ER 2023-004 Initial Study OCR — Salinas City Council, March 19, 2024

SALINAS

RICH IN LAND I RICH JN VALUES

1. BACKGROUND
Project Name:

Project Location:

City of Salinas

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
65 W. Alisal Street, 2nd Floor• Salinas, California 93901 (831) 758-7387 • (831) 775-4258 (Fax)• www.ci.salinos.co.us St. George's Senior Apartments
98 Kip Drive in the Public/Semipublic Zoning District
(see Vicinity Map)
Assessor Parcel Number: 261-661-011-000
l:&l See Attached Vicinity Map
Current Land Use: Religious Assembly
Surrounding Land Uses/Zoning Districts:

North: Single-family residential/Residential -Low Density (R-L-5.5) South: Multi-family residential/Residential High Density (R-H-2.1) East: Single-family residential/Residential Low Density (R-L-5.5) West: Public School (North Salinas High School)/Public Semipublic (PS) Lead Agency Contact Person: Thomas Wiles, Senor Planner Telephone: (831) 758-7206
Location and Existing Setting:

Project Description: The Applicant (CHISPA Incorporated) is requesting to construct a three-story, 36-unit, 36-foot high, one (1) bedroom multi-family residential use affordable 100% senior housing project on a 0.85-acre vacant eastern portion of a

2.3-acre property (see Attachments). ·

1. General Plan Amendment 2023-001 (GPA 2023-001 ); Request to change the General Plan designation of a 0.85-acre portion of a 2.3-acre lot from "Public/Semipublic" to "Residential High Density";

2. Rezone 2023-001 (RZ 2023-001 ); Request to rezone the same above referenced 0.85-acre portion of a 2.3-acre lot from "Public/Semipublic (PS)" to "Residential High Density (R-H-2.1 )";

3. Conditional Use Permit 2022-059 (CUP 2022-059); Request to construct a three-story, 36-unit, 36-foot high, one (1) bedroom multi-family residential use, 100% affordable senior housing project (St. Georges Senior Apartments) with a 100% density bonus, a manager's unit, 31 off-street parking spaces with a five (5) space (14%) Parking Reduction, concession Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 2 of 40 ends

and waiver requests for usable open space, density, and off-street parking, and alternative means of compliance for landscaping along the east property line;

4. Resubdivision 2022-006 (RS 2022-006); Request for a parcel map (vesting tentative parcel map) to subdivide a 2.3-acre lot into two (2) lots of 1.45 and 0.85 acres each; and

5. Minor Modification to Conditional Use Permit 1977-031 (MM 2022-019); Request to delete the terms and conditions of Conditional Use Permit 1977-031 (CUP 1977-031 ),from the proposed 0.85-acre lot, which currently applies the entire 2.3-acre lot.

The project site is currently developed with an existing religious assembly use and a rectory (St. George's Episcopal Church) which was approved by Conditional Use Permit 1977-031 (CUP 1977-031).

The entire 2.3-acre subject property is currently zoned Public/Semipublic (PS). Per the Zoning Code, multi-family residential uses are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) in the PS District. However, in the PS District, all residential development must comply with the Residential Medium Density (R-M-2.9) development regulations, which only allows for one (1) unit for every 2,900 square-feet of lot area. The Applicant is requesting the General Plan Amendment (GPA) and Rezone (RZ) to change the General Plan and Zoning designations from "Public/Semipublic" to "Residential High Density" and "Residential High Density (R-H-2.1 )" respectively to allow for increased residential density. The proposed GPA and RZ would be consistent with the designations of the adjacent property located to the south. Upon approval of the General Plan Amendment and Rezone, the proposed affordable senior housing project with a 100% density bonus can be approved through the CUP process. The proposed parcel map is requested to remove the 0.85-acre project site from the remainder of the

2.3-acre site. The Minor Modification to CUP 1977-031 is requested to delete the terms and conditions of the religious assembly CUP from the proposed 0.85-acre lot.

Environmental Factors Potentially Affected:
□ Aesthetics
□ Biological Resources
□ Geology/Soils
□ Hydrology/Water Quality
□ Noise
□ Recreation
□ Utilities/Service Systems
□ Agricultural Resources
IRl Cultural Resources
□ Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
□ Land Use/Planning
□ Population/Housing
IRl Transportation
□ Wildfire
□ Air Quality
□ Energy
□ Hazards &
Hazardous Materials
□ Mineral Resources
□ Public Services
IRl Tribal Cultural
Resources
□ Mandatory Findings
of Significance
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 3 of 40 ends

2. CHECKLIST
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact Incorporated

1. AESTHETICS. Except as
provided in Public Resources
Code Section 21099, would
the proposal:
(a) Have a substantial adverse [&] □ □ effect on a scenic vista? (b) Substantially damage [&] □ □ scenic resources,
including, but not limited
to, trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state
scenic highway?
(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 a
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?
(d) Create a new source of □ [&] □ substantial light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
A1, A2,
A3, A5,
A6, Al,
AS, A9,
M1, N1
□
□
□
□
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 4 of 40 ends

(a-c) The project site is not located adjacent to or near a scenic vista or a scenic highway. Any development will be required to comply with all applicable Zoning Code land use and Development Standards. The project is not expected to degrade scenic resources or the visual character of the area because compliance with Zoning Code development standards will ensure environmental impacts related to aesthetics will be reduced to a level of insignificance. (d) Development of the affordable housing project could create additional light and glare. However, compliance with the City's lighting standards as stated in Zoning Code Section 37-50.480 will reduce any impact to less than significant.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact lncoroorated Impact Source List)

2. AGRICULTURAL A1, A2,
RESOURCES. Would the A6, A?,
proposal: AS, A9,
M1, N1
(a) Convert Prime [8] □ □ □ Farmland, Unique
Farmland, or Farmland
of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown
on the maps pursuant to
the Farmland Mapping
and Monitoring Program
of the California
Resources Agency, to
non-agricultural use?
(b) Conflict with existing [8] □ □ □
zoning for agricultural
use or a Williamson Act
contract?
(c) Conflict with existing [8] □ □ □
zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land
(as defined in Public
Resources Code
12220(9)), timberland
(as defined by Public
Resources Code
Section 4526), or
timberland zoned
Timberland Production
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 5 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact Incorporated
(as defined by
Government Code
Section 51104(g))?
(d) Result in the loss of IB] □ □ forest land or conversion of forest land to non-
forest use?
(e) Involve other changes IB] □ □ 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?
Discussion
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
□
□
(a-e) The project site is located on a partially developed in-fill property within the PS zoning district. The project site is currently developed with an existing religious assembly use. No farming activities are located on or near the site.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated lmoact Source List)

3. AIR QUALITY. Would the A1, A2,
proposal: A6, A?,
A8, A9,
(a) Conflict with or obstruct IB] □ □ □ F1, F2
implementation of the
Initial Study-St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 6 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)
applicable air quality plan?
(b) Result in cumulatively [8] □ □ □ 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?
(c) Expose sensitive receptors [8] □ □ □ to substantial pollutant concentrations?
(d) Result in other emissions [8] □ □ □ (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting
a substantial number of
people?
a-c) Salinas lies within the North Central Coast Air Basin, which meets the federal standard for ozone levels but falls short of the higher State standards for ozone and PM10. Ozone is the primary constituent of smog and is formed in the atmosphere via a chemical reaction involving nitrogen oxides (NOx), volatile organic gases (VOC), and sunlight. The primary sources are motor vehicles, organic solvents, pesticides, and industry. The Monterey Bay Air Resources District (MBARD) oversees various air quality regulations and programs.

MBARD Board of Directors adopted the 2012-2015 Air Quality Management Plan in March 2017 which represents the latest edition of the 2012 Triennial Plan, which addresses NOx and reactive organic gasses (ROG) emissions as precursors to ozone. The air quality impact generated by the project is expected to be less than significant, because it will create less than a significant number of vehicle trips.

The revised CEQA Air Quality Guidelines prepared by the Monterey Bay Air Resources District, dated February 2008 (Source F1 ), stipulate maximum thresholds for air quality as follows:
a) Emit less than 137 lb./day of VOC's or NOx;
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 7 of 40 ends

b) Directly emit less than 550 lb./day of CO or will not cause a violation of CO ambient air quality standards (AAQS) at existing or reasonably foreseeable receptors;
c) Not significantly impact traffic levels of service or will not cause a violation of CO or contribute 550 lb./day to an existing or projected violation at existing or reasonably foreseeable receptors;
d) Directly emit less than 82 lb./day of PM10 on-site or will not cause a violation of particulate matter, ten-micron diameter (PM10) AAQS or contribute 82 lb./day to an existing or projected violation at existing or reasonably foreseeable receptors;
e) Not indirectly generate PM10 along unpaved roads or will not cause a violation of PM10 AAQS or contribute 82 lb./day to an existing projected violation at existing or reasonably foreseeable receptors; f) Directly emit less than 150 lb./day of sulfur oxide (SOx) or will not cause a violation of sulfur dioxide (SO2) AAQS at existing or reasonably foreseeable receptors.
d) Objectionable odors are unlikely to be produced by the project because no odor generating activities will occur within the proposed affordable senior housing project.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. A1, A2,
Would the proposal result in A6, A7,
impacts to: A8, A9,
M1, N1
(a) Have a substantial adverse [&I □ □ □ 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
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 8 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact Incorporated
Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
(b) Have a substantial adverse [8] □ □ 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
(c) Have a substantial adverse [8] □ □
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?
(d) Interfere substantially with [8] □ □
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?
(e) Conflict with any local [8] □ □ policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or
ordinance?
(f) Conflict with the provisions [8] □ □ of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:
lmoact Source List)
□
□
□
□
□
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 9 of 40 ends

Issue
local, regional, or state
habitat conservation Ian?
Discussion
No
Impact
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Less Than Unless
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
(a-f) The project is located on a partially developed in-fill property within the PS (Public/Semipublic) zoning district. There is no native flora or fauna remaining on the project site. It is not located within a wetland habitat, riparian woodland or vernal pool, nor is it located near any sensitive habitat areas. It will not conflict with a Habitat Conservation Plan, or other habitat plan.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. A1, A2,
Would the proposal: A6, A7,
(a) Cause substantial [R] □ □ □
A8, 01,
a 02
adverse change in the
significance of a historical
resource pursuant to
Section §15064.5
(b) Cause a substantial □ □ [R] □ adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource
pursuant to Section
§15064.5?
(c) Disturb human
[R] □ □ □ any
remains, including those
interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 10 of 40 ends

Discussion
(a-c) Per Section 5.8 (Cultural Resources) of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Salinas General Plan (Source A 1 ), little archaeological investigation has occurred in the City of Salinas or in Monterey County. However, there is always the potential to encounter subsurface materials during grading and construction.

Therefore, pursuant to the Public Resources Code (Section 21083.2), in the event that cultural materials are encountered during development, all work shall cease until the find has been evaluated and mitigation measures put in place for the disposition and protection of any find. With this requirement, there is little potential for a significant impact on the environment.

On June 12, 2023, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, subd. (d), and Assembly Bill 52 (AB52), City of Salinas staff sent via certified mail, a consultation request regarding the proposed project to all applicable California Native American Tribes whose geographic area of traditional and cultural affiliation lands boundary includes the City of Salinas as specified by the Native American Heritage Foundation. Staff received correspondence from the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians dated June 23, 2023 requesting no further consultation on the project (Attachment 24). No additional correspondence was received from any of the other consulted California Native American Tribes.

On October 17, 2023, staff sent a request to the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) to determine if the project could adversely affect cultural resources. Per the attached response dated October 31, 2023 (Source 02, Attachment 23), CHRIS found no record of any previous cultural resource studies for the proposed project area. The response from CHRIS recommended to request tribal consultation, which as stated above, occurred on June 12, 2023.

Mitigation Measure CU-1, pursuant to Public Resources Code (Section 21083.2), will be required, which states that in the event that cultural materials are encountered during grading/construction, all work shall cease until the find has been evaluated and mitigation measures put in place for the disposition and protection of any find.

Mitigation
CU-1 In the event that cultural materials are encountered during development, all work shall cease until the find has been evaluated and mitigation measures put in place for the disposition and protection of any find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2.

Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 11 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact Incorporated

6. ENERGY. Would the proposal:
(a) Result in potentially [&] □ □ significant environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy
resources, during project
construction or operation?
(b) Conflict with or obstruct a [&] □ □ state or local plan for renewable energy or
energy efficiency?
Discussion
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
G1
□
□
(a-b) The proposed project would not result in any potentially significant environmental impact due to inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during project construction or operation. The proposed project would not obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

7. GEOLOGY/SOILS. Would the A1, A2,
proposal result in or expose A6, A7,
people to potential impacts A8, A9,
involving: M1, N1,
03 (a) Directly or indirectly cause [&] □ □ □
potential substantial
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 12 of 40 ends

Issue
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.
(ii) Strong seismic ground
shaking?
(iii) Seismic-related ground
failure, including
liquefaction?
(iv) Landslides?
(b) Result in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
(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?
( d) Be located on expansive
soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994),
creatinq substantial direct
No
Impact
[&]
Impact
Less Than
Significant
lmoact
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
Potentially
Significant
lmoact
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
Source
(Refer to
Section 3:

Source List)
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 13 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact Incorporated
or indirect risks to life or
property?
(e) Have soils incapable of [8] □ □ adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative wastewater
disposal systems where
sewers are not available
for the disposal of
wastewater?
(f) Directly or indirectly destroy [8] □ □ a unique paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
Discussion [a (i-iv)]
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
□
□
a (i-iv) As shown on the Seismic Hazards Map for the Greater Salinas Planning Area (Figure 5.10-1 of the Salinas General Plan Final EIR), the site is located within the Low Seismic Hazard Zone. Any development will be subject to the Uniform Building Code as a part of the building permit process to ensure that adequate seismic design is provided.
(b-f) Any development is not expected to induce substantial changes to the topography or to the soil conditions as a result of excavation or grading. A grading permit will be required, subject to review and approval by the City Engineer, to ensure that impacts to topography and soil are reduced to a level of insignificance.

To further evaluate any potential impacts, a soils report is required as part of any building permit process to determine the possible presence of expansive soils.

Results and conclusions of the report would be incorporated into the final project design.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 14 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact lncornorated Impact Source List)

8. GREENHOUSE GAS A1, A2,
EMISSIONS. Would the project: A3, A7,
(a) Generate greenhouse gas [8] □ □ □
A8, A9
emissions, either directly
or indirectly, that may have
a significant impact on the
environment?
(b) Conflict with an applicable [8] □ □ □ plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of
greenhouse gases?
Discussion
(a) The proposed project will not generate, either directly or indirectly, greenhouse gas emissions causing a significant impact on the environment. (b) The proposed project will not conflict with any other applicable plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purposes of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases including:

Assembly Bill 32, which requires the state board to adopt a statewide greenhouse gas emissions limit equivalent to the statewide greenhouse gas emissions levels in 1990 to be achieved by 2020.
-Senate Bill 375, which requires the state board, working in consultation with the metropolitan planning organizations, to provide each affected region with greenhouse gas emission reduction targets for the automobile and light truck sector for 2020 and 2035 by September 30, 2010. -At the time the City of Salinas General Plan 2002 was adopted, the issue of greenhouse gas emissions and the need to combat it in general plans had not risen to a critical level of concern. Nevertheless, the City adopted numerous goals and policies with the intent of improving development sustainability. These goals and policies have both direct and indirect benefits in terms of reducing GHG emissions. Important overall land Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 15 of 40 ends

use/urban design related themes in the General Plan that serve this purpose include:
i. Increasing density and intensity of development to promote more compact development and reuse/revitalization,
ii. Facilitating in-fill development as a means to promote compact development, and
iii. Promoting mixed-use development and a compact city core, emphasizing Traditional Neighborhood Development (TND) design, walkable neighborhoods, and transit-oriented development, especially in new growth areas.
-The City of Salinas Final Supplemental EIR for the Salinas General Plan Program EIR 2007 (Supplemental EIR) provides specific mitigation for future development, but mostly for larger scale projects. In this case, the project would not result in a significant effect on the environment with regard to greenhouse gases.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

9. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS A1, A2,
MATERIALS. Would the A6, A7,
proposal: AS, A9
(a) Create a significant hazard I&] □ □ □ to the public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous
materials?
(b) Create a significant hazard I&] □ □ □
to the public or the
environment through
reasonably forseeable upset
and accident conditions
involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment?
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 16 of 40 ends

Issue
(c) Emit hazardous emissions or
handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within
one-quarter mile of an
existing or proposed school?
(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?
(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 or excessive noise
for people residing or
working in the project area?
(f) Impair implementation of or
physically interfere with an
adopted emergency
response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
(g) Expose people or structures,
either directly or indirectly to
a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving
wildland fires?
Discussion
No
Impact
IBJ
IBJ
IBJ
IBJ
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Less Than Unless
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
□ □
□ □
□ □
□ □
□ □
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
□
□
□
□
□
(a-b) The proposed affordable senior housing project is not expected to create a Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 17 of 40 ends

significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of the materials. Compliance with local, state, and federal requirements would ensure that the hazards to the public are reduced to a level of insignificance.
(c) See above discussion (a-b). The site will not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous materials.
(d) The project is not located on a site known to be included on a list of hazardous materials sites.
(e) The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and it is not located within the Airport Local Area of Influence per Figure LU 11 of the Salinas General Plan. The site is located approximately 3.2-miles away from the end of the runway (13-31) of the Salinas Municipal Airport. See Section 15(h) below for further discussion of Airport operations.
(f) The project will not interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
(g) The project will not expose people or structures to risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, because the site is an infill property and no wildlands are located nearby.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

10. HYDROLOGY AND WATER A1, A2,
QUALITY. Would the proposal: A6, A7,
(a) Violate any water quality [8] □ □ □
AS, A9
standards or waste
discharge requirements or
otherwise substantially
degrade surface or ground
water quality?
(b) Substantially decrease [8] □ □ □ ~roundwater supplies or Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 18 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
lmoact lmoact lncoroorated
interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge
such that the project may
impede sustainable
groundwater management
of the basin?
(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 !RI □ □ erosion or siltation on- or off-site;
ii. Substantially increase !RI □ □ the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would
result in flooding on-or
offsite;
iii. Create or contribute !RI □ □ runoff water which
would exceed the
capacity of existing or
planned stormwater
drainage systems or
provide substantial
additional sources of
polluted runoff; or
(d) In flood hazard, tsunami, !RI □ □
or seiche zones, risk
release of pollutants due to
project inundation?
(e) Conflict with or obstruct !RI □ □
implementation of a water
quality control plan or
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:
lmoact Source List)
□
□
□
□
□
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 19 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact lncornorated
sustainable groundwater
management plans?
(f) With regards to NPDES
compliance:
(i) Potential impact of [&] □ □ project construction
on storm water
runoff?
(ii) Potential impact of [&] □ □ project post-
construction activity
on storm water
runoff?
(iii) Potential for [&] □ □ discharge of storm
water from material
storage areas, vehicle
or equipment fueling,
vehicle or equipment
maintenance
(including washing),
waste handling,
hazardous materials
handling or storage,
delivery areas or
loading docks, or
other outdoor work
areas?
(iv) Potential for [&] □ □
discharge of storm
water to impair the
beneficial uses of the
receiving waters or
areas that provide
water quality benefit?
(v) Potential for the [&] □ □
discharge of storm
water to cause
significant harm on
the bioloqical inteqritv
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
□
□
□
□
□
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 20 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
lmoact lmoact lncoroorated
of the waterways and
water bodies?
(vi) Potential for IRI □ □
significant changes in
the flow velocity or
volume of storm water
runoff that can cause
environmental harm?
(vii) Potential for IRI □ □
significant increases
in erosion of the
project site or
surrounding areas?
(viii) Could this proposed IRI □ □
project result in an
increase in pollutant
discharges to
receiving waters?
Consider water
quality parameters
such as
temperature,
dissolved oxygen,
turbidity, and other
typical Stormwater
pollutants (e.g.,
heavy metals,
pathogens,
petroleum
derivatives,
synthetic organics,
sediment, nutrients,
oxygen-demanding
substances, and
trash).
(ix) Could the proposed IRI □ □
project result in a
decrease in treatment
and retention capacity
for the site's
Stormwater run-on?
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:
lmoact Source List)
□
□
□
□
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 21 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
lmoact lmoact lncoroorated
(x) Could the proposed [8] □ □ project result in
significant alteration
of .. water rece1v1ng
quality during or
following
construction?
(xi) Could the proposed [8] □ □ project result in
increased impervious
surfaces and
associated increased
urban runoff?
(xii) Could the proposed [8] □ □ project create a
significant adverse
environmental impact
to drainage patterns
due to changes in
urban runoff flow
rates and/or volumes?
(xiii) Could the proposed [8] □ □ project result in
increased erosion
downstream?
(xiv) Could the proposed [8] □ □ project alter the
natural ranges of
sediment supply and
transport to receiving
waters?
(xv) Is the project tributary [8] □ □ to an already impaired water body, as listed
on the CWA Section
303(d) list? If so, can
it result in an increase
in any pollutant for
which the water body
is already impaired?
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:
lmoact Source List)
□
□
□
□
□
□
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 22 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact lmoact Incorporated
(xvi) Could the proposed IB] □ □ project have a
potentially significant
environmental impact
on surface water
quality, to either
marine, fresh, or
wetland waters?
(xvii) Could the proposed IB] □ □ project result in
decreased baseflow
quantities to receiving
surface waterbodies?
(xviii) Could the proposed IB] □ □
project cause of
contribute to an
exceedance of
applicable surface or
groundwater receiving
water quality
objectives or
degradation of
beneficial uses?
(xix) Does the proposed IB] □ □
project adversely
impact the hydrologic
or water quality
function of the 100-
year floodplain area?
(xx) Does the proposed IB] □ □ project site layout
adhere to the
Permittee's waterbody
setback
requirements?
(xxi) Can the proposed IB] □ □
project impact
aquatic, wetland, or
riparian habitat?
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:
lmoact Source List)
□
□
□
□
□
□
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 23 of 40 ends

Discussion
(a) The subject property consists of an in-fill site, which is developed with an existing religious assembly use. An affordable senior housing project is proposed on the eastern portion of the subject property. The proposed affordable senior housing project will be required to conform to NPDES requirements and identify Best Management Practices (BMPs).
(b) The project is not expected to use significant quantities of water and therefore would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies. It would not interfere substantially with the direction or rate of flow of groundwater. California Water Service Company (CalWater) will supply water; no wells will be drilled as part of this project.
(c-e) The subject property consists of an in-fill site, which is developed with an existing religious assembly use. An affordable senior housing project is proposed on the eastern portion of the project site, which will be required to provide drainage into existing and proposed drainage lines to ensure that drainage impacts are reduced to a level of insignificance through the NPDES and building permit process.
(f) (see "a" above)
The proposed affordable senior housing project is not located within a 100-year flood area. Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow is unlikely because the site is located a considerable distance from the ocean and is relatively flat thereby negating a potential mudflow.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

11. LAND USE AND PLANNING. A1, A2,
Would the proposal: A6, A7,
(a) Physically divide IRl □ □ □
A8, A9,
an M1, N1
established community?
(b) Cause a significant IRl □ □ □
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 24 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact lncornorated
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?
Discussion
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
(a) The proposed project does not have the potential to disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the community.
(b) The General Plan (Source A1) Land Use designation of the approximately 2.3- acre subject property is "Public/Semipublic". The proposal includes a request to change the General Plan designation of a 0.85-acre portion of the subject property from "Public/Semipublic" to "Residential High Density". The proposed change in the General Plan land use designation would be consistent with the Residential High Density designated property located adjacent to the south of the project site at 90 Kip Drive to allow for uses and density prescribed by the City's 2002 General Plan land use designation of Residential High Density.

