard goods, and services such as real estate offices, dance studios, florists, and small restaurants. • The estimated residential buildout potential is approximately 515 residential dwelling units, which is based on three (3) floors of multi-family residential dwelling units (calculation: 525,625 sf. multiplied by 0.25 FAR = 131,414 sf.; 525,625 sf. minus 131,406 sf. = 394,219 sf.; 394,219 sf./1,000 sf. = 394 units; plus 10 units to the acre: 12.1 acres multiplied by 10 units = 121 units; 121 units plus 394 units = 515 units). 9 The resulting residential density is 42.6 dwelling units per acre (calculation: 515 dwelling units divided by 12.1 acres = 42.6).

In CalEEMod, this use is modeled as the “Apartments Mid Rise” land use (apartment buildings between 3 to 10 levels).
• Based on buildout assumptions of commercial sf. and residential units, an estimated 843 parking stalls would be required pursuant to SMC Section 37-50.360 (calculation: 131,406sf. divided by 400 sf. plus 515 dwelling units = 843 parking stalls).
9 Pursuant to SMC Section 37-30.250, mixed use developments shall have a maximum commercial FAR of 1.0 plus ten dwelling units per net acre. Further, as described in Section 37-30.260, within a mixed-use building providing commercial uses of at least 0.25 FAR, allowable floor area may be substituted for residential dwelling units at a ratio of one dwelling unit for each one thousand square feet of allowable floor area to the maximum FAR of 1.0. For example, the maximum development potential of a one-acre lot is forty-three thousand five hundred sixty square feet of commercial floor area plus ten dwelling units. A proposed mixed-use building providing at least 10,890 sq. ft. of commercial floor area could also include forty-three dwelling units as follows: 43,560 sq. ft. × 0.25 = 10,890 sq. ft.; 43,560 sq. ft. - 10,890 sq. ft. = 32,670 sq. ft./1,000 sq. ft. = 33 dwelling + 10 dwelling units = 43 dwelling units.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 43 In addition, most CalEEMod default factors were utilized. All lengths of the construction phases were multiplied by three (3) to assume a buildout by the end of 2026 and starting operations in 2027. Note: the model assumes simultaneous buildout of all the parcels.

4.3.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. The applicable air quality plan is the MBARD’s 2012-2015 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP). A project could be inconsistent with the AQMP if: 1) the project-generated emissions of either of the ozone precursor pollutants (ROG, NOx) or PM10 would exceed the MBARD’s significance thresholds and 2) the project would result in a change of land use and corresponding increases in population generation, housing, or employment growth exceeding 2015 AQMP forecasts.

For the proposed Project, operational and construction-related emissions of criteria air pollutants were estimated using CalEEMod. As shown in Table 4-2, estimated total operational emissions for ROG, NOx, and PM10 are below all significance thresholds. Further, as shown in Table 4-3, estimated total construction-related emissions for PM10 are below the significance threshold. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project-generated emissions would not exceed the MBARD’s significance thresholds and therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

Table 4-2 Operational Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants, Unmitigated Emissions Source (lbs per day) CO NOx ROG PM10 PM2.5
Area 42.4613 0.4891 17.3750 0.2356 0.2356
Energy 0.5332 1.1725 0.1366 0.0944 0.0944
Mobile 182.7619 24.6417 21.4448 36.2175 9.8476
Total Operational Emissions 225.7563 26.3033 38.9564 36.5475 10.1776 Significance Threshold 550 137 137 150 82
Exceed Threshold? No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0, ran on November 21, 2022 Emissions presented are the highest of the winter and summer modeled emissions.

Table 4-3 Construction Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants, Unmitigated Emissions Source (lbs per day) CO NOx ROG PM10 PM2.5
Construction Year 2023 67.5007 83.6699 8.4372 32.9868 17.2775 Construction Year 2024 28.5573 18.3989 2.9348 4.5726 1.6693 Construction Year 2025 27.6269 17.2605 2.7427 4.4854 1.5873 Construction Year 2026 41.8064 25.7114 139.2398 5.0263 2.0042 Maximum Emissions 67.5007 83.6699 139.2398 32.9868 17.2775 Significance Threshold N/A N/A N/A 82 N/A
Exceed Threshold? No No No No No
Source: CalEEMod, Version 2020.4.0, ran on November 21, 2022 Emissions presented are the highest of the winter and summer modeled emissions.

While the Project would result in a change of land use, it would not generate corresponding increases in population generation, housing, or employment growth that exceeds 2015 AQMP forecasts. Although no physical development is proposed, the Project site could yield up to 131,414 square feet of commercial use and 515 residential units, which would generate approximately 382 employees and 2,137 residents(See Section 4.14). As described in Section

4.14, these increases are within the 2015 AQMP forecasts. Therefore, it can be determined that the Project would CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 44 not result in a change of land use and corresponding increases in population generation, housing, or employment growth that would exceed 2015 AQMP forecasts. As a result, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

Overall, the Project-generated emissions of either of the ozone precursor pollutants or PM10 would not exceed the MBARD’s significance thresholds, and the Project would not result in a change of land use and corresponding increases in population generation, housing, or employment growth exceeding 2015 AQMP forecasts. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan and a less than significant impact would occur. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Operational and construction-related emissions of criteria air pollutants were estimated for the proposed Project using CalEEMod.

Operational Emissions
Operational activities such as vehicle trips, use of natural gas and electricity, consumer products, architectural coatings, and landscape maintenance equipment can generate long-term mobile, energy, and area-type emissions.

Operational emissions were estimated using CalEEMod, assuming an operational date/assumed buildout of the site by end of year 2026. This assumption provides a conservative estimate for operational emissions as it is likely that parcels within the Project site would be developed independently and at varying time intervals. As shown in Table 4-2, estimated total operational-related emissions are below all MBARD significance thresholds. Because emissions are below these thresholds, the Project can be presumed to have a less than significant impact.

Construction Emissions
Construction activities such as excavation, grading, and on-site vehicles generate emissions that represent temporary impacts that are typically short in duration, depending on the size, phasing, and type of project.

According to MBARD’s CEQA Guidelines, construction activities which directly generate 82 pounds per day or more of PM10 would have a significant impact on local air quality when they are located nearby and upwind of sensitive receptors. If modeling demonstrates that direct emissions under individual or cumulative conditions would not cause the exceedance of the PM10 significance thresholds at existing receptors as averaged over 24 hours, the impact would not be considered significant.

Construction emissions were estimated using CalEEMod, assuming a four (4)-year buildout of all parcels within the Project site simultaneously. This assumption provides a conservative estimate for construction emissions as it is likely that parcels within the Project site would be developed independently and at varying time intervals. As shown in Table 4-3, estimated total construction-related emissions for PM10 are below the 82 pounds per day significance threshold. Because emissions are below this threshold, the Project can be presumed to have a less than significant impact. However, to further ensure that emissions of future development of the Project site are below the significance threshold, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure AQ-1 and Mitigation Measure AQ-2.

Through incorporation, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Lastly, future development resulting from Project implementation would be reviewed and conditioned by the MBARD for compliance with applicable rules and regulations including but not limited to Rule 200 (Permits CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 45 Required), Rule 400 (Visible Emissions), Rule 403 (Particulate Matter), Rule 402 (Nuisance), Rule 425 (Use of Cutback Asphalt), and Rule 426 (Architectural Coatings). Thus, compliance with MBARD’s rules would further reduce emissions during operations and/or construction activity.

Overall, the anticipated development of the Project site would not have potential emissions of regulated criterion pollutants that exceed the MBARD adopted thresholds. Incorporation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1 and Mitigation Measure AQ-2 and compliance with MBARD’s rules would further reduce emissions. Consequently, the Project would result in a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Construction Air Quality. During construction, the applicant or successor in interest for each individual site shall:
• Limit grading to 8.1 acres per day, and limit grading and excavation to 2.2 acres per day. • Provide watering trucks on site to maintain adequate soil moisture during grading and water. graded/excavated areas at least twice daily, thus minimizing dust generation. In addition, the water trucks shall be used to wash down trucks and tractors, including earth loads, prior to entering public roadways.
• Prohibit all grading activities whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph). • Maintain a minimum of two feet for freeboard for all haul trucks. • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose materials. • Cover inactive storage piles.
• Enforce a 15-mph speed limit for all unpaved surfaces when visible dust clouds are formed by vehicle movement.
• Place gravel base near site entrances to clean tires prior to entering public roadways.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2: MBARD Health Risk Consultation. Prior to issuance of any grading permit and/or building permit for each individual site, the applicant or successor in interest shall consult with MBARD regarding the potential need for a diesel health risk assessment (HRA). If required, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare a diesel HRA and shall implement the measures contained therein to ensure that project-specific emissions are below MBARD’s established health risk thresholds: hazard index greater than 1 for acute or chronic impacts, and cancer risk greater than 10 in one million for long-term operational emissions or 1 per 100,000 population for temporary construction-related emissions. Measures may include, but would not be limited to:
• Use of diesel-fueled equipment equipped with Tier 4 (or Tier 3 if the Tier 4 standard is unavailable) USEPA engine standards. The USEPA estimates that Tier 4 engines would reduce PM emissions by approximately 90 percent compared to the USEPA Tier 2 standards (USEPA 2008). • Retrofit off-road diesel equipment with Verified Diesel Emissions Control Strategy (VDECS) like Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF). Particulate Matter level 3 VDECS can provide at least an 85 percent reduction (CARB 2015).
• Use alternatively fueled (e.g., natural gas) diesel construction equipment, including all off-road and portable diesel-powered equipment.
• Use electrically driven equipment that is not powered by a portable generator set. • Limit the hours of operation for heavy-duty equipment and/or limit the quantity of heavy-duty equipment operating at the same time.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 46 c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors are defined as people that have an increased sensitivity to air pollution or environmental contaminants. Sensitive receptors include schools, parks and playgrounds, day care centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential dwelling units. The nearest sensitive receptors to the Project site are single-family residences located approximately 75 feet northeast of the site. As stated under criterion a) above, emissions during construction or operation would not reach the significance thresholds and would not be anticipated to result in concentrations that reach or surpass ambient air quality requirements. Further, anticipated development that would result from Project implementation would not be uses that would generate toxic emissions (i.e., Type A uses identified by the CAPCOA guidelines). Therefore, the Project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and a less than significant impact would occur. d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than Significant Impact. Construction activities may emit temporary odors from exhaust and fumes associated with vehicles and equipment. Such odors would be short-term and cease upon completion. In addition, discharge of air contaminants or other materials that would cause a nuisance or detriment to a considerable number of persons or the public would be prohibited through compliance with MBARD Rule 402. Therefore, construction activities would not result in other emissions adversely affecting a substantial number of people and a less than significant impact would occur.

Specific uses and operations that are considered sources of undesirable odors include landfills, transfer stations, composting facilities, sewage treatment plants, wastewater pump stations, asphalt batch plants and rendering plants. The Project would not consist of such land uses; rather, implementation of the proposed Project would facilitate mixed use development, including residential and commercial uses that are unlikely to produce odors that would be considered to adversely affect a substantial number of people. Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.

4.3.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Air Quality related mitigation measures AQ-1 and AQ-2 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION

5. CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 47

4.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Have a substantial adverse effect,
either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on
any riparian habitat or other sensitive
natural community identified in local
or regional plans, policies, regulations
or by the California Department of
Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife
Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
state or federally protected wetlands
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through
direct removal, filling, hydrological
interruption, or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or
ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation
policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 48

4.4.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within the Salinas city limits and is planned and zoned for industrial and commercial uses.

Street frontage includes East Alisal Street, a four (4)-lane east-west major arterial in addition to several two (2)-lane local streets, Rianda Circle, JD Alvarado Circle, Prader Street, and Griffin Street. A segment of Union Pacific Railroad is located adjacent to the Project site to the west. The existing biotic conditions and resources of the site can be defined primarily as urban landscaping with heavy alteration and disturbance given the existing commercial and industrial uses. There are existing trees and shrubs throughout the site and along the East Alisal Street rights-ofway. No water features are present.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife – Special-Status Species Database The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) operates an “Information for Planning and Consultation” (IPaC) database, which is a project planning tool for the environmental review process that provides general information on the location of special-status species that are “known” or “expected” to occur (note: the database does not provide occurrences; refer to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Natural Diversity Database below). 10i Specifically, the IPaC database identifies 13 endangered species in Salinas including: California condor, Least Bell’s Vireo, Southwestern Willow Flycatcher, Yellow-billed Cuckoo, California Red-legged Frog, California Tiger Salamander, Monarch Butterfly, Vernal Pool Fairy Shrimp, Contra Costa Goldfields, Marsh Sandwort, Monterey Gilia, Monterey Spineflower, and Yandon’s Piperia.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife – Critical Habitat Report
Once a species is listed under the federal Endangered Species Act, NOAA Fisheries is required to determine whether there are areas that meet the definition of Critical Habitat. Per NOAA Fisheries, Critical Habitat is defined as:
• Specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species at the time of listing that contain physical or biological features essential to conservation of the species and that may require special management considerations or protection; and
• Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species if the agency determines that the area itself is essential for conservation.
11 The process of Critical Habitat designation is complex and involves the consideration of scientific data, public and peer review, economic, national security, and other relevant impacts.

According to the Critical Habitat for Threatened & Endangered Species Report updated September 28, 2022, the City of Salinas, inclusive of the Project site and its immediate vicinity (0.5-mile radius from the site) are not located 10 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Information and Planning Consultation Online System. Accessed on October 12, 2022, https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/
11 National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Critical Habitat. Accessed on October 12, 2022, https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/national/endangered-species-conservation/critical-habitat#key-regulations CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 49 within a federally designated Critical Habitat.12 No critical habitats are identified in the city limits. The closest federally designated Critical Habitat is located approximately 5.3 miles southwest of the Project site designated for the Monterey spineflower (Chorizanthe pungens var. pungens).

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service – National Wetlands Inventory The USFWS provides a National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) with detailed information on the abundance, characteristics, and distribution of U.S. wetlands. A search of the NWI shows no federally protected wetlands (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) on the Project site or within the immediate vicinity (0.5-mile radius) of the Project site.
13 The NWI does not identify any water features within the Project site. The closest water feature identified is a 0.6-acre R2UBHx riverine habitat, Alisal Creek, approximately 0.02 miles east of the Project site. R2UBHx indicates Riverine System (R) of a lower perennial (2) with an unconsolidated bottom (UB) that is permanently flooded (H) and has been excavated by humans (x) (i.e., canal). Additionally, the Project site is not within or adjacent to a riparian area nor does the site contain water features.

Environmental Protection Agency – WATERS Geoviewer
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) WATERS GeoViewer provides a GeoPlatform based web mapping application of water features by location. According to the WATERS GeoViewer, there is a catchment within the Project site, where a catchment is defined as a local drainage area for a specific stream segment (see Figure 4-3).

The catchment is further associated with Alisal Slough which has been drained and filled. Alisal Creek runs to the east of the Project site. There are no streams, canals, or waterbodies on the Project site. 14 12 U.S. Fish & Wildlife. (2021). ECOS Environmental Conservation Online System - USFWS Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report (updated September 28, 2022). Accessed October 12, 2022, https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html 13 U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. National Wetlands Inventory. Accessed October 12, 2022, https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html
14 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. WATERS GeoViewer. Accessed October 12, 2022, https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=074cfede236341b6a1e03779c2bd0692 CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 50 Figure 4-3 Water Features in Project Vicinity
Canals
Catchments
Hydrologic Units
D Project Site
CllY OF SALINAS -Genera l Plan Amendment & Rezone: AlisalMarketplace CV$/ptlartn•~
EAHufSt
Created 10/12/2022
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 51 California Department of Fish and Wildlife – Natural Diversity Database The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) operates the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), which is an inventory of the status and locations of rare plants and animals in California in addition to the reported occurrences of such species.15 According to the CDFW CNDDB, there are 38 special-status species with a total of 75 occurrences that have been observed and reported to the CDFW in or near the Salinas Quad as designated by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) (the Salinas Quad includes most of the City of Salinas, inclusive of the Project site). Of the 38 species, there are seven (7) federally or state-listed species: tricolored blackbird, California tiger salamander, Monterey spineflower, seaside bird-beak, Monterey gilia, Contra Costa goldfields, and California redlegged frog.7F 16 Appendix B lists the CNDDB-identified animal and plant species within the Salinas Quad, including their habitat and occurrences.

The CNDDB also provides CNDDB-known occurrences within a set geographic radius. Figure 4-4 shows the CNDDBidentified occurrences of animal and plant species within the five (5)-mile radius of the Project site. Table 4-4 lists all federally or state-listed special-status species CNDDB-known occurrences within the five (5)-mile radius of the Project site, organized by distance to the site. As shown, the nearest occurrences are California red-legged frog approximately 3.8 miles northeast of the site, dated 2004, and Tricolored Blackbird approximately 4.0 miles northeast, dated 2004. Other species that are not federally or state-listed that are near the Project site include western spadefoot, western bumble bee, alkali milk-vetch, and burrowing owl. The CNNDB ranks occurrences by the condition of habitat and ability of the species to persist over time. As shown, the occurrences within the five (5)-mile radius of the Project site are ranked as unknown and fair. Table 4-5 provides an analysis of essential habitats and the potential for the existence of the special-status species to exist on the Project site. 15 California Department of Fish and Wildlife. California Natural Diversity Database. Accessed September 7, 2022, https://wildlife.ca.gov/Data/CNDDB
16 California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Biogeographic Information and Observation System. Accessed September 7, 2022, https://apps.wildlife.ca.gov/bios/?tool=cnddbQuick CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 52 Figure 4-4 CNDDB Species Occurrences
O
IZJ Plant {non-specific)
Plant { circular)
■ An imal {80m)
183 Animal { specific)
fZ) An imal {non-specific)
0 Animal { circular)
0 Multiple {circular)
.A Project Site
5-mile rad ius from
the Proje ct Site
Note: Data Accuracy
Accuracy represents spatial
uncertainty in a relative way
on a scale of one to ten (from
most accurate to least
accurate).

Specific• Specific bounded
area. (Level 1)
Non-specific· Non-specific
bounded area. (Level 3)
80 m - Specific bounded
area with an 80-meter
radius. (Level 1)
t=RECISIO N l"G~r •-.o +--
Source: California Natural
Diversity Database
'
' l ;
g_i .,
1 ~FO<kle~~
CllY OF SALINAS -General Plan Amendment
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 53 Table 4-4 Special-Status Species Occurrences within 5-mile radius of Project site Species Date Rank Distance to site
California red-legged frog 5/12/2004 Fair* 3.8 miles northeast Tricolored Blackbird 5/19/2004 Fair* 4.0 miles northeast California tiger salamander 11/8/2021 Unknown 4.2 miles northeast Tricolored Blackbird 5/4/1932 Unknown 5.0 miles northwest Only federally or state-listed threatened/endangered species are listed in the table.

Extirpated or possible extirpated occurrences are not shown in the table. * Fair (C) - Population small and/or potentially not very viable OR habitat in disturbed, fragmented or otherwise suboptimal condition. Disturbances are more severe and can include nearby development, heavy recreational use, ORV use and damage, heavy weed infestation, and more.

Population not expected to persist in the long term but may persist for 10 years.

Table 4-5 Essential Habitats and Potential Existence of Special-Status Species on Site Special-Status
Species
General Habitat Micro Habitat Assessment
California redlegged frogLowlands and foothills
in or near permanent
sources of deep water
with dense, shrubby or
emergent riparian
vegetation.

Requires 11-20 weeks of
permanent water for
larval development. Must
have access for estivation
habitat.

The Project site is fully developed.

The site does not contain any
waterbodies. As such, the site
does not provide suitable habitat.

Tricolored
Blackbird
Highly colonial species,
most numerous in
central valley and
vicinity. Largely
endemic to California.

Requires open water,
protected nesting
substrate, and foraging
area with insect prey
within a few km of the
colony.

The Project site is fully developed.

The site does not contain any
open water. As such, the site does
not provide suitable habitat.

California tiger
salamander
Lives in vacant or
mammal-occupied
burrows throughout
most of the year; in
grassland, savanna, or
open woodland
habitats.

Need underground
refuges, especially
ground squirrel burrows,
and vernal pools or other
seasonal water sources
for breeding.

The Project site is fully developed
and mostly paved. The site does
not contain grassland, burrows,
woodland, or waterbodies. As
such, the site does not provide
suitable habitat.

California Fish and Game Code
Sections 3503, 3503.5, and 3513 of the California Fish and Game Code specifically protect native birds and raptors.

Mitigation for avoidance of impacts to nesting birds is typically necessary to comply with these Sections of the Fish and Game Code in CEQA. 17
17 The California Biologist's Handbook. California Fish and Game Code. Accessed on October 12, 2022, https://biologistshandbook.com/regulations/state-regulations/state-fish-and-gamecode/#:~:text=Section%203503,any%20regulation%20made%20pursuant%20thereto.%E2%80%9D CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 54 Section 3503: It is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto.

Section 3503.5: It is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconiformes or Strigiformes (birdsof-prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.

Section 3513: It is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the Migratory Treaty Act.

General Plan
The Ecological and Biological Resources Element of the Salinas General Plan provides policies to protect and enhance significant ecological and biological resources within the City. The General Plan identifies resources including Salinas River, Carr Lake, Carr Lake tributaries and sloughs, and the reclamation ditch that provide riparian habitat for a variety of species. Figure 4-5 from the General Plan identifies vegetative communities in the city’s planning area. The Project site is not located in an area with an identified vegetative community. A policy included in the General Plan that may be applicable to the Project site is:

Policy COS-20 Oak Tree Retention. Require project developers to retain coast live oak and valley oak trees within the planning area, including oaks within new development areas. All coast live oak and valley oak trees should be surveyed prior to construction to determine if any raptor nests are present and active. If active nests are observed, the construction should be postponed until the end of the fledgling.

City of Salinas Municipal Code
The City of Salinas Municipal Code Chapter 35 - Trees and Shrubs, establishes standards for the planting of trees, plants, or shrubs. Applicable regulations include:

Section 35-14 – Trees, etc., to be protected during construction. During the erection, repair or alteration of any building, house or structure in the city, no person in charge of such work shall leave any tree, shrub or plant in any street, parkway or alley in the city in the vicinity of such building or structure without such good and sufficient guards or protectors as shall prevent injury to such tree, shrub or plant arising out of or by reason of the erection, repair or alteration.

Section 35-18 – Heritage and/or landmark trees. No heritage or landmark Oak tree shall be removed from city property except with the prior written approval by the director.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 55 Figure 4-5 Vegetation Communities in the City of Salinas ·-·- City llound.,y ~ . R;parbn Wooclbnd ~ Oak Woodland '!"!'!--!""""""" Furun; CN!!1h /\Ra -!n~! D Grwl,,nd
Wedioda and Poncb
Project Location D /\gnturutt
~ ••••• Rlpu1,n Woodland,

1...0..nnol
Wctl.odund Pond. Figure COS-4
0 1,SOO ~-n. Vegetation Communities
City of Salinas Soptomber 2002
G..,.,,ol Pion COS-30
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 56

4.4.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project site is fully developed and paved, containing existing structures and on- and off-site improvements including drive approaches, curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, utilities, and landscaping. There are approximately 23 existing structures on the site that predominately consist of commercial and industrial uses. The existing biotic conditions and resources of the site can be defined primarily as urban landscaping with heavy alteration and disturbance given the existing commercial and industrial uses. There are existing trees and shrubs throughout the site and along the East Alisal Street rights-of-way. No water features are present.

As shown in Table 4-4, there are no recorded occurrences of special-status species or critical habitats on the Project site. In addition, as described in Table 4-5, the site conditions provide low suitability for habitat for any candidate, sensitive, or special-status species that may occur on the Project site or vicinity. However, the existing trees and shrubs throughout the site and along the East Alisal Street rights-of-way could provide habitat for birds and raptors that are protected under CFGC Sections 3503 and 3503.5. Future development of the site could result in the removal of this vegetation and thereby impact protected nesting birds through direct habitat modifications.

Therefore, to reduce impacts to protected nesting birds that may occur during site construction and development, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure BIO-1. Through incorporation of the mitigation measure, potentially significant impacts would be reduced to less than significant with mitigation incorporated and the Project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.

Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Nesting Bird Surveys and Avoidance. The Project shall implement the following measures to mitigate for loss of nesting habitat of the Project in compliance with the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and relevant Fish and Game Codes:
• Avoidance. In order to avoid impacts to nesting raptors and migratory birds, the Project will be constructed, if feasible, from September 16th and January 31st, which is outside the avian nesting season. • Preconstruction Surveys. If Project activities must occur during the nesting season (February 1-September 15), a qualified biologist will conduct preconstruction surveys for active raptor and migratory bird nests within 10 days prior to the start of these activities. The survey will include the proposed work area(s) and surrounding lands within 500 feet, where accessible, for all nesting raptors and migratory birds. If no active nests are found within the survey area, no further mitigation is required. • Establish Buffers. Should any active nests be discovered near proposed work areas, no disturbance buffers of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and 500 feet around active nests of non-listed raptors will be established. If work needs to occur within these no disturbance buffers, a qualified biologist will monitor the nest daily for one week, and thereafter once a week, throughout the duration of CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 57 construction activity. Should the nature of construction activity significantly change, such that a higher level of disturbance will be generated, monitoring will occur daily for one week and then resume the once-a-week regime. If, at any time, the biologist determines that construction activity may be compromising nesting success, construction activity within the designated buffer will be altered or suspended until the biologist determines that the nest site is no longer susceptible to deleterious disturbance. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
No Impact. According to the General Plan and CDFW and USFWS databases, there are no known riparian habitats or other sensitive natural communities identified on the Project site or within the immediate vicinity of the Project.

In addition, the site does not contain any water features that would provide habitat for riparian species. Further, the site consists of scant vegetation. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project site does not provide any riparian or sensitive natural community habitat and thus, no impact would occur because of the Project. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No Impact. Based on the search of the NWI, the Project site does not contain any federally protected wetlands. As a result, it can be determined that the Project site would not result in any impact on state or federally protected wetlands and no impact would occur because of the Project. d) Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less than Significant Impact. Wildlife movement corridors are linear habitats that function to connect two (2) or more areas of significant wildlife habitat. These corridors may function on a local level as links between small habitat patches (e.g., streams in urban settings) or may provide critical connections between regionally significant habitats (e.g., deer movement corridors).

