Agenda packet, regular meeting — Sand City City Council, June 18, 2024

CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING

JOINT SAND CITY COUNCIL AND

SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE

REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
TUESDAY, JUNE 18, 2024
5:30 PM
1 AGENDA

JOINT SAND CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
City Council Regular Meeting - Tuesday, June 18, 2024
5:30 PM

THIS MEETING WILL BE HELD VIRTUALLY AND IN PERSON, IS COMPLIANT WITH ASSEMBLY BILL (“AB”) 2449, SIGNED INTO LAW ON SEPTEMBER 13, 2022, WHICH AMENDS GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953 TO PROVIDE AUTHORITY FOR PUBLIC

AGENCIES TO CONTINUE TO HOLD VIRTUAL MEETINGS AND REMAIN IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE BROWN ACT (GOV. CODE §§ 54950 ET SEQ.).

TO PARTICIPATE IN THE ZOOM COUNCIL WEBINAR LIVE:
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88349100938
Webinar ID: 883 4910 0938
To participate telephonically by calling the number below:
(669) 900-6833
Webinar ID: 883 4910 0938#
If prompted to enter a participant ID, press #
TO PARTICIPATE IN PERSON:

City Hall Council Chamber
1 Pendergrass Way
Sand City, CA
How to submit written Public Comments:

If any member of the public would like to provide written comments at the meeting, please do as set forth below.

Written: All comments received before 8:00 am the day of the meeting will be posted on the City’s website as “Correspondence” under the relevant agenda item and provided to the City Council members at the meeting. Please email your comments to: [email protected].

Read Aloud During the Meeting: Email your comments to [email protected]. When the Mayor opens the public comment period for the relevant agenda item; please indicate the agenda item and title in your email subject line. If you want your comment read aloud, prominently write “Read Aloud at Meeting” at the top of the email and your comments will be read into the record (not to exceed three minutes at staff’s cadence). 2 1. ROLL CALL

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

3. INVOCATION

4. ANNOUNCEMENT BY MAYOR, CITY ATTORNEY, AND CITY MANAGER

5. COMMUNICATIONS
Members of the public may address the City Council/Successor Agency on matters not appearing on the City Council/Successor Agency Agenda at this time for up to three minutes. In order that the City Clerk may later identify the speaker in the minutes of the meeting, it is helpful if speakers state their names. Public comments regarding items on the scheduled agenda will be heard at the time the item is being considered by the City Council/Successor Agency. The City Council Chambers podium is equipped with a portable microphone for anyone unable to come to the podium. If you need assistance, please advise the City Clerk as to which item you would like to comment on and the microphone will be brought to you.

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
The Consent Agenda consists of routine items for which City Council approval can be taken with a single motion and vote. A Council member may request that any item be placed on the Regular Agenda for separate consideration.
6A. Approve the City Council Special Meeting and Regular Meeting Minutes for June 4, 2024
Minutes
6B. Acceptance of City/Successor Agency Financial Reports from May 2024 Staff Report
May Cash Register Activity Report
May Cash Disbursement Report
Trial Balance May
6C. Approve a Resolution Establishing a Special Revenue Fund for the Long-Term Maintenance of Environmentally Sensitive Areas that are Impacted by Development
Staff Report
Resolution
6D. Approve a Resolution Authorizing Agreement for Property Tax Audit and Information Services with HDL Coren & Cone, A California Corporation Staff Report
Resolution
DURING EACH MEETING, members of the public may participate by calling and speaking live during the designated time(s), subject to time limits that may be imposed pursuant to the Brown Act at the number provided above. Please use the "raise your hand" option on Zoom, and the City Clerk will call on your name.
3 HdL Coren & Cone Agreement
6E. Approve a Resolution Authorizing an Amendment to the Memorandum of Understanding between ReGen Monterey and its Member Agencies Regarding Assistance with Compliance with California Senate Bill 1383 Staff Report
Resolution
MOU with Revised Exhibits A & B
6F. Approve a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment No. 1 to the Monterey Peninsula Special Response Unit Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) adding the City of Del Rey Oaks as a Participating Agency Staff Report
Resolution
SRU MOU 2010
SRU-MOU Amendment 1
6G. Approve a Resolution Authorizing Renewal of Sheltering Agreement with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County (SPCA) Staff Report
Resolution
SPCA Sheltering Services Agreement

7. CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR

8. PRESENTATION
8A. 3CE Annual Update - Judith Young, 3CE Senior Account Manager Presentation

9. PUBLIC HEARING
9A. Approve a Resolution Approving a Coastal Development Permit (CDP 23-009), Including a Tree Removal Permit and Design Permit for the Proposed MontereySalinas Transit (MST) SURF! Bus Rapid Transit Project and Finding the Project Exempt from CEAQ per Public Resources Code Section 21080325(b) Staff Report
Resolution
EXHIBIT A_Findings (CDP 23-009)
EXHIBIT B_ Conditions of Approval_CDP 23-009
Exhibit C, SURF! Busway Overall Route
Exhibit D, Coastal Commission Letter
Exhibit E, MST Response to Coastal Commission Letter
Exhibit F, SURF! Sand City Site Plan
Exhibit G, SURF! Busway 100% Plans
Exhibit H, DD&A ESHA Impacts Report
4 Exhibit I, Intersection Control Evaluation Memo
Exhibit J, Multi-Use Trail Impacts and Improvements
Exhibit K, Application Letter of Intent
Exhibit L, MST SURF! Final Initial Study
Exhibit M, Notice of Exemption

10. NEW BUSINESS
10A. Consideration and Approval for the Cancellation of the August 6, 2024 Regular City Council Meeting
10B. Approve a Resolution Establishing a Façade Improvement Program Staff Report
Resolution
Exhibit A1 Sand City
Exhibit A2 Sand City Facade Program Application
10C. Approve a Resolution Approving the City's Fiscal Year 2023-2024 General Employees Salary Schedule and the City's 2022-2024 POA Salary Schedule Staff Report
Resolution
General Employees Salary Schedule
2022-2024 POA Salary Schedule
10D. Approve a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Enter Into an Agreement with Motorola Solutions for the Body Worn Camera/In-Car Video System Purchase in an Amount not to Exceed $71,170.00
Staff Report
Resolution
Agreement

11. COMMENTS BY COUNCILMEMBERS ON ITEMS OF INTEREST TO SAND CITY

12. ADJOURNMENT
The current agenda is available in PDF format on our website at:
www.sandcity.org
If you have a request for a disability-related modification or accommodation, including auxiliary aids or services, which will allow you to participate in a Sand City public meeting, please call the City Clerk at (831) 394-3054 extension 220, or give your written request to the City Clerk at 1 Pendergrass Way, Sand City, CA 93955 at least 48 hours prior to the scheduled meeting to allow the City Clerk time to arrange for the requested modification or accommodation.
5 AGENDA ITEM
6A.

Approve the City Council Special Meeting
and Regular Meeting Minutes for June 4,
2024
6 1

MINUTES

JOINT SAND CITY COUNCIL AND SUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
City Council Special Meeting - Tuesday, June 4, 2024 4:30 PM Mayor Carbone called the meeting to order at 4:35 PM.

1. ROLL CALL

Present: Mayor Carbone
Vice Mayor Blackwelder
Councilmember Diaz
Councilmember Hawthorne
Councilmember Sofer
Staff: City Manager Vibeke Norgaard
Interim City Attorney Adam Lindgren
City Clerk Kerry Lindstrom

2. COMMUNICATIONS
No public comment received.

3. CLOSED SESSION
3A.

City Council/Successor Agency Board to adjourned to Closed Session regarding:

Conference with labor negotiators pursuant to Government Code §54957.6.

Negotiators: Vibeke Norgaard, City Manager, Adam Lindgren, Interim City Attorney, and Che Johnson, LCW Attorney. Employee Organization: Police Officer's Association
3B. Re-adjourned to Open Session to report any action taken at the conclusion of Closed Session in accordance with California Government Code §54957.1
Interim City Attorney Adam Lindgren reported the Council received updates from labor negotiators and provided direction to labor negotiators.

No reportable action was taken.

4. ADJOURNMENT
City Council adjourned the meeting at approximately 5:00 PM 7 1

MINUTES

JOINT SANDCITYCOUNCIL ANDSUCCESSOR AGENCY OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY City Council Regular Meeting - Tuesday, June 4, 2024 5:30 PM Mayor Carbone called the meeting to order at 5:30 PM.

1. ROLL CALL

2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Interim City Attorney Adam Lindgren.

3. INVOCATION
No invocation was made.

4. ANNOUNCEMENT BY MAYOR, CITY ATTORNEY, AND CITYMANAGER City Manager Vibeke Norgaard provided updates on the implementation of the façade improvement program and will bring back to Council at the next regular meeting for approval. The City Manager stated the Design Review Committee me and reviewed the MST SURF! Bus CDP application, approved forwarding it to Council to be heard by Council at the Regular Meeting on June 18, 2024. The City Manager asked the Council if there was an interest in touring the South of Tioga project, the entire Council expressed there was an interest. The City Manager let the Council know the City has entered into escrow for the purchase of 501 Ortiz Avenue.

5. COMMUNICATIONS
Public comment received from Michele Adams.

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
No public comment received.

Upon motion by Councilmember Hawthorne and seconded by Vice Mayor Blackwelder, Council voted 5-0 to approve the Consent Calendar.
6A. Approved the City Council Special Meeting and Regular Meeting Minutes for March 19, 2024, April 16, 2024, and May 21, 2024.
8 2
6B. Approved Resolution SC 24-29 calling for the holding of a November 5, 2024 General Municipal Election, requesting the County of Monterey Board of Supervisors to consolidate the General Municipal Election, and requesting the County of Monterey Elections Department to Conduct the Election.
6C. Approved Resolution SC 24-30 establishing an Appropriations Limit for Fiscal Year 2024- 2025 pursuant to Article XIII B of the CaliforniaConstitution. 6D. Approved Resolution SC 24-31 granting CUP 24-001 for 398 Shasta Street.

This item was continued from May 21, 2024.

7. CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS PULLED FROM CONSENTCALENDAR
No items were pulled.

8. PRESENTATION
None.

9. PUBLIC HEARING
None.

10. NEW BUSINESS
10A. Approve a Resolution Adopting the City of Sand City's Budget for the Fiscal Year 2024- 2025
No public comment received.

Upon motion by Councilmember Hawthorne and seconded by Councilmember Sofer, Council voted 5-0 to approve Resolution SC 24-32 adopting the City of Sand City’s Budget for the Fiscal Year 2024-2025.
10B. Approve a Resolution ApprovingDelegation of Authority for ExecutingCaltrans Documents
No public comment received.

Upon motion by Councilmember Sofer and seconded by Councilmember Hawthorne, Council voted 5-0 to approve Resolution SC 24-33 approving delegation of Authority for executing Caltrans documents.
10C. 2023-2031 Housing Element of the General Plan:

1. Approve a Resolution Adopting a Categorical Exemption for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update and;

2. Approve a Resolution Adopting a General Plan Amendment to Repeal the 2015- 9 3
2023 Housing Element and Adopt the 2023-2031 Housing Element of the General Plan in Compliance with State Housing ElementLaw

Public Comment received from Michele Adams.

Upon motion by Councilmember Hawthorne and seconded by Councilmember, Council voted 5-0 to approve Resolution SC 24-34 adopting a Categorical Exemption for the 2023-2031 Housing Element Update and;
Upon motion by Councilmember Sofer and seconded by Councilmember Diaz, Council voted 5-0 to approve Resolution SC 24-35 adopting a General Plan Amendment to repeal the 2015-2023 Housing Element and adopt the 2023-2031 Housing Element of the General Plan in compliance with state Housing Element Law.

11. COMMENTS BY COUNCILMEMBERS ON ITEMS OF INTEREST TO SANDCITY None.

12. ADJOURNMENT
Council adjourned the meeting at 6:55 PM.
______________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
10 AGENDA ITEM
6B.

Acceptance of City/Successor Agency
Financial Reports from May 2024
11 City of Sand City

STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council/Successor Agency Board Members FROM: Jennifer Pope, Finance Manager
SUBJECT: May 2024 Financial Report
DATE: June 18, 2024
_______________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

Attached are the financial reports for the City of Sand City and the Sand City Successor Agency of the former Redevelopment Agency.

A. City of Sand City Reports
a. Cash Register Activity Report, May 2024 (Attachment 1) Revenue total - $662,228
b. Cash Disbursement Report, May 2024 (Attachment 2)
Expenditure total - $351,584
B. Sand City Successor Agency for the former Redevelopment Agency Reports a. Trial Balance Report, May 2024 (Attachment 3)
i. Revenue total - $644,773
ii. Expenditures total - $0
Transfers
Transfers are shown on the Month End Cash Register Activity Report; they are transfers from one bank account to another and should not be considered as a revenue or expenditure.

Date Source Amount Description
There were no transfers in May 2024.

CEQA:

This action does not constitute a "project" as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines section 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact with receiving this report.

RECOMMENDATION:

Receive the report.
12 ATTACHMENTS:

1. Sand City Month End Cash Register Activity Report

2. Sand City Month End Cash Disbursement Report

3. Successor Agency Trial Balance Report
13 Period Deposit/Posting Date Receipt Date Receipt Description Debit Acct Credit Acct Amount Paid 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29423 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 317.52 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29424 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 3,215.55 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29425 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 68.61 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29426 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 0.36 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29427 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 14,296.20 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29428 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 100.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29429 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29430 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29431 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29432 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29433 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29434 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29435 FRNCHISE TX RF. 4040 99 1001 10 4040 00 16,856.74 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29436 RENTAL INCOME 99 1001 10 4740 00 1,699.59 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29437 ROAD MAINTENANCE & REHAB 99 1001 37 4306 11 793.46 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29438 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29439 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29440 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 450.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29441 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29442 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29443 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29444 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29445 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29446 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29447 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 500.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29447 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 100.00 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29448 BUSINESS LICENSE 99 1001 10 4055 00 917.56 24-May 5/2/2024 4/30/2024 29448 BUSINESS LICENSE CASP FEE 99 1001 10 4033 00 4.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29449 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29450 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 300.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29451 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29452 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29453 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29454 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29455 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29456 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29457 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29458 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29459 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29460 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29461 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 500.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29461 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 100.00 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29462 TRANSACTION/USE TAX 99 1001 10 4032 00 325,428.31 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29463 TRANSACTION/USE TAX 99 1001 10 4032 00 0.45 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29464 TRANSACTION/USE TAX 99 1001 10 4032 00 46.37 24-May 5/2/2024 5/1/2024 29465 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 2,500.00 24-May 5/7/2024 5/7/2024 29466 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/7/2024 5/7/2024 29467 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 805.39 24-May 5/7/2024 5/7/2024 29468 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 454.80 24-May 5/7/2024 5/7/2024 29469 SALES TAX RECEIVED 99 1001 10 4030 00 257,573.46 24-May 5/20/2024 5/8/2024 29470 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 500.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/8/2024 29470 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 100.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29471 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 270.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29472 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 1,258.75 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29473 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 1,160.52 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29474 SHORT TERM RENTAL INSPECTION FEE 99 1001 10 4164 06 197.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29475 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 1,662.61 City of Sand City
Month End Cash Register Activity Report
For Period: 04-24
14 Period Deposit/Posting Date Receipt Date Receipt Description Debit Acct Credit Acct Amount Paid City of Sand City
Month End Cash Register Activity Report
For Period: 04-24
24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29476 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 563.76 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29477 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 797.40 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29478 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 333.60 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29479 TOT TAX 99 1001 10 4034 00 302.40 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29480 SHORT TERM RENTAL INSPECTION FEE 99 1001 10 4164 06 197.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29481 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 97.78 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29482 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 0.34 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29483 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 3,014.30 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29484 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 173.94 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29485 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 120.47 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29486 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 1.14 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29487 UTILITY USERS TAX 99 1001 10 4025 00 17.07 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29488 COUNTY/TRAFFIC 99 1001 35 4205 11 52.82 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29488 CRIMINAL PC1463/CITY FINES 99 1001 10 4210 08 141.69 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29488 COUNTY/PROOF OF CORR 99 1001 35 4205 11 9.90 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29488 1/2 TAX POLICE/PROP 172 99 1001 10 4330 08 30.93 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29488 COUNTY/REV & RECOVERY 99 1001 10 4210 08 284.06 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29489 BUSINESS LICENSE- BALANCE DUE 99 1001 10 4055 00 4,716.71 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29489 BUSINESS LICENSE CASP FEE 99 1001 10 4033 00 4.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29490 CABLE FRANCHISE 99 1001 10 4035 00 273.26 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29491 CABLE FRANCHISE 99 1001 10 4035 00 1,351.57 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29492 GAS TAX 2103 99 1001 31 4305 11 228.10 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29492 GAS TAX - 2105 31 99 1001 31 4305 11 172.67 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29492 GAS TAX - 2106 32 99 1001 31 4305 11 477.57 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29492 GAS TAX - 2107 33 99 1001 31 4305 11 235.70 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29493 COPS GRANT 99 1001 10 4069 08 8,333.33 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29494 SOUTH OF TIOGA REIMBURSEMENTS 99 1001 10 4530 00 1,898.93 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29496 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 100.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29497 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 500.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29498 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29499 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29500 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29501 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29502 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29503 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29504 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29505 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29506 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29507 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29508 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29509 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29510 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29511 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29512 WEST END REVENUE 99 1001 10 4500 00 150.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29513 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29514 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29515 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29516 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29517 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 24-May 5/20/2024 5/20/2024 29518 SAND CITY PARKING 99 1001 10 4221 08 40.00 TOTAL 662,227.69
15 Period Check Number Check Date Vendor # (Name) Gross Amount Net Amount Check Description 24-May 39407 5/3/2024 AFL01 (AFLAC ) 527.94 527.94 Automatic Generated Check 39408 5/3/2024 ALA04 (ALHAMBRA) 165.82 165.82 Automatic Generated Check 39409 5/3/2024 ALT01 (ALTERNATOR AND STARTER EXCHANGE) 6,148.96 6,148.96 Automatic Generated Check 39410 5/3/2024 AME04 (AMERICAN LOCK & KEY) 278.6 278.6 Automatic Generated Check 39411 5/3/2024 ASC01 (AMERICAN SUPPLY CO) 43.59 43.59 Automatic Generated Check 39412 5/3/2024 AVA01 (AVAYA, INC) 227.07 227.07 Automatic Generated Check 39413 5/3/2024 CAL01 (CAL-AM WATER) 729.79 729.79 Automatic Generated Check 39414 5/3/2024 CHA04 (CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY) 350 350 Automatic Generated Check 39415 5/3/2024 COA07 (MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY) 1,244.00 1,244.00 Automatic Generated Check 39416 5/3/2024 COM11 (COMCAST) 44.4 44.4 Automatic Generated Check 39417 5/3/2024 COR01 (CORBIN WILLITS SYSTEMS) 256.05 256.05 Automatic Generated Check 39418 5/3/2024 ELK01 (ELKS LODGE) 500 500 Automatic Generated Check 39419 5/3/2024 FIR03 (FIRST ALARM SECURITY) 1,246.20 1,246.20 Automatic Generated Check 39420 5/3/2024 GRA02 (GRANITEROCK CO # 29137) 53,922.00 53,922.00 Automatic Generated Check 39421 5/3/2024 HDL01 (HDL COREN & CONE) 1,260.00 1,260.00 Automatic Generated Check 39422 5/3/2024 MAL01 (MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY, LLC) 423.87 423.87 Automatic Generated Check 39423 5/3/2024 MBA01 (MONTEREY BAY AREA SELF INS.) 641 641 Automatic Generated Check 39424 5/3/2024 MEY01 (MEYERS NAVE, CORPORATION) 33,121.63 33,121.63 Automatic Generated Check 39425 5/3/2024 MME01 (MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT) 877.46 877.46 Automatic Generated Check 39426 5/3/2024 MON04 (MONTEREY TIRE SERVICE,INC) 773.15 773.15 Automatic Generated Check 39427 5/3/2024 MON10 (COUNTY OF MONTEREY) 29 29 Automatic Generated Check 39428 5/3/2024 NAT10 (NATIVE CALIFORNIA RESEARCH INSTITUTE) 2,500.00 2,500.00 Automatic Generated Check 39429 5/3/2024 OFF03 (ODP BUSINESS SOLUTIONS) 138.29 138.29 Automatic Generated Check 39430 5/3/2024 PET01 (PETTY CASH-CASHED BY SHAN NORTON) 148.82 148.82 Automatic Generated Check 39431 5/3/2024 QUA05 (QUALITY CODE PUBLISHING, LLC) 911 911 Automatic Generated Check 39432 5/3/2024 RUS01 (DARCY RUSSAK) 150 150 Automatic Generated Check 39433 5/3/2024 SAF02 (SAFEGUARD BUSINESS SYSTEMS) 80.85 80.85 Automatic Generated Check 39434 5/3/2024 SAN01 (SAND CITY POLICE OFFICERS) 1,420.00 1,420.00 Automatic Generated Check 39435 5/3/2024 STU02 (STURDY OIL COMPANY) 1,064.34 1,064.34 Automatic Generated Check 39436 5/3/2024 SUN02 (SUN LIFE FINANCIAL) 850.42 850.42 Automatic Generated Check 39437 5/3/2024 TIT01 (MARY TITUS) 160 160 Automatic Generated Check 39438 5/15/2024 ALT01 (ALTERNATOR AND STARTER EXCHANGE) 2,640.51 2,640.51 Automatic Generated Check 39439 5/15/2024 AME04 (AMERICAN LOCK & KEY) 260.58 260.58 Automatic Generated Check 39440 5/15/2024 AME10 (VESTIS) 660.52 660.52 Automatic Generated Check 39441 5/15/2024 ATT05 (AT&T MOBILITY) 994.43 994.43 Automatic Generated Check 39442 5/15/2024 BAL05 (BALTHROP ELECTRIC) 7,439.25 7,439.25 Automatic Generated Check 39443 5/15/2024 BCM01 (BCM ONE, INC.) 321.13 321.13 Automatic Generated Check 39444 5/15/2024 BUS05 (JEFF BUSHNELL) 209.06 209.06 Automatic Generated Check 39445 5/15/2024 CAL15 (CALIFORNIA CONSULTING, INC.) 4,250.00 4,250.00 Automatic Generated Check 39446 5/15/2024 CBS02 (CANON SOLUTIONS AMERICA, INC.) 295.52 295.52 Automatic Generated Check 39447 5/15/2024 CHA04 (CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY) 350 350 Automatic Generated Check 39448 5/15/2024 CLE01 (CALIFORNIA LAW) 320 320 Automatic Generated Check 39449 5/15/2024 COM11 (COMCAST) 346.8 346.8 Automatic Generated Check 39450 5/15/2024 COR04 (CORODATA SHREDDING, INC.) 61.75 61.75 Automatic Generated Check 39451 5/15/2024 COR05 (CORODATA RECORDS MANAGEMENT) 56.45 56.45 Automatic Generated Check 39452 5/15/2024 CSD01 (CALIFORNIA STATE DISBURSE UNIT) 385 385 Automatic Generated Check 39453 5/15/2024 CYP04 (CYPRESS COAST FORD) 1,286.97 1,286.97 Automatic Generated Check 39454 5/15/2024 DEL04 (DELL MARKETING L.P.) 6,636.72 6,636.72 Automatic Generated Check 39455 5/15/2024 EMC02 (EMC PLANNING GROUP, INC.) 658.62 658.62 Automatic Generated Check 39456 5/15/2024 GAT02 (HOPE SERVICES) 6,542.14 6,542.14 Automatic Generated Check 39457 5/15/2024 GRE01 (MITSUGU MORI) 800 800 Automatic Generated Check 39458 5/15/2024 HAR06 (HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC.) 34,952.24 34,952.24 Automatic Generated Check 39459 5/15/2024 HER01 (THE MONTEREY COUNTY HERALD) 379.24 379.24 Automatic Generated Check 39460 5/15/2024 HOM01 (HOME DEPOT CREDIT SERVICE) 473.05 473.05 Automatic Generated Check 39461 5/15/2024 LIN01 (LINGO ) 139.88 139.88 Automatic Generated Check 39462 5/15/2024 MBP03 (MONTEREY BAY PEST CONTROL) 130 130 Automatic Generated Check 39463 5/15/2024 MBT01 (MONTEREY BAY TECHNOLOGIES, INC.) 2,700.00 2,700.00 Automatic Generated Check 39464 5/15/2024 MME01 (MUNICIPAL MAINTENANCE EQUIPMENT) 1,539.85 1,539.85 Automatic Generated Check 39465 5/15/2024 MON04 (MONTEREY TIRE SERVICE,INC) 34.83 34.83 Automatic Generated Check 39466 5/15/2024 MRW02 (MRWMD ) 566.84 566.84 Automatic Generated Check 39467 5/15/2024 PET01 (PETTY CASH-CASHED BY SHAN NORTON) 168.69 168.69 Automatic Generated Check 39468 5/15/2024 PGE01 (PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC) 3,641.03 3,641.03 Automatic Generated Check 39469 5/15/2024 RED01 (BECK'S SHOES) 775.11 775.11 Automatic Generated Check 39470 5/15/2024 SEA09 (SEASIDE GROUNDWATER BASIN WATERMASTER) 1,768.00 1,768.00 Automatic Generated Check 39471 5/15/2024 SLV01 (STEPHEN L. VAGNINI) 6,000.00 6,000.00 Automatic Generated Check 39472 5/15/2024 SPC01 (SPCA ) 184 184 Automatic Generated Check City of Sand City
Month End Cash Disbursements Report
Report for 05-24
16 Period Check Number Check Date Vendor # (Name) Gross Amount Net Amount Check Description City of Sand City
Month End Cash Disbursements Report
Report for 05-24
39473 5/15/2024 STA03 (STAR SANITATION, LLC) 909.2 909.2 Automatic Generated Check 39474 5/15/2024 STU02 (STURDY OIL COMPANY) 1,119.16 1,119.16 Automatic Generated Check 39475 5/15/2024 TYL02 (TYLER TECHNOLOGIES, INC) 145 145 Automatic Generated Check 39476 5/15/2024 VER01 (VERIZON WIRELESS) 127.36 127.36 Automatic Generated Check 39477 5/15/2024 VIS01 (MECHANICS VISA CARD) 21 21 Automatic Generated Check 39478 5/15/2024 WEE02 (BOB WEEMS) 266.27 266.27 Automatic Generated Check 39479 5/30/2024 4LE01 (4LEAF, INC.) 7,865.00 7,865.00 Automatic Generated Check 39480 5/30/2024 AFL01 (AFLAC ) 527.94 527.94 Automatic Generated Check 39481 5/30/2024 ALA04 (ALHAMBRA) 87.91 87.91 Automatic Generated Check 39482 5/30/2024 ATT03 (A.T. & T.) 202.72 202.72 Automatic Generated Check 39483 5/30/2024 BRI04 (BRITT GLOBAL INDUSTRIES LLC) 500 500 Automatic Generated Check 39484 5/30/2024 COM11 (COMCAST) 291.9 291.9 Automatic Generated Check 39485 5/30/2024 COR01 (CORBIN WILLITS SYSTEMS) 256.05 256.05 Automatic Generated Check 39486 5/30/2024 EMC02 (EMC PLANNING GROUP, INC.) 54,148.88 54,148.88 Automatic Generated Check 39487 5/30/2024 FLO04 (FLOOR COVERINGS INTERNATIONAL) 2,603.95 2,603.95 Automatic Generated Check 39488 5/30/2024 GRA02 (GRANITEROCK CO # 29137) 41,626.90 41,626.90 Automatic Generated Check 39489 5/30/2024 HUM02 (HUMANA INSURANCE COMPANY) 4,428.24 4,428.24 Automatic Generated Check 39490 5/30/2024 LEF02 (LEFTA SYSTEMS) 6,440.00 6,440.00 Automatic Generated Check 39491 5/30/2024 MAL01 (MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY, LLC) 1,994.13 1,994.13 Automatic Generated Check 39492 5/30/2024 MAR09 (MARKS BARN AUTO BODY, INC.) 2,097.65 2,097.65 Automatic Generated Check 39493 5/30/2024 MCP01 (M.C.P.O.A.) 280 280 Automatic Generated Check 39494 5/30/2024 MFE01 (MONTEREY FIRE) 790.98 790.98 Automatic Generated Check 39495 5/30/2024 MOB02 (MCGRATH RENTCORP) 998.62 998.62 Automatic Generated Check 39496 5/30/2024 MRW01 (MONTEREY ONE WATER) 7,120.00 7,120.00 Automatic Generated Check 39497 5/30/2024 PET01 (PETTY CASH-CASHED BY SHAN NORTON) 59.25 59.25 Automatic Generated Check 39498 5/30/2024 SNO01 (SHANNON NORTON) 293.77 293.77 Automatic Generated Check 39499 5/30/2024 STU02 (STURDY OIL COMPANY) 1,299.39 1,299.39 Automatic Generated Check 39500 5/30/2024 SUN02 (SUN LIFE FINANCIAL) 1,184.42 1,184.42 Automatic Generated Check 39501 5/30/2024 TRO01 (TROIA FOODS) 395.5 395.5 Automatic Generated Check 39502 5/30/2024 URE01 (THOMAS URETSKY) 5,850.00 5,850.00 Automatic Generated Check 39503 5/30/2024 USB01 (U.S. BANK CORP PAYMENT SYSTEMS) 9,450.15 9,450.15 Automatic Generated Check -------------- --------------
Total for Bank Account 1001 -----> 351,583.80 351,583.80 17 Report Date: 06/05/24 SUCCESSOR AGENCY Page.: 1
Run Date...: 06/05/24 16:56 Month End G/L Trial Balance - Detail in the Order of FUND ID # GLTB Run by.....: Audrey Cray For All Accounts CTL.: SUC
Beginning of.: May 1, 2024 (11-24) Thru Ending of.: May 31, 2024 (11-24) G/L Account No
Ctr Cal. Fiscl Date Jrnl Line Description Debit Credit
--- ------ ----- -------- ----- ---- -------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- 40 1005 Fiduciary Fund Tax Increment Account
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 1,195,131.19
-------------- --------------
May 2024 11-2024 05/31/24 00-00 0002 ROPS 24-25 640,281.00 May 2024 11-2024 05/31/24 DL-00 0002 May Interest 4,491.74 ** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> 644,772.74 .00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 1,839,903.93
.................................................................................................................................... 40 1025 Fiduciary Fund 2008 TAX EXEMPT CD#69981148831
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 535,050.30
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 535,050.30
.................................................................................................................................... 40 1026 Fiduciary Fund 2008 TAX EXEMPT CD#53567157891
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 540,471.43
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 540,471.43
.................................................................................................................................... 40 1070 Fiduciary Fund 2008B RESERVE ACCOUNT
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 216,039.34
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 216,039.34
.................................................................................................................................... 40 1072 Fiduciary Fund 2008B Debt Service Fund
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 1,511.78
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 1,511.78
.................................................................................................................................... 18 Report Date: 06/05/24 SUCCESSOR AGENCY Page.: 2
Run Date...: 06/05/24 16:56 Month End G/L Trial Balance - Detail in the Order of FUND ID # GLTB Run by.....: Audrey Cray For All Accounts CTL.: SUC
Beginning of.: May 1, 2024 (11-24) Thru Ending of.: May 31, 2024 (11-24) G/L Account No
Ctr Cal. Fiscl Date Jrnl Line Description Debit Credit
--- ------ ----- -------- ----- ---- -------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- 40 1085 Fiduciary Fund 2017 Debt Service Fund
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 3.99
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 3.99
.................................................................................................................................... 40 1291 Fiduciary Fund Land
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 1,100,000.26
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 1,100,000.26
.................................................................................................................................... 40 1293 Fiduciary Fund FURNITURE AND FIXTURES
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 40,218.25
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 40,218.25
.................................................................................................................................... 40 1297 Fiduciary Fund SIGNS AND LANDSCAPING
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 182,630.99
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 182,630.99
.................................................................................................................................... 40 1300 Fiduciary Fund ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 222,849.24
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 222,849.24
.................................................................................................................................... 19 Report Date: 06/05/24 SUCCESSOR AGENCY Page.: 3
Run Date...: 06/05/24 16:56 Month End G/L Trial Balance - Detail in the Order of FUND ID # GLTB Run by.....: Audrey Cray For All Accounts CTL.: SUC
Beginning of.: May 1, 2024 (11-24) Thru Ending of.: May 31, 2024 (11-24) G/L Account No
Ctr Cal. Fiscl Date Jrnl Line Description Debit Credit
--- ------ ----- -------- ----- ---- -------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- 40 2045 Fiduciary Fund REFUNDABLE FEES
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 1,455,000.00
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 1,455,000.00
.................................................................................................................................... 40 2050 Fiduciary Fund Deferred Revenue
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 575,959.00
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 575,959.00
.................................................................................................................................... 40 2055 Fiduciary Fund Due to General Fund
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 127,330.33
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 127,330.33
.................................................................................................................................... 40 2330 Fiduciary Fund GENERAL LT- ADVANCE COSTC0/SEA
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 4,650,000.00
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 4,650,000.00
.................................................................................................................................... 40 2455 Fiduciary Fund LT ADVANCES FOR OPERAT EXPENSE
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 3,626,057.91
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 3,626,057.91
.................................................................................................................................... 20 Report Date: 06/05/24 SUCCESSOR AGENCY Page.: 4
Run Date...: 06/05/24 16:56 Month End G/L Trial Balance - Detail in the Order of FUND ID # GLTB Run by.....: Audrey Cray For All Accounts CTL.: SUC
Beginning of.: May 1, 2024 (11-24) Thru Ending of.: May 31, 2024 (11-24) G/L Account No
Ctr Cal. Fiscl Date Jrnl Line Description Debit Credit
--- ------ ----- -------- ----- ---- -------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- 40 2460 Fiduciary Fund ADVANCES COP REIMBURSEMENTS
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 1,454,766.42
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 1,454,766.42
.................................................................................................................................... 40 2485 Fiduciary Fund SERIES B BONDS
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 210,000.00
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 210,000.00
.................................................................................................................................... 40 2490 Fiduciary Fund Refunding Bonds, Series 2017
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 2,210,000.00
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 2,210,000.00
.................................................................................................................................... 40 3400 Fiduciary Fund Unappropriated Fund Balance
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 11,178,162.24
-------------- --------------
** Budget not Applicable ** Activity ----> .00 .00
-------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 11,178,162.24
.................................................................................................................................... 40 4007 Fiduciary Fund RPTTF
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 696,150.00
-------------- --------------
Annual Budget -1,391,368.00 Remaining Balance -695,218.00 Activity ----> .00 .00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 696,150.00
.................................................................................................................................... 21 Report Date: 06/05/24 SUCCESSOR AGENCY Page.: 5
Run Date...: 06/05/24 16:56 Month End G/L Trial Balance - Detail in the Order of FUND ID # GLTB Run by.....: Audrey Cray For All Accounts CTL.: SUC
Beginning of.: May 1, 2024 (11-24) Thru Ending of.: May 31, 2024 (11-24) G/L Account No
Ctr Cal. Fiscl Date Jrnl Line Description Debit Credit
--- ------ ----- -------- ----- ---- -------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- 40 4007 00 Fiduciary Fund RPTTF Non Department
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) .00
-------------- --------------
May 2024 11-2024 05/31/24 00-00 0001 ROPS 24-25 640,281.00 Annual Budget .00 Remaining Balance 640,281.00 Activity ----> .00 640,281.00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 640,281.00
.................................................................................................................................... 40 4450 Fiduciary Fund TAX INCR INTER
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 21,778.44
-------------- --------------
Annual Budget -13,444.00 Remaining Balance 8,334.44 Activity ----> .00 .00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 21,778.44
.................................................................................................................................... 40 4450 00 Fiduciary Fund TAX INCR INTER Non Department Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 4,576.85
-------------- --------------
May 2024 11-2024 05/31/24 DL-00 0001 May Interest 4,491.74 Annual Budget .00 Remaining Balance 9,068.59 Activity ----> .00 4,491.74 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 9,068.59
.................................................................................................................................... 40 5415 03 Fiduciary Fund Finance Srvc Finance
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 155,622.83
-------------- --------------
Annual Budget 143,996.00 Remaining Balance -11,626.83 Activity ----> .00 .00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 155,622.83
.................................................................................................................................... 40 5545 Fiduciary Fund OUTSIDE COUNSEL
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 6,831.00
-------------- --------------
Annual Budget .00 Remaining Balance -6,831.00 Activity ----> .00 .00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 6,831.00
.................................................................................................................................... 22 Report Date: 06/05/24 SUCCESSOR AGENCY Page.: 6
Run Date...: 06/05/24 16:56 Month End G/L Trial Balance - Detail in the Order of FUND ID # GLTB Run by.....: Audrey Cray For All Accounts CTL.: SUC
Beginning of.: May 1, 2024 (11-24) Thru Ending of.: May 31, 2024 (11-24) G/L Account No
Ctr Cal. Fiscl Date Jrnl Line Description Debit Credit
--- ------ ----- -------- ----- ---- -------------------------------------------------- -------------- -------------- -------------- 40 5545 04 Fiduciary Fund OUTSIDE COUNSEL Attorney
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 34,468.50
-------------- --------------
Annual Budget .00 Remaining Balance -34,468.50 Activity ----> .00 .00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 34,468.50
.................................................................................................................................... 40 5980 03 Fiduciary Fund BANK CHARGES Finance
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 12.00
-------------- --------------
Annual Budget .00 Remaining Balance -12.00 Activity ----> .00 .00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 12.00
.................................................................................................................................... 40 6390 Fiduciary Fund Bond Expenses
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 2,300.00
-------------- --------------
Annual Budget 3,400.00 Remaining Balance 1,100.00 Activity ----> .00 .00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 2,300.00
.................................................................................................................................... 40 6571 Fiduciary Fund 2017A Interest
Balance May 1, 2024 (11-24) 66,014.09
-------------- --------------
Annual Budget 82,009.00 Remaining Balance 15,994.91 Activity ----> .00 .00 -------------- --------------
Balance May 31, 2024 (11-24) 66,014.09
.................................................................................................................................... 23 AGENDA ITEM
6C.