The project site consists of 0.85-acres and is currently zoned "Public/Semipublic" (PS). The proposed Rezone would change the Zoning designation of the 0.85-acre project site from "Public/Semipublic" (PS) to "Residential -High Density" (R-H-2.1 ). The proposed zoning would be consistent with the R-H-2.1 Zoning designation of the property located adjacent to the south of the project site at 90 Kip Drive. The proposed Rezone would allow increased residential density for the project site pursuant to the Zoning Code Development Regulations of the R-H-2.1 District. The project site is not located within a specific plan or a precise plan area and therefore does not conflict with such a plan. The project site is located entirely within the City limits of Salinas and does not conflict with the adopted sphere of influence.

Conditional Use Permit 2022-059 (CUP 2022-059) is requested to construct a multi-family residential use (affordable senior housing project) through the discretionary Conditional Use Permit (CUP) process. Proposed conditions of CUP 2022-059 will ensure that, when implemented, the project will conform and comply with the provisions of the Salinas Zoning Code.

Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 25 of 40 ends

Resubdivision 2022-006 (RS 2022-006) is a request for a parcel map to subdivide a 2.3-acre lot into two (2) separate lots of 1.45 and 0.85 acres each.

The proposed 1 .45-acre lot would contain the existing religious assembly use and the 0.85-acre lot would be developed with an affordable senior housing project. The proposed parcel map when implemented will conform and comply with the provisions' of the Salinas Zoning Code.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

12. MINERAL RESOURCES. A1, A2,
Would the proposal: A6, A7,
A8, A9
(a) Result in the loss of [RI □ □ □
availability of a known
mineral resource that
would be of value to the
region and the residents of
the state?
(b) Result in the loss of [RI □ □ □ availability of a locally important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on
a local general plan,
specific plan or other land
use plan?
Discussion
(a-b) The proposed project is not expected to 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.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 26 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact Incorporated

13. NOISE. Would the proposal
result in:
(a) Generation of a substantial [R] □ □
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?
(b) Generation of excessive [R] □ □ ground borne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
(c) For a project located within [R] □ □
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?
Discussion
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
A1, A2,
A3, A5,
□
A6, A7,
A8, A9,
M1, N1
□
□
(a-b) The project site is located within the 60 CNEL contour as shown on Figure 5.3-1 Noise Contours (CNEL) of the Salinas General Plan, Final Environmental Impact Report, 2002. The Future Noise Contours as shown on Figure 5.3-4 of the Salinas General Plan, Final Environmental Impact Report, 2002, shows the project site as located within the 60 CNEL contour. Traffic generates the main source of noise for the depicted 60 CNEL contour. Noise levels and vibrations generated by the proposed affordable senior residential project would not be significant because the Zoning Code Standards regarding noise are expected to reduce noise impacts to a level of insignificance.

Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 27 of 40 ends

No substantial permanent, or temporary or periodic, increases in the ambient noise level are expected with the project. According to the General Plan Master Environmental Assessment Section 9.2, ambient noise is defined as the "all encompassing noise associated with a given environment, being a composite of sounds from many sources, near and far."
(c) The project site is located approximately 3.2 miles from the Salinas Municipal Airport and is located within the 55 CNEL contour as shown on Figure 5.3-2:

Salinas Airporl Future Noise Contours) of the Salinas General Plan, Final Environmental Impact Report, 2002. Noise impacts from airport operations will not have an adverse impact on the site.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

14. POPULATION AND A1, A2,
HOUSING. Would the proposal: A5, A6,
(a) Induce substantial I:&] □ □ □
A7, A8,
A9
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)?
(b) Displace substantial I:&] □ □ □
numbers of existing people
or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Discussion
(a-b) The existing PS zoning and the proposed R-H-2.1 zoning would allow development of the proposed affordable senior housing development. Due to the size of the site and the small number of units (36-units), substantial population Initial Study-St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 28 of 40 ends

growth is unlikely. The project site consists of a partially developed religious assembly use.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

15. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would A1, A2,
the project result in A6, A?,
substantial adverse physical A8, A9
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:
(a) Fire protection? IB] □ □ □
(b) Police protection? IB] □ □ □
(c) Schools? IB] □ □ □
(d) Parks? IB] □ □ □
(e) Other public facilities? IB] □ □ □
Discussion
(a-e) The proposed project is located on an existing partially developed in-fill site.

Police and Fire services are currently available to serve the site. No school children will be generated by the proposed affordable senior housing project.

East Alvin Drive and Kip Street have been designed and constructed to Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 29 of 40 ends

accommodate the demands of any future development and traffic. No other government services are expected to be impacted by the project.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

16. RECREATION. Would the A1, A2,
proposal: A3, A6,
A?, AS,
(a) Would the project increase IB1 □ □ □ A9
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?
(b) Does the project include IB1 □ □ □ recreational facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational
facilities, which might have
an adverse physical effect
on the environment?
Discussion
(a-b) Natividad Neighborhood Park is located approximately 1,300 feet to the southeast of the project site across. The proposed affordable senior housing project will not substantially increase the use in park facilities. The proposed R H-2.1 zoning would allow development of residential uses. Due to the size of the site and the small number of units (36-units), substantial population growth is unlikely. The project does not include recreational facilities. Development of the project will require payment of applicable Park and Recreation fees as determined by the Director of Library and Community Services at the time of building permit issuance. Payment of fees is expected to reduce impacts to recreational facilities to a level of insignificance.

Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 30 of 40 ends

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact Incorporated

17. TRANSPORTATION. Would
the project:
(a) Conflict with a program [&I
□ □ plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation
system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
(b) Would the project conflict □ □ [&I
or be inconsistent with
CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.3, Subdivision (b)?
(c) Substantially increase [&I
□ □ hazards due to a
geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g.,
farm equipment)?
(d) Result in inadequate [&I
□ □ emergency access?
Discussion
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
A1, A2,
A6, A7,
AS, A9
□
□
□
□
(a) The project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. No changes to the existing Monterey Salinas Transit (MST) network are proposed.
(b) Due to the size of the site and the proposed use, the project is not expected to generate significant traffic trips. Payment of all applicable traffic impact fees will be required as determined by the City Engineer at the time of building permit Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 31 of 40 ends

issuance. Payment of traffic fees will ensure that potential traffic impacts are reduced to a level of insignificance.
(c) The project will not substantially increase hazards due to design features or incompatible uses.
(d) The proposal will not result in inadequate emergency access.

Mitigation
TR-1 Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant or successor-in-interest shall pay all applicable traffic impacts fees as determined by the City Engineer.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

18. TRIBAL CULTURAL A1, A2,
RESOURCES. Would the A6, A7,
project: A8, 01,
02 (a) Would the project cause
a substantial adverse
change in the
significance of a tribal
cultural resource,
defined in Public
Resources Code 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
Californian Native
American tribe, and that
is:
i. Listed or eligible for IB] □ □ □
listing in the
California Register of
Historical Resources,
or in a local register
of historical
resources as defined
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 32 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact Incorporated
in Public Resources
Code Section
5020.1 (k); or
ii. A resource
□ □ [ID
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 5024.1, the
Lead Agency shall
consider the
significance of the
resource to a
California Native
American tribe.

Discussion
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
□
(a-c) Per Section 5.8 (Cultural Resources) of the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Salinas General Plan (Source A 1 ), little archaeological investigation has occurred in the City of Salinas or in Monterey County. However, there is always the potential to encounter subsurface materials during grading and construction.

On June 12, 2023, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, subd. (d), and Assembly Bill 52 (AB52), City of Salinas staff sent via certified mail, a Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 33 of 40 ends

consultation request regarding the proposed project to all applicable California Native American Tribes whose geographic area of traditional and cultural affiliation lands boundary includes the City of Salinas as specified by the Native American Heritage Foundation. Staff received correspondence from the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians dated June 23, 2023 requesting no further consultation on the project (Attachment 24). No additional correspondence was received from any of the other consulted California Native American Tribes.

Mitigation
TCR-1 In the event that cultural materials are encountered during development, all work shall cease until the find has been evaluated and mitigation measures put in place for the disposition and protection of any find pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.2.

Impact
Potentially
Source Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless Potentially (Refer to
No Significant Mitigation Significant Section 3:

Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Source List)

19. UTILITIES & SERVICE A1, A2,
SYSTEMS. Would the A6, A7,
project: A8
(a) Require or result in the IRl □ □ □ relocation or construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas,
or telecommunications
facilities, the construction or
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 34 of 40 ends

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact lmoact lncoroorated
relocation of which could
cause significant
environmental effect?
(b) Have sufficient water IB] □ □
supplies available to serve
the project and reasonably
foreseeable future
development during normal,
dry, and multiple dry years?
(c) Result in a determination by IB] □ □ the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has
the adequate capacity to
serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the
provider's existing
commitments?
(d) Generate solid waste in IB] □ □
excess of State or Local
standards, or in excess of
the capacity of local
infrastructure, or otherwise
impact the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals?
(e) Comply with federal, state, IB] □ □
and local management and
reduction statues and
regulations related to solid
waste?
Discussion
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:
lmoact Source List)
□
□
□
□
(a-c) The proposed project is not expected to involve a heavy usage of water and therefore would not discharge significant quantities of water into the wastewater treatment plant (also see Hydrology and Water Quality above). (d-e) The proposed project is not expected to generate significant solid waste because there are no products produced. Disposal of waste generated by future development is not expected to be significant and will be required to comply with Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 35 of 40 ends

federal, state, and local statutes.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Impact
Potentially
Significant
Issue
Less Than Unless
No Significant Mitigation
Impact Impact Incorporated

20. WILDFIRE. If located in or
near State responsibility
areas or lands classified as
very high fire hazard severity
zones, would the project:
(a) Substantially impair an IB] □ □ adopted emergency
response plan or emergency
evacuation plan?
(b) Due to slope, prevailing IB] □ □ 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?
(c) Require the installation or IB] □ □ 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?
(d) Expose people or structures IB] □ □ to significant risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire
slope instability, or drainage
chanqes
Source
Potentially (Refer to
Significant Section 3:

Impact Source List)
A1, A2,
A6, A7,
A8
□
□
□
□
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 36 of 40 ends

Discussion
(a-d) The proposed project is located on an urban in-fill site adjacent to existing developed properties. The project as proposed would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. The project also would not require the installation and maintenance of infrastructure that may exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary of ongoing impacts to the environment.

Mitigation
No mitigation is required.

Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 37 of 40 ends

Less Than
Significant
Mandato No Im act Im act

1. Does the project have the potential to IE! □
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 self-sustaining levels,
threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially 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?

2. Does the project have impacts that are IE! □
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)?
("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).

3. Does the project have environmental
effects, which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?
□
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Miti ated
□
□
□
Potentially
Significant
Im act
□
□
□
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community DevelopJTlent Department

Page 38 of 40 ends

3. SOURCE LIST
Source
City of Salinas:

Salinas General Plan, 2002.

Salinas General Plan, Final Environmental Impact Report, 2002.

Salinas Zoning Code: IRl Entire Code Section:

City of Salinas Stormwater Ordinance, dated March 2013
1989 Citv Historical and Architectural Survev
2016 Citv Historical and Architectural Survev
Engineer's Report for CUP 2022-059 and RZ 2023-001 dated Auqust 28, 2023 Enqineer's Report for RS 2022-006 dated Auaust 28, 2023 Citv Traffic Fee Ordinance 201 O
Monterey Bay Air Resources District:

CEQA Air Quality Guidelines prepared by the Monterey Bay Air Resources District, dated Februarv 2008
Monterey Bay Air Resources District. Triennial Plan Revision 2009-2011, dated April 17, 2013
Monterey Bay Community Power Authority:

Monterev Bav Communitv Power Authoritv Implementation Plan, Auqust 2017 Bv Citv staff, various dates
Maps/Aerial Photography:

City's aerial photographs, 2018.

Other:

Native American Heritaqe Commission
California Historical Resources Information Systems (CHRIS) Response on proposed proiect dated October 31, 2023
Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Senior Housing Apartments 98 Kip Drive from Rock Solid Enqineering Inc., dated Auqust 29, 2022 Source
Number
A1
A2
A3
A4
A5
A6
A7
AS
A9
F1
F2
G1
M1
N1
01 02
03 Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 39 of 40 ends

4. DETERMINATION
On the basis of this Initial Study:
□ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

IRl 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 MIT/GA TED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
□ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
□ 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:
(a) Has been adequately analyzed in (Reference document) pursuant to applicable legal standards; and
(b) Has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described in Section 2: Checklist, if the effect is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or a Negative Declaration: "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated".

An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
□ 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 El R or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.

NOTHING FURTHER IS REQUIRED.

Prepared by: a~
Courtney Grossman
Planning Manager
Attachments:

1. Vicinity Map for 98 Kip Drive

2. General Plan Amendment Map for 98 Kip Drive

3. Rezone Map for 98 Kip Drive
Dated: / /io/z7'
Initial Study -St. George's Senior Apartments -98 Kip Drive City of Salinas -Community Development Department

Page 40 of 40 ends

4. Proposed Site Plan (Sheet A 1.1)

5. Proposed Floor Plans (Sheet A2.1)

6. Enlarged Plans (Sheet A2.2)

7. Elevations (Sheet A3.1)

8. Building Sections (Sheet A4.1)

9. Site Details (Sheet A8.1)

10. Civil Cover Sheet (C0.1)

11. Civil Overall Site Plan (Sheet C1 .0)

12. Civil Grading, Drainage, and Utility Plan (Sheet C 1.1)

13. Civil Grading, Drainage, and Utility Plan (Sheet C1.2)

14. Civil Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (Sheet C2.1)

15. Stormwater Control Plan (Sheet C3.1)

16. Landscape Plan (Sheet L 1. 0)

17. Planting Plan (Sheet L-2.0)

18. Plant Images (Sheet L-2.1)

19. Hydrozone Map Water Use Calculations (Sheet L-3.0)

20. Conceptual Vesting Tentative Parcel map dated June 26, 2023

21. Engineer's Report for CUP 2022-059 and RZ 2023-001 dated August 28, 2023

22. Engineer's Report for RS 2022-006 dated August 28, 2023

23. California Historical Resources Information Systems (CHRIS) Response dated October 31, 2023

24. Comment letter from the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians dated June 23, 2023

25. Affordable Housing Plan -St. George's Senior Apartments dated July 13, 2023

26. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

27. Density Bonus, Concession & Waiver Request dated July 26, 2023

28. Geotechnical Investigation for the Proposed Senior Housing Apartments 98 Kip Drive from Rock Solid Engineering Inc., dated August 29, 2022

29. Facilities Traffic Management Plan for 98 Kip Drive -GPA 2023-001, RZ 2023-001, CUP 2022- 059, RS 2022-006, and MM 2022-019
l:\ComDev\Planning Share Space\98 Kip Dr\ER 2023-004\ER 2023-004 Initial Study.doc North Vicinity Map
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2023-
001, REZONE 2023-001, CONDITIONAL
USE PERMIT 2022-059,
RESUBDIVISION 2022-006
98 Kip Drive
f:\ComDev\Pfanning Share Space\98 Kip Dr\98 Kip Drive Vicinity Map.docx iI
North General Plan
Amendment Map
~
Change the General Plan
designation of a 0.85-acre
portion of 98 Kip Drive
from "Public/Semipublic"
to "Residential High
General Plan Amendment 2023-001
(Related to Rezone 2023-001)
Project Description: Change the General Plan designation of a 0.85-acre portion of 98 Kip Drive (APN: 261-661-011-000) from "Public/Semipublic" to "Residential High Density". l:\ComDev\Planning Share Space\98 Kip Dr\GPA 2023-001 GPA map.doc if
North Rezoning Map
-:r:L_~---
Rezone a 0.85--acre portion
of 98 Kip Drive from ...

1.:-"Public/Semipublic" (PS} t
~ "Residential High Density'
-H-2.1}
L
REZONE 2023-001
~
(Related to General Plan Amendment 2023-001)
Project Description: Change the zoning of a 0.85-acre portion of 98 Kip Drive (APN: 261-661-011-000) from Public/Semipublic (PS) to Residential High Density (R-H-2.1 ).
l:\ComDev\Planning Share Space\98 Kip Dr\RZ 2023-001 Rezone Map.doc R-L-5.5 J}~ RESl~OCNS!TY
------------------:;- --I\---- :; -~-----------:;---I\ - cl - I\ --- 7J ~ ::_::._-<'L.:
(! )o
o~------------ · ------ E~ A L VIN DR ________________________ _ I ~RJIUTY,_,IO~
I
I
I

PROJECT DATA PARCEL A
(tJDUII..Ol>IOAAU.S:

E.Al.VINORIV[
S41..INA3.C4~
EXtITIN0CtlVRCHAN01..$1ORVHOUSEw / OET~ED
OAAAGETOREMAIN. PAAKINGIMAAOVEMENTSTOINCUJCE
~ "'1<ID REMOVAi.. OF 3 P,\Rl(INO SPACE:; FOIi
=~..CCUSLANECOr.lNECTEDlOAtlJACEl,IT
(O CHIIACH
(E!1101JSE
~;~
r.~SF

1.dSF
~
\~~=:~c~~=~ fi~~~~~~11;u :PS
IEl HOUSE(::! PSCAAACEDPEFI DWELJ..INC Ut,/!T FOR• l!EDIIOOl,IOFI U:SS):
l'foJ-1/C).,....,
CHISPA
Senior Housi ng
Apartments
E. ALVIN DRIVE
SAUNAS . CA
APN.:2:61-861-011
I
I
.,rr
~ PAA~NGlANDSCAPEAAE,\ 1.:0,,s:Fw•• .oF .PAAKING!,R[I.I 1 •p~~J•E~; ~A~; ;;R~~: ~
TIIE

PAUL DAVIS

PARTNERSHIP
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I :

I
I o_
' "'
I
m,
)( !
::r!
L'JSBU'f I
I
~ I I I I"
li§IB !lt
--~------

PARCEL A

1.45 AC±
i 1= 81,, 43 TOTAL PA
90KlP0Rl'a
APN:261-661-012-000
r™4lili ffi ~, ~ .. <? .. P O S E D S I T E
~
PLA N
R-H-2.1
RBIC£Nw..LHIC.t<DENSITY
_________ r - - -- 7 ------, CI",
(E) 6' HIGH WOOD FENCE· SE~ ~
T
I

EXTERIOR PATH OF TRAVEL ------- -
WAU(INOSURFA.CES'MTHA!:LOPELESSTHAN~ %A,h'OAI.IAJ(IMU>I CRO!::: !:LOPE'. OF Zollo, THE ::;u11nCE S"""I.L llE !;TABLE. FIRIA. AND!lUP ~:~~~f ;:~~ ~~~\:~;.L1~:-=~~~~fl COOlc
WALKW4Yll !:IW.L BE A, MIMIMUM •'-O"CLU.R 'NOTH. Mll!UPT CW.NOE!:
~E~\~E~~N~~~~~;~~~~~~~iw.tl.

SIOEWAl,.K3URF.0.CE.
1l1fENTlRE!:ITE1-Al.LW•UCICOM"1.Y.

J78(A1.VLNC
APN:281-J74-00"
/
<,.
- - /' ..........
·~- ,-' ( §,i I --
157 I
~~ I
, ~,
I
I
~- ' I
,-,
............................... /
~J
/--------
/
I
! x,
~ !.