Wildlife corridors typically include vegetation and topography that facilitate the movements of wild animals from one area of suitable habitat to another, in order to fulfill foraging, breeding, and territorial needs. These corridors often provide cover and protection from predators that may be lacking in surrounding habitats. Wildlife corridors generally include riparian zones and similar linear expanses of contiguous habitat.

As previously mentioned, the Project site does not contain habitat that could support wildlife species in nesting, foraging, or escaping from predators. This is based on the existing conditions of the site including the site’s heavy alteration and lack of cover, vegetation, or water features. Due to these conditions, it can be determined that the Project would not interfere with wildlife movement and a less than significant impact would occur. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Less than Significant Impact. SMC Chapter 35 - Trees and Shrubs establishes standards and regulations related to the planting, maintenance, and removal of trees and shrubs in the City of Salinas. Planting, maintenance, and removal of existing trees on the Project site would be subject to compliance with these standards and regulations.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 58 There are no other local policies or ordinances that protect biological resources applicable to the Project. Through compliance, the Project would have a less than significant impact. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? No Impact. There are no adopted Habitat Conservation Plans, Natural Community Conservation Plans, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans applicable to the Project site. As such there would be no impact.

4.4.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Biological Resources related mitigation measure BIO-1 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION

5. CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 59

4.5 CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical
resource as defined in Section
15064.5?

b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to Section
15064.5?

c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries?

4.5.1 Environmental Setting
Generally, the term ‘cultural resources’ describes property types such as prehistoric and historical archaeological sites, buildings, bridges, roadways, and tribal cultural resources. As defined by CEQA, cultural resources are considered “historical resources” that meet criteria in Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. If a Lead Agency determines that a project may have a significant effect on a historical resource, then the project is determined to have a significant impact on the environment. No further environmental review is required if a cultural resource is not found to be a historical resource.

California Historical Resource Information System Record Search The Northwest Information Center (NWIC) was requested to conduct a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Record Search for the Project site and surrounding “Project Area” (0.5-mile radius from perimeter of Project site). Results of the CHRIS Record Search were provided on April 14, 2022 (Record Search File Number 21-1411). Full results are provided in Appendix C.

The CHRIS Record Searches generally review file information based on results of Class III pedestrian reconnaissance surveys of project sites conducted by qualified individuals or consultant firms which are required to be submitted, along with official state forms properly completed for each identified resource, to the Regional Archaeological Information Center. Guidelines for the format and content of all types of archaeological reports have been developed by the California Office of Historic Preservation, and reports will be reviewed by the regional information centers to determine whether they meet those requirements.

The results of the SJJIC CHRIS Record Search indicate:
(1) There were no previous cultural resource studies conducted within the project area. (2) There are no recorded archaeological resources or historical buildings and structures within the project area.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 60 (3) The State Office of Historic Preservation Built Environment Resources Directory (OHP BERD), which includes listings of the California Register of Historical Resources, California State Historical Landmarks, California State Points of Historical Interest, and the National Register of Historic Places, lists no previously recorded buildings or structures within or adjacent to the proposed project area.

Further, the NWIC provided the following comments and recommendations:
(1) Prior to any future development and ground disturbance activities, a qualified, professional consultant should conduct a field survey to determine if cultural resources are present. (2) Contact the NAHC for a list of Native American tribes that can assist with information regarding traditional, cultural, and religious heritage values.
(3) If the proposed project area contains buildings or structures that meet the minimum age requirement (45 years of age or older), prior to commencement of project activities, it is recommended that the unrecorded building or structure be documented on Office of Historic Preservation’s DPR 523 resource recordation forms by a professional familiar with the architecture and history of Monterey County. (4) Mitigate for archaeological resources that could potentially be encountered during construction.

California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)
A consultation list of tribes with traditional lands or cultural places located within Monterey County was requested and received from the California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) on April 8, 2022. The listed tribes include Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, Amah Mutsun Tribal Band of Mission San Juan Bautista, Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe, Esselen Tribe of Monterey County, Indian Canyon Mutsun Band of Costanoan, Ohlone/CostanoanEsselen Nation, Wuksache Indian Tribe/Eshom Valley Band, Xolon-Salinan Tribe, and Runsen Am:a Tur:ataj Ohlone.

The NAHC also conducted a Sacred Lands File (SFL) check which received positive results. Correspondence is provided in Appendix D.

AB 52 and SB 18 Tribal Consultation
The City of Salinas conducted formal tribal consultation pursuant to AB 52 (Chapter 532, Statutes 2014) and SB 18 (Chapter 905, Statutes 2004) on June 14, 2022, utilizing the consultation list of tribes received from the NAHC. The same nine (9) tribes listed above were included in the formal consultation. Consultation for AB 52 ended on July 14, 2022, and consultation for SB 18 ended on September 12, 2022. Chairperson Louise Miranda-Ramirez of the Ohlone/Costanoan-Esselen Nation requested formal consultation on September 13, 2022. Formal consultation was held by telephone on June 21, 2023. Nine (9) mitigation measures were requested through formal consultation, as incorporated in Section 4.5 and Section 4.18. No response was received from the other tribes.

General Plan
The Salinas General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element identifies the following policies related to historic and cultural resources.

Policy COS-13 California Environmental Quality Act. Continue to assess development proposals for potential impacts to sensitive historic, archaeological, and paleontological resources pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 61 a. For structures that potentially have historic significance, require that a study be conducted by a professional archaeologist or historian to determine the actual significance of the structure and potential impacts of the proposed development in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5. The City may require modification of the project and/or mitigation measures to avoid any impact to a historic structure, when feasible.
b. For all development proposals within the Carr Lake/Natividad Creek corridor, require a study to be conducted by a professional archaeologist. The objective of the study is to determine if significant archaeological resources are potentially present and if the project will significantly impact the resources. If significant impacts are identified, the City may require the project to be modified to avoid the impacts, or require mitigation measures to mitigate the impacts. Mitigation may involve archaeological investigation and resources recovery.

Policy COS-14 Historic/Architectural Preservation. Consider implementing a historic/architectural preservation program and a historic/architectural preservation ordinance that encourages public/private partnerships to preserve and enhance historically significant buildings in the community.

The General Plan also identifies the Carr Lake/Natividad Creek corridor and the northwest portion of the city’s planning area on either side of Highway 101 as areas having high potential of containing archeological sites.

Monterey County requires archeological field inspections prior to all proposed development in high sensitivity zones. The Project site is not within a high sensitivity zone (see Figure 4-6).

City of Salinas Historic Resources Board
The Historic Resources Board (HRB) was created on April 27, 2010, by the City Council’s adoption of Ordinance # 2505. The HRB was tasked by the Council to protect Salinas’ architectural heritage assets for education, community revitalization and the promotion of heritage tourism. 18 SMC Chapter 3 Article 2 – Historic Resources Board codifies the operations of the HRB. For instance, Section 3-02.05 – Designation process allows the board to recommend the promotion, preservation, restoration, and protection of historic resources to the City Council. Other sections regulate designation amendment, powers of City Council, maintenance and repair, enforcement, and incentives for historic preservation.
18 City of Salinas. Historic Resources Board. Accessed on October 24, 2022, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/ourgovernment/boards-commissions/historic-resources-board CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 62 Figure 4-6 County of Monterey Archeological Sensitivity Map C] Project Site
high archaeological sensitivity
low archaeological sensitivity
Source: City of Salinas

0.45 0.9 1.8
CITY OF SALINAS - General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal M arketplace

2.7 Miles
\.

PRECISIO N --s;.YIL ENG,N~EilllNCi, 1p,.s,,_
Created 10/24/2022
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 63

4.5.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the CHRIS Records Search conducted on April 14, 2022, there are no known local, state, or federal designated historical resources pursuant to Section 15064.5 on the Project site. While there is no evidence that historical resources exist on the Project site, there is some possibility that existing structures qualify as historical resources or hidden, and buried resources may exist with no surface evidence that may be impacted by future physical development of the site. While the Project does not propose development, future redevelopment may include typical construction activities such as demolition of existing buildings, grading, trenching, excavation, etc. In order to ensure that the existing structures are not of historical significance at the time of demolition, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-1 to mitigate the destruction or alternation of any potential historical structures. Thus, if such resources were discovered, implementation of the required mitigation measures would reduce the impact to less than significant. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure CUL-1 Historical Resources Identification and Treatment Plan Prior to permit approval for development on the Project site, a historical resources evaluation shall be completed for that individual site to confirm if existing buildings and/or structures withing these sites qualify as historical resources as defined by Section 15064.5(a) of CEQA Guidelines. The evaluation shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (PQS) in architectural history or history. The qualified architectural historian or historian shall conduct an intensive-level evaluation in accordance with the guidelines and best practices promulgated by the State Office of Historic Preservation to identify any potential historical resources within the proposed project area. All properties 45 years of age or older shall be evaluated within their historic context and documented in a report meeting the State Office of Historic Preservation guidelines. All evaluated properties shall be documented on Department of Parks and Recreation Series 523 Forms. The report shall be submitted to the City for review and concurrence.

If significant historical resources are identified on a development site and compliance with the Standards and or avoidance is not feasible, the applicant or developer shall provide a report explaining why compliance with the Standards and or avoidance is not feasible for the City’s review and approval. Site-specific mitigation measures shall be established and undertaken, including, but not limited to, documentation of the historical resource in the form of CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 64 a Historic American Buildings Survey-Like report. The report shall be commissioned by the project applicant or their consultant to comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Architectural and Engineering Documentation and shall generally follow the Historic American Buildings Survey Level III requirements, including digital photographic recordation, detailed historic narrative report, and compilation of historic research. The documentation shall be completed by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the PQS and submitted to the City prior to issuance of any permits for demolition or alteration of the historical resource. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the CHRIS Records Search conducted on April 14, 2022, there are no known archeological resources pursuant to Section 15064.5 on the Project site. While there is no evidence that archeological resources exist on the Project site, there is some possibility that existing structures qualify as historical resources or hidden, and buried resources may exist with no surface evidence that may be impacted by future physical development of the site. In the event of the accidental discovery and recognition of previously unknown historical resources before or during construction activities, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-2 through CUL-8 as described below to assure construction activities do not result in significant impacts to any potential archeologicalresources discovered above or below ground surface. Thus, if such resources were discovered, implementation of the required mitigation measures would reduce the impact to less than significant. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure CUL-3 Extended Phase I Testing
If recommended by the Phase I study for each individual site (Mitigation Measure CUL-2), the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to conduct an Extended Phase I (XPI) study to determine the presence/absence and extent of archaeological resources on the project site. XPI testing shall include a series of shovel test pits and/or hand augured units and/or mechanical trenching to establish the boundaries of archaeological site(s) on the project site.

If the boundaries of the archaeological site are already well understood from previous archaeological work, an XPI will not be required. All archaeological excavation shall be conducted by a qualified archaeologist(s) under the CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 65 direction of a principal investigator meeting the SOI’s PQS for archaeology (National Park Service 1983). If an XPI report is prepared, it shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of a grading or construction permit. Recommendations therein shall be implemented for all ground disturbance activities.

Mitigation Measure CUL-4 Archaeological Site Avoidance
Any identified archaeological sites (determined after implementing Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and/or CUL-3) or archaeological resources encountered during ground-disturbing activities shall be avoided by project-related construction activities, where feasible. A barrier (temporary fencing) and flagging shall be placed between the work location and any resources within 60 feet of a work location to minimize the potential for inadvertent impacts. If the resource cannot be avoided, Mitigation Measure CUL-5 shall be implemented.

Mitigation Measure CUL-5 Phase II Site Evaluation
If the results of any Phase I and/or XPI for each individual site (Mitigation Measures CUL-2 and/or CUL-3) indicate the presence of archaeological resources that cannot be avoided by the project (Mitigation Measure CUL-4) and that have not been adequately evaluated for the NRHP or CRHR listing at the project site, the qualified archaeologist shall conduct a Phase II investigation to determine if intact deposits remain and if they may be eligible for the CRHR or qualify as unique archaeological resources. If the archaeological resource(s) of concern are Native American in origin, the qualified archaeologist shall confer with the City and local California Native American tribe(s).

A Phase I evaluation shall include any necessary archival research to identify significant historical associations and mapping of surface artifacts, collection of functionally or temporally diagnostic tools and debris, and excavation of a sample of the cultural deposit. The sample excavation would be carried out to characterize the nature of the site(s), define the artifact and feature contents, determine horizontal and vertical boundaries, and retrieve representative samples of artifacts and other remains.

If the archaeologist and, if applicable, a Native American monitor or other interested tribal representative determine it is appropriate, cultural materials collected from the site shall be processed and analyzed in a laboratory according to standard archaeological procedures. The age of the materials shall be determined using radiocarbon dating and/or other appropriate procedures; lithic artifacts, faunal remains, and other cultural materials shall be identified and analyzed according to current professional standards. The significance of the site(s) shall be evaluated according to the criteria of the CRHR and if applicable, NRHP. The results of the investigations shall be presented in a technical report following the standards of the California Office of Historic Preservation publication “Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Content and Format (1990 or latest edition).” Recommendations in the Phase II report shall be implemented for all ground disturbance activities. Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, Phase III Data Recovery, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-6 through CUL-8). The report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of any grading or construction permits. The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 66 Mitigation Measure CUL-6 Phase III Data Recovery
Should the results of the Phase II site evaluation for each individual site (Mitigation Measure CUL-5) yield resources that meet CRHR significance standards and if the resource cannot be avoided by project construction in accordance with CUL-4, the project applicant shall ensure that all feasible recommendations for mitigation of archaeological impacts are incorporated into the final design and approved by the City prior to construction. Any necessary Phase III data recovery excavation, conducted to exhaust the data potential of significant archaeological sites, shall be carried out by a qualified archaeologist meeting the SOI’s PQS for archeology (National Park Service 1983). Data recovery shall be conducted in accordance with a research design reviewed and approved by the City, prepared in advance of fieldwork, and using the appropriate archaeological field and laboratory methods consistent with the California Office of Historic Preservation Planning Bulletin 5 (1991), Guidelines for Archaeological Research Design, or the latest edition thereof. If the archaeological resource(s) of concern are Native American in origin, the qualified archaeologist shall confer with the City and local California Native American tribe(s).

Mitigation Measure CUL-7 Cultural Resources Monitoring
If recommended by Phase I, XPI, Phase II, or Phase III studies for each individual site (Mitigation Measures CUL-2, CUL-3, CUL-5, and/or CUL-6), the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to monitor project-related, ground-disturbing activities which may include the following but not limited to: grubbing, vegetation removal, trenching, grading, and/or excavations. The archaeological monitor shall coordinate with any Native American monitor as required. Monitoring logs must be completed by the archaeologist daily. Cultural resources monitoring may be reduced for the project if the qualified archaeologist finds it appropriate to reduce the monitoring efforts.

Mitigation Measure CUL-8 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work within 50 feet shall be halted and the project archaeologist meeting the SOI’s PQS for archeology (National Park Service 1983) shall immediately to evaluate the find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of a treatment plan and archaeological testing for CRHR eligibility. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA and cannot be avoided by the project, additional work may be warranted, such as data recovery excavation, to mitigate any significant impacts to significant resources. If the resource is of Native American origin, implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR-1 may be required. Any reports required to document and/or evaluate unanticipated discoveries shall be submitted to the City for review and approval and submitted to the NWIC after completion. Recommendations contained therein shall be implemented throughout the remainder of ground disturbance activities.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 67 c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less Than Significant Impact. There is no evidence that human remains exist on the Project site. Nevertheless, there is some possibility that a non-visible buried site may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which would constitute a significant impact. If any human remains are discovered during construction, then the Project would be subject to CCR Section 15064.5(e), PRC Section 5097.98, and California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. Regulations contained in these sections address and protect human burial remains. Compliance with these regulations would ensure impacts to human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, are less than significant.

4.5.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Cultural Resources related mitigation measures CUL-1 through CUL-8 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 68

4.6 ENERGY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources,
during project construction or
operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or
local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
X

4.6.1 Environmental Setting
The California Energy Commission updates the Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Title 24, Parts 6 and 11) every three years as part of the California Code of Regulations. The standards were established in 1978 in an effort to reduce the state’s energy consumption. They apply to new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings and relate to various energy efficiencies including but not limited to ventilation, air conditioning, and lighting.12F
19 The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen), Part 11, Title 24, California Code of Regulations, was developed in 2007 to meet the state goals for reducing Greenhouse Gas emissions pursuant to AB32. CALGreen covers five (5) categories: planning and design, energy efficiency, water efficiency and conservation, material and resource efficiency, and indoor environmental quality.13F 20 The 2019
Building Energy Efficiency Standards went into effect on January 1, 2020. Additionally, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) oversees air pollution control efforts, regulations, and programs that contribute to reduction of energy consumption. Compliance with these energy efficiency regulations and programs ensuresthat development will not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy sources. Lastly, the Energy Action Plan (EAP) for California was approved in 2003 by the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC). The EAP established goals and next steps to integrate and coordinate energy efficiency demand and response programs and actions.14F 21 General Plan
The Salinas General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element identifies the following goal and policies for energy conservation to sustain existing and future economic and population growth. 19 California Energy Commission. 2019 Building Energy Efficiency Standards. Accessed on September 12, 2022, https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2019-building-energyefficiency 20 California Department of General Services. (2020). 2019 California Green Building Standards Code. Accessed on September 12, 2022, https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CGBC2019P3
21 State of California. (2008). Energy Action Plan 2008 Update. Accessed on September 14, 2022, https://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/word_pdf/REPORT/28715.pdf
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 69 Goal COS-8: Encourage energy conservation.

Policy COS-8.1: Enforce State Title 24 building construction requirements.

Policy COS-8.2: Apply standards that promote energy conservation in new and existing development.

Policy COS-8.5: Encourage land use arrangements and densities that facilitate the use of energy efficient public transit.

Policy COS-8.6: Encourage the creation and retention of neighborhood-level services (e.g., family medical offices, dry cleaners, grocery stores, drug stores) throughout the City in order to reduce energy consumption through automobile use.

4.6.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than Significant Impact. Although no development is currently proposed, future development that results from Project implementation would consume energy resources. Energy would be consumed through future construction and operations. Construction activities typically include demolition, site preparation, grading, paving, architectural coating, and trenching. The primary sources of energy for construction activities are diesel and gasoline, from the transportation of building materials and equipment and construction worker trips. Operations would involve heating, cooling, equipment, and vehicle trips. Energy consumption related to operations would be associated with natural gas, electricity, and fuel.

All construction equipment and operational activities shall conform to current emissions standards and related fuel efficiencies, including applicable CARB regulations (Airborne Toxic Control Measure), California Code of Regulations (Title 13, Motor Vehicles), and Title 24 standards that include a broad set of energy conservation requirements (e.g., Lighting Power Density requirements). Compliance with such regulations would ensure that the short-term, temporary construction activities and long-term operational activities do not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources.

Energy outputs for short-term construction and long-term operations were estimated using CalEEMod (Appendix A) and Project assumptions. Traffic impacts related to vehicle trips were considered through a Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis contained in Section 4.17. Results are summarized as follows.

The Project site would be served by Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) for both electricity and natural gas.

Monterey County consumed approximately 2,434 GWh of electricity, or 0.87 percent of electricity generated in California in 2020 (279,510 GWh) and approximately 10,998,356 MMBtu, or 0.89 percent of natural gas generated in California in 2020 (1,232,858,652 MMBtu).22
22 California Energy Commission. “Electricity Consumption by County.” Accessed on September 7, 2022, http://ecdms.energy.ca.gov/elecbycounty.aspx
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 70 Table 4-6 shows the estimated electricity and natural gas consumption for the Project based on output from CalEEMod. The Project would consume less than one (1) percent of the total electricity used in Monterey County in 2020 and less than one (1) percent of the total natural gas use in Monterey County in 2020. These results do not rise to a level of significance.

Table 4-6 Project Energy Consumption
Energy Consumption Electricity (GWh per year) Natural Gas (MMBtu per year) Project 3.2714 4,439.65
Monterey County 2,434.2729 10,998,356.15
Project Percentage (%) 0.1344 0.04
Regarding energy consumed through vehicle trips, development of the Project site to the maximum permitted density/intensity (i.e., 515 dwelling units and 131,414-square foot commercial space) would generate approximately 1,771 daily trips (See Section 4.17). The anticipated trips do not rise to a level of significance under VMT thresholds as described under Section 4.17 because the site is located along a High-Quality transit corridor, within 0.5-miles of an existing major transit stop that maintains a service interval frequency of 14 minutes or less during peak commute. In addition, the Project site would facilitate the redevelopment of a site within an urbanized area that is surrounded by existing urban uses, which has the potential to further reduce travel miles due to the proximity to existing uses. Mixed use development and development near existing bus stops also encourages the use of transit and alternative transportation modes such as walking and biking.

Overall, energy consumption for the Project does not rise to a level of significance. In addition, through compliance with applicable CARB regulations (Airborne Toxic Control Measure), California Code of Regulations (Title 13, Motor Vehicles), and Title 24 standards, it can be determined that the proposed Project would not consume energy in a manner that is wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary. For these reasons, the Project would result in a less than significant impact.
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed under criterion a), the construction and operations of the Project would be subject to compliance with applicable energy efficiency regulations. Thus, applicable state and local regulations and programs would be implemented to reduce energy waste from construction and operations. Table 4-7 demonstrates that the Project does not conflict with or obstruct with the energy conservation/efficiency policies identified in the General Plan.

Table 4-7 Consistency with General Plan Energy Conservation Policies General Plan Energy Conservation Policies Consistency/Applicability Determination Policy COS-8.1: Enforce State Title 24
building construction requirements.

Consistent. Future development facilitated by the Project would be subject to Title 24 requirements and
conditioned for compliance during the entitlement review and approval process.

Policy COS-8.2: Apply standards that
promote energy conservation in new and
existing development.

Consistent. Future development facilitated by the Project would be required to comply with the Title 24 and
CalGreen standards, which include energy conservation
measures. Compliance would be ensured through the
entitlement review and approval process.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 71 Policy COS-8.5: Encourage land use
arrangements and densities that facilitate
the use of energy efficient public transit.

Consistent. The Project would introduce higher density, mixed use development, including commercial and
residential uses, in an area that is in close proximity to transit.

Policy COS-8.6: Encourage the creation and
retention of neighborhood-level services
(e.g., family medical offices, dry cleaners,
grocery stores, drug stores) throughout the
City in order to reduce energy consumption
through automobile use.

Consistent. The Project would introduce higher density, mixed use development, including commercial and
residential uses, in an area that is in close proximity to transit.

Therefore, through compliance, the Project would not conflict with or obstruct any state or local plan for energy efficiency and a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

4.6.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 72

4.7 GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Directly or Indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:

i. Rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake
Fault Zoning Map issued by
the State Geologist for the
area or based on other
substantial evidence of a
known fault? Refer to Division
of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

X
ii. Strong seismic ground
shaking? X
iii. Seismic-related ground
failure, including liquefaction? X
iv. Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the
loss of topsoil? X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil
that is unstable, or that would become
unstable as a result of the project, and
potentially result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater disposal
systems where sewers are not
available for the disposal of waste
water?
X
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feature?
X
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 73

4.7.1 Environmental Setting
The City of Salinas is located at the northern opening of the Salinas Valley and is situated 10 miles west of Monterey Bay and the Pacific Ocean, approximately mid-way between Santa Cruz and the Monterey Peninsula.

Geographically, the city inclusive of the Project site is in a seismically active region that is subject to various natural hazards such as earthquakes, liquefaction, flooding, landslides, and erosion. A brief discussion of the likelihood of such activities occurring in or affecting the city is provided below. The discussion is based on the 2022 County of Monterey Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) adopted in September 2022 as well as the Salinas General Plan Safety Element.
23 Faulting
There are no known active faults in the city. 24 No Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault zoning has been established for the city. There are two (2) potentially active faults within the city. These potentially active faults include King City Fault and Gabilan Creek Fault, both of which have not been active within the past 11,000 years. The nearest active fault and Alquist-Priolo Fault zoning to the city is the San Andreas Fault, which is located 13 miles northeast of the Project site. 25 Due to the distance from an active fault, there is low potential for ground rupture in the city.

Ground Shaking
The City of Salinasis in Seismic Risk Zone IV, the highest potential risk category due to the frequency and magnitude of earthquake activity nationwide. Therefore, the entire population is potentially exposed to direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes. As shown in Figure 4-7, the Project site is in a zone with moderately high seismic risk.

Earthquake-related damage is often the result of liquefaction.

Liquefaction
Liquefaction primarily occurs in areas of recently deposited sands and silts and in areas of high groundwater levels.

Susceptible areas include sloughs and marshes that have been filled in and developed over. The city has former wetland areas that have been drained, filled, and developed. As shown in Figure 4-8, the Project site is in an area with high susceptibility to liquefaction.

Erosion
The primary types of erosion identified by the HMP are coastal cliff and shoreline erosion. The city is not susceptible to these erosion types in all sea level rise scenarios (i.e., sea level rise at 25 cm, 75 cm, 200 cm). 23 County of Monterey. 2022 Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Accessed on April 27, 2022, https://www.co.monterey.ca.us/home/showpublisheddocument/109180/637800072369600000 24 According to the California Department of Conservation, “An active fault, for the purposes of the Alquist-Priolo Act, is one that has ruptured in the last 11,000 years.”
25 California Department of Conservation. “CGS Seismic Hazard Program: Alquist-Priolo Fault Hazard Zones.” Accessed on October 25, 2022, https://gis.data.ca.gov/maps/ee92a5f9f4ee4ec5aa731d3245ed9f53/explore?location=37.213952%2C117.946341%2C7.19 CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 74 Figure 4-7 City of Salinas, General Plan, Seismic Hazard Zones 0 Oty Bound.ry
l'uturc C,-,h Arc•
Oound.ry
Project Location

2.500
City of Solinas
General Pion
D
Im]
~ .

S.000 II.

L<,\v
Mode rate
Mockrau:ly High
s.22
~
-
High
Very 1-llgh
Figure S- 1
Seismic Hazard Zones
Soplo,nbor 2002
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 75 Figure 4-8 Monterey County HMP, Liquefaction Susceptibility in the City of Salinas A ... t
urce 1foTanvc L1quctacnon "S"uscepnb1
Monterey County Planning Deparunent
__ .! Proposed Sphere of Influence
Llquofaclion Susceptlbllity
Low
Moderate
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 76 Ground Subsidence
Ground subsidence is the settling or sinking of surface soil deposits with little or no horizontal motion. Soils with high silt or clay content are subject to subsidence. According to the HMP, the City of Salinas is not exposed to earthquake induced landslide risk.