Approve a Resolution Establishing a
Special Revenue Fund for the Long-Term
Maintenance of Environmentally Sensitive
Areas that are Impacted by Development
24 City of Sand City

STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jennifer Pope, Finance Manager
SUBJECT: Environmental Enhancement Fund
DATE: June 18, 2024
_______________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

At the April 16, 2024, Council Meeting, staff proposed a new Environmental Enhancement Fund fee that was approved by Council. The purpose of the Environmental Enhancement Fund fee is to collect in-lieu fees which are paid to the City to mitigate impacts to dune habitat or other environmentally sensitive habitats from development projects.

In accordance with the fee schedule, fees are charged for development which results in permanent or temporary impacts to dune habitat or ESHA. Applicants for certain permits may mitigate such impacts by paying into an Environmental Enhancement Fund at the rate set by the City’s fee schedule ($2.50/sq. ft ). The acreage or square footage of required mitigation will be determined by approved conditions in the requisite development permit including Conditional Use Permit and/or Coastal Development Permits.

The Environmental Enhancement Fund is a restricted fund which must be used to pay for projects which restore environmentally sensitive habitat within Sand City, consistent with the purposes of the Environmental Enhancement Fee.

CEQA:

This action does not constitute a "project" as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines section 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact in setting up the Environmental Enhancement Fund.

RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the establishment of an Environmental Enhancement Fund.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution
25 CITY OF SAND CITY
RESOLUTION SC 24- ___, 2024

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAND CITY ESTABLISHING A SPECIAL

REVENUE FUND FOR THE LONG-TERM MAINTENANCE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY

SENSITIVE AREAS THAT ARE IMPACTED BY DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the City of Sand City has environmentally sensitive habitat areas; and WHEREAS, the City Council approved a Fee Schedule that includes an Environmental Enhancement Fund Fee at the April 16, 2024 Council meeting; and WHEREAS, Environmental Enhancement Fund fees will be used to mitigate for impacts to habitat including the preparation, implementation, and monitoring of the restoration projects that restore dune habitat or ESHA.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Sand City does hereby establish a special revenue fund within the general fund to be known as the Environmental Enhancement Fund for the purpose of mitigating impacts to the dune habitat or other environmentally sensitive habitat Area (including ESHA) from development projects.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Sand City this __, day of ___, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Mary Ann Carbone, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED: ____________________
___________________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
26 AGENDA ITEM
6D.

Approve a Resolution Authorizing
Agreement for Property Tax Audit and
Information Services with HDL Coren &
Cone, A California Corporation
27 City of Sand City

STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Jennifer Pope, Finance Manger
SUBJECT: Property Tax Services
DATE: June 18, 2024
_______________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

HdL Coren & Cone (HdLCC) is a pioneer and leader of auditing, operations, and revenue solutions for public agencies. HdL partners with over 500 government agencies and has recovered more than $2 billion in revenue for their clients. Founded by local government leaders, HdL maintains a unique government perspective and dedication to supporting clients.

Sand City has contracted with HdLCC for Property Tax services since 2001. Their services include revenue forecasting, property tax audits, data analysis, successor agency services, special assessment administration, quarterly reporting, and more. The City has benefited from their levels of service and professionalism. The cost of their services is $5,544 for Fiscal Year 2024-2025. This fee will be adjusted annually by the California Consumer Price Index as determined by the California Department of Industrial Relation as measured February to February by the California All Urban Consumer Index. Fees received from an audit performed by HdLCC are payable on a contingent basis, HDLCC will receive 25 percent of net proceeds recovered or reallocated which are directly or indirectly the result of an audit, analysis or consultation performed by HdLCC.

CEQA:

This action does not constitute a "project" as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines section 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The funds to support this agreement are included in the FY 2024-2025 budget.

RECOMMENDATION:

Authorize the City Manager to enter into a three year agreement with HdL Coren & Cone for property tax services.

ATTACHMENTS:
28 1. Resolution

2. HdL Coren & Cone Agreement
29 CITY OF SAND CITY
RESOLUTION SC ___, 2024

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAND CITY

AUTHORIZING AGREEMENT FOR PROPERTY TAX AUDIT AND INFORMATION

SERVICES WITH HDL COREN & CONE, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION WHEREAS, property tax revenues can be verified and potentially increased through a system of continuous monitoring, identification and reconciliation to county records; and WHEREAS, an effective program of property tax management will assist the City in fiscal, economic and community development planning; and
WHEREAS, City desires the property tax data based reports and data analysis required to effectively manage the city property tax base and identify and recover revenues misallocated within the City, or to other jurisdictions; and WHEREAS, Contractor is a state-wide expert in such data analysis with over 260 public agency clients for whom such services are performed and has the programs, equipment, data and personnel required to deliver the property tax services referenced herein; and WHEREAS, certain services are payable on a contingent basis, Contractor shall receive 25 percent of net proceeds recovered or reallocated which are directly or indirectly the result of an audit, analysis or consultation performed by Contractor.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Sand City does hereby approve an agreement with HdL Coren and Cone to provide property tax services and authorize the City manager to execute an agreement in substantially the same form as attached at Exhibit A subject to City Attorney’s approval.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Sand City this 18, day of June 2024, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Mary Ann Carbone, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED: ____________________
___________________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
30 Rev. 8/21 Page 1 of 18 Non-Construction PSA

CITY OF SAND CITY

PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT
This PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENT (PSA) FOR NON-CONSTRUCTION PROJECT (“AGREEMENT”) is made and effective as of July 1, 2024, between the City of Sand City ("CITY"), a municipal corporation and HdL Coren & Cone a corporation ("CONSULTANT"). In consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions set forth herein, the parties agree as follows:

I. TERM
This AGREEMENT shall commence on July 1, 2024, and shall remain and continue in effect until tasks described herein are completed, but in no event later than June 30, 2027, unless sooner terminated pursuant to the provisions of this AGREEMENT.

II. SERVICES
CONSULTANT shall perform the tasks described and set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein as though set forth in full.

CONSULTANT shall complete the tasks according to the schedule of performance which is also set forth in Exhibit A. To the extent that Exhibit A is a proposal from CONSULTANT, such proposal is incorporated only for the description of the scope of services and no other terms and conditions from any such proposal shall apply to this AGREEMENT unless specifically agreed to in writing. Unless otherwise explicitly stated in Exhibit A, contractor shall at it sole cost and expense furnish all facilities and equipment which may be required for completing the tasks set forth in Exhibit A.

III. PERFORMANCE
CONSULTANT shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of his/her ability, experience, and talent, perform all tasks described herein. CONSULTANT shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons engaged in providing similar services as are required of CONSULTANT hereunder in meeting its obligations under this AGREEMENT.

IV. CITY MANAGEMENT
City Manager shall represent CITY in all matters pertaining to the administration of this AGREEMENT, review and approval of all products submitted by CONSULTANT, but not including the authority to enlarge the Tasks to Be Performed or change the compensation due to CONSULTANT. The City Manager shall be authorized to act on CITY's behalf and to execute all necessary documents which enlarge the Tasks to Be Performed or change CONSULTANT's compensation, subject to Section 5 hereof.
31 Rev. 8/21 Page 2 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
V. PAYMENT
A. The CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT $5,544 annually (This fee will be adjusted annually by the California Consumer Price Index as measured February to February by the California All Urban Consumer Index.) in accordance with the payment rates and terms and the schedule of payment as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as though set forth in full, based upon actual time spent on the above tasks. This amount shall not exceed nineteen thousand dollars ($19,000) for the total term of the AGREEMENT unless additional payment is approved as provided in this AGREEMENT.

B. CONSULTANT shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this AGREEMENT which are in addition to those set forth herein, unless such additional services are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Manager. CONSULTANT shall be compensated for any additional services in the amounts and in the manner as agreed to by City Manager and CONSULTANT at the time CITY's written authorization is given to CONSULTANT for the performance of said services. The City Manager may approve additional work not to exceed ten percent (10%) of the amount of the AGREEMENT.

Any additional work in excess of this amount shall be approved by theCity Council of Sand City.

C. CONSULTANT will submit invoices quarterly for actual services performed. Invoices shall be submitted on or about the first business day of each month, or as soon thereafter as practical, for services provided in the previous month. Payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of each invoice as to all non-disputed fees. If the CITY disputes any of CONSULTANT's fees it shall give written notice to CONSULTANT within thirty (30) days of receipt of an invoice of any disputed fees set forth on the invoice. Any final payment under this AGREEMENT shall be made within forty-five (45) days of receipt of an invoice therefore.

VI. SUSPENSION OR TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT WITHOUT CAUSE A. The CITY may at any time, for any reason, with or without cause, suspend or terminate this AGREEMENT, or any portion hereof, by serving uponthe CONSULTANT at least ten (10) days prior written notice. Upon receipt of said notice, the CONSULTANT shall immediately cease all work under this AGREEMENT, unless the notice provides otherwise. If the CITY suspends or terminates a portion of this AGREEMENT such suspension or termination shall not make void or invalidate the remainder of this AGREEMENT.

B. In the event this AGREEMENT is terminated pursuant to this Section, the CITY shall pay to CONSULTANT the actual value of the workperformed 32 Rev. 8/21 Page 3 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
up to the time of termination, provided that the work performed is of value to the CITY. Upon termination of the AGREEMENT pursuant to this Section, the CONSULTANT will submit an invoice to the CITY pursuant to Section 5.

VII. DEFAULT OF CONSULTANT
A. The CONSULTANT's failure to comply with the provisions of this AGREEMENT shall constitute a default. In the event that CONSULTANT is in default for cause under the terms of this AGREEMENT, CITY shall have no obligation or duty to continue compensating CONSULTANT for any work performed after the date of default and can terminate this AGREEMENT immediately by written notice to the CONSULTANT. If such failure by the CONSULTANT to make progress in the performance ofwork hereunder arises out causes beyond the CONSULTANT's control, and without fault or negligence of the CONSULTANT, it shall not be considered a default.

B. If the City Manager or his/her designee determines that the CONSULTANT is in default in the performance of any of the terms or conditions of this AGREEMENT, he/she shall cause to be served upon the CONSULTANT a written notice of the default. The CONSULTANT shall have ten (10) days after service upon it of said notice in which to cure the default by rendering a satisfactory performance. In the event that the CONSULTANT fails to cure its default within such period of time or fails to present the CITY with a written plan for the cure of the default, the CITY shall have the right, notwithstanding any other provision of this AGREEMENT, to terminate this AGREEMENT without further notice and without prejudice to any other remedy to which it may be entitled at law, in equity or under this AGREEMENT.

VIII. OWNERSHIP OF DOCUMENTS
A. CONSULTANT shall maintain complete and accurate records with respect to sales, costs, expenses, receipts, and other such information required by CITY that relate to the performance of services under this AGREEMENT.

CONSULTANT shall maintain adequate records of services provided in sufficient detail to permit an evaluation of services. All such records shall be maintained in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall be clearly identified and readily accessible.

CONSULTANT shall provide free access to the representatives of CITY or its designees at reasonable times to such books and records; shall give CITY the right to examine and audit said books and records; shall permit CITY to make transcripts or copies therefrom as necessary; and shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, proceedings, and activities related to this AGREEMENT. Such records, together with supporting 33 Rev. 8/21 Page 4 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
documents, shall be maintained for a period of three (3) years after receipt of final payment.

B. Upon completion of, or in the event of termination or suspension of this AGREEMENT, all original documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared in the course of providing the services to be performed pursuant to this AGREEMENT shall become the sole property of the CITY and may be used, reused, or otherwise disposed of by the CITY without thepermission of the CONSULTANT. With respect to computer files, CONSULTANT shall make available to the CITY, at the CONSULTANT's office and upon reasonable written request by the CITY, the necessary computer software and hardware for purposes of accessing, compiling, transferring, copying and/or printing computer files. CONSULTANT hereby grants to CITY all right, title, and interest, including any copyright, in and to the documents, designs, drawings, maps, models, computer files, surveys, notes, and other documents prepared by CONSULTANT in the course of providing the services under this AGREEMENT.

IX. INDEMNIFICATION AND DEFENSE
A. Indemnity
To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall indemnify and hold harmless CITY and any and all of its officials, employees, consultants and agents (“Indemnified Parties”) from and against any and all claims, losses, liabilities, damages, costs and expenses, including legal counsel’s fees and costs, caused in whole or in part by the negligent or wrongful act, error or omission of CONSULTANT, its officers, agents, employees or subconsultants (or any agency or individual that CONSULTANT shall bear the legal liability thereof) in the performance of services under this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT’s duty to indemnify and hold harmless CITY shall not extend to the CITY’s sole or active negligence.

B. Duty to defend
In the event the CITY, its officers, employees, agents and/or volunteers are made a party to any action, lawsuit, or other adversarial proceeding arising from the performance of the services encompassed by this AGREEMENT, and upon demand by CITY, CONSULTANT shall defend the CITY at CONSULTANT’s cost or at CITY’s option, with counsel selected by CITY, to reimburse CITY for its costs of defense, including reasonable attorney’s fees and costs incurred in the defense of such matters to the extent the matters arise from, relate to or are caused by CONSULTANT’s negligent acts, errors or omissions. Payment by CITY is not a condition precedent to enforcement of this indemnity. In the event of any dispute between CONSULTANT and CITY, as to whether liability 34 Rev. 8/21 Page 5 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
arises from the sole or active negligence of the CITY or its officers, employees, or agents, CONSULTANT will be obligated to pay for CITY’s defense until such time as a final judgment has been entered adjudicating the CITY as solely or actively negligent. CONSULTANT will not be entitled in the absence of such a determination to any reimbursement of defense costs including but not limited to attorney’s fees, expert fees and costs of litigation.

X. INSURANCE
CONSULTANT shall maintain prior to the beginning of and for the duration of this AGREEMENT insurance coverage as specified in Exhibit B attached to and part of this AGREEMENT.

XI. INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT
A. CONSULTANT is and shall at all times remain as to the CITY a wholly independent consultant and/or independent contractor. The personnel performing the services under this AGREEMENT on behalf of CONSULTANT shall at all times be under CONSULTANT's exclusive direction and control. Neither CITY nor any of its officers, employees, or agents shall have control over the conduct of CONSULTANT or any of CONSULTANT's officers, employees, or agents, except as set forth in this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT shall not at any time or in any manner represent that it or any of its officers, employees, or agents are in any manner officers, employees, or agents of the CITY. CONSULTANT shall not incur or have the power to incur any debt, obligation, or liability whatever against CITY, or bind CITY in any manner.

B. No employee benefits shall be available to CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of this AGREEMENT. Except for the fees paid to CONSULTANT as provided in the AGREEMENT, CITY shall not pay salaries, wages, or other compensation to CONSULTANT for performing services hereunder for CITY. CITY shall not be liable for compensationor indemnification to CONSULTANT for injury or sickness arising out of performing services hereunder.

XII. LEGAL RESPONSIBILITIES
The CONSULTANT shall keep itself informed of State and Federal laws and regulations which in any manner affect those employed by it or in any way affect the performance of its service pursuant to this AGREEMENT. The CONSULTANT shall at all times observe and comply with all such laws and regulations. The CITY, and its officers and employees, shall not be liable at law or in equity occasioned by failure of the CONSULTANT to comply with this Section.
35 Rev. 8/21 Page 6 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
XIII. UNDUE INFLUENCE
CONSULTANT declares and warrants that no undue influence or pressure was used against or in concert with any officer or employee of the CITY in connection with the award, terms or implementation of this AGREEMENT, including any method of coercion, confidential financial arrangement, or financial inducement.

No officer or employee of the CITY has or will receive compensation, directly or indirectly, from CONSULTANT, or from any officer, employee or agent of CONSULTANT, in connection with the award of this AGREEMENT or any work to be conducted as a result of this AGREEMENT. Violation of this Section shall be a material breach of this AGREEMENT entitling the CITY to any and all remedies at law or in equity.

XIV. NO BENEFIT TO ARISE TO LOCAL EMPLOYEES
No member, officer, or employee of CITY, or their designees or agents, and no public official who exercises authority over or responsibilities with respect to the Project during his/her tenure or for one year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any agreement or sub-agreement, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the Project performed under this AGREEMENT.

XV. RELEASE OF INFORMATION/CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
A. All information gained by CONSULTANT in performance of this AGREEMENT shall be considered confidential and shall not be released by CONSULTANT without CITY's prior written authorization.

CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents, or subconsultants, shall not without written authorization from the City Manager or unless requested by the City Attorney, voluntarily provide declarations, letters of support, testimony at depositions, response to interrogatories, or other information concerning the work performed under this AGREEMENT or relating to any project or property located within the CITY. Response to a subpoena or court order shall not be considered "voluntary" provided CONSULTANT gives CITY notice of such court order or subpoena.

B. CONSULTANT shall promptly notify CITY should CONSULTANT, its officers, employees, agents, or subconsultants be served with any summons, complaint, subpoena, notice of deposition, request for documents, interrogatories, request for admissions, or other discovery request (“Discovery”), court order, or subpoena from any person or party regarding this AGREEMENT and the work performed there under or with respect to any project or property located within the CITY, unless theCITY is a party to any lawsuit, arbitration, or administrative proceeding connected to such Discovery, or unless CONSULTANT is prohibited by law from informing the CITY of such Discovery. CITY retains the right, but has no obligation, to represent CONSULTANT and/or be present at any 36 Rev. 8/21 Page 7 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
deposition, hearing, or similar proceeding as allowed by law. Unless CITY is a party to the lawsuit, arbitration, or administrative proceeding and is adverse to CONSULTANT in such proceeding, CONSULTANT agrees to cooperate fully with CITY and to provide the opportunity to review any response to discovery requests provided by CONSULTANT. However, CITY's right to review any such response does not imply or mean the right by CITY to control, direct, or rewrite said response.

XVI. NOTICES
Any notices which either party may desire to give to the other party under this AGREEMENT must be in writing and may be given either by (i) personal service, (ii) delivery by a reputable document delivery service, such as but not limited to, Federal Express, which provides a receipt showing date and time of delivery,or (iii) mailing in the United States Mail, certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested, addressed to the address of the party as set forth below or at any other address as that party may later designate by notice:

To CITY: City of Sand City
1 Pendergrass Way
Sand City, CA 93955
Attention: City Clerk
To CONSULTANT:

Nichole Cone-Morishita, CFO
120 S. State College Blvd., Suite 200
Brea, CA 92821
XVII. ASSIGNMENT
The CONSULTANT shall not assign the performance of this AGREEMENT, nor any part thereof, nor any monies due hereunder, without prior written consent of the CITY. Because of the personal nature of the services to be rendered pursuant to this AGREEMENT, only CONSULTANT shall perform the services described in this AGREEMENT. Upon termination of this Agreement, CONSULTANT's sole compensation shall be payment for actual services performed up to, and including, the dateof
HdL Coren & Cone
37 Rev. 8/21 Page 8 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
termination or as may be otherwise agreed to in writing between CITY and the CONSULTANT. Before retaining or contracting with any consultant for any services under this AGREEMENT, CONSULTANT shall provide CITY with the identity of the proposed sub-consultant, a copy of the proposed written contract between CONSULTANT and such sub-consultant which shall include and indemnity provision similar to the one provided herein and identifying CITY as an indemnified party, or an incorporation of the indemnity provision provided herein, and proof that such proposed sub-consultant carries insurance at least equal to that required by this AGREEMENT or obtain a written waiver from CITY for such insurance.

XVIII. LICENSES
At all times during the term of this AGREEMENT, CONSULTANT shall have in full force and effect, all licenses required of it by law for the performance of the services described in this AGREEMENT.

XIX. GOVERNING LAW
The CITY and CONSULTANT understand and agree that the laws of the State of California shall govern the rights, obligations, duties, and liabilities of the parties to this AGREEMENT and also govern the interpretation of this Agreement. Any litigation concerning this AGREEMENT shall be brought and maintained in the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of Monterey.

XX. ENTIRE AGREEMENT
This AGREEMENT contains the entire understanding between the parties relating to the obligations of the parties described in this AGREEMENT. All prior or contemporaneous agreements, understandings, representations, and statements, oral or written and pertaining to the subject of this AGREEMENT or with respect to the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT, are merged into this AGREEMENT and shall be of no further force or effect. Each party is entering into this AGREEMENT based solely upon the representations set forth herein and upon each party's own independent investigation of any and all facts such party deems material.

XXI. AUTHORITY TO EXECUTE THIS AGREEMENT
The person or persons executing this AGREEMENT on behalf of CONSULTANT warrants and represents that he/she has the authority to execute this AGREEMENT on behalf of the CONSULTANT and has the authority to bind CONSULTANT to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 38 Rev. 8/21 Page 9 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this AGREEMENT to be executed the day and year first above written.

CONSULTANT
By:
(Signature)
(Typed Name)
(Title)

CITY OF SAND CITY
39 Rev. 8/21 Page 10 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
Vibeke Norgaard, City Manager
ATTEST:

Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

City Attorney
By:

Attachments: Exhibit A Consultant’s Proposal
Exhibit B Insurance Requirements
40 01089/0001/61175.03
EXHIBIT “A”

SCHEDULE OF PERFORMANCE

TIMELINE FOR DELIVERABLES
July/August Data available for purchase from counties
September 30 Data available on HdLCC’s web-based property tax application September/October Unsecured audits performed and forwarded to county assessor October Appeals quarterly updates emailed in counties where the data is available October-February Delivery of preliminary property tax reports January Appeals quarterly updates emailed in counties where the data is available January/February General Fund Budget Projections
April Appeals quarterly updates emailed in counties where the data is available April/May Final Books – Addendums emailed to clients
July Appeals quarterly updates emailed in counties where the data is available Ongoing Secured Audits – City
Property sales reports
City and Successor Agency mid-year budget reviews and budget projections
Analytical work at the request of clients
Monthly updates of database with property sale information 41 Rev. 8/21 Page 12 of 18 Non-Construction PSA

EXHIBIT B

INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS
Without limiting CONSULTANT’s indemnification of CITY, and prior to commencement of Work, CONSULTANT shall obtain, provide and maintain at its own expense during the term of this AGREEMENT, policies of insurance of the type and amounts described below and in a form satisfactory to CITY.

Note: Verify minimum limit for each coverage with City Manager.

General liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain commercial general liability insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CG 00 01, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 general aggregate, for bodily injury, personal injury, and property damage. The policy must include contractual liability that has not been amended. Any endorsement restricting standard ISO “insured contract” language will not be accepted.

Automobile liability insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain automobile insurance at least as broad as Insurance Services Office form CA 00 01 covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities of the Consultant arising out of or in connection with Work to be performed under this AGREEMENT, including coverage for any owned, hired, non-owned or rented vehicles, in an amount not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit for each accident.

Professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain professional liability insurance that covers the Services to be performed in connection with this AGREEMENT, in the minimum amount of $1,000,000 per claim and in the aggregate. Any policy inception date, continuity date, or retroactive date must be before the effective date of this AGREEMENT and CONSULTANT agrees to maintain continuous coverage through a period no less than three (3) years after completion of the services required by this AGREEMENT.

Note: May need to delete workers' compensation and employer's liability insurance requirements for certain sole proprietorships, partnerships, or corporations without employees.

Workers’ compensation insurance. CONSULTANT shall maintain Workers’ Compensation Insurance (Statutory Limits) and Employer’s Liability Insurance (with limits of at least $1,000,000).

CONSULTANT shall submit to CITY, along with the certificate of insurance, a Waiver of Subrogation endorsement in favor of CITY, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers.
42 Rev. 8/21 Page 13 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
Note: If the required limits for general liability, auto and employer’s liability are $1 million or less, the following paragraph may be omitted.