IJS.AOU:OPOISPAO':

AAEAPOIUN!T :

PAAKINGLOT
l>.NOSCAPE:

LALVINDIUVE
SAUW-:i . CAO JIIOI',
PSIPU8UCISEMIPUOUC!
~•CFIESIOENTW.ttlGHCIENSllYI
CONSTFIUCTlONOF ;)II . 100".AFFOAOABL.E 1-&'.DAOOi,1
APAATME.NTU/.IITSFOflSENIORS.
3'rc<PAOPOSEDl•,FTMAX.AU.OWED
mofllT,.,,.
~Al~~;ior•10'
il=~~= -onMYB0/,1~
= ~=ra~~~E~
<1.liDOS ► lDT"L
FRONT(10F1')
!NTUIIORSl[)E.1,Ru.,q Fll;CUIFIE:'.D!~Fl)
~~~r:x~~~~
f'RON'TSEffl,O.CIC(3FTTAU."""7.J
!NTEFIIOFISIDt:IFIEAR ltFTT AU.1,1,\Xl
1STFU>OII•
:'NOFUX)FI•
~~~ -
l:.'.010SF
11,1..aSF
~.cl15~
~UIIIITS: • 1
TOfALPROVIOC0311NC.:,lCCBSlflLESPACfS
PAAl(INGl>.NDSCAPl!.,lA£A :,•~-~u:•'."_g~~~GARl:l<I

VICINITY MAP
., ... ~ ,

ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS
JI.
n.,r-~~:::;_:ir.UJ•
UUIJJ;t-;:~';'J\~~~0
n-;.i.:;Q
01A!l.1l•f....,,••l~••-lor_,.....i,1,..,...,.
...
'""''
,._ _ ., ____ __ _ _ .. __ .... ... ~---- ---- ---_____ ., __ _ ----·- ------ --------------- ,I',, ---..~o t 9"':"".._:_~,- ~
_,_~ ~ 9 - ---9 / -· ....... • ,.,., h u,.; .. .... ,.
j o.•~r""
-...... ~.-... '""_.,._, -~
✓.. ~
- 9
9" P R,OPOSED
• SITE PLAN
CMtr O'~ .. Vo>ICilOO
-~- .,
-· 9-;, _, --- - - ~·--~ 9
- -··-~Q= /~
Q .,.
•-9
........ II
e:; ~!
·----~:'1
I
-·~ ••4; .-.Q
-✓
- 9\ ,. A1 .1
II
~·tlil'
~flilf
El
~L~u IJFtf.l.. ·~~"=;-! nm .~
3RD FLOOR PLAN
11 UNITS
3RD FLOOR UNJTS
UNITNO. AREA
'"
603SF
,02 603SF
'"
687SF
'°'
603SF
"'
603SF
"'
603SF
"'
803SF
308 616SF
"'
603SF
310 603SF
"'
603SF
TOTAL 6,730SF
TH!S DOES NOT INCLUDE
UNIT DECK (47 SF)
3RD FLOOR

USE I AREA
APARTMENT Including j 7,247 SF
decks(517sf)
STORAGE I 57 SF
CIRCULATION (hal!1:, I 1649 SF
elevator,)
TOTAL I 6,953 SF
-:'.•
~
2ND FLOOR PLAN
14 UNITS
2ND FLOOR UNITS
UNIT NO. AREA
2<'1 603SF
202 612SF
203 603SF
204 603SF
205 603SF
200 667SF
20, 603SF
206 603SF
209 603SF
2'0 603SF
211 616SF

2.12 603SF
213 603SF
214 603SF
TOTAL 6,546SF

THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE
UNIT DECK (47 SF)
2ND FLOOR

USE I AREA
APARTMENT Including I 9,206 SF
decks(656sl)
STORAGE I 57 SF
C1RCULATlON (ho.lls, j 1883SF
eleva!or,)
TOTAL I 11,146SF
1 ST FLOOR PLAN
11 UNITS
1ST FLOOR UNITS
UNITNO. AREA
'"
603SF
603SF
603SF
'°'
603SF
"'
603SF
"'
649SF
,01 60JSF
"'
603SF
"'
603SF
'"
603SF
616SF
TOTAL 6.692.SF

THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE
UNIT PATlO (47 SF)
1ST FLOOR

USE I AREA
APARTMENT Including j 7,209 SF
p,illos(517:.f}
LAUNDRY j 205 SF
COMM, RM lne!udlng offK:e& 1735 SF
UTILITY 226SF
CIRCULATION (h/UI~. I 2155 SF
olovator,moeh.roomJ
-mASH ENCLOSURE I 332 SF
ELECTRICAL 155SF
TOTAL 12,019SF
ffi PROPOSED FLOOR PLANS 36 UNITS :~~ ,l
P,~;.ct / o-e•r
CHISPA
Senior Housing
Apartments

E, ALVIN DRIVE

SAUNAS, CA
THE

PAUL DAVIS

PARTNERSHIP

ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS
,h
Th,l',:~I~~~~~ZLU'
f,\JIJJJ'.H7.~l f-\Xllll1JJ7J-7./59
OII\/L:1"f""l'""J.l"'''•l'"""....i,'!'~""'
...

OrnwegDole /jlM,'20:!3
..,._,,_,..... .... __ _ ._ _____ ,., ____ _ --------b-.... __ r_,., ... -~ -rr ____ ,. __ _, -------------------
...
0 P.ROPOSED

FLOOR PLANS
A2.1
NATURAL LIGHT & VENT CALC.
7s~ ~~ I ~~~~~i ~~~~i;; I ~~u~~6 I ~~~;;i6

22.40SF ) ZlSF{MIN) 28.4$F(MIN)
Ill:
t

MAINTENANCE
!

HALL COMMUNITY ROOM
L __ OFFICE COMPUTER AREA
-·
1'1"-~-
llliil!illlill
z.7_!•
E)EB··

ENLARGED TYPICAL UNIT FLOOR PLAN, LAUNDRY, OFFICE, AND COMMUNITY ROOM ~
rrn·.a / ~-~•"
CHISPA
Senior Housing
Apartments
E. ALVIN DRIVE
SAUNAS.CA
APN.:261-£61-011
THE

PAUL DAVIS

PARTNERSHIP

ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS
....
n ... r,",1/Jd,.,•l'•m,,..h,r,1.LI'
/t:.;;:1;,~t~ ·~~~
(IUIJJ;'3-};sj f\.\'.[.''3l)J7J.7l:JS
/.:I.II\/Uw(""'T""'!Jrt,'L,rom,,,.,,1,,/'·'""'
h
AC/ML
P"•1•C1 ~"mbor.
"----.... ---.. -.. ____ ... ____ _,
---•--.. h--__ ¥_., __ _
-........ _._ .... _ ... __ ..,. __ _._ _____ ._._.,
h
~ENLARGED PLANS
A2.2
:T-
ml!!!I ■
~
!-'
□
□

EAST ELEVAITON
□ .-ai
g. llU!h l.dll 10

WEST ELEVATION

ELEVAT I O N S
!
_ ROO~,:i-i~--
--~~-~ ----
_ 2Nf0''::--\,--
,s~.~~ -

SOUTH ELEVATION

MATERIALS AND COLORS
\, EXT'l,R$OR WAU.: SAND ~NISH STUCCO
PAINTCOLOR•SWC1ZT (!VORE')
EXTERIORWAU.: s.ANOFWISHSTUCCO
PAINTCOLOR-SWtll:?11 (FIESTTWNEOGOLO)

3. EXTERIORW,'U.: \/ERTICAI.FIB~CEN'ENTSIDING& m!M
PAINTCOLOR-SW~(HM'MEAEDSD.\o'af)
WOOD TRIM, WOOD F"5CIA.

GI.JTTERS, POST PAINTCOLOR -SW C1111 (ANTIOUEWHITE}
PAINTCOLOA-swn,e (FIUSHINORIVER)
C. VINYL WINDOWS 'MilTE
ANOl.OU'v£RS,
_ROOt~'-J-~
-~~- ~
2Hf>O''::~
__ 1S1:__F~- '!,
_ ROO~~-,S
• §
0 tli
!
~8-.
_Rook~-~
3R~~~~
CHISPA
Senior Housing
Apartments
E.ALVINDRIVE
SAUNAS.CA
APN.:281-881-(111
1HE

PAUL DAVIS

PARTNERSHIP

ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS
...
n.,r..,~~';;.'.;t~-::,11'-UJ'

1.QIJJ:,.i-;:.;;;1A~~~~").;~
D,t.\ //.Jl•(....,...•l.l~~---1,......,.
...
o.--,11r-
"""' °' ..... "'°"'-' !lt•f.10:!3
-~H-
,._ _,. ______ _ -----·--_____ ., ____ _
---·-·--·-----------_______ ..
...

ELEVATIONS
A3.1
m
§1 @ LONGITUDINAL SECTION

G) CROSS SECTION
~ ,I.
s.cALE:1 ,r.1'-(1"
l'ro)on/0•..-.

CHISPA
Senior Housing
Apartments
E. ALVIN DRIVE
SAUNAS.CA
APN.: 261-651-011
THE

PAUL DAVIS

PARTNERSHIP
ARCHrTECTS & PUNNERS
...
~r~,:;~:-;;::r,u.P
t!!Jl)J:l7.~~A'.~~;;~J~~i~
D1.tfLl1<f,...,....,1J••...,...""•••ldr.,.....
...

IJ<a..,11,: AC/Ml
D<a..1.-,g O.loa 8/1~r.io::'3
~~~=r-~==r• 'M~~· ~~~c:g
...
_ 1: :1 : " I ~mm, ~ B UILDING
8': SECTIONS
0 i 4 I
:.CAU::1 ,r .. 1'-0'" A4.1
ij
!
.. _::.~
><
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
l,-.,-=
sm1sw .. :r
r ....

I I I I

I I I I
I I r--- ,. • ...,~'"'"'"'-'· I

I I I I
'--' I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
IF
>m=•==
... ,l'?DF .. r.-o.c.
. 1,CECA.RCll'R'M)FE1

0..GIOCWZ"OIIERI
lf-:,,,;::no:£
"""!l!1!!
0 ~!~~.~ENC E
,r[ ! i
~

PANEL CAP
I t l i _Jfl'.'.!.11
I I
I I
I I
L_J
·1. r r-
~ ,e.·o·•"
r~··· 1_:·: . ,r m ...
,.,.,.,r.,,l!r"
~ -
1,::_-,..__J ,:::_-,.._
i
~ WAI I, Bl BYATIQN !illCI!ill!..'."
~ 10~:.!:'EH SOUND WALL
0 PHOTO OF EXISTING FENCE

PLAN VIEW

FRONT ELEVATION
0 ;:.:~-~ .. ;NCLOSURE
to ,: HICM W000 ,ENCE TO A0WN
(50UT1"1PIIOl'tll1YIJNO
::"Wl:EPHOLL!';TO
l/UICGCAPESTlllP•
Sl!l!SIT£Pl/.N
lillCTAJ.PANfl.alSTl
FRAICGATE.TVP
CHISPA
Senior Housing
Apartments
E.ALVINORIVE
SAUNAS.CA
APN.:281-&51-011
THE

PAUL DAVIS

PARTNERSHIP

ARCHITECTS & PUNNERS
...
n...r"'i!:i,';;!:'.::r:!:"' W'
1t.JIJJ~7,.;-};t~~~·1}.;{:;•
011111,1.,....,._i~~~,...-
,/'a
D,.,,...l)r: AC/ML
~------_____ ,. __ ____ ., ___ _
---------------------------- -
,/'a
s"j-f'E DETAILS
A8.1
~-=-•n .,.,...S'-),.oA9,r,.,
fll'l.tUllllPIIDI
tlU)) .. Utlk'JJAI:)
ll0-199-19l:MdV
Stl33Nl!lN3
O□
S,39~039 lS-'v'dSIH:) ~ j i iU
i~e!f~
~ A D lJ t Q □
l~
.... ""-"' ...........

JO
..... ,~.

Ch'lhA.11\fpllDJ
euv-•u~Jpf::,
--,
I
I
I
I
I
r--
' _,
---1
I
I
I
I
____ J
--~ i
I
-·--1
I
I
I
I
---'
II0-199-l9l:MdV
I_
-,
I
I
I
I\JOIDn~lSi\/0:) ~0:1 lOf\l
p. • ;
MVld 311S 77V~3/\0 t • 0 •
I ,--,
I I I
/ I I
/ / ,(
I
r --- 1 i , .
/ / ! j I I
t _/ ;' !
I I
I I
j
I
llU11hA.ll'ISptllll
811)1 .. UJl'U]!,i,l;)
\
Stl33NION3
!
"
_I.: I
0 ',
1 1
I I
,·
NOIDmHSI\JO:) ~0:1 lON
I 10-l99-19l:r,JdV
NVld A11711n ONV 39VNIV~O '9NIOV~9
--'
~~--V.+1•
~•>'fill
~•-....
,,101DmHSi's!O:) ~o~ lOf\l
NVld Allllln ONV 39\INIV~O .9NIOV~9 ~ ~ ~ ('! •
OU!iH.llltf>UDl
lhlllHlliGuJIW:1 S,3:)~03:) !S -\ldSIH:)
.. • .... ~
{\.;,-: ~ =--~.' i I
i \ , ,, I ~!~I;
) • ,/ ~ i s i ~ ~ i i ~ : I
_ _ _ _ _ -~-, _ _ _ _ _ I ~ I i i ~ ; i I : I
----" 0 0 e 0 e 0 0 e e ®
-----1.(1 -·
"--;;-"'=-----,,.---:-.. --I
• , .. 1-,)------
. ~;, ____ It.)
----_ -----11:, _
,. ----
.t -----
N 'b ~
"fa · -
~~
~-5l :;:.;.!
~ ~Q Ml
_.___.-----'o.-..,.._.~__:--~-',,---,L-.--..---!-,L--,-LiL_.:o;.i.___j____J__,.l.._ _ _:. _u __ -_-':_:,.! ffi ~, ~[ i /d s0-JH,.,S
. ~ !\!~ ·j !!
/\ s
, \ I \ ~
~J ~, ~
~ -~ :;~ , , -.. xi-s
--os._,;n.._~ OS--GQ~CE =..jo c;s-·-c;s os--
i> .. ---n ~~~ -:------,----~
~l ; t ! : !l -I\ l \
~ ~ .\
I I
,! ' I
·: \: I I
,· I I
; I :
' ... ,,-LI
I -
i
I
I
I
I
I
L____ "'
~
Ex
tlu1A.,..,.spuo1
euµHV[IIU)JAP
z
:5
CL
--' 0
a::
1-z
0 (_)
z
0 1= ::>
--' --' 0
CL
a:: w I-
~
I -v
F
I >
t I 1 I I.
0 z w
('.)
w
--'
NVld lO~lNO:) 1N3WI03S ONV NOIS0~3 A~V~Odl-'/31 f
,;
: ~ ~! ~ -"i'" ~-
/ /
I
S,38~038 lS -VdSIH:)
I ,
I
I I
I I
I :

I I
I I
I I
I
I
I
11 ~ I:
l t \ '
~
0P
• i .u i ii •
[HJ
I I_ ____ _!
_J -------- i - , -!
,\- - - - - -- --- - J_J _ _:·:,_, ____ J_i _ _JI:,_•. - ~---t___~--. 1:
\ ,,
:.~)o ',\.1
--------===----
--
- ~-~-:--·---~----=-;,._
\ -=~~;:;=::!•~;;~~~~::::::='=::::~ ,:..'N ~f/~lf!!-irn -~~ _::_ --- -.. ---- -- !
ALVlNSIRl!ET
.l:+ ·1 ; --~ / I ~
;11:[~ I_J
I/ft!!-__ -_.._~ -~ -...;-- -~ ~ ----=...-- - "'"1'.r•-=-~ - 1£~ ~ :HJ .. - 1 br i -~r -~~-J _oMA 1·11 ' V _i?,,
41 t ~~ r.o ______ _ I X ! --:--1/, lh
. ,. 11 iJ · .. ! ,, !
• I -- I g
! 1 'I~=""-, , j :LJ1
1/,~ I I I -, ,
//- I l L __ I t--
:; 1 •I :=_j CZ] __ ___, ~-
If 11 ,-.._,
I='-'- ==----J - 0-2- -'-=~.:.:;::-·::-
-- I _ _ \\ \ ·•1_) I I 1·
-~ '·,,,--
~
Sl
~
' ( I) /,' 1,/1,11.•; /1,I/ 1.,.,7,1 ; \.','\; y fi, X ' '·> ~-......__ ,..-,- r /I l ~ ........____ '/
/ I ' / • ,.. ./ 1; ' ' / -....__' ·1
,r, l/'"•1/ 1 ,1/!l J / -.._ ~I ..V
/',,, 'I .Jo~--- 2\\ / -..._i--:- \/
~i' i-'=~'4q]_ '\-. / ; ------- l'-. ;,
I
1--- -h _ __ l _____ = c-, ,.::.c_-- --- -- -- ~ -
1---.-, \ \ ' \ -
~
I e u
",._ \ \ . \ \ \ I . \
~I
I .\ so-\ -~~so~so~\~~
---r=-----=--=-=- _ -- ! - - - ----: S7Y~'OO'r l81.~- - -- I,, ~Tc\ - - - ------------------------~----------
1- 7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I f" ~"]1111
=~11 ~:

K~!il ® , I ,.,,--.ii. . , . I
' I
, '
·-eaa-....,., ...

I I 1---. r-----.

I I
1 "-'
I
I I I __________________________________ J
2 t,MS l
___ J
I
I
I
' -------------------
I
I
1f~ I
(fl I
t/ I
·1 I :
,; I
Y-
I
I
1/'
I
I
1--1
' -~')·,,
----- -
....
-- ----
/6 / I
' / 1 ----
r:

L _ '----
/ -----/ I ;---
CJ
CJ
CJ
CJ
CJ
c:::J
c:::J
~
l...:..:..:J
C:=J
llH
LEGEND

DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA (OMA)

NEW IMPERVIOUS AREA

REPLACED IMPERVIOUS AREA
NEW PERVIOUS AREA (REMO\iUl

IMPERVIOUS AREA)

REPLACED PERVIOUS AREA

EXISTING IMPERVIOUS AREA TO REMAIN

EXISTING PERVIOUS AREA TO REMAIN

STORM WATER CONTROL MEASURE
(SCM) (REPLACED PERVIOUS AREA)
SELf- iREATING AREA (STA)

SELF-RETAINING AREA (SRA)
\ _::fr
\
"
SC.\L(: 1·., W'
., to r ... t
f I I l ! ! ~ , ij
! H!L
iii
(/)
z LJ..J ::i <..'.) 0..

Cl:'.
0 0 °' w z <..'.) 0
f-- u z (/)
~ 0 I
i= --< < u 3: CL ::; ::,
e2
°" °' >-:r: 0 V)
u l ::;; z
0 ~CALE: , .... ::au
o,,..w,t
~ °" JOINO~ =· 0
~Hm u.

C3.l 0
....2!......!.. z
SIGHT VISIBILITY TRIANGL ES:

Within this area , nothing shall be erected, placed, planted, or allowed to grow exceeding three feet in height with the exception of trees with canopies no lower than six feel
... __ =y-,::.
~--7
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
--+----.J
D
'\
\
\
\
\
I
I
I
I
\
/ 20,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
---,
-,-§-, EES I
T°i

RAY CON
MTHMEDl
ISH
_Bl
@ ■
', @
5: --- ~'::""'. 7J I~-----u_:;,~~:~;:,: '- ~

0.20•
@
~o~"'i.'r>
h.r1J-L_J------ ~
SCALE:1 tllr'•l'-O'
~
/
I
I
I ,,
BASKET \NEAVE PATTERN BRICK PAVER

SET ON CONCRETE PAD
BRICK COLOR AND SlYLE TBS
18M WOE NATURAL GRAY CONCRETE

BANDS VVITH MEDIUM BROOM FINISH
NATURAL GRAY CONCRETE WAL'l<M/AY

WTH MEDIUM

BROOM FINISH
@
~o~,~
ANCHOR ED METAl.JWOOD BENCH

MANUFACTURER AND STYLE TBS
-l
~l

COMMON AREA INSER T
~~ !..-1
SC\I..E:1W•1'-C'
Mlc~~~~~T,~~~ c:,~~;,1.ite!.
mlko@omonoL:u,lr..capo.com 831.462.4958
Cf)
f--
z w
~ 2 f-- z
0::: w 0:::
<( > 0 0
<( CL 0:: !:!:: .-!-

0...<(0-l <O
Cf)~z<C "r _z_ o;;;
Ici5::'.j Cl)':"
Q::l<(<(Z
0 . z ~ IW ::::i
0::: <(
0 Cf)
z w
Cf)
Cl Mich:11:l Arnone l..:lmkc;ipc ArchiLcct - '.!O'.!J
THr.lCOllA-Ut ... fllN IO[t,no,ultVIC[.IIIUCO
PO•AO<oll•,,..~-UiUHHT>a<-lll.T>llt'-'fflll[
COIITClffll0'THCl[DIU,,-" ■ C0""1DH'ICI-U
U"OOIIVJIDa~IJN;:ICl'RCT ....... DK""""e,,ITlC'T
11n,uw1111.1.~ANDTTT1.C.NO•"'IT ..... Yll[
Ul'IIOOUCCD ... ...,.,r....._011 11(-"""'°'"TMII
U'l'IIO.WllrrTDl..,..._ALMTHCVJIDKAl'C
l,IIO<IT[C'f . T>ICl'IIOl'(ll[U:CffOHICTIU.NM'lflO,b>,IA

1....u..nn,1u11n11u"°"~-u,,aun'
,one 1.,t.NDtUl'C UO<l'T[et.

OIO'MCIIIIIAI.LI.UU " IIIIPO'IJ.lll.UTY•DIICO"""""CI
WITHIU.I.U.IDl[HTt,IUW...CICUOUlll[ .. tHT'IAWD
... o•UT"IU>d:A,OWWC•l""U."COUIIIIAI.L
... , ............... 1,11~0Ulll[DTO•u,011 .. w01tK
,_,.o,1,.,_..11A.ute1w,011 .,,. nc.,,.uact11
... CMlltoSVT~IOWNC.ll. " IC""-UUWCIW[L,t.MDli;.+.I'[
AIICHITCallltCUMl"CINOU,,IIUIY,Clllf>t[
M:Cint.t.CY~&.+JDl'IIOl'C1tl"IUWe11ouwoo.11C1.,t>1cc
UNU DI! ,11~111TTC01u,tu.

REVISIONS

LANDSCAPE PLAN
JOB NO. 202218
SCALE as noted

DRAWN MA SHEET
CHECK
DATE s.,4.2023 L-1.0
'"" . ;! " ' " >--0
im • •i i., 1, w C'i 0 w E l f0-f99-f9Z :Ndv' ~io~~~§~!; i~ i~j .. c' z J: I ·u: ~5i~~i:~0 ~,,t"~iti (f) ..J jj 'lf1Nc:IO.::lll'lf8 'S'lfNll'lfS ;gi;nii (•11! ,, <( ii~Hil~i il~i~~ii ...J
.. 0..
~ "' 3/\lc:IO Nl/\l'lf ·3 !;i!g%! ljl'l!hs (!) c•
!~
i"'"' .. i ... ::ia e .. ~-5.~:. :r S1N3l/1Jlcl'lfd'lf 8NISnOH c:IOIN:3S ,m:1i,1•m'i1''1 z <( i= "
.;
]E ,m1:,:,i ;,;!;,!i.
~ wZ
\idSIH8 1m;1!~,, w:1,1H z ><'.
-fi' h!ii~faa~lf~ ;~j:1°ai~g <( .J s: ~~ i ii!!i!!W !!1!il,li .; ...J j~ J: <(
«] 0.. VJ 0 uo
II l I l l l l l l Iii l l l J J J l
I
l l l iii l Iii !I, l -~ l
ii ~' " "
fl
'
~ a ~' ~ . ~
'
~
!I ; ' ~ : ; !I ! !I :-~ ! ~ '
j 1 J i I i l l !
j
J I ' ! i l f l I l t j l J
i
~ ' • !
' l l
i I ! 3
l ' l 1
!
r i i l l i " J • ! • ; ! i ., I
i
r r I
; I i !
l i i a i
i i
l j 'I
! i I
j i
~
! ! I'
l I I i j 1
! i • j ' ! l i l i ! ~ j , l l l i t I l
0 { ! : I i
l i 1 ' l
l
i j i i l t I ! j 1 i l i ! i I i l ' ''
110@00@@0®®l10o000000000 !loo ~o ~~ i i II
LJ
l
□
l I L
Ex ibit [aJ
il41Y,W.£:'~
;;J
~';;;i['~ j; □
C
iill3 ,
.
~~ca
~'K~ ~Zo
@]
TREES
Arbutus x 'Marina'
Marina Strawberry Tree Standard
TREES
SHRUBS
Arctostaphylos hooker! 'Monterey Carpet'
Monterey Carpet Hooker's Manzanita
SHRUBS
t-_,:!' :· .. i·: .. .. ,-~
-.:;;.;~ '(.•. K • -~
-. ~_. --,'.:l. :-:::1:~'<~ .; ·., -;.,:_ _.; ...

Myrlca callfornlca 'Buxifolia'
PaclficWaxMyrtle
~ -. ;, i;=-........ - ...
·,-: r-:.-:·;c.rr',
I-;._: •:J ~:,;:J.C:~7.-~
1r- I r - .., <-
: • ;,-;...;1 : r.i
I
- . --~ ·'-~ ,, . .. . '
1- • • !IEi
-
Citrus x limon 'Improved Meyer' Citrus x slnens!s 'Dwarf Washington' lagerstroemia lndica x fauriel 'Muskogee' Lagerstroemla lndica x fauriel 'Zunl' Improved Meyer Lemon Dwarf Washington Navel Orange Muskogee Crape Myrtle Zuni Crape Myrtle

VINES RETENTION BASIN
II -
~~~· -~~}~i:i~:., ,, •.• 1-,._,.,.'I.,~
•~~~i!{,;.~a ,
,11-:~"V~,6 ~ .;.'ft,":'-'""'
Olea europaea
Olive Multi-Trunk
Prunus cerasifera 'Krauter Vesuvius'
Krauter Vesuvius Purple.leaf Plum

ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
Quercus agrifolla
Coast Live Oak
- •~ '~ .i
Buxus x 'Green Mounta in'
Green Mounta in Boxwood
?i~1~~ t~r·,·'.:2
'.•::,-\~,,, ; . ;; .· 1
>,l~!ll:l~ _:

Plttosporum tenu lfol!um 'Marjorie Channon'
Marjo rie Channon Ta'Nhlwhi
Bougalnvlllea X 'Oh My My'
Oh My My Bougainvillea
Trachetospermum Jasmlnol des
Chinese Star Jasmine
Juncus patens
Callfornla Gray Rush
lomandra long !folia Platinum Beauty
Variegated Mat Rush
~ -~~-... ~~ - ... } .... -· ~-:.=-..
•~-7"" ,_:.,'i. ·i- ·-;:_;;, .. ·,
-~ ~:f1-~~t{~,;i( ~}
. ·fll. '-~ ... '\t,-O ti'.~ ... . ~- ~ ''."" :' -t.~ •. , ... . ~I -•~-~ U •~.- ,. i,··, •' ~ ~ ~-.---.. -;._~-> - ·:~ i
tif > --=~~~-·~-' -~ ..,..._, -~ -~ .- ... "',. a;_f--."!"f+ '//. -· \.~ -{ .::,, · ,..;;;;_ Ji: : '?
~ -. i ' J .. ~-:z\;.:

J
Seslerla x 'Greenlee'
Greenlee Moor Grass
Ceanothus marltimus ·valley Vlolef
Maritime Ceanothus
Clstus salv ilfolius 'Prostratus·
Sageleaf Rockrose
Correa x ·carmine Bens·
Carm ine Bells Aust ral!an Fuchs ia
Loropetalum chinense rubrum 'Plum Delight'
Purple Lear Fringe Flower
Pittosporum toblra "Shima· TM
Cream de Mint Mock Orange
t
C •• •. ·~- ~I Ji~~}{·:
•,• •·.'.~~10 : .-•I".• '_" ;••i:; •
/_}:,;•:·'-'?i
~-~, .. :~~- ~~i~:

Westrlngla frutlcosa · Morning Ughf
Morn ing Ugh! Coast Rosemary

PERENNIALS
·~ ... ' ) 1t.', •·,11r- •
,..~\ ·1,· ·i~, ,.Jt ' . ' .. . I •. -1--
~.t' ' .. -.·~ -~ .
i.r· ~ ~··-. ' a,.~ . •i,,
·. fl ,l'.;., • "I'" , ... ~
": ' r
:ilr 1f-·· -- ~.ll!-
~ ~ . -.

Dletes irldioides
Fortnight LIiy
~ \ . , . .
\ . ... ¼''ij"···• .•... · •'
" ' ~-:: !( ... --=>--, ,-: ,._ •.• .,,._,. ' ... •
£: ~ /,l ....,_ '··•:~ ,,,. ':''"i :, . . '
\ C,;;. ,(!/ -' ~!:".'.-~ {-::, ; ,.;' J r!" ·"_
• . .. t ,
~-- / ~ . -r.t--t•
• / ~ d:· . -Si~"!,; ,
Iris doug]as !ana 'Pacific Coast Hybrids' Nepeta x faassenll 'Blue Wende( Pacific Coast Hybr id Iris Catm int
Mlc~~e~:Y .. ~~~~c: ,~~~f.lates
mlltaC:unonabnd-..e:ipo.eom 831.462.4988
Cf)
f
z
w < ~ -f- z
0:: w 0::
<> 0 0
<(O.ii:l:!::...'.o..<o...Jco
(J)C!:!z<'-'? _z_ u;;;
Ici5~ 0"' O::J<;:<;:Z 0 . z 9;,
I W :::::i "-
0:: < 0 Cf)
z w
Cf)
Q Mid1:id Arnone: Ulllllcapc: .~hile-ct • W'.:J
TWUC DU.-l/J!C .. Jllll,IMo,11, Dr l[orv,ec.lHUCD
,a11 a g,c.n111-L1.UHG YT'lllOWWDI.T'llllMfftt
COtlrt,ITSOP ntCU:DIU.w..Da IICO,..fllCIHTO IIICMACL
"""OOl[VoMD""""""'1ttc:1 ....... D-UC"'1"1:CT
HT& .. IAU.~AIIDl!TI.LNOP.vrrT ll4YIC
IK ... QOUa:DIIAN'l,......., .. 011 .... -wm,oUTT'II I
~Ul,wMTTl.11........,..&LD,T'lll:1,,Ull>IGt.l'I;
•ltc:>IITl:CT.1'MC-IIULJ;TWOOl1C-•t11D,DAT&
l...,U.IIT'ICUSUl'GJl~wffHDUTUAIIJIV
TOT'IIIU.NHC...,.CUClell:CT.

DWWc ■ l""LLAHU ll [IIU"'OMal ■ -...tfffOIICOIIPl.l,t.NCC MT'IIAU.C.Uottlffa. l ~ll'JICQVlll[ IOo,11,,\NO
NQPCllf'f'U~Cl,DWll[lll .... LL.ACOIIIIICAI.L
111c11a,.nPV1lllltll[QUIIIIDTO ..... a1111 w(HIK
1-00IPU, lll, ... ll"'f0111l4TIOIIHUDU:W
NCMDIDGTTMl0...,111. IIIC>Wtl.....,OlltU,MOICAPI
AIIOt!TCCTUIICAHUIICIIIOUAU/TY,OIIT'IIC
o.ctllJIO.c:TO,l&IIINO"'-ll'T'l'U...IOVIIDIJllfl,•Po~
LINUOll,~~Cllf'f'COIINCJIL

REVISIONS

PLANT IMAGES
JOB NO. 202216
SCALE not to scale

DRAWN MA
CHECK
DA TE 8.14.2023
SHEET
L-2.1
®¥4.,\f.i!:ZJ
~l3
@;i§sc:il 8
~
§
~--,
:o
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-+--- J
@
~o?-'~
h_n1---i__J---- 1 ..
:.CALE:1/16'•1'-0°
,----7
filt;
l~s::?'J
@
.
,mJ
" . ..

HYDROZONE MAP LEGEND

SYMBOL DESCRIPTION

DRIP LOW WATER USE

DRIP MODERATE WATER USE
1-
1 I
I I ____ ..,
I
I
I
I
I t ___ _ l
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
L__
,.

I
I
1-1
I
z. _______ _
,-----
~¢?.x:~$.o/./.;.;<?,j
k-<-::::-.::_>::.::~<>.::::<:.J
111111111111111111111

RETENTION BASIN MODERATE WATER USE

TOTAL LANDSCAPE AREA
QTY
9 ,586 s.f.
1,503 s.f.
412 s.f.
11,501 s.f.

MAWA
M:iximum Applied Water Allowance Calculations for New and RehDbllilated Residential Ulndscapes Messng c s and W::amings
Click on the blue cell on right to Pick City Name
ETo of City from Appendix A
Total Land:;cape Area
ResultG:
{ETo) x (0.62) x [(0.55 xLA) + (1.0 - 0.55) X SLA)]
MAWA c;.i]culation incorporating Effective Precipitation (Optional) PrecipitaUon(Optional)
ETo of City from Appendix A
Tot3IL:lndscapeAiea
Special landscape Area
Enter Effective PredpitaUon
Results:

MAWA• [(ETo • Epp!) x (0.52)]x !(0.5Sx LA) + ((t.0-0.55) x: SLA)] Salim:is
ETWU
E:;tim3ted Total W::ater U,e
Name of City

39.10ETo (Inches/year)
4120ve rhcad Landscape Area (ft2)
11,D89Drlp Landscape Area (ft2)
OSLA{ft2)

11.501.00
Gallons
Cubic Feet
HCF
Acr~ feet
Millions of Gallon s

39.10ETo(lnches/year)

11.so1.00LA(ft2J
O.OOSLA(tt2)
14Tol 3[ 3nnual preclpiti:itlon ~nches/ye3r)

3.SOEppl (in/yr)(25% of total annual preclpllaUon)
139,604 .89Gallons
18,662 .52Cub lc Feet
186.63HCF

0.43Acre-fect

0.14Mil!lonso!Gallons
Equ.:ition: ETWU • ETo x 0.62 x [((PF x HA)/IE) + SLAJ: Com:!dering precipitation ETWA =(ETo-Eppt) x0.62:x !((PF x HA)/IE) +SLA] Messages and Warnings
!rrig:ition Efficiency Ot!!.:,u!t V.i lue for overhead 0.75 and drip 0.81.

PlantW aterU:.eType
Very Low
low
M~ium
High
SLA
Select System
From the
Dropdown List PlantW:llerU5'1
Pl.int F.ictor
0 - 0.1

0.2 - 0.3

0.-4 - 0.6

0.7 - 1.0
HydrozoneArea Irrigation
click on cell Type(s)(low, Plant F3ctor {HA) (ft2) W1lhou! Efficiency Hydrozone
Zone 1
Zone2
Zone 3
Results
MAWAa
below medium.high) (PF) SLA
Drip Low 0.30 9,586
Drip Medium 0.50 1.503
OverheadSpray Medium 0,60 412
SLA 0
Sum 11,50 1
139,605 ETvVIJ11 106,107GaUom;.
14,184CubicFcet
142HCF
OAcf~fect
OMilllons of Gallons
(IE)

0.81 0,81

0.75 (PF x HA (ft2))/IE

3.550
......
330
4,808
0 E1WU complie:. with MAWA
M!c~~~~!Y .. ~~~~c: ;~\~~ ~~1:it~s
mlko@:111"i0nobncbc:1po.et1m a:31.452.-4968
CJ)
f
z
w <(
2: -f- z
0::: w 0:::
<( > 0 0
-<Cl..ii:!:!:: ...!-0.... <( 0 ...J <O
(/) C) Z<( ~
_Z-O c'o
Ici5::'.j Cl) '":'.
0::::><(<(Z
0 . z 9;:

IW::J "-
0::: <(
0 (/)
z w
CJ)
0 Mich~cl .4-monc Lnmi~c;,,flC ,\n:hih:d - .W:!~
THtllCDU-0.1.U:Cl~ITIIU ltC!lnO,l Cll\'ICC,IUUCD
'°"" Dwt-Tl ltt Y,GU:U • tUYTH l DWNUI. TK! umu
CD"1tWTSD~ llttUDIII.-O• ISCtl,..,'l!OKT O IIICMU
UW<>NCI.ANIIICUl:AOICHrTtC1,U. WDKAl'tUCHITtCT
lnlTA.,l,J,..1.1t111"1•""'111TTU!.Wlll'HfltAYH
ltCl'IIIDUCCD_,,..,.,,,..HK>WDII MCll•JMWllltllUTT>lt
Ul'RlUWSlll'lfN ..... IDY-'l.D• n<ll.ANDKl>l'I:
.U:CHITT:ct. not,10"°' t U:CTltllWICTil.411UtJI DrDAT ..

UU1.U,.Hn<tu•unRUl'OHallllUn'WITHIIUTW.•Lln'
TDl>C ,.. HDI C..,.fUCMIT(CT,
OWWCIIIHALLAUU WC ltll' DIIT.IH.m •011co1tl'U,.W Ct
WITH .. LL u.nwu.n.,1r1 ... c~ lfQ!JPl1 11~"1ll ""D
... Dl'tlTYU~t._DWN[I IKA U.,.CDUllt-'l.L
wr c1,..,.IYl'tJ1Wftl. 'lt OUPlr DTD ,rll1 DIWWDU
SIIO'Mj<>flJ'U.NJ..D.UC1 N•DRllAT10'1'4Almllll
l''ID~rll ■ YTM! ...... (11. MIC>t,U"LUW""I...._..OIU"" dCHITl:CT\JR(AHU II UWDW.a,Ul'f',11RTHt
ACCUUC"t'Ol'UIDl'IIDl'UTYUWt ■ OUWOUIU,fUCf
L..iUDRl'RDl'CllTYCOIIIIPI ._

REVIS IO NS
.& 8.14.23 I additional planting

HYDROZO NE MAP

WATER USE

CALCULAT IONS
JOB NO. 202218
SCALE 1/16 = 1' - D"

DRAWN MA SHEET
CHECK
DATE 8.14.2023 L-3.0
::~
-~
. " ~~.t '.!~ .. ~·
~
'-'~GENEAAC~dTEs:
,. APN 2sf.:..ss1-011 - ooo
E. ALVIN DRIVE. SAUNAS, CA
LEGEND
---100--- ----x---- FENCE
SIGN
EXISTING EASEMENT NOTES:

EASEMENTS OF RECORD AS IDENTIFIED IN PRELIMINARY mLE REPORT PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE COMPANY, ORDER NO. 4408-5877183, DATED OCTOBER 4, 2022, EXCEPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS: 2. lHIS MAP PORTRAYS THE SITE AT THE TIME OF THE SURVEY AND DOES NOT

SHOW SOILS OR GEOLOGY INFORMATION, UNDERGROUND CONDITIONS, EASEMENTS,

ZONING OR REGULA TORY INFORMATION OR ANY OTHER ITEMS NOT SPECIFICALLY REQUESTED BY THE CLIENT.

GROUND CONTOUR

SUBJECT PROPERTY LINE

PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE

ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE

CONTROL POINT

BENCHMARK
---OH---
--- E---

OVERHEAD UTILITY LINE(S)

UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE
EXCEPTIONS 1. THROUGH 4. NOT EASEMENT INTERESTS

5. EASEMENTS OVER EXISTING ROADS, PIPELINES - NONE KNOWN, EXCEPT AS SHOWN

6. POLE LINE EASEMENT - SUBSEQUENTLY QUITCLAIMED & NOT PLOTT ABLE

7. NOT AN EASEMENT INTEREST 3. BOUNDARY LOCATIONS SHOWN HEREON WERE DETERMINED W'!1H THE BENEFIT OF A FJELD SURVEY SUPPLEMENTED BY RECORD DATA. ALL BOUNDARY SHOWN IS FROM RECORD DATA. THIS TOPOGRAPHY DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A BOUNDARY SURVEY. THERE MAY BE EASEMENTS OR OlHER RIGHTS, RECORDED OR

UNRECORDED, AFFECTING THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN HEREON.
&100
~BM
@
--\Jl½ UTILITY POLE SHOW'!NG ARMS
AND GUY \-VIRE

8. PG&E EASEMENT - NOT PLOTTABLE

9. NOT AN EASEMENT INTEREST

10. PG&E EASEMENT - SUBSEQUENTLY QUITCLAIMED & NOT PLOTT ABLE FOUND IRON PIPE, AS NOTED [Ji) (_~)

11. PGt..E EASEMENT - SUBSEOUENTL Y QUITCLAIMED & NOT PLOTT ABLE

12. TELEPHONE EASEMENT - SUBSEQUENTLY QUITCLAIMED & NOT PLOTT ABLE

13. THROUGH 19. NOT EASEMENT INTERESTS

4. DISTANCES ANO DIMENSIONS SHOWN ARE EXPRESSED IN FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF, UNLESS OTHERW'!SE NOTED. + 926.30 SPOT GRADE
TREE
- -- ----s-

STORM DRAIN/SEWER MANHOLE

UNDERGROUND GAS LINE

SANITARY SEWER ( GRAVI TY)
LIGHT, ELECTROUER 5. LOCAL BENCHMARK: r REBAR & CAP DESIGNATED PT. #200 ELEVATION: 93.B8° (NAV088)

ELEVATIONS SHO'MJ HEREON WERE ESTABLISHED THROUGH STATIC GPS OBSERVATIONS AND THE USE OF THE NATIONAL GEODETIC SURVEYS ONLINE POSITIONING USER SERVlCE (OPUS).
@De-
• 12" (,,lJ<
◊fH

TREE DRIPUNE

FIRE HYDRANT
- ·r ~ (0.3") EA S T A L V I N D R I V E
----~=-.::-:-- A64'PUBLIC00A0WAY ~
I"'.,; ,
w ~ w - - --- w w :=w ~- ---~-- w
~- -- ---·- -- -~-----~ ----=- -- -J.~----- -2!?3-.J2'30·w ... 37756-;£ *
~ STORM DRAIN INLET
.,.
90 -0
2 -
30 - / •• ,· r N73'32'30"W _22a06• [ -i - -1··
R•20 00' t· ~....-, . ~1· r ( ~·i 6~ oz . .rjl3 33 - 0150 • :t ... oo - • l•3143 ·,·en, '~ ~ ¾_ "•' 7 •g.!,.-g --:::,,. r :- ·p,. - , ~ , . ~ 1 FouNo 1-1; 2 •
1 p
_ • .!,?) _J I I_[ l ,, I - - I ,Aj TA"._ILJ,E__c;l~E
- --- : , ~I .,,.. •"7' / 1 I I § I
I ~ JlL1 ! ·1 . ~:,: EYJs11:C
2 ~0- PJ"'H'·'w-J ~~ :
lyl
l~ I
►
~g
- <
"'o
0~
O..,i'
;:;~
<
ID
I I I [ ~-=a....1 · ... ~ 7-CT-78 1 ~¾
1 I ! ~,-- Hll.! •J3tl3 I I I ""' L I I 0 01· .,,_,, .,,,, -,.:.,, ;'::." ,.,. 1 .. !:j,-,-7 ..,.!. r---1 L___ 7'U I I ~-j' .- ; ~ ~~
i . ~Lr--:::1.LJb r""-.,- =.J 1,,,.,,, .,,_., .,,.,, .,,.., ·k"' ". 1~·1l, ~) I . __}~ .E---~1 I \ \ ~
[f□~ jIT 'r ·"-" .,.,. .,,., \ \ = I ,., t ~ PARCEL A (':,._[ •. ,,rn · "-"' .,,,, ,;'kl_i--;''<1'· ,' ~-"',-1_ r : :·-1 _o 1.'15AC± £=-~CJ.=:r-~ ·~ PARCEL B ;· \ .. g , ,!J. \ •,lt2 c·---_J'.~ ~ 0.85AC:t I '7 = ,jm,- \\ .\ .. -urn ;i; : ·"'' .,,.,~ _,, .. ·, /'.I ,~:! --~ l::zzz:::J \ \ 'l\. J. :~ ........_,, ~ '''" "'~A: 'lig~ 1- ____ _ _ __F7--;i::-; \ .,· 11 ~ -OJ.O: .,,.,. .''---. bj ffiJ'. 1 1J \ : : ~ i .,, .. ~ ,1!~~ 12·~.,1:~:~ _,,,, -,c, .,,ill~:

I l ,, ~/,'"~05.t.:, ,!l\'34 ~ - ~ 0 lHI ~b391 -.J ti < , l 1 / ,,,,,, l" \ '· , .,..., .,. ·
J [ ~---l. r-' / ----...._ ·1 ./'·' ;. ' '-• CYPRESS TREES 1 /
' .... . , _...,,, _ _ ... / ......... -r:7,.1,· .. I ~!lJ!t: 11' -~.17 "'--- TOBE REMOVED Ali O .... ' I •..t•.-:-~-- , _./ I I ·9~0 " • ~pl 0
'l --.~-;rt== ~ \\ °/ ............_I' ,·./ '1' ,, ( ,,;,:.,I!.:: - .,.,, .,.,, .... .,,,.,,--1' !J_/' ,L R
1 ~iur,1 1 }J):i~J.'1~_...:,,,_..:;!e.J r..c • ..-I.I_ · iii 1.i (1.,1 / ;:;! gJ :1 8 , ,.,_..,. ,-.<5 ~ ~ I :i--r·,-- . cJJ--n- ' - - - - - ~ ~ •: _,.\ ✓,,,1 .,,, '';'~l'C:'-,; ;•:,, . . ~;; g! r77°
3 • PROPOSED 40' ~"1J ', li ,l.o ~i
~
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ' \ ' EMERGENCY ACCESS & -- c .,, _, •'3'2 ~ .,,,: , .,, . ~, • '< ~ , \ , , \ , \ UllU~ESrS~ENT , 1 ·-, _,., ., .. ,,~ J, I i
1 , --- c_- :_ • _ N73'35'00' W 2~789.:,___ _~ _ •o.1:,,·,tt..J, -m· ,,.:.,. •''-i-''• '~ ,o,:, •a ,':, /, '-......_, / - "'· ~---- -- 7 .C - - - N73'35' • - N73'3500W 13.319•··· ----.....:..; -o ~ ;,_ ~~ • [ JO ----- ----- --- -~-- DOW 38108' '::'"_- 7 '"" '-""~ -""•- .... ·- _ , I __ • ,, ,\ I O
JO
60 PARCEL 2 ____ .1_ ___ ..::L_:::'...., .,,,,,,,,.F ,- -J<.-- 11 11 I SCALE: 1· - 30' II PM 224 FOUND j1p WITH CAP / I 131,,.oc'I-6,'l. ... con.._ · •. ' 90 KIP ORIVE / ~">
1 , ?.
0 ;-
-™--~- I ,~~ /
tt VICINITY MAP
SCALE: 1" - 2000'

PROJECT DATA
=--= E. ALVlN DRIVE
SAUNAS, CA 93906
APN 261-661-011 - 000
I /DI IIX PROYIOEBS·

STORM DRAINAGE CITY OF SALINAS

SANITARY SEWER CITY OF SALINAS

WATER CAL WATER

GAS/ELECTRIC PG&E

TELEPHONE COMCAST
ZONING:

GENERAL PLAN LANO USE:

PARCEL k
PARCEL 8:

TOTAL ACREACE:

R-H-2.1
(RESIDENTIAL HICH DENSITY}

RESIDENTIAL

1.45 AC
QJl5...6C.

2.30 AC

OWNER/SUBDIVIDER
ST. GEORGE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
98 KIP DRIVE.