Subsurface Soils
A search of the Web Soil Survey by the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service indicates that the following soils comprise the Project site (Figure 4-9):
26 CnA: Cropley silty clay, 0 to 2 percent slopes, well drained, and high runoff. The depth to water table is more than 80 inches. The CnA soils account for 79.9% of the project site.

CnC: Cropley silty clay, 2 to 9 percent slopes, MLRA 14, well drained, and very high runoff. The depth to water table is more than 80 inches. The CnC soils account for 5.6% of the project site.

SbA: Salinas clay loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes, MLRA 14, well drained, and low runoff. The depth to water table is more than 80 inches. The SbA soils account for 14.4% of the project site.

California Building Code
The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 is assigned to the California Building Standards Commission, which, by law, is responsible for coordinating all building standards. The California Building Code incorporates by reference the International Building Code with necessary California amendments. About one-third of the text within the California Building Standards Code has been tailored for California earthquake conditions. Construction within the City of Salinasis governed by the seismic safety standards of Chapter 16 of the Code. These standards are applicable to all new buildings and are required to provide the necessary safety from earthquake related effected emanating from fault activity.

General Plan
The General Plan includes objectives and policies relevant to natural hazards in the Safety Element since Salinas is subject to earthquakes, liquefaction, flooding, landslides, and erosion:

Policy S-4.1: During the review of development proposals, investigate and mitigate geologic and seismic hazards, or require that development be located away from such hazards, in order to preserve life and protect property.

Policy S-4.2: Locate development outside flood-prone areas unless flood risk is mitigated without decreasing retention capacity.

Policy S-4.6: Ensure that all development and reuse/revitalization projects are developed in accordance with the most recent Uniform Fire Code requirements.
26 United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service. “Web Soil Survey.” Accessed on April 27, 2022, https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 77 Figure 4-9 Web Soil Survey Soil Map for Project Site
- Soil Types
Project Site
CITY Of SAUNAS - Genera l Pla n Amendment & Rezone: AlisalMa rketplace Created 12/ 22/2022 CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 78

4.7.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i.Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

Less than Significant Impact. There are no known active earthquake faults in Salinas inclusive of the Project site, nor is Salinas within an Alquist-Priolo earthquake fault zone as established by the Alquist-Priolo Fault Zoning Act. There are two (2) potentially active faults within the city, both of which have not been active within the past 11,000 years.

The nearest active fault to the city is the San Andreas Fault, which is located 13 miles northeast of the Project site.

Due to the distance from an active fault, there is low potential for ground rupture in the city. The likelihood of the Project rupturing due to an earthquake would be reduced through compliance with current seismic protection standards in the CBC which would significantly limit potential seismic-related hazards such as landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Compliance with the CBC would ensure a less than significant impact.
ii.Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is in a zone with moderately high seismic risk. Future development of the Project site would be required to comply with current seismic protection standards in the CBC which would significantly limit potential damage to structures and thereby reduce potential impacts including the risk of loss, injury, or death. Compliance with the California Building Code would ensure a less than significant impact. iii.Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. While the Project site is in an area with high susceptibility to liquefaction, there are no known geologic hazards or unstable soil conditions. Due to the distance from an active fault, there is low potential for ground rupture. Further, the site is primarily made up of silty clay soils that are well drained, which are less susceptible to liquefaction than silt or sands. Future development of the site would require compliance with the city’s grading and drainage standards that would reduce the likelihood of settlement or bearing loss. In addition, future development would be required to comply with CBC and specific requirements that address liquefaction.

For these reasons, the Project does not have any aspect that could result in seismic-related ground failure including liquefaction and a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project. iv.Landslides?
No Impact. The topography of the Project site is relatively flat with stable, native soils, and the site is not in the immediate vicinity of rivers or creeks that would be more susceptible to landslides. Therefore, no impact would occur because of the Project.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. Soil erosion and loss of topsoil can be caused by natural factors, such as wind and flowing water, and human activity. The Project site is relatively flat and mostly paved, which limits the potential for CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 79 substantial soil erosion. Although no development is proposed, future development of the Project site would require typical site preparation activities such as grading and trenching which may result in the potential for shortterm soil disturbance or erosion impacts. Soil disturbance during construction is largely caused by the use of water.

Excessive soil erosion could cause damage to existing structures and roadways.

The likelihood of erosion would be further reduced through compliance with regulations set by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). Namely, the SWRCB requires sites larger than one (1) acre to comply with the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (i.e., General Permit Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ). The General Permit requires the development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) by a certified Qualified SWPPP Developer (QSD). The SWPPP estimates the sediment risk associated with construction activities and includes best management practices (BMP) to control erosion. BMPs specific to erosion control cover erosion, sediment, tracking, and waste management controls. Implementation of the SWPPP minimizes the potential for the Project to result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. With these provisions in place, impacts to soil and topsoil by the Project would be considered less than significant. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse?
Less than Significant Impact. Ground subsidence is the settling or sinking of surface soil deposits with little or no horizontal motion. Soils with high silt or clay content are subject to subsidence. Subsidence typically occurs in areas with groundwater withdrawal or oil or natural gas extraction. The topography of the site is relatively flat with stable, native soils and no apparent unique or significant landforms. Future development of the Project site would be required to comply with current seismic protection standards in the CBC which would significantly limit potential seismic-related hazards such as landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Compliance with the CBC would ensure a less than significant impact.
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994, as updated), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is relatively flat with native soils of silty clay and clay loam, which are moderately expansive. Future development would be required to submit a soils report pursuant to SMC Section 31- 402.5 (b) – Soils Report which would investigate the expansion potential of the underlying soils and recommend corrective action. Project construction would also be subject to the 2018 International Building Code (IBC) design standards, specifically Section 1808.6 Design for expansive soils, and the CBC. Compliance with the SMC, IBC, and CBC would ensure a less than significant impact.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 80 e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. The Project site is within city limits and is currently connected to city utility services. Future development would also connect to Citywastewater services. Thus, no permanent septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would be installed, and no impact would occur.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in the Cultural Resources section above, there are no known paleontological resources or unique geological features known to the city on this site. In addition, the Project site is heavily disturbed as it has been previously developed. Nevertheless, there is some possibility that a non-visible, buried resource, site. or feature may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which would constitute a significant impact. To further assure future development does not result in significant impacts to any potential resources, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measures CUL-2 as described in Section

4.5. Therefore, if any paleontological resources or geologic features were discovered, implementation of CUL-2 would reduce the Project’s impact to less than significant.

4.7.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 81

4.8 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy
or regulation adopted for the purpose
of reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
X

4.8.1 Environmental Setting
In assessing the significance of impacts from GHG emissions, Section 15064.4(b) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a lead agency may consider the following:
• The extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions as compared to the environmental setting;
• Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project;
• The extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan, guidance from the MBUAPCD, Monterey County Municipal Climate Action Plan, and Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy are discussed below and are utilized as thresholds of significance. 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan
The CARB 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan is the adopted statewide plan for reduction and mitigation of GHGs to implement Assembly Bill (AB) 1279. AB 1279 was issued on August 12, 2022 to require California to achieve “net zero greenhouse gas emissions” as soon as possible and to further reduce anthropogenic GHG emissions thereafter.

It sets a statewide goal to reduce emissions 85% below 1990 levels no later than 2045.

Consequently, the Scoping Plan involves several measures for cost-effective reduction of GHG emissions, including continuing existing programs such as Renewable Portfolio Standard, Advanced Clean Cars, Low Carbon Fuel Standard, etc., and achieving new mandates to decarbonize several sectors. Along with reducing emissions, environmental justice policies are included to address the ongoing air quality disparities.

Appendix D of the 2022 Scoping Plan include recommendations to build momentum for local government actions to align with State goals, including through CEQA review. The Appendix outlines the priority GHG reduction CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 82 strategies for local governments, including transportation electrification, VMT reduction, and building decarbonization. 27
2008 MBUAPCD CEQA Air Quality Guidelines
MBUAPCD adopted CEQA thresholds of significance for air quality, including criteria pollutants. However, the guidelines do not specify a threshold for GHG emissions. 2013 Monterey County Municipal Climate Action Plan (MCAP) 28 The MCAP does not identify the threshold of significance on GHG emissions for CEQA purposes. It only identifies actions calling for local governments to complete community-wide CAPs, incorporating MCAP, and adopt for purposes of CEQA tiering.
2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) 29 The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Monterey Bay Area. As required by SB 375, all MPOs should develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) to establish actions to reduce GHG emissions. The SCS identifies implementation strategies, including encouraging infill development, supporting projects along high quality transit corridors, construction of complete streets, conducting studies to identify opportunities, etc.

General Plan
The City of Salinas General Plan does not include any context or policies on GHG reduction; however, it does include policies that encourage high density development and energy conservation (See Section 4.6). The City of Salinas is currently in the process of drafting a Climate Action Plan.

4.8.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. The 2023 CEQA Guidelines do not establish a quantitative threshold of significance for GHG impacts, leaving lead agencies the discretion to establish such thresholds for their respective jurisdictions.

Since the MBARD does not have established GHG significance emissions thresholds and the City of Salinas does not have an adopted CAP for CEQA tiering purposes, the following analysis utilizes emissions thresholds from other air districts.
27 California Air Resources Board. (2022). 2022 Scoping Plan Appendix D. Accessed on March 1, 2023, https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2022-11/2022-sp-appendix-d-local-actions.pdf 28 Monterey County. (2013). Monterey County Municipal Climate Action Plan. Accessed on March 24, 2022, https://www.co.monterey.ca.us/Home/ShowDocument?id=48122 29 Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments. (2022). 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan & the Sustainable Communities Strategy. Accessed on October 25, 2022, https://www.ambag.org/plans/2045-metropolitan-transportation-plansustainable-communitiesstrategy#:~:text=AMBAG%20is%20developing%20the%202045,transportation%20plan%20every%20four%20years.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 83 Although no specific project is currently proposed, short-term construction and long-term operational GHG emissions for project buildout were estimated using CalEEModTM (v.2020.4.0). (See Appendix A for output files and Section 4.3 for CalEEMod Assumptions). Emissions are expressed in annual metric tons of CO2 equivalent units of measure (i.e., MTCO2e), based on the global warming potential of the individual pollutants.

Construction Emissions
The Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) and Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) have concluded that construction emissions should be assessed for impacts since they may remain in the atmosphere for years after construction is complete. The SMAQMD and BAAQMD both established quantitative significance thresholds of 1,100 MT CO2e per year for the construction phases of land use projects. As such, annual construction emissions below the 1,100 MT CO2e would have a less than significant cumulative impact on GHGs. The maximum annual construction emission of GHG associated with development of the project is estimated to be 792.3655 MT CO2e based on the CalEEMod run. This is less than the 1,100 MTCO2e threshold of the SMAQMD and BAAQMD.

Operational Emissions
Regarding the long-term operational related GHG emissions, the estimated operational emissions for buildout of the Project incorporates the potential area source and vehicle emissions, and emissions associated with utility and water usage, and wastewater and solid waste generation. The South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) adopted the staff proposal for an interim GHG significance threshold of 10,000 MT CO2e per year for GHG for construction and operational emissions. The BAAQMD also adopted the 10,000 MT CO2e per year threshold. Utilizing this as the threshold, annual operational emissions below 10,000 MTCO2e would have a less than significant cumulative impact on GHGs. The annual operational GHG emissions associated with buildout of the Project is 6,404.6150 MT CO2e based on the CalEEMod run. This is less than the 10,000 MTCO2e threshold of the SCAQMD and BAAQMD.

Further, the Project would not exceed the thresholds of significance for construction or operational emissions as discussed in Section 4.3. Cumulatively, these emissions would not generate a significant contribution to global climate change over the lifetime of the proposed Project. As such, it can be determined that the Project would not occur at a scale or scope with potential to contribute substantially or cumulatively to the generation of GHG emissions and therefore the impact would be less than significant. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The compatibility of the Project with the 2022 Scoping Plan and MCAP, and MTP/SCS is evaluated below.

Consistency with the 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan
Based on the evaluation shown in Table 4-8, the Project is consistent with the reduction measures identified in the 2022 Scoping Plan. The reduction measures are derived from the 2022 Scoping Plan Appendix D Section 3.2.1 – Project Attributes for Residential and Mixed-Use Projects to Qualitatively Determine Consistency with the Scoping Plan. As stated in the section, “Residential and mixed-use projects that have all of the key project attributes in [Table 4-8] should accommodate growth in a manner consistent with State GHG reduction and equity prioritization goals.” CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 84 Table 4-8 Scoping Plan Reduction Measures Consistency Analysis Priority Areas Key Project Attribute Consistency/Applicability Determination

Transportation
Electrification
Provides EV charging infrastructure
that, at minimum, meets the most
ambitious voluntary standard in the
California Green Building Standards
Code at the time of project approval.

Consistent with Mitigation. New development
projects are currently subject to residential and/or
non-residential mandatory measures as specified
in Chapter 4 and 5 of the 2022 CalGreen Code.

However, the mandatory standards for EV charging
infrastructure is less than the voluntary standards
as described in Appendix A4 of the 2022 CalGreen
Code. Thus, the Project incorporates Mitigation
Measure GHG-1 to ensure that future
development resulting from the Project would be
subject to EV charging infrastructure per the
CalGreen Residential Voluntary Standards Code. As
such, the Project would be consistent with
mitigation incorporated.

VMT Reduction

Is located on infill sites that are
surrounded by existing urban uses
and reuses or redevelops previously
undeveloped or underutilized land
that is presently served by existing
utilities and essential public services
(e.g., transit, streets, water, sewer)
Consistent. The Project is on an infill site that is
currently developed with commercial uses. In
addition, it is currently served by existing utilities, street improvements, sidewalks, and six (6) bus
stops within 1,000 feet of the site.

Does not result in the loss or
conversion of natural and working
lands.

Consistent. Natural and working lands include
forests, rangelands, urban green spaces, wetlands,
and farms. The Project is currently developed with
urbanized uses and does not include forests,
rangelands, green spaces, wetlands, or farms. As
such, redevelopment of the Project site will not
result in the loss or conversion of natural and
working lands.
• Consists of transit-supportive
densities (minimum of 20
residential
• dwelling units per acre), or
• Is in proximity to existing transit
stops (within a half mile), or
• Satisfies more detailed and
stringent criteria specified in the
region’s SCS.

Consistent. While no development is proposed at
this time, the Project aims to increase residential
density. According to Project assumptions as
described in Section 2.9, the Project could be built
to a maximum of 42.7 dwelling units per acre. In
addition, there are six (6) bus stops within 1,000
feet of the Project site , providing proximity to
existing transit.

Reduces parking requirements by:
• Eliminating parking
requirements or including
maximum allowable parking
ratios (i.e., the ratio of parking
Consistent with Mitigation. The City of Salinas does
not currently have a maximum allowable parking
ratio. As such, Mitigation Measure GHG-2 is
incorporated to ensure that the future
developments as a result of Project
implementation have a maximum allowable
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 85 spaces to residential units or
square feet); or
• Providing residential parking
supply at a ratio of less than one
parking space per dwelling unit;
or
• For multifamily residential
development, requiring parking
costs to be unbundled from costs
to rent or own a residential unit.
parking ratio or that parking costs be unbundled
from costs to rent/own a residential unit.

At least 20 percent of units included
are affordable to lower-income
residents. 30
Consistent. The City of Salinas has an inclusionary
zoning ordinance that requires that residential
projects include some level of affordable housing.

Specifically, SMC Chapter 17 Article III –
Inclusionary Housing requires inclusionary units be
built as part of residential development for both
for-sale and rental units. The ordinance requires a
choice of 20%, 15%, and 12% of affordability for a
mix of income, including workforce income,
moderate income, lower income, and very low
income households.

Results in no net loss of existing
affordable units.

Consistent. The Project site is currently developed
with commercial uses. There are no existing
residential units on site. As such, future
redevelopment of the Project site would not result
in loss of existing affordable units.

Building
Decarbonization
Uses all-electric appliances without
any natural gas connections and
does not use propane or other fossil
fuels for space heating, water
heating, or indoor cooking.

Consistent. Future development on the site will
comply with applicable building codes at the time
of development. Current state building code
requires new residential development to be all
electric.

According to the analysis in Table 4-8, mitigation measures are incorporated to ensure that future development that occurs as a result of the Project would comply with the 2022 Scoping Plan. With mitigation measures incorporated, future development resulting from the implementation of the Project incorporates all of the key project attributes that are aligned with the State’s priority GHG reduction strategies for local climate action. Per the 2022 Scoping Plan, this is considered to be consistent with the Scoping Plan and therefore, would result in a less than significant GHG impact under CEQA.

Mitigation Measure GHG-1: Future development shall install EV charging infrastructure according to the most ambitious voluntary standard in the California Green Building Standards Code at the time of project approval. 30 Newmark, G. and Haas, P. (2015). Income, Location Efficiency, and VMT: Affordable Housing as a Climate Strategy. Accessed March 2, 2023, https://chpc.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/CNT-Working-Paper-revised-2015-12-18.pdf CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 86 Mitigation Measure GHG-2: Future development shall provide no more parking spaces than the off-street parking requirements established in the City of Salinas Municipal Code. Alternatively, multi-family residential development can choose to unbundle parking costs with costs to rent or own a residential unit instead of meeting the maximum off-parking requirement.

Policies and actions established in the MCAP and RTP/SCS do not directly apply to development projects. For instance, the MCAP calls for local governments to complete community-wide CAPs. The City of Salinas is currently developing a Climate Action Plan. The RTP/SCS identifies strategies related to land use patterns, transportation planning, research, and education that promote the reduction of GHG emissions in local jurisdictions. The Project complies with SCS implementation strategies, including encouraging infill housing and promoting increased development in a high-quality transit corridor.

In conclusion, the Project contains features that would reduce GHG emissions in compliance with California Air Resources Board (CARB) 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan, goals from the MCAP, and implementation strategies from the RTP/SCS. As such, the Project would not conflict with any applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs, and therefore the impact would be less than significant.

4.8.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Greenhouse Gas Emissions related Mitigation Measures GHG-1 and GHG-2 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 87

4.9 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIAL
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal
of hazardous materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into
the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included
on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government
Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant hazard to
the public or the environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport
land use plan or, where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a
safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
g) Expose people or structures, either
directly or indirectly, to a significant
risk of loss, injury or death involving
wildland fires?
X

4.9.1 Environmental Setting
For the purposes of this section, the term “hazardous materials” refers to "injurious substances," which include flammable liquids and gases, poisons, corrosives, explosives, oxidizers, radioactive materials, and medical supplies and waste. These materials are either generated or used in various commercial and industrial activities. Hazardous CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 88 wastes are injurious substances that have been or will be disposed of. Potential hazards arise from the transport of hazardous materials, including leakage and accidents involving transporting vehicles. There also are hazards associated with the use and storage of these materials and waste. Hazardous materials are grouped into the following four categories based on their properties:
• Toxic: causes human health effect
• Ignitable: has the ability to burn
• Corrosive: causes severe burns or damage to materials • Reactive: causes explosions or generates toxic gases
“Hazardous wastes” are defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 25141(b) as wastes that: “…because of their quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, [may either] cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious illness or pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed.” A hazardous waste is any hazardous material that is discarded, abandoned, or slated to be recycled. If improperly handled, hazardous materials and hazardous waste can result in public health hazards if released into the soil or groundwater or through airborne releases in vapors, fumes, or dust. Soil and groundwater having concentrations of hazardous constituents higher than specific regulatory levels must be handled and disposed of as hazardous waste when excavated or pumped from an aquifer. The California Code of Regulations, Title 22, Sections 66261.20‐24 contains technical descriptions of toxic characteristics that could cause soil or groundwater to be classified as hazardous waste.

Hazardous waste generators may include industries, businesses, public and private institutions, and households.

Federal, state, and local agencies maintain comprehensive databases that identify the location of facilities using large quantities of hazardous materials, as well as facilities generating hazardous waste. Some of these facilities use certain classes of hazardous materials that require risk management plans to protect surrounding land uses. The release of hazardous materials would be subject to existing federal, State, and local regulations and is similar to the transport, use, and disposal of hazard materials.

Regulatory Setting
The California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA) was established in 1991 to protect the environment.

CalEPA oversees the Unified Program through Certified Unified Program Agencies (CUPAs), which consolidates six (6) environmental programs to ensure the handling of hazardous waste and materials in California. The local CUPA in Monterey County, Hazardous Materials Management Services (HMMS), is responsible for administering the following six (6) CUPA programs: 31
• Hazardous Materials Business Plan Requirements
• Hazardous Waste Generator Requirements
• California Accidental Release Prevention Program (CalARP) • Aboveground Storage Petroleum Storage
31 County of Monterey. CUPA Programs. Accessed on November 21, 2022, https://www.co.monterey.ca.us/government/departments-a-h/health/environmental-health/hazardous-materialsmanagement/cupa-programs CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 89 • Underground Storage of Hazardous Substances
• Uniform Fire Code Hazardous Materials Management Plan The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) is another agency in California that regulates hazardous waste, conducts inspections, provide emergency response for hazardous materials-related emergencies, protect water resources from contamination, removing wastes, etc. DTSC acts under the authority of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and California Health and Safety Code. The DTSC implements California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22 Division 4.5 to manage hazardous waste. Government Code Section 65962.5 requires that DTSC shall compile and update at least annually a list of:
(1) All hazardous waste facilities subject to corrective action pursuant to Section 25187.5 of the Health and Safety Code (“HSC”).
(2) All land designated as hazardous waste property or border zone property pursuant to Article 11 (commencing with Section 25220) of Chapter 6.5 of Division 20 of the Health and Safety Code. (3) All information received by the Department of Toxic Substances Control pursuant to Section 25242 of the Health and Safety Code on hazardous waste disposals on public land. (4) All sites listed pursuant to Section 25356 of the Health and Safety Code. (5) All sites included in the Abandoned Site Assessment Program.

This list of hazardous waste sites in California, referred to as the Cortese List, is then distributed to each city and county. According to the CCR Title 22, soils excavated from a site containing hazardous materials is considered hazardous waste, and remediation actions should be performed accordingly. Cleanup requirements are determined case-by-case by the jurisdiction.

Record Search
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund National Priorities List (NPL)32, California Department of Toxic Substance Control’s EnviroStor database28F 33 , and the State Water Resources Control Board’s
GeoTracker database29F
34 include hazardous release and contamination sites. A search of each database was conducted on March 24, 2022. The searches revealed one (1) open and three (3) completed - case closed hazardous material release sites on the Project site (see Figure 4-10). The one (1) site that is open is eligible for closure and is a LUST cleanup site at 250 Rianda Circle, Salinas, CA 93901. Corrective action at the site has been completed and any remaining petroleum constituents from the release are considered to be low threat to Human Health, Safety, and the Environment. The case in GeoTracker is going through the process of being closed. 32 United States Environmental Protection Agency. Superfund National Priorities List. Accessed October 26, 2022 https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=33cebcdfdd1b4c3a8b51d416956c41f1 33 California Department of Toxic Substances Control. Envirostor. Accessed October 26, 2022, https://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/
34 California State Water Resources Control Board. GeoTracker. Accessed October 26, 2022, https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 90 Figure 4-10 Hazardous Sites
■ Lust Cleanup Site
■ Case Closed
D Project Site
CllY OF SALINAS -General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisa I Ma rketplace Created 12/ 22/ 2022 CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 91

4.9.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than Significant Impact. Although no development is proposed, future development of the Project site resulting from Project implementation would result in mixed-use development that would include residential and commercial uses. Uses common to mixed-use development typically do not include production or services that would require the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Further, operations that are likely to routinely transport, use, or dispose of hazardous materials would not otherwise be permitted in the proposed MX zone district (i.e., industrial uses, warehousing and storage, and vehicle sales, services, repair, storage, and washing). While demolition and construction activities may include the temporary transport, storage, use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials (e.g., fuels, lubricating fluids, cleaners, solvents, etc.), such activities would be regulated by the Department of Toxic Substances Control through the California Hazardous Waste Control Law and Hazardous Waste Control Regulations as well as by MBARD through Rule 424 (i.e., asbestos-containing materials). Compliance would ensure that construction-related impacts would be less than significant. For these reasons, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and a less than significant impact would occur. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than Significant Impact. As described under criterion a), the Project is not anticipated to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials.

Therefore, the Project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment.

Therefore, a less than significant impact would occur.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. As described under criteria a) and b), the Project is not anticipated to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials and would not create upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Further there are no schools within one-quarter mile of the Project site. Therefore, no impact would occur. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. According to NPL, EnviroStor, and GeoTracker, the Project site includes one (1) hazardous materials site that is considered an open case and three (3) completed “case closed” hazardous material release sites. According to GeoTracker, corrective action at the site with an open case has been determined to be completed and any remaining petroleum constituents from the release are low threat to health, safety, and the environment. However, to further ensure that residual contamination does not exist from CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 92 any of the open or closed cases, thereby creating a significant hazard to the public or environment, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure HAZ-1. Incorporation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 would reduce impacts to less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to the obtaining grading permits or starting other ground disturbing work for each individual parcel, the City shall hire a qualified environmental professional to conduct a Phase I environmental assessment (ESA), consistent with the American Society for Testing Materials standards (ASTM E1527). The Phase I ESA shall evaluate the likelihood that hazardous chemicals are present and whether soil sampling is necessary. If the Phase I ESA indicates that contamination is unlikely, no further mitigation is necessary other than any recommendations identified in the Phase I ESA (such as stopping work if stained soil is encountered). If the Phase I ESA indicates that additional soil sampling or other further evaluation is necessary, the City and/or future developer shall hire a qualified environmental professional to conduct a Phase II ESA to determine the presence and extent of contamination. If the results indicate that contamination exists at levels above regulatory action standards, then the site shall be remediated in accordance with recommendations made by applicable regulatory agencies, including RWQCB and DTSC. The agencies involved shall depend on the type and extent of contamination. If remediation is necessary, the City shall hire a qualified environmental professional prior to obtaining grading permits or ground disturbance to prepare a work plan that identifies necessary remediation activities, including excavation and removal of on-site contaminated soils, appropriate dust control measures, and redistribution of clean fill material on the project site. The plan shall include measures that ensure the safe transport, use, and disposal of contaminated soil removed from the site. The plan shall also identify when and where soil disturbing construction activities may safely commence. The City shall review and approve the work plan prior to issuance of demolition or grading permits.