Umbrella or excess liability insurance. [Optional depending on limits required].

CONSULTANT shall obtain and maintain an umbrella or excess liability insurance policy with limits that will provide bodily injury, personal injury and property damage liability coverage at least as broad as the primary coverages set forth above, including commercial general liability, automobile liability, and employer’s liability. Such policy or policies shall include the following terms and conditions:
• A drop down feature requiring the policy to respond if any primary insurance that would otherwise have applied proves to be uncollectible in whole or in part for any reason;
• Pay on behalf of wording as opposed to reimbursement; • Concurrency of effective dates with primary policies; • Policies shall “follow form” to the underlying primary policies; and • Insureds under primary policies shall also be insureds under the umbrella or excess policies.

Other provisions or requirements
Proof of insurance. CONSULTANT shall provide certificates of insurance to CITY as evidence of the insurance coverage required herein, along with a waiver of subrogation endorsement for workers’ compensation. Insurance certificates and endorsements must be approved by City’s Risk Manager prior to commencement of performance. Current certification of insurance shall be kept on file with CITY at all times during the term of this contract. CITY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, at any time.

Duration of coverage. CONSULTANT shall procure and maintain for the duration of the contract insurance against claims for injuries to persons or damages to property, which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the Work hereunder by CONSULTANT, his agents, representatives, employees or subconsultants.

Primary/noncontributing. Coverage provided by CONSULTANT shall be primary and any insurance or self-insurance procured or maintained by CITY shall not be required to contribute with it. The limits of insurance required herein may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and non-contributory basis for the benefit of CITY before the CITY’s own insurance or self-insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

City’s rights of enforcement. In the event any policy of insurance required under this AGREEMENT does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, CITY has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary 43 Rev. 8/21 Page 14 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
and any premium paid by CITY will be promptly reimbursed by CONSULTANT or CITY will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from CONSULTANT payments. In the alternative, CITY may cancel this AGREEMENT.

Acceptable insurers. All insurance policies shall be issued by an insurance company currently authorized by the Insurance Commissioner to transact business of insurance or is on the List of Approved Surplus Line Insurers in the State of California, with an assigned policyholders’ Rating of A- (or higher) and Financial Size Category Class VI (or larger) in accordance with the latest edition of Best’s Key Rating Guide, unless otherwise approved by the City Manager.

Waiver of subrogation. All insurance coverage maintained or procured pursuant to this agreement shall be endorsed to waive subrogation against CITY, its elected or appointed officers, agents, officials, employees and volunteers or shall specifically allow CONSULTANT or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. CONSULTANT hereby waives its own right of recovery against CITY, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.

Enforcement of contract provisions (non estoppel). CONSULTANTacknowledges and agrees that any actual or alleged failure on the part of the CITY to inform CONSULTANT of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligations on the CITY nor does it waive any rights hereunder.

Requirements not limiting. Requirements of specific coverage features or limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits or other requirements, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. Specific reference to a given coverage feature is for purposes of clarification only as it pertains to a given issue and is not intended by any party or insured to be all inclusive, or to the exclusion of other coverage, or a waiver of any type. If the Consultant maintains higher limits than the minimums shown above, the CITY requires and shall be entitled to coverage for the higher limits maintained by the Consultant. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits of insurance and coverage shall be available to the CITY.

Notice of cancellation. Consultant agrees to oblige its insurance agent or broker and insurers to provide to CITY with a thirty (30) day notice of cancellation (except for nonpayment for which a ten (10) day notice is required) or nonrenewal of coverage for each required coverage.

Additional insured status. General liability policies shall provide or be endorsed to provide that CITY and its officers, officials, employees, and agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds under such policies. This provision shall also apply to any excess/umbrella liability policies.
44 Rev. 8/21 Page 15 of 18 Non-Construction PSA
Prohibition of undisclosed coverage limitations. None of the coverages required herein will be in compliance with these requirements if they include any limiting endorsement of any kind that has not been first submitted to CITY and approved of in writing.

Separation of insureds. A severability of interests provision must apply for all additional insureds ensuring that Consultant’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the insurer’s limits of liability. The policy(ies) shall not contain any cross-liability exclusions.

Pass through clause. CONSULTANT agrees to ensure that its subconsultants, subcontractors, and any other party involved with the project who is brought onto or involved in the project by CONSULTANT, provide the same minimum insurance coverage and endorsements required of CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT agrees to monitor and review all such coverage and assumes all responsibility for ensuring that such coverage is provided in conformity with the requirements of this section.

CONSULTANT agrees that upon request, all agreements with consultants, subcontractors, and others engaged in the project will be submitted to CITY for review.

City’s right to revise specifications. The CITY reserves the right at any time during the term of the contract to change the amounts and types of insurance required by giving the CONSULTANT ninety (90) days advance written notice of such change. If such change results in substantial additional cost to the CONSULTANT, the CITY and CONSULTANT may renegotiate CONSULTANT’s compensation.

Self-insured retentions. Any self-insured retentions must be declared to and approved by CITY. CITY reserves the right to require that self-insured retentions be eliminated, lowered, or replaced by a deductible. Self-insurance will not be considered to comply with these specifications unless approved by CITY.

Timely notice of claims. CONSULTANT shall give CITY prompt and timely notice of claims made or suits instituted that arise out of or result from CONSULTANT’s performance under this AGREEMENT, and that involve or may involve coverage under any of the required liability policies.

Additional insurance. CONSULTANT shall also procure and maintain, at its own cost and expense, any additional kinds of insurance, which in its own judgment may be necessary for its proper protection and prosecution of the work. 45 AGENDA ITEM
6E.

Approve a Resolution Authorizing an
Amendment to the Memorandum of
Understanding between ReGen Monterey
and its Member Agencies Regarding
Assistance with Compliance with
California Senate Bill 1383
46 City of Sand City
Staff Report
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Mark Parker, Public Works Manager
SUBJECT: Approve FY 25 Amendments to Exhibits A & B of the MOU between ReGen Monterey and its Member Jurisdictions Regarding Compliance with California’s Senate Bill 1383
DATE: June 18, 2024
Recommendation:

Approve FY 25 Amendments to Exhibits A & B of the MOU between ReGen Monterey and its Member Jurisdictions regarding compliance with California’s Senate Bill 1383.

Background:

The State of California has passed legislation, known as Senate Bill 1383, California’s Short-Lived Climate Pollutants legislation. The regulation has significant impact on each Member Agency with the goal of reducing organic material being landfilled by 75% by 2025, compared to a 2014 basis. The legislation mandates that Member Agencies undertake certain activities around the handling of organic waste materials collected within their jurisdictions. The regulation also requires 20% recovery of edible food by 2025 to direct it to a beneficial use and thus, prevent it from entering the waste stream.

Regulations took effect and local program implementation began on January 1, 2022.

In 2021, the Member Agencies determined that it was in their best interest to coordinate their activities related to this legislation. This coordination is being facilitated by ReGen Monterey’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of staff from each Member Agency, the three haulers in our service area (Haulers) and ReGen Monterey.

The Member Agencies determined that ReGen Monterey has the expertise and resources necessary to implement shared activities on the Member Agencies’ behalf and requested that the ReGen incur costs to provide these activities. The Member Agencies have agreed to reimburse ReGen for proportionate shares of certain designated annual costs incurred by ReGen for these activities under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Monterey Regional Waste Management District (DBA ReGen Monterey) and its Member Agencies Regarding Assistance with Compliance with California Senate Bill 1383.
47 The purpose of the MOU is to provide a structure for the Member Agencies to reimburse ReGen Monterey for SB 1383 related activities it performs on behalf of the Member Agencies. The MOU was voluntarily entered into by the Parties for the purpose of facilitating the implementation of SB 1383. The MOU was adopted by the ReGen Monterey Board on June 18,2021, the Member Agencies soon thereafter, and became effective July 1, 2021.
 Exhibit A - Detailed Activities and Costs: Contains the scope of work, and associated costs related to general SB 1383 activities. (Enacted June 2021, updated annually.)
 Exhibit B - Member Agencies’ Annual Proportionate Shares and Costs:

Allocation of such costs to the Member Agencies. (Enacted June 2021, updated annually.)
 Exhibit C - Member Agencies’ Estimated Allocation of CalRecycle Local Assistance Grant Program Funding for OWR1: Details proposed programs funded by the CalRecycle Local Assistance Grant Program. (Enacted February 2022. OWR1 grant term extended through November 2024.. Note: Per the application, CalRecycle Local Assistance Grant OWR4 (FY 2022-23) grant funds will be remitted directly to ReGen Monterey on behalf of member jurisdictions.)  Exhibit D – Member Agencies’ Estimated Procurement Requirements of Organic Material: Details the organic materials (compost or mulch) procurement requirements and costs for each Member Agency. (Enacted April 16, 2022, to be updated in 2026 when CalRecycle reevaluates annual procurement targets.) Review and Analysis:

Each year ReGen Monterey staff identifies expected expenses associated with jurisdictional compliance of SB 1383 and compiles those expenses in Exhibit A of the MOU. Expenses include items such as program administration, public education, monitoring, reporting and edible food recovery capacity building, program administration and outreach.

These expenses are then broken down to proportional percentages per population in Exhibit B.

The draft budget is first presented to the TAC for review, feedback, and consensus. It then is presented to the ReGen Monterey Board of Directors and Member Agencies’ Councils and Boards for approval.

The amendment to Exhibits A and B of the MOU would supersede exhibits covering previous fiscal years.
48 CEQA:

This action does not constitute a "project" as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines section 15378.

Financial Impact:

These are costs that ReGen Monterey incurs and is then reimbursed by our Member Agencies, with invoicing occurring twice annually. Sand City’s portion is $9,000, in two equal installments of $4500. Outlined in exhibit A of revised MOU Conclusion:

ReGen Monterey will continue to support its Member Agencies with SB 1383 compliance in a manner that provides cost savings for the communities we serve.

Attachments:

1. Resolution

2. MOU with revised exhibits A & B for 2025
49 CITY OF SAND CITY
RESOLUTION SC 24-__, 2024

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAND CITY AUTHORIZING AN

AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN REGEN

MONTEREY AND ITS MEMBER AGENCIES REGARDING ASSISTANCE WITH COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1383
WHEREAS, the State of California has passed legislation, known as Senate Bill 1383, California’s Short-Lived Climate Pollutants regulation with the goal of reducing organic material being landfilled by 75% by 2025, compared to a 2014 basis; and WHEREAS, the legislation mandates that the City undertake certain activities around the handling of organic waste materials collected within our jurisdiction and requires 20% recovery of edible food by 2025 be directed to a beneficial use; and WHEREAS, regulations took effect, and local program implementation began, on January 1, 2022; and
WHEREAS, in 2021, the Member Agencies determined that it was in their best interest to coordinate their activities related to this legislation and that that ReGen has the expertise and resources necessary to implement shared activities on the Member Agencies’ behalf and requested that ReGen incur costs to provide these activities; and WHEREAS, the Member Agencies have agreed to reimburse ReGen for proportionate shares of certain designated annual costs incurred by ReGen for these activities under a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Monterey Regional Waste Management District and its Member Agencies Regarding Assistance with Compliance with California Senate Bill 1383; and
WHEREAS, an MOU was adopted by the Member Agencies, and became effective July 1, 2021; and
WHEREAS, the amended Exhibit A and Exhibit B to the MOU amend the activities and costs with the anticipated regional cost of $197,412.00 and the cost to Sand City ratepayers is $9,000.00.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Sand City does hereby direct the City Manager to accept and execute on behalf of the City Council, the Amendment to Exhibit A & B of the Memorandum of Understanding between ReGen Monterey and its member agencies regarding assistance with compliance with California Senate Bill 1383.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Sand City this ___, day of ____, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:
50 APPROVED:
___________________________
Mary Ann Carbone, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED: ____________________
___________________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
51 1

MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

BETWEEN THE MONTEREY REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND ITS

MEMBER AGENCIES REGARDING ASSISTANCE WITH COMPLIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA SENATE BILL 1383
This Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) is made and entered into as of the date of the signatures set forth below by and between the MONTEREY REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT (“District”, “MRWMD”), a California Garbage and Refuse Disposal District, and its member agencies including the cities of CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA, DEL REY OAKS, MARINA, MONTEREY, PACIFIC GROVE, SAND CITY, and SEASIDE; THE PEBBLE BEACH COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT; and THE COUNTY OF MONTEREY (“Member Agencies”). Collectively these entities shall be known herein as “Parties” or individually as a “Party.”
Recitals
A. The State of California has passed legislation, known as Senate Bill 1383, California’s Short-Lived Climate Pollutants regulation. The regulation will have significant impact on each Member Agency, with the goal of reducing organic material being landfilled by 75% by 2025, compared to a 2014 basis. The legislation mandates that Member Agencies undertake certain activities around the handling of organic waste materials collected within their jurisdictions. The regulation also requires 20% recovery of edible food by 2025 to direct it to a beneficial use and thus prevent it from entering the waste stream. Regulations take effect, and local program implementation will begin, on January 1, 2022.

B. The Member Agencies have determined that it is in their best interest to coordinate their activities related to this legislation. This coordination is being facilitated by the District’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) comprised of staff from each Member Agency, the three Haulers in the District service area (Haulers), Salinas Valley Recycles (SVR) and MRWMD.

C. The Member Agencies have further determined that the District has the expertise and resources necessary to implement some of these activities on the Member Agencies’ behalf and have now requested that the District incur costs to provide these activities.

D. The Member Agencies have agreed to reimburse the District for proportionate shares of certain designated annual costs incurred by the District for these activities.

E. The form and content of this MOU have been presented to the TAC, and the TAC has recommended it for approval by the Parties
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits to be derived by the District and the Member Agencies, and of the promises contained in this MOU, the Parties agree as 52 2
follows:

Section 1. Recitals: The recitals set forth above are incorporated into this MOU.

Section 2. Purpose: The purpose of this MOU is to provide a structure for the Member Agencies to reimburse the District for SB 1383 related activities it performs on behalf of the Member Agencies.

Section 3. Voluntary: This MOU is voluntarily entered into by the Parties for the purpose of facilitating the implementation of SB 1383.

Section 4. Term: This MOU shall become effective on the last day of its execution by a Party and shall remain in effect until terminated by the Parties.

Section 5. Scope of Work, Costs & Cost Sharing: The scope of work, and associated costs, are set out in Exhibit A, entitled Detailed Activities and Costs, attached hereto and incorporated herein. Allocation of such costs to the Member Agencies is set out in Exhibit B, entitled Member Agencies’ Annual Proportionate Shares and Costs, attached hereto and incorporated herein. Exhibit C outlines estimated individual Member Agencies’ allocations related to the Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant Program (OWR1: 2021-22), attached hereto and incorporated herein. Exhibit D defines the estimated annual procurement requirements of organic material and estimated cost per ton of compost for each Member Agency, attached hereto and incorporated herein.

No later than March 1 of each year, and at such other times as directed by the Parties, the TAC shall meet to consider and, if deemed necessary, modify Exhibits A, B, C, and/or D subject to direction from the governing bodies of each Member Agency to its TAC representative.

Section 6. The District Agrees:
(a) District staff will manage activities as identified in Exhibit A, C, and D which activities include contracting with third party vendors when reasonably necessary and paying those vendors for contracted costs.
(b) Two times per year, on dates to be determined by the TAC, District will invoice Member Agencies for each Member Agency’s proportionate share of costs as shown in Exhibit B with each invoice to be fifty percent (50%) of the Member Agency’s share of costs. (c) Upon award of CalRecycle SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant Program funds, the District will invoice Member Agencies for their full allocation of grant funds as shown in Exhibit C. Four times during the grant term, aligned with dates identified by CalRecycle grant Terms & Conditions, the District shall report to Member Agencies a summary of actual grant expenditures and progress toward grant tasks to date.
53 3
(d) District will maintain an accounting of activities and expenses and provide reconciliation of payments annually. Material differences between estimated costs and actual incurred costs will result in either: 1) an adjustment made to the final annual payment for each Member Agency, or 2) such cost difference shall be incorporated into the subsequent year cost allocation.
(e) In year one only, in recognition of expected continuation of improved recycling revenues for the District from recyclable material sales, the District will off-set $140,000 of the costs identified in Exhibit A. This off-set is reflected in the cost allocations set out in Exhibit B for FY 2021-22.

Section 7. The Member Agencies Agree:
(a) To reimburse the District for all expenses incurred by the District under this MOU in accordance with each Member Agency’s proportionate share as shown on Exhibit B, C, and D. (b) To make a full-faith effort to cooperate with one another and with the District to achieve the purposes of this MOU by providing information, reviewing information in a timely manner, and informing their respective administration and governing bodies.

Section 8. Termination. Any Party may terminate its participation in this MOU upon giving written notice to the District no later than April 1 of any calendar year during the term of this MOU. Within ten days following a Party’s termination date, such party shall pay District all charges then due and payable and shall pay when determined any additional charges that shall later come due under the MOU, subject to the limits set out in Exhibits A, B, C, and D.

Section 9. General Provisions.
(a) This MOU is binding and for the benefit of the respective successors, heirs, and assigns of each Party and the District; provided however, no Party may assign its respective rights or obligations under this MOU without the prior written consent of the District. (b) This MOU is governed by, interpreted under, and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California.
(c) If any provision of this MOU is determined by any court to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable to any extent, then the remainder of this MOU will not be affected, and this MOU will be construed as if the invalid, illegal, or unenforceable provision had never been contained in this MOU.
(d) Waiver by the District or any Party to this MOU of any term, condition, or covenant of this MOU will not constitute a waiver of any other term, condition, or covenant. 54 4
Waiver by the District or any Party of any breach of the provisions of this MOU will not constitute a waiver of any other provision, nor a waiver of any subsequent breach or violation of any provision of this MOU.
(e) This MOU may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which is an original but all of which taken together will constitute one and the same instrument, provided, however, that such counterparts have been delivered to all parties to this MOU. (f) All parties acknowledge they have been represented, or have had the opportunity to be represented, by counsel in the preparation and negotiation of this MOU. Accordingly, this MOU will be construed according to its fair language. Any ambiguities will be resolved in a collaborative manner by the District and the Parties and must be rectified by amending this MOU.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the District and the Parties have caused this MOU to be executed by their duly authorized representatives as of the date of their respective signatures.

MONTEREY REGIONAL WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
55 5

CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
56 6

CITY OF DEL REY OAKS
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
57 7

CITY OF MARINA
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
58 8

CITY OF MONTEREY
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
59 9

CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
60 10

SAND CITY
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
61 11

CITY OF SEASIDE
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
62 12

PEBBLE BEACH COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
63 13

COUNTY OF MONTEREY
By: ________________________ DATE: _______________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
_______________________
64 14

EXHIBIT A

DETAILED ACTIVITIES & COSTS
FY 2024-2025
Scope of Work
The activities related to the implementation of SB 1383 may include contracting and policy development; public education; materials purchasing and distribution; reporting; contamination monitoring; edible food waste recovery; enforcement; procurement; organics processing; rate setting; cost monitoring; and any other related activities the Parties choose to address.

The District will take the lead producing public education campaigns in concert with the alreadyprovided Hauler and/or Member Agency resources. The Member Agencies will be responsible for production and mailing fees associated with outreach. The District will also contract with a vendor to administer contamination monitoring in the form of curbside lid flipping. The District will also provide CalRecycle reporting services to the Member Agencies. In addition, funds will be allocated to food recovery organizations for procurement of refrigerated holding facilities or transport vehicles to support edible food recovery efforts.

Costs
65 15

EXHIBIT A

DETAILED ACTIVITIES & COSTS
FY 2024-2025 (CONTINUED)
66 16

EXHIBIT B
MEMBER AGENCIES’ ANNUAL PROPORTIONATE SHARES & COSTS*
FY 2024-2025
*Member Agencies’ proportionate costs subject to adjustment annually in accordance with any change in scope and total costs. Costs “with minimums” will be utilized. 67 17

EXHIBIT C
MEMBER AGENCIES’ ESTIMATED ALLOCATION OF CALRECYCLE LOCAL ASSISTANCE GRANT PROGRAM FUNDING (OWR1: 2021-22)**
The Member Agencies of Carmel, Del Rey Oaks, Marina, Monterey, Sand City, Seaside, Pacific Grove, and the Pebble Beach Community Services District (PBCSD) join the Local Assistance Grant Program as a regional collaborative project for the implementation of regulation requirements associated with SB 1383, in coordination with other jurisdictions of the Monterey County region to maximize project impact and cost-effectiveness across the countywide area.

This regional grant-funded project will be coordinated through the two local waste management governmental agencies within Monterey County, Monterey Regional Waste Management (MRWMD), and Salinas Valley Solid Waste Authority (SVSWA).

The Member Agencies, along with each of the MRWMD and SVSWA member agencies are applying individually to this grant program using a unified regional project design, budget and implementation approach. All participating jurisdictions’ individual grant funding will be pooled together and expended in a cooperative manner by their agencies’ respective waste districts, MRWMD and SVSWA. The County of Monterey is applying separately and will manage its budget and project implementation independently, in coordination with broader regional planning efforts.

Based on current regional needs and findings to date related to SB 1383 in Monterey County, the following four major components will comprise the principal focus areas of program expenditures under the proposed regional project approach:
1) Grant Management, Tracking & Reporting
2) Agency Procurement Support
3) Edible Food Recovery Implementation and Capacity Building 4) Organics & Edible Food Recovery Education, Outreach and Technical Assistance Each element will be informed by regional coordination through the established MRWMD and SVSWA Technical Advisory Committee forums, Capacity Planning Assessments and related studies completed or in process throughout the region, and new data and information obtained through program implementation trials, stakeholder feedback and best practices as identified.

All expenditures will be incurred jointly, facilitated through each respective waste agency, and tracked and reported by each jurisdiction, based on the percentage of grant funds received by each agency compared to the full funding received collectively by all participating member agencies. CalRecycle, based on per capita calculations, using the Department of Finance’s January 2021 population statistics, estimates jurisdictions’ proportionate grant allocations. A summary of individual and collective agency grant allocations is presented below as Table 1. 68 18
Table 1. Thirteen Agency Collaborative Approach Budget Summary ** Working in coordination with the designated CalRecycle grant manager or other agency representatives as appropriate, the region may adjust these proposed expenditure areas, amounts, or priorities, consistent with grant expenditure eligibility requirements, as needed during the course of the grant term based on the needs of the region.

Agencies Estimated
Funding
% of District
Subtotal
% of Region
Total
Waste
District
Carmel-by-the-Sea $20,000 9% 4% MRWMD
Del Rey Oaks $20,000 9% 4% MRWMD
Marina $29,771 14% 6% MRWMD
Monterey $38,247 18% 7% MRWMD
Pacific Grove $21,398 10% 4% MRWMD
Sand City $20,000 9% 4% MRWMD
Seaside $43,151 20% 8% MRWMD
Pebble Beach Community
Services District
$20,000 9% 4% MRWMD
Subtotal (MRWMD): $212,566 100% 41%
Gonzales $20,000 6% 4% SVSWA
Greenfield $25,157 8% 5% SVSWA
King City $20,665 7% 4% SVSWA
Salinas $211,143 68% 40% SVSWA
Soledad $33,095 11% 6% SVSWA
Subtotal (SVSWA): $310,060 100% 59%
TOTAL (13 Agency Regional
Approach): $522,626 100%
69 19

EXHIBIT D
MEMBER AGENCIES’ ESTIMATED PROCURMENT REQUIRMENTS

OF ORGANIC MATERIAL
The list below indicates the annual recovered organic waste product procurement targets for each jurisdiction (city, county, or city and county) that will be in effect from January 1, 2022, through December 31, 2026 per CalRecycle.
70 AGENDA ITEM
6F.

Approve a Resolution Authorizing the City
Manager to Execute Amendment No. 1 to
the Monterey Peninsula Special Response
Unit Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) adding the City of Del Rey Oaks as
a Participating Agency
71 City of Sand City

STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: David Honda, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Authorizing the City Manager to execute Amendment No.1 to the Monterey Peninsula Special Response Unit (SRU) Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) adding the City of Del Rey Oaks as a participating agency.

DATE: June 18, 2024
_______________________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

In 2010 the cities of Seaside, Marina, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City, Carmel, and California State University at Monterey Bay entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for the “Implementation and Deployment of a Regional Police Special Response Unit (SRU) Consisting of Special Weapons and Tactics, Tactical Medicine, and Crisis Negotiation Team Components”. The City of Del Rey Oaks is the only Peninsula agency not to have joined SRU. Each of the participating agencies dedicate resources and personnel in support of SRU’s objective, which is to provide specialized support in handling critical field operations where intense negotiations and/or special tactical deployment methods are required, but beyond the normal scope of field officers.

Section 8 of the MOU allows a new agency to join the SRU if agreed upon by all current parties. Currently all parties agree to add Del Rey Oaks as a participating agency to the SRU MOU. On April 23, 2024, the Del Rey Oaks City Council adopted a resolution adding their city as a participating agency to the Monterey Peninsula SRU.

CEQA:

This action does not constitute a "project" as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines section 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT:

This action will not have a fiscal impact on the City.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the amendment to the Monterey Peninsula SRU MOU adding the City of Del Rey Oaks as a member agency.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Monterey Peninsula SRU MOU

3. Monterey Peninsula SRU MOU Amendment No. 1
72 CITY OF SAND CITY
RESOLUTION SC____ , 2024

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAND CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE MONTEREY PENINSULA

SPECIAL RESPONSE UNIT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (MOU) ADDING

THE CITY OF DEL REY OAKS AS A PARTICIPATING AGENCY
WHEREAS, in 2010, the cities of Seaside, Marina, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City, Carmel, and California State University at Monterey Bay entered into an agreement to form the Monterey Peninsula Special Response Unit (SRU).

WHEREAS, Section 8 of the MOU allows a new agency to join the SRU if agreed upon by all current parties, and currently all parties are in agreement to add Del Rey Oaks as a participating agency to the SRU MOU.

WHEREAS, on April 23, 2024, the Del Rey Oaks City Council approved a resolution approving staff to execute the MOU Amendment No. 1, adding the City of Del Rey Oaks to the Monterey Peninsula SRU MOU.

WHEREAS, Except as provided herein, all remaining terms, conditions and provisions of the MOU are unchanged and unaffected by this AMENDMENT NO. 1 and shall remain in full force and effect as set forth in the MOU.

WHEREAS, This AMENDMENT NO. 1 shall be effective upon execution by all parties.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Sand City hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute Amendment No. 1 of the SRU MOU adding the City of Del Rey Oaks as a participating member agency.

PASSED AND ADOPTED, at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sand City, this ___, day of ___, 2024 by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mary Ann Carbone, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED: __________________
_________________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
73 74
75 76
77 78
79 Amendment No. 1 to Regional Police Special Response Unit (SRU) Memorandum of Understanding
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO

REGIONAL POLICE SPECIAL RESPONSE UNIT (SRU) CONSISTING OF SPECIAL WEAPONS AND

TACTICS, TACTICAL MEDICINE AND CRISIS NEGOTIATION TEAM COMPONENTS Among the Following agencies:

City of Carmel
City of Marina
City of Monterey
City of Pacific Grove
City of Sand City
City of Seaside
California University Monterey Bay
City of Del Rey Oaks (to be added via this Amendment No. 1)

Page 1 ends

80 Amendment No. 1 to Regional Police Special Response Unit (SRU) Memorandum of Understanding
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO

REGIONAL POLICESPECIAL RESPONSE UNIT (SRU) CONSISTING OF SPECIAL WEAPONS AND

TACTICS, TACTICAL MEDICINE, AND CRISIS NEGOTIATION TEAM COMPONENTS This AMENDMENT NO. 1 is made to the Regional Police Special Response Unit (SRU) Consisting Of Special Weapons And Tactics, Tactical Medicine, And Crisis Negotiation Team Components Memorandum of Understanding dated 01-21-2010 (hereinafter the MOU) establishing the Regional Special Response Unit (SRU) by and between the original Participating Agencies (hereinafter the Agencies).

WHEREAS, the Agencies wish to amend the MOU to add the City of Del Rey Oaks as a Participating Agency.

NOW THEREFORE, the Agencies hereby agree to amend the MOU as follows:

1. This AMENDMENT NO. 1 shall be effective upon execution by all parties.

2. As of the effective date, the City of Del Rey Oaks shall be a Participating Agency in the MOU.

3. The following language shall be added to the heading of page 1 and the first paragraph of page 1 of the MOU: City of Del Rey Oaks

4. Except as provided herein, all remaining terms, conditions and provisions of the MOU are unchanged and unaffected by this AMENDMENT NO. 1, and shall remain in full force and effect as set forth in the MOU.

5. A Copy of this AMENDMENT NO. 1 shall be attached to the original MOU executed by the Agencies.
(The remainder of this page is intentionally left blank.)

Page 2 ends

81 Amendment No. 1 to Regional Police Special Response Unit (SRU) Memorandum of Understanding
City of Seaside City of Marina
NAME (Print):

X /

SIGNATURE DATE
X /

SIGNATURE DATE
City of Monterey City of Pacific Grove
NAME (Print):

X /

SIGNATURE DATE
X /

SIGNATURE DATE
City of Sand City City of Carmel
NAME (Print):

X /

SIGNATURE DATE
X /

SIGNATURE DATE
California State University at Monterey Bay
NAME (Print):

X /

SIGNATURE DATE

Page 3 ends

82 AGENDA ITEM
6G.

Approve a Resolution Authorizing
Renewal of Sheltering Agreement with the
Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to
Animals for Monterey County (SPCA)
83 City of Sand City

STAFF MEMO
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: David Honda, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Approval of the Animal Sheltering Services Agreement DATE: June 18, 2024
_______________________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

The City currently has an Animal Sheltering Services Agreement Amendment with the SPCA for animal disposition services that was adopted by the City Council on June 21, 2022 by Resolution SC 22-52, 2022.

The contract with the SPCA is due for renewal on July 1,2024 for a thirty-six (36) month term, and per the contract may be renewed for an additional two years. In this agreement, the fees will be as such: FY 2024-2025, the City will pay $245 per impounded animal with an additional $25 if SPCA staff is required to provide additional assistance with the animal.

This is an increase from the FY 2023/2024 cost of $184 per impounded animal. For fiscal year 2025-26 the cost would increase to $260 per impounded animal, and for fiscal year 2026-2027, the cost would increase to $275 per impounded animal along with the additional $25 for additional assistance. The City shelters a small volume of animals on an annual basis therefore, the annual cost increases should not have a significant budgetary impact.