SAUNAS, CA 93906
ATTN: (831) 4-49-6709
GEOJfCHN!CA! ENGINFfR·

ROCK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC
1100 MAIN STREET. SUITE A
WATSONVlLLE, CA 95076
831 -72 4-5868
omcECROCKSOUDENCINEERS.COM
CIVIi ENGINFfB /Sl/BYfYOB·
~ ITSON ENCINEERS
6 HARRIS COURT
MONTEREY. CA 93940
831-6-49-5225
RICHARD P. WEBER. LS f: 8002

VESTING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP

CHISPA - ST GEORGE'S
A SUBDIVISION OF A 2.3OAC PARCEL 1, BOOK 11 OF PARCEL
MAPS, AT PAGE 224 IN THE CITY OF SAUNAS, COUNTY OF

MONTEREY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
PREPARED BY:

Whitson ENGINEERS
6 Harris Court, Monl~rey , Caritomla
831.649..5225 whltsonengineers.com
Civil Engineering + Land Surveying
06/26/2023 JOB NO. 4546.DD
SHEET 1 OF 1
~ r ~----f--"7-1 City of Salinas
~i-~~ DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING (PW) • 65 West Alisal Street• Salinas, California SALi NAs---------------
Phone: (831) 758-7251 • www.cityofsalinas.org HlCll IN LAND I lllCll IN VALUBS

ENGINEERING REVIEW
PURPOSE: CUP2022-059/RZ2023-001
LOCATION: 98 Kip Drive
APPLICANT: CHISPA
ENGINEER: Whitson Engineers
DATE: 8/28/2023
PLANNER: Thomas Whiles
REVIEWER: Adriana Robles, PE, CFM
City Engineer
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL: New three-story multifamily facility with 38-unit senior rental units and one manager's office on 37,160 sf vacant area of an existing lot (APN 261-661-011).

RECOMMENDATION: Approve with Conditions
SWDS THRESHOLD: PR-01 though PR-04
NPDES CATEGORY: Low Priority
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW: Development Review Submittal prepared by The Paul Davis Partnership and Whitson Engineers dated June 27, 2023
FEES DUE:

NPDES Development Review Fee -In accordance with the City Council approved Schedule of Fees and Charges, a fee of $3890.50 shall be assessed for review of the preliminary stormwater control plan and NPDES requirements. A portion of this fee ($1,737.73) is outstanding and shall be paid prior to approval of the development permit.

DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES:

Development Impact Fees -Development impact fees will be assessed for the development. Fees are assessed with the building permit and due prior certificate of occupancy. Pursuant to Salinas Municipal Code Section 9-44(h), governmentally assisted low-income housing unit may be exempt from cettain development impact fees with City Council approval. Development impact fees are currently estimated at $348,066.33. See attached worksheet.

Notice: The Conditions of Approval for this Site Plan Review include certain fees and development requirements.

Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020 (d)(I), this hereby constitutes written notice stating the amount of said fees and describing the development requirements. The applicant is hereby notified that the 90-day appeal period in which he/she/they may protest these fees and development requirements, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020 (a), begins on the date the office land use permit is approved. If applicant files a written protest within this 90-day period complying with all requirements of Section 66020, he/she/they will be legally bal'l'edji·om challenging such fees and/or requirements at a later date.

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Prior to issuance of a building permit)

1. Boundary -A minor subdivision shall be recorded in accordance with Article 6 of Chapter 31 of the Salinas Municipal Code.
98 Kip Drive -CUP2022-059 COA2

2. Easements Applicant shall record emergency access easements and utility easements, as needed, with the County of Monterey. Emergency access and utility easement may be incorporated as part of the Parcel Map.

3. Addressing -Applicant shall provide a completed address change/assignment application and exhibits for processing.

4. Grading & Drainage Plan -Applicant shall provide sawcut limits, grades, and slopes for curb extensions on the adjacent parcel.

5. Utility Plan-Applicant shall provide grate, invert, pipe size and slope on all proposed pipes.

Provide details for diverter weir and underground chambers.

6. SWDS/NPDES Compliance -A Stormwater Quality (SWQ) Permit shall be required prior to any land disturbance.

7. SWDS Compliance -Efforts shall be made to mitigate DMA 4. At a minimum, provide curb openings to drain area into the landscape planters.

8. SWDS Compliance -Applicant shall perform infiltration testing at the depth of the proposed chambers to confirm design assumptions.

9. SWDS Compliance -Provide clear calculations that demonstrate how the 2200-cf retention volume is reached if the outflowing pipe is set 0.5-ft above the pipe to the chambers at the weir.

10. SWDS Compliance -Operation and Maintenance Plan shall also include cleaning of inlets and area drains.

11. NPDES Compliance -Applicant shall add inlet protection to all downstream inlets along E Alvin Dr and Kip Dr.

12. Off site Improvements All off site improvements shall be made in accordance with City of Salinas Standards.

13. Offsite Improvements -Applicant shall remove existing ADA ramp, crosswalk, and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB) and signs at E Alvin Dr on the west side of the E Alvin Dr/Solano Way intersection and remove the yield lines roadway markings. A new ADA-compliant ramp and triple-four crosswalk shall be installed on the east side of the intersection along with new yield lines on either side, signage and RRFB, and impacted roadway markings. Crosswalk and ramp shall be perpendicular to the existing east side ramp. Relocation of the crosswalk has been approved by Salinas City Council via Resolution 22753 (attached).

14. Offsite Improvements -Applicant shall slurry seal area of stripe removal and any trenches (5-ft beyond clean sawcut lines) along E Alvin Dr.

15. Offsite Improvements -Applicant shall paint red curbs from the driveway to the projected intersection of the visibility triangle with the curb.

16. Offsite Improvements -A minimum 4-ft wide ADA-compliant sidewalk is required at all driveways. Applicant shall confirm compliance for all driveway including the driveway at Kip Dr.

Applicant shall reconstruct any non-compliance driveway.

17. Off site Improvements -Identify any sidewalk damage that may cause someone to trip and fall on the sidewalk along your frontage. In accordance with Council Resolution No. 4926 and State Code 5610, maintenance of the sidewalk is the responsibility of the property owner.

18. Off site Improvements-Per City Standards, street trees are required at a maximum of 60-ft spacing I' a g C 12
Z:\ENGINEER!NG PW\P/an ReviewVavier\Pla1111i11g\98 Kip Dr -CUP2022-059\98 Kip Drive -CUP2022-059 COA2.docx 98 Kip Drive -CUP2022-059 COA2
based on street frontage. For this property a minimum of three (3) trees are required. If the existing improvements or the site cannot accommodate three street trees, the applicant shall pay the street tree impact fee in lieu of the street tree installation.

19. Offsite Improvements -Any construction, reconstruction, or closure of the right of way shall require an encroachment permit.

20. Offsite Improvements -Consistent with state law, applicant shall be responsible for maintenance and watering of the parkway plantings.

I' age 13
Z:\ENGJNEERJNG PW\P/a11 ReviewVavier\P/a1111i11g\98 Kip Dr -CUP2022-059\98 Kip Drive -CUP2022-059 COA2.docx DEVELOPMENT FEES (By Unit Size)
RESIDENTIAL UNITS (2023-2024}
Address: 98 Kip Dr Permit#: Estimate Only
No. of Units Demolished: 0 No. of Proposed Units: 36
No. of Proposed Bedrooms: 36 Type of Unit Proposed: Multi Family Residence No. of Bedrooms Demolished: 0 Type of Unit Demolished: Single Family Residence

1. STREET TREE FEE 2304.00.0000-56.5110
149 Street Frontage (LF} multiplier (per 60' frontage): $ 1,013.20 TOTAL STREET TREE FEE DUE: $ 1,013.20

2. PUBLIC UTILITY IMPACT FEE
Total No. Bedroom Credit: 0
Net Bedrooms: 36
Fee Per Bedroom: $ 633.00
TOTAL SANITARY SEWER FEE DUE: $ 22,788.00 2301.00.0000-56.5120 Fee Per Bedroom: $ 678.00
TOTAL STORM DRAIN FEE DUE (Do Not Assess For Mixed Use): $ 24,408.00 2301.00.0000-56.5130

3. TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
7 Trip Rate Per Proposed Unit(s) Total Proposed Trips: 252 0 Trip Credits Net Trips: 252 Location:

Fee Per Trip: $ 451.00 Existing City Streets
TOTAL TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE DUE: $ 113,652.00 2306.00.0000-56.5150

4. REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE Per attached TAMC worksheet.

Fee assessed by the Transportation Agency for Monterey County $ 28,777.13 8809.81.815 7-57 .8640

5. PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT FEES

SENIOR UNIT FEE SCHEDULE
Bedrooms Unit Size No. Units Fire Police Library Recreation Parks 1 603 36 $ 4,932.00 $ 27,324.00 $ 19,440.00 $ 10,764.00 $ 94,968.00 2 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -
3 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -
4 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -
5 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -
6 $ -$ -$ -$ -$ -
GOOD Subtotal: $ 4,932.00 $ 27,324.00 $ 19,440.00 $ 10,764.00 $ 94,968.00 Credits by Unit/Bedroom:

PUBLIC FACILITIES IMPACT FEES DUE: $ 4,932.00 $ 27,324.00 $ 19,440.00 $ 10,764.00 $ 94,968.00 TOTAL DEVELOPMENT FEES DUE: $ ' . 348,066.33
Effective: July 1, 2022 Valid through: June 30, 2023
Estimate prepared by: AR
Z:IENGINEERING PW\Plan Review\Javier\Survey\98 Kip Dr -RS2022-006\98 KIP DIF Estimate 230810 Regional Development Impact Fees
Fee Calculation Worksheet
Last updated July 1, 2022
Project Name:

Select the Benefit Zone:

Select the Agency:

Select the Land Use Type:
1 Senior Housing
2 3
4 5
Date:

GREATER SALINAS
City of Salinas
Fee Schedule Enter the# of Units
$1,469.49 36
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
-------
Calculate by Fee per Trip (Only use for appeals) $396._! ______ _.

Subtotal:

Apply discount: 45.60%
Apply credits:

Total Regional Fee:

Fees
$52,901.62
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$52,901.62
$24,124.50
$0.00
$28,777.13
City of Salinas
DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERING (PW) • 65 West Alisal Street• Salinas, California SALi NAs----------------
n,cu IN LAND I IIICll IN VALUES Phone: (831) 758-7251 • www.cityofsalinas.org PURPOSE: RS2022-006 '_
LOCATION: 98 Kip Dr.

APPLICANT: CHISPA Inc.

SURVEYOR: Whitson Engineers

MAP REVIEW
DATE: 8/28/2023
PLANNER: Tom Wiles
REVIEWER: Adriana Robles, PE, CFM
City Engineer
PROPOSAL: Vesting Tentative Map (APN 261-661-011) for a minor subdivision of a 2.30 ac partially occupied parcel into two parcels (1.45 ac and 0.85 ac ). Development wi II separate the developed area to create an undeveloped parcel.

SUBMITTAL REVIEWED:
• Vesting Tentative Map dated 6/26/2023
• Prelimina,y Title Report, First American Title Company, Order No. dated October 4, 2022 RECOMMENDATION: Approved with Conditions
FINDINGS:

The Tentative Map has been reviewed for technical accuracy and found compliant with the Subdivision Ordinance (SMC §31-502).

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
I. Parcel Map shall be clear and consistent with Chapter 31, Article 6 of the Salinas Municipal Code.

2. Once the Parcel Map is approved, the applicant shall provide a CAD file of the new lot configuration. The file shall hold a horizontal datum ofNAD83, California Coordinate System, Zone 4.

3. Applicant shall remove and relocate the existing rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFB), crosswalk, ADA curb ramps and associated curb markings.

4. Applicant shall make any required offsite improvements to sidewalks, trees and driveway aprons needed.

CITY OF SALINAS
Jf!:::;,t,~
City Engineer
Z:\ENG!NEER!NG PW\Plan ReviewVavier\Sun•ey\98 Kip Dr -RS2022-006\RS2022-006 98 Kip Drive.

CALIFORNIA

HISTORICAL

RESOURCES

INFORMATION
SYSTEM
October 31, 2023
Tom Wiles, Senior Planner
City of Salinas
Community Development Department
65 W. Alisal Street, 2nd Floor
Salinas, CA 93901

ALAMEDA
COLUSA

CONTRA COSTA

DEL NORTE

I IUMBOLDT SAN FRANCISCO

LAKE SAN MATEO

MARIN SANTA CLARA

MENDOCINO SANTA CRUZ

MONTEREY SOLANO
NAPA SON0~1A
SAN llENITO YOLO
Northwest Information Center
Sonoma State University
1400 Valley I louse Drive, Suite 210
Rohnert Park, California 94928-3609
Tel: 707.588.8455
[email protected]
https://nwic.sonoma.edu
File No.: 23-0542
re: GPA 2023-001; RZ 2023-001 / APN 261-661-011 at 98 Kip Drive/ CHISPA, Inc.

Dear Tom Wiles
Records at this office were reviewed to determine if this project could adversely affect cultural resources.

Please note that use of the term cultural resources includes both archaeological sites and historical buildings and/or structures. The review for possible historic-era building/structures, however, was limited to references currently in our office and should not be considered comprehensive.

Project Description:

A General Plan Amendment to create a lot for an affordable housing project with a zoning designation of R-H-

2.1. Previous Studies:

XX This office has no record of any previous cultural resource field survey for the proposed project area conducted by a professional archaeologist or architectural historian (see recommendation below).

Archaeological and Native American Resources Recommendations:

XX The proposed project area has the possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological site(s). A field study by a qualified professional archaeologist is recommended prior to commencement of project activities . .2QL We recommend that the lead agency contact the local Native American tribe(s) regarding traditional, cultural, and religious heritage values. For a complete listing of tribes in the vicinity of the project, please contact the Native American Heritage Commission at (916) 373-3710. __ The proposed project area has a low possibility of containing unrecorded archaeological site(s). Therefore, no further study for archaeological resources is recommended.

Built Environment Recommendations:

XX Since the Office of Historic Preservation has determined that any building or structure 45 years or older may be of historical value, if the project area contains such properties, it is recommended that prior to commencement of project activities, a qualified professional familiar with the architecture and history of Monterey County conduct a formal CEQA evaluation.

Due to processing delays and other factors, not all of the historical r_esource reports and resource records that have been submitted to the Office of Historic Preservation are available via this records search. Additional information may be available through the federal, state, and local agencies that produced or paid for historical resource management work in the search area. Additionally, Native American tribes have historical resource information not in the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Inventory, and you should contact the California Native American Heritage Commission for information on local/regional tribal contacts.

The California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) contracts with the California Historical Resources Information System's (CHRIS) regional Information Centers (ICs) to maintain information in the CHRIS inventory and make it available to local, state, and federal agencies, cultural resource professionals, Native American tribes, researchers, and the public. Recommendations made by IC coordinators or their staff regarding the interpretation and application of this information are advisory only. Such recommendations do not necessarily represent the evaluation or opinion of the State Historic Preservation Officer in carrying out the OHP's regulatory authority under federal and state law.

For your reference, a list of qualified professionals in California that meet the Secretary of the Interior's Standards can be found at htt : www.chrisinfo.or . If archaeological resources are encountered during the project, work in the imme iate vicinity o t e in s should be halted until a qualified archaeologist has evaluated the situation. If you have any questions please give us a call at (707) 588-8455. :=_incerely, /
i5rl:._-.

Bryan,Much
Coordinator
ai\
~

SANTA YNEZ CHUMASH
TRIOAI. F.LnER'S COUNCIi,
T0'110UCfAHO,,-talJlvt TIUBAl.t.NCUfllrt,
TIIAOl'TIOH1 .lHO CVlTUIU
June 23, 2023
City of Salinas
Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians
Tribal Elders' Council
P.O. Box517♦ Santa Ynez ♦CA ♦93460
Phone: (805)688-7997 ♦ Fa:i:: (805)688-9578 ♦
Community Development Department
65 W. Alisa! Street
Salinas, CA 93901
Att.: Thomas Wiles, Senior Planner
Re: General Plan Amendment 2023-001, Rezone 2023-001, Conditional Use Permit 2022-59 Resubdivison 2022-006, and Minor Modification 2022-019 Located at 98 Kip Drive in the Public/Semipublic Zoning District
Dear Mr. Wiles:

Thank you for contacting the Tribal Elders' Council for the Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians.

At this time, the Elders' Council requests no further consultation on this project; however, we understand that as part of NHPA Section 106, we must be notified of the project.

Thank you for remembering that at one time our ancestors walked this sacred land.

Sincerely Yours,
Crystal Mendoza
Administrative Assistant I Cultural Resources
Santa Ynez Band of Chumash Indians I Tribal Hall
(805) 325-5537
cmendoza@ch u mash .gov
DocuSign Envelope ID: EAD18DC3-E427-4C00-93DA-795FDF97785A City of Salinas

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT

SALINAS
RICH IN LAND 1 fllCH IN VALUES
65 W. Alisal Street, 2nd Floor• Salinas, California 93901 (831) 758-7387 • (831) 775-4258 (Fax)• www.ci.salinas.ca.us Affordable Housing Plan
Date of Plan Approval:

Project Description:

Entitlement App. Date:

Project Address:

Project APN:

Owner(s):

Developer(s)/lnvestor(s):

Project Link To:

St. George's Senior Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, CA 93906
July 13, 2023
New construction, 36-unit,senior rental apartment development.

The St. George's Senior Apartments development will be located at 98 Kip Drive, corner of E. Alvin Drive. Salinas, CA 93906. The proposed structure will be three stories. The building will consist of 36 one-bedroom units. One unit will be reserved for the onsite property manager. The development will have 31 parking spaces, including two accessible (ADA) spaces. The development includes a community room and a manager's office. The site is .85 acres and is to be subdivided from the existing parcel containing the church and single-family home. All units will be 653 square foot one bedroom-apartments (including a 49 sq. ft. patio/deck). Units will include a full bathroom (roll-in shower, accessible sink, and toilet), full kitchen, living room, bedroom, balcony or deck, and outdoor storage. Green features: all-electric building with solar panels on the roof., dual pane low-e vinyl windows, energy efficient light fixtures and appliances, low flow plumbing fixtures including dual flush toilets, high R-value formaldehyde free insulation, and a drought tolerant landscaping plan.
11/02/2022
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, CA 93906
261-661-011-000 (Lot to be split)
Rector Wardens and Vestrymen of St. George's Parish
CHISPA, Inc.
295 Main Street, Suite 100
Salinas, CA 93901
CUP 2022-059
DocuSign Envelope ID: EAD18DC3-E427-4C00-93DA-795FDF977B5A Affordability Restriction: 55 years (Density Bonus)
lnclusionary Option: N/A (100% affordable housing projects are exempt from the lnclusionary Housing Program)
lnclusionary Restricted N/A
Units:
lnclusionary
Restricted Unit Mix: NIA
Density Bonus Request: Yes. 100% Density Bonus with 97% of the base zoning units in the development restricted to Low and/or Very-low Income
households.

Density Bonus Restricted
Units: 35 Units
Density Bonus
Restricted Unit Mix:

Density Bonus
Concessions Requested:

Other Affordable
Alternative:

Project Units:
2 3
32 Very Low-Income Units (30%-50% AMI)
Low-Income Units (80% AMI & below)

1. Open Space

2. Density

3. Parking (31 spaces for 36 units)
N/A
The table below shows the unit distribution on the project.

NUMBER BED-UNIT

UNIT TYPE OF ROOMS SQUARE

UNITS FOOTAGE
Very Low Income 653
3 1 (including (30-50% AMI) balcony)
Low Income 653
(50-80% AMI) 32 1 (including
balcony)
Non-Restricted 653
1 1 (including (Manager's Unit) balcony)
TOTAL 36
% OF
TOTAL
UNITS
8%
89%
3%
DocuSign Envelope ID: EAD18DC3-E427-4C00-93OA-795FDF977B5A Unit Placement:

Follow-up Items:

Units offered under the Density Bonus shall represent an equitable distribution of unit types and bedroom mix in comparison to the overall development.