The City shall require individual projects to comply with the work plan as a condition of approval. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area?
No Impact. The nearest public airport or public use airport is the Salinas Municipal Airport located approximately

1.8 miles southeast of the Project site. The airport occupies 763 acres with two (2) runways, measuring 4,825 feet long and 150 feet wide and 6,004 feet long and 150 feet wide. The air traffic control tower is in operation 12 hours a day, seven (7) days a week. The applicable airport land use plan is the 1982 Salinas Municipal Airport Land Use Plan (Plan) adopted by the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission on May 17, 1982.31F 35 According to the
Plan, the Project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) or Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) of the Salinas Municipal Airport. Since the Project site is not located within the AIA and RPZ, the Project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the Project Area and no impact would occur. 35 Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission. (1982). Salinas Municipal Airport Land Use Plan. Accessed on October 26, 2022,
https://www.cityofsalinas.org/sites/default/files/departments_files/public_works_files/airport_files/salinas_clup_reduced_si ze_adopted_05-17-1982_0.pdf
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 93 f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is currently fully developed and paved, containing existing structures and on- and off-site improvements including drive approaches, curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, utilities, and landscaping. There are approximately 23 existing structures on the site that predominately consist of commercial and industrial uses. Street frontage includes East Alisal Street, a four (4)-lane east-west major arterial in addition to several two (2)-lane local streets, Rianda Circle, JD Alvarado Circle, Prader Street, and Griffin Street. Therefore, future development of the Project site would constitute redevelopment that would be served by the existing roads and infrastructure. Construction may require lane closures, but access would be maintained through standard traffic control as required by an encroachment permit. Furthermore, future development of the Project site would be reviewed and conditioned to compliance with applicable standards for on-site emergency access including turn radii and fire access. For these reasons, it can be determined that Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan and impacts would be less than significant.
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is located in an urbanized area surrounded by urban uses. In addition, the site is not identified by Cal Fire to be in a Moderate, High, or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ). Future development of the site would result in the construction of structures and installation of infrastructure that would be reviewed and conditioned by the City for compliance with all applicable standards, specifications, and codes. In addition, any structure to be occupied by humans would be required to be constructed in adherence to the Wildland Urban Interface Codes and Standards of the CBC Chapter 7A. Compliance with such regulations would ensure that the Project meets standards to help prevent loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

4.9.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Hazards and Hazardous Material related mitigation measure HAZ-1 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 94

4.10 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Violate any water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially degrade
surface or ground water quality?
X
b) Substantially decrease groundwater
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that the
project may impede sustainable
groundwater management of the
basin?
X
c) Substantially alter the existing
drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, or through
the addition of impervious surfaces, in
a manner which would:

i. Result in a substantial erosion
or siltation on- or off-site; X
ii. Substantially increase the rate
or amount of surface runoff in
a manner which would result
in flooding on- or off-site:

X
iii. Create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed the
capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted
runoff; or
X
iv. Impede or redirect flood
flows? X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche
zones, risk release of pollutants due to
project inundation?
X
e) Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of a water quality
control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
X
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 95

4.10.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is within city limits and currently connected to the city’s water and stormwater services. The city’s water and stormwater services are described as follows.

Water
Water is provided by two (2) private water companies: Alco Water Service and California Water Service Company (Cal Water). The City of Salinas is served by the Salinas District (District), which also includes communities of Las Lomas, Oak Hills, Salinas Hills, and Country Meadows. Water supply comes from local groundwater. According to the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the District has 38 wells, 23 storage tanks, and over 300 miles of pipeline, delivering approximately 14 million gallons of local groundwater daily. 36 The Project site is served by the Salinas Public Water System (PWS), see Figure 4-11.

The city’s long-term water resource planning for existing and future demand is addressed in the UWMP. According to the UWMP, the District has sufficient production capacity and groundwater supply to meet most demands in the projected future during dry year and multiple dry year conditions. Minor shortfalls (2%) are anticipated in 2040 under single dry year and multiple dry year conditions in the Salinas PWS and will increase slightly in 2045. However, the UWMP expects that shortfalls are alleviated through implementation of the District’s Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) and other supply augmentation measures. According to the UWMP, water quality is not expected to impact water supplies through 2045.

A Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was not prepared for the proposed project because no development is currently proposed for the project site. Future development, at max residential buildout, could result in development that could trigger the requirements for a WSA. The thresholds are provided below.

Under California Water Code, the following types of developments require a WSA:
(1) A proposed residential development of more than 500 dwelling units. (2) A proposed shopping center or business establishment employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 500,000 square feet of floor space.
(3) A proposed commercial office building employing more than 1,000 persons or having more than 250,000 square feet of floor space.
(4) A proposed hotel or motel, or both, having more than 500 rooms. (5) A proposed industrial, manufacturing, or processing plant, or industrial park planned to house more than 1,000 persons, occupying more than 40 acres of land, or having more than 650,000 square feet of floor area.
(6) A mixed-use project that includes one or more of the projects specified in this subdivision. (7) A project that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500-dwelling unit project.

36 California Water Service. (2021). 2020 Urban Water Management Plan. Accessed on October 26, 2022, https://www.calwater.com/docs/uwmp2020/SLN_2020_UWMP_FINAL.pdf CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 96 Stormwater
The City of Salinas Urban Watershed Management Program is an integrated effort of the public and public agencies with the goal to protect water resources by reducing or eliminating contaminants from entering local creeks. The City of Salinas Public Works Departments prepared the Stormwater Standard Plans (SWSP) based on Low Impact Development Initiative (LIDI) Standard Details and City of Portland Stormwater Management Manual Typical Details. In conjunction with the City of Salinas Stormwater Development Standards (SWDS) and the City of Salinas Standard Specifications, Design Standards, and Standard Plans, all development projects are required to comply with these provisions to filter stormwater on site and assess needs for liners, subdrains, storm drain connections, etc. 37
37 City of Salinas. Stormwater Program. Accessed on October 26, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/our-city-services/publicworks/stormwater-program CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 97 Figure 4-11 Salinas District Location and PWS Boundaries ..

G II E _. I
8,AS/o;

NE'IADA
J n1uon..1
Pajaro \
~ L,as Lomas PWS
Elkhorn
Salinas
Hills PWS
0 4
(Scale in Miles
[ZJ Service Area Boundary
8 CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 98

4.10.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less than Significant Impact. Although no development is currently proposed, implementation of the Project would result in future residential and commercial development. If a future development on the Project site is greater than one (1) acre in size, the developer would be required to prepare a SWPPP (Section 4.7) in compliance with the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (i.e., General Permit Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ). The SWPPP estimates the sediment risk associated with construction activities and includes best management practices (BMP) to control erosion. BMPs specific to erosion control cover erosion, sediment, tracking, and waste management controls. Implementation of the SWPPP minimizes the potential for the Project to result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil. These provisions minimize the potential for future development of the Project site to violate any waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Further, runoff resulting from future development would be managed in compliance with approved grading and drainage plans in addition to the City of Salinas MS4 Permit (Order No. R3-2019-0073, NPDES Permit No.

CA0049981). Thus, compliance with regulations including the General Construction Permit, BMPs, approved grading and drainage plans, and MS4 Permit would reduce potential impacts related to water quality and waste discharge to less than significant levels.
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project includes a GGPA and Rezone pertaining to 18 parcels that total approximately 12.1 acres. The GPA requests a land use change from Retail and General Commercial/Light Industrial to Mixed-Use and the rezone requests a zone change from CR – Commercial Retail and IGC – Industrial General Commercial to MX-Mixed Use. Although no physical development is proposed by the Project, the SMC would allow a maximum of 131,414 sf. of commercial development and 515 multi-family residential units. Future development would be served by Cal Water.

Potable water demands for the existing and proposed land use designation were estimated using water use factors from the WSA Water Factor Tool developed by Cal Water. These factors are based on the expected parameters and characteristics of the existing and proposed development. Calculated water demands are shown in Table 4-9. As shown, existing land uses utilize approximately 11.6-acre feet per year (AFY) compared to an estimated 90.9 AFY under the proposed use at maximum build out. Maximum build out would account for a less than one percent increase above Cal Water’s 2020 water demand of 16,497 AFY. In addition, the increase in demand would not exceed available groundwater supplies during a normal year water supply estimate of 23,569 AFY per the UWMP.

Therefore, future development of the Project site could be accommodated by existing groundwater supplies and impacts would be less than significant.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 99 Table 4-9 Existing versus Future Potable Water Demand
Land Use Unit of
Measurement
gpd/unit gpd AFY
Potable Water Demand of Existing Land Use
Commercial 159,700 sf. 0.065 10,381 11.6
total 10,381 11.6
Potable Water Demand of Proposed Land Use
Commercial 131,414 sf. 0.065 8,542 81.3
Multi-Family
Residential
515 du 141 72,615 9.6
total 81,157 90.9
Furthermore, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to the city’s water conservation efforts (e.g., compliance with California Plumbing Code, efficient appliances, efficient landscaping, etc.) should not negatively impact water supply or impede water management. In particular, future development would be built accordance with all mandatory outdoor water use requirements as outlined in the applicable California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11, Section 4.304 – Outdoor Water Use and verified through the building permit process. As a mixed-use development that would contain landscaping pursuant to SMC regulations, future development shall comply with the updated Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chapter 2.7, Division 2), as implemented and enforced through the building permit process. Therefore, through compliance, the potential for the Project to substantially decrease groundwater supplies is limited and impacts would be less than significant.

In addition, development of the Project site would not substantially increase impervious surfaces because the site has been previously developed and paved. Redevelopment of the site would require review and approval for compliance with the city’s Standard Specifications, Design Standards, and Standard Plans to filter stormwater on site and assess needs for liners, subdrains, and storm drain connections. Therefore, through compliance, the potential for the Project to interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the Project would impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin is limited and impacts would be less than significant.

Finally, although the proposed Project, would increase demand for water use on this specific site compared to the water use currently on the site, as previously discussed in Section 2.9 of this document, the overall projected citywide population would not change because of this Project. In fact, the increase in potential residential units does not constitute a significantly greater water demand because higher density, multi-family residential development generates less water use due to property features including less outdoor irrigation due to shared common areas (and as evidenced in Cal Water demand factors). Thus, if assumed population increases are redirected to higher density multi-family development rather than single-family development, the overall anticipated water demand would be less than anticipated citywide. In addition, the UWMP determined there is enough water capacity to serve the city’s projected population. As discussed further in Section 4.14.2, the population and housing units generated by the proposed Project would be within the AMBAG projections for the region and city.

Overall, based on the information collected from the UWMP, the Project would not generate significantly greater water demand as to substantially decrease groundwater supplies. Additionally, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to water conservation efforts as well as compliance with applicable CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 100 California Green Building Standards Code and MWELO would reduce water demand and reduce the potential for the Project to substantially decrease water supply. Lastly, compliance with the city’s stormwater requirements as ensured through the building permit process would reduce the potential for the Project to interfere with groundwater recharge. Although the current project, which does not propose new development would result in a less than significant impacts, a future development project on the site could trigger the threshold for a WSA. In order to address this and ensure the project will not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such a mitigation measure has been added as follows:

Mitigation Measure HYD-1: Future Development projects on the subject site that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500-dwelling unit project are required to prepare a Water Supply Assessment.
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? Less than Significant Impact. Erosion is a natural process in which soil is moved from place to place by wind or from flowing water. The effects of erosion within the Project Area can be accelerated by ground-disturbing activities associated with development. Siltation is the settling of sediment to the bed of a stream or lake which increases the turbidity of water. Turbid water can have harmful effects to aquatic life by clogging fish gills, reducing spawning habitat, and suppress aquatic vegetation growth.

Soil erosion and loss of topsoil can be caused by natural factors, such as wind and flowing water, and human activity.

The Project site is relatively flat and mostly paved due to previous development, which limits the potential for substantial soil erosion. Although no development is proposed, future development of the Project site would require typical site preparation activities such as grading and trenching which may result in the potential for shortterm soil disturbance or erosion impacts. Soil disturbance during construction is largely caused by the use of water.

Excessive soil erosion could cause damage to existing structures and roadways.

The likelihood of erosion occurring during construction would be reduced through site grading and surfacing, which would be subject to review and approval by the City for compliance with applicable standards. Future development of the Project site would be required to comply with SMC Section 29-15(d) - Best Management Practices for Construction Sites, which requires all construction to “comply with the City of Salinas Standards to Control Excavations, Cuts, Fills, Clearing, Grading, Erosion and Sediments” and to keep debris and dirt out of the city’sstorm drain system. The likelihood of erosion would be further reduced through compliance with regulations including the General Construction Permit, BMPs, approved grading and drainage plans, and MS4 Permit as described under criterion a). With these provisions in place, the impact to soil and topsoil by the Project would be considered less than significant.
ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
Less than Significant Impact. Although no development is proposed, future development of the Project site resulting from implementation of the Project would be subject to the entitlement review and approval process through the City of Salinas. Through the entitlement review and approval process, future development would be reviewed and CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 101 conditioned for compliance with the General Construction Permit, BMPs, approved grading and drainage plans, and MS4 Permit as described under criteria a) and c)-i. Further, if onsite retention facilities are required to manage surface runoff so as not result in flooding on- or off-site, then the size and capacity of such facilities would be determined through the site design, review, and conditioning of future development. Therefore, the entitlement review and approval process conducted by the City would ensure that surface runoff is controlled in a manner which would not result in flooding on- or off-site. For this reason, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
iii. Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less than Significant Impact. Although no development is proposed, future development of the Project site resulting from implementation of the Project would be subject to the entitlement review and approval process through the City of Salinas. Through the entitlement review and approval process, future development would be reviewed and conditioned for compliance with the General Construction Permit, BMPs, approved grading and drainage plans, and MS4 Permit as described under criteria a) and c)-ii. Further, if onsite retention facilities are required to manage surface runoff so as not result in exceedance of the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, the entitlement review and approval process conducted by the City would ensure that surface runoff is controlled in a manner which would not exceed capacity or contribute to additional sources of polluted runoff. For this reason, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows?
Less than Significant Impact. Because the site is developed and paved, there are existing stormwater drainage systems including curb and gutter along the existing roadways adjacent to the Project site. Given the existing stormwater drainage systems surrounding the site, future development of the site is not expected to substantially change the topography of the site and therefore would not be expected to impede or redirect flood flows. Although no development is proposed, future development of the Project site resulting from implementation of the Project would be subject to the entitlement review and approval process through the City of Salinas. Through the entitlement review and approval process, future development would be reviewed and conditioned for compliance with the General Construction Permit, BMPs, approved grading and drainage plans, and MS4 Permit as described under criteria a) and c)-ii. Further, if onsite retention facilities are required to manage surface runoff so as not to impede or redirect flood flows. Therefore, the entitlement review and approval process conducted by the City would ensure that surface runoff is controlled in a manner which would not impede or redirect flood flows. For this reason, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation? Less than Significant Impact. The northeastern portion of the Project site is designated as Zone AH (EL 48) on the most recent Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 06053C0217G dated April 2, 2009 (see Figure 4-12). The parcels within Zone AH include APNs 003-052-018, 003-052-019, 003-052-023, 003-052-032, 003-052-031, 003-052-017.

Zone AH (EL 48) is considered a special flood hazard area with a one (1) percent annual chance of shallow flooding, usually in the form of a pond, with flood depths of one (1) to three (3) feet. This portion of the Project site is also within the City of Salinas Flood Zone Overlay. All new development within the Flood Overlay district shall comply CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 102 with the requirements and development regulations of SMC Chapter 9, Article VI: Flood Damage Prevention.

Compliance with such regulations, in addition to the regulations described under criteria a) and c)-ii, would ensure that the Project would not result in flooding or the release of pollutants. Furthermore, the Project site is not in a tsunami or seiche zone (i.e., standing waves on rivers, reservoirs, ponds, and lakes), therefore the risk of inundation is 7unlikely. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than Significant Impact. The City of Salinas is a member agency of the Salinas Valley Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency (SVBGSA). The Project site is within the 180/400-Foot Aquifer Subbasin and the East Side Aquifer Subbasin. The SVBGSA adopted the Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) for the 180/400-Foot Aquifer Subbasin in September 2022 and the GSP for the East Side Aquifer Subbasin in January 2022.38,39 Generally, the GSPs outline how groundwater sustainability will be achieved in 20 years and then maintained for an additional 30 years. According to the GSPs, groundwater is the primary water source for all water use sectors in the subbasins.

There are existing monitoring programs for groundwater elevation, groundwater extraction, and groundwater quality carried out by the Monterey County Water Resources Agency (MCWRA) and municipal and community water purveyors in order to fulfill groundwater quality regulatory requirements. As described above, the Project would not substantially deplete groundwater resources. In addition, as mentioned above, although the proposed Project, would increase demand for water use on this specific site compared to the water use currently on the site, the overall city-wide projected population would not change because of this project. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

4.10.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Hydrology and Water Quality related mitigation measure HYD-1 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.
38 Salinas Valley Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency. (2022). Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin 180/400-Foot Aquifer Subbasin 2022 Update. Accessed on December 21, 2022, https://svbgsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/09/180400-2022-GSP09292022.pdf. 39 Salinas Valley Basin Groundwater Sustainability Agency (2022). Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin East Side Aquifer Subbasin Groundwater Sustainability Plan. Accessed on December 21, 2022, https://svbgsa.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/EastsideWhole-GSP-Report-Only-20220414.pdf.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 103 Figure 4-12 Flood Zone Map
National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette ~ FEMA
0 250 500 1.000 1.500
Feel

2.000
1:6,000
S..Sern,p: USG$ ~tioMJ M•p: O,ttJoim•to,y. Oat.t rcfr•sh¢4 0c(l)bet. ~O Legend
SP<CW. n.ooo I HAZARD -
WiehoutW..ef10od8evetiofl (8FE) ~A.'(A.9t
Will8
_ FCor~a...AC.AQ.M\CM .. ..,_,,
O.~Mnuel(;Mnce Rood HMW,At~
Of .Ui &Mi.al d'lence flood 'dtl 6'f'Hafe
depth le"~ lf'len one loot Or rihdrairie.fe •* oC ~-; u.en one ~•re mie Dlllt.t -,- NM=c::o~:.:= • ill'l~UCHnood~due~
O™ERAAfASC>r ~SffHot~~A
F\.OOOHAZARO "'f I At~• ithflOodRi'...l<CIWtoleveeli:ntO cti6nnet, c:.,tv,ert.. or st,;,rm seWICf
~ . Dlb, or Aood'M!III
& trossSt<:tionswltl\1 .. A/V'IVal~
_.!!:1 W'MCf SUrfKrc £1evotion
coestelll61'1Std
-•- BeiseAoodOe'wetiontlne(BfQ
._____ Umit cf study =- ----
00&'..tel llaM.«t Br~
OTHER - ---- rt'.ATUR£S Hydroe,ophit Fee.ture
D Project Site
The pin ~$'1'Cd on the ~G •n owo:dmtte poa'!t s.t5e<ffll brlt'M!: ~ end dots f'IOt r~..el'l en auth01tlati'te ~ IOeetion. ~ ffl6'> COMplies lfri.4th ttMA'S'SWldelds for ll'le, u<..e or ~telnooct~illiti!.f'IOtw.id~d~~.

Tht bV..e,moo$.hown(Offl~ with FEMA'$. W;emap
e,cwreq, sttndelt!S
The flood ~rd lnfom'letion G ~ liredfyfrom the
authoritotive ,-A4l websco'k~ prO'lick,d ~ FEMA. ~mep
waso:ported on 12/22/2022 • 1:.so PM encl ooes not refl«1 Cben(tsor ~ si,t,,,~~ to ~dettiel'ld time.. me NlltL end e1tKtiYe il'dorM&tklt'I may cherr(e or becotne ~.eded by newdMA o,;ec time.

Thi$ mep lmeCe Is void it the one or mote Of tht r011o¥Ar.C rnep ekmefltsdo not 8PPMl!blllsemeel ltnafery, flood ?Ont leibels.. ltfffld.stale-bel,,nep<:reationdet!-. eomrnunilyldMtif"~ A RM ~ nu"""1, and ARM ett«hdate. Mop imo~ for
i.,mopped ~ U!'lmod,cmQed °'* COMOt be~ tor
tfCU5etory~.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 104

4.11 LAND USE PLANNING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Physically divide an established
community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land
use plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
X

4.11.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is currently fully developed and is within Salinas city limits.

4.11.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established community?
Less than Significant Impact. Typically, physical division of an established community would occur if a project introduced new incompatible uses inconsistent with the planned or existing land uses or created a physical barrier that impeded access within the community. Typical examples of physical barriers include the introduction of new, intersecting roadways, roadway closures, and construction of new major utility infrastructure (e.g., transmission lines, storm channels, etc.).

Surrounding Land Uses
This Project is funded by SB 2 grant funding for the purpose of providing additional opportunities for housing and mixed-use development, in line with the goals contained in the General Plan and Housing Element. Currently, the site is occupied by mostly light-industrial uses and big-box retail buildings collectively identified as “Alisal Marketplace.” A 2010 proposal envisioned a transformation of Alisal Marketplace into a new mixed-use neighborhood integrating housing and services with public open space and educational and civic buildings, including a new police station that was ultimately built in 2020. The City considers the Project site to have significant redevelopment potential and proposes to change the land use designation and zone district to facilitate future mixed-use development. Implementation of the Project would thereby facilitate future development in line with the envisioned transformation of Alisal Marketplace.

Circulation System
No new streets are proposed that would result in a physical barrier. Street frontage includes East Alisal Street, a four (4)-lane east-west major arterial in addition to several two (2)-lane local streets, Rianda Circle, JD Alvarado Circle, Prader Street, and Griffin Street. Four (4) to five (5)-foot sidewalks are on both sides of the roadways. There are two (2) controlled crosswalks at East Alisal/Work Street and East Alisal/Griffith Street. A segment of Union Pacific Railroad is located adjacent to the Project site to the west. There is one (1) bus stop adjacent to the site CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 105 (“East Alisal/Work” Stop ID: 3467) on East Alisal Street and Work Street for Route 41 – Salinas-Alisal-Northridge operated by the Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) with service every 15 minutes.

While no development is proposed, implementation of the Project would result in future development of the Project site with commercial and residential uses. Future development would be accessible by the existing circulation system, including existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit systems, and would not require the development of new roadways or permanent roadway closures.

Utility Infrastructure
No new major utility infrastructure is proposed that would result in a physical barrier. Since the Project site is within the city limits, future development resulting from Project implementation would be required to connect to the city’s water, sewer, stormwater, and wastewater services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications are provided by private companies. Utility systems are described and analyzed in Section 4.10 and Section 4.15. Based on the analysis, implementation of the Project would not result in the construction of new, major utility infrastructure.

Overall, the Project would not result in the physical separation of the established community. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project. b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? Less than Significant Impact. Generally, policy conflicts are environmental impacts when they would result in direct physical impacts or where those conflicts relate to avoiding or mitigating environmental impacts. As such, associated physical environmental impacts are discussed in this document under specific topical sections, such as Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, and Tribal Cultural Resources. The Project includes a General Plan Amendment and Rezone to provide additional opportunities for mixed-use development. Although no development is proposed, future development of the Project site would result in residential and commercial uses.

A discussion of land use policies that are applicable to the Project are included in Table 4-10. As discussed below, the Project is generally consistent with the proposed General Plan land use designation of Mixed Use. Specifically, the Project helps the City achieve Goal LU-1: Develop a balanced land use pattern that provides a wide range of jobs, housing, shopping, services, and recreation and Goal CD-3: Create a community that promotes a pedestrian friendly, livable environment.

Table 4-10 Discussion on Land Use Policies in the General Plan for Mixed Use Development General Plan Policy Project Consistency
Policy LU-1.1: Achieve a balance of land uses to
provide for a range of housing, jobs, libraries, and
educational and recreational facilities that allow
residents to live, work, shop, learn, and play in the
community.

Consistent. The proposed land use and zone district change would diversify the types of land uses permitted on the Project site, including the provision of housing, jobs, and public facilities which would otherwise not be permitted under the current land use and zoning designation.

Implementation of the Project would thereby facilitate a greater balance of land uses.

Policy LU-1.2: Provide a plan for land uses that
includes the capacity to accommodate growth
projected for 2020 and beyond.

Consistent. As described under Section 4.3 and Section 4.14, the City of Salinas and County of Monterey are expected to experience population growth. In addition, the city’s RHNA CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 106 indicates a need for an additional 2,229 housing units. The Project would introduce additional opportunities for housing and mixed-use development that would help the city meet the projected population growth and demand for housing
units. Therefore, implementation of the Project would
increase the city’s capacity to accommodate growth
projected for the next decade.

Policy LU-1.3: Make provision in residential areas
for institutional uses that are needed near homes
or which benefit from a residential environment,
including places of religious assembly, day-care
homes, homes for physically or developmentally
disabled persons, and care facilities in accordance
with the provisions of State law.

Consistent. The Project proposes a land use and zoning
change that would allow for future mixed-use development consisting of commercial and residential uses. Under the proposed planned land use designation and zone district, institutional uses including places of religious assembly, daycare homes, homes for physically or developmentally disabled persons, and care facilities would be permitted.

Therefore, Project implementation would allow for
institutional uses near homes.

Policy LU-1.4: Create and preserve distinct,
identifiable neighborhoods that have traditional
neighborhood development (TND) characteristics.

Specifically, development should: Provide a
balanced mix of housing, workplaces, shopping,
recreational opportunities, and institutional uses,
including mixed-use structures (combined
residential and nonresidential uses), that help to
reduce vehicular trips.

Consistent. The proposed land use and zone change would help the city achieve a mix of uses, including housing, workplaces, shopping, recreational opportunities, and
institutional uses. Project implementation would facilitate the future development of mixed-use structures on a site with existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure.

Therefore, Project implementation would introduce
traditional neighborhood development characteristics that help to reduce vehicular trips.

Policy CD-3.4: Actively encourage mixed-use
development in order to provide a greater
spectrum of housing near businesses, alternative
modes of transportation and other activity areas.

Consistent. The Project proposes a land use and zoning
change that would allow for future mixed-use development in an area with existing pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure. Therefore, Project implementation would encourage mixed-use development including commercial
and residential uses near alternative modes of
transportation.

Further, through the entitlement process, future development would be reviewed for compliance with applicable regulations inclusive of those adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects. Overall, the entitlement process would ensure that the Project complies with the General Plan, SMC, and any other applicable policies and regulations. As such, a less than significant impact would occur.