CEQA:

This action does not constitute a "project" as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines section 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The City impounds 18-28 animals annually and the additional fiscal impact of the amended contract would be approximately $1,708 for fiscal year 2024-25, and $2,128 for fiscal year 2025-2026, and $2,548 for fiscal year 2026-2027. The exact fiscal impact depends upon the number of impounded animals. The Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget has $6000.00 allocated.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached Resolution authorizing renewal of Sheltering Agreement with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County (SPCA)
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Sheltering Services Agreement
84 CITY OF SAND CITY
RESOLUTION SC____ , 2024

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAND CITY AUTHORIZING RENEWAL

OF SHELTERING AGREEMENT WITH THE SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF

CRUELTY TO ANIMALS FOR MONTEREY COUNTY (SPCA)
WHEREAS, in 2003 the County of Monterey Health Department established a temporary animal shelter program for the humane boarding, care, and disposition of animals; and
WHEREAS, on August 2, 2016, the City Council approved the Public Safety’s recommendation to terminate the Animal Service Agreement with the County of Monterey Health Department and enter into an animal service agreement with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County (SPCA); and WHEREAS, the County and other participating jurisdictions agreed to share the cost of renovating the shelter and establishing and operating a shelter program, as approved by the Sand City Council by Resolution SC 03-43 (2003) and has been continually renewed through FY 2021-2022 by Resolution (SC 19-38) (SC 21-52); and WHEREAS, the Sheltering Agreement (Attachment 2) shall take effect beginning July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2027 and shall remain in full force and effect for thirty-six (36) months with the option to extend the Agreement an additional two years; and WHEREAS, the financial obligation of Sand City under the agreement shall include:

1. The following fees shall apply for each domestic and exotic animal brought to the SPCA:
 $245 for Fiscal Year ending June 2025
 $260 for Fiscal Year ending June 2026
 $275 for Fiscal Year ending June 2027

2. A surcharge of $25.00 per animal will be assessed if SPCA staff assists City’s employee or representative in receiving impounded animals; and

3. After holding an animal for five (5) days, a charge to the City of $30.00 per additional day will be charged for animals held in protective custody;

4. An agreed upon fee of $28.12 for mammal and wildfowl carcasses weighing from five pounds to two hundred pounds and $6.49 for a mammal or carcasses weighing less than five pounds.
85 -2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Sand City hereby approves the 2024-2027 Sheltering Service Agreement with the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County (SPCA).

PASSED AND ADOPTED, at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sand City, this ___, day of ___, 2024 by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mary Ann Carbone, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED: __________________
_________________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
86 SHELTERING SERVICES AGREEMENT
TIDS AGREEMENT is made and entered into by and between the City of Sand City hereinafter referred to as "City", which has duly executed, pursuant to resolution or ordinance, a counterpart hereof and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals for Monterey County, hereinafter referred to as "Society".

WHEREAS, City is required by state law to provide for the capture, impoundment, sheltering and disposition of certain non-human vertebrates within the corporate limits of the City and City has qualified personnel to perform field services but does not operate an animal shelter, City desires to contract for the humane sheltering, impoundment and disposition of said non-human vertebrates, including stray and unwanted animals, pursuant to the provisions of applicable California State Code, Agency Rules, County Ordinances, Judicial Orders and City Codes; and
WHEREAS, Society owns and operates an animal shelter and represents itself as being willing and able to provide the services required by City and to carry out the provisions of the aforesaid California Codes and City Ordinances pertaining to the shelter, impoundment, humane care, and disposition of stray and unwanted animals covered by said codes, rules, ordinances, and judicial orders; and
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants, conditions and provisions herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows:

1. DEFINITIONS. The following definitions shall apply to this Agreement:
a. Terms defined in the City's codes shall have the meanings described in said Codes except for the following:

1. "Animal" means all non-human vertebrates;
a) "Domestic Animal" means animals that are habituated to live in or about the habitations of humans and includes livestock. b) "Exotic Animal" means animals not commonly habituated to live in or about the habitations of humans.
c) "Wild Animal" means native and non-native animals in California, which retain their wild nature and which have not been held in captivity.
ii. "Animal Control Business Hours" means those hours enumerated in section 3 87 ( c) during which Society staff members will assist City's Animal Control Officers in the intake to Society of impounded animals without City incurring additional fees for these services. iii. "A nuisance animal control operator" means a private individual or other non-governmental entity that removes animals from structures or other areas for a fee; iv. "Field services" means stray animal pickup, owned animal pickup, injured animal pick up, animal nuisance, and animal complaint investigations and similar services. v. "Animal Control Officer" is a role provided by Cities and not by the Society.

The person in the role (who may have the title Animal Control Officer, Community Services Officer, Police Officer, or another similar title depending on the City) has multiple functions which include pick-up of strays in their city and delivering these strays to the Society

2. TERM AND TERMINATION. This Agreement shall take effect on July 1, 2024 and shall remain in full force and effect for thirty-six (36) months, ending on June 30, 2027, with an option to extend the Agreement an additional two (2) years, so long as City and Society agree upon fees and terms within sixty ( 60) days of the expiration of this agreement.

In addition, either party may terminate this Agreement by presentation to the other party hereto a written notice of said termination thirty (30) days prior to the effective date of said termination.

Notwithstanding any other provision to the contrary, failure to provide humane care, handling, or treatment of animals shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement that must be remedied within 24 hours of written notice delivered to the authorized representative of the breaching party. Failure to remedy such a breach of contract within the 24 hours shall terminate this Agreement without further notice.

In the event of termination, regardless of the type of termination, the parties shall fulfill their obligations to the other party up to and including the day of termination.

3. SERVICES TO BE PERFORMED BY SOCIETY.
a. Society shall operate and maintain at 1002 Monterey-Salinas Highway, Salinas, California, an animal shelter in a secure and sanitary manner adequate for the confinement, treatment, and disposition of all animals which may be delivered to it from City, and, except as otherwise agreed, shall furnish at its sole expense all supervision, labor, animal food, tools, supplies and other things necessary for satisfactory performance of the services herein agreed.

Society shall maintain on its property all animal food, tools, supplies, etc. and said items may not be removed from Society's property without authorization of the Society's Executive Director or his/her designee.
2 88
b. Society shall provide the means to accept during Animal Control Business Hours, and without charge to the person delivering the animal, all stray, abandoned and surrendered dogs, cats, and other domestic and exotic animals delivered to the animal shelter by City's Animal Control or Police Department personnel. Society shall also provide the means to accept during its public business hours, and without charge to the person delivering the same, all live, stray or abandoned dogs, cats, and other domestic or exotic animals delivered to the animal shelter from within the corporate limits of City by the City's residents or others. c. Animal Control Business Hours for receiving animals from Animal Control or Police Department personnel are 8:00 am until 4:00 pm daily. As always, your staff have access to our shelter outside of these hours, but we can't provide regular assistance after 4:00 pm. A surcharge of $25.00 per animal will be assessed if SPCA staff members assist City's employee or representative in receiving impounded animals at the SPCA shelter between 4:00 pm and 5:00 pm. After 5 :00 pm, SPCA staff generally won't be available at all. SPCA staff must have completed paperwork in hand by 4:00 pm or the surcharge will be assessed. d. Society shall require all such persons who deliver domestic and exotic animals to give their names and present home or post office address and, if they deliver a stray, abandoned, or injured animal, to identify the place where the animal was found. Failure to provide part or all of the required information shall not prevent Society from accepting an animal. e. Any animal taken into custody by an employee of City shall be delivered to the Society at its shelter in a humane manner or held in a humane way at City's designated holding area until it is delivered to the Society or returned to its owner. Society shall maintain a listing for the public of all stray dog/cat-holding facilities in the County, including location, telephone number and hours of operation, in accordance with state and local laws. f. Society shall maintain a quarantine section within the animal shelter facility for the confinement and care of any dogs, cats, or ferrets that have bitten persons for a ten day observation period at the discretion of City. Disposition of those animals that have bitten a person and are exhibiting neurological symptoms shall be disposed of in accordance with instructions of the Monterey County Health Officer (MCHO) as listed in the Health Department's Rabies Protocols (updated copies to be provided to Society by City). If kennel or cage space is not available in the isolation/quarantine sections of the shelter facility, Society will consult with the County Health Officer to determine how the animal(s) shall be housed and isolated. If directed by the City or the Monterey County Health Officer that the brain of an animal must be tested for rabies, Society shall euthanize the animal and tum over the carcass to County or City personnel who will remove the brain and deliver it to the County Health Department Laboratory for testing. Regardless of the test results, City shall be responsible for the disposal of the remains and reimbursement of any fees charged by County Health 3 89
Department. Society will not be responsible for removal of the brain or costs attendant thereto. g. With respect to domestic livestock animals and exotic animals, Society shall use its best efforts to provide these animals with shelter and care. However, the parties acknowledge that Society is not equipped to handle significant numbers of such animals and may decline to provide services if Society in its sole discretion believes that it is unable to provide for the humane sheltering and care for such animals in a cost effective manner. In the event that Society must decline such animals, Society shall cooperate with and assist City in locating other sheltering and care options for those animals.
h. When an impounded domestic or exotic animal bears a license tag from any jurisdiction or other identification tag or can otherwise be identified as to its ownership, Society shall notify the owner in the manner provided by law and include in such notice information regarding the procedure whereby the owner can recover the animal Any animal suspected of rabies or which has bitten or otherwise exposed any person shall not be released to its owner prior to the end of the quarantine period without express approval of City and MCHO. i. Before releasing an impounded animal to its owner, Society shall (1) determine, using reasonable prudence, the owner's identity, (2) collect the redemption and maintenance fees prescribed by City's Fee Schedule unless otherwise waived by City, and any other fees set by the Society, (3) provide owner with a receipt for fee payment and (4) obtain a receipt for the return of the animal.
j. Society shall assist City to the extent provided herein in the enforcement of the licensing and anti-rabies vaccination provisions of City's ordinances. Society shall require a redeeming owner to provide proof of a current dog license or anti-rabies vaccination before releasing the impounded dog to its owner. If a redeeming owner does not provide proof of a current dog license or rabies vaccination, Society will administer the rabies vaccination at the owner's expense. If a qualified Society staff member is not available to administer the vaccination, the owner redeeming the dog will be required to pay for a license and anti-rabies vaccination. The license tag will not be issued and information will be forwarded to City for follow-up to assure compliance. This will also apply to animals released that are under the age to be vaccinated. The Society is not responsible for enforcement or failure to vaccinate or license once the animal leaves its property. The Society will not issue license renewals or assess late fees unless provided for under separate agreement. The above provisions apply to cats if City requires that cats be licensed.
k. Any animal may be redeemed by the owner or owners thereof or adopted in accordance with applicable law, ordinances, and Society policies. The disposition of domestic animals not redeemed by their owner shall be at the sole discretion of Society at the end of any 4 90
legally mandated holding period. No animal taken into custody within City's jurisdiction and delivered to Society shall be sold, loaned or given to any person, firm, group, society, hospital, corporation, institution, or university for research purposes.

1. Subject to the provisions of Sub-paragraph (h.) above, Society may dispose of currently licensed dogs and identified cats and otherwise identified animals which are not redeemed by their owners after the legally mandated notice has been given. The holding period for such animals shall be that period mandated by law. Animals which are not reclaimed, are relinquished by their owner, or cannot be identified as to ownership, may be disposed ofby whichever of the following methods Society may elect:

1. Adoption at such price as Society may determine, subject to licensing requirements and laws pertaining to the sale or transfer of animals.

2. Euthanasia at a time and in a manner that is in accordance with applicable laws pertaining to impounding, housing, and disposition of animals.

3. Transfer to a rescue group.
m. City shall be responsible for emergency treatment of animals in accordance with Sections 597f and 597.1 of the California Penal Code for the mandated holding period. City personnel or agent shall transport injured or sick domestic or exotic animals to the shelter only after they have been seen by a veterinarian. In what in its sole discretion Society considers to be a medical emergency, Society may transport domestic or exotic animals to a veterinarian designated by City. City shall provide Society with a list of the approved veterinarians. If an animal becomes sick or injured at the shelter during the legally mandated holding period, Society shall arrange for the treatment of the animal by Society's veterinarian staff or by one of City's approved veterinary providers at City's expense. If City does not designate approved veterinarians or if those veterinarians are unavailable, Society will transport the animal to a veterinarian of its choosing on behalf of City at City's expense. After the mandated holding period, Society shall be responsible for the cost of any veterinary treatment it chooses to provide to the animal. If the owner of an injured or sick stray animal redeems the animal, the owner shall be responsible for reimbursing City and Society for all costs incurred; Society shall not be required to collect City's reimbursement from the owner or withhold returning the animal to its owner. Society shall notify City if the animal is redeemed. n. To facilitate redemption and adoption of impounded animals, Society shall provide a section of the shelter facility for viewing animals by prospective adopters and a section of the shelter office for redemption and adoption administration. The shelter office and viewing area hours of operation shall coincide with the hours the kennels are open to the public. o. Society shall collect and remit to City not later than the fifteenth (15th) working day of each month following the end of a quarter those fees enumerated in City Code and collected by 5 91
Society on behalf of City pursuant to this Agreement during the prior month. The nomenclature of these fees may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction but in general they include impound fees, license fees, quarantine fees and maintenance or board fees. Society shall be entitled to retain a $5.00 processing fee for each license sold for City and any other fees not mandated by City Code that it may collect. The City is responsible for providing Society with the most current fee schedule in writing in a timely manner.
p. Society shall keep complete and accurate records on the receipt, source, holding time and disposition of all dogs, cats, and other domestic and exotic animals delivered into its custody at the Animal Shelter. Said record shall be delivered to the City each month by the twentieth (20) working day of the month for the prior month's activity. All relevant records and accounts shall be made physically or electronically available for viewing at the animal shelter on Society's premises at reasonable times by an authorized representative of the City with 24 hours notice. q. Society shall use its best efforts to provide opportunities for City's residents to adopt, vaccinate, and microchip dogs and cats. Society shall retain all fees for services and adoptions other than licensing which shall be handled as provided in Paragraph 3( o) above. r. Society and City believe that neither party has an obligation to subsidize fee based nuisance animal control operators. Consequently, Society shall not charge City for wild animals brought to it by nuisance animal control operators and City shall support Society's protocols requiring nuisance animal control operators to pay a fee to Society for wild animals they bring to Society.
s. Society shall not be responsible for any animal control field services mandated by City ordinance.

4. PAYMENT. Except for animals held in protective custody or as otherwise noted, the financial obligation of City under this Agreement shall be to pay a fee to Society for each domestic and exotic animal brought to Society from within the corporate limits of City and accepted by Society irrespective of what agency or individual brings the animal to Society based on the following schedule;
For the Year Ending June 30,
Dogs and Cats
Small Domestic Animals
2025
$245
$150
2026
$260
$150
2027
$275
$150
A surcharge of $25 per animal will be assessed if SPCA staff members assist City's employee or representative in receiving impounded animals at the Society shelter outside of the Animal Control Business Hours set forth in Section 3 (c) above. After holding for five (5) days, a charge to City of $30 per additional day will be made for animals held in protective custody by 6 92
Society at the request of City, District Attorney, or pursuant to a judicial order. Any animals held longer than 60 days from the intake date at the direction of the City or Courts will be billed at a rate of 150% of the daily boarding rate.

On a limited basis and for a fee Society will accept from City's Animal Control, Police, or Public Works Departments, animal carcasses for disposal. The agreed upon fee for the period of July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2027 is $28.12 for mammal and wildfowl carcasses weighing from five pounds to two hundred pounds and $6.49 for mammal or wildfowl carcasses weighing less than five pounds. Society will not accept livestock carcasses or carcasses weighing in excess of two hundred pounds.

Society shall invoice City monthly for the number of animals sheltered for city under this Agreement in the previous month. The invoice shall be accompanied by an activity report listing individual animals by a control number, their origin, and the billing for each animal. City shall pay said invoice within 30 days of the invoice date and will incur a late fee of one and a half (1 Yi) percent per month on amounts more than fifteen (15) days past due. Payments made will apply to current billings frrst and arrears second.

Failure of the parties to negotiate fees and terms within sixty (60) days of the expiration of the existing agreement may result in Society's election, at its sole discretion, to continue services after the end of the term at the then rate charged City per animal per day plus ten (10) percent.

5. CONTRACT SUPERVISION. City shall designate an official assigned to represent the interest of the City and to ensure that the terms and conditions of this Agreement are carried out. That official will be identified to the Society upon execution of this Agreement. Society's Executive Director or his/her designee shall administer this Agreement on behalf of Society.

6. INDEPENDENT SOCIETY STATUS. Society understands and agrees that the services performed hereunder by its and its directors, officers, agents, employees or contracting persons or entities are performed in an independent capacity and not in the capacity of officers, agents or employees of the City. All personnel, supplies, equipment, furniture, quarters, and operating expenses of any kind required for on premise performance of this Agreement shall be provided by Society in performance of the contracted services. It is also understood that Society shall have control of its work and the manner in which it is performed, provided Society meets all legal requirements. While under contract with City, the Society shall be free to contract for similar shelter services to be performed for other agencies and/or jurisdictions.

Society employs Level 2 Humane Officers who are empowered under California Corporations Code Section 14502 to investigate and prepare for prosecution cases involving animal neglect 7 93
and cruelty within Monterey County. City agrees to cooperate fully with SPCA Humane Officers during the performance of their duties in City. If requested by City, Society may, at its sole discretion and upon request by City assist in an investigation initiated by City. Society's Humane Officers will provide technical assistance to City at no charge. Society will shelter animals seized during the course of an investigation under the terms and conditions set forth in Section 3 of this agreement. Where City and Society have each incurred costs in the successful prosecution of a case, each will request and make a good faith effort to secure restitution for both City and Society and will ask that any order of restitution require that funds be allocated proportionally to City and Society based on actual costs incurred by each.

7. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE. Each party agrees to indemnify, defend and save harmless the other party, their directors, officers, agents, and employees, from and against any and all claims and losses whatsoever accruing or resulting to any and all persons, firms or corporations furnishing or supplying work, services, materials, or supplies in connection with the performance of this Agreement and from any and all claims and losses accruing or resulting to any person, firm, or corporation for damage, injury or death arising out of or connected with the indemnifying party's performance of this Agreement.

To this end, Society shall maintain in force at all times during the performance of this Agreement a policy of insurance covering all of its operations (including public liability and property damage coverage but not including contingent malpractice) with not less than $1,000,000.00 single limit liability and motor vehicle insurance, covering all motor vehicles (whether or not owned) used in providing services under the Agreement with a combined single limit of not less than $1,000,000.00. A certificate evidencing the maintenance of such insurance shall be filed with the City. City shall be given notice in writing at least thirty (30) days in advance of cancellation or any modification thereof. Insurance shall be in a company authorized by law to transact insurance business in the State of California. All policies shall provide an endorsement naming City, its officers, agents, and employees as Additional Insured, and shall further provide thirty (30) days written notice to the City in advance of cancellation or non-renewal of said policies.

Policies shall also be endorsed to provide such insurance as Primary Insurance and that no insurance of the additional insured shall be called on to contribute to a loss covered by Society's insurance.

City shall maintain in force at all times a Comprehensive Liability Insurance including automobile liability in the amount of $1,000,000. Proof of such coverage will be a Certificate of Insurance with written notice to the Society of not less than 30 days prior to cancellation. The Society shall be named as an additional insured for acts or failure to act, arising out of the performance of this Agreement. Any required insurance may be provided by a plan of 8 94
self-insurance at the option of the City.

8. WORKERS' COMPENSATION. Society shall, throughout the period of this Agreement, maintain in full force and effect a policy of Workers' Compensation insurance, with employers' liability limits of not less than $100,000.00, covering all of its employees and shall furnish to City evidence of said insurance.

9. INSURANCE COVERAGE CHANGE. If City requires the Society to increase its insurance coverage within a contract year, the City agrees to pay any additional premium cost resulting from that change.

10. SECTION 504 COMPLIANCE. Section 504 of the Federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended, requires that all benefits, aids and services are made available to handicapped persons on an equivalent basis with those received by non-handicapped persons. The Society shall agree to be in compliance with Section 504 requirements.

11. COOPERATION. City and Society shall cooperate with each other in carrying out the terms of this Agreement and in order to be in compliance with state law and local ordinances or regulations. City and Society shall each make available to the other all knowledge and information each has that may be of benefit to the other party. City's Animal Control or Police Department personnel shall be subject to the rules, regulations and requirements of Society while at the Shelter. City and Society agree that results of their joint proactive programs will not be immediately evident and that each will make a good faith effort to eliminate the euthanasia of adoptable animals from within City's jurisdiction.

12. ENABLING ACTS. City shall enact all necessary and reasonable Codes, resolutions and/or regulations to the extent permitted by applicable law, to enable Society to carry out all of its performances and functions under the terms and conditions of this Agreement and incidental thereto.

13. NOTICE. In addition to all other notices provided for herein, City shall give Society notice of any Code, resolution, or regulation changes contemplated by it relating to any matters affecting Society's performance or the well-being or humane treatment of animals in the community and/or functions under the terms and conditions of the Agreement. All notices herein provided to be given, or which may be given, by either party to the other, shall be in writing and be given by personal service or by United States mail postage prepaid, certified mail return receipt requested, and addressed.

14. NONDISCRIMINATION CLAUSE. During the performance of this Agreement, Society and its subcontractors shall not unlawfully discriminate against any employee or 9 95
applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap, medical condition, marital status, age or sex. Society and subcontractors shall insure that the evaluation and treatment of their employees and applicants for employment are free of such discrimination. Society and subcontractors shall comply with the provisions of the Fair Employment and Housing Act (Government Code Section 12900 et seq.). The applicable regulations of the Fair Employment Housing Commission implementing Government Code Section 12900, set forth in Chapter 5 of Division 4 of Title 2 of the California Administrative Code are incorporated into this Agreement by reference and made a part of as if set forth in full.

Society shall also abide by the Federal Civil Right Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. Section 1981 et seq.) and all amendments thereto, and all administrative rules and regulations issued pursuant to said Act. Society and its subcontractors shall give written notice of their obligations under this clause to labor organizations with which they have a collective bargaining or other agreement. Society shall include the nondiscrimination and compliance provisions of this clause in all subcontracts to perform work under this Agreement.

15. SOLICITATION BY SOCIETY. Throughout the term of this Agreement, Society shall be free to solicit and accept donations from any person or organization to defray the cost of any of Society's programs, including sheltering services for government organizations and general education.

16. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING. This Agreement shall not be assigned or subcontracted by Society, either in whole or in part, without the prior written consent of the City, and any assignment without such consent shall automatically terminate this Agreement.

17. TIMELINESS: Time is of the essence in this Agreement.

18. AGREEMENT PREPARATION: It is agreed and understood by the parties hereto that this Agreement has been arrived at through thorough negotiation and that neither party is to be deemed that party which prepared this Agreement within the meaning of Civil Code Section 1654.

19. ATTORNEYS' FEES AND COSTS: The prevailing party in any action brought to enforce the terms of this Agreement or arising out of this Agreement may recover from the other party its reasonable costs and attorneys' fees expended in connection with such an action.

20. AMENDMENT: This Agreement may only be modified or amended by the written agreement of the parties.
10 96
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto, by and through their respective duly authorized representatives, have executed this Agreement on the date(s) so indicated.

SOCIETY FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS, a California nonprofit public benefits corporation
By: ei 0 -=--
Scot~hi
Date: __ Lt_ -_ /_/_·_2.. _ '7.,_
Executive Director
CITY OF SAND CITY Date: -----------
By:~~- · -~--·- · --
Its: -------------
Attest: ------------
By: -------------
City Clerk
11 97
98 AGENDA ITEM
8A.
3CE Annual Update - Judith Young, 3CE
Senior Account Manager
99 Judith Young
Senior Account Manager, Member Agencies
June 18, 2024

CITY OF SAND CITY
3CE Annual Presentation
100

A PARTNERSHIP TO SUPPORT SHARED CUSTOMERS
101
2023 YEAR IN REVIEW
Lower emissions
Cleaner more reliable grid
Community investment
Stable and responsible rates
102
3CE PRIORITIZES INNOVATION –One of California’s first solar + storage projects –The state’s first new geothermal project in three decades –The largest compressed air battery storage in the world 103
ADDITIONALITY – THE KEY TO OUR

PROCUREMENT STRATEGY
Investing in a diverse portfolio of renewables coupled with innovative energy storage capacity
104

CALIFORNIA BREAKS RENEWABLE ENERGY

RECORDS
It’s working!
105
3CE DELIVERS POWER FOR GOOD Affordable Rates Project Selection Criteria Rebates & Incentives 106

INVESTING IN YOUR COMMUNITY
Residential, Commercial, & Agriculture Rebates Available Agriculture
Electrification
Program
- $75,000
Electrify Your Home
$17,385
$2,500 per unit
Concierge - $24,000
New Construction
Electrification
$5,000
$250,000
Electric Bus
- $200,000
$1000-4000
$150,000
Electrify Your Ride
Residential
Commerical & Ag
107
INVESTING IN YOUR CITY’S ENERGY TRANSITION
Member Agency Programs:

Plan Your Fleet
Electrify Your Fleet
Charge Your Fleet
108
INVESTING IN YOUR CITY’S ENERGY TRANSITION – Reach Code Program – Charging Stations/Charge-ready –Member Agency
Communications
109
Thank You
11 3CE.org [email protected]
877-455-2223
Senior Account Manager (805) 693-2000
Judith Young [email protected]
110

AGENDA ITEM
9A.

Approve a Resolution Approving a Coastal
Development Permit (CDP 23-009),
Including a Tree Removal Permit and
Design Permit for the Proposed MontereySalinas Transit (MST) SURF! Bus Rapid Transit Project and Finding the Project
Exempt from CEAQ per Public Resources
Code Section 21080325(b)
111
1 City of Sand City

STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Michael Groves, AICP, Contract Senior Principal
SUBJECT: Application for a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) including a tree removal permit and design permit for the Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project Application CDP 23-009, CEQA exempt pursuant to PRC 21080.25(b)
DATE: June 18, 2024
______________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

A Coastal Development Permit (CDP 23-009) application was submitted by MontereySalinas Transit (MST) (the “Applicant”) for a bus rapid transit project known as the SURF! Busway. A Design Permit and Tree Removal Permit are also required for the project.

Municipal Code Section 18.72.030 (Combining Permits) provides a means to combine multiple permits into one for development projects that require multiple facets of review.

Therefore, this Coastal Development Permit (CDP) is a combined permit for a CDP, Design Permit, and Tree Removal Permit, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 18.72.030 (Combining Permits). The project includes approximately six (6) linear miles of new roadway surface adjacent to State Route 1 that would be dedicated to the SURF! busway.

The SURF! busway will run between Marina and Sand City with the northern terminus located at MST’s Marina Transit Exchange at Reservation Road and De Forest Road and the southern terminus located at Contra Costa Street in Sand City. Given the length of the proposed busway and its physical location, the project would be located in and/or adjacent to the cities of Marina, Seaside, and Sand City, extending parallel to Highway 1 and Fort Ord Dunes State Park. See Exhibit A, Findings of Approval, Exhibit B, Conditions of Approval, and Exhibit C, Surf! Busway Overall Route.

The project will use 100 percent zero-emission, near-zero emission, low oxide or nitrogen engines, compressed natural gas fuel, fuel cell, or hybrid powertrain buses. The purpose of the project is to establish faster, more efficient bus rapid transit between the Monterey Peninsula and the Salinas Valley to help relieve commuter congestion on Highway 1 and to better serve environmental justice communities including low income, minority, and other disadvantaged populations within MST’s service area.

Coastal Commission Staff Letter of Opposition:

The City was copied on a May 17, 2024 letter sent from Kevin Kahn, District Manager of the Central Coast District of the California Coastal Commission to the California 112
2 Transportation Commission (CTC) and California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). Mr.

Kahn’s letter raised two major concerns. The first concern was that the Applicant lacked the legal ability to construct the project because the project is not compatible with the requirements of the property owners Proposition 116 funding source or with the intended future use of the TAMC corridor for rail use. The second concern surrounded the project’s inconsistency with the Coastal Act as a result of the projects impact to Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Area (ESHA). See Exhibit D, Coastal Commission Letter.

TAMC/MST Joint Response to Coastal Commission Letter:

On May 21, 2024, TAMC, the property owner, and MST, the Applicant, provided a joint response to the Coastal Commission letter. The response states that the Proposition 116 funding that TAMC received is allowed to be used for rail projects. Under Proposition 116, they explain, exclusive public mass transit guideway projects, which the SURF! Busway project is, fall under the definition of a “rail project”. The letter opines that the SURF! Busway is an allowed use under the Proposition 116 grant funding and that the use of the TAMC corridor for the SURF! Busway does not preclude the future use of the corridor to also be used for rail. The letter states that the SURF! Busway will increase ridership and would help build demand for a future rail project. The letter did not address the Coastal Commission’s comments regarding impacts to ESHA. See Exhibit E, TAMC AND MST Response to CCC Letter.

Staff Analysis:

The City has considered both the points raised by the Coastal Commission and the response by the Applicant. The City defers to the Applicant regarding conformance with their grant funding source. The City would generally not question the funding and financing of public agency applicants for projects within the City. Regarding ESHA, the Applicant has agreed to the City’s required 1:1 mitigation for impacts to ESHA, with the opportunity for enhanced mitigation of up to 3:1, as discussed in more detail below.

Project Description:

The Sand City portion of the MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project (project) is approximately 0.67 miles long and begins at Sand City’s northern city-limit and terminates at Playa Avenue to the south. See Exhibit F, Sand City SURF! Busway Alignment. From Sand City’s northern city-limit to the future Monterey Bay Shores development project (located where California Avenue intersects the southbound Highway 1 on-ramp) the busway would be located between Beach Range Road and the Monterey Bay Coastal Recreation Trail, seaward of State Route 1. After passing the future Monterey Bay Shores development project entrance location, the busway alignment will meet California Avenue at the SR 1 southbound on-ramp. Buses will re-enter the public right-of-way via a new roundabout at the junction of California Avenue, the SR 1 southbound on-ramp, and the Monterey Bay Shores access road. Buses would navigate the roundabout, proceed through the existing signalized intersection, and continue on California Avenue for a few-hundred feet before making a left turn back into the undeveloped TAMC corridor just south of the 113
3 California/Fremont/Del Monte/Monterey intersection. Once back within the corridor, buses would travel on dedicated lanes down to Playa Avenue to a new bus stop and platforms within the TAMC right-of-way. Following this stop, buses would turn left on Playa Avenue and then right back on to Del Monte Boulevard where they would continue south to Contra Costa Street on existing roadways. See Exhibit G, Sand City SURF! Busway 100% Plans.

The project alignment within Sand City includes the following: approximately 0.67 miles of new dedicated SURF! busway lanes located adjacent to SR 1 and California Avenue; a new multi-use trail adjacent to the new SURF! Busway lanes along the California Avenue portion of the route; a new roundabout at the SR 1 southbound on-ramp, which includes a new bus stop; a new dedicated SURF! bus stop and platform at Playa Avenue and California Avenue; a new traffic signal at Playa Avenue/California Avenue; re-alignment of beach range road and closure of a portion of the Monterey Peninsula Coastal Recreation Trail; and removal of nine trees.