Items to be completed prior to issuance of the Building Permit:
• amended Affordable Housing Plan (only if the project's unit count or composition changes)
• Affordable Housing Agreement (Recorded Covenant)
Items to be completed prior to issuance of the final Certificate of Occupancy (CO):
• Marketing Plan
• Management Plan
• Unit Income and Rent Limits (per the lnclusionary Housing Density Bonus Program)
lJDocuSlgned by:
~~ag::;;
4 :'; 7/13/2023 I 2:08 PM PDT
Joan Dresser Date
Rector Wardens and Vestrymen
of St. George's Parish (Owner)
Dana Cleary, Director of Real Estate Development
CHISPA, Inc. (Developer)
G
DocuSlgned by:
~J., P~wuL
D07AB3E93D49464
Rod Powell, Acting Assistant Director
Community Development Department
3 Date
7/18/2023 I 9:07 PM PDT
Date
ST. GEORGE'S SENIOR APARTMENTS

MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
98 KIP DRIVE
(General Plan Amendment 2023-001, Rezone 2023-001, Conditional Use Permit 2022-059, Resubdivision 2022-006, and Minor Modification 2022-019) Mitigation Nature of Result after Party Party Timing for Number Mitigation Mitigation Responsible Responsible for Implementation for Monitoring:

Implementing Method to
Confirm
Implementation
CU-1 In the event that cultural materials are Ensure Applicant, or Public Works During Cultural encountered during development, all work protection of Successor m Department and construction Resources and shall cease until the find has been on-site cultural Interest. Community phase.

TCR-1 evaluated and mitigation measures put in resources. Development Tribal and place for the disposition and protection of Department.

Cultural any find pursuant to Public Resources
Resources Code Section 21083.2.

TR-1 Pay all applicable traffic impacts fees as Ensure that Applicant, or Public Works Prior to issuance Transportation determined by the City Engineer. potential traffic Successor m Department and of a building impacts are Interest. Community permit.
reduced to a Development
level of Department.
insignificance.

I:\ComDev\Planning Share Space\98 Kip Dr\ER 2023-004\ER 2023-004 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.docx

Page 1 of 1 ends

THE

PAUL DAVIS

PARTNERSHIP, LLP

ARCHITECTS & PLANNERS
July 26, 2023
Planning Department
City of Salinas
Re: CHISPA, lnc./St. George Senior Housing-98 Kip Drive Subj: Density Bonus, Concessions & Waiver Requests as a Development Incentive.

The City of Salinas allows for exceptions to building development regulations in Sec. 17-18. -Waiver.

We request the following:

Useable Open Space Table 37-30.80
This Code Section requires 500 sf/unit of open space for multi-family projects. We request a variance for less than the minimum required open space.
• This is a 100% affordable senior housing project.
• The proposed project has 3,172 sf of open space and 1,728 sf of private open spaces for a total of 4,900 sf total open space. The minimum required is 19,500 sf. • Since the open space minimum is a required for a multi-family project, we ask for a 75% reduction in open space requirements based on the tenant type and their passive use of open space.

Density Section Bonus 37-50.060
This code section 37-30.150(j)(1} calls for a maximum of 24 units per acre. The proposed project is at 43 units per acre. We request a density bonus based on:
• An allowable request of a 100% density bonus for Affordable Senior Housing as per Zoning Code Section 37-50.060. It is proposed that 35 of the 36 residential units will be affordable. Per Section 37-30.lS0(j)(l), the maximum net density without a density bonus is 24 dwelling units to the acre. The project site consists of .85 acres, which would allow for a maximum of 21 dwelling units onsite without a density bonus (.85 x 24). Using the calculations for a 100% density bonus for affordable senior housing per Zoning Code Section 37-50.060, the maximum number of units with a density bonus is 36 units. The proposed number of 36 units is within the maximum allowed with a 100% density bonus.

Parking Density Reduction 37-50.370
Sec. 37-50.370. Reduction of required number of parking and loading spaces. (a)Reductions Allowed by the City Planner. The city planner may consider a reduction from zero to a maximum of twenty percent subject to the approval of a site plan review and a reduction of greater than twenty percent to a maximum of thirty percent subject to the approval of an administrative conditional use permit of the number of parking and loading spaces required by Schedules A and Bin Section 37-50.360: Off-street parking and loading spaces regulations if the city planner determines/finds any of the following conditions exist:
{2} The use or activity is participating in a facilities trip reduction plan in accordance with Section 37-50.330:

Vehicle trip reduction;
(4) Survey or other data exists which supports a reduction in parking and loading spaces for uses which, by their nature, are not likely to be converted to another use with greater parking requirements . .,._ t~~ ff.'J t~ ·• · · ~ilJ .. . •. ~ ·-I D .-
The Paul Davis Partnership, LLP i:X'··'@' E:~-,; ,, n L--,~. f.'-' ~.J.). 286 El Dorado Street ·l ,:'.' ti1 ~ ~~ F '\;,\1 1;~ij gl} Monterey, CA 93940 · ' I l:Zl ~ ~~ .ii-} &~ {
831-373-2784 Fax: 831-373-7459 ~ tnl

Page 1 of 2 ends

Per items 2 & 4: We would like to formally request a reduction of parking at St. George Senior Housing.

According to parking counts at 3 other CHISPA senior projects in Salinas, the number of cars per unit ranges from 35% to 52%. St. George is designed with 31 spaces for 36 units. The required number of spaces is 36 spaces. Therefore, we are requesting a 14% reduction in the amount of parking spaces required.

Please call me with any questions you have with our request.

Sincerely,
Paul W. Davis AIA
Architect
CA License C-15182
,h
The Paul Davis Partnership, LLP
286 El Dorado Street
Monterey, CA 93940
831-373-2784 Fax: 831-373-7459

Page 2 of 2 ends

GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive
Salinas, California
APN: 261-661-011-000
For:

CRISP A, Inc.
295 Main Street, Suite 100
Salinas, California 93901
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022
1100 Main Street, .,Suite A, Watsonville, California 95076 • (831) 724-5868 CRISP A, Inc.
295 Main Street, Suite 100
Salinas, California 93901
ATTN: Dana Cleary
SUBJECT: GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
APN: 261-661-011-000
Dear Ms. Cleaiy:

Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022
In accordance with your authorization, we have completed a geotechnical investigation for the proposed senior housing apartments at 98 Kip Drive in Salinas, California. This report summarizes the findings, conclusions, and recommendations from our field exploration, laborat01y testing, and engineering analysis. The conclusions and recommendations included herein are based upon applicable standards at the time this repo1t was prepared.

It is a pleasure being associated with you on this project. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office.

Sincerely,
ROCK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

Signed: September 1, 2022
Dusty M. Osburn, P .E.

Senior Engineer
R.C.E. 85113
Distribution: (4) Addressee and via email
(1) Paul W. Davis via email
(1) Andy Hunter via email
1100 Main Street, Suite A, Watsonville, California 95076 • (831) 724-5868 • Email: [email protected]

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ....................................................... 1

1.1 Purpose .......................................................... 1

1.2 Proposed Development .............................................. 1

1.3 Scope of Services .................................................. 1

1.4 Authorization ..................................................... 2

1.5 Exclusions ........................................................ 2 FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM ......... 2 SITE DESCRIPTION .................................................... 2

3.1 Location ......................................................... 2 3 .2 Surface Conditions ................................................. 2

3.3 Subsurface Conditions .............................................. 2 GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS ............................................ 3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............................. 4

5.1 General .......................................................... 4 5 .2 Grading .......................................................... 5

5.2.1 General .................................................... 5

5.2.2 Site Clearing ................................................ 5

5.2.3 Excavating Conditions ........................................ 6

5.2.4 Fill Material ................................................ 6

5.2.5 Fill Placement and Compaction ................................. 6 5 .2.6 Preparation of On-Site Soils .................................... 7

5.2.7 Groundwater Table ........................................... 8

5.2.8 Expansive Soils .............................................. 8

5.2.9 Sulfate Content .............................................. 8

5.2.10 Surface Drainage ............................................. 8

5.2.11 Utility Trenches .............................................. 9

5.3 Foundations ...................................................... 10

5.3.1 General ................................................... 10

5.3.2 Conventional Shallow Foundations ............................. 10

5.4 Settlements ...................................................... 11

5.5 Retaining Structures ............................................... 11

5.5.1 General ................................................... 11

5.5.2 Lateral Earth Pressures ....................................... 11

5.5.3 Backfill ................................................... 12

5.5.4 Backfill Drainage ........................................... 12

5.6 Slabs-on-Grade ................................................... 13

5.7 Preliminaiy Pavement Design ........................................ 14

6. LIMITATIONS ........................................................ 16 REFERENCES ............................................................... 17 APPENDIX A ................................................................ 18 Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 1 ends

Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 1.2
Purpose
The purpose of our investigation is to provide preliminary geotechnical design parameters and recommendations for development of the site. Conclusions and recommendations related to site grading, foundations, slabs-on-grade, and retaining structures are presented herein.

Proposed Development
a. Based on our conversations with you, it is our understanding that the project consists of the construction of a 3 story building with 49 apartment units at the subject site.
b. Anticipated construction consists of standard light frame construction with raised wood or slab-on-grade floors. Exact wall, column, and foundation loads are unavailable, but are expected to be typical of such construction. c. Final grading and foundation plans were unavailable at the time of this report.

It is our understanding that the information obtained during our investigation will be used in the development of a finalized plan set. d. Also anticipated, are the construction of an attendant parking, drainage systems and associated landscaping improvements.

1.3 Scope of Services
The scope of services provided during the course of our investigation included:
a. Review of the referenced geotechnical, geologic, and seismological reports and maps pertinent to the development of the site (available in our files). b. Field exploration consisting of 7 borings, drilled to depths between 6. 5 and

21.5 feet below existing grade in the area of the proposed development. c. Logging and sampling of the borings by our Field Engineer, including the collection of soil samples for laboratory testing.
d. Laboratory testing of soil samples considered representative of subsurface conditions.
e. Geo technical analyses of field and laboratory data. f. Preparation of a report ( 4 copies) presenting our findings, conclusions and recommendations.

Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California

1.4 Authorization
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 2 ends

This investigation, as outlined in our Proposal dated May 13, 2022, was performed in accordance with your written authorization on May 20, 2022.

1.5 Exclusions
Our services on this project are limited to the proposed senior housing apartments.

Our services specifically exclude all existing improvements to the site.

2. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM
Details of the field exploration and laboratory testing are presented in Appendix A.

3. SITE DESCRIPTION
3 .1 Location
The subject project is located at 98 Kip Drive, in Salinas, Monterey County, California. The location is shown on the Location Map, Figure 1. 3 .2 Surface Conditions
The subject site is approximately 2.2 acres in size and rectangular in shape. The west side of the site is developed with an existing church and associated structures. The east side of the parcel is relatively level, is currently clear of all development and vegetated with wild grasses and a tree. Based on our review of the proposed plan, it is our understanding that the parcel will be split into two parcels in association with this project and the proposed apartments will be located on the east undeveloped portion.

3.3 Subsurface Conditions
a. Based on our review of the Geologic Map of the Natividad Quadrangle, Monterey County, California (Reference 5), the site is mapped as Older Surficial Settlements (Qoa). These deposits are described as dissected older alluvium. The results of our field exploration indicate that the subsurface soils present are consistent with the mapped geologic unit. b. Groundwater was not encountered during the course of our field exploration.
c. The subsurface profile generally consists of dark grayish to yellowish brown sandy clay. The sandy clay was observed from the surface to the extent of our borings at 21.5 feet below existing grade. This material is generally moist, firm to hard, and slightly plastic to plastic.
~
ot to Scale REFERENCE 4: Monterey County Parcel Report Web App Iff!gcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.
' 98 Kip Ddve, SaHaas . I

I LOCATION MAP II FIGURE I
Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 3 ends

d. Complete soil profiles are presented on the Logs of Exploratory Borings and the boring locations are shown on the Boring Location Plan in Appendix A.

4. GEOTECHNICAL HAZARDS
a. Potential geotechnical hazards to man made structures include ground shaking, surface rupture, landsliding, liquefaction, lateral spreading, and differential compaction. The potential for each of these to impact the site is discussed below. b. Ground shaking caused by earthquakes is a complex phenomenon. Structural damage can result from the transmission of earthquake vibrations from the ground into the structure. The intensity of an earthquake at any given site depends on many variables including, the proximity of the site to the hypocenter, and the characteristics of the underlying soil and/or rock. The subject site is situated at the approximate latitude of36. 7063 ° and longitude -121.6431 °. The project location (latitude and longitude) were used in conjunction with the American Society of Civil Engineers website (Reference 1) to obtain the seismic design parameters presented in Table 1. All proposed structures at the subject site shall be designed with the corresponding seismic design parameters in accordance with the 2019 California Building Code (Reference 2).

Table 1: 2019 CBC Seismic Design Criteria
Site Seismic Spectral Response Accelerations
Class Design
Category Ss S1 FA Fv SMS SMI Sos SDI
D D 1.917 0.667 1.0 1.7* 1.917 ** 1.278 **
* See ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.8. This value ofFv shall be used only for calculation ofT5• **See ASCE 7-16, Section 11.4.8.
c. Surface rupture usually occurs along lines of previous faulting. Based on our review of the County of Monterey Geologic Hazards Map (Reference 3 ), no faults are shown to cross the property. Therefore, the potential for surface rupture should be considered low.
d. Landslides are generally mass movements ofloose rock and soil, both dry and water saturated, and usually gravity driven. Based on our review of the County of Monterey Geologic Hazards Map (Reference 3), the subject parcel is mapped in an area oflow susceptibility for landslides. In addition, the subject site is relatively level, therefore, the potential for landsliding to occur across the site and cause damage to structures should be considered low.

Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 4 ends

Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
e. Liquefaction, lateral spreading, and differential compaction tend to occur in loose, unconsolidated, noncohesive soils with shallow groundwater. Based on our review of County of Monterey Geologic Hazards Map (Reference 3) the site is mapped in an area oflow susceptibility for liquefaction. Our field observations confirm that the potential for these hazards to occur should be considered low, due to the presence of relatively dense, cohesive soils and the lack of a shallow groundwater table.

5. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 General
a. Based on the results of our investigation, it is our opinion that from the geotechnical standpoint, the subject site will be suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations presented herein are implemented during grading and construction.
b. It is our opinion that the subject site will be suitable for the support of the proposed structure on a foundation system composed of conventional, shallow, continuous and pad footings. Recommendations for this foundation system are provided in Section 5.3, Foundations. c. Site preparation, consisting of over excavation and recompaction of the native subgrade will be required prior to placement of shallow foundations, slabs-on-grade, and pavements. See Section 5.2.6 for Preparation of On-Site Soils recommendations.
d. At the time we prepared this report, grading and foundation plans had not been finalized. We request an opportunity to review these plans during the design stages to determine if supplemental recommendations will be necessary.
e. The design recommendations of this report must be reviewed during the grading phase when subsurface conditions in the excavations become exposed.
f. Field observation and testing must be provided by a representative of Rock Solid Engineering, Inc., to enable them to form an opinion regarding the adequacy of the site preparation, and the extent to which the earthwork is performed in accordance with the geotechnical conditions present, the requirements of the regulating agencies, the project specifications and the recommendations presented in this report. Any earthwork performed in connection with the subject project without the full knowledge of, and not under the direct observation of Rock Solid Engineering, Inc., the Geotechnical Consultant, will render the recommendations of this report invalid.

Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 5 ends

g. The Geotechnical Consultant should be notified at least five (5) working days prior to any site clearing or other earthwork operations on the subject project in order to observe the stripping and disposal of unsuitable materials and to ensure coordination with the grading contractor. During this period, a preconstruction conference should be held on the site to discuss project specifications, observation/testing requirements and responsibilities, and scheduling. This conference should include at least the Grading Contractor, the Architect, and the Geotechnical Consultant.

5.2 Grading

5.2.1 General
All grading and earthwork should be performed in accordance with the recommendations presented herein and the requirements of the regulating agencies.

5.2.2 Site Clearing
a. Prior to grading, the areas to be developed for struch1res, pavements and other improvements, should be stripped of any vegetation and cleared of any surface or subsurface obstructions, including any existing foundations, utility lines, basements, septic tanks, pavements, stockpiled fills, and miscellaneous debris.
b. All pipelines encountered during grading should be relocated as necessary to be completely removed from construction areas or be capped and plugged according to applicable code requirements. c. Any wells encountered shall be capped in accordance with the local health department requirements. The strength of the cap shall be at least equal to the adjacent soil and shall not be located within 5 feet of any structural element.
d. Surface vegetation and organically contaminated topsoil should be removed from areas to be graded. The required depth of stripping will vary with the time of year the work is done and must be observed by the Geotechnical Consultant. It is generally anticipated that the required depth of stripping will be 6 to 12 inches.
e. Holes resulting from the removal of buried obstructions that extend below finished site grades should be backfilled with compacted engineered fill per Section 5.2.5.

Geoteclmical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 6 ends

5.2.3 Excavating Conditions
a. We anticipate that excavation of the on-site soils may be accomplished with standard earthmoving and trenching equipment. b. Groundwater was not encountered during the course of our field exploration is not expected to present a problem during construction. c. Although not anticipated, any excavations adjacent to existing structures should be reviewed, and recommendations obtained to prevent undermining or distress to these structures.

5.2.4 Fill Material
a. The on-site soils may be used as compacted fill.
b. All soils, both on-site and imported, to be used as fill, should contain less than 3% organics and be free of debris and cobbles over 3 inches in maximum dimension.
c. Any imported soil to be used as engineered fill shall meet the following requirements:
(i) free of organics, debris and other deleterious materials (ii) be granular (sandy) in nature and have sufficient fines to allow for excavation of the foundation trenches.
(iii) free of rock and cobbles in excess of 3 inches
(iv) have an expansion potential not greater than low (EI<20) (v) have a soluble sulfate content less than 150 ppm
d. Imported fill material should be approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to importing. The Geotechnical Consultant should be notified not less than 5 working days in advance of placing any fill or base course material proposed for import. Each proposed source of import material should be sampled, tested and approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to delivery of any soils imported for use on the site.

5.2.5 Fill Placement and Compaction
a. Any fill or backfill required should be placed in accordance with the recommendations presented below.
b. Material to be compacted or reworked should be moisture conditioned or dried to achieve near-optimum conditions, and compacted to achieve the following minimum relative compaction:
(a) All fill and compacted building subgrade: 90%
Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
(b)
(c)
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 7 ends

Upper 6 inches of sub grade in pavement/drive areas: 95% Baserock and subbase: 95%.
c. The placement moisture content of imported material should be evaluated prior to grading.
d. The relative compaction and required moisture content shall be based on the maximum d1y density and optimum moisture content obtained in accordance with ASTM Dl557.
e. The in-place dry density and moisture content of the compacted fill shall be tested in accordance with ASTM D8167 /D8167M-18 or ASTM D6938.
f. The number and frequency of field tests required will be based on applicable county standards and at the discretion of the Geo technical Consultant. As a minimum standard every 1 vertical foot of engineered fill placed within a building pad area, and every 2 vertical feet in all other areas shall be tested, unless specified otherwise by a Rock Solid Engineering, Inc. representative.
g. Fill should be compacted by mechanical means in uniform horizontal loose lifts not exceeding 8 inches in thickness.
h. All fill should be placed and all grading performed in accordance with applicable codes and the requirements of the regulating agency.

5.2.6 Preparation of On-Site Soils
a. Laboratory consolidation test results indicate that the native, near surface soils are moderately compressible under the anticipated loads and moderately collapsible upon wetting. Site preparation, consisting of over excavation and recompaction of the native sub grade will be required prior to placement of shallow foundations, slabs-on-grade, and pavements.
b. The native subgrade beneath shallow foundations should be reworked to a depth sufficient to provide a zone of compacted fill extending at least 3 feet below the bottom of all footings. c. The native subgrade beneath slabs-on-grade floors should be reworked to a depth sufficient to provide a zone of compacted fill extending at least 12 inches below the bottom of the capillary break. d. The native subgrade beneath pavements should be reworked to a depth sufficient to provide a zone of compacted fill extending at least 12 inches below the bottom of aggregate base coarse.

Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 8 ends

e. The zone of compacted fill must extend a minimum of 3 feet laterally beyond all shallow foundations and 2 feet beyond pavements. f. A representative of our firm shall observe the bottom of the excavation once the required depth of overexcavation has been achieved to verify suitability. Prior to replacing the excavated soil, the exposed surface should be scarified to a depth of 6 to 8 inches, moisture conditioned, and compacted.
g. The depths of reworking required are subject to review by the Geotechnical Consultant during grading when subsurface conditions become exposed.

5.2.7 Groundwater Table
Groundwater was not encountered during the course of our investigation, and is not expected to interfere with the proposed construction.

5.2.8 Expansive Soils
Our laboratory testing shows that the expansion index of the near surface soils are equal to 43, this indicates that the expansion potential of the near surface soils should be considered low.

The California Building Code (Section 1803.5.3) defines soils with an Expansion Index greater than 20 to be expansive. The foundation and grading recommendations presented herein are intended to be in accordance with CBC Section 1808.6.

5.2.9 Sulfate Content
The results of our laboratory testing indicate that the soluble sulfate content of the on-site soils likely to come into contact with concrete is below the 150 ppm generally considered to constitute an adverse sulfate condition. Type II cement is therefore considered adequate for use in concrete in contact with the on-site soils.

5.2.10 Surface Drainage
a. Pad drainage should be designed to collect and direct surface water away from structures to approved drainage facilities. Where soil is adjacent to foundations, a minimum gradient of 5 percent for a distance of no less than 10 feet measured perpendicularly from the wall face, should be maintained and drainage should be directed toward approved swales or drainage facilities. If 10 horizontal feet can not be satisfied due to lot lines or physical constraints, the drainage shall be designed in accordance with the requirements of Section 1804.4 of the 2019 California Building Code.

Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 9 ends

b. Swales and impervious surfaces shall be sloped a minimum of 2 percent towards an approved drainage inlet or discharge point or as specified by the Project Civil Engineer.
c. All roof eaves should be guttered with downspouts provided. The downspouts shall discharge to either splash blocks or solid pipe to carry the storm water away from the stmcture to reduce the possibility of soil saturation and erosion. It may be necessary to use swales or pipes to direct the mnoff to an appropriate drainage system or discharge location.
d. We recommend that infiltration facilities be located at least 10 feet from stmctures.
e. Drainage patterns approved at the time of constmction should be maintained throughout the life of the stmctures. The building and surface drainage facilities must not be altered nor any grading, filling, or excavation conducted in the area without prior review by the Geotechnical Consultant.
f. Irrigation activities at the site should be controlled and reasonable.

Planter areas should not be sited adjacent to walls without implementing approved measures to contain irrigation water and prevent it from seeping into walls and under foundations and slabs on-grade. Large trees should be planted a minimum distance of ½ their mature height away from the foundation.