4.11.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 107

4.12 MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
known mineral resource that would
be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
locally-important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other
land use plan?
X

4.12.1 Environmental Setting
For the purposes of CEQA, mineral resources are land areas or deposits deemed significant by the California Department of Conservation (DOC). Mineral resources include oil, natural gas, and metallic and nonmetallic deposits, including aggregate resources. The California Geological Survey (CGS) classifies and designates areas within California that contain or potentially contain significant mineral resources. Lands are classified into Aggregate and Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs), which identify known or inferred significant mineral resources. According to the California Department of Conservation, CGS’s Surface Mining and Reclamation Act (SMARA) Mineral Lands Classification (MLC) data portal, the Project site is in the MRZ-1 zone, indicating little likelihood for the presence of resources.
40 In addition, the City of Salinas, inclusive of the Project site, is not within a CalGEM-recognized oilfield and there are no oil and gas wells on-site.

4.12.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
No Impact. The Project site is not located in an area designated for mineral resource preservation or recovery.

Therefore, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the Project. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan?
No Impact. As described above, the Project site is not located in an area designated for mineral resource preservation or recovery and as a result, the Project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. Further, the site is not delineated in 40 California Department of Conservation. (2009). Mineral Lands Classification. Accessed on October 26, 2022, https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/informationwarehouse/index.html?map=mlc CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 108 the General Plan, a Specific Plan, or other land use plan as a locally important mineral resource recovery site, thus it would not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the Project.

4.12.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 109

4.13 NOISE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Generation of a substantial temporary
or permanent increase in ambient
noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise
levels?
X
c) For a project located within the
vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
X

4.13.1 Environmental Setting
An Acoustical Analysis of the Project was conducted on February 28, 2023, by WJV Acoustics, Inc. (WJVA). The full report is provided in Appendix E. A summary of the Acoustical Analysis is provided below. Overall, the Acoustical Analysis concludes that future development of the Project site would decrease traffic volumes (and potentially decrease overall noise exposure levels) in the vicinity of the Project site. However, residential development could potentially be exposed to exterior and interior noise levels that exceed the City of Salinas noise standards for residential land uses. Additionally, non-residential land uses associated with future development could result in compatibility concerns with both existing and proposed uses in the vicinity of the Project site. When site-specific uses are proposed, site-specific acoustical analyses may be required if there are potential noise impacts at existing and proposed noise-sensitive land uses. However, because the Project does not propose development, the Project itself would not specifically be expected to result in any significant noise impacts to existing noise-sensitive receptors.

General Plan
The Salinas General Plan Noise Element outline policies to address negative effects of noise by establishing programs and policies to reduce excessive noise and limit the community’s exposure to loud noise. These policies are related to land use planning (Goal N-1), transportation-related noise (Goal N-2), and non-transportation related noise (Goal N-3). In particular, policies in the General Plan that are applicable to the Project include:

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 110 Goal N-1: Minimize the adverse effects of noise through proper land use planning Policy N-1.1: Ensure that new development can be made compatible with the noise environment by using noise/land use compatibility standards and the Noise Contours Map as a guide for future planning and development decisions.

Policy N-1.2: Require the inclusion of noise-reducing design features in development and reuse/revitalization projects to address the impact of noise on residential development.

Policy N-1.4: Ensure proposed development meets Title 24 Noise Insulation Standards for construction.

Goal N-2: Minimize transportation-related noise impacts Policy N-2.1: Ensure noise impacts generated by vehicular sources are minimized through the use of noise control measures (e.g., earthen berms, landscaped walls, lowered streets).

Goal N-3: Minimize non-transportation related noise impacts Policy N-3.1: Enforce the City of Salinas Noise Ordinance to ensure stationary noise sources and noise emanating from construction activities, private developments/residences and special events are minimized.

The General Plan also addresses noise standards and land use compatibility. To ensure that noise producers do not adversely affect sensitive receptors, the City uses land use compatibility standards when planning and making development decisions. Table N-2 of the General Plan (reproduced as Table 4-11 below) summarizes the City noise standards for various types of land uses. The standards represent the maximum acceptable noise level as measured at the property boundary, which is used to determine noise impacts.

Table 4-11 Exterior Noise Standards (General Plan Table N-2) Designation/District of Property Receiving Noise Maximum Noise Level, Ldn or CNEL, dBA Agricultural 70
Residential 60
Commercial 65
Industrial 70
Public and Semipublic 70
Source: City of Salinas General Plan, Noise Element, Table N-2 Exterior Noise Standards These noise standards are the basis for development of the land use compatibility guidelines presented in Table N3 of the General Plan (i.e., the Noise/Land Use Compatibility Matrix) (reproduced as Table 4-12 below). If the noise level of a project falls within Zone A or Zone B as identified in the Noise/Land Use Compatibility Matrix, then the project is considered compatible with the noise environment. Zone A implies that no mitigation will be needed.

Zone B implies that minor mitigation may be required to meet the city’s and Title 24 noise standards. All development project proponents are required to demonstrate that the noise standards will be met prior to human occupation of a building.

The General Plan identifies and projects noise contours and impact areas. Figure N-1 of the General Plan (reproduced as Figure 4-13 below) shows future noise contours and impact areas. The noise contours are used as a guide for land use and development decisions. Contours of 60 dBA or greater define noise impacted areas. When noise sensitive land uses are proposed within these contours, an acoustical analysis must be prepared. For a project to be approved, the analysis must demonstrate that the project is designed to attenuate the noise to meet the city CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 111 noise standards identified in Table N-2 (Table 4-11 reproduced above). If a project is not designed to meet the noise standards, mitigation measures should be recommended in the analysis. If the analysis demonstrates that the noise standards can be met with implementation of mitigation measures, the project can be approved with the mitigation measures, which shall be required as conditions of project approval. The proposed Project site is located in a noise contour and impact area greater than 60 dBA.

Lastly, the General Plan incorporates California Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24) which establishes an interior noise standard of 45 dBA for residential space (CNEL or Ldn). For residential structures to be located within noise contours of 60 dBA or greater from freeways, major streets, thoroughfares, rail lines, rapid transit lines, or industrial noise sources, acoustical studies must be prepared. Studies must demonstrate that the building is designed to reduce interior noise to 45 dBA or lower.

Table 4-12 Noise/ Land Use Compatibility Matrix
Land Use
Community Noise Exposure (Ldn or CNEL)
Zone A
Normally
Acceptable
Zone B
Conditionally
Acceptable
Zone C
Normally
Unacceptable
Zone D
Clearly
Unacceptable
Residential < 60 60 - 70 70 - 75 > 75
Transient Lodging – Motel, Hotel < 60 60 - 75 75 - 80 > 80 Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals,
Nursing Homes < 60 60 - 70 70 - 80 > 80
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, Amphitheaters - < 70 - > 70 Sports Arena, Outdoor Spectator Sports - < 75 - > 75
Playground, Parks < 70 - 70 - 75 > 75
Golf Course, Riding Stables, Water Recreation,
Cemeteries < 70 - 70 – 80 > 80
Office Buildings, Business Commercial, and
Professional < 65 60 - 75 > 75 -
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture < 70 70 - 80 > 80 - Source: City of Salinas General Plan, Modified by CBA from 1998 State of California General Plan Guidelines Zone A - Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved meet conventional Title 24 construction standards. No special noise insulation requirements.

ZONE B - Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development shall be undertaken only after a detailed noise analysis is made and noise reduction measures are identified and included in the project design.

Zone C- Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development is discouraged. If new construction is proposed, a detailed analysis is required, noise reduction measures must be identified, and noise insulation features included in the design.

ZONE D- Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development clearly should not be undertaken.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 112

Figure 4-13 Future Noise Contour and Impact Areas
SoW'0Cf.l Wx&.ud AMocilito, 200 I
Cil)' Boundary
(;rc:,"11, ~ Boundary
Proje.ct Location
0 2,500
City of Solinas
Genaro! Pion
S,0001\.
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Future Community Noise Equivalent level
(CNEL) Contours
N-14
Figure N-1
Future Noise Contours
and Impact Areas
September 2002
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 113 California Noise Insulation Standards (Title 24)
Title 24 established an interior noise standard of 45 dBA for residential space (CNEL or Ldn). The standards regulate that technical noise studies shall be prepared for residential units that are located within noise contours of or over 60 dBA from traffic or industrial noise sources. This is incorporated in General Plan as illustrated above.

City of Salinas Municipal Code
SMC Section 37-50.180 regulates ambient noise levels measured at the property boundary. The city’s noise standards for different types of land uses are listed in Table 4-13.

Table 4-13 Maximum Noise Standards
Zone of Property Receiving Noise Maximum Noise Level (CNEL, dBA) Agricultural District 70
Residential District 60 **
Commercial District 65
Industrial District 70
Mixed Use District 65 *
Parks or Open Space District 70
Public or Semipublic District 60
Source: City of Salinas Municipal Code Table 37-50.50
* The interior noise level in any residential dwelling unit located in a mixed use building or development shall not exceed a maximum of forty-five dBA from exterior ambient noise. ** In residential zones, the noise standard shall be 5.0 dBA lower between 9:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.

Other sections of the code provide regulations on operational noise, such as Section 5-12.03 – Prohibited Noises provides examples of noise disturbance that are not allowed. These include operational sounds that could bring disturbance across a residential or commercial property line, such as residential devices, speakers, animals, loading and unloading, emergency signaling devices, and domestic power tools or machinery.

4.13.2 Impact Assessment
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards?
Less than Significant Impact. While no development is currently proposed, implementation of the Project would result in future development that would have noise generating activities. It is not anticipated that future development would generate substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the Project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or in other applicable local, state, or federal standards, given the type of development that would be permitted in the Project area (i.e., commercial, industrial).

Traffic Noise Exposure
The Project site is exposed to traffic noise associated with vehicles on East Alisal Street and surrounding local streets. The FHWA Traffic Noise Prediction Model (FHWA-RF-77-108) was utilized for modeling traffic noise exposure (Appendix E) based on the estimated trip generation (Appendix F) that would occur under maximum buildout of the Project site. Overall, the modeling indicates a reduction of theoretical noise exposure levels by 7 dB Leq that would occur under maximum buildout. This demonstrates that traffic volumes associated with the Project CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 114 would decrease as a result of Project implementation; however, implementation of the Project would likely not result in any significant overall reduction in existing traffic noise exposure levels in proximity to the site.

Existing ambient noise exposure measured in vicinity of the site indicates a 69.1 dB Ldn and 70.9 dB Ldn which are above the city’s 60 dB Ldn exterior noise level standard for residential uses. Typically, the exterior noise standard would apply at the outdoor activity areas (e.g., outdoor common areas, balconies, etc.). Additionally, the city’s interior noise level standard is 45 dB Ldn.

A reduction of 7 dB Leq would not meet this standard. With regard to analyzing the exposure of sensitive uses to ambient noise levels in the vicinity in excess of established standards, CEQA case law had concluded that agencies subject to CEQA generally are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents except in specific instances where such conditions could be exacerbated due to implementation of the project (California Building Industry Association v Bay Area Air Quality Management District (S213478, December 17, 2015). As modeled, implementation of the proposed Project would not exacerbate traffic noise. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Stationary Noise Exposure
Mixed‐use land uses would typically include a variety of land uses including residential, commercial, retail and office uses. A wide variety of noise sources can be associated with commercial and retail land uses. The noise levels produced by such sources can also be highly variable and could potentially impact existing on‐site and off‐site sensitive receptors. From the perspective of the city’s noise standards, noise sources not associated with transportation sources are considered stationary noise sources. Typical examples of stationary noise sources include:
• Fans and blowers
• HVAC/Mechanical equipment
• Truck deliveries
• Loading Docks
• Compactors
• Amplified Drive‐Thru Menu Board Speakers
• Automated Car Wash Operations
Since no physical development is proposed, noise levels from new stationary noise sources cannot be predicted with certainty at this time since specific uses have not yet been proposed and the locations of stationary noise sources relative to locations of noise sensitive uses are not known. However, under some circumstances, there is a potential for such uses to exceed the city’s noise standards for stationary noise sources at the location of sensitive receptors. Future mixed-use development resulting from Project implementationwould be required to comply with General Plan Policy N-3.1, requiring that stationary sources are minimized.

In addition, the Project site is within a noise contour and impact area greater than 60 dBA as shown in Figure N-1 of the General Plan (reproduced as Figure 4-13 below). Therefore, future development would be required to prepare a site-specific acoustical analysis that demonstrates the development is designed to attenuate the noise to meet the city’s noise standards identified in Table N-2 (Table 4-11 reproduced above). Any mitigation would be required as conditions of project approval. Therefore, the Project would not be expected to result in any significant impacts related to stationary noise. Impacts would be less than significant.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 115 Construction Noise Exposure
Construction noise was estimated using the FHWA Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) Version 1.0.

Construction phases would include demolition, site preparation, grading, building construction, architectural coating, and paving. Of all construction phases, it is anticipated that grading would produce the loudest noise.

Consequently, for the purpose of this noise assessment, one of each construction equipment listed in the CalEEMod run (Appendix A) is included in the construction noise modeling. According to existing and anticipated land use within and around the Project site, the baseline and receptorsthat are analyzed in the RCNM are shown in Appendix A.

Table 4-14 Receptors and Baseline Analyzed in the RCNM
Location Land Use Daytime Baseline
(dBA)
Evening Baseline
(dBA)
Nighttime Baseline
(dBA) **
50 feet to the north Commercial 65 65 65
50 feet within site* Residential 60 60 55
* Since the site would not be development concurrently, the analysis assumes that future development could happen approximately 50 feet from future developed residential units on site. ** Noise Baselines are based on Section 37-50.180 – Performance standards Short-term construction noises include traffic noise generated from transporting construction equipment and materials and construction worker commuting. These activities would raise noise levels near the site. According to CalEEMod, construction of the Project site would require 37 offroad equipment and generate a total of 564 worker trips and 77 vendor trips. According to modeling of the FHWA RCNM Version 1.0, construction noise generated from the offroad equipment is estimated to be 89.2 dB Leq. Ambient noise from construction activities would cease upon completion of construction. However, to further ensure that potential impacts related to construction noise levels are mitigated to levels that are less than significant, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure NOI-1.

Compliance with the mitigation measure and applicable policies and regulations would ensure the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Prior to ground disturbing activities, the City of Salinas shall ensure the following with the Project proponent:
• Construction equipment, fixed of mobile, shall be outfitted with properly operating and maintained mufflers. • Construction noise reduction methods such as shutting off idling equipment, installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources, maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas and occupied residential areas, and using electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment shall be used. • During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be located so that emitted noise is directed away from or shielded from sensitive noise receivers.
b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. While no development is currently proposed, implementation of the Project would result in future development that would have noise generating activities. Ground borne vibration may result from operations and/or construction, depending on the use of equipment (e.g., pile drivers, bulldozers, jackhammers, etc.), distance to affected structures, and soil type. Depending on the method, equipment-generated vibrations could spread through the ground and affect nearby buildings. It is not anticipated CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 116 that the Project would generate excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels, given the type of development that would be permitted in the Project area (i.e., residential, commercial, office). Potential vibration impacts from future construction would be short-term, temporary, and subject to compliance with Mitigation Measure NOI-1 and SMC Section 37-50.180 – Performance Standards. However, to further ensure that potential vibration impacts related to construction noise levels are mitigated to levels that are less than significant, the Project shall also incorporate Mitigation Measure NOI-2. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure NOI-2: The use of heavy construction equipment within 25 feet of existing structures shall be prohibited.
c) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Less than Significant Impact. The nearest public use airport is the Salinas Municipal Airport (SNS) located approximately 1.8 miles southeast of the Project site. SNS occupies 763 acres with two (2) runways, measuring 4,825 feet long and 150 feet wide and 6,004 feet long and 150 feet wide. The air traffic control tower is in operation 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. The applicable airport land use plan for SNS is the 1982 Salinas Municipal Airport Land Use Plan (Plan) adopted by the Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission on May 17, 1982.31F 41 According
to the Plan, the Project site is not located within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) or Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) of the Salinas Municipal Airport. The Project is also not within the 55, 60, or 65 CNEL contour. Since the Project site not located within the AIA and RPZ, the Project would not result in exposing people residing or working in the Project area to excessive noise levels. Therefore, the impacts would be less than significant.

4.13.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Noise related mitigation measures NOI-1 and NOI2 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5. 41 Monterey County Airport Land Use Commission. (1982). Salinas Municipal Airport Land Use Plan. Accessed on October 26, 2022,
https://www.cityofsalinas.org/sites/default/files/departments_files/public_works_files/airport_files/salinas_clup_reduced_si ze_adopted_05-17-1982_0.pdf
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 117

4.14 POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Induce substantial unplanned
population growth in an area, either
directly (for example, by proposing
new homes and businesses) or
indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of
existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere?
X

4.14.1 Environmental Setting
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.2(d) requires that a CEQA document discuss the ways in which the proposed Project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment. The CEQA Guidelines provide an example of a major expansion of a wastewater treatment plant that may allow for more construction within the service area. The CEQA Guidelines also note that the evaluation of growth inducement should consider the characteristics of a project that may encourage or facilitate other activities that could significantly affect the environment. Direct and Indirect Growth Inducement consists of activities that directly facilitate population growth, such as construction of new dwelling units. A key consideration in evaluating growth inducement is whether the activity in question constitutes “planned growth.” Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG)
The Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG) is the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Monterey Bay Area, inclusive of the City of Salinas. In 2022, AMBAG adopted the long-term transportation planning document, 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) that provides population and employment forecasts for the region between 2015 and 2045.42 The AMBAG region is projected to grow by 107,500 people, build over 42,200 housing units, and add 65,500 jobs between 2015 and 2045, for a total population of 869,800, 304,900 total housing units, and 442,800 total jobs by 2045. The City of Salinas is projected to grow by 19,069 people, build over 10,149 housing units, and add 12,674 jobs between 2015 and 2045 for a total population of 177,128, 53,150 total housing units, and 85,683 total jobs between 2015 and 2045.
42 AMBAG. (2022). 2045 Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (Appendix A). Accessed November 17, 2022, https://www.ambag.org/sites/default/files/2022-05/PDFAAppendix%20A_2022%20RGF.pdf.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 118 U.S. Census Bureau
According to the U.S. Census Bureau, the current population of the City of Salinas is 163,542 with a total of 44,405 housing units and an average household size of 4.15; there are approximately 68,879 jobs. 43 Housing Element
The City of Salinas 2015-2023 Housing Element identifies the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the CCity of Salinas as determined by AMBAG. The RHNA for 2014-2023 is 2,229 units with an estimated 43,001 total units as of 2015.
44 The additional units would increase the total units to 45,230.

4.14.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Less than Significant Impact. The Project includes a General Plan Amendment and Rezone. GPA No. 2022-002 requests a land use change from Retail and General Commercial/Light Industrial to Mixed-Use. Rezone No. 2022- 002 requests a rezone from CR – Commercial Retail and IGC – Industrial General Commercial to MX – Mixed Use, consistent with the proposed land use designation.

Although no physical development is proposed, the Project would facilitate future mixed-use development containing commercial and residential uses. The proposed Project would allow future buildout of up to 515 multifamily residential units and up to 131,414 sq.ft. of commercial space. Based on an average household size of 4.15, the 515 units could generate approximately 2,137 new residents thereby increasing the city’s population from 163,542 to 165,679. The 515 units would also increase the total number of housing units from 44,405 to 44,920.

The 131,414 sf. of commercial space could generate approximately 382 employees, increasing the number of employees citywide from 68,879 to 69,261.
45 Overall, the population, housing units, and employees generated by the proposed Project would be within the AMBAG projections for the region and city. The new units would also assist the city with meeting its RHNA.

Therefore, the Project would not induce substantial unplanned population growth and a less than significant impact would occur.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No Impact. There are approximately 23 existing structures on the Project site that predominately consist of commercial and industrial uses. The site does not contain any existing housing or residential uses. Since the site 43 U.S. Census Bureau. 2022. Community Profile: Salinas, City, California. Accessed on November 17, 2022, https://data.census.gov/profile/Salinas_city,_California?g=1600000US0664224. 44 City of Salinas. (2015). 2015-2023 Housing Element. Accessed on October 26, 2022, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/sites/default/files/Departments_Files/Community_Development_Files/General_Plan_Files/Ad opted_Salinas_HE_2015-2023_1.pdf
45 Southern California Association of Governments. (2001). Employment Density Study Summary Report. Accessed on March 1, 2023, https://www.mwcog.org/file.aspx?A=QTTlTR24POOOUIw5mPNzK8F4d8djdJe4LF9Exj6lXOU%3D CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 119 does not currently provide housing, future development of the Project site would not result in the physical displacement of people or housing. No impact would occur because of the Project.

4.14.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 120

4.15 PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Result in substantial adverse physical
impacts associated with the provision
of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new
or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental
impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response
times or other performance
objectives for any of the public
services:

i. Fire protection? X
ii. Police protection? X
iii. Schools? X
iv. Parks? X
v. Other public facilities? X

4.15.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located within Salinas city limits and thus, future development would be subject to fees for the construction, acquisition, and improvements for public services and facilities. The City of Salinas implements a Public Facilities Impact Fee program per SMC Article V-D whereby any new development occurring within city limits is required to contribute its proportionate share of the costs of new public facilities intended to serve said development. Public services and facilities are further described below.

Fire Protection Services
Fire Protection Services in the city are provided by the Salinas Fire Department (SFD). The SFD operates a total of six (6) fire stations that serve the city, with Fire Station #1 closest to the Project site at 16 West Alisal Street. Fire Station #1 is located approximately 0.5 miles west of the Project site. The total authorized staffing for SFD is 99 personnel, and the minimum daily staffing is 26. The response time goal for fire protection and emergency services is to “provide a 6-minute response from receipt of 911 call for arrival of first company 90% of the time.” The General Plan Safety Element includes the following goals and policies to ensure reductions in the potential for fire hazards and fire demand:

Policy LU-4.1: Provide an effective and responsive level of fire protection, public education and emergency response service (including facilities, personnel, and equipment) through the Salinas Fire Department.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 121 Policy LU-4.2: Improve the enforcement of regulations, such as zoning codes and building codes, to ensure existing and new development is constructed, occupied, and maintained to minimize potential fire and other hazards.

Policy LU-12: Review the level of services and funding levels at budget time, adjusting when necessary to ensure that adequate levels of service are provided and facilities are maintained.

Policy S-4.6: Ensure that all development and reuse/revitalization projects are developed in accordance with the most recent Uniform Fire Code requirements.

Policy S-5.2: Ensure that street widths and clearance areas are sufficient to accommodate fire protection equipment and emergency vehicles.

Policy S-5.3: Monitor water fire-flow capability throughout the city and work with water providers to improve water pressure availability considered inadequate for fire protection.

Further, projects are subject to review by the SFD and to regulations and standards such as the California Uniform Fire Code (UFC), which includes regulations on construction, maintenance and building use. The UFC addresses fire department access, fire hydrants, sprinklers, fire alarm system, etc., for new buildings.

Police Protection Services
Police Protection Services in the city are provided by the Salinas Police Department (SPD). The SPD is located at 222 Lincoln Avenue, which is approximately 0.6 miles east of the Project site. According to the SPD 2021 Annual Report, there are 143 sworn officers employed, which provides a ratio of approximately 0.87 officers per thousand residents, a decrease from the ratio of 1.1 assessed in the General Plan. 46 The SPD received a total of 72,565 calls
in 2021, and 90% of those instances officers arrives on-scene in four (4) minutes or less. The General Plan identifies policies to provide effective and responsive police protection, including alternative policing methods, youth programs, and crime awareness.

Schools
Educational services within the Project area are primarily served by Salinas City Elementary School District (SCESD) and Salinas Union High School District. Schools within a one (1)-mile radius of the Protect site include Sherwood Elementary, Lincoln Elementary School, Roosevelt Elementary School, Salinas High School, Mount Toro High School, and Salinas Pre-School. In the 2021-2022 school year, the Salinas City Elementary School District had an enrollment of 8,287 students and the Salinas Union High School District had an enrollment of 16,525 students.47 Funding for schools and school facilities impacts is outlined in Education Code Section 17620 and Government Code Section 65995 et. seq. (State statutes) which govern the amount of fees that can be levied against new development. These fees are used to construct new or expanded school facilities. Payment of fees authorized by the statute is deemed “full and complete mitigation.” Pursuant to SMC Article V-A – School Facilities Fee, a School Facilities Fee would be 46 Police Services of Salinas. (2021). 2021 Annual Report. Accessed on November 1, 2022, https://salinaspd.org/2021-annualreport/ 47 California Department of Education (2022). Data Quest. Accessed on November 17, 2022, https://dq.cde.ca.gov/dataquest/
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 122 assessed for future development based on the rates in place at the time payment is due. In addition, the Salinas General Plan Land Use Element includes the following policy for educational facilities:

Policy LU-19: Continue to work with the school districts to the extent allowed by State law to ensure adequate school and recreational facilities are provided and maintained in the community. The City will cooperate in expediting construction of schools. School districts will consult with the City at the earliest possible time.

Parks and Recreation
Park and Recreation Facilities are overseen by the City of Salinas Recreation and Community Services Department.

Currently, there are approximately 593.5 acres of parkland, which provides a parkland to population ratio of 3.64 acres of parkland per 1,000 people. 48 This meets the city’s standard of three (3) acres per 1,000 residents. In addition, the City of Salinas General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element includes the following goals and policies related to park and recreational facilities and services:

Goal COS-7: Provide, develop, and maintain ample park and recreational facilities that offer a variety of recreational activities.

Policy COS-7 .1: Develop a high-quality public park system that provides adequate space and facilities for a variety of recreational opportunities conveniently accessible to all Salinas residents.

Policy COS-7.3: Plan and recreation facilities in cooperation with concerned public and private agencies and organizations, particularly school districts and neighborhood residents.

Policy COS-7.5: Identify the recreation needs of special user groups, such as the disabled and elderly, and address these in park and recreation facility development.

Policy COS-7.7: Encourage development of private commercial recreational facilities (e.g., golf courses, sports centers, bowling alleys, family fun centers, etc.) to expand community recreational opportunities and to fill unmet needs.

Policy COS-7.8: While supporting the development of private recreational facilities, ensure that the supply and maintenance of public parks and recreational opportunities is adequate to ensure permanent availability of parks and recreational facilities for use by the entire community.