The project is located within an existing transportation corridor that is assumed for continued transportation use in local land use and zoning documents. The majority of the alignment of the new “off-road” busway would be within the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) Monterey Branch Line rail corridor right-of-way, an approximately 100-foot-wide corridor generally located between Beach Range Road and the Monterey Peninsula Recreation Trail on the ocean side of Highway 1, and adjacent to California Avenue in Sand City, which has been used for transportation purposes (rail) since the late 1800s. Some existing public roadways would be used for the SURF! line throughout the route.

Regulatory Setting:

The project improvements related to the SURF! Busway are located almost entirely within the Coastal Zone in Sand City. Therefore, the standard of review for this Coastal Development Permit is Sand City’s certified Local Coastal Program (LCP). The LCP includes regulations for land uses, development standards, coastal access, and addressing potential impacts to special status species and Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas or ESHAs. Public transportation rights-of-ways have neither land use designations nor zoning ascribed to them as their only uses are for transportation. Where Sand City’s certified Local Coastal Program does not include clear regulations, the Coastal Act and the City’s General Plan are used as guidance.

Sand City Municipal Code (SCMC) Section 16.12.030 requires a tree removal permit from the City to perform or cause to be performed the removal, cutting down, or trimming of more than one-third of the green foliage of, poisoning, or otherwise killing or destroying, any significant tree within City limits, unless exempted by SCMC Section 16.12.080. Under Municipal Code Section 18.72.030, Combining Multiple Permits, when development projects require multiple permit approvals within the coastal zone, the coastal development permit may serve as the single overriding land use entitlement permit for the project. In this case, a separate tree removal permit is not required, and the proposed tree removal is addressed in this CDP.
114
4 ESHA:

The project is located mostly within the TAMC corridor which is characterized by coastal scrub and ruderal habitat. According to the Biological Resources Report prepared by Denise Duffy & Associates, Inc., May 2021, multiple special-status species, including Hooker’s manzanita, Sandmat manzanita, Monterey spineflower, and Coast and seacliff buckwheat, have been identified in the project area. These areas are considered environmentally sensitive habitat (ESHA) under the LCP. The LCP includes the Coastal Act definition of ESHA, which is:

Any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could easily be disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments.

Section 30240 of the Coastal Act further states that ESHA “shall be protected against any significant disruption of habitat values, and only uses dependent on those resources should be allowed within those areas.”
To reduce impacts to ESHA, the City asked the Applicant to explore locating the SURF! Busway on the existing California Avenue right-of-way to connect between the proposed roundabout and Playa Avenue. The Applicant provided that the project includes dedicated SURF! Busway lanes along the railroad corridor adjacent to California for multiple reasons:
1) the existing bus stops on Playa Avenue are currently running at full capacity during peak hours and MST will gain operational efficiencies and travel time savings by utilizing two new SURF-themed bus stops along this route; 2) locating the busway within the rail corridor allows MST to install a new multiuse trail immediately adjacent to the busway, and separated from California Avenue vehicular traffic, further supporting safe routes to Seaside High School and supporting Sand City’s planning efforts to use the rail corridor for bicycle/pedestrian use; and 3) in the future, MST hopes to extend the busway through the rail corridor and eventually connecting to downtown Monterey. In short, the proposed alignment is part of a larger multi-use transportation vision that will utilize the TAMC rightof-way. The Applicant has demonstrated that the success of the project is dependent upon use of this transportation corridor. City staff finds that, if mitigated, the project is compliant with the LCP’s ESHA policies.

According to Table 6 of the ESHA Impacts Memo prepared by Denise Duffy & Associates on March 18, 2024, the project includes 4.53 acres of impact to ESHA within Sand City.

This includes both long-term temporary impacts and permanent impacts. See Exhibit H, DD&A ESHA Impacts Report. Of the 4.53 acres, 0.49 acres are impacted as a result of the proposed multi-use bicycle and pedestrian trail. Given the bicycle and pedestrian trails location in highly fragmented, ruderal habitat and the fact that the bicycle/pedestrian trail 115
5 has been included in the project to meet the public access and recreation provisions of the LCP, this area has been removed from the ESHA mitigation requirements. In total, 4.04 acres of ESHA must be mitigated as a result of the project.

Sand City’s LCP does not contain specific mitigation ratios for the disturbance of ESHA.

However, as part of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, the Applicant prepared a Biological Resource Evaluation which requires 1:1 mitigation ratio for impacts to special-status species and dune scrub habitat. The City has conditioned the permit to mitigate impacts to ESHA at a 1:1 ratio by payment of in-lieu fees into the City’s Environmental Enhancement Fund. The City’s Environmental Enhancement Fund is a fund that has been established for the purpose of ESHA and dune restoration with Sand City. In addition to the required mitigation, MST has indicated a willingness to apply for a grant which would fund enhanced mitigation. The City is in support of assisting with the grant application, which would fund mitigation above the required 1:1 ratio, to an enhanced mitigation ratio of 1.5:1 for longterm temporary impacts and a ratio of 3:1 for permanent impacts.

Landscaping:

The City’s LCP requires landscaped areas to utilize native coastal plants, as shown below:

LUP Policy 4.3.21. Enhance coastal plant communities by requiring new developments to utilize appropriate native coastal plants in landscaping plans that are compatible with existing native species. Prohibit the use of invasive plants in landscaping schemes.

The project includes landscaping surrounding the proposed roundabout, the proposed new bus stop platform at California and Playa, and adjacent to the new bus lanes and multi-use path along California Avenue. The majority of the planting palette includes native coastal dunes species and native trees. This permit includes a condition which requires the Applicant to submit an updated landscape plan to include irrigation for all landscaping. The irrigation and landscaping will be maintained by the Applicant for the life of the project, that is, for the perpetuity of the operation and use of the SURF! Busway lanes. The project is in conformance with the LCP’s policies regarding native landscaping.

Tree Removal:

Within Sand City, there are 39 significant trees that are within the project area but are outside of the project grading area and will be avoided and protected in place during construction through the use of exclusionary fencing per Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO 4.12 from the IS/MND. There are nine significant trees, as defined in Municipal Code Section

16.12, within the grading area that cannot be avoided. Removal of these trees will require pre-construction surveys for protected avian species (MM BIO-1.4). Tree’s will be replaced at a ratio of a 2:1 for significant trees, and shall be increased based on available planting space when project design is complete.
116
6 Traffic:

A traffic impact assessment was prepared in March 2021 as part of the IS/MND. The traffic impact assessment found that all intersections in Sand City would remain above Level of Service (LOS) D as a result of the project and no traffic mitigation measures were included in the IS/MND. Sand City’s traffic engineer reviewed the project and raised concerns with the impact of the project on the Playa / California intersection. In response to the City’s concerns, the Applicant prepared an Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) memo, dated February 7, 2024, for the California Avenue & Playa Avenue intersection within Sand City.

As a result of the findings of the ICE memo, the Applicant has included a signal at the Playa / California intersection to improve congestion and traffic conditions and has agreed to provide grant writing support to Sand City for activities beneficial to the SURF! operational service and City bike, pedestrian, and shared mobility plans. See Exhibit I, Intersection Control Evaluation memo.

Public Access and Recreation:

A portion of the project is located seaward of Highway 1, between Beach Range Road and the Monterey Bay Coastal Recreation trail, both of which serve as lateral coastal access ways and are heavily used by walkers, runners, and bicyclists. The project will result in a temporary closure to a portion of the Monterey Peninsula Coastal Recreation Trail just north of the proposed roundabout during construction. To compensate for this temporary closure, the project will include a partial re-alignment of the Monterey Peninsula Coastal Recreation and Beach Range Road in order to maintain the continuous trail connection between the Monterey Peninsula Coastal Recreation and Beach Range Road during construction. The project also includes a multi-use trail located parallel to the new bus lanes which will run adjacent to California Avenue. See Exhibit J, Multi-Use Trail Impacts and Improvements.

One of the key provisions of the Coastal Act is to maximize public access to and along the coast. The LCP includes the following policies regarding public access:

LCP Policy 2.3.4. …Future developments shall implement safe access ways and improvements as determined by the City. Site specific locations shall be developed as part of future development proposals, and according to guidelines established by the City….

Overall, a continuous bicyclist and pedestrian trail will be maintained along the Monterey Peninsula Coastal Recreation Trail / Beach Range Road connection. However, bicyclists and pedestrians using the Monterey Peninsula Coastal Recreation Trail and/or Beach Range Road in this area will have to cross the proposed roundabout as a result of this project. In order to ensure safe crossing and reduce barriers to public access, the roundabout has been sited and designed to include crosswalks, signs that indicate pedestrian crossings, and MST drivers will be notified and trained to proceed into the 117
7 roundabout with caution for trail users. Additionally, the Applicant has staged the Monterey Peninsula Coastal Recreation Trail closure and Beach Range Road improvements in such a way to ensure that use of the trails remain open throughout construction of the project.

Additionally, the project includes a new multi-use trail which will be located adjacent to the new bus lanes paralleling California Avenue.

In summary, the project is in compliance with the LCP as it relates to public access.

Visual Resources:

The scenic and visual qualities of coastal areas are considered a resource of public importance. The LCP contains the following policies which address visual resources:

LCP Policy 5.3.1. Views of Sand City's coastal zone shall be enhanced and protected through regulation of siting, design, and landscaping of all new development in the coastal zone, adjacent to Highway One (on both the east and west) in order to minimize the loss of visual resources.

LCP Policy 5.3.2. Views of Sand City's coastal zone, Monterey Bay and Monterey Peninsula shall be protected through provision of view corridors, vista points, development height limits, and dune restoration areas, as shown on Figure 9.

LCP Policy 5.3.4. Develop design standards for future development proposals based on LCP policies and the following general design guidelines. These standards shall be used by the City's Design Committee to ensure that new development will be sited, designed and landscaped in a manner that provides view corridors and considers protection and/or enhancement of visual resources in a manner consistent with all LUP policies, including but not limited to, those governing required view corridors, dune preservation/restoration areas, and height regulations.

LCP Policy 5.3.5. Require all future developments to obtain a design permit, in order to assure conformance with the City's design standards, and design compatibility with surrounding development. All design permit applications shall be reviewed by the City's Design Committee.

According to Figure 9 in the LCP, the project is not located within an identified view corridor.

Additionally, the busway is located in a depression between Highway One and the railroad tracks and will not block views to the coastline from Highway 1. While the busway lanes would be visible from Highway 1 and the Monterey Bay Coastal Recreation Trail in some locations, the lanes do not significantly differ in visual character from the existing railroad tracks within the corridor. In conclusion, the project as proposed is in conformance with the LCP’s visual resource policies.
118
8 Archaeological Resources:

The project is not located within a designated archaeological sensitivity area. However, in the event that an archaeological resource is found during ground disturbance the LCP includes the following policy:

LCP Policy 4.4.30 Require protection, evaluation, and/or removal under supervision by a qualified archaeologist and consultation with a qualified Native American representative, archaeological resources that may be found during the construction process.

If archaeological resources are found during ground disturbance, they will be protected and evaluated by a qualified archaeologist in consultation with a qualified Native American Representative, as conditioned by this CDP. As a result, the project is in compliance with the LCP with regard to protection of archaeological resources.

The Applicant provided a Letter of Intent for the project, which is included here as Exhibit K, Application Letter of Intent.

CEQA:

Early on in the CEQA process, MST, as the lead agency, considered declaring the project exempt from CEQA under a then-recently enacted statutory exemption pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 288, which exempts certain types of transit projects, including bus rapid transit projects, from CEQA. Public Resources Code § 21080.25(b). MST nonetheless prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND). As part of that process, MST consulted with the City as a “responsible agency” under CEQA (CEQA Guidelines, § 15096). On June 14, 2021, MST filed a Notice of Determination of MST’s adoption of a MND for the project. MST determined that, based on the results of the Initial Study and supporting documentation, all potential environmental effects resulting from the project are either less than significant, or can be avoided or mitigated to a less than significant level, and that there is no substantial evidence that the project as mitigated would have a significant effect on the environment.

As such, an Environmental Impact Report is not required. On July 11, 2021, MST found the Project exempt from CEQA under the statutory exemption in SB 288 (2021) and filed a Notice of Exemption.

See Exhibit L, MST SURF! Final Initial Study and Exhibit M, Notice of Exemption.

APPEALABILITY:

Per Sand City Municipal Code Section 18.50.120, an appeal of a decision regarding a coastal development permit may be made to the State Coastal Commission for the following types of development:
119
9 1. Developments approved located between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea or within 200 feet of the inland extent of any beach or 200 feet of the mean high tide line of the sea where there is no beach, whichever is the greater distance;

2. Developments approved located on tidelands, submerged lands, public trust lands, within 100 feet of any wetland, estuary, stream, or within 200 feet of the top of the seaward face of any coastal bluff;

3. Any development which constitutes a major public works project or a major energy facility.

In addition, Coastal Act Section 30603 (3) identifies developments that are located in a sensitive coastal resource areas as appealable to the Coastal Commission.

This Coastal Development is appealable to the California Coastal Commission per Sand City Municipal Code Section 18.50.120 (2) because the project is partially located between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea and per Coastal Act Section 30603 (3) because the project is located within a sensitive coastal resource area.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Costs associated with the processing of this CDP are being reimbursed by the applicant per a signed reimbursement agreement with the City and therefore, there will be minimal direct costs to the City associated with staff time.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends APPROVAL of the Coastal Development Permit CDP23-009 for the SURF! Busway.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Exhibit A: Findings of Approval

2. Exhibit B: Conditions of Approval

3. Exhibit C: SURF! Busway Overall Route

4. Exhibit D: Coastal Commission Letter

5. Exhibit E: MST Response to Coastal Commission Letter

6. Exhibit F: SURF! Sand City Site Plan

7. Exhibit G: SURF! Busway 100% Plans

8. Exhibit H: DD&A ESHA Impacts Report

9. Exhibit I: Intersection Control Evaluation Memo

10.Exhibit J: Multi-Use Trail Impacts and Improvements

11.Exhibit K: Application Letter of Intent

12.Exhibit L: MST SURF! Final Initial Study

13.Exhibit M: Notice of Exemption
120

CITY OF SAND CITY
RESOLUTION SC ___, 2024

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAND CITY APPROVING A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT (CDP 23-009), INCLUDING A TREE REMOVAL

PERMIT AND DESIGN PERMIT FOR THE PROPOSED MONTEREY-SALINAS TRANSIT (MST) SURF! BUS RAPID TRANSIT PROJECT AND FINDING THE

PROJECT EXEMPT FROM CEQA PER PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21080.25(b).

WHEREAS, an application was submitted by Monterey-Salinas Transit (the “Applicant”) on August 29, 2023 for a Coastal Development Permit to allow for approximately 0.67 miles of new roadway to be dedicated to the SURF! Busway; a new segment of multi-use bicycle trail; a new roundabout at the SR 1 southbound on-ramp; a new dedicated SURF! bus stop and platform at Playa Avenue and California Avenue; a new traffic signal at Playa Avenue and California Avenue; re-alignment of beach range road and closure of a portion of the Monterey Peninsula Coastal Recreation Trail; and removal of nine significant trees; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant’s proposed project is located almost entirely within a transportation corridor that is assumed for continued transportation use in local land use and zoning documents; and
WHEREAS, public transportation rights-of-way have neither land use designations nor zoning ascribed to them; and
WHEREAS, the project was duly noticed for the Design Review Committee Meeting held on May 30, 2024 and the City Council Meeting held on June 18, 2024; and WHEREAS, the Applicant prepared an Initial Study in June 2021; and WHEREAS, the Applicant’s use is exempt from CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) Guidelines per Section 21080.25 (b) because the project is a bus rapid transit and bus transit project that includes transit stations which utilize a rail corridor and public streets, and utilize 100% zero emission vehicles. In addition, it is located in an urbanized area and will use a skilled and trained workforce; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Sand City has accepted the findings (Exhibit A) and associated conditions (Exhibit B) for Coastal Development Permit CDP 23-009, as outlined in the City Staff report, dated June 18, 2024; and attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Sand City does hereby grant and issue the Coastal Development Permit CDP23-009 based on the findings in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and according to the terms and conditions in Exhibit B, attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Sand City this __, day of ___, 2024 by the following vote:
121
AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Mary Ann Carbone, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED: ____________________
___________________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
122

EXHIBIT A
CDP23-009 FINDINGS

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF SAND CITY
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CDP23-009 FINDINGS OF APPROVAL Project Name and Description: Coastal Development Permit (CDP23-009) including a tree removal permit and design permit for the
proposed Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) SURF! Bus
Rapid Transit project.

Address: Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) right-of-way from northern city-limit to Playa Avenue;
including APN 011-501-015; and APN 011-011-029.

Hearing Date: June 18th, 2024
Findings:

The below findings are based on all of the evidence in the record, including without limitation, all written documents and oral testimony at public meetings on the project.

Coastal Development Permit findings per Sand City Municipal Code Section

18.50.090(C):

1. Finding: Project complies with provisions for public access.

Evidence:
a) The project is a bus rapid transit facility;
b) The project includes a new segment of multi-use trail along the TAMC corridor adjacent to California Avenue; and
c) A continuous connection will be maintained between the Monterey Peninsula Coastal Recreation Trail and Beach Range Road both during construction and long-term as a result of the project.
d) A new bus stop within the coastal zone is incorporated within the project as well as pedestrian at grade crossing to maintain and enhance coastal access.

2. Finding: Appropriate legal documents are submitted to ensure provision of vertical and lateral access or in-lieu fees paid as may be required by the LCP Land Use Plan.

Evidence:
a) The project as submitted complies with LCP requirements for providing lateral and vertical access. A continuous lateral trail connection is maintained between Beach Range Road and the Monterey Peninsula Recreation Trail. A pedestrian at grade crossing is incorporated in the project to provide continued coastal access across the new bus lanes.
123

EXHIBIT A
CDP23-009 FINDINGS
b) The project includes a new segment of pedestrian and bicycle trail in Sand City.

3. Finding: Project complies with provisions for public visitor serving facilities and services.

Evidence:
a) The project is a transportation project located within an existing transportation corridor that is assumed for continued transportation use in local land use and zoning documents; and
b) The project provides transportation for visitors and employees of visitor accommodation facilities, including two new bus stops within the coastal zone.

4. Finding: Identified geologic, flood, groundwater and fire hazards are mitigated as recommended in the geologic and soils reports pursuant to the Local Coastal Plan Land Use Plan and deed restrictions are recorded which provide:
a) That the permittee(s) understand that the site is subject to extraordinary hazard and the permittee(s) assume(s) the liability for this (these) hazard(s), b) That the permittee(s) unconditionally waive any claim of liability on the part of the City or other regulatory agency for any damage from such hazard(s), and c) That the permittee(s) understand that the construction in the face of the known hazard(s) may make them ineligible for public disaster funds or loans for repair, replacement or rehabilitation of the property in the event of storms or natural disasters.

Evidence:
a) The LCP identifies that a deed restriction should be recorded to specify the above. However, MST does not own the land that the project being built upon and, therefore, does not have the right or ability to deed restrict land it does not own. The City is waiving the specified deed restriction, and requiring acknowledgement and responsibility for liability by the permittee as a part of the Conditions of Approval (#6); and
b) The Applicant has prepared a geotechnical investigation report dated November 10, 2023; and
c) Condition #22 requires the Applicant to follow the recommendations of the geotechnical investigation.

5. Finding: Project complies with measures in approved habitat restoration plan to protect identified environmentally sensitive habitats and archaeological resources and/or develop dune restoration programs.
124

EXHIBIT A
CDP23-009 FINDINGS
Evidence:
a) The project will mitigate impacts to ESHA, as defined in Denise Duffy and Associates May 2021 Biological Resources Report and March 2024 ESHA Impacts Memorandum, at a ratio of 1:1 by payment of in-lieu fees to the City’s Environmental Enhancement Fund (Condition #16); and
b) Archaeological resources inadvertently found during the ground disturbance will be protected and evaluated by a qualified archaeologist in consultation with a qualified Native American Representative per Condition #20.

6. Finding: Provision of view corridors and vista points pursuant to the Local Coastal Land Use Plan and appropriate easements or other legal mechanisms to ensure their permanent provision.

Evidence:
a) The proposed development is not located within a view corridor or vista point as defined by the City’s LCP.

7. Finding: Approval by City design committee of project design, siting, landscaping and provision of view corridors from Highway 1 to the ocean in conformance with policies and guidelines set forth in the Local Coastal Program Land Use and Implementation Plans.

Evidence:
a) The proposed project was presented to the City Design Review Committee on May 30, 2024. The body recommended approval of the project (3-0-2 (Davis and Lewis absent)).

8. Finding: Demonstrated ability and adequacy of water and sewer services. If there is a limit placed on the amount of wastewater that may flow into the Seaside Treatment Plant or pump station, then no coastal permits for new development which require sewer hookups shall be issued until the City Council adopts a wastewater allocation plan. This plan must allocate at least 50% of the City’s remaining capacity to coastal dependent and visitor serving uses within the coastal zone.

Evidence:
a) The proposed project includes minimal water for irrigation of landscaping; and b) The project does not include wastewater demand.

9. Finding: Provision of minimal water flow rates and fire response times.

Evidence:
a) The proposed project does not require use of potable water and flow rates and fire response times will not be impacted.
125

EXHIBIT A
CDP23-009 FINDINGS

10.Finding: Compliance with City water allocation.

Evidence:
a) The proposed project requires minimal use of water for landscaping and the City has adequate water available.

11.Finding: Provision of adequately sized water and sewer lines.

Evidence:
a) The project does not include new water or sewer lines.

12.Finding: Provision of required parking.

Evidence:
a) The Sand City Municipal Code does not establish the number of required parking spaces for public transportation projects; and
b) The project does not include parking spaces.

13.Finding: Uses proposed adjacent to existing industrial manufacturing uses and the sewage treatment plant will be sited and designed in a manner that is compatible with these uses.

Evidence:
a) The project is not sited adjacent to industrial manufacturing uses or the sewage treatment plant.

14.Finding: New uses proposed adjacent to locations of known environmentally sensitive habitat shall be sited and designed to prevent impacts which would significantly degrade such areas and shall be compatible with the continuance of such habitat areas based on the standards set forth by the City in the Local Coastal Land Use Plan.

Evidence:
a) The project results in impacts to 4.96 acres of ESHA as documented in a report by Denise Duffy and Associates dated March 18, 2024; b) The impacted areas will be mitigated for at a 1:1 ratio by payment into the City’s Environmental Enhancement Fund.

15.Finding: Project complies with policies regarding shoreline structures; and Evidence:
a) The project does not include shoreline armoring.
126

EXHIBIT A
CDP23-009 FINDINGS

16.Finding: The project complies with all permit conditions as set forth in Sand City Municipal Code Section 18.50.090, Permit Conditions.

Evidence:
a) The project complies with the provisions of the design control (DC) overlay zone and a design permit and tree removal permit are included in the Coastal Development Permit per Municipal Code 18.72.030;
b) The project complies with parking and landscaping requirements as set forth in Chapters 18.62 and 18.64;
c) The project includes appropriate native coastal plants in the landscaping plans provided to the City;
d) The project does not represent conflicting land uses; e) The project utilizes minimal irrigation for landscaping; f) The project does not include planned unit development and is not located in an area subject to a specific plan.

Tree Removal Permit findings per Sand City Municipal Code Section 16.12.050:

17.Finding: That tree removal is necessary in conjunction with another permit to allow the property owner an economic use of the site consistent with the land use designation of the General Plan and/or the Local Coastal Plan.

Evidence:
a) Tree removal of a total of 9 significant trees of varying circumference and species as documented in a November 9, 2023 arborist report is necessary for the project and will be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio; and all other non-significant trees will be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio; and,
b) All trees outside of the project grading area will be protected.

Design Permit findings per Sand City Municipal Code Section 18.58.050 (B):

18.Finding: The Design Review Committee shall review proposed coastal zone developments according to standards and guidelines established in the local coastal program.

Evidence:
a) This item was brought before the Design Review Committee at a Special Meeting on May 30, 2024 for recommendation to the Sand City City Council, and, as conditioned, the proposed project is sited, designed and landscaped in conformance with the provisions of the LCP.

CEQA finding:

The project was analyzed previously in an Initial Study (June 2021). The project is a Bus Rapid Transit and Bus Service project that includes transit stations which utilizes an existing urbanized rail corridor and public streets. Zero emission vehicles will be utilized and a skilled and trained workforce employed. Therefore, the project qualifies for a 127

EXHIBIT A
CDP23-009 FINDINGS
Statutory Exemption under CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) Guidelines, Section 21080.25(b)
128

EXHIBIT B

CITY OF SAND CITY
COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CDP23-009

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Project Name and Description: Coastal Development Permit (CDP23-009) including a tree removal permit and design permit for the proposed
Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) SURF! Bus Rapid
Transit project.

Address: Transportation Agency of Monterey County (TAMC) right-of-way from northern city-limit to Playa Avenue;
including APN 011-501-015; and APN 011-011-029.

Hearing Date: June 18th, 2024
Conditions of Approval:

Standard Conditions:

1. General. Coastal Development Permit CDP23-009 is not valid, and project use(s) shall not commence, until two (2) copies of this Resolution/Permit, signed by the permittee, acknowledging receipt of the Resolution/Permit and acceptance of the terms and conditions, are returned to the City's Planning Department. Failure of the permittee to return the two (2) copies of the signed Resolution/Permit within thirty (30) days from the date of City Council approval shall cause said Coastal Development Permit to become null and void unless good cause to grant an extension is found acceptable by the City Manager.

2. Effective Date, Expiration, and Extensions. This approval shall become effective immediately, except when an appeal period applies pursuant to SCMC Section 18.50.120 in which case actions shall become effective ten (10) days after the approval date provided that no appeal is filed. Approval shall expire two (2) years from the Approval date, or from the date of the final decision in the event of an appeal, unless within such period a complete building permit application has been filed with the City’s Building Department, or the authorized activities have commenced in the case of a permit not involving construction. Upon written request and payment of appropriate fees submitted no later than the expiration date of this Approval, the City Manager or designee may grant a one-year extension of this date, with additional extensions subject to approval by the approving body (City Council). Expiration of any necessary building permit or other construction-related permit for this project may invalidate this Approval if said Approval has also expired. If litigation is filed challenging this Approval or its implementation, then the time period stated above for obtaining necessary permits for construction and/or commencement of authorized activities is automatically extended for the duration of the litigation.
129

3. Compliance with Other Requirements. The permittee shall comply with all other applicable federal, state, regional, and local laws, codes, requirements, regulations, and guidelines. Compliance with other applicable requirements may require changes to the approved use and/or plans. All such changes shall be in accordance with these conditions of approval and any revised plans shall be submitted to the City for review and approval by the City Manager.

4. Modifications. Any modification to the approved project, site plan, conditions of approval, or use requires consistency review and approval by the Planning Department. Major and/or significant modifications and/or revisions may require review and approval by the original approving body or a new independent permit.

5. Compliance with Conditions of Approval. The Applicant shall be responsible for compliance with all Conditions of Approval. The City reserves the right at any time during construction to require certification by a licensed professional at the applicant’s expense that the as-built project conforms to all applicable requirements. Violation of any term, project description, or Condition of Approval is prohibited. Noncompliance with the requirements of this Coastal Development Permit shall result in revocation of said permit.

Upon completion of construction, and prior to any use by Permittee of the constructed property, the Permittee shall request approval and sign-off by the City Manager that all Conditions of Approval have been met, prior to any use of the site. Approval will not be unreasonably withheld if the conditions of this permit have been satisfied.

6. Indemnification. To the extent allowable by law, the Applicant and operator agree to indemnify with counsel selected by the City and hold the City harmless from costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of the City in connection with the City’s defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any state or federal court challenging the City’s actions with respect to the project. The Applicant and operator understand and acknowledge that the City is under no obligation to defend any legal actions challenging the City’s actions with respect to the project.

7. Violation. If the City determines any term or condition of Coastal Development Permit CDP 23-009 has been violated, written notice shall be issued to the Applicant, that if such violation is not corrected or removed within a specified time, a public hearing may then be scheduled where the City Council may consider amending or revoking Coastal Development Permit CDP 23-009 and may then order said Permits amended or revoked.

8. Interpretation. Any questions of intent or interpretation regarding any condition of Coastal Development Permit CUP 23-009 shall be resolved by the City Manager.

9. Revocation. Where one or more project Conditions of Approval are not met, or the development is not within compliance of the approved plans, the City Manager may revoke or modify the approval for the project.
130

10.Agency/Department Compliance: All requirements of the City’s Planning, Building, Fire, Public Works, and Engineering Departments shall be implemented to the satisfaction of each agency/department. If a dispute arises that cannot be resolved by the individual departments, the dispute shall be taken to the City Manager for resolution. The decision of the City Manager is appealable to the City Council.

11.Property Maintenance: The site shall be maintained in a clean, orderly, weedfree, and litter-free condition. The Applicant shall remain responsible for maintenance and upkeep of the property, including landscaping and maintenance of the right-of-way, that is the subject of this CDP for the duration of the operation and use of the SURF! bus lanes.

12.Final Plan Set. A revised plan set shall be submitted within 30-days of approval of this permit to include all permit conditions and requirements, to be signed off by the City Manager.

13.Timing of Construction. No activities approved by this CDP shall commence in Sand City until any challenges to the CDP have been resolved in the favor of the Applicant in all jurisdictions making a CDP decision on the SURF! Busway project.

Planning:

14.Design of Bus Stop. The design of the new SURF! themed bus station at California Avenue and Playa Avenue must be approved by the City of Sand City Design Review Committee prior to construction.

15.Landscaping.
a. Restoration. All impacted areas outside of the development footprint shall be restored.
b. Native Landscaping. Native coastal plants shall be utilized in landscaping.

A revised final landscaping and irrigation plan shall be submitted to the City for approval by the City Manager prior to issuance of Building Permits. c. Water Conservation. Applicant shall utilize water conservation fixtures for irrigation and landscaping that maximizes the planting of drought tolerant plants as provided in the City's water conservation ordinance codified in Chapter 15.12 of the City’s Municipal Code, subject to review and approval by the City Manager prior to issuance of Building Permits. d. Maintenance. The Applicant shall maintain all landscaping, within the project boundaries, for the duration of the operation and use of the SURF! bus lanes.
131
e. Irrigation. Within 30-days of approval of this permit, the Applicant shall submit to the City Manager for approval, a revised landscaping plan which includes an irrigation system for all landscaping. The irrigation system shall be implemented at the time of planting of the landscaping. The irrigation system shall be maintained by the Applicant for the duration of the operation and use of the SURF! busway and bus lanes.

16.Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Restoration. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Applicant must pay a mitigation fee to the City’s Environmental Enhancement Fund at the rate established by the City’s Fee Schedule. The fee shall be paid to mitigate the project impacts to 4.96 acres of ESHA at a mitigation ratio of 1:1.