5.2.11 Utility Trenches
a. Bedding material may consist of sand with SE not less than 20 which may then be jetted, unless local jurisdictional requirements govern. b. Existing on-site soils may be utilized for trench backfill, provided they are free of organic material and rocks over 6 inches in diameter. c. If sand is used, a 3 foot concrete plug should be placed in each trench where it passes under the exterior footings.
d. Backfill of all exterior and interior trenches should be placed in thin lifts and mechanically compacted to achieve a relative compaction of not less than 95% in paved areas and 90% in other areas per ASTM D-1557. Care should be taken not to damage utility lines. e. Utility trenches that are parallel to the sides of a building should be placed so that they do not extend below a line sloping down and away at an inclination of 2: 1 (H:V) from the bottom outside edge of all footings.

Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 10 ends

f. Trenches should be capped with 1.5± feet of impermeable material.

Import material must be approved by the Geotechnical Consultant prior to its use.
g. Trenches must be shored as required by the local regulatory agency, the State Of California Division of Industrial Safety Construction Safety Orders, and Federal OSHA requirements.

5.3 Foundations

5.3.1 General
a. It is our opinion that the subject site will be suitable for the support of the proposed structure on a foundation system composed of conventional, shallow, continuous and pad footings.
b. At the time we prepared this report, grading and foundation plans had not been finalized. We request an opportunity to review these plans during the design stages to determine if supplemental
recommendations will be necessary.

5.3.2 Conventional Shallow Foundations
a. Footing widths should be based on the allowable bearing values but not less than 12 inches for 1 story, 15 inches for 2 story, 18 inches for 3 story structures.
b. The minimum recommended depth of embedment is 24 inches for all footings. Should local building codes require deeper embedment of the footings or wider footings the codes must apply. c. Footing excavations must be checked by the Geotechnical Consultant before steel is placed and concrete is poured to insure bedding into proper material. Excavations should be thoroughly wetted down just prior to pouring concrete.
d. The allowable bearing capacity shall not exceed 2,000 psf. e. The allowable bearing capacity values above may be increased by one-third in the case of short duration loads, such as those induced by wind or seismic forces.
f. In the event that footings are founded in structural fill consisting of imported soil, the recommended allowable bearing capacity may need to be re-evaluated.

Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 11 ends

Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
5 .4 Settlements
Total and differential settlements beneath foundation elements are expected to be within tolerable limits. Vertical movements are not expected to exceed 1 inch.

Differential movements are expected to be within the normal range(½ inch) for the anticipated loads and spacings. These preliminary estimates should be reviewed by the Geotechnical Consultant when foundation plans for the proposed structures become available.

5.5 Retaining Structures

5.5.1 General
Retaining walls may be founded on conventional shallow footings.

Recommendations for this foundation system are provided in Section 5.3, Foundations.

5.5.2 Lateral Earth Pressures
a.

I
b.

The lateral earth pressures presented in Table 2 are recommended for the design of retaining structures with a gravel backdrain and backfill soils of expansivity not higher than medium. Should the slope behind the retaining walls be other than level or 3: 1 (H: V), supplemental design criteria will be provided for the active earth or at-rest pressures for the particular slope angle.

Table 2: Lateral Earth Pressures I
Soil Pressure (psf/ft)
Type Soil
Profile Unrestrained Rigidly
Wall Supported Wall
Active Pressure Level 35 -
3:1 55 -
At-Rest Pressure Level -76
3:1 -106
Passive Pressure* Level 390 195
*Neglect upper 1' 3:1 270 135
The friction factor between rough concrete and the native, near surface sandy clay is 0.35.

Where both friction and the passive resistance are utilized for sliding resistance, either of the values indicated should be reduced by one third.

Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 12 ends

d. When required by the code, lateral load due to earthquakes may be calculated as 17xH2 acting at 0.6H above the base of the wall. e. These are ultimate values, no factor of safety has been applied. f. Although not anticipated, pressure due to any surcharge loads from adjacent footings, traffic, etc., should be analyzed separately.

Pressures due to these loading configurations can be supplied upon receipt of the appropriate plans and loads.

5.5.3 Backfill
a. Backfill should be placed under engineering control. b. It is recommended that granular, or relatively low expans1v1ty, backfill be utilized, for a width equal to approximately 1/3 x wall height, and not less than 2 feet, subject to review during construction. c. The granular backfill should be capped with at least 12 inches of relatively impe1meable material.
d. Backfill should be compacted to achieve a minimum 90 percent relative compaction, the compaction standard being obtained in accordance with ASTM D-1557.
e. Precautions should be taken to ensure that heavy compaction equipment is not used immediately adjacent to walls, so as to prevent undue pressures against, and movement of, the walls.
f. The use of water-stops/impermeable barriers and appropriate waterproofing should be considered for any basement construction, and for building walls which retain earth.

5.5.4 Backfill Drainage
a. Backdrains should consist of a minimum 4-inch diameter, perforated, SDR 35 pipe or equivalent, embedded in permeable material meeting the State of California Standard Specification Section 68-2.02F(3), Class 2, or equivalent. A layer of Mirafi 140N Filter Fabric, or equivalent, shall be placed over the permeable material and the remaining 12 inches shall be capped with compacted native soil. The pipe should be approximately 4 inches above the trench bottom with a gradient of at least 1 % being provided to the pipe and trench bottom, discharging to an approved location. See Figure 2 for Retaining Wall Backdrain Configuration.
. .
.. ' ...
1-----i -.
12 INCHES CAP OF

COMPACTED SOIL INISHED GRADE
. < : · LASS 2 PERMEABLE MATERIAL
1-----1 _. : ~~ · ... '· ·.. 1TH SPECIFIED FILTER FABRIC COVERING · .:_ ...... ·· i. :. TOP OF PERMEABLE MATERIAL.
1-----1: ·. ~~ ~. -~ ... £ ••
. · . . .. . . . . .
··: ,l,. ~· . £ • ~ 1'.:
1-----1, . ·L. ,,,,
. · ... > .· R WALLS ENCLOSING INTERIOR SPACES, THE
1-------f
~--~----<
••
4 .• : , '. •• • ALL SHALL BE DAMPPROOFED OR WATERPROOFED , .z.. · , . : ··. N ACCORDANCE WITH THE CBC. WATERPROOFING IS • ••• 4.". ·: =-~-' :.: BEYOND THE SCOPE OF THIS REPORT. ... . .
... :~ .·· , -: . INCH RIGID PERFORATED SOR 35 PIPE
.,·. R APPROVED EQUIVALENT
. PERFORATIONS DOWN
12 INCHES
SLOPE PIPE MIN 1 % TO OUTLET
INCHES

BOTTOM OF PIPE TO BE LOCATED
BELOW FINISHED SLAB ELEVATION.
~CK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

RETAINING WALL

BACKDRAIN CONFIGURATION
FIGURE
2 Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 13 ends

b. Should the proposed wall construction consist of steel I-beams with wood or concrete lagging and spacers are utilized between lagging courses, the filter fabric shall also be placed between the wall and permeable material.
c. Perforations in backdrains are recommended as follows: 3/8-inch diameter, in 2 rows at the ends of a 120 degree arc, at 3-inch centers in each row, staggered between rows, placed downward.
d. Backdrains placed behind retaining walls should be approved by the Geo technical Consultant prior to the placement of backfill. e. An unobstructed outlet should be provided at the lower end of each segment of backdrain. The outlet should consist of an unperforated pipe of the same diameter, connected to the perforated pipe and extended to a protected outlet at a lower elevation on a continuous gradient of at least 1 %.
f. When terrace retaining walls are proposed, the upper retaining wall should have a backdrain which extends below the elevation of the top of the lower retaining wall backdrain. This will prevent spring effects and seepage between the terraced walls.
g. We recommend vertical cleanouts be provided for the backdrain.

Cleanout locations should be shown on the drainage plan.

5.6 Slabs-on-Grade
a. Concrete floor slabs may be founded on compacted engineered fill per the recommendations in Section 5.2.6. The subgrade should be proof-rolled just prior to construction to provide a firm, relatively unyielding surface, especially if the surface has been loosened by the passage of construction traffic.
b. It is important that the subgrade soils be thoroughly saturated for 24 to 48 hours prior to the time the concrete is poured. For compacted engineered fill with a low expansion potential, the subgrade should be presoaked 4 percentage points above optimum to a depth of 1.0 feet. c. The slab-on-grade section should incorporate a minimum 4 inch capillary break consisting of 3/4 inch, clean, crushed rock, or approved equivalent.

Class II baserock is not recommended. Structural considerations may govern the thickness of the capillary break.

Geotechnical Investigation Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 14 ends

Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California

5.7 d. Where moisture sensitive floor coverings are anticipated or vapor transmission may be a problem, a 15 mil waterproof membrane should be placed between the floor slab and the capillary break in order to reduce moisture condensation under the flam-coverings. Refer to ACI 302.2R-06 for additional criteria.
e. We have provided generalized recommendations associated with standard construction practices for the reduction of moisture transmission through concrete slab-on-grade floors. We are not moisture-proofing specialists. A waterproofing or moisture proofing expert should be consulted for project specific moisture protection recommendations.
f. Slab thiclmess, reinforcement, and doweling should be determined by the Project Structural Engineer, based on the design live and dead loads, including vehicles.

Preliminary Pavement Design
a. For the pavement design and planning, an R-value test was completed for a sample of the near surface soils. The results of the R-value tests at equilibrium is 15.
b. The subgrade material beneath pavements may differ from that sampled during our investigation. Therefore, these preliminary pavement sections are subject to verification after rough grading and revision if necessary based on additional R-value tests and revised traffic indices.
c. We have calculated several pavement sections options based on the tested R values and Traffic Indices ranging from 5 to 7. We have also provided the baserock thiclmess without geofabric reinforcement and with Mirafi RS3 80i geofabric.

Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 15 ends

PRELIMINARY PAVEMENT SECTIONS
I
Class II Baserock (inches)
Traffic A/C without with Mirafi
R-Value Index (inches) reinforcement RS380i
5 3 8 6
15 6 3.5 10.5 6.5
7 4 13 8
d. Use only quality materials of the type and minimum thickness specified. All baserock must meet Caltrans Standard Specification 26-1.02B for Class II Aggregate Base.
e. Compact the base and subgrade uniformly to a minimum relative dry density of95%.
g. Asphalt concrete should be placed only during periods of fair weather when the ambient air temperature is within prescribed limits. h. Provide sufficient gradient to prevent ponding of water.

1. Maintenance should be undertaken on a routine basis.

Geotechni cal lnvestigati on
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California

6. LIMITATIONS
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 16 ends

a. Our investigation was performed in accordance with the usual and current standards of the profession, as they relate to this and similar localities. No other wan-anty, expressed or implied, is provided as to the conclusions and professional advice presented in this report.
b. The samples taken and tested, and the observations made, are considered to be representative of the site; however, soil and geologic conditions can vary significantly between sample locations.
c. As in most projects, conditions revealed during construction excavation may be at variance with preliminary findings. If this occurs, the changed conditions must be evaluated by the Project Geotechnical Consultant, and revised recommendations be provided as required.
d. This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the Owner, or of his Representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the Architect and Engineer for the project and incorporated into the plans, and that it is ensured that the Contractor and Subcontractors implement such recommendations in the field. e. This firm does not practice or consult in the field of safety engineering. We do not direct the Contractor's operations, and we are not responsible for other than our own personnel on the site; therefore, the safety of others is the responsibility of the Contractor. The Contractor should notify the Owner if he considers any of the recommended actions presented herein to be unsafe.
f. The findings of this report are considered valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a site can occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural events or to human activities on this or adjacent sites. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate codes and standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. g. Accordingly, this report may become invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and revision as changed conditions are identified.

Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California

REFERENCES
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022

Page 17 ends

1. American Society of Civil Engineers, ASCE 7 Hazards Report, Site Utilized July 12, 2022. https :/ /www .asce7hazardtoo 1. on line/

2. California Building Standards Commission, July 2019, 2019 California Building Code, California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 2, Effective January 1, 2020.

3. County of Monterey, Geologic Hazards Map, Site Utilized August 8, 2022. https://montereyco.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer

4. County of Monterey, Parcel Repo1t Web App, Site Utilized July 12, 2022. https ://maps. co. monterey. ca. us/wab/parcelreportwebapp/.

5. Dibblee, T.W. and Minch, J.A., 2007, Geologic Map of the Natividad Quadrangle, Monterey County, California, Dibblee Geological Foundation, Dibblee Foundation Map DF-354, Scale:
1:24,000.

6. The Paul Davis Partnership, Architects and Plam1ers, CRISP A Senior Housing Apartments, E. Alvin Drive, Salinas, CA, APN: 261-661-011, Project Number: 2211, Sheets Al .1 and A2. l, Dated 07/22/2022.

APPENDIX A

FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING PROGRAM
• Field Exploration Procedures Page A-1
. Laboratory Testing Procedures Page A-2
. Boring Location Plan Figure A-1
. Key to Logs Figure A-2
• Logs of Exploratory Borings Figures A-3 thru A-9
• Summary of Laboratory Test Results Figures A-10.1 & A-10.2 • Direct Shear Test Results Figure A-11
. Consolidation Test Results Figure A-12 & A-13
. R-Value Test Results Figure A-14
Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California

FIELD EXPLORATION PROCEDURES
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022
Page A-1
A-1. Subsurface conditions were explored by drilling 7 borings to depths between 6.5 and 21.5 feet below existing grade. The borings were advanced with a truck mounted drill rig equipped with 6 inch solid stem augers. The approximate locations of the borings are shown on the Boring Location Plan, Figure A-1. The Key to Logs, Figure A-2, gives definitions of the terms used in the Logs of Exploratory Borings. The Logs of Exploratory Borings are presented in Figures A-3 through A-9.

A-2. Drilling of the borings was observed by our Field Engineer who logged the soils and obtained bulk and relatively undisturbed samples for classification and laboratory testing. The soils were classified, based on field observations and laboratory testing, in accordance with Unified Soil Classification System.

A-3. Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained by means of a drive sampler. The hammer weight and drop being 140 pounds and 30 inches, respectively. The number of"Blows/Foot" required to drive samplers are indicated on the logs.

A-4. Exploratory borings were located in the field by measuring from known landmarks. The locations, as shown, are therefore within the accuracy of such a measurement.

A-5. Groundwater was not encountered during the course of our field exploration.

Geotechni cal Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California

LABO RA TORY TESTING PROCEDURES
A-6. Classification
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022
Page A-2
Soils were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Moisture content and in-situ density determinations were made from relatively undisturbed soil samples. The results are presented in the Logs of Exploratory Borings and in the Summary of Laboratory Test Results, Figures A-10.1 and A-10.2.

A-7. Direct Shear
Direct shear strength tests were performed on representative samples of the on-site soils in accordance with laboratory test standard ASTM D 3080-98. Samples were relatively undisturbed, or remolded as specified. To simulate possible adverse field conditions, the samples were saturated prior to testing unless otherwise noted. A saturating device was used which permitted the samples to absorb moisture while preventing volume change. The direct shear test results are presented in Figure A-11.

A-8. Consolidation
Consolidation tests were performed on representative, relatively undisturbed samples of the underlying soils to determine compressibility characteristics. The samples were saturated during the tests to simulate possible adverse field conditions. The test results are presented in Figures A-12 and A-13.

A-9. Expansion Index
Expansion tests were performed on representative, remolded samples of the on-site soils in accordance with laboratory test standard ASTM D 4829-11. The test results are presented in Figure A-10.1.

A-10. Amount of Materials in Soil Finer than the No. 200 Sieve Determination of the amount of materials in the soil finer than the No. 200 sieve analyses were performed on samples considered representative of the on-site soils. The laboratory test was performed in accordance with ASTM: D 1140. The test results are presented in Figure A-10.1.

A-11. Soluble Sulfates
The soluble sulfate content was determined for samples considered representative of the on site soils likely to come in contact with concrete in accordance with test method California 417. The test results are presented in Figure A-10.1.

Geotechnical Investigation
Proposed Senior Housing Apartments
98 Kip Drive, Salinas, California
A-12. R-Value
Project No. 22030
August 29, 2022
Page A-3
The resistance (R) value was determined for a sample considered representative of the native soils anticipated to be used as pavement subgrade in accordance with ASTM D-2844. The test result is presented in Figure A-14.
0 r ALVIN DRIVr
f00fP
0P05f 17 5f NI0
H0U51Na PR0JfCr
I ,
I • . ,
' I •
®B-1
I'\\ \ ~-----itr;:;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;-::;;;-;;;-;;;;;;;;:~~;;;;;-;--;;:---~-~ l?A5f MPP fR0M PR0P05fl7 51-it P~Ml, PRf PARfl7 l?Y
1rlf PAlt 17AVl5 PARfNfR5HIP, 17A1tl7 05{ 14{ 2_022,
(
ft?gcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

BORING LOCATION PLAN FIGURE
11--------------------l
98 Kip Drive, Salinas A-I

KEY TO LOGS

UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM
GROUP

PRIMARY DIVISIONS SYMBOL SECONDARY DIVISIONS
CLEAN GRAVELS GW Well graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines

GRAVELS
More than half of (Less than 5% fines) GP Poorly graded gravels, gravel-sand mixtures, little or no fines the coarse fraction
COARSE is larger than the GM Silty gravels, gravel-sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines GRAVEL GRAINED No. 4 sieve SOILS

WITH FINES
GC Clayey gravels, gravel-sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines More than half of
the material is CLEAN SANDS SW Well graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines larger than the SANDS (Less than 5% fines)
No. 200 sieve More than half of SP Poorly graded sands, gravelly sands, little or no fines the coarse fraction
is smaller than the SAND SM Silty sands, sand-silt mixtures, non-plastic fines No. 4 sieve WITH FINES SC Clayey sands, sand-clay mixtures, plastic fines ML Inorganic silts and very fine sands, silty or clayey fine sands or clayey silts with slight plasticity
FINE SIL TS AND CLAYS CL Inorganic clays oflow to medium plasticity, gravelly clays, GRAINED Liquid limit less than 50 sandy clays, silty clays, lean clays SOILS OL Organic silts and organic silty clays oflow plasticity More than half of Inorganic silts, micaceous or diatomacaceous fine sandy or the material is MH silty soils, elastic silts
smaller than the SIL TS AND CLAYS
No. 200 sieve Liquid limit greater than 50 CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity, fat clays OH Organic clays of medium to high plasticity, organic silts HIGHLY ORGANIC SOILS Pt Peat and other highly organic soils

GRAIN SIZE LIMITS

SAND GRAVEL

SILT AND CLAY

MEDIUM I I

COBBLES BOULDERS

FINE COARSE FINE COARSE
No. 200 No. 40 No. 10 No. 4 3/4 in. 3 in. 12 in.
us STANDARD SIEVE SIZE

RELATIVE DENSITY CONSISTENCY MOISTURE CONDITION
SAND AND GRAVEL BLOWS/FT* SILT AND CLAY BLOWS/FT* DRY
VERY LOOSE 0-4 VERY SOFT 0-2 DAMP
LOOSE 4-10 SOFT 2-4 MOIST
MEDIUM DENSE 10-30 FIRM 4-8 WET
DENSE 30-50 STIFF 8 -16
VERY DENSE OVER50 VERY STIFF 16 -32
HARD OVER32
• Number of blows of 140 pound hammer falling 30 inches to drive a 2 inch O.D. (I 3/8 inch I.D.) split spoon (ASTM D-1586).

I
lff?EcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC. II Fl~~E I
Project No.: 22030
Project: 98 Kip Drive
Salinas, California
Date:

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
Boring: Bl
Location: Southwest Corner of Site
Elevation:

Method of Drilling: Truck Mounted Drill Rig
Logged By:

June 17, 2022
JDB 6 in. Solid Stem Auger, 140 lb. Hammer
~
$
-B 0,
<U
Ci
5 10
15 20
-
25 "Cl
<U <U
0,
--e ;;,-.,
""' f-< .E "3 "' ·s ~ P'.l
f/l i::
:::i
i/12" DIA
lLJ Sample ~

2.5" DIA
Sample
DJ
Terzaghi Split ~
Spoon Sample
Description
Static Water
Table
Bulk
Sample
CL \X Dark Grayish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff, Slightly 30 1-r--oc--..Plastic. Fine Grained Sand.
l ~ Material Consistent. Fine to Coarse Grained Sand. 22

6.4 -
\Z Material Consistent. Hard. Lighter Brown. Clay Content _ Increases.

TV Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff, Medium 1--'-+A--"Plastic to Plastic. Fine Grained Sand. Black Lenses. -
\ Z Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff, Plastic. _ Fine Grained Sand.

V Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Stiff, Plastic. Fine /\ Grained Sand.

Boring Terminated @ 21.5 Feet
Groundwater Not Encountered
Boring Backfilled With Cuttings

9.6 39 123.6 11.8 138.2
22 18.5
22 101.9 23.7 126.1
15 32.5
l.f!EcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

Direct
Shear
Q
"' 8
Ll
0 -e-
Sulfate
55% Fines
II FI~~E I
Project No.: 22030
Project: 98 Kip Drive
Salinas, California
Date: June 17, 2022

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
Boring: B2
Location: Northwest Corner of Site
Elevation:

Method of Drilling: Truck Mounted Drill Rig
Logged By: JOB 6 in. Solid Stem Auger, 140 lb. Hammer
,-_
~
"%
<lJ
Q
5 15
20 -
-
25 •
'Cl
<lJ <lJ

0. ..D
>-. ...

E-B
(/}
·o :.a
Cl) ,::
;:::i
~
~
3 O'.l
l7i 2"DIA
liJ Sample

2.5" DIA
Sample
[D
Terzaghi Split ~
Spoon Sample
Descriotion
Static Water
Table
Bulk
Sample
CL \ 8 Dark Grayish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Medium Plastic. Fine Grained Sand.
rr V Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Medium
..... 11.._../\__,,Plastic. Fine to Coarse Grained Sand. ~
0 iii
-<lJ
~
86 115.8 5.4 122.0
71 6.4
CL T x Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Slighly Plastic. 64 17.1 \
~ Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Plastic. Fine ~ to Medium Grained Sand.
rrx..-Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Plastic.

I--'--" I_ Fine Grained Sand.
x Material Consistent. Very Stiff.