Policy COS-7.9: Require new residential development to provide land and/or fees to achieve a minimum of

3.0 acres per additional 1,000 population for developed public parklands for community or neighborhood parks.
48 City of Salinas, Public Works Department, GIS Division. (Modified October 17, 2022). Parks and Recreation. Accessed on November 1, 2022, https://cityofsalinas.opendatasoft.com/explore/dataset/parks-andrecreation/information/?location=13,36.69581,-121.63405 CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 123 Policy COS-7 .11: Develop and maintain an integrated system of open-space corridors and trails along utility easements, power-transmission-line rights-of-way, the reclamation ditch, stream banks, drainageways, slopes, and other natural features.

Policy COS-7.12: Link activity centers, recreational opportunities, transit nodes and other services to the integrated trails network.

4.15.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i.Fire protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within city limits and is currently served by the Salinas Fire Department (SFD). Therefore, future development of the Project site would be served by the SFD. Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore could increase the demand for fire protection services.

However, the increase would be incremental and would be within the anticipated growth projections for the city (See Section 4.14).The Project’s proximity to the existing station would support adequate service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for fire protection services. In addition, future development would be reviewed by the SFD for requirements related to water supply, fire hydrants, and fire apparatus access. Further, future development would be subject to proportionate payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee for construction and acquisition costs for improvements to fire protection services and facilities. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would not result in the need for new or altered facilities that could have an environmental impact and a less than significant impact would occur. ii.Police protection?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within the city limits and therefore is currently served by the SPD.

Therefore, future development of the Project site would be served by the SPD. Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore could increase the demand for police services. However, the increase would be incremental and would be within the anticipated growth projections for the city (See Section 4.14). The Project’s proximity to the existing station would support adequate service ratios, response times, and other performance objectives for police protection services. In addition, future development of the Project site would be reviewed by the SPD for requirements related to crime protection. Further, future development would be subject to proportionate payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee for construction and acquisition costs for improvements to police protection services and facilities. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would not result in the need for new or altered facilities that could have an environmental impact and a less than significant impact would occur.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 124 iii.Schools?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within the SCESD and Salinas Union High School District with several schools within a one-mile radius including Sherwood Elementary, Lincoln Elementary School, Roosevelt Elementary School, Salinas High School, Mount Toro High School, and Salinas Pre-School. In the 2021-2022 school year, SCESD had an enrollment of 8,287 students and the Salinas High School District had an enrollment of 16,525 students.

Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore could generate new students that would increase the school districts’ enrollment. A School Impact Fee would be assessed for future development of the Project site based on the rates in place at the time payment is due. As stated in Government Code Section 65995 et. seq., payment of School Impact Fees is deemed full and complete mitigation for potential impacts to schools caused by development. Therefore, payment of the assessed School Impact Fee would reduce impacts related to new school facilities resulting from implementation of the Project and impacts would be less than significant. iv.Parks?
Less than Significant Impact. Park and recreational facilities are typically impacted by an increase in use from residential development. Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore could increase the demand for and use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The nearest public parks to the Project site include the Cornell Corner (0.08 acres, 0.2 miles southwest), Bantaan Memorial Park (0.7 acres, 0.4 miles northwest), Exposition Grounds (7.6-acre community park, 0.4 miles north), La Paz Neighborhood Park (1.5 acres, 0.3 miles east), and Cesar Chavez Community Park (33.3 acres, 0.4 miles northeast).

As described in Section 4.16, the city’s current parkland to population ratio is 3.64 acres of parkland per 1,000 people, which meets the city’s standard of three acres per 1,000 people. The proposed Project would allow future buildout of up to 515 multi-family residential units. Based on an average household size of 4.15, the 515 units could generate approximately 2,137 new residents thereby increasing the city’s population from 163,542 to 165,679. The incremental population increase would result in a parkland to population ratio of 3.59, which would still meet the city’s standard. Therefore, residential demand associated with future development of the Project site would maintain the city’s performance standard.

In addition, future development would be subject to the applicable SMC regulations, including payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee in order to mitigate any potential impacts to the city’s park and recreation facilities generated by the incremental population increase. Compliance with these requirements would reduce any impacts resulting from increased residential demand for park and recreational facilities so as to not cause substantial physical deterioration of the facilities. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact. v.Other public facilities?
Less than Significant Impact. Although no specific development is currently proposed, future development resulting from Project implementation could increase the demand for other public services, such as courts, libraries, hospitals, etc. Increased demand as a result of the continued implementation of the Project could result in development or expansion of public facilities. Typical environmental impacts associated with the development of these facilities include air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, noise, traffic, etc. The expansion of these facilities would be subject to CEQA as they are proposed. In addition, future development would be subject to the payment CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 125 of the Public Facilities Impact Fee in order to mitigate any potential impacts to these public facilities. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact.

4.15.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 126

4.16 RECREATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Increase the use of existing
neighborhood and regional parks or
other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of
the facility would occur or be
accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities
which might have an adverse physical
effect on the environment?
X

4.16.1 Environmental Setting
Park and Recreation Facilities are overseen by the City of Salinas Recreation and Community Services Department.

Currently, there are approximately 593.5 acres of parkland, which provides a parkland to population ratio of 3.64 acres of parkland per 1,000 people. 49 This meets the city’s standard of three (3) acres per 1,000 residents. The nearest public parks to the Project site include the Cornell Corner (0.08 acres, 0.2 miles southwest), Bantaan Memorial Park (0.7 acres, 0.4 miles northwest), Exposition Grounds (7.6-acre community park, 0.4 miles north), La Paz Neighborhood Park (1.5 acres, 0.3 miles east), and Cesar Chavez Community Park (33.3 acres, 0.4 miles northeast).

General Plan
The Salinas General Plan Conservation/Open Space Element includes the following goals and policies related to park and recreational facilities and services:

Goal COS-7: Provide, develop, and maintain ample park and recreational facilities that offer a variety of recreational activities.

Policy COS-7 .1: Develop a high-quality public park system that provides adequate space and facilities for a variety of recreational opportunities conveniently accessible to all Salinas residents.

Policy COS-7.2: Maximize the use of built and natural features to develop a citywide network of parks and open spaces with Carr Lake, Gabilan Creek and the Sherwood Park/Rodeo Grounds complex as essential elements of the open space network.
49 City of Salinas, Public Works Department, GIS Division. (Modified October 17, 2022). Parks and Recreation. Accessed on November 1, 2022, https://cityofsalinas.opendatasoft.com/explore/dataset/parks-andrecreation/information/?location=13,36.69581,-121.63405 CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 127 Policy COS-7.3: Plan park and recreation facilities in cooperation with concerned public and private agencies and organizations, particularly school districts and neighborhood residents.

Policy COS-7.5: Identify the recreation needs of special user groups, such as the disabled and elderly, and address these in park and recreation facility development.

Policy COS-7.9: Require new residential development to provide land and/or fees to achieve a minimum of

3.0 acres per additional 1,000 population for developed public parklands for community or neighborhood parks.

Policy COS-7 .11: Develop and maintain an integrated system of open-space corridors and trails along utility easements, power-transmission-line rights-of-way, the reclamation ditch, stream banks, drainageways, slopes, and other natural features.

Policy COS-7.12: Link activity centers, recreational opportunities, transit nodes and other services to the integrated trails network.

Salinas Municipal Code
In addition, the City of Salinas implements a Public Facilities Impact Fee program per SMC Article V-D whereby any new development occurring within city limits is required to contribute its proportionate share of the costs of new public facilities intended to serve said development.

4.16.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? Less than Significant Impact. Park and recreational facilities are typically impacted by an increase in use from residential development. Although no specific development is proposed by the Project, the Project would facilitate future residential development that would introduce residents to the area and therefore increase the demand for and use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities. The nearest public parks to the Project site include the Cornell Corner (0.08 acres, 0.2 miles southwest), Bantaan Memorial Park (0.7 acres, 0.4 miles northwest), Exposition Grounds (7.6-acre community park, 0.4 miles north), La Paz Neighborhood Park (1.5 acres, 0.3 miles east), and Cesar Chavez Community Park (33.3 acres, 0.4 miles northeast).

The proposed Project would allow future buildout of up to 515 multi-family residential units. Based on an average household size of 4.15, the 515 units could generate approximately 2,137 new residents thereby increasing the city’s population from 163,542 to 165,679. The incremental population increase would result in a parkland to CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 128 population ratio of 3.59, which would still meet the city’s standard. Therefore, residential demand associated with future development of the Project site would maintain the city’s performance standard.

Future development would be subject to the applicable SMC regulations, including payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee in order to mitigate any potential impacts to the city’s park and recreation facilities generated by the incremental population increase. In addition, future development would be subject to open space provisions as required by the SMC. Compliance with these requirements would reduce any impacts resulting from increased residential demand for park and recreational facilities so as to not cause substantial physical deterioration of the facilities. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact. b) Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Less than Significant Impact. Future residential development resulting from the Project could include the construction of recreational facilities as required by the SMC. In such cases, development would be subject to compliance with the SMC and would be reviewed and conditioned by the City to ensure that physical effects on the environment are less than significant. Compliance would ensure that the facilities would not be in an area or be built to a scale that would cause an adverse physical effect on the environment. As a result, a less than significant impact would occur.

4.16.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 129

4.17 TRANSPORTATION
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Conflict with a program, plan,
ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and pedestrian
facilities?
X
b) Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA
Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)? X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to
a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency
access? X

4.17.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is currently fully developed and paved. Street frontage includes East Alisal Street, a four (4)-lane east-west major arterial in addition to several two (2)-lane local streets, Rianda Circle, JD Alvarado Circle, Prader Street, and Griffin Street. Four (4) to five (5)-foot sidewalks are on both sides of the roadways. There are two (2) controlled crosswalks at East Alisal/Work Street and East Alisal/Griffin Street. A segment of Union Pacific Railroad is located adjacent to the Project site to the west. There is one (1) bus stop adjacent to the site (“East Alisal/Work” Stop ID: 3467) on East Alisal Street and Work Street for Route 41 – Salinas-Alisal-Northridge operated by the Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) with service every 15 minutes.

Monterey County Active Transportation Plan (ATP)
The Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) adopted the Monterey County Active Transportation Plan (ATP) in 2018 as an update to the 2011 Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.50 The ATP identifies gaps in the bicycle and pedestrian network and opportunity areas for innovative bicycle facility design. Chapter 5.10 of the ATP provides a community profile for the City of Salinas. The profile identifies an existing Class II bike lane on East Alisal Street in the vicinity of the Project site. There are no proposed bikeway or pedestrian improvements identified adjacent to the Project site.
50 Transportation Agency for Monterey County. (2018). 2018 Monterey County Active Transportation Plan. Accessed November 17, 2022, https://www.tamcmonterey.org/files/991071e61/2018-Monterey-County-Active-TransportationPlan.pdf.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 130 General Plan
The Circulation Element of the Salinas General Plan established goals and policies to maintain the operations of existing roadway systems as new development occurs. These policies aim to prevent negative impacts caused by new developments and ensure that adequate transportation system is provided. The following goals and policies are generally applicable to the proposed Project.

Goal C-1: Provide and maintain a circulation system that meets the current and future needs of the community.

Policy C-1.2: Strive to maintain traffic Level of Service (LOS) D or better for all intersections and roadways.

Policy C-1.3: Require that new development and any proposal for an amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan demonstrate that traffic service levels meeting established General Plan standards will be maintained on arterial and collector streets.

Policy C-1.4: Continue to require new development to contribute to the financing of street improvements, including formation of roadway maintenance assessment districts, required to meet the demand generated by the project.

Policy C-1.5: Ensure that new development makes provisions for street maintenance through appropriate use of gas tax and formation of maintenance assessment districts.

Policy C-1.8: Whenever possible, in reuse/revitalization projects, reduce the number of existing driveways on arterial streets to improve traffic flow.

Policy C-1.9: Use traffic calming methods within residential areas where necessary to create a pedestrianfriendly circulation system.

Policy C-1.11: Continue to enforce traffic laws, including those addressing bicycle and pedestrian traffic, to ensure a circulation system that is safe for motorized, bicycle, and pedestrian traffic.

Goal C-4: Provide an extensive, safe public bicycle network that provides on-street as well as off-street facilities.

Policy C-4.3: Encourage existing businesses and require new construction to provide on-premise facilities to aid bicycle commuters, such as on-site safe bicycle parking.

Policy C-4.6: Ensure that all pedestrian and bicycle route improvements meet the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards for accessibility, and Caltrans standards for design.

Policy C-4.7: Encourage parking lot designs that provide for safe and secure bicycle parking.

General Plan Policies C-1.2 and C-1.3 require a level of service (LOS) evaluation to determine project consistency with the General Plan. However, LOS is no longer required to determine potential transportation impacts under CEQA (See CEQA Guidelines).

City of Salinas Vision Zero: Reducing Serious Injuries and Fatalities on Salinas Streets The City of Salinas adopted the Vision Zero Policy (Resolution No. 21791) on February 11, 2020, commencing the development of a Vision Zero Action Plan. The “Vision Zero” strategy seeks to eliminate all traffic facilities and serve CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 131 injuries, while increasing safe, healthy, equitable mobility for all.51 The Vision Zero Action Plan was adopted on August 24, 2020.52
According to the Action Plan, the Project site is in the vicinity of the highest collision corridors (East Alisal Street from Front Street to North Sanborn Road), highest collision intersections (East Alisal Street at Griffin Street), and highest pedestrian-involved intersections (East Alisal Street at Griffin Street). The Action Plan also identifies a High Injury Network (HIN) (Figure 4-14). The portion of East Alisal Street in the vicinity of the Project site is not in the HIN. The Action Plan identifies implementation actions are identified. Applicable policies for new development, or redevelopment, are as follows.

Action 2.6. Establish internal process for Vision Zero countermeasures to be evaluated and implemented, where feasible, on projects on the HIN.

Action 2.7. Require that new development incorporate Vision Zero principles for any new road construction.

Action 2.8. Require that any redevelopment contributes to street safety improvements required to meet the demand generated by the project.

Action 2.9. Whenever possible, in new or re-development projects, reduce the number of driveways and access points on arterial streets.

CEQA Guidelines
Under Senate Bill 743 (SB743), traffic impacts are related to Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). The VMT metric became mandatory on July 1, 2020. Senate Bill (SB) 743 requires that relevant CEQA analysis of transportation impacts be conducted using a metric known as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of Level of Service (LOS). VMT measures how much actual automobile travel (additional miles driven) a proposed Project would create on California roads.

If the project adds excessive automobile travel onto roads, then the project may cause a significant transportation impact. Therefore, LOS measures of impacts on traffic facilities are no longer a relevant CEQA criteria for transportation impacts.

To implement SB 743, the CEQA Guidelines were amended by adding Section 15064.3. According to Section 15064.3, VMT measures the automobile travel generated from a proposed project (i.e., the additional miles driven).

Here, ‘automobile’ refers to on-road passenger vehicles such as cars and light-duty trucks. If a proposed project adds excessive automobile travel on California roads thereby exceeding an applicable threshold of significance, then the project may cause a significant transportation impact. 51 City of Salinas. 2022. Vision Zero: Reducing Serious Injuries and Fatalities on Salinas Streets. Accessed November 22, 2022, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/our-city-services/public-works/traffic-transportation-engineering/vision-zero 52 City of Salinas. 2020. Vision Zero Action Plan. Accessed November 22, 2022, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/sites/default/files/departments_files/public_works_files/salinas_vision_zero_action_plan.pdf CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 132 Figure 4-14 High Injury Network Map
HIGH INJURY NETWORK - High Injury Network
A
~ I
.. '
'•
:·-...... --·---·-·~ ......... ___ _
✓
~': ·-·-·-. ... ~ ...........

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 133 Among its provisions, Section 15064.3(b) establishes criteria for analyzing transportation impacts. Specifically, Section 15064.3(b) (1) establishes a less than significant presumption for certain land use projects that are proposed within ½-mile of an existing major transit stop or along a high-quality transit corridor. If this presumption does not apply to a land use project, then the VMT can be qualitatively or quantitatively analyzed.

In the case that quantitative models or methods are not available to the lead agency to estimate the VMT for the project being considered, provisions of CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b)(3) permits the lead agency to conduct a qualitative analysis. The qualitative analysis may evaluate factors including but not limited to the availability of transit, proximity to other destinations, and construction traffic.

Lastly, Section 15064.3(b)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines states that “[a] lead agency has discretion to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or in any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled and may revise those estimates to reflect professional judgment based on substantial evidence. Any assumptions used to estimate vehicle miles traveled and any revision to model outputs should be documented and explained in the environmental document prepared for the project. The standard of adequacy in Section 15151 shall apply to the analysis described in this section.”
SB 743 Technical Advisory
In April 2018, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) issued the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) (revised December 2018) to provide technical recommendations regarding VMT, thresholds of significance, and mitigation measures for a variety of land use project types.

The Technical Advisory includes screening thresholds for agencies to use in order to identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant impact without conducting a detailed study. • Screening Thresholds for Small Project. Absent substantial evidence indicating that a project would generate a potentially significant level of VMT, or inconsistency with a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) or general plan, projects that generate or attract fewer than 110 trips per day generally may be assumed to cause a less-than significant transportation impact. This threshold is based on a CEQA categorical exemption for existing facilities, including additions to existing structures of up to 10,00 square feet, so long as the project is in an area where public infrastructure is available to allow for maximum planned development and the project is not in an environmentally sensitive area. • Map-Based Screening Threshold for Residential and Office Projects. Residential and office projects that locate in areas with low VMT, and that incorporate similar features (i.e., density, mix of uses, transit accessibility), will tend to exhibit similarly low VMT. Maps created with VMT data, for example from a travel survey or a travel demand model, can illustrate areas that are currently below the threshold VMT. Because new development in such locations would likely result in a similar level of VMT, such maps can be used to screen out residential and office projects from needing to prepare a detailed VMT analysis. • Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact Near Transit Thresholds. Proposed CEQA Guideline Section 15064.3, subdivision (b)(1), states that lead agencies generally should presume that certain projects (including residential, retail, and office projects, as well as projects that are a mix of these uses) proposed within ½ mile of an existing major transit stop or an existing stop along a high-quality transit corridor will CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 134 have a less-than-significant impact on VMT. This presumption would not apply, however, if project-specific or location-specific information indicates that the project will still generate significant levels of VMT. • Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development. Adding affordable housing to infill locations generally improves jobs-housing match, in turn shortening commutes and reducing VMT. Therefore, a project consisting of a high percentage of affordable housing may be a basis for the lead agency to find a less-than-significant impact on VMT.

According to the Technical Advisory, lead agencies, using more location-specific information, may develop their own more specific thresholds, which may include other land use types.

City of Salinas SB 743 VMT Implementation Policy
The City of Salinas adopted the Interim Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Policy on October 13, 2020, to determine transportation impacts under CEQA. 53 The VMT Policy provides guidance and steps to determine the significance of transportation impacts and identify mitigation measures. The VMT Policy provides seven (7) screening criteria per the OPR guidance, concluding that projects that fall within the thresholds would not cause a significant impact regarding VMT. The screening criteria include:
• Small Projects: Less than significant impact if the project generates less than 110 trips per day. • Projects Near High Quality Transit: Less than significant impact if the project is 1) within 0.5-miles of an existing major transit stop, 2) maintains a service interval frequency of 15 min or less during peak commute times, 3) has a floor area ratio (FAR) of more than 0.75, and 4) does not include more parking than the municipal code requires. (See Figure 4-15)
• Local-Serving Retail: Less than significant impact if the project proposes 1) no single store on-site exceed 50,000 sf, and 2) project is local-serving as determined by the City of Salinas. • Affordable Housing: Less than significant impact if the project provides a high percentage of affordable housing as determined by the City of Salinas.
• Local Essential Service: Less than significant impact if buildings less than 50,000 sf. with land use of day care center, public K-12 school, police or fire facility, medical office, or government offices. • Map-based Screening: Less than significant impact if the area of development is under the 15 percent County threshold as shown on the City of Salinas VMT screening map. The screening map is limited to residential and office projects. (See Figure 4-16)
• Redevelopment Projects: Less than significant impact if project replaces an existing VMT-generating land use and does not result in net overall increase in VMT. 53 City of Salinas. (2020). Senate Bill 743 VMT Implementation Policy. Accessed on November 1, 2022, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/sites/default/files/departments_files/community_development_files/final_interim_vmt_policy .pdf
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 135 Figure 4-15 City of Salinas High-Quality Transit Corridors - Project Site
Bus Stops .
~ El High-Oua . Tranist Corridors llty
Source: City of Sa!n as 0.55
0 0 - --
02 15 ~ace
CITY OF SALINAS . General Plan Amendm ent & Rezone.
u 1.65
l.fo1es
Esri, HER armi
Created 11/1/ 2022
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 136 Figure 4-16 City of Salinas VMT Screening Map - Residential VMT per Capita Mot Appfticab-.

Al or S.aow Cown'Y Th,eshold
- 1~ to 1j% Abov• County Thr•thokl
- Ht"' o,r Moc. A.bov• County ThtUM-ld
0 ..5 t t $
Mlt•1
Mont•t•)' Coun_!r Thtnhokl"
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 137

4.17.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Although no development is proposed by the Project, future development of the Project site would be required by the City to comply with all project-level requirements implemented by a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, roadway, pedestrian and bicycle, and transit facilities. The Project’s consistency for each facility type is addressed below.

Roadway Facilities
CEQA Guidelines no longer use motorist delays or level of service (LOS) to measure transportation impacts.

However, in evaluating Project consistency with the General Plan, a comparison of LOS is required per General Plan Policies C-1.2 and C-1.3. Therefore, a LOS analysis is provided for informational purposes. Based on the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual, 10th Edition, trip generation rates for mid-rise residential with ground floor commercial (ITE 231), the Project would generate an estimated total average daily trip generation of 1,771 trips.54 A Trip Generation Memo is provided in Appendix F.

To provide a conservative analysis, Project-generated trips were applied to the intersection with the highest available trip counts in the vicinity of the Project site. The East Alisal Street/Work Street intersection has the highest available trip counts in the vicinity of the Project site with a reported total volume of 9,221 average daily trips. 55 56
Assuming all Project-generated trips use East Alisal Street, 10,992 average daily trips would be expected on this roadway resulting in a LOS of A (below 22,000 trips) per General Plan Table C-2 for a four (4)-lane divided arterial (with left turn lane).
57 Therefore, the Project would be consistent with General Plan Policies C-1.2 and C-1.3, which aims to maintain LOS D for all roadways in the city. As such, impacts to roadway facilities would be less than significant.

Although no physical development is proposed, future development resulting from Project implementation would be subject to review and approval by the City for compliance with standards for on and off-site improvements. In addition, because the Project site is in the vicinity of the highest collision corridors (East Alisal Street from Front Street to North Sanborn Road), highest collision intersections (East Alisal Street at Griffin Street), and highest pedestrian-involved intersections (East Alisal Street at Griffin Street), future development would be subject to compliance with implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan. To ensure compliance with implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan and thereby maintain safety standards at all intersections and roadway segments pursuant to the Plan, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure TRANS54 According to ITE 231, an Average Rate of 3.44 multiplied by 515 dwelling units equals 1,771 average daily trips. 55City of Salinas. 2022. Traffic Volumes (GIS Data). Accessed November 22, 2022, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/map/trafficvolumes 56 The next closest intersection is East Alisal Street/Griffin Street with an average daily traffic volume of 5,567 trips. 57 9,221 plus 1,771 equals 10,992
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 138

1. Incorporation of the mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts related to roadway facilities to less than significant.

Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: To maintain safety standards at all intersections and roadway segments pursuant to implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan, a traffic impact study shall be required for all development projects anticipated to generate 110 or more new daily vehicle trips within the Project Area, unless not required by the City. Depending on the results of this study, future developments may be required to construct or contribute to street safety improvements to meet the demand generated by the project. Improvements shall be in accordance with the City of Salinas’ Vision Zero Action Plan (i.e. pedestrian-activated crosswalk warning beacon, high visibility crosswalks, pedestrian hybrid beacon, reduced parking at intersection, intersection control, raised median and street trees, protected bike lanes, and lane reduction). These improvements shall be required as conditions of approval.

Pedestrian and Bicycle Facilities
There is an existing Class II bike lane on East Alisal Street in the vicinity of the Project site. There are also four (4) to five (5)-foot sidewalks located on both sides of East Alisal Street. There are two (2) controlled crosswalks at East Alisal Street/Work Street and East Alisal Street/Griffin Street. According to intersection data available for East Alisal Street/Work Street and East Alisal Street/Griffin Street, approximately 267 pedestrians utilize these crosswalks on a daily basis. Although no development is currently proposed, future development of the Project site would result in an incremental increase in residents which could result in an increased demand for pedestrian and bicycle facilities.

Future development would be subject to review and approval by the City to ensure compliance with existing City plans and policies regarding pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including the Vision Zero Action Plan implementation actions and Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 as identified above. Further, all future development would be subject to the Public Facilities Impact Fee program per SMC Article V-D whereby any new development occurring within city limits is required to contribute its proportionate share of the costs of new public facilities intended to serve said development. Through compliance with City plans and policies and payment of the Public Facilities Impact Fee, impacts to pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be less than significant.

Transit Facilities
There is one (1) bus stop adjacent to the site (“East Alisal/Work” Stop ID: 3467) on East Alisal Street and Work Street for Route 41 – Salinas-Alisal-Northridge operated by the Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) with service every 15 minutes. Although no development is currently proposed, future development of the Project site would result in an incremental increase in residents which could result in an increased demand for transit. Increased demand for transit would result in fewer automobile trips, which would not cause an adverse environmental impact. The Project would generate new automobile trips, which could cause a delay for buses utilizing East Alisal Street. However, as discussed above, the projected traffic volumes would not have a significant impact. For these reasons, impacts to transit facilities would be less than significant.