17.Mitigation Measures BIO 1 – BIO 6. The owner, applicant, and operator shall be responsible for compliance with the Construction Best Management Practices, Construction-Phase Monitoring, Non-Native/Invasive Species Controls, PreConstruction Surveys for Protected Avian Species, Pre-Construction Surveys for Monterey Dusky-Footed Woodrat, and Pre-Construction Surveys for Townsend’s Big-eared Bat as described in the Biological Report and MMRP.

18.Tree Removal
a. Timing of Tree Removal. Tree removal is prohibited until construction has commenced.
i. Per Mitigation Measure (MM) BIO-1.4 from MST’s adopted MND:

Construction activities that may directly (e.g., vegetation removal) or indirectly (e.g., noise/ground disturbance) affect protected nesting avian species will be timed to avoid the breeding and nesting season. Specifically, vegetation and/or tree removal can be scheduled after September 16 and before January 31.

Alternatively, a qualified biologist will be retained by the project applicant to conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting raptors and other protected avian species within 500 feet of proposed construction activities if construction occurs between February 1 and September 15. Pre-construction surveys will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of construction activities during the early part of the breeding season (February through April) and no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of these activities during the late part of the breeding season (May through August). Because some bird species nest early in spring and others nest later in summer, surveys for nesting birds may be required to continue during construction to address new arrivals, and because some species breed multiple times in a season. The necessity and timing of these continued surveys will be determined by the qualified biologist based on review of the final construction plans and in coordination with the CDFW [California Department of Fish and Wildlife], as needed.

If raptors or other protected avian species nests are identified during the pre-construction surveys, the qualified biologist will notify the project applicant and an appropriate no disturbance buffer will be imposed within which no construction activities or disturbance should take place (generally 500 feet in all directions 132
for raptors; other avian species may have species-specific requirements) until the young of the year have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival, as determined by a qualified biologist.
ii. Per MM BIO-1.5:

Not more than thirty (30) days prior to the start of construction of Segments 1-4 and the 5th Street Station (including vegetation removal), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey of suitable habitat within the work site to locate existing Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests. All Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests shall be mapped and flagged for avoidance. Graphics depicting all Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests shall be provided to the construction contractor. Any Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests that cannot be avoided shall be relocated according to the following procedures:
 Each active nest shall be disturbed by the qualified biologist to the degree that the woodrats leave the nest and seek refuge elsewhere.
 Nests shall be dismantled during the non-breeding season (between October 1 and December 31), if possible.
 If a litter of young is found or suspected, nest material shall be replaced and the nest left alone for 2-3 weeks, after this time the nest will be rechecked to verify that young are capable of independent survival before proceeding with nest dismantling. iii. Per MM BIO-1.6: To avoid and reduce impacts to Townsend’s bigeared bat, if the project construction is planned during the reproductive season (May 1 through September 15), MST will retain a qualified bat specialist or wildlife biologist to conduct site surveys to characterize bat utilization within and adjacent to the project site and potential species present (techniques utilized to be determined by the biologist) prior to construction. Based on the results of these initial surveys, one or more of the following will occur:
 If it is determined that bats are not present within or adjacent to the site, no additional mitigation is required.
 If it is determined that bats are utilizing the trees or abandoned buildings within or adjacent to the site and may be impacted by the proposed project, pre-construction surveys will be conducted within 50 feet of construction limits no more than 30 days prior to the start of construction. If, according to the bat specialist, no bats or bat signs are observed in the course of the pre-construction surveys, construction may proceed. If bats and/or bat signs are observed during the pre-construction b. Tree Removal Restoration. The ground surface shall be restored in the vicinity of any tree removals. Restoration shall include, but not be limited to, the removal of tree stumps, filling of any holes left by removal, and restoration of any existing infrastructure (concrete, asphalt, signs, poles, 133
posts, fences, striping, etc.) if removed or damaged during tree removals.

Restoration shall be per city standards and requirements. c. Display of Tree Removal Permit. Prior to and during the removal of any tree approved for removal, a copy of the tree removal permit shall be displayed on site. If no tree removal permit is displayed, the City will issue a stop work order and commence the City’s administrative fine process. d. Tree Protection.
i. Per MM BIO-1.1 from MST’s adopted MND: Tree and vegetation not planned for removal or trimming shall be protected prior to and during construction to the maximum extent possible through the use of exclusionary fencing, such as hay bales for herbaceous and shrubby vegetation and protective wood barriers for trees. Only certified weedfree straw shall be used to avoid the introduction of non-native, invasive species. A biological monitor shall supervise the installation of protective fencing and monitor at least once per week until construction is complete to ensure that the protective fencing remains intact.
ii. Per MM BIO-4.12 from MST’s adopted MND: Temporary construction fencing shall be placed at approximately 10 feet from the trunk, limiting work within the dripline (e.g., and no grading, trenching, or vegetative alteration shall occur within this environmental exclusion zone). Grading, vegetation removal, and other ground disturbing construction activities may not commence until the project forester has inspected and approved the protective fencing installed by the contractor. No equipment or materials, including soil, shall be stored within the established environmental exclusion zone. Prior to grading within 25 feet of retained trees, the project forester, arborist, or other tree care professional shall be consulted to determine whether pruning is necessary to protect limbs from grading equipment.
 To avoid soil compaction from damaging the roots, heavy equipment shall not be allowed to drive over the root area. If deemed necessary and approved by the forester, equipment may drive across one side of the tree. To reduce soil compaction, wood chips shall be spread 6-12 inches deep to disperse the weight of equipment and plywood sheets shall be placed over the wood chips for added protection.  Roots exposed by excavation must be pruned and recovered as quickly as possible to promote callusing, closure, and healthy regrowth.  Retained trees shall be watered periodically in accordance with species need to promote tree health. Transplanted trees and their intended planting areas shall be pre-watered. Post planting watering shall be done as needed to assure establishment.
e. Replacement Trees. The trees shall be replaced at no less than a 2:1 ratio for significant trees.
i. Tree replacement report. Replacement trees (minimum five-gallon specimens) shall be planted along boundaries and within landscape 134
areas. Replacement trees must be native species and the report shall determine the number and types of trees to be replanted. Final replanting numbers may be modified by additional tree retention and should be made part of the tree replacement report. The report shall be submitted to the City Manager for review and approval prior to tree planting.
ii. Transplanting. If possible, transplants are encouraged and shall be credited on a 1:1 basis.

19.Tree, Landscaping, and Maintenance. The trees and landscaping installed under this permit shall be maintained by the Applicant for the duration of operation and use of the SURF! bus lanes using the International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) best management practices (BMPs).

20.Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological, Tribal Cultural Resources, Paleontological Resources or Human Remains. Any inadvertent discovery during any ground disturbance activities, including removing trees, grading and/or restoring the site post-removal shall be mitigated in accordance to MM CR-2 in the adopted MMRP.

Transportation:

21.Traffic Improvements. To comply with General Plan Policy 3.1.1, the Applicant shall implement the intersection improvements to California / Playa intersection, including assisting the City of Sand City with facilitating improvements for minor modifications needed for the efficient and safe movement of transit vehicles, and bicycles, and improve intersection performance during the AM/PM weekday peak periods within existing public rights-of-way:
a. California / Playa Intersection Traffic Signal. During project construction, the Applicant shall construct a five-way traffic signal at the California/ Playa Intersection to accommodate busway and mixed-flow traffic operations. The Applicant shall ensure that sufficient traffic flow through this intersection is maintained at all times during construction of the traffic signal. b. Timing of Implementation. These improvements shall be completed before the first day of the SURF! Bus Rapid Transit operational service. c. Approval. The plans for these improvements are subject to review and approval by the City's Engineer and Transportation Engineer. Once installed, the City may review and inspect the improvements to ensure compliance with City-approved project plans.
d. Support. The Applicant shall provide support to the City in the form of grant writing and related administrative support, for activities that are mutually beneficial to the SURF! operational service and City bike, pedestrian, and shared mobility plans.
135
e. Limitations and Non-Contravention of Laws: The applicant shall provide support for activities that are reimbursable by its federal, state, and local funding programs, and allowable under federal, state, and municipal laws and regulations including the SB 922 CEQA Exemption relied upon by the City in taking this action.
f. Mutual Agreement and Cooperation: This condition is intended to be flexible and to be satisfied by MST based on a mutually acceptable agreement between the City Manager and the MST General Manager/Chief Executive Officer, with sign-off on the condition subject to approval of the City Manager. MST and the City are mutually committed to providing quality multimodal mobility services to the public.

Engineering and Building:

22.Geotechnical Report. All recommendations of the geotechnical report prepared by Kimley-Horn on November 10, 2023 must be complied with during construction.

23.Geotechnical Evaluation. A construction level geotechnical evaluation shall be prepared and implemented for the project based on the final engineering plans.

The project shall be required to adhere to and incorporate all standards and recommended engineering measures to mitigate for liquefaction, expansive soils and other local soil constraints. The final geotechnical evaluation will be prepared by MST and provided to the City of Sand City for review by the City Engineer and Building Official prior to the issuance of local building permits or related local approvals.

24.Encroachment Permit(s). The applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the City’s Engineering and Public Works Department prior to the commencement of any work within the City’s public rights-of-way (ROW). A copy of the approved encroachment permit shall be maintained on-site at all times during construction of the project and made available for review by the City and/or designated representatives.
a. Public Improvements and Plans. The project shall construct public improvements as necessary to accommodate the approved use. The permittee shall submit Improvement Plans to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of any encroachment and/or grading permits.

The plans shall be prepared, signed, and stamped by a California Registered Professional Civil Engineer. The permittee shall be responsible for the design and construction of the improvements. The Improvement Plans shall clearly show the proposed improvements necessary to serve the project and shall be designed per City standards and requirements. b. Utility Plans: The Applicant shall submit Utility Improvement Plans showing how utilities will be provided to serve the project. The Utility Improvement Plan shall identify all utilities and utility connections required for the Project, including but not limited to, storm drainage, water, electric, gas, telephone, cable, onsite utilities, and associated infrastructure. Any trenching of street asphalt and/or concrete for utility connections shall be replaced per City standards and requirements.
136
c. Coordination of Plans: All improvement plans (architectural, civil, electrical, mechanical, landscaping, etc.) shall be fully coordinated with each other to ensure that the improvements may be constructed safely and without conflict with one another.
d. Examination of Plans: All construction plans, documents, reports, and supporting materials for the project shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the issuance of any encroachment and/or grading permits. Any and all requirements specified by the City during the plan review process, including previous review comments provided by the City, shall be satisfied.

25.Lighting. Lighting fixtures shall be adequately shielded to a point below the light bulb and reflector to prevent unnecessary glare onto adjacent properties. After installation, the City Building Official or designee shall retain the right to require reduction in the intensity of illumination or change of light color of said illumination if it creates any undue public nuisance. Busway and bike path lighting shall provide appropriate lighting per City standards and requirements and shall be approved by the City Manager.

26.Water and Sewer: Any proposed water and sewer infrastructure, if needed, shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the standards and specifications of California American Water – Monterey District (Cal-Am) and the Seaside County Sanitation District (SCSD). The permittee shall provide a copy of any plan approvals and acceptance of constructed infrastructure from both Cal-Am and the SCSD for all water and sewer infrastructure, to the City Engineer.

Public Works:

27.Construction Hours. All non-emergency construction activities shall be limited to the following schedule:
i. Monday through Friday: 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
ii. Saturday: 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
iii. Sunday and city observed holidays: no work shall occur.

No construction activities shall be performed outside of the schedule listed above unless authorized in writing by the City.

28. Construction Noise. No construction, vehicles, equipment or tools shall produce a decibel level of more than sixty (60) decibels for twenty-five (25) percent of an hour at any receiving property line.
a. If Sand City receives a noise complaint related to construction noises, the City’s Police or Public Works Department shall address the noise complaint and the Applicant will be required to mitigate construction related noise nuisances.

29.Construction Impacts. The Applicant shall ensure that sufficient traffic flow is maintained at all times during construction.

30.Waste Receptacles. No storage of trash, recycling, or food waste receptacles shall be permitted within the public right-of-way. Receptacles shall be stored on site and screened from public view. The Building Official shall review the construction plans to ensure that all requirements of the City’s municipal code 137
pertaining to recycling and solid waste disposal are met prior to issuance of building permits.

31.Graffiti. All graffiti on facilities must be removed at the sole expense of the permittee within 48 hours after notification from the City. Failure to do so is a violation of this CDP.

32.Hazardous Material. No hazardous materials will be stored or used on-site.

33.Site Maintenance. The site shall be kept in a blight- and nuisance-free condition, and healthy and well-kept landscaping shall be continuously maintained by the Applicant for the duration of the operation and use of the SURF! busway and bus lanes. Any existing blight or nuisance shall be abated within 60 days of a written notice from the City. Failure to maintain or address blight or nuisance issue(s) will result in a violation of the CDP and corrective action will be enforced by the City.

Stormwater Management:

34.Applicability. The project shall comply with the requirements of Sand City Municipal Code (SCMC) 13.05 Stormwater Management and the City’s Phase 2 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit, including the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region (PCRs).

35.Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP): Prior to issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall prepare and submit to the City Engineer for review and approval a Stormwater Control Plan (SWCP) for the project demonstrating compliance with the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region (PCRs). The SWCP shall be prepared by the project civil engineer in accordance with the City’s adopted Stormwater Technical Guide (STG) and templates.

36.Agreement Regarding Maintenance and Right of Entry for Stormwater Control Measures: The property owner shall enter into a written agreement with the City to provide for the long-term operation and maintenances of all Stormwater Control Measures (SCMs). This agreement shall provide for ongoing maintenance and verification of maintenance by the Owner and any successors in interest, among other provisions. This agreement shall be based on the City’s latest adopted template and shall be prepared per City requirements. A fully executed copy of this Agreement shall be required prior to final certificate of operation.

37.Operation and Maintenance Plan (OMP): If determined that the project is subject to the Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region (PCRs) and structural SCMs are required, the Applicant shall prepare and submit to the City Engineer for review and approval an OMP that establishes, identifies, directs, and records the operation and maintenance of all Development Project SCMs. The OMP shall be prepared by the project civil engineer in accordance with City requirements. The OMP shall be 138
prepared in accordance with the latest adopted Stormwater Technical Guide (STG) and templates.

38.Best Management Practices (BMPs): During all phases of construction and/or land disturbance activities, the project shall implement site-specific BMPs to protect water quality and prevent storm water pollution, as required by SCMC

13.05 Stormwater Management. The permittee shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) or Water Pollution Prevention Plan (WPPP), as applicable, for review and approval by the City Engineer, prior to the issuance of any encroachment and/or grading permit(s).
___________________________ ___________________________ Applicant (Monterey-Salinas Transit) Date
139
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Source: Kimley Horn, 2020
Figure 3-2: General Project Location
CSUMB
VA Hospital
Reservation Rd
Marina Transit Exchange Del Monte Blvd
California Ave
2nd Ave
8th St Imjin Pkwy
General Jim Moore Blvd
Fremont Blvd
Hilby Ave
Broadway Ave
San Pablo Ave
Old Grove Ave
Monterey Rd
California, Fremont,
Monterey Interchange
Del Monte Blvd
1 1
Playa Ave
Palm Ave
12' 12' 3' 9'
100'
Beach Range
Road
Monterey
Peninsula
Recrea onal
Trail
3'
Rail Corridor Typical Section
Contra Costa St
Multimodal Transit Center
at 5th St
140
STATE OF CALIFORNIA — NATURAL RESOURCES AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR

CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION CENTRAL COAST DISTRICT
725 FRONT STREET, SUITE 300
SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060
PHONE: (831) 427-4863
EMAIL: [email protected]
WEB: WWW.COASTAL.CA.GOV
May 17, 2024
Kacey Ruggiero
California Transportation Commission
Assistant Deputy Director – Programming
State Transportation Improvement Program
[email protected]
Eyitejumade “Ade” Sogbesan
California Public Utilities Commission
Rail Safety Division – Rail Crossings Engineering Branch [email protected]
Subject: MST SURF! Busway Project
Dear Ms. Ruggiero and Mr. Sogbesan:

As you know, it has recently come to our attention that it is not clear that the proposed SURF! Busway project in Monterey County can proceed without certain California Transportation Commission (CTC) and California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) determinations. We asked that the applicant (Monterey Salinas Transit) withdraw its coastal development permit (CDP) application to the California Coastal Commission so that it could take care of these CTC and CPUC requirements, because the deadline for the CDP application to be acted upon is September 27, 2024, but they would not agree to do so. Thus, since we are required to take this application forward by that date, we are contacting you to ask for CTC and CPUC determinations as to whether the project is (a) compatible with Proposition 116 funding requirements; and (b) compatible with the intended future use of the rail corridor for rail.1
An essential component of any CDP application is proof of the applicant’s legal ability to construct the project, and evidence of all required authorizations. In this case, it seems clear to us that (a) a busway is not allowed on land purchased for rail purposes through Proposition 116 funding (and in fact that legislation appears to explicitly prohibit a busway); and (b) even if it were allowed, it would appear that the busway now proposed would essentially preclude future rail development for a number of reasons. On the latter, as you may or may not be aware, the rail corridor in question is made up entirely of dune environmentally sensitive habitat area (ESHA), where only development dependent on the ESHA resource (i.e., habitat restoration and the like) is allowed pursuant to the Coastal Act. A busway does not so qualify, and thus the proposed 1 On this point we note that CPUC informed the applicant on April 22, 2024 of the need for a corridor-wide diagnostic review to be able to resolve this question.
141
MST SURF! Busway Project

Page 2 ends

project is inconsistent with Coastal Act Section 30240. This fact would typically direct denial of the required CDP. We have informed the applicant of this determination for several years, but they have continued to propose the project.

If, notwithstanding this Coastal Act inconsistency, the project were to be approved because denial would lead to conflicts with other Coastal Act Chapter 3 policies, which is possible under certain very limited circumstances (that do not appear to apply here at the current time), then any such approval would limit the allowed development footprint, and would require everything else in the corridor to be enhanced/restored and deed restricted against any future development (in addition to significant additional offsite mitigation given there would be a loss of over 20 acres of dune ESHA in such a scenario). As such, from a Coastal Act permitting perspective, construction of the busway would almost assuredly preclude the addition of rail, and the only potential path forward for a rail project in the future would be in the footprint of the so-constructed busway project. Given the proposed configuration of the busway (e.g., crisscrossing the corridor), even that seems to be infeasible, notwithstanding it would also mean destroying the busway to do so. Put another way, the busway would not only appear to make a future rail project infeasible, but it would ‘use up’ any development potential that might be able to be considered under the Coastal Act and its ESHA provisions for the corridor, thus displacing any potential for rail in that corridor in the future.

Given the serious Coastal Act conformance issues of the project, we have continued to advocate to the applicant that it pursue other alternatives that do not use the proposed rail corridor alignment through dune ESHA (such as bus on highway shoulder, dedicated highway bus line during commute hours, bus on highway median, alternative inland of Highway 1 routings, etc.), but the applicant to date has not been interested in pursuing such alternatives, and continues to pursue the busway project in the ESHA rail corridor. While we understand and can address the Coastal Act ramifications of that applicant decision, and although we have our own opinions about the Proposition 116 and future rail feasibility questions, we recognize that these latter questions are directly within your purviews, and would like to have the benefit of your determinations on these questions as soon as possible. Given that we must publish a staff report and recommendation on this CDP application by August 23rd, we request the benefit of your response no later than June 23rd.

We would be happy to meet with you again to discuss this matter if it would help you in developing your determinations on the above questions. In any case, thank you again for your assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,
Kevin Kahn
District Manager
Central Coast District
California Coastal Commission
142
MST SURF! Busway Project

Page 3 ends

cc: Michelle Overmeyer, Monterey-Salinas Transit (applicant) Todd Muck, Transportation Agency of Monterey County
Alyson Hunter, City of Marina
Zane Mortensen, City of Sand City
143
144
145
146
Figure, Site Plan
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Source: Kimley Horn, 2023
NOT FO
CONSTR

CEPTUAL DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Not to scale
SB SR-1
NB SR-1

DEL MONTE BLVD

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE
CALIFORNIA AVE SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP

CITY OF SAND CITY

EDGEWATER

SHOPPING
CENTER

CITY OF SEASIDE
NORTH
LEGEND:
147
N I A
L I FOR C A1
N I A

L I FOR
C A1
N I A

L I FOR
C A1
100% DESIGN

MONTEREY-SALINAS TRANSIT

MONTEREY-SALINAS TRANSIT
SURF! BUSWAY AND BUS

RAPID TRANSIT (BRT) PROJECT

MONTEREY COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

VICINITY MAP
NORTH
LEGEND:

CITY OF SAND CITY SUBMITTAL
04/13/2024
148
100% DESIGN

ABBREVIATIONS LEGEND EXISTING PROPOSED
149
100% DESIGN
“
“ ”
GENERAL NOTES:
150
∆=
100% DESIGN
NORTH
NORTH

GENERAL NOTES
151
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP

CAN GEOMETRIC DATA

SURF BRT GEOMETRIC DATA

RAB-E-MPRT GEOMETRIC DATA

RAB-N-BRR GEOMETRIC DATA
SB SR-1 ON RAMP GEOMETRIC DATA
100% DESIGN
NORTH
152

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

SURF BRT GEOMETRIC DATA RAB-N-BRR GEOMETRIC DATA
100% DESIGN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN
PLAN
153

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

SURF BRT GEOMETRIC DATA

RAB-N-BRR GEOMETRIC DATA
100% DESIGN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN
PLAN
154

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD

PLAYA AVE GEOMETRIC DATA

CA BP GEOMETRIC DATA

CA BW GEOMETRIC DATA
100% DESIGN
NORTH
PLAN
155

CALIFORNIA AVE

CA BP GEOMETRIC DATA

CA BW GEOMETRIC DATA
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN
156

CALIFORNIA AVE

CA BP GEOMETRIC DATA

CA BW GEOMETRIC DATA
100% DESIGN

PLAN NORTH
157
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
DEMOLITION NOTES LEGEND:

NORTH
PLAN
158
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP

GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH
PLAN

DEMOLITION NOTES
159
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN

PLAN NORTH
NORTH
PLAN

DEMOLITION NOTES
160

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN

DEMOLITION NOTES
161

GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH

DEMOLITION NOTES
162

GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN

DEMOLITION NOTES
163

GENERAL NOTES GENERAL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN

PLAN NORTH DEMOLITION NOTES
164
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN

EROSION CONTROL NOTES
NORTH
165
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH

EROSION CONTROL NOTES
166

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN
PLAN

EROSION CONTROL NOTES
167

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN
PLAN

EROSION CONTROL NOTES
168

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
PLAN

EROSION CONTROL NOTES
NORTH
169

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN

EROSION CONTROL NOTES
170

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN

PLAN NORTH

EROSION CONTROL NOTES
171
100% DESIGN

SECTION A
STA "CA BW" 10+38 TO 11+57

SECTION B
STA "CA BW" 11+57 TO 22+00
LEGEND:

ASPHALT

AGGREGATE BASE

CEMENT TREATED BASE

APPROXIMATE OVER

EXCAVATION LIMITS

NATIVE MATERIAL

BACKFILL

CONCRETE
172
100% DESIGN

SECTION C
STA "CA BW" 22+00 TO 26+08
LEGEND:

ASPHALT

AGGREGATE BASE

CEMENT TREATED BASE

APPROXIMATE OVER

EXCAVATION LIMITS

NATIVE MATERIAL

BACKFILL

CONCRETE
173

GENERAL NOTES
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
100% DESIGN
NORTH

CIVIL NOTES
LEGEND:
174
80 84
88 92
96 100
104
108
80 84
88 92
96 100
104
108

GENERAL NOTES
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
100% DESIGN

NORTH PROFILE

CIVIL NOTES
175
72 76
80 84
88 92
96 72
76 80
84 88
92 96

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH

PROFILE
PLAN

CIVIL NOTES
176
60 64
68 72
76 80
60 64
68 72
76 80

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH

PROFILE
PLAN

CIVIL NOTES
177
32 36
40 44
48 52
32 36
40 44
48 52 E E E E E E E E

PLAYA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN

PROFILE
PLAN

CIVIL NOTES
NORTH
178
E
E
E
E

E E E E E

CALIFORNIA AVE
36 40
44 48
52 56
36 40
44 48
52 56

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN

PROFILE
PLAN

CIVIL NOTES
NORTH
179

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES
40 44
48 52
56 60
40 44
48 52
56 60
100% DESIGN

PROFILE
PLAN

CIVIL NOTES
NORTH
180

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES
52 56
60 64
68 72
76 80
52 56
60 64
68 72
76 80
100% DESIGN

PROFILE
PLAN

CIVIL NOTES
NORTH
181

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES
64 68
72 76
80 84
88 92
64 68
72 76
80 84
88 92
100% DESIGN

PROFILE

CIVIL NOTES PLAN NORTH
182
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH
PAVING AND JOINTING PLAN NOTES LEGEND:
183

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH

PAVING AND JOINTING PLAN NOTES
184

ASPHALT

AGGREGATE BASE

CEMENT TREATED BASE

CONCRETE
SAND

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND
100% DESIGN
185

ASPHALT

AGGREGATE BASE

CEMENT TREATED BASE

CONCRETE
SAND

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND
100% DESIGN
186

ASPHALT

AGGREGATE BASE

CEMENT TREATED BASE

CONCRETE
SAND

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND
100% DESIGN
187

ASPHALT

AGGREGATE BASE

CEMENT TREATED BASE

CONCRETE
SAND

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND
100% DESIGN
188

ASPHALT

AGGREGATE BASE

CEMENT TREATED BASE

CONCRETE
SAND

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND
100% DESIGN
189

ASPHALT

AGGREGATE BASE

CEMENT TREATED BASE

CONCRETE
SAND

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND
100% DESIGN
190

GENERAL NOTES
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
NORTH
PLAN

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
100% DESIGN
LEGEND:
191
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH
PLAN

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
192

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

STORM CENTERLINE DATA TABLE

NAME SYMBOL LENGTH BEARING DIAMETER MATERIAL

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH
PLAN

SUPERELEVATION DIAGRAM

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
193

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

STORM CENTERLINE DATA TABLE

NAME SYMBOL LENGTH BEARING DIAMETER MATERIAL

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
NORTH
PLAN

SUPERELEVATION DIAGRAM

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
194

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD

STORM CENTERLINE DATA TABLE GENERAL NOTES

NAME SYMBOL LENGTH BEARING DIAMETER MATERIAL
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
195

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
196

CALIFORNIA AVE

GENERAL NOTES
100% DESIGN
PLAN

GRADING AND DRAINAGE NOTES
NORTH
197
100% DESIGN

DETAIL A DETAIL B

DETAIL C DETAIL D

NORTH NORTH
NORTH

NORTH DETAIL E
NORTH

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND:

GRADING DETAIL NOTES
198
100% DESIGN

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND:

NORTH
NORTH

DETAIL B
SCM 100

GRADING NOTES

DETAIL A
SCM 11+50

DETAIL C
SCM 115 NORTH
199
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
100% DESIGN

DETAIL A DETAIL B

DETAIL C

NORTH NORTH
NORTH

GRADING DETAIL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND:
200
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
100% DESIGN
NORTH

GRADING DETAIL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND:

DETAIL C
NORTH
NORTH

DETAIL A

DETAIL B

DETAIL D NORTH
201
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
∆
100% DESIGN

DETAIL A NORTH

GRADING DETAIL NOTES

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND:
202
∆
∆
∆
∆
100% DESIGN

DETAIL A NORTH

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND:

GRADING DETAIL NOTES
203
C
C

E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E

E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E
E
E
E
E
100% DESIGN

GENERAL NOTES
LEGEND:

GRADING DETAIL NOTES
NORTH
204
SD-2 (STA:0+75 TO STA:6+00)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
60 64
68 72
76 80
84 88
60 64
68 72
76 80
84 88
SD-1.1 (STA:0+50 TO STA:2+75)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
25 28
32 36
40 44
48 52
25 28
32 36
40 44
48 52
SD-1.3 (STA:0+50 TO STA:1+75)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
22 24
28 32
36 40
44 48
52 22
24 28
32 36
40 44
48 52
SD-1.2 (STA:0+50 TO STA:1+75)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
22 24
28 32
36 40
44 48
52 22
24 28
32 36
40 44
48 52
100% DESIGN
205
SD-2 (STA:6+00 TO STA:11+50)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
68 72
76 80
84 88
92 96
68 72
76 80
84 88
92 96
SD-2.1 (STA:0+75 TO STA:6+25)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
60 64
68 72
76 80
84 88
60 64
68 72
76 80
84 88
100% DESIGN
206
SD-3 (STA:0+75 TO STA:2+00)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
72 76
80 84
88 92
96 72
76 80
84 88
92 96
SD-4 (STA:0+75 TO STA:2+50)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
84 88
92 96
100
104
108
84 88
92 96
100
104
108
SD-5 (STA:0+75 TO STA:2+75)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
100
104
108
112
116
120
124
100
104
108
112
116
120
124
SD-2.2 (STA:0+33 TO STA:1+95)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
60 64
68 72
76 80
84 60
64 68
72 76
80 84
SD-3.5 (STA:0+50 TO STA:1+75)
HORIZ: 1" = 20'
VERT: 1" = 4'
70 72
76 80
84 88
92 70
72 76
80 84
88 92
100% DESIGN
207
100% DESIGN
208
100% DESIGN
209
100% DESIGN
210
100% DESIGN
211
100% DESIGN
212
100% DESIGN
213
100% DESIGN