Boring Terminated @ 21.5 Feet
Groundwater Not Encountered
Boring Backfilled With Cuttings
55 116.5 16.6 135.9
33 19.7
17 28.7
J!!EcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

Direct
Shear
C
(/}
-8
u
0 -e-
Consolidation
Sulfate
66% Fines

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
Project No.: 22030 Boring:

Project: 98 Kip Drive
Salinas, California
Location:

Elevation:

Date: Method of Drilling:

Logged By:

June 17, 2022
JDB
g
<1.)

0. ?' ,5

0. ·o <1.)
Q (/]
CL
5 -
-
-
-
-
-
[Z] 2" DIA
[SJ

2.5" DIA
0 Bulk
"Cl Sample Sample Sample <1.)
..0 .... .-"<
E ::l Cl)
P'.1 [D Terzaghi Split ~ Static Water :a
<:1 Spoon Sample Table :=i
Description
\ ½ Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Plastic.
1-r-lc---,1Fine to Coarse Grained Sand. Holes, Roots.

X Material Consistent. __._ _ _,,
\ -6 Material Consistent. Micaceous.
.----'
18 Olive Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff, Plastic.

Fine to Coarse Grained Sand. Blocky.
58 15
505"
13 506"
27 X
Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Firm, Medium Plastic 7 Fine Grained Sand.

Boring Terminated@ 16.5 Feet
Groundwater Not Encountered
Boring Backfilled With Cuttings
Jl!EcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

B3
North of Proposed Courtyard
Truck Mounted Drill Rig
6 in. Solid Stem Auger, 140 lb. Hammer
117.3 6.4

7.5 120.8 11.8

17.2 22.8
124.8
135.1
Direct
Shear
0 -e-
51 % Fines

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
Project No.: 22030 Boring:

Project: 98 Kip Drive
Salinas, California
Location:

Elevation:

Date: Method of Drilling:

Logged By:

June 17, 2022
JDB
~ <l)
:S 0. >,
t
f-<
·o <l)
Q Ul
CL
5 10
-
15 ·
-
-
-
-
-
25 •
"O
<l)
-e .-'<
B :3 Cf)
:; 0'.1
i::
;:::i
-
f712" DIA
liJ Sample [SJ

2.5" DIA
Sample
DJ
Terzaghi Split ~
Spoon Sample
Descriotion
Static Water
Table
Bulk
Sample
\
~ Dark Grayish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Medium 48 [X Plastic. Fine to Coarse Grained Sand.
llxf--Olive Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff, Medium Plastic 29 I-'--+ !__,,Fine to Coarse Grained Sand. Arkosic.
.....___ X Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Slightly Plastic. 506" Fine to Coarse Grained Sand.

T
V Yellowish Brown and White Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard,
.,_._..,./\_Plastic. Fine to Medium Grained Sand. White Lenses. i\/ Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Stiff, Medium
1/\ Plastic. Fine Grained Sand.

Boring Terminated@ 16.5 Feet
Groundwater Not Encountered
Boring Backfilled With Cuttings
36 11
Jl!EcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

B4
South of Proposed Courtyard
Truck Mounted Drill Rig
6 in. Solid Stem Auger, 140 lb. Hammer
105.1
108.3

6.2 22.6

9.6 8.0

17.4 21.8
C
(.)
8 .€
Cf)
f
Q .....
<l)
~
111.6
117.0
Direct
Shear
C
Cf)
8 (.)
0 -e-
58% Fines
E.I.=43
Sulfate

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
Project No.: 22030 Boring:

Project: 98 Kip Drive
Salinas, California
Location:

Elevation:

Date: Method of Drilling:

Logged By:

June 17, 2022
JDB
~ <l)
:S 0.
?' ~ ·a <l)
Q (/)
-
CL -
-
-
"Cl
<l)
.n ,...
~ B
ti) ;:l
:.s i:o
Cl
:::i
f712" DIA
lLJ Sample [SJ

2.5" DIA
Sample
DJ
Terzaghi Split ~
Spoon Sample
Description
I Abandoned Pipe at Surface.

Static Water
Table
Bulk
Sample
\8 Dark Grayish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff,
Slightly Plastic. Fine to Medium Grained Sand. Mottled. rr X Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff, Medium 1-l-'-f-I___,, Plastic. Fine Grained Sand.

B5
Southeast Corner of Site
Truck Mounted Drill Rig
6 in. Solid Stem Auger, 140 lb. Hammer
Direct
Shear
Q
ti)
8 (.)
0 -e-
27 107.8 8.4 116.9 530 21 Consolidation
17 11.9
5 -
-T )< Material Consistent. Very Stiff. Fine to Coarse Grained Sand. 32 15.3 -
-
-
10-
-
-
-
15 -
_ MH
-
-
20 -
-
.
25 -
\8 Olive Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Plastic. Fine
~ Grained Sand. Black Blocky.

KJ Olive Brown Sandy SILT. Moist, Stiff, Medium
1/\ Plastic. Fine Grained Sand.

Boring Terminated@ 16.5 Feet
Groundwater Not Encountered
Boring Backfilled With Cuttings
47 104.6 22.6 128.3
13 21.8
}l!gcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
Project No.: 22030
Project: 98 Kip Drive
Salinas, California
Boring:

Location:

Elevation:

Date: June 17, 2022
JDB
Method of Drilling:

Logged By:
~ <l.)
$ 0. ;,..
t
f-
·o <l.)
Q [/]
-CL
-
-
5 -
-
-
IO -
-
-
-
15 -
-
-
-
-
20 -
-
-
-
-
25 •
I
"O
<l.)
..0 ,_..
~ B
U) ::>
~ i::o
~
::J
~
~
X
T X
i712" DIA
liJ Sample [SJ
DJ
Terzaghi Split
Spoon Sample

2.5" DIA
Sample
~
Description
Static Water
Table
Bulk
Sample
Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Hard, Slightly Plastic. Fine
to Coarse Grained Sand.

Material Consistent. Yellowish Brown.

Material Consisten. Very Stiff.

T
V Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff, Plastic. 1-L---+J\--'IFine Grained Sand.
~ Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff,
1/\ Plastic. Fine Grained Sand.

Boring Terminated@ 16.5 Feet
Groundwater Not Encountered
Boring Backfilled With Cuttings
U)
;S
0 2i5
20 506"
57 22
20 27
JllEcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

B6
Northeast Corner of Site
Truck Mounted Drill Rig
6 in. Solid Stem Auger, 140 lb. Hammer
~
Q ~ Q Direct
0 E
0 Shear
U)
8 8 ::>
~ blJ ~
0 _q c
<l.)
U) 0 ·;;; § ~ ._§
~ u ~ ~ 8 ~ <l.)
2:
<l.) Q ~ {l f- Q Q U) 0
r:, £1 0) 8 -0-i ...:i
Q ·c3 :3: 0
~
113 .1 5.2 119.0 R-Value=l5

6.9 7.7

20.1 20.6

LOG OF EXPLORATORY BORING
Project No.: 22030 Boring:

Project: 98 Kip Drive
Salinas, California
Location:

Elevation:

Date: Method of Drilling:

Logged By:

June 17, 2022
JDB
~ <l)
$ 0.
~
t ·s <l)
Q VJ
-
_ CL
-
5 -
-
-
-
10 -
-
.
15 ·
.
.
20 •
25 "O
<l)
{2 ."<
.a "5
:a a'.l
i::
::-i
~
[Z]
2" DIA
Sample [SJ

2.5" DIA
Sample
[D
Terzaghi Split ¥'.

Spoon Sample
Descriotion
Static Water
Table
\8 Yellowish Brown Sandy CLAY. Moist, Very Stiff,
Slightly Plastic. Fine to Coarse Grained Sand.
~ )< Material Consistent. Hard. Clay Content Increases. )< Material Consistent.

Boring Terminated@ 6.5 Feet
Groundwater Not Encountered
Boring Backfilled With Cuttings
Bulk
Sample
30 36
37 Jl!EcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

B7
Middle of East Side of Site
Truck Mounted Drill Rig
6 in. Solid Stem Auger, 140 lb. Hammer

99.9 6.9 106.8

11.2 12.1
Direct
Shear
Q
"' 8
0 0
-e-

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
,-_
E

0. ~ 0.
~
GRAIN SIZE (%)
µ.l C/J

IN-SITU DIRECT SHEAR
~ ~ CJ
µ.l
::r::
~
Q Q µ.i <(
~
0 0
z f-, 8
~
8 Q ..-1 µ.,
~
~ ~ "' 0 0 s µ.l ,-l :>, :>, 8
~Q
..-1 ....,
0 0 ...., f--, ~ f--, f--, z~ µ.i Q :>, C/J C/J
O'.l 0 vi vi 0 ~ >
f--, z
C/J f--, z -<( :Z<(
~
..-1 <( <( µ.l
iii
[fl µ.i
iii
[fl µ.i 0 µ.i j vi ..-1 ,-l
-f--, ~
Oz b:J c -P... [fl u ~ ~ Q Q f--, ~ 0
~
:s 0 f--, 0 u µ.l ,-l u µ.i u ;:2 0 Q :3: µ, C/J
Bl 1.0 CL 6.4 7
Bl 2.5 CL 9.6 55
Bl 5.0 CL 123.6 11.8 138.2
Bl 10.0 CL 18.5
Bl 15.0 CL I 01.9 23.7 126.1
Bl 20.0 CL 32.5
B2 1.0 CL 115.8 5.4 122.0 5
B2 2.5 CL 6.4
B2 5.0 CL 17.1 66
B2 10.0 CL 116.5 16.6 135.9
B2 15.0 CL 19.7
B2 20.0 CL 28.7
B3 1.0 CL 117.3 6.4 124.8 51
B3 2.5 CL 7.5
B3 5.0 CL 120.8 11.8 135.1
B3 10.0 CL 17.2
B3 15.0 CL 22.8
B4 1.0 CL 105.1 6.2 111.6
B4 1-3 CL 22.6 58 43
B4 2.5 CL 9.6
B4 5.0 CL 108.3 8.0 117.0 20
I
Jl?EcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

I
FIGURE
A-IO.I

SUMMARY OF LABORATORY TEST RESULTS
,....._
s

0..

X 8
µ.) r/l
IN-SITU DIRECT SHEAR GRAIN SIZE(%)
~
µ.)
µ.) f-< (.'.J ::r: ~
Q Q µ.i <t:'.
~
0 0
z f-< 8
~
8 Q ,-1 µ.,
P-, f-<
~ e,
Vl
0 0 ;3 µ.) .-:l ;:,-, >--8
~Q
,-1 - 0 Q -f-;:i f-f-z~ µ.i Q >--
r/l r/l i'.Q 0 u5 f-z u5 0 ~ Z<!'. > ~
f-<!'. z µ.) r/l
~
f/l µ.i
~
...., <!'.
~
,-l ,-1 <t:'. .-:l ...., f-f/l µ.i 0 µ.i u5 P-,
Oz ~c
>-< p., f/l u X § Q Q f-~ 0 :;;;o u µ.) ;:,-, u f-0 ;;:: .-:l ~ µ.i u 0 Q ~
(.I., r/l
B4 10.0 CL 17.4
B4 15.0 CL 21.8
B5 1.0 CL 107.8 8.4 116.9 530 21
B5 2.5 CL 11.9
B5 5.0 CL 15.3
B5 10.0 CL 104.6 22.6 128.3
B5 15.0 MH 21.8
B6 1.0 CL 113.1 5.2 119.0
B6 2.0 CL 6.9
B6 5.0 CL 7.7
B6 10.0 CL 20.l
B6 15.0 CL 20.6
B7 1.0 CL 99.9 6.9 106.8
B7 2.5 CL 11.2
B7 5.0 CL 12.1
I
JllEcK SOLID ENGINEERINGJ INC.

I
FIGURE
A-10.2
BORING: B5 COHESION FRICTION
DEPTH (ft): 1.0 (psf) ANGLE
SOIL TYPE (USCS): CL PEAK 530 21
-------RESIDUAL 470 19
TEST SAMPLE TYPE: FIELD MOISTURE: 8.4%
IN-SITU (SATURATED) SATURATED MOIST: 17.8%
3500
3000
2500
' Q
(/}
Q.
2000 .__,
00 00
~
r-'
:~:
00 ~
< 1500 f.l .,.,,,,.. - :c i,..,-- 00
~
.,.,,,,..

I)..,,,-'.,.,,,,..
~ f>
1000 -
~
.....--.,.,,,,.. ,.,,.,..-
~
~
i..---.,.,,,,..
500 ....
0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
NORMAL LOAD (psf)
If?:gcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

DIRECT SHEAR TEST RESULTS FIGURE
98 Kip Drive, Salinas A-11
BORING: B2 FIELD MOISTURE
DEPTH (ft): 1.0 -------sATURATED
SOIL TYPE (USCS): CL ...................... REBOUND
SEATING WEIGHT: 250 psf FIELD MOISTURE: 5.4%
SATURATED MOIST: 15.2%
3%
2%
1%
0%
--- -1%
-2%
I'
-3% "'-----........ z -------'
0 ---------------· .... 1sa----·--,l. E-< -4% -< Q .... ..:l
0 -5%
rJJ
z 0 -6% u
-7%
-8%
-9%
-10%
-11%
-12%
100 1000 10000
NORMAL LOAD (psf)
Jf!gcK SOLID ENGINEER/NG, INC.

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE
98 Kip Drive, Salinas A-12
BORING: BS FIELD MOISTURE
DEPTH (ft): 1.0 ------.. SATURATED
SOIL TYPE (USCS): CL ...................... REBOUND
SEA TING WEIGHT: 220 psf FIELD MOISTURE: 8.4%
SATURATED MOIST: 15.4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
-----------
-1% ~
-...,
~ ...... ...... -2%
7~
-3% z
0 -f,-<
-4% -< A
' -..:l
0 -5%
'- ifJ
z ~--------~ 0 ' ----· --- -6% ----- u -------· ----"'--""ii, -7%
-8%
-9%
-10%
-11%
-12%
100 1000 10000
NORMAL LOAD (psf)
JllgcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

CONSOLIDATION TEST RESULTS FIGURE
98 Kip Drive, Salinas A-13
D
Earth S~stems
500 Park Center Drive, Unit 1 I Hollister, CA 95023 I 831.637.2133 I www.earthsystems.com Rock Solid Engineering OTF File No.: 301321-001
RSE Project 22033
RESISTANCE 'R' VALUE AND EXPANSION PRESSURE CTM 301
July 18, 2022
Boring 116 @ 1.0 -5.0' Dry Density @ 300 psi Exudation Pressure: 130.2-pcf Brown Clayey Sand (SC) %Moisture @ 300 psi Exudation Pressure: 11.9% Specified Traffic Index: 5.0 R-Value -Exudation Pressure: 15 R-Value -Expansion Pressure: 25
R-Value@ Equilibrium: 15

EXUDATION PRESSURE

CHART EXPANSION PRESSURE CHART

2.0 90 ~
I
--,

1.8 80 .:::
..r p: 1.6 ' -:::,
'I
"' 70
"'
~
.:.l
-~ IA /:l.,
---z --
60 0
;:
-I'. 1.2 ----Q ------- --~
-
.:.l 50
:::, -.:.l
' ..l ;;., 1.0 ' -I'. ~ I -
> -- - --"'
- -, -
0: 40 "' ----~ ------
--.:.l ~
~

0.8 -
S:! -- -~ 30 --- -;: 0.6
c:i:
~ --- - > ' 20 0 ' - --
u 0.4
-
--- - 10 0.2
--
I
0 0,0
800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 0,0 0.2 0.4 0,6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.-1 1.6 1.8 2.0 EXUDATION PRESSURE, psi COVER THICKNESS BY EXPANSION PRESSURE, ft Iff!gcK SOLID ENGINEERING, INC.

R-VALUE
II~ 98 Kip Drive, Salinas A-14

FACILITIES TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLAN
City of Salinas • Community Development Department • 65 West Alisa! Street • Salinas, CA 9390 I • (831) 758-7206 EXHIBIT 29
For Permit/Subdivision No. 98 Kip Drive -GPA 2023-001, RZ 2023-001, CUP 2022-059, RS 2022-006, and MM 2022-019
The follavving Residential Facilities Traffic Management Measures are included, and made a part hereof, in the above referenced permit/subdivision:

Included Vehicle Trip Residential Reduction
Check (v; Reduction Permit/Subdivision Conditions (%)
All boxes Measure
that aJJJJly
Provide ridesharing, public transportation and
nearby (within one mile) licensed child care
Public Information facilities information to tenants/buyers as a part of 1.0% move-in materials. An information packet must be
provided as part of the project's development
approval process.

Print transit schedule information on all
Printed transit promotional materials for the project. Printed .5% schedules transit schedules shall be provided as part of the project's development approval process.

Bike lanes must be provided adjacent to the project
~ Bicycle amenities and must tie into a City-wide system and provide 2.0% bicycle access to schools, employment centers and
shopping within two miles.

Facilities or measures which go beyond those listed 1.0% Other bicycle above and which facilitate increase non-vehicular amenities trips. Description attached.

Provide bus pull-outs, convenient pedestrian access 2.0% Bus pull-outs to bus stops and other related amenities to encourage transit use for those portions of the
development within one-quarter mile of a bus stop.

Provide locked and secured transpo1iation .5%
Transportation information centers or kiosks with bus schedules information centers and transit information as a part of the common area of the development if agreement is reached
with transit agencv for maintenance of information.

Total
(%)

2.0%
rm
Included Vehicle Trip Residential Reduction Total
Check (v) Reduction Permit/Subdivision Conditions (%) (%) All boxes Measure
that avvly
~
Provide pedestrian facilities linking transit stops
Pedestrian facilities top common areas. .5% .5%
Provide park-and-ride facilities if part of an on-site
Park-and-ride traffic management plan. 1.0%
Provide on-site child care facilities based on the
Child care facilities capacity of the center and marketing data on 1.0% expected use.

Provide facilities to encourage telecommuting such
Telecommuting as a telecommuting center. * 1.0%
Provide mixed uses that reduce the length and
Mixed uses number of vehicle trips. Project must consist of at 5.0% of least five acres of high-density housing within one-combined quarter mile of neighborhood commercial trips
development and have convenient pedestrian
access. (Note: Similar trip reduction measures
listed elsewhere cannot be counted toward the
required vehicle trio reduction).

Residential development with at least 35 percent of
~
Transit-oriented the project in high density housing and clustered 5.0% of 5.0% Design within one-quarter mile of bus stops on a major high density arterial with convenient pedestrian access to transit housing trips and neighborhood shopping.

Other measures supported by documented data of
Other trip reductions Varies
RESIDENTIAL TOT AL (Must total 7 percent or more) 7.5%
The following Commercial, Industrial a11d Tourist Orie11ted Vehicle Trip Reductio11 Measures are included, and made a part hereof, in the above referenced permit/subdivision:

Included Vehicle Trip Reduction Total
Check (v) Reduction Permit/Subdivision Conditions (%) (%) All boxes Measure
that apply
Provide on-site child care facilities for children of
Child care facilities customers. 1.0%
Provide on-site child care facilities for children of
Child care facilities employees. * 1.0%
Provide transit-scheduling information quarterly to
Transit scheduling employees. * 1.0%
information
* Optional traffic management measure (counts toward total if implemented).

Included Vehicle Trip Reduction Total
Check (v) Reduction Permit/Subdivision Conditions (%) (%) All boxes Measure
that aooly
Bicycle amenities I. Proposed development/use adjacent to bicycle I. 2.0% lanes. 2. Proposed development/use adjacent to
bicycle lanes, showers provided, and site is located
within 4 miles ofone-halfofthe City's residential 2. 4.0% areas.

Bus pull-outs Provide bus pull-outs, pedestrian access and transit 2.0% stops.

Provide transit subsidy program for employees that
Bus subsidy * reduces the cost of monthly bus pass by 50% from 4.0% standard group rate.

Provide locked and secures transportation
Transportation information centers or kiosks with bus schedules Information and transit information if agreement is reached with 1.0% centers transit agency for maintenance of information.

Provide pedestrian facilities linking transit stops to
Pedestrian employment site entrances provided such 1.0% facilities * pedestrian facilities do not exceed one-quarter mile.

Pedestrian and bicycle system improvements
Other pedestrian beyond above related measures. Varies
facilities Description attached.

Provide site amenities that reduce the need for
Other site vehicle trips based on documentation of trip 1.0-2.0% amenities reduction. Description attached.

Provide park-and-ride facilities if part of an
Park-and-ride * employee sponsored rideshare program. 1.0% Transportation Provide a local transportation system management system program to reduce on-site trips based on 5.0%
management documentation of expected trip reduction.
program
Provide mixed uses that reduce the length and
number of vehicle trips. Project must consist of
neighborhood serving retail commercial that has at
Mixed uses least five acres of high-density residential housing within one-quarter mile of the perimeter of the 5.0%
commercial site. (Note: Similar trip reduction
measures listed elsewhere cannot be counted
toward the required vehicle trip reduction).

Provide educational and marketing strategies to
Educational and customers to reduce vehicle trips. 1.0% marketing
Provide educational and marketing strategies to
Educational and employees to reduce vehicle trips. * 1.0% marketinir
* Optional traffic management measure (counts toward total if implemented).

Included Vehicle Trip Reduction Total
Check (v) Reduction Permit/Subdivision Conditions (%) (%) All boxes Measure
that avvlv
Provide preferential parking for employees who
Preferential carpool. Sites must be closest to building parking for entrances, used only by carpoolers and represent at 3.0% carpools * least 3 percent of the total parking spaces.

Provide facilities to encourage telecommuting if
Telecommuting * telecommute center could accommodate one 1.0% percent of employees at an off-site neighborhood
location.

Provide on-site ATMs, restaurants, dry cleaners, I .0% per services.

On-site services grocery and other typically needed services to If linked to reduce travel. transit, I .0% for
development
Other Other measures supported by documented data of
trip reductions in other developments. Varies

COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND TOURIST ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT TOTAL (Must total 7 percent or more)
* Optional traffic management measure (counts toward total if implemented).

I/we declare under penalty of pe1jury that the information contained in this Facilities Traffic Management Plan, including any attachment included herewith, are true and correct to the best of my/our knowledge.

Signature of Applicant
Signature of Property Owner or
Authorized Agent
Signature of
Planning Manager
Date
Date
Date

Salinas City CouncilMarch 19, 2024

Salinas City Council
March 19, 2024