Therefore, through compliance with the programs, plans, ordinances, and policies addressing the circulation system (inclusive of transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities), a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 139 b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)? Less than Significant Impact. Senate Bill (SB) 743 requires that relevant CEQA analysis of transportation impacts be conducted using a metric known as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of LOS. Based on the city’s adopted SB 743 VMT Implementation Policy, the Project is eligible to “screen out” from further VMT analysis pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b) because the site is located along a High-Quality transit corridor, within 0.5-miles of an existing major transit stop that maintains a service interval frequency of 14 minutes or less during peak commute (Figure 4-15). In addition, the Project can also screen out from further VMT analysis using Map-based Screening for residential development and Redevelopment Projects for commercial development. As shown in Figure 4-16, the Project site is at or below County threshold for residential VMT per capita. For the commercial development portion, the Project site currently has a 0.3 FAR, which is larger than the proposed 0.25 FAR commercial use assessed in this study. As such, the Project would replace an existing VMT-generating land use and does not result in net overall increase in VMT. For these reasons, it can be determined that the Project would have a less than significant impact.
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact. Although no development is currently proposed, future development of the Project site would be subject to review and approval by the City through the entitlement process. Review by the City would ensure that project design does not include hazardous design features such as sharp curves or dangerous intersections, or incompatible uses. As discussed above, the Project site is in the vicinity of the highest collision corridors (East Alisal Street from Front Street to North Sanborn Road), highest collision intersections (East Alisal Street at Griffin Street), and highest pedestrian-involved intersections (East Alisal Street at Griffin Street). As such, to reduce safety hazards resulting from future development, the Project would be subject to compliance with implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan as incorporated through Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 described under criterion a). Through compliance with the city’s standards and Vision Zero Action Plan implementation actions, the Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses and a less than significant impact would occur. d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
Less than Significant Impact. The Project does not involve a change to any emergency response plan. In addition, although no development is currently proposed, future development of the Project site is subject to review by the city to ensure adequate site access including emergency access. In the case that future construction requires lane closures, access through existing roadways would be maintained through standard traffic control and therefore, potential lane closures would not affect emergency evacuation plans. Thus, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

4.17.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Transportation related mitigation measure TRANS1 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 140

4.18 TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project:

Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in PRC section 21074 as either a
site, feature, place, cultural landscape that
is geographically defined in terms of the size
and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or
object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the
California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of
historical resources as defined in PRC
section 5020.1(k), or,
X
b) A resource determined by the lead
agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to
be significant pursuant to criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of PRC section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set
forth in subdivision (c) of PRC section
5024.1, the lead agency shall consider
the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.

4.18.1 Environmental Setting
See Section 4.5.

4.18.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. Based on the CHRIS Records Search conducted on April 14, 2022, there are no known local, state, or federal designated historical resources pursuant to Section 5020.1(k) on the Project site. While there is no evidence that historical resources exist on the Project site, there is some possibility that existing structures qualify as historical resources or hidden, and buried resources may exist with no surface evidence that may be impacted by future physical development of the site. In the event of the accidental discovery and recognition of previously unknown historical resources before or during construction activities, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure CUL-1 through Mitigation Measure CUL-8 to assure construction CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 141 activities do not result in significant impacts to any potential historical resources discovered above or below ground surface. Thus, if such resources were discovered, implementation of the required mitigation measures would reduce the impact to less than significant. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The Project site and its resources have not been determined by the city to be significant pursuant to Section 5024.1. However, as discussed in Section 4.5, there is some possibility that a non-visible, buried site may exist and may be uncovered during ground disturbing construction activities which could constitute a significant impact. Therefore, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure TCR-1 to assure construction activities do not result in significant impacts to any potential resources of significance to a California Native American tribe discovered above or below ground surface. Thus, if such resources were discovered, implementation of the required mitigation measures would reduce the impact to less than significant. As a result, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

Mitigation Measure TCR-1 Inadvertent Discoveries During Construction In the event that cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during grading or construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find; an appropriate Native American representative, based on the nature of the find, is consulted; and mitigation measures are put in place for the disposition and protection of any find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If the City, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with local Native American group(s) prior to continuation of any earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find. The plan shall include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, shall outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the appropriate local Native American tribal representative and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist. Examples of appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural resources include, but are not limited to, protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery.

4.18.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Tribal Cultural Resources related mitigation measures CUL-1 through CUL-8 and TCR-1 identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 142

4.19 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or storm
water drainage, electric power, natural
gas, or telecommunications facilities,
the construction or relocation of which
could cause significant environmental
effect?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available
to serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development
during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider, which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition
to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of state
or local standards, or in excess of the
capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes
and regulations related to solid waste?
X

4.19.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is currently fully developed and contains approximately 23 existing structures. The site is connected to water, wastewater, and stormwater services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications are provided by private companies. Each utility system is described below.

Water
Water supply, usage, and services are described in Section 4.10.

Wastewater
Monterey One Water (M1W) is the public wastewater treatment agency for the City of Salinas. M1W provides wastewater collection, treatment, and disposal services. Collected wastewater is transported to the Regional Treatment Plan located two (2) miles north of the city of Marina, CA. The RTP’s daily capacity is 29.6 million gallons CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 143 for primary and secondary treatment and five (5) million gallons for advanced purification for groundwater replenishment.58 The RTP treats an average 17 million gallons per day with a remaining capacity of 12.6 million gallons per day.

The City of Salinas maintains 292 miles of sanitary sewer collection system pipeline, which vary in diameter from 6- inch to 54-inches, and 11 sanitary sewer lift stations. The city’s Wastewater Division of the Public Works Department is responsible for the operation and maintenance of the city’s sanitary sewer collection system, including performing infrastructure maintenance, water quality monitoring, illicit discharge prevention, and public education on the city’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit (NPDES). The City of Salinas Sewer System Master Plan (Updated 2023) addresses the City’s long-term wastewater planning. 59 Solid Waste
The Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority provides solid waste collection services for residents, commercial, and industrial developments in the city, transporting waste to the Johnson Canyon Landfill. This landfill is permitted to receive a maximum of 1,574 tons per day and has a remaining capacity of 6,923,297 cubic yards, with an estimated closure date of 2055. Of note, to comply with the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 (AB 939), Monterey County is required to divert at least 50 percent of solid waste from landfills. The City of Salinas mandates recycling for businesses and multifamily complexes, including both Business Recycling and Organic Recycling, as required by the city’s ordinance and State law (i.e., AB 341, Mandatory Commercial Recycling Law). The City also implements a Household Hazardous Waste Program to ensure that hazardous waste produced in homes is safely used, transported, and disposed of.

Stormwater
Stormwater services are described in Section 4.10.

Natural Gas and Electricity
The Central Coast Community Energy (CCCE) would provide electricity supply to new development at the Project site. Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) would provide electricity transmission and natural gas. According to the PG&E Distribution Investment Deferral Framework (DIDF) Map, there are PG&E-maintained power lines along the street frontages surrounding the Project site.60

58 Monterey One Water. (2022). Regional Treatment Plant. Accessed on November 23, 2022, https://www.montereyonewater.org/280/Regional-Treatment-Plant 59 City of Salinas (2023). Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update. Accessed July 31, 2023, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/files/sharedassets/city/public-works/documents/salinas-sanitary-sewer-master-plan-update2023.pdf 60 PG&E. (2022). Distribution Investment Deferral Framework (DIDF) Map. Accessed on November 23, 2022, https://www.pge.com/b2b/distribution-resource-planning/grid-needs-assessment-map.html CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 144 Telecommunications
Accordingly, telecommunications providers in the area incrementally expand and update their service systems in response to usage and demand. Upon request, the site would be connected to existing broadband infrastructure and subject to applicable connection and service fees.

4.19.2 Impact Assessment
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than Significant Impact. The Project site is within city limits and thus, future development of the Project site would be required to connect to water, stormwater, and wastewater services, and utilize solid waste, collection services. Natural gas, electricity, and telecommunications would be provided by private companies. In general, the Project site is an infill site within an area of the city that is predominantly developed with commercial uses. Because the Project site is largely developed, there is existing utility infrastructure available to serve the site which would not require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities. Through the entitlement review process for future development, the city and responsible agencies would review the Project to ensure compliance with applicable connection requirements. Compliance would ensure that future development would not cause significant environmental effects related to utilities and service systems. For these reasons, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years?
Less than Significant Impact. As discussed in detail in Section 4.10, the city’s long-term water resource planning is addressed in the city’s UWMP. As concluded in Section 4.10, it can be presumed that existing and planned water supplies should be adequate to serve the Project’s anticipated demand at maximum buildout. Regarding water supply availability for the Project and future development, the UWMP indicates that Cal Water has sufficient production capacity and groundwater supply to meet most demands in the future during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. Minor shortfalls (two percent) are anticipated in 2040 under single dry year and multiple dry year conditionsin the Salinas PWS and is expected to increase slightly in 2045. However, the UWMP expects for shortfalls to be alleviated through implementation of the Water Shortage Contingency Plan (WSCP) and other supply augmentation measures as discussed in Chapter 8 – Water Shortage Contingency Planning in the UWMP.

Furthermore, as discussed under Section 4.10, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to the city’s and Cal Water’s water conservation efforts (e.g., compliance with California Plumbing Code, efficient appliances, efficient landscaping, etc.) should not negatively impact water supply or impede water management. In particular, future development would be built accordance with all mandatory outdoor water use requirements as outlined in the applicable California Green Building Standards Code, Title 24, Part 11, Section 4.304 – Outdoor Water Use and verified through the building permit process. As a mixed-use development that would contain landscaping pursuant to SMC regulations, future development shall comply with the updated Model Water CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 145 Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO) (California Code of Regulations, Title 23, Chapter 2.7, Division 2), as implemented and enforced through the building permit process. Therefore, through compliance, the potential for the Project to substantially decrease groundwater supplies is limited and impacts would be less than significant.

Finally, although the proposed Project, would increase demand for water use on this specific site compared to the water use currently on the site, as previously discussed in Section 2.9 of this document, the overall projected citywide population would not change because of this Project. In fact, the increase in potential residential units does not constitute a significantly greater water demand because higher density, multi-family residential development generates less water use due to property features including less outdoor irrigation due to shared common areas. Thus, if assumed population increases are redirected to higher density multi-family development rather than single-family development, the overall anticipated water demand would be less than anticipated citywide. In addition, the UWMP determined that there is enough water capacity to serve the city’s projected population. As discussed further in Section 4.14.2, the population and housing units generated by the proposed Project would be within the AMBAG projections for the region and city.

Overall, based on the information collected from the UWMP, the Project would not generate significantly greater water demand as to substantially decrease groundwater supplies. Additionally, adherence to connection requirements and recommendations pursuant to water conservation efforts as well as compliance with applicable California Green Building Standards Code and MWELO would reduce water demand and reduce the potential for the Project to substantially decrease water supply available to serve the Project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The City’s long-term wastewater planning is addressed in the City’s Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update (Master Plan). 61 Land use types are important to determine projected demand and adequate sizing and capacity for pipes and facilities to maintain effective sanitary sewer system facilities. The land use assumptions in the Master Plan were based on the General Plan Land Use Map and the City’s GIS database.

The Master Plan also uses the General Plan to forecast the wastewater flows that will be contributed by growth areas in the future, both within and outside City limits, for buildout in the Year 2045. For the purposes of the Master Plan, 213,063 persons was used for the City’s buildout population. 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 the Master Plan. The total estimated future flow is estimated to 17,715,200 gallons per day (GPD).
61 City of Salinas (2023). Sanitary Sewer Master Plan Update. Accessed July 31, 2023, https://www.cityofsalinas.org/files/sharedassets/city/public-works/documents/salinas-sanitary-sewer-master-plan-update2023.pdf CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 146 To analyze capacity of the collection system, the Master Plan utilizes the City’s Public Works Department’s Standard Specifications and Design Standards (2017) and the City’s Sewer System Management Plan (2019). One of the performance criteria for gravity sewer lines is the maximum allowable flow depth (i.e., 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.

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.

According to the Master Plan, the Project site is in the existing sewer service area with existing 8-inch, 10-inch, and 12-inch pipes serving the site, in addition to an existing sewer main located in Alisal Street. The Project site is not within a future growth area, nor is the site in an area with existing or future sewer upgrade projects planned due to pipeline deficiencies and flow conditions.

The Project proposes to change the planned land use from Retail and General Commercial/Light Industrial to Mixed Use. As shown in Table 4-4 of the Master Plan, the Residential land use type is projected to generate a wastewater flow factor of 54.5 GPD per person and the Commercial land use type is projected to generate a wastewater flow factor of 0.08 GPD per square feet. Table 4-15 summarizes the total wastewater flows to be expected for future buildout of the Project site compared to the existing wastewater flows estimated for the existing use. The estimated wastewater flows for future buildout of the Project site account for approximately 0.72 percent of the total estimated future flow for buildout in the Year 2045 (126,958 GPD divided by 17,715,200 GPD equals 0.72 percent).

Therefore, the wastewater treatment plant would have the capacity to meet the wastewater demands resulting from maximum buildout of the site.

Table 4-15 Estimated Wastewater Flow by Land Use
Land Use Unit Flow Factor
(GPD/Unit)
Existing Average
Flow
Future Average
Flow
Residential Persons 54.5 None 116,44662
Commercial Square Feet 0.08 12,00063 10,51264
Total 12,000 126,958
However, given the potential increase in future average flow resulting from Project implementation, there is a potential for flows to exceed the allowable flow depth for gravity sewer lines that could cause insufficient capacity to meet the City’s performance standards while conveying existing population wastewater flows. Insufficient pipeline capacity would necessitate upgrades and improvements. As discussed above, the maximum d/D criteria defined in the Sewer System Management Plan is 0.75 for new developments; exceedance of 0.75 d/D would constitute a significant impact. Therefore, to mitigate any impacts to gravity sewer lines to a less than significant level, the Project shall incorporate Mitigation Measure UTL-1 62 Future population of the Project site was estimated in Section 4.14, finding that a 515-unit residential development could generate 2,137 residents.
63 The square footage of existing commercial buildings was estimated using property data and aerial imagery. Based on this data, there is approximately 150,000 square feet of existing building area. 64 As detailed in the Project Description, build out of the Project site could result in a commercial building area of 131,406 square feet.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 147 Mitigation Measure UTL-1: New development generating wastewater flows that results in a downstream exceedance of 0.75 d/D shall construct system upgrades for those found to be insufficient in capacity per the requirements of the Public Works Department. The flow shall be verified through a sewer modeling program during the planning and design phase, prior to entitlement approval. The model shall evaluate pipeline capacity, flow velocity, and maximum d/D ratio for normal, dry, and wet weather conditions.

In addition, future development would be reviewed and conditioned by the City to install new branches or laterals and pay all required connection charges and ongoing user charges to serve the development. This, in addition to compliance with Mitigation Measure UTL-1, would ensure that the Project’s impacts on wastewater facilities are adequately offset (i.e., ensuring that sufficient capacity is available). Compliance with these requirements would be ensured through the building permit process.

In summary, maximum buildout of the Project site is anticipated to generate additional wastewater beyond existing conditions. However, the estimated generation would be within the remaining capacity of the wastewater treatment plant. In addition, future development of the Project site resulting in downstream exceedance of pipeline capacity would be required to comply with Mitigation Measure UTL-1. Future development would be reviewed and conditioned by the City to install new branches or laterals and pay applicable fees to adequately offset any impacts.

This would ensure that sufficient capacity is maintained and therefore impacts would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Less than Significant Impact. Although no development is currently proposed, future development that results from the implementation of the Project would generate solid waste and recycling. The future development would be served by the Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority and would be required to comply with local and state law regarding solid waste and recycling. According to CalEEMod (Appendix A), buildout of the Project site is expected to generate approximately 374.9 tons per year or 2,054 pounds per day of solid waste. Assuming a 50 percent diversion from landfills pursuant to AB 939, the Project would send approximately 187.4 tons per year or 1,027 pounds per day of solid waste to the Johnson Canyon Landfill, which would account for less than 0.1 percent of the landfill’s receiving maximum.

In addition, through the entitlement review process, future development would be required to comply with requirements outlined in SMC Sec. 37-50.200. - Recycling and solid waste disposal regulations. Compliance with these requirements would ensure regular collection and recycling of materials based on the capacity of local infrastructure. Through compliance, future development would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. For these reasons, the Project would have a less than significant impact. e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than Significant Impact. As described under criterion d), future development would be required to comply with state and local law which include management and reduction statutes and regulations to ensure that solid waste is handled, transported, and disposed accordingly. Through compliance with local and state law, it can be determined CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 148 that future development would also comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. As a result, a less than significant impact would occur because of the Project.

4.19.3 Mitigation Measures
The Project shall implement and incorporate, as applicable, the Utilities and Service System related mitigation measure UTL-1 as identified above and in the MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM contained in SECTION 5.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 149

4.20 WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility or
lands classified as very high fire hazard
severity zones, Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Substantially impair an adopted
emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and
other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project
occupants to pollutant concentrations
from a wildfire or the uncontrolled
spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or
maintenance of associated
infrastructure (such as roads, fuel
breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result
in temporary or ongoing impacts to
the environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to
significant risks, including downslope
or downstream flooding or landslides,
as a result of runoff, post-fire slope
instability, or drainage changes?
X

4.20.1 Environmental Setting
The City of Salinas is an urbanized community that is surrounded by agricultural lands. The risk of wildland fires increases in the rangelands on the hillsides surrounding the city. The Project site is centrally located within the city limits and sphere of influence and is not in proximity to the rangelands or hillsides. As such, the greatest fire risk is urban fires. The city, inclusive of the Project site, is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as moderate, high, or very high fire hazard severity zones as identified by CAL FIRE. 65 Rather, the city, inclusive of the Project site, is within an “area of local responsibility” that is an area of low fire risk. As an area of local responsibility, the Salinas Fire Department is responsible for providing fire protection services (See Section 4.15). 65 California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. FHSZ Viewer. Accessed on August 29, 2022, https://egis.fire.ca.gov/FHSZ/.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 150 Figure 4-17 Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones Surrounding the City of Salinas CJ C1tyUm1
D Sphorcof lnfucncc
Proposed Sphorc of lnfuenco
Very High Fire Hazard Severity
- Zone In Stoto Responsibility
Area
Very High Are H4Z4td SeYerlty
- Zono in Local Responsibilfy
Area
Sou1ce State of CaUorr~c - Oepamnent o! Forestry end F.:e P?Otecuon, F:re aid Resowc.t: Asses mt:m Progidlli, 2007. City of Scd.n~. 2021.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 151

4.20.2 Impact Assessment
If located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, Would the project:
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The city inclusive of the Project site is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The Project site is fully developed and paved, containing existing structures and on- and off-site improvements including drive approaches, curb, gutter, sidewalk, streetlights, utilities, and landscaping. As discussed in Section 4.15, the Salinas Fire Department provides emergency response and public safety services for sites within city limits including the Project site. Future development would be reviewed and conditioned by the City for adequate provision of vehicular and pedestrian circulation and emergency access.

Review and approval by the City would ensure that future development does not substantially impair the adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. For these reasons, no impact would occur because of the Project.
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? No Impact. The city inclusive of the Project site is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The Project site is fully developed and paved, is located on a relatively flat property with minimal slope and is not in an area that is subject to strong prevailing winds or other factors that would exacerbate wildfire risks. For these reasons, no impact would occur. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
No Impact. The city inclusive of the Project site is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The Project site is fully developed and paved. As such, the site is served by existing infrastructure such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines, and other utilities. Future development of the site would be reviewed and conditioned by the City for compliance with applicable standards, specifications, and codes related to the installation and maintenance of infrastructure. Such infrastructure would be typical for urban uses and would not exacerbate fire risks or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Therefore, no impact would occur.
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No Impact. The city inclusive of the Project site is not located in or near state responsibility or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. The topography of the Project site is relatively flat with stable, native soils, and the site is not in the immediate vicinity of rivers or creeks that would be more susceptible to landslides. Therefore, no impact would occur because of the Project.

4.20.3 Mitigation Measures
None required.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 152

4.21 MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project:

Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less than
Significant with
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the
environment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or
prehistory?
X
b) Does the project have impacts that
are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means
that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed
in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current
projects, and the effects of probable
future projects)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
X

4.21.1 Impact Assessment
a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below selfsustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. The analyses of environmental issues contained in this Initial Study indicate that the Project is not expected to have substantial impact on the environment or on any resources identified in the Initial Study. Standard requirements that will be implemented through the entitlement process and the attached mitigation monitoring and reporting program have been incorporated in the project to CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 153 reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact.
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.)
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(i) states that a Lead Agency shall consider whether the cumulative impact of a project is significant and whether the effects of the project are cumulatively considerable. The assessment of the significance of the cumulative effects of a project must, therefore, be conducted in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects. Due to the nature of the Project and consistency with environmental policies, incremental contributions to impacts are considered less than cumulatively considerable. All Project-related impacts were determined to be less than significant in compliance with all applicable standards, policies, and mitigation measures. The Project would not contribute substantially to adverse cumulative conditions, or create any substantial indirect impacts (i.e., increase in population could lead to an increased need for housing, increase in traffic, air pollutants, etc.). In addition to the proposed Project, four (4) other General Plan Amendments and Rezones (GPA/RZ) are proposed within the City of Salinas. All these GPA/RZ projects are funded by SB 2 for the purpose of providing additional opportunities for housing and mixed-use development, in line with the goals contained in the General Plan and Housing Element. This indicates that the anticipated growth and impacts from the GPA/RZs are, to an extent, compliant and previously analyzed within the General Plan and Housing Element. In addition, no development is proposed or mandated as part of these GPA/RZs, and there is no guarantee of future development or the timing that development could happen. In addition, as mentioned above, it has been shown in previous studies that upzoning property doesn’t typically result in overall population increases. As such, Project impacts are not considered to be cumulatively considerable given the insignificance of project induced impacts.

The impact is therefore less than significant with mitigation incorporated. c) Does the project have environmental effects that will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation Incorporated The analyses of environmental issues contained in this Initial Study indicate that the project is not expected to have substantial impact on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Standard requirements and conditions in addition to mitigation measures have been incorporated in the project to reduce all potentially significant impacts to less than significant. Therefore, the Project would have a less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 154 5 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
This mitigation measure monitoring and reporting checklist was prepared pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15097 and Section 21081.6 of the PRC (PRC). The timing of implementing each mitigation measure is identified in in the checklist, as well as identifies the entity responsible for verifying that the mitigation measures applied to a project are performed. Project applicants are responsible for providing evidence that mitigation measures are implemented. As lead agency, the City of Salinas is responsible for verifying that mitigation is performed/completed.

Mitigation Measures
Timing of
Verification
Responsible for
Verification
Verification of
Completion
Date Initials
Air Quality
Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Construction Air Quality. During construction, the applicant or successor in interest for each individual site shall:
• Limit grading to 8.1 acres per day, and limit grading and excavation to 2.2 acres per day.
• Provide watering trucks on site to maintain adequate soil moisture during grading and water
graded/excavated areas at least twice daily, thus minimizing dust generation. In addition, the
water trucks shall be used to wash down trucks and tractors, including earth loads, prior to
entering public roadways.
• Prohibit all grading activities whenever wind speeds exceed 15 miles per hour (mph).
• Maintain a minimum of two feet for freeboard for all haul trucks. • Cover all trucks hauling dirt, sand, or loose materials. • Cover inactive storage piles.
• Enforce a 15-mph speed limit for all unpaved surfaces when visible dust clouds are formed by vehicle movement.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department – Plan
Check Service
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 155 • Place gravel base near site entrances to clean tires prior to entering public roadways.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2: MBARD Health Risk Consultation. Prior to issuance of any grading permit and/or building permit for each individual site, the applicant or successor in interest shall consult with MBARD regarding the potential need for a diesel health risk assessment (HRA). If required, the applicant or successor in interest shall prepare a diesel HRA and shall implement the measures contained therein to ensure that project-specific emissions are below MBARD’s established health risk thresholds: hazard index greater than 1 for acute or chronic impacts, and cancer risk greater than 10 in one million for long-term operational emissions or 1 per 100,000 population for temporary construction-related emissions. Measures may include, but would not be limited to:
• Use of diesel-fueled equipment equipped with Tier 4 (or Tier 3 if the Tier 4 standard is unavailable) USEPA engine standards. The USEPA estimates that Tier 4 engines would reduce PM emissions by approximately 90 percent compared to the USEPA Tier 2 standards (USEPA 2008).
• Retrofit off-road diesel equipment with Verified Diesel Emissions Control Strategy (VDECS) like Diesel Particulate Filters (DPF). Particulate Matter level 3 VDECS can provide at least an 85 percent reduction (CARB 2015). • Use alternatively fueled (e.g., natural gas) diesel construction equipment, including all off-road and portable diesel-powered equipment. • Use electrically driven equipment that is not powered by a portable generator set.
• Limit the hours of operation for heavy-duty equipment and/or limit the quantity of heavy-duty equipment operating at the same time.

Prior to
issuance of
any grading
permit
and/or
building
permit;
during
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department – Plan
Check Services;
MBARD
Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Nesting Bird Surveys and Avoidance. The Project shall implement the following measures to mitigate for loss of nesting habitat of the Project in compliance with the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and relevant Fish and Game Codes:

Not more
than 14 days
prior to
Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 156 • Avoidance. In order to avoid impacts to nesting raptors and migratory birds, the Project will be constructed, if feasible, from September 16th and January 31st, which is outside the avian nesting season.
• Preconstruction Surveys. If Project activities must occur during the nesting season (February 1-September 15), a qualified biologist will conduct preconstruction surveys for active raptor and migratory bird nests within 10 days prior to the start of these activities. The survey will include the proposed work area(s) and surrounding lands within 500 feet, where accessible, for all nesting raptors and migratory birds. If no active nests are found within the survey area, no further mitigation is required.
• Establish Buffers. Should any active nests be discovered near proposed work areas, no disturbance buffers of 250 feet around active nests of non-listed bird species and 500 feet around active nests of non-listed raptors will be established.

If work needs to occur within these no disturbance buffers, a qualified biologist will monitor the nest daily for one week, and thereafter once a week, throughout the duration of construction activity. Should the nature of construction activity significantly change, such that a higher level of disturbance will be generated, monitoring will occur daily for one week and then resume the once-a-week regime. If, at any time, the biologist determines that construction activity may be compromising nesting success, construction activity within the designated buffer will be altered or suspended until the biologist determines that the nest site is no longer susceptible to deleterious disturbance. vegetation
clearance.

Development
Department
Cultural Resources
CUL-1 Historical Resources Identification and Treatment Plan Prior to permit approval for development on the Project site, a historical resources evaluation shall be completed for that individual site to confirm if existing buildings and/or structures withing these sites qualify as historical resources as defined by Section 15064.5(a) of CEQA Guidelines. The evaluation shall be prepared by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (PQS) in architectural history or history. The qualified Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 157 architectural historian or historian shall conduct an intensive-level evaluation in accordance with the guidelines and best practices promulgated by the State Office of Historic Preservation to identify any potential historical resources within the proposed project area. All properties 45 years of age or older shall be evaluated within their historic context and documented in a report meeting the State Office of Historic Preservation guidelines. All evaluated properties shall be documented on Department of Parks and Recreation Series 523 Forms. The report shall be submitted to the City for review and concurrence.