CROSS-SECTION

RSP OUTLET PROTECTION

PROFILE
214
100% DESIGN
PLAN

PROFILE

SECTION A-A

PIPE ADAPTER DETAIL

GENERAL NOTES
215
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SOIL PARAMETERS TABLE - SOLDIER PILE WALL WALL NO. BACKFILL SOIL WEIGHT (PCF) FRICTION ANGLE (°) ACTIVE PRESSURE COEFFICIENT, Ka ACTIVE SEISMIC PRESSURE COEFFICIENT, Kae PASSIVE PRESSURE COEFFICIENT, Kp PASSIVE SEISMIC PRESSURE COEFFICIENT, Kpe RW022R-C 115 36 0.470 0.752 7.90 6.25 RW103R-C 110 32 0.307 0.492 5.70 4.70 RW150R-C 110 34 0.307 0.492 6.40 5.50 RW173R-C 110 34 0.283 0.463 6.40 5.50 RW197R-C 110 36 0.318 0.521 7.90 6.25 RW207R-C 110 34 0.531 0.971 6.40 5.50 RW232R-C 120 34 0.460 0.718 6.40 5.50 RW296R-C 115 32 0.414 0.663 5.70 4.70 RW307R-C 115 30 0.375 0.586 4.85 3.50 SHEET NO. TITLE RW-001 RETAINING WALL GENERAL NOTES RW-002 RETAINING WALL NO. RW22R-C GENERAL PLAN RW-003 RETAINING WALL NO. RW22R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-004 RETAINING WALL NO. RW22R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-005 RETAINING WALL NO. RW22R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 3 RW-006 RETAINING WALL NO. RW103R-C GENERAL PLAN RW-007 RETAINING WALL NO. RW103R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-008 RETAINING WALL NO. RW103R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-009 RETAINING WALL NO. RW150R-C GENERAL PLAN RW-010 RETAINING WALL NO. RW150R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-011 RETAINING WALL NO. RW150R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-012 RETAINING WALL NO. RW150R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 3 RW-013 RETAINING WALL NO. RW150R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 4 RW-014 RETAINING WALL NO. RW158R-F GENERAL PLAN RW-015 RETAINING WALL NO. RW158R-F STRUCTURE PLAN RW-016 RETAINING WALL NO. RW173R-C GENERAL PLAN RW-017 RETAINING WALL NO. RW173R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-018 RETAINING WALL NO. RW173R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-019 RETAINING WALL NO. RW173R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 3 RW-020 RETAINING WALL NO. RW193R-F GENERAL PLAN RW-021 RETAINING WALL NO. RW193R-F STRUCTURE PLAN RW-022 RETAINING WALL NO. RW197R-C GENERAL PLAN RW-023 RETAINING WALL NO. RW197R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-024 RETAINING WALL NO. RW197R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-025 RETAINING WALL NO. RW200R-F GENERAL PLAN RW-026 RETAINING WALL NO. RW200R-F STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-027 RETAINING WALL NO. RW200R-F STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-028 RETAINING WALL NO. RW207R-C GENERAL PLAN RW-029 RETAINING WALL NO. RW207R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-030 RETAINING WALL NO. RW207R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-031 RETAINING WALL NO. RW207R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 3 RW-032 RETAINING WALL NO. RW218R-F GENERAL PLAN RW-033 RETAINING WALL NO. RW218R-F STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-034 RETAINING WALL NO. RW218R-F STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-035 RETAINING WALL NO. RW218R-F STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 3 RW-036 RETAINING WALL NO. RW218R-F STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 4 RW-037 RETAINING WALL NO. RW218R-F STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 5 RW-038 RETAINING WALL NO. RW232R-C GENERAL PLAN RW-039 RETAINING WALL NO. RW232R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-040 RETAINING WALL NO. RW232R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-041 RETAINING WALL NO. RW232R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 3 RW-042 RETAINING WALL NO. RW296R-C GENERAL PLAN RW-043 RETAINING WALL NO. RW296R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-044 RETAINING WALL NO. RW296R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-045 RETAINING WALL NO. RW296R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 3 RW-046 RETAINING WALL NO. RW307R-C GENERAL PLAN RW-047 RETAINING WALL NO. RW307R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 RW-048 RETAINING WALL NO. RW307R-C STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-049 RETAINING WALL NO. RW315R-F GENERAL PLAN RW-050 RETAINING WALL NO. RW315R-F STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 1 SHEET NO. TITLE RW-051 RETAINING WALL NO. RW315R-F STRUCTURE PLAN NO. 2 RW-052 SOLDIER PILE AND LAGGING WALL DETAILS RW-053 MSE WALL DETAILS NO. 1 RW-054 MSE WALL DETAILS NO. 2 RW-055 MSE WALL DETAILS NO. 3 RW-056 CABLE RAILING DETAILS INDEX TO PLANS DESIGN CRITERIA (SOLDIER PILE WALLS) DESIGN: SOIL PARAMETERS: LIVE LOAD: SEISMIC: STRUCTURAL STEEL: REINFORCED CONCRETE: AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS (8TH EDITION) WITH INTERIM REVISIONS, AND THE CALIFORNIA AMENDMENTS, PREFACE DATED OCTOBER, 2022 SEE "SOIL PARAMETERS TABLE - SOLDIER PILE WALLS" SURCHARGE = 240 PSF kh = 0.26 SOLDIER PILES - ASTM A572 GRADE 50 PLATES - ASTM A36 GRADE 36 PIPES - ASTM A53 GRADE B f'c = 3600 PSI fy = 60 KSI DESIGN CRITERIA (MSE WALLS) DESIGN: SOIL PARAMETERS: LIVE LOAD: SEISMIC: PRECAST CONCRETE PANELS: SOIL REINFORCEMENT: REINFORCED CONCRETE: AASHTO LRFD BRIDGE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS (8TH EDITION) WITH INTERIM REVISIONS, AND THE CALIFORNIA AMENDMENTS, PREFACE DATED OCTOBER, 2022 RETAINED BACKFILL SOIL UNIT WEIGHT: γ = 125 PCF RETAINED BACKFILL FRICTION ANGLE: = 34° ACTIVE PRESSURE COEFFICIENT: Ka = 0.283 ACTIVE SEISMIC PRESSURE COEFFICIENT: Kae = 0.463 FOUNDATION SOIL UNIT WEIGHT: RW158R-F, RW193R-F: γ = 105 PCF RW200R-F, RW218R-F, RW315R-F: γ = 110 PCF FOUNDATION SOIL FRICTION ANGLE: RW158R-F, RW193R-F, RW315R-F: = 30° RW200R-F, RW218R-F: = 34° SURCHARGE = 240 PSF kh = 0.17 f'c = 4000 PSI fy = 60 KSI WELDED WIRE MATS: fy = 65 KSI COUPLER: fy = 36 KSI CORROSION RATE: 1.1 MILS/YEAR f'c = 3600 PSI fy = 60 KSI GENERAL THE DRAWINGS REPRESENT THE FINISHED STRUCTURES. THEY DO NOT SHOW CONSTRUCTION MEANS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. FABRICATE AND CONSTRUCT ALL ITEMS ACCORDING TO THE DRAWINGS, SPECIFICATIONS, & CODES. MAKE NO MODIFICATIONS WITHOUT THE ENGINEER'S WRITTEN APPROVAL. DO NOT SCALE THE DRAWINGS FOR DIMENSIONS, SIZES, OR LOCATIONS. STATIONS, ELEVATIONS, AND DIMENSIONS CONTAINED IN THESE PLANS ARE CALCULATED FROM A RECENT FIELD SURVEY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DEPENDENT DIMENSIONS IN THE FIELD BEFORE ORDERING OR FABRICATING ANY MATERIAL. ALL LONGITUDINAL AND TRANSVERSE DIMENSIONS ARE MEASURED HORIZONTALLY AND INCLUDE NO CORRECTION FOR GRADE. IF A DISCREPANCY IS FOUND WITHIN THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, IMMEDIATELY SUBMIT THE MATTER IN WRITING TO THE ENGINEER WHO WILL MAKE A DETERMINATION AND PROVIDE WRITTEN CLARIFICATION. SUBSTITUTIONS OF MATERIALS, SIZES, OR SHAPES IS PROHIBITED WITHOUT THE WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE ENGINEER. STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS CONSTRUCTION OF THE SOLDIER PILE RETAINING WALLS AND MSE RETAINING WALLS IN MONTEREY COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SHALL CONFORM TO THE CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (CALTRANS) STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS, 2023 EDITION. STANDARD PLANS DATED 2023 A3A ABBREVIATIONS (SHEET 1 OF 3) A3B ABBREVIATIONS (SHEET 2 OF 3) A3C ABBREVIATIONS (SHEET 3 OF 3) A10A LEGEND - LINES AND SYMBOLS (SHEET 1 OF 5) A10B LEGEND - LINES AND SYMBOLS (SHEET 2 OF 5) A10C LEGEND - LINES AND SYMBOLS (SHEET 3 OF 5) A10D LEGEND - LINES AND SYMBOLS (SHEET 4 OF 5) A10E LEGEND - LINES AND SYMBOLS (SHEET 5 OF 5) A10F LEGEND - SOIL (SHEET 1 OF 2) A10G LEGEND - SOIL (SHEET 2 OF 2) A10H LEGEND - ROCK B11-81 CONCRETE BARRIER TYPE 842 DETAILS No. 1 B11-82 CONCRETE BARRIER TYPE 842 DETAILS No. 2 A85 CHAIN LINK FENCE A85A CHAIN LINK FENCE DETAILS A85B CHAIN LINK FENCE DETAILS MSE = MECHANICALLY STABILIZED EMBANKMENT STANDARD PLAN SHEET NO. DETAIL NO. INDEX TO PLANS 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SHEET 323 OF 617 SHEET 323 OF 617 SHEET 323 OF 617 SHEET 323 OF 617 323 610 216
NORTH
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 1" = 20' DEVELOPED MIRRORED ELEVATION 1" = 20' TYPICAL SECTION 1/2" = 1'-0" CURVE DATA SHEET 324 OF 617 SHEET 324 OF 617 SHEET 324 OF 617 SHEET 324 OF 617 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 217
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SOLDIER PILE SCHEDULE PLAN 3/16" = 1'-0" DEVELOPED MIRRORED ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0" SOLDIER PILE SCHEDULE NORTH SHEET 325 OF 617 SHEET 325 OF 617 SHEET 325 OF 617 SHEET 325 OF 617 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 218
SOLDIER PILE SCHEDULE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SOLDIER PILE SCHEDULE NORTHPLAN 3/16" = 1'-0" DEVELOPED MIRRORED ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0" SHEET 326 OF 617 SHEET 326 OF 617 SHEET 326 OF 617 SHEET 326 OF 617 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 219
SOLDIER PILE SCHEDULE NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION SOLDIER PILE SCHEDULE NORTH PLAN 3/16" = 1'-0" DEVELOPED MIRRORED ELEVATION 3/16" = 1'-0" SHEET 327 OF 617 SHEET 327 OF 617 SHEET 327 OF 617 SHEET 327 OF 617 95% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION 220
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
100% DESIGN
NORTH
LEGEND:

GAS VALVE

WATER VALVE

FIRE HYDRANT

MANHOLE

UTILITY POLE

UTILITY CAP
221

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD

POTHOLE TABLE
100% DESIGN
NORTH

GAS VALVE

WATER VALVE

FIRE HYDRANT

MANHOLE

UTILITY POLE

UTILITY CAP

POTHOLE
222

CALIFORNIA AVE
100% DESIGN
NORTH
LEGEND:

GAS VALVE

WATER VALVE

FIRE HYDRANT

MANHOLE

UTILITY POLE

UTILITY CAP
223
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
100% DESIGN
NORTH
LEGEND:

GAS VALVE

WATER VALVE

FIRE HYDRANT

MANHOLE

UTILITY POLE

UTILITY NOTES
224

DEL MONTE BLVD PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE
100% DESIGN
NORTH
LEGEND:

GAS VALVE

WATER VALVE

FIRE HYDRANT

MANHOLE

UTILITY POLE

UTILITY NOTES
225

CALIFORNIA AVE
100% DESIGN
LEGEND:

GAS VALVE

WATER VALVE

FIRE HYDRANT

MANHOLE

UTILITY POLE

UTILITY NOTES NORTH
226
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
100% DESIGN

SIGNING & MARKING NOTES GENERAL NOTES
NORTH
LEGEND
227
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
100% DESIGN

SIGNING & MARKING NOTES GENERAL NOTES
NORTH
PLAN
228

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
100% DESIGN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN

SIGNING & MARKING NOTES GENERAL NOTES
PLAN
229

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
100% DESIGN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN

SIGNING & MARKING NOTES GENERAL NOTES
230

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH

SIGNING & MARKING NOTES GENERAL NOTES
231

CALIFORNIA AVE

CALIFORNIA AVE
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN

SIGNING & MARKING NOTES GENERAL NOTES
232

CALIFORNIA AVE
100% DESIGN

PLAN NORTH

SIGNING & MARKING NOTES GENERAL NOTES
233
TREES
SYMBOL QTY BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT. SPACING WUCOLS MATURE SIZE SHRUBS

GROUND COVERS

HYDROSEED
100% DESIGN

1. THE WORK SHALL BE DONE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PLANS AND THE MOST CURRENT EDITION OF THE APPLICABLE COUNTY AND/OR REGIONAL STANDARDS. IT SHALL BE THE

CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITY TO OBTAIN COPIES OF THESE STANDARDS, SPECIFICATIONS

AND DRAWINGS, AS WELL AS ALL OTHER STANDARDS AND SPECIFICATIONS NECESSARY TO COMPLETE AND ACCURATELY INTERPRET THESE PLANS.

2. QUANTITIES LISTED IN THE LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE ARE FOR THE CONVENIENCE OF THE CONTRACTOR. IN THE CASE OF ANY DISCREPANCIES, PLANS SHALL OVERRIDE THE LANDSCAPE AND BID SCHEDULE QUANTITIES. CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY QUANTITIES SHOWN ON THE PLANS AND BASE THEIR BID ACCORDINGLY.

3. RESPONSIBILITY FOR ESTABLISHING SUBGRADES IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS WORK. INSPECT SUBGRADES PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK TO CONFIRM SUBGRADE DEPTHS AND GRADES.

ADVISE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT OF DISCREPANCIES WITH DRAWINGS OR SPECIFICATIONS.

PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE LEFT FREE OF CONSTRUCTION DEBRIS AND/OR TOXIC MATERIAL AND GRADED TO A LEVEL TO PERMIT LANDSCAPE CONSTRUCTION. TRENCHES OR OTHER FILLED EXCAVATIONS SHALL BE COMPACTED PRIOR TO LANDSCAPE INSTALLATION.

4. SITE GRADING NECESSITATED BY THE WORK AS IT PROGRESSES AND NOT SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT ON THE PLANS WILL BE CONSIDERED INCIDENTAL WORK.

5. LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE UNIFORMLY GRADED SO THAT FINISHED SURFACES CONFORM TO THE TYPICAL SECTIONS AND PROPOSED GRADES SHOWN. FINISHED SURFACES SHALL BE REASONABLY SMOOTH, COMPACTED, AND FREE FROM IRREGULAR SURFACE DRAINAGE. THE

LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ESTABLISHING THE FINISH GRADE

AND SHALL BEAR FINAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR PROPER SURFACE DRAINAGE OF PLANTED AREAS.

6. AFTER ROUGH GRADING HAS OCCURRED, CONTRACTOR SHALL OBTAIN AN AGRONOMIC

SOILS REPORT AND SUBMIT TO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT FOR APPROVAL PRIOR TO AMENDMENTS AND/OR PLANTING. CONTRACTOR SHALL APPLY RECOMMENDATIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.

7. BACKFILL MIX SHALL BE PLACED IN 6" LIFTS AND TAMPED INTO PLACE AROUND THE PLANT.

NO TRANSPLANTING SHALL BE DONE WHEN SOIL IS EXCESSIVELY WET. DO NOT COUNTERSINK AROUND CACTI OR SUCCULENTS. PROVIDE POSITIVE DRAINAGE AWAY FROM PLANT.

8. TREES SHALL BE PLANTED A MINIMUM OF 5 FEET, SHRUBS AND ACCENTS A MINIMUM OF 24", ALL GROUNDCOVERS 18" FROM EDGE OF CURBS, WALKS, WALLS, PADS, ETC., UNLESS DIRECTED OTHERWISE BY THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.

9. EXCAVATE PITS, AS SHOWN ON DRAWINGS AND DETAILS. LOOSEN HARD SUBSOIL IN BOTTOM OF PIT. TEST DRAINAGE OF TREE, SHRUB AND PLANT PITS BY FILLING WITH WATER TWICE IN SUCCESSION. THE RETENTION OF WATER IN PLANTING PITS FOR MORE THAN TWENTY-FOUR (24) HOURS SHALL BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.

SUBMIT IN WRITING A PROPOSAL FOR THE CORRECTION TO THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE FOR APPROVAL BEFORE PROCEEDING WITH WORK.

10. IF ROCK, UNDERGROUND CONSTRUCTION, ADVERSE DRAINAGE CONDITIONS, OR OTHER

OBSTRUCTIONS ARE ENCOUNTERED IN EXCAVATION FOR PLANTING OF ANY PLANT MATERIAL, NOTIFY THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE. NEW LOCATIONS MAY BE SELECTED BY

THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE, OR INSTRUCTIONS MAY BE ISSUED TO DIRECT REMOVAL OF OBSTRUCTION. PROCEED WITH WORK ONLY AFTER APPROVAL OF THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE.

11. DO NOT MAKE SUBSTITUTIONS. IF SPECIFIED LANDSCAPE MATERIAL IS NOT OBTAINABLE,

SUBMIT PROOF OF NON-AVAILABILITY FROM AT LEAST FIVE SOURCES TO THE OWNER'S

REPRESENTATIVE, TOGETHER WITH PROPOSAL FOR USE OF EQUIVALENT MATERIAL FOR FINAL APPROVAL.

12. PLANT MATERIAL AND SPECIFICATIONS TO CONFORM TO THE AMERICAN STANDARD FOR NURSERY STOCK STANDARDS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

13. LAY OUT INDIVIDUAL TREE AND PLANT LOCATIONS AND AREAS FOR MULTIPLE PLANTINGS,

STAKE LOCATIONS AND OUTLINE AREAS AND SECURE THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE'S ACCEPTANCE BEFORE START OF PLANTING WORK. MAKE MINOR ADJUSTMENTS AS DIRECTED.

14. SHRUBS SHALL HAVE A FULL HEAD THAT COVERS THE CAN DIAMETER (CAN FULL) AND A MINIMUM OF THREE STEMS/BRANCHES.

15. FINISH GRADE FOR PLANTED AREAS SHALL BE 1" BELOW ALL CURBS, WALKS AND PAVING WITH SMOOTH EVEN LINES AT EDGES OF STRUCTURES.

16. FINISH LANDSCAPE GRADES SHALL SLOPE AT A 2% GRADE AWAY FROM CURBS, WALKS, AND WALLS.

17. LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL RECEIVE A 3" DEPTH OF WOOD BARK MULCH, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ON THESE PLANS. TREES TO HAVE A 6" DIAMETER RING AROUND TRUNK FREE OF MULCH. MULCH SHALL EXTEND UNDER ALL SHRUBS AND PLANTS. APPLY PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDE PRIOR TO AND AFTER MULCH INSTALLATION.

18. PROVIDE SAMPLES OF PROPOSED MULCH SHOWING COLOR, GRADATION SIZE RANGE AND TEXTURE INCLUDING PROPOSED SOURCE. PROVIDE 1/2 CUBIC FOOT SAMPLE OF EACH.

19. ROCK MULCH OR DECOMPOSED GRANITE SHALL NOT CONTAIN LUMPS OR BALLS OF CLAY, CALICHE, ORGANIC MATTER OR CALCAREOUS COATING. PROVIDE WEED BARRIER UNDER ALL DG AND/OR ROCK MULCH. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ENSURE THAT SUFFICIENT QUANTITY IS AVAILABLE FROM A SINGLE SOURCE TO COMPLETE THE PROJECT. THE OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE SHALL APPROVE SAMPLES PRIOR TO ORDERING.

20. NO JOB WILL BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE UNTIL ALL CURBS, PAVEMENT AND SIDEWALKS HAVE BEEN SWEPT CLEAN OF ALL DIRT AND DEBRIS ACCORDING TO PLANS.

21. IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CONTRACTOR TO OBTAIN ANY PERMITS REQUIRED. (SEE THE COUNTY GENERAL CONDITIONS)

22. ALL CONSTRUCTION ROADS AND COMPACTED AREAS DEVELOPED THROUGH CONSTRUCTION

THAT ARE WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE SCARIFIED AND LOOSENED TO A DEPTH OF 12" PRIOR TO LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION WORK BEGINNING

23. PLANTINGS WITHIN THE SIGHT VISIBILITY TRIANGLE LINE SHALL BE MAINTAINED SO THAT NO LIMBS HANG LOWER THAN SEVEN (7) FEET AND SHRUBS OR OTHER PLANTS PLANTED WITHIN THE SIGHT VISIBILITY TRIANGLE LINE SHALL BE NO TALLER THAN TWO (2) FEET AT FULL GROWTH.

I HAVE COMPLIED WITH THE CRITERIA OF THE ORDINANCE AB-1881 AND APPLIED THEM FOR THE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER IN THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN. ________________ MATHEW J. MORGAN, LLA 6256

1. LANDSCAPE AREAS WILL NOT BE IRRIGATED WITH AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. CONTRACTORS SHALL ENSURE THAT ALL PLANTS RECEIVE

APPROPRIATE WATERING TO ESTABLISH HEALTHY AND DEEP ROOT GROWTH DURING THE PLANT ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR. EACH WATERING SHALL BE OF SUCH QUANTITY AS TO PROVIDE OPTIMUM GROWTH CONDITIONS.

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE EQUIPMENT AND MEANS FOR THE PROPER

APPLICATION OF WATER TO LANDSCAPED AREAS NOT PROVIDED WITH AN IRRIGATION SYSTEM.

2. CONTRACTOR SHALL HAND WATER PLANTING AREAS AS REQUIRED TO ENSURE

ACTIVE GROWTH KEEPING AREAS MOIST BUT NOT SATURATED AND REGULATED WATERING AS NECESSARY TO AVOID EROSION AND GULLYING.

3. FOLLOWING THE PLANT ESTABLISHMENT PERIOD, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A WARRANTY WHICH GUARANTEES ALL PLANTS FOR ONE (1) YEAR FROM DATE OF FINAL ACCEPTANCE OF THE CONTRACT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL

REPLACE ANY PLANT WHICH HAS DIED, AND THE PLANT REPLACEMENT SHALL BE THE SAME SIZE CONTAINER AS ORIGINALLY DESIGNATED ON THE PLANS.

4. WATER SUPPLY SHALL BE CLEAN, FREE OF SUSPENDED PARTICLES, ALGAE, OR

CHEMICALS THAT MAY FORM INSOLUBLE PRECIPITATES IN THE EQUIPMENT OR MAY BE DETRIMENTAL TO PLANTINGS.

GENERAL LANDSCAPE NOTES LANDSCAPE SCHEDULE

GENERAL IRRIGATION NOTES

APPLY HYDROMULCH WITH HYDRAULIC SPRAY EQUIPMENT THAT MIXES FIBER,

TACKIFIER, FERTILIZER, AND OTHER EROSION
CONTROL MATERIALS SPECIFIED. IF APPLYING HYDROSEED, ADD SEED TO HYDROMULCH. SEED MAY BE DRY APPLIED TO

SMALL AREAS NOT ACCESSIBLE BY HYDROSEEDING EQUIPMENT IF AUTHORIZED.

ADD WATER TO HYDROMULCH AND HYDROSEED MATERIALS AS RECOMMENDED

BY THE MANUFACTURER AND MIX SUFFICIENTLY TO ENSURE AN EVEN APPLICATION. A DISPERSING AGENT MAY BE ADDED TO THE MIXTURE IF AUTHORIZED.EQUIPMENT MUST HAVE A BUILT-IN CONTINUOUS AGITATION AND

DISCHARGE SYSTEM CAPABLE OF PRODUCING A HOMOGENEOUS MIXTURE AND A UNIFORM APPLICATION RATE. THE TANK MUST HAVE A MINIMUM CAPACITY OF 1,000 GALLONS. YOU MAY USE A SMALLER TANK IF AUTHORIZED.

APPLY MATERIALS IN LOCATIONS, RATES, AND NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS SHOWN AND AS FOLLOWS:

1. START APPLICATION WITHIN 60 MINUTES AFTER ADDING SEED TO THE TANK.

2. APPLY IN SUCCESSIVE PASSES AS NECESSARY TO ACHIEVE THE SPECIFIED APPLICATION RATE.

3. APPLY ALL HYDROMULCH OR HYDROSEED MATERIALS SHOWN FOR A SINGLE AREA WITHIN 72 HOURS.

IF HYDROMULCH OR HYDROSEED MATERIALS ARE APPLIED TO AREAS COVERED

BY RECP, APPLY HYDROMULCH AND HYDROSEED MATERIALS TO THE ROLLED PRODUCT AS FOLLOWS:

1. VERIFY THE RECP IS IN UNIFORM CONTACT WITH THE SLOPE SURFACE.

2. SPRAY MATERIALS INTO THE RECP PERPENDICULAR TO THE SLOPE AND INTEGRATE WELL.

3. DO NOT DISPLACE OR DAMAGE THE RECP. AFTER THE FINAL APPLICATION, DO NOT ALLOW PEDESTRIANS OR EQUIPMENT ON THE TREATED AREAS.

NON-IRRIGATED HYDROSEED MIX

SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME APPLICATION
RATE (LBS./AC)
ABMROSIA CHAMISSONIS SILVER BURR RAGWEED 0.50
ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM COMMON YARROW 1.00
ARMERIA MARITIMA SEA THRIFT 1.00
DESCHAMPSIA CESPITOSA SSP.

HOLICIFORMUS CALIFORNIA HAIRGRASS 5.00
ERIGONUM LATIFOLIUM SEASIDE BUCKWHEAT 1.00
HELIOTROPIUM CURASSAVICUM SALT HELIOTROPE 1.00
HORDEUM BRACHYANTHERUM MEADOW BARLEY 6.00
LUPINUS ARBOREUS YELLOW BUSH LUPINE 3.00
NOTE: CONTACT PACIFIC COAST SEED COMPANY (925)-373-4417 PRIOR TO

PROCEEDING WITH INSTALLATION OF HYDROSEED TO CONFIRM SPECIFICATIONS AND AVAILABILITY OF SEED MIX.

SEED MIX TABLE
234

LANDSCAPE NOTES
TREES

SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
SHRUBS

SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME

GROUND COVERS

HYDROSEED
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
100% DESIGN
NORTH

LANDSCAPE LEGEND
235

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

MONTEREY PENINSULA RECREATIONAL TRAIL

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

LANDSCAPE NOTES

SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME

HYDROSEED
100% DESIGN
NORTH
NORTH
PLAN
PLAN

LANDSCAPE LEGEND
236

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD

LANDSCAPE NOTES

SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
TREES

SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME
SHRUBS

GROUND COVERS

HYDROSEED
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH

LANDSCAPE LEGEND
237

CALIFORNIA AVE

LANDSCAPE NOTES

SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT HEIGHT/SPREAD
TREES
SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT.

HYDROSEED
100% DESIGN
PLAN
NORTH
NORTH

PLAN LANDSCAPE LEGEND
238

CALIFORNIA AVE

LANDSCAPE NOTES

SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT
TREES
SYMBOL BOTANICAL / COMMON NAME CONT.

HYDROSEED
100% DESIGN

PLAN NORTH

LANDSCAPE LEGEND
239
100% DESIGN
PLAN

TYPICAL SHRUB PLANTING G NTS
9-12"
3 X
ROOTBALL WIDTH 6"
2-3" MULCH LAYER AS

SPECIFIED
4" HIGH BERM, FIRMLY

COMPACTED
3" DIA. CLEAR OF MULCH

FROM TRUNK
FINISHED GRADE.

UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL

SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF

PLANTING PIT

SET ROOTBALL ON UNDISTURBED

STABLE SUBSOIL SO THAT TOP OF
ROOTBALL IS 1" ABOVE FINISHED
GRADE.

PREPARED BACKFILL

PLANT TO BE INSTALLED CENTERED

AND PLUMB/LEVEL IN PLANTING PIT

FERTILIZER TABLETS (MAX
3" DEEP)
NOTES:

1. REFERENCE PLANTING

SPECIFICATIONS/ SPECIAL

PROVISIONS FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION.

2. WHEN SHRUBS MASSED WITH

GROUNDCOVER BEDS, ENTIRE
BED TO BE AMENDED.

3. WHEN SHRUBS ARE USED IN

MASSES, PRUNE ALL SHRUBS

TO ACHIEVE UNIFORM

MASS/HEIGHT

SECTION

BEST FACE OF SHRUB TO FACE

FRONT OF PLANTING BED

REFER TO PLANT SCHEDULE AND

PLANS FOR SPACING/LAYOUT
PLAN 4"

FRONT OF BED

PREPARED PLANTING SOIL

APPLY PRE-EMERGENT HERBICIDE
PRIOR TO LAYING MULCH 1/2"

CONCRETE
CURB
3" DEPTH WOOD BARK MULCH
WOOD BARK MULCH D NTS 6"
NOTES:

1. REFERENCE PLANTING

SPECIFICATIONS/ SPECIAL

PROVISIONS FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION.

2. DOUBLE STAKE ALL TREES #15 (15
GAL.) SIZE AND LARGER.

3. FOR SINGLE STAKED TREES, PLACE

STAKE ON WINDWARD SIDE OF
TREE.

4. FOR DOUBLE STAKED TREES,

PLACE STAKES PERPENDICULAR TO
WINDWARD SIDE OF TREE.

5. LOCATE ALL STAKES OUTSIDE OF
ROOTBALL. DO NOT DRIVE STAKES
INTO ROOTBALL. STAKE SHALL BE
DRIVEN MIN. 24" INTO NATIVE SOIL
AT BOTTOM OF PLANTING PIT.

6. REMOVE ANYTHING (IE. BURLAP,
WIRES, STRAPS, ETC.) THAT COULD

GIRDLE TREE OR RESTRICT TREE
GROWTH. 3 X ROOTBALL WIDTH
3" MULCH LAYER
4" HIGH BERM, FIRMLY COMPACTED
6" DIA. CLEAR OF MULCH AT TRUNK FLARE
FINISHED GRADE.

FERTILIZER TABLETS (MAX 3" DEEP)

SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF PLANTING
PIT

SET ROOTBALL ON

UNDISTURBED STABLE SUBSOIL
SO THAT TOP OF ROOTBALL IS 1"

ABOVE FINISHED GRADE
AND TO PREVENT SETTLING.

PREPARED BACKFILL
24" BOX TREE PLANTING C

TRUNK/ROOTBALL TO BE CENTERED AND

PLUMB/LEVEL IN PLANTING PIT

UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL

MINIMUM
PLAN
SECTION 24"
2" DIA. LODGEPOLE STAKES AND 4 RUBBER TIES.

TOP TREE TIES SHALL BE 6" ABOVE BENDING
MOMENT OF TREE. TIES SHOULD PROVIDE

FLEXIBILITY OF TRUNK BUT NOT ALLOW RUBBING
OF TRUNK AGAINST STAKE.

CUT STAKE OFF 6" ABOVE TIES. 6"
4" PERFORATED PVC 4"

STANDPIPE WITH

GRATE CAP AT

MULCH LEVEL,

WRAPPED IN FILTER

FABRIC, EXTEND TO

BOTTOM OF

PLANTER PIT

TREE TRUNK

RUBBER TREE TIES LOOPED IN A
"FIGURE 8" AROUND TREE TRUNK

AND STAKE
2" DIA. LODGEPILE STAKE

EACH TREE TIE SHALL BE

NAILED TO STAKE USING
GALVANIZED NAILS 6"
NOTES:

1. REFERENCE PLANTING

SPECIFICATIONS/ SPECIAL

PROVISIONS FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION.

2. TRIPLE STAKE ALL TREES #36"
BOX SIZE AND LARGER.

3. LOCATE ALL STAKES OUTSIDE
OF ROOTBALL. DO NOT DRIVE
STAKES INTO ROOTBALL.

STAKE MUST BE DRIVEN MIN.
24" INTO NATIVE SOIL AT
BOTTOM OF PLANTING PIT.