Mitigation Measure CUL-2 Phase I Cultural Resources Study Prior to the issuance of any grading or construction permits for each individual site, a Phase I cultural resources study shall be performed by a qualified professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s (SOI’s) Professional Qualification Standards (PQS) for archaeology (National Park Service 1983). The Phase I cultural resources study shall include a pedestrian survey of the project site when appropriate and sufficient background research and field sampling to determine whether archaeological resources may be present. Archival research shall include a records search of the Northwest Information Center (NWIC) no more than two years old and a Sacred Lands File search with the NAHC. The Phase I technical report documenting the study shall include recommendations that shall be implemented prior to and/or during construction to avoid or reduce impacts to archaeological resources. Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, archaeological construction monitoring, sensitivity training, or additional testing and mitigation (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-3 through CUL7). The report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of any grading or construction permits. The City shall include recommendations in the Phase I technical report as Conditions of Approval to be implemented throughout all ground disturbance activities. The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

Prior to
issuance of
grading or
construction
permits.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
Mitigation Measure CUL-3 Extended Phase I Testing
If recommended by the Phase I study for each individual site (Mitigation Measure CUL2), the project applicant shall retain a qualified archaeologist to conduct an Extended Phase I (XPI) study to determine the presence/absence and extent of archaeological resources on the project site. XPI testing shall include a series of shovel test pits and/or hand augured units and/or mechanical trenching to establish the boundaries of archaeological site(s) on the project site. If the boundaries of the archaeological site are already well understood from previous archaeological work, an XPI will not be required.

All archaeological excavation shall be conducted by a qualified archaeologist(s) under the direction of a principal investigator meeting the SOI’s PQS for archaeology (National Prior to the
issuance of a
grading or
construction
permit.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 159 Park Service 1983). If an XPI report is prepared, it shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of a grading or construction permit.

Recommendations therein shall be implemented for all ground disturbance activities.

Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, site avoidance, Phase II Site Evaluation, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-4, CUL-5, CUL-7, and CUL-8). The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
Mitigation Measure CUL-5 Phase II Site Evaluation
If the results of any Phase I and/or XPI for each individual site (Mitigation Measures CUL2 and/or CUL-3) indicate the presence of archaeological resources that cannot be avoided by the project (Mitigation Measure CUL-4) and that have not been adequately evaluated for the NRHP or CRHR listing at the project site, the qualified archaeologist shall conduct a Phase II investigation to determine if intact deposits remain and if they may be eligible for the CRHR or qualify as unique archaeological resources. If the archaeological resource(s) of concern are Native American in origin, the qualified archaeologist shall confer with the City and local California Native American tribe(s).

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 160 If the archaeologist and, if applicable, a Native American monitor or other interested tribal representative determine it is appropriate, cultural materials collected from the site shall be processed and analyzed in a laboratory according to standard archaeological procedures. The age of the materials shall be determined using radiocarbon dating and/or other appropriate procedures; lithic artifacts, faunal remains, and other cultural materials shall be identified and analyzed according to current professional standards.

The significance of the site(s) shall be evaluated according to the criteria of the CRHR and if applicable, NRHP. The results of the investigations shall be presented in a technical report following the standards of the California Office of Historic Preservation publication “Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Content and Format (1990 or latest edition).” Recommendations in the Phase II report shall be implemented for all ground disturbance activities. Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, Phase III Data Recovery, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-6 through CUL-8). The report shall be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of any grading or construction permits. The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC.

Mitigation Measure CUL-6 Phase III Data Recovery
Should the results of the Phase II site evaluation for each individual site (Mitigation Measure CUL-5) yield resources that meet CRHR significance standards and if the resource cannot be avoided by project construction in accordance with CUL-4, the project applicant shall ensure that all feasible recommendations for mitigation of archaeological impacts are incorporated into the final design and approved by the City prior to construction. Any necessary Phase III data recovery excavation, conducted to exhaust the data potential of significant archaeological sites, shall be carried out by a qualified archaeologist meeting the SOI’s PQS for archeology (National Park Service 1983). Data recovery shall be conducted in accordance with a research design reviewed and approved by the City, prepared in advance of fieldwork, and using the appropriate archaeological field and laboratory methods consistent with the California Office of Historic Preservation Planning Bulletin 5 (1991), Guidelines for Archaeological Research Design, or the latest edition thereof. If the archaeological resource(s) of concern are Native American in During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 161 origin, the qualified archaeologist shall confer with the City and local California Native American tribe(s).

As applicable, the final Phase III Data Recovery reports shall be submitted to the City prior to issuance of any grading or construction permit. Recommendations contained therein shall be implemented throughout all ground disturbance activities. Recommendations may include, but would not be limited to, Cultural Resources Monitoring, and/or measures for unanticipated discoveries (outlined in Mitigation Measures CUL-7 and CUL8). The final report shall be submitted to the NWIC upon completion.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
Mitigation Measure CUL-8 Unanticipated Discovery of Cultural Resources If archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities, work within 50 feet shall be halted and the project archaeologist meeting the SOI’s PQS for archeology (National Park Service 1983) shall immediately to evaluate the find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If necessary, the evaluation may require preparation of a treatment plan and archaeological testing for CRHR eligibility. If the discovery proves to be significant under CEQA and cannot be avoided by the project, additional work may be warranted, such as data recovery excavation, to mitigate any significant impacts to significant resources. If the resource is of Native American origin, implementation of Mitigation Measures TCR-1 may be required. Any reports required to During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 162 document and/or evaluate unanticipated discoveries shall be submitted to the City for review and approval and submitted to the NWIC after completion. Recommendations contained therein shall be implemented throughout the remainder of ground disturbance activities.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Mitigation Measure GHG-1: Future development shall install EV charging infrastructure according to the most ambitious voluntary standard in the California Green Building Standards Code at the time of project approval.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
Mitigation Measure GHG-2: Future development shall provide no more parking spaces than the off-street parking requirements established in the City of Salinas Municipal Code. Alternatively, multi-family residential development can choose to unbundle parking costs with costs to rent or own a residential unit instead of meeting the maximum off-parking requirement.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
Hazards and Hazardous Material
Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Prior to the obtaining grading permits or starting other ground disturbing work for each individual parcel, the City shall hire a qualified environmental professional to conduct a Phase I environmental assessment (ESA), consistent with the American Society for Testing Materials standards (ASTM E1527). The Phase I ESA shall evaluate the likelihood that hazardous chemicals are present and whether soil sampling is necessary. If the Phase I ESA indicates that contamination is unlikely, no further mitigation is necessary other than any recommendations identified in the Phase I ESA (such as stopping work if stained soil is encountered). If the Phase I ESA indicates that additional soil sampling or other further evaluation is necessary, the City and/or future developer shall hire a qualified environmental professional to conduct a Phase II ESA to determine the presence and extent of contamination. If the results Prior to
obtaining
grading
permits or
starting other
ground
disturbing
work for each
individual
parcel.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 163 indicate that contamination exists at levels above regulatory action standards, then the site shall be remediated in accordance with recommendations made by applicable regulatory agencies, including RWQCB and DTSC. The agencies involved shall depend on the type and extent of contamination. If remediation is necessary, the City shall hire a qualified environmental professional prior to obtaining grading permits or ground disturbance to prepare a work plan that identifies necessary remediation activities, including excavation and removal of on-site contaminated soils, appropriate dust control measures, and redistribution of clean fill material on the project site. The plan shall include measures that ensure the safe transport, use, and disposal of contaminated soil removed from the site. The plan shall also identify when and where soil disturbing construction activities may safely commence. The City shall review and approve the work plan prior to issuance of demolition or grading permits. The City shall require individual projects to comply with the work plan as a condition of approval.

Hydrology and Water Quality
Mitigation Measure HYD-1: Future Development projects on the subject site that would demand an amount of water equivalent to, or greater than, the amount of water required by a 500-dwelling unit project are required to prepare a Water Supply Assessment.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department
Noise
Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Prior to ground disturbing activities, the City of Salinas shall ensure the following with the Project proponent:
• Construction equipment, fixed of mobile, shall be outfitted with properly operating and maintained mufflers.
• Construction noise reduction methods such as shutting off idling equipment, installing temporary acoustic barriers around stationary construction noise sources, maximizing the distance between construction equipment staging areas During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 164 and occupied residential areas, and using electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel equipment shall be used. • During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be located so that emitted noise is directed away from or shielded from sensitive noise receivers.

Mitigation Measure NOI-2: The use of heavy construction equipment within 25 feet of existing structures shall be prohibited.

During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department.

Transportation
Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: To maintain safety standards at all intersections and roadway segments pursuant to implementation actions identified in the Vision Zero Action Plan, a traffic impact study shall be required for all development projects anticipated to generate 110 or more new daily vehicle trips within the Project Area, unless not required by the City. Depending on the results of this study, future developments may be required to construct or contribute to street safety improvements to meet the demand generated by the project. Improvements shall be in accordance with the City of Salinas’ Vision Zero Action Plan (i.e. pedestrian-activated crosswalk warning beacon, high visibility crosswalks, pedestrian hybrid beacon, reduced parking at intersection, intersection control, raised median and street trees, protected bike lanes, and lane reduction). These improvements shall be required as conditions of approval.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –Traffic
Engineering and
Plan Check Services
Tribal Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure TCR-1 Inadvertent Discoveries During Construction In the event that cultural resources of Native American origin are identified during grading or construction, all earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find shall be temporarily suspended or redirected until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the nature and significance of the find; an appropriate Native American representative, based on the nature of the find, is consulted; and mitigation measures are put in place for the disposition and protection of any find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section During
construction.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department –
Community
Development
Department.

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 165 21083.2. If the City, in consultation with local Native Americans, determines that the resource is a tribal cultural resource and thus significant under CEQA, a mitigation plan shall be prepared and implemented in accordance with state guidelines and in consultation with local Native American group(s) prior to continuation of any earth disturbing work within the vicinity of the find. The plan shall include avoidance of the resource or, if avoidance of the resource is infeasible, shall outline the appropriate treatment of the resource in coordination with the appropriate local Native American tribal representative and, if applicable, a qualified archaeologist. Examples of appropriate mitigation for tribal cultural resources include, but are not limited to, protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource, protecting traditional use of the resource, protecting the confidentiality of the resource, or heritage recovery.

Utilities and Service Systems
Mitigation Measure UTL-1: New development generating wastewater flows that results in a downstream exceedance of 0.75 d/D shall construct system upgrades for those found to be insufficient in capacity per the requirements of the Public Works Department. The flow shall be verified through a sewer modeling program during the planning and design phase, prior to entitlement approval. The model shall evaluate pipeline capacity, flow velocity, and maximum d/D ratio for normal, dry, and wet weather conditions.

Prior to
permit
approval.

Development and
Engineering Services
Department

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 166 6 REPORT PREPARATION
Names of Persons Who Prepared or Participated in the Initial Study:

Lead Agency
Lead Agency
City of Salinas
65 West Alisal Street
Salinas, CA 93901
Lisa Brinton, Director, Community Development
Department
Oscar Resendiz, Associate Planner, Community
Development Department
Initial Study Consultant
Initial Study
Precision Civil Engineering
1234 O Street
Fresno, CA 93721
(559) 449-4500
Bonique Emerson, AICP, VP of Planning
Jenna Chilingerian, AICP, Senior Planner
Shin Tu, AICP Candidate, Associate Planner
Technical Studies
Noise Assessment WJV Acoustics, Inc. Walter J. Van Groningen, President 113 N Church Street
Visalia, CA 93291
(559) 627-4923

CITY OF SALINAS – General Plan Amendment & Rezone: Alisal Marketplace | 167 7 APPENDICES

7.1 Appendix A: CalEEMod Output Files
Prepared by Precision Civil Engineering, Inc. dated November 21, 2022.

Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone
Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual
Project Characteristics -
Land Use - lot acerage: Per the CalEEMod guide, if the project is mixed-use with non-residential and residential use, lot acreage value of the residential area should be retained and non-residential area to be zeroed out. population: according to average household size
Construction Phase - Lengthen the total days for each phase to assume a 5-year buildout.

Grading -
Mobile Land Use Mitigation -
Area Mitigation -

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Apartments Mid Rise 515.00 Dwelling Unit 12.10 515,000.00 2137 Strip Mall 131.40 1000sqft 0.00 131,400.00 0

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization
Climate Zone
Urban
4 Wind Speed (m/s) 2.8 Precipitation Freq (Days) 53

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data

1.0 Project Characteristics
Utility Company Pacific Gas and Electric Company
Operational Year 2027
CO2 Intensity
(lb/MWhr)
203.98 CH4 Intensity 0.033
(lb/MWhr)
N2O Intensity 0.004
(lb/MWhr)
Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value
tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck False True tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 60.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied l------------------------------1------------------------------~-------------------------t------------~-------------~---------------I 1-----------------------------!-----------------------------l------------------------ --------------------------I

2.0 Emissions Summary
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 300.00 900.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 60.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 30.00 90.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 20.00 60.00
tblConstructionPhase NumDays 10.00 30.00
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 7/12/2024 12/23/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 5/17/2024 9/4/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 1/27/2023 3/24/2023
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 3/24/2023 6/16/2023
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 6/14/2024 10/23/2026
tblConstructionPhase PhaseEndDate 2/10/2023 3/10/2023
tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 6/15/2024 10/1/2026 tblConstructionPhase PhaseStartDate 5/18/2024 8/1/2026
tblLandUse LotAcreage 13.55 12.10
tblLandUse LotAcreage 3.02 0.00
tblLandUse Population 1,473.00 2,137.00
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied : :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------l------------------------------t-------------------------- ■ ■ I ■ ■ I -----------------------------4------------------------------I------------------------------~--------------------------

2.1 Overall Construction
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Year tons/yr MT/yr
2023 0.5658 4.5484 5.0774 0.0119 1.1013 0.1877 1.2890 0.4214 0.1746 0.5960 0.0000 1,069.663 9 1,069.663
9 0.1907 0.0315 1,083.818
4 2024 0.3711 2.3884 3.6761 9.3600e0030.4970 0.0862 0.5832 0.1337 0.0811 0.2148 0.0000 854.6731 854.6731 0.0850 0.0395 868.5701 2025 0.3453 2.2321 3.5481 9.1700e0030.4951 0.0745 0.5696 0.1332 0.0701 0.2033 0.0000 840.0902 840.0902 0.0831 0.0381 853.5255 2026 4.4042 1.7974 2.9018 7.0800e0030.3591 0.0646 0.4238 0.0965 0.0606 0.1572 0.0000 647.5948 647.5948 0.0761 0.0255 657.0968 Maximum 4.4042 4.5484 5.0774 0.0119 1.1013 0.1877 1.2890 0.4214 0.1746 0.5960 0.0000 1,069.663 9 1,069.663
9 0.1907 0.0395 1,083.818
4 Unmitigated Construction
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I
I I I I I I I I I I I I ■ I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • 1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I ■■ I I I I I I I I I I ■ I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • 1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I ■■ I I I I I I I I I I ■ I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • 1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
I

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG + NOX (tons/quarter) 1 1-1-2023 3-31-2023 1.8823 1.8823
2 4-1-2023 6-30-2023 1.7625 1.7625
3 7-1-2023 9-30-2023 0.7268 0.7268
4 10-1-2023 12-31-2023 0.7444 0.7444
5 1-1-2024 3-31-2024 0.6933 0.6933
6 4-1-2024 6-30-2024 0.6770 0.6770
7 7-1-2024 9-30-2024 0.6845 0.6845
8 10-1-2024 12-31-2024 0.7010 0.7010
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I
I I I I I I I I I I I I ■ I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • 1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I ■■ I I I I I I I I I I ■ I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • 1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I ■■ I I I I I I I I I I ■ I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • 1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
9 1-1-2025 3-31-2025 0.6430 0.6430
10 4-1-2025 6-30-2025 0.6347 0.6347
11 7-1-2025 9-30-2025 0.6417 0.6417
12 10-1-2025 12-31-2025 0.6572 0.6572
13 1-1-2026 3-31-2026 0.6354 0.6354
14 4-1-2026 6-30-2026 0.6278 0.6278
15 7-1-2026 9-30-2026 0.6636 0.6636
Highest 1.8823 1.8823

2.2 Overall Operational
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area 3.0976 0.0611 5.3077 2.8000e0040.0295 0.0295 0.0295 0.0295 0.0000 8.6787 8.6787 8.3200e0030.0000 8.8866 Energy 0.0249 0.2140 0.0973 1.3600e0030.0172 0.0172 0.0172 0.0172 0.0000 557.3086 557.3086 0.0550 0.0106 561.8457 Mobile 3.3698 3.9559 28.6566 0.0554 5.9053 0.0488 5.9541 1.5784 0.0455 1.6239 0.0000 5,306.225 8 5,306.225
8 0.3894 0.2732 5,397.387
3 Waste 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 76.0952 0.0000 76.0952 4.4971 0.0000 188.5227 Water 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 13.7331 30.4538 44.1869 1.4155 0.0339 89.6762 Total 6.4923 4.2310 34.0616 0.0570 5.9053 0.0955 6.0008 1.5784 0.0922 1.6706 89.8283 5,902.666 9 5,992.495
3 6.3652 0.3178 6,246.318
5 Unmitigated Operational
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied .,
., &
&
& I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••·-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• ., & ., & & I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••·-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• ., & ., & & I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••·-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• ., & ., & & I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------T-------~•••••••·-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• ., & ., & &
&

3.0 Construction Detail
Construction Phase
Phase
Number
Phase Name Phase Type Start Date End Date Num Days
Week
Num Days Phase Description
1 Demolition Demolition 1/1/2023 3/24/2023 5 60
2 Site Preparation Site Preparation 1/28/2023 3/10/2023 5 30 3 Grading Grading 2/11/2023 6/16/2023 5 90
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e
Percent
Reduction

9.89 21.65 18.94 29.35 31.40 14.26 31.13 31.40 13.80 30.43 0.00 27.17 26.76 1.13 19.42 25.99 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T••••••• I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I •••••••••••m-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------,-------~-------~•••••••1-------,-------,-------,-------T------- I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
I ■ ■ I -------~------------------------=-----------------------1------------~------------~--------~--------~------------------------- ■ ■ I I I I I ■ ■ I I I I I
-------~------------------------~----------------------+-------------~------------~--------~--------~------------------------- 4 Building Construction Building Construction 3/25/2023 9/4/2026 5 900 5 Paving Paving 8/1/2026 10/23/2026 5 60
6 Architectural Coating Architectural Coating 10/1/2026 12/23/2026 5 60 OffRoad Equipment
Phase Name Offroad Equipment Type Amount Usage Hours Horse Power Load Factor Architectural Coating Air Compressors 1 6.00 78 0.48
Demolition Concrete/Industrial Saws 1 8.00 81 0.73
Building Construction Cranes 1 7.00 231 0.29
Demolition Excavators 3 8.00 158 0.38
Grading Excavators 2 8.00 158 0.38
Building Construction Forklifts 3 8.00 89 0.20
Building Construction Generator Sets 1 8.00 84 0.74
Grading Graders 1 8.00 187 0.41
Paving Pavers 2 8.00 130 0.42
Paving Paving Equipment 2 8.00 132 0.36
Paving Rollers 2 8.00 80 0.38
Demolition Rubber Tired Dozers 2 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Rubber Tired Dozers 1 8.00 247 0.40
Site Preparation Rubber Tired Dozers 3 8.00 247 0.40
Grading Scrapers 2 8.00 367 0.48
Building Construction Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 3 7.00 97 0.37 Grading Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 2 8.00 97 0.37
Residential Indoor: 1,042,875; Residential Outdoor: 347,625; Non-Residential Indoor: 197,100; Non-Residential Outdoor: 65,700; Striped Parking Area: 0 (Architectural Coating – sqft)
Acres of Grading (Site Preparation Phase): 45
Acres of Grading (Grading Phase): 270
Acres of Paving: 0
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied : :
-------•------------------------•-----------------------+------------+------------+--------+--------+------------------------- ■ ■ 1 I I I I ■ ■ 1 I I I I -------J------------------------~-----------------------1-------------~------------~--------~--------~------------------------- ■ -
I
■
-
I
I
I
I I
----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I ----------------------------=---------------------------~---------------- I -------------1---------+-------------- I I I ----------------------------~---------------------------1----------------- ~ ------------1--------------~-------------- ■ -

3.2 Demolition - 2023
Fugitive SO2 CO NOx ROG
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
CO2e N2O CH4 Total CO2 NBio- CO2 Bio- CO2
MT/yr tons/yr Category

1.1600e- 0.5893 0.6445 0.0681 Off-Road
003
102.6902 0.0000 0.0286 101.9762 101.9762 0.0000 0.0278 0.0278 0.0299 0.0299

1.1600e- 0.5893 0.6445 0.0681 Total
003
102.6902 0.0000 0.0286 101.9762 101.9762 0.0000 0.0278 0.0278 0.0299 0.0299 Unmitigated Construction On-Site

3.1 Mitigation Measures Construction

0.37 97 8.00 4 Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes Site Preparation

0.45 46 8.00 1 Welders Building Construction
Trips and VMT
Offroad Equipment Phase Name
Count
Worker Trip
Number
Vendor Trip
Number
Hauling Trip
Number
Worker Trip
Length
Vendor Trip
Length
Hauling Trip
Length
Worker Vehicle
Class
Vendor
Vehicle Class
Hauling
Vehicle Class
HHDT HDT_Mix LD_Mix 20.00 7.30 10.80 0.00 0.00 15.00 6 Demolition HHDT HDT_Mix LD_Mix 20.00 7.30 10.80 0.00 0.00 18.00 7 Site Preparation HHDT HDT_Mix LD_Mix 20.00 7.30 10.80 0.00 0.00 20.00 8 Grading HHDT HDT_Mix LD_Mix 20.00 7.30 10.80 0.00 77.00 413.00 9 Building Construction HHDT HDT_Mix LD_Mix 20.00 7.30 10.80 0.00 0.00 15.00 6 Paving HHDT HDT_Mix LD_Mix 20.00 7.30 10.80 0.00 0.00 83.00 1 Architectural Coating Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Page 8 of 37 CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ' ' ' ' ' ' I
' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ,.
' ' ' ' ' ' I
' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ,.
' ' ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ,. ' ' ' ' ' ' I
' ' ' ' I ' ' ' ,.
. ' . ' --+-- • ----------r------- -----------t---------1-----------t---------- ---------T--------- -----------t--------------~---------------- 1 1 1 1 I I I I I ■ I I I I I I I I I ■
---------· t··--------1--------------1----------;-----------1-----------t----------t · ---------1-----------1---------------=- --------------- I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I ■
---------· t··--------1--------------1----------;-----------1-----------t----------t · ---------1-----------1---------------=- --------------- I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I ■
---------· t··--------1--------------1----------;-----------1-----------t----------t · ---------1-----------1---------------=- --------------- I I I I I I I I I • I I I I I I I I I ■
---------· t··--------1--------------1----------;-----------1-----------t----------t · ---------1-----------1---------------=- --------------- I I I I I I I I I I 1 ! I I
I- ------------+----------+----------+--------------+------------------------+---------------------------I

3.2 Demolition - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 1.4700e0031.1300e0030.0126 3.0000e0053.5800e0032.0000e0053.6000e0039.5000e0042.0000e0059.7000e0040.0000 3.0109 3.0109 1.1000e0049.0000e0053.0416 Total 1.4700e0031.1300e0030.0126 3.0000e0053.5800e0032.0000e0053.6000e0039.5000e0042.0000e0059.7000e0040.0000 3.0109 3.0109 1.1000e0049.0000e0053.0416 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Off-Road 0.0681 0.6445 0.5893 1.1600e0030.0299 0.0299 0.0278 0.0278 0.0000 101.9761 101.9761 0.0286 0.0000 102.6901 Total 0.0681 0.6445 0.5893 1.1600e0030.0299 0.0299 0.0278 0.0278 0.0000 101.9761 101.9761 0.0286 0.0000 102.6901 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 9 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
• • • • • • • • • • • 1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
I
I
I
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I • • • • • • • • • • • 1--------,--------,--------,-------,--------,--------,--------,--------,-------"T"------- .. • • • • • • -1--------,--------,--------,-------"T • • • • • • • I I
I
I

3.3 Site Preparation - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Hauling 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Vendor 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Worker 8.8000e0046.8000e0047.5800e0032.0000e0052.1500e0031.0000e0052.1600e0035.7000e0041.0000e0055.8000e0040.0000 1.8065 1.8065 6.0000e0056.0000e0051.8250 Total 8.8000e0046.8000e0047.5800e0032.0000e0052.1500e0031.0000e0052.1600e0035.7000e0041.0000e0055.8000e0040.0000 1.8065 1.8065 6.0000e0056.0000e0051.8250 Unmitigated Construction Off-Site
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.2949 0.0000 0.2949 0.1515 0.0000 0.1515 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.0399 0.4129 0.2737 5.7000e0040.0190 0.0190 0.0175 0.0175 0.0000 50.1760 50.1760 0.0162 0.0000 50.5817 Total 0.0399 0.4129 0.2737 5.7000e0040.2949 0.0190 0.3139 0.1515 0.0175 0.1690 0.0000 50.1760 50.1760 0.0162 0.0000 50.5817 Mitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 11 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I

3.4 Grading - 2023
ROG NOx CO SO2 Fugitive
PM10
Exhaust
PM10
PM10
Total
Fugitive
PM2.5
Exhaust
PM2.5
PM2.5
Total
Bio- CO2 NBio- CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N2O CO2e
Category tons/yr MT/yr
Fugitive Dust 0.4142 0.0000 0.4142 0.1644 0.0000 0.1644 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 Off-Road 0.1495 1.5532 1.2623 2.7900e0030.0641 0.0641 0.0590 0.0590 0.0000 245.4084 245.4084 0.0794 0.0000 247.3927 Total 0.1495 1.5532 1.2623 2.7900e0030.4142 0.0641 0.4783 0.1644 0.0590 0.2234 0.0000 245.4084 245.4084 0.0794 0.0000 247.3927 Unmitigated Construction On-Site
CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 12 of 37 Date: 11/21/2022 8:23 AM Alisal Marketplace GPA and Rezone - Monterey Bay Unified APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied I
I

Salinas City CouncilOctober 24, 2023

Salinas City Council
October 24, 2023