4. REMOVE ANYTHING (IE.

BURLAP, WIRES, STRAPS, ETC.)

THAT COULD GIRDLE TREE OR
RESTRICT TREE GROWTH.
3 X ROOTBALL WIDTH
3" MULCH LAYER
4" HIGH BERM, FIRMLY COMPACTED
6" DIA. CLEAR OF MULCH AT TRUNK
FLARE
FINISHED GRADE.

FERTILIZER TABLETS (MAX 3" DEEP)

SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF

PLANTING PIT

SET ROOTBALL ON UNDISTURBED STABLE
SUBSOIL SO THAT TOP OF ROOTBALL IS 1"

ABOVE FINISHED GRADE
AND TO PREVENT SETTLING.

PREPARED BACKFILL
36" AND LARGER BOX TREE PLANTING

TRUNK/ROOTBALL TO BE

CENTERED AND PLUMB/LEVEL IN

PLANTING PIT

UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL

MINIMUM
PLAN
SECTION 24"
2" DIA. LODGEPOLE STAKES AND 6
RUBBER TIES. TOP TREE TIES
SHALL BE 6" ABOVE BENDING
MOMENT OF TREE. TIES SHOULD

PROVIDE FLEXIBILITY OF TRUNK

BUT NOT ALLOW RUBBING OF
TRUNK AGAINST STAKE.

CUT STAKE OFF 6" ABOVE TIES. 6" 4"
4" PERFORATED PVC STANDPIPE

WITH GRATE CAP AT MULCH LEVEL,

WRAPPED IN FILTER FABRIC,

EXTEND TO BOTTOM OF PLANTER
PIT

TREE TRUNK

RUBBER TREE TIES LOOPED

AROUND TREE TRUNK AND STAKE
2" DIA. LODGEPILE STAKE

EACH TREE TIE SHALL BE NAILED TO STAKE

USING GALVANIZED NAILS

PREVAILING WIND
B NTS
CONSTRUCTION AND INSTALLATION:

NOTES:

MATERIALS:

ANTI-LIFT GROUND LOCK

ZIPPER JOINING SYSTEM

DOUBLE TOP EDGE

ZIPPER JOINING SYSTEM
.085"
.085"
1/2"
1/4"
7/16"
.085"
.085"
2 1/4"
.085" 3/8"

SPECIFIED TREE ROOT BARRIERS ARE A MECHANICAL BARRIER AND ROOT DEFLECTOR TO PREVENT TREE ROOTS FROM DAMAGING ADJACENT PAVING / HARDSCAPE ELEMENTS. ASSEMBLED IN 2' LONG MODULES OR FOR LINEAR APPLICATIONS DIRECTLY BESIDE AN ADJACENT HARDSCAPE AREA TO ONE SIDE OF THE TREES (LINEAR PLANTING STYLE).

1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL FURNISH AND INSTALL TREE ROOT BARRIERS AS SPECIFIED. THE TREE ROOT BARRIERS SHALL BE PRODUCT # UB 24-2 AS MANUFACTURED BY DEEP ROOT PARTNERS, L.P. 530 WASHINGTON STREET, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 (800-458-7668), OR APPROVED EQUAL. THE BARRIER SHALL BE BLACK, INJECTION MOLDED PANELS, OF 0.085" WALL THICKNESS IN MODULES 24" LONG BY 24" DEEP; MANUFACTURED WITH A MINIMUM 50% POST CONSUMER RECYCLED POLYPROPYLENE PLASTIC WITH ADDED ULTRAVIOLET INHIBITORS; RECYCLABLE.

1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL THE TREE ROOT BARRIERS WITH THE NUMBER OF PANELS AND IN THE MANNER SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS. THE VERTICAL ROOT DEFLECTING RIBS SHALL BE FACING INWARDS TO THE ROOT BALL AND THE TOP OF THE DOUBLE EDGE SHALL BE 1/2" ABOVE GRADE. EACH OF THE REQUIRED NUMBER OF PANELS SHALL BE JOINED IN A LINEAR FASHION AND PLACED ALONG THE ADJACENT HARDSCAPE.

2. EXCAVATION AND SOIL PREPARATION SHALL CONFORM TO THE DRAWINGS

DOUBLE TOP EDGE

FOR PREVENTION OF

ROOT OVER GROWTH
90° ROOT DEFLECTING

RIBS INTEGRAL PART

OF PANEL
PANEL 0.085" (2.16MM)

THICK POLYPROPYLENE

PATENTED MOLDED

GROUND LOCKING

ANTI-LIFT PADS (SEE
DETAIL "B")

ROUNDED EDGES FOR

SAFETY AND

STRENGTH
ROOT CONTROL BARRIER H NTS 10' MIN. 10' MIN.

ROOT BARRIER REQUIRED WITHIN
5' OF TREE TRUNK

TREE TRUNK

ROOT BARRIER

TREE TRUNK
24" DEPTH ROOT BARRIER

FINISHED GRADE
TOP OF ROOT BARRIER 1/2"

ABOVE FINISHED GRADE BUT

NOT HIGHER THAN

ADJACENT HARDSCAPE

ROOT BARRIER REQUIRED WITHIN
5' OF TREE TRUNK

HARDSCAPE, WALLS,

BUILDINGS, BROW

DITCHES, OR OTHER

IMPROVEMENTS

SECTION
PLAN
NOTES:

1. ROOT BARRIER SHALL BE INSTALLED ADJACENT TO THE IMPROVEMENT AND NOT AROUND THE ROOTBALL.

2. ROOT BARRIER REQUIRED WHEN TREE TRUNK IS WITHIN 5' OF HARDSCAPE, WALLS, BUILDINGS,

BROW DITCHES, OR OTHER IMPROVEMENTS

CL TREE

TYPICAL GROUNDCOVER PLANTING E NTS
2-3" MULCH LAYER
4" HIGH BERM FIRMLY

COMPACTED
FINISHED GRADE.

UNDISTURBED NATIVE SOIL
PREPARED PLANTING SOIL. AMEND
ENTIRE BED FOR GROUNDCOVER BEDS.

SECTION

SCARIFY BOTTOM AND SIDES OF

PLANTING PIT

BEST FACE OF PLANT TO FACE FRONT OF PLANTING BED

REFER TO PLANT SCHEDULE AND PLANS FOR

SPACING/LAYOUT
PLAN
NOTES:

1. REFERENCE PLANTING SPECIFICATIONS/

SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION.

FRONT OF BED 4"
SHRUB/GROUNDCOVER PLANTING ON SLOPE F NTS 3-4"
9-12"
3 X

ROOTBALL WIDTH
6" 6"
3" THICK MULCH LAYER AS SPECIFIED
4" MULCH MOUND TO DIVERT WATER
TOWARD ROOT BALL.

LEAVE 6" OF EXPOSED ROOTBALL

AT TRUNK FLARE

UNDISTRUBED SUBSOIL

TRENCH FOR DRAINAGE

SET ROOTBALL ON UNDISTURBED STABLE SUBSOIL
SO THAT TOP OF ROOTBALL IS 1" ABOVE FINISHED
GRADE.

PLANTING SOIL AS SPECIFIED

ROOTBALL CENTERED IN PIT AS SPECIFIED
FINISHED GRADE. REFERENCE

GRADING PLAN

EXISTING SLOPE
NTS
240

KEY MAP
N I A

L I FOR C A
1 N I A

L I FOR
C A
1 LEGEND

DESCRIPTION EXISTING PROPOSED
100% DESIGN
241
GR
’
’
’
ELECTRICAL, LIGHTING, AND COMMUNICATIONS GENERAL NOTES (SHEETS 497 TO 528)

UTILITY GENERAL NOTES

LEGEND ABBREVIATIONS

PROPOSED DESCRIPTION
100% DESIGN
242

CALIFORNIA AVE
C C
E E
E
C
GR
GR E
E
E
E

E E E E E
C
E
C

E E E E E
E
E
E
C C
E E
E
E
E
E
C
C
C
C
E
C
C
C
GR
GR
E

E E E E
C C
E E
E
E
E
C
E
100% DESIGN

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

PLAYA AVE
SURF! BRT BUSWAY
DETAIL 'A"

DETAIL 'B'
243
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
E
E
C
E
E E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
C
C
E
E
E
E
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C C
C
E C
C
C
C
E
E
C
GR GR
E
E
E
C
C
C
C
C
C
E
C
C
C
GR
GR

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

LEG TO FUTURE NEW DEVELOPMENT

DETAIL 'A'
100% DESIGN
SURF! BRT BUSWAY
244
100% DESIGN

DETAIL 'A'

RFID LONG-RANGE READER

FRONT VIEW

DETAIL 'B'

VEHICLE GATE CONTROL SYSTEM

AND GATE ARM FRONT VIEW

DETAIL 'D'

VEHICLE GATE CONTROL SYSTEM

FOUNDATION PLAN VIEW

DETAIL 'C'

VEHICLE GATE CONTROL SYSTEM

FOUNDATION SIDE VIEW
245

INFORMATION
PANEL

STATION NAME, TYP

INFORMATION
PANEL
100% DESIGN

DETAIL 'A'

WAYFINDING PYLON ELECTRICAL

FRONT VIEW

DETAIL 'D'

BUS SHELTER ELECTRICAL

FRONT VIEW

DETAIL 'B'

BUS SHELTER ELECTRICAL

PLAN VIEW

DETAIL 'C'

BUS SHELTER ELECTRICAL

PROFILE VIEW
246
100% DESIGN
DETAIL 'A': LUMINAIRE-MOUNTED

CCTV CAMERA
DETAIL 'A-1': LUMINAIRE

MOUNTING ASSEMBLY

DETAIL 'B' PA SPEAKER

ON STREET LIGHT
DETAIL 'D: COMMUNICATIONS

CABINET MOUNTED ON

STREET LIGHT POLE
247
100% DESIGN
248
100% DESIGN
L2 CHARGER DETAIL FUTURE L2 CHARGER DETAIL

SWITCHBOARDS ELEVATION DETAIL
249
100% DESIGN
CONDUIT TRENCHING DETAIL L3 CHARGER POWER LINK DETAIL L3 CHARGER POWER BLOCK DETAIL 250
100% DESIGN

CONDUIT AND CONDUCTOR SCHEDULES
100% DESIGN - NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION

CONDUIT AND CONDUCTOR SCHEDULES CONDUIT AND CONDUCTOR SCHEDULES 251
100% DESIGN
DETAIL 'A': CIRCUIT
DIAGRAM FOR SC1
(CALIFORNIA AVE AND PLAYA AVE BUS STOP)
DETAIL 'B': CIRCUIT
DIAGRAM FOR SC3
(CALIFORNIA AVE ENTRANCE ROUNDABOUT)
DETAIL 'C': CIRCUIT
DIAGRAM FOR SC5
(BUS STOP AT DEL MONTE BLVD AND PALM AVE STATION)
252
100% DESIGN
D D
C C
B

1.75 44.5
TYP
B
E
DETAIL 'A':

COMMUNICATIONS CABINET
DETAIL 'A-5':

BOTTOM VIEW
DETAIL 'A-7':

SECTION B-B
DETAIL 'A-4':

TOP VIEW
DETAIL 'B-1':

DETAIL 'B-2'

SIDE VIEW
DETAIL 'B-3'

BASE VIEW
DETAIL 'B-4'
DETAIL 'B': FRONT VIEW

COMMUNICATIONS CABINET
DETAIL 'A-1':

DETAIL 'A-2':

DETAIL 'A-3':

DETAIL 'A-6':

BOTTOM VIEW
253
100% DESIGN
LEGEND
254
100% DESIGN

TRENCHING DETAILS

SECTION A-A SECTION B-B

SECTION C-C SECTION D-D

SECTION E-E SECTION F-F

SECTION H-H

SECTION I-I SECTION J-J

SECTION G-G
255

KEY MAP
N I A

L I FOR
C A
1 N I A

L I FOR
C A
1 100% DESIGN

DESCRIPTION EXISTING PROPOSED
LEGEND
256
100% DESIGN

DESCRIPTION EXISTING PROPOSED

ABBREVIATIONS
TRAFFIC SIGNAL GENERAL NOTES (SHEETS TS-102 TO TS-301)
LEGEND
257

DEL MONTE BLVD

CONTRA COSTA ST

BROADWAY AVE

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

EXISTING PHASE DIAGRAM
100% DESIGN
258

DEL MONTE BLVD

CLEMENTINA AVE

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

EXISTING PHASE DIAGRAM
100% DESIGN
259

DEL MONTE BLVD TIOGA AVE

THE MALL

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

EXISTING PHASE DIAGRAM
100% DESIGN
260
E
E
E
E
E
E E E
E
E
E
E
100% DESIGN DEL MONTE BLVD

CONSTRUCTION NOTES

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE
PLAYA AVE SURF! BRT BUSWAY

PROPOSED PHASE DIAGRAM
DETAIL 'A': 5-SECTION HEAD
DETAIL 'B': POLE-MOUNTED SIGN
DETAIL 'B1': R3-1 BLANKOUT SIGN
DETAIL 'C': R3-1 (MOD)
DETAIL 'C': 4-SECTION HEAD
261
100% DESIGN
262
100% DESIGN

DETAIL 'C'

TRANSIT SIGNAL

PRIORITY LINE DIAGRAM

DETAIL 'A'

GPS RADIO MOUNTING ON

TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE

DETAIL 'B'

SIGNAL POLE GPS RADIO UNIT DETAIL
263
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
NORTH
GENERAL NOTES: STAGING NOTES

SIGN LEGEND
ROAD
CLOSED
LEGEND
DETOUR
264

CALIFORNIA AVE

ONE WAY
NORTH
GENERAL NOTES:

ONE LANE
ROAD
AHEAD

STAGING NOTES

SIGN LEGEND
NORTH
LEGEND
ROAD
CLOSED

SHOULDER
CLOSED
265
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
NORTH
GENERAL NOTES: STAGING NOTES

SIGN LEGEND
ROAD
CLOSED

DETOUR DETOUR
LEGEND
266
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
NORTH
GENERAL NOTES: STAGING NOTES
LEGEND

SIGN LEGEND
ROAD
CLOSED
DETOUR
267
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
NORTH
GENERAL NOTES:

ROAD
CLOSED

STAGING NOTES

SIGN LEGEND
DETOUR
DETOUR
LEGEND
268
NB SR-1
SB SR-1
SB SR-1 OFF-RAMP

CALIFORNIA AVE
SB SR-1 ON-RAMP
NORTH
GENERAL NOTES:

ROAD
CLOSED

DETOUR DETOUR
LEGEND

STAGING NOTES

SIGN LEGEND
269

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD
100% DESIGN
NORTH
GENERAL NOTES: STAGING NOTES SIGN LEGEND
DETOUR
DETOUR
AHEAD
END
DETOUR
ROAD
CLOSED
LANE
CLOSED

LEGEND MUST

RIGHT LANE

TURN RIGHT
270

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD
100% DESIGN
NORTH

STAGING NOTES SIGN LEGEND

END DETOUR
DETOUR
ROAD
CLOSED
LANE
CLOSED
LEGEND
GENERAL NOTES:

DETOUR
AHEAD
MUST

RIGHT LANE

TURN RIGHT
271

CALIFORNIA AVE
100% DESIGN
NORTH

STAGING NOTES SIGN LEGEND
LANE
CLOSED
GENERAL NOTES: LEGEND

LEFT LANE
CLOSED
AHEAD

LEFT LANE
CLOSED
AHEAD
2 272
100% DESIGN

STAGING NOTES SIGN LEGEND

END DETOUR
DETOUR
LANE
CLOSED
DETOUR
NORTH
GENERAL NOTES: LEGEND
273

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD
100% DESIGN
END

ROAD WORK
NORTH

STAGING NOTES SIGN LEGEND
AHEAD
WORK
ROAD
NARROW
LANE
GENERAL NOTES: LEGEND

RIGHT LANE
CLOSED
AHEAD
274

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD
100% DESIGN
END

ROAD WORK
NORTH

STAGING NOTES SIGN LEGEND
AHEAD
WORK
ROAD
NARROW
LANE
GENERAL NOTES: LEGEND
275

PLAYA AVE CALIFORNIA AVE DEL MONTE BLVD
100% DESIGN
NORTH
GENERAL NOTES: STAGING NOTES LEGEND

SIGN LEGEND

DETOUR DETOUR
ROAD
CLOSED
MUST

RIGHT LANE

TURN RIGHT
DETOUR
276
100% DESIGN
LOCAL
ACCESS

STAGING NOTES

SIGN LEGEND
DETOUR
LEGEND
DETOUR
GENERAL NOTES:

NORTH
ROAD
CLOSED

ONLY DETOUR
277

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
SB SR-1
NB SR-1

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL
100% DESIGN
GENERAL NOTES:

DETAIL B

DETAIL A

STAGING NOTES

SIGN LEGEND
LEGEND
DETOUR
NORTH
NORTH
NORTH
DETOUR
278
8TH STREET
SB SR-1
NB SR-1
5TH STREET
NB SR-1
SB SR-1

BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL

DEL MONTE BLVD
100% DESIGN
GENERAL NOTES:

STAGING NOTES

SIGN LEGEND

DETAIL B

DETAIL A
LEGEND
NORTH

NORTH NORTH

DETOUR DETOUR
279
GENERAL NOTES:

NORTH
NORTH
NORTH

STATIONARY MOUNTED CONSTRUCTION AREA SIGNS
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
301
302
303
304
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 1

MEMORANDUM
To: Leon Gomez | Sand City, CA
From: Frederik Venter, PE and Anthony Nuti, PE | Kimley-Horn and Associates Date: February 7, 2024
Re: MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE)

1. Executive Summary
This memorandum provides the analysis of Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) for the following five (5) intersections along the MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Corridor (the “Project”) in Monterey County, California:
• California Avenue & Edgewater Mall
• 1
st Avenue Transit Center Access
a. 1st Avenue & Street I/Northern Transit Center Driveway (Bus Only Driveway) b. 1st Avenue & Street J/Transit Center Pick-Off/Drop-Off Driveway (Car/Van Driveway)
c. 1st Avenue & Southern Transit Center Driveway (Passenger Car Driveway) • California Avenue & Playa Avenue
Table 1 provides a summary of the recommended intersection control for all study intersections.

Table 1 – Summary of Recommended Intersection Control
Intersection Side Street
Stop Control
All-Way
Stop Control Signal Roundabout
California Ave & Edgewater Mall -1 Acceptable Acceptable Not Feasible4 1 st Ave & Northern Transit Center Dwy Acceptable Acceptable2 Acceptable3 Not Feasible4 1 st Ave & St J/Transit Center Pick-Up/Drop-Off Dwy Acceptable Acceptable2 Acceptable3 Not Feasible4 1 st Ave & Southern Transit Center Dwy Acceptable Acceptable2 Acceptable3 Not Feasible4 California Ave & Playa Ave -1 Not Acceptable Acceptable Not Acceptable Notes

1. If study intersections have control greater than a side street stop control, a side street stop was not analyzed.

2. All-Way Stop Controlled intersections should be reassessed per the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUCTD) (Section 2B.07) once the transit center and Dunes are constructed.

3. Signalized intersections should be reassessed per the CAMUTCD (Section 4C) once the transit center and Dunes are constructed.

2. Roundabouts deemed not feasible due to geometric constraints. 305
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 2

2. Introduction
This memorandum provides the analysis of Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) for the following five (5) intersections along the MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Corridor (the “Project”) in Monterey County, California:
• California Avenue & Edgewater Mall
• 1
st Avenue Transit Center Access
a. 1st Avenue & Northern Transit Center Driveway (Bus Only Driveway) b. 1st Avenue & Pick-Off/Drop-Off Driveway (Car/Van Driveway) c. 1st Avenue & Southern Transit Center Driveway (Passenger Car Driveway) • California Avenue & Playa Avenue

3. California Avenue & Edgewater Mall
The traffic volume data for the California Avenue & Edgewater Mall Driveway intersection presented in this memorandum were extracted from the Transportation Impact Analysis for MST Surf! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project, Kimley-Horn, (January 2021).

3.1 Geometry and Traffic Volume Revisions
Figure 1 illustrates the geometry updates for the All-Way Stop Control (AWSC) at the California Avenue and Edgewater Mall intersection.

Southbound buses will perform a southbound left and northbound buses will perform a westbound right turn as the bus travels along a new the busway that runs parallel to California Avenue at the intersection of California Avenue and Edgewater Mall. The lane configuration of the southbound approach is updated to one shared left turn-through lane and one right turn lane to allow buses to enter the exclusive right-of-way. The lane configuration of the westbound approach is a right turn lane to allow buses to exit the exclusive right-of-way. The rerouted bus volumes are illustrated in Figure 2 for both Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Project Conditions. To be consistent with the Transportation Impact Analysis for MST Surf! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project, a passenger car equivalent (PCE) of 2 was utilized for bus traffic at this study intersection.

3.2 All-Way Stop Control Analysis
All-way stop control (AWSC) was reviewed for the study intersection. Results of level of service (LOS) for Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Project conditions are provided in Table 2.

With the implementation of the exclusive busway, this intersection would operate at an acceptable LOS with AWSC for the AM and PM peak hours.

A concern with the AWSC control is that the northbound vehicle queues could potentially block the intersection preventing buses from performing a southbound left turn into the busway. Therefore, it is recommended that if the AWSC remains, it is recommended to enhance the keep clear markings and signage at the intersection.
306
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 3
Table 2 – All-Way Stop Controlled LOS Summary
Intersection LOS
Standard
Control
Type
Existing Plus
Project Conditions
Cumulative Plus
Project Conditions
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
9 California Ave & Edgewater Mall D AWSC 9.4 A 12.1 B 10.4 B 14.1 B Notes

1. Analysis performed using HCM 6th Edition methodology.

2. Overall level of service (LOS) standard for the City is D.

3. AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled Intersection

4. Delay indicated in seconds/vehicle.

3.3 Signal Analysis
A signal was reviewed for the study intersection. Since the intersection cannot be widened, it was assumed that the signal would run split phasing for the north/south direction. Results for Existing Plus Project and Cumulative Plus Project conditions are provided in Table 3.

With implementation of the exclusive busway and a signal, the intersection this intersection would operate at an acceptable LOS for the AM and PM peak hours.

If this alternative is selected, it is recommended to conduct simulation analysis to determine the estimated queuing between the California and Edgewater Mall intersection and the Highway 1 and California Avenue intersection due to close intersection spacing.

Table 3 – Signal LOS Summary
Intersection LOS
Standard
Control
Type
Existing Plus
Project Conditions
Cumulative Plus
Project Conditions
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
AM Peak
Hour
PM Peak
Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
9 California Ave & Edgewater Mall D Signal 14.6 B 16.3 B 15.9 B 21.7 C Notes

1. Analysis performed using HCM 6th Edition methodology.

2. Overall level of service (LOS) standard for the City is D.

3. AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled Intersection

4. Delay indicated in seconds/vehicle.

3.4 Roundabout Analysis
A roundabout was reviewed for the study intersection. It was determined that the intersection is geometrically constrained, and a roundabout cannot be designed to accommodate trucks and bus movements. Therefore, it is not recommended to install a roundabout at the study intersection and this improvement would be infeasible.
307
MST SURF! ICE January 2024
California & Edgewater Mall Intersection Updates
Figure 1
12RT+
308
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 5
Figure 2 – California Avenue & Edgewater Mall/Busway Volumes and Geometry* *Geometry remains the same for the signal alternative.
309
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 6

4. 1
st Avenue Transit Center
The Project proposes to construct a transit center along 1st Avenue just west of the Dunes development in Marina, CA.

Figure 3 illustrates the proposed 1st Avenue Transit Center.

This section provides and ICE analysis for the three intersections proposed along 1st Avenue.

4.1 1
st Avenue Volume Development
The following projects were analyzed to develop volumes along 1st Avenue for the Background Conditions:
• 1
st Avenue Transit Center
• Dunes
Figure 4 illustrates the geometry and volumes for the Background Conditions. 1 st Ave Transit Center Trip Generation
Trip generation for the Project was calculated using the rates from the Institute of Transportation The trip generation table for the 1st Ave Transit Center has been provided in Table 4.

The land uses are anticipated to generate a total of 594 Daily, 61 AM peak hour trips (49 IN / 12 OUT), and 84 PM peak hour trips (21 IN / 63 OUT) primary trips. These trips are for passenger cars only.

Table 4 – 1st Avenue Transit Center Trip Generation
Trip Generation Rates ITE Land Use
Code/Reference Units Daily2 Weekday AM Weekday PM
Rate2 IN / OUT Rate2 IN / OUT
Park & Ride Los with Bus
or Light Rail Service ITE 090 - Occupied Parking Spaces - - 80% / 20% - 25% / 75% Project
1st Avenue Transit Center 153 Occupied Parking
Spaces 6223 76 61 / 15 84 21 / 63
Notes

1. Trip Generation Rates are published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, "Trip Generation," 11th Edition, 2021 unless otherwise stated

2. The following equations were utilized to calculate trips:

Daily: T = 3.78(X) + 44.13
AM Peak Hour: T = 0.40(X) + 14.78
PM Peak Hour: T = 0.54 (X) + 1.84

3. Due to the commute nature of this transit center, the daily trip generation will not be utilized and was provided for informational purposes.

In addition to passenger vehicles, the following transit services were also assumed to utilize this transit center:
• MST Route 17
o Travel to/from bus pick-up/drop-off along 1st Avenue
o 60-minute headways
• MST Route 61
o Travel to/from bus pick-up/drop-off along 1st Avenue
o 120-minute headways
310
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 7
• CSUMB
o Travel to/from passenger car pick-up/drop-off along 1st Avenue o 15-minute headways
• MST SURF!
o Travel to/from bus pick-up/drop-off along SURF! Busway o 10-minute headways
To be consistent with the Transportation Impact Analysis for MST Surf! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project, a passenger car equivalent (PCE) of 2 was utilized for bus traffic at these study intersections.

4.2 Side Street Stop Control
Side Street Stop Control (SSSC) was reviewed for the study intersections. Results of level of service (LOS) for Background Conditions are provided in Table 5. It was determined that all three (3) intersections along 1st Avenue operate at an acceptable LOS.

Table 5 – Side Street Stop Control LOS Summary
Intersection LOS
Standard
Control
Type
Background Conditions
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
MVMT Delay LOS MVMT Delay LOS
1 1
st Avenue & N. Transit Center Dwy D SSSC - - - - - -
Worst Approach EB 10.8 B EB 10.9 B
2 1
st Avenue & Pick-Up/Drop-Off Dwy D SSSC - - - - - -
Worst Approach EB 10.5 B WB 10.4 B
3 1
st Avenue & S. Transit Center Dwy D SSSC - - - - - -
Worst Approach EB 10.5 B EB 10.2 B
Notes:

1. Analysis performed using HCM 6th Edition methodology.

2. Overall level of service (LOS) standard for the City is D.

3. SSSC – Side Street Stop Controlled Intersection

4. Delay indicated in seconds/vehicle.

4.3 All-Way Stop Control Analysis
All-Way Stop Control (AWSC) was reviewed for the study intersections. Results of level of service (LOS) for Background Conditions are provided in Table 5. It was determined that all three (3) intersections along 1st Avenue operate at an acceptable LOS.

It should be noted that the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) has requirements for implementation of an AWSC intersection (Section 2B.07). At the time of this study it is uncertain if the requirements for All-Way Stop are met and should be reassessed once the transit center and Dunes are constructed.
311
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 8
Table 6 – All-Way Stop Control LOS Summary
Intersection LOS
Standard
Control
Type
Background Conditions
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 1st Avenue & N. Transit Center Dwy D AWSC 8.3 A 8.3 A 2 1st Avenue & Pick-Up/Drop-Off Dwy D AWSC 8.3 A 8.3 A
3 1st Avenue & S. Transit Center Dwy D AWSC 8.2 A 8.3 A Notes:

1. Analysis performed using HCM 6th Edition methodology.

2. Overall level of service (LOS) standard for the City is D.

3. AWSC – All Way Stop Controlled Intersection

4. Delay indicated in seconds/vehicle.

4.4 Signal Analysis
Signal control was reviewed for the study intersections. Results of level of service (LOS) for Background Conditions are provided in Table 5. All signals along 1st Avenue were assumed to operate in permissive phasing. It was determined that all three (3) intersections along 1st Avenue operate at an acceptable LOS.

It should be noted that the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) has nine (9) warrants for implementation of a signalized intersection (Section 4C). At the time of this study it is uncertain if the warrants for a signal are met and should be reassessed once the transit center and Dunes are constructed.

Table 7 – Signal LOS Summary
Intersection LOS
Standard
Control
Type
Background Conditions
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 1st Avenue & N. Transit Center Dwy D Signal 3.7 A 3.6 A 2 1st Avenue & Pick-Up/Drop-Off Dwy D Signal 4.0 A 4.0 A 3 1st Avenue & S. Transit Center Dwy D Signal 3.7 A 4.6 A Notes:

1. Analysis performed using HCM 6th Edition methodology.

2. Overall level of service (LOS) standard for the City is D.

3. Signal – Signalized Intersection

4. Delay indicated in seconds/vehicle.

4.5 Roundabout Analysis
A roundabout was reviewed for the study intersection. It was determined that the intersection is geometrically constrained, and a roundabout cannot be designed to accommodate trucks and bus movements. Therefore, it is not recommended to install a roundabout at the study intersection and this improvement would be infeasible.

312
MST SURF! ICE January 2024
1st Avenue Transit Center
Figure 3
12RT+
313
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 10 Figure 4 – 1st Avenue Transit Center Volumes and Geometry *Geometry remains the same for all alternatives.
314
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 11

5. California Avenue & Playa Avenue
The Project proposed the following Scenarios for the intersection of California Avenue & Playa Avenue:
• Scenario 1: Existing Geometry
• Scenario 2: 95% Design
• Scenario 3: 95% Design + NBL (California)
• Scenario 4: Single Lane Roundabout
Refer to Figure 5 for an illustration of the study scenarios.

This intersection was reviewed using a VISSIM simulation and the results of this analysis have been provided in Table 8 through Table 10.

Table 11 provides a summary of the recommendations for the analysis.

A presentation was prepared for that summarizes the analysis in more detail and has been provided in the Appendix.
315
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 12 Figure 5 – California & Playa Avenue Study Scenarios
316
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 13 Table 8 – Cumulative 2045 PM Peak LOS Summary
Table 9 – Cumulative 2045 AM Peak LOS Summary
317
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 14 Table 10 – Cumulative 2045 Weekend Midday Peak LOS Summary Table 11 – Summary of Vissim Results
318
MST SURF! Intersection Control Evaluation (ICE) Page 15

6. Appendix
A. California Avenue and Edgewater Mall/MST SURF! Busway – All-Way Stop Control: Existing Plus Project Conditions Synchro Outputs
B. California Avenue and Edgewater Mall/MST SURF! Busway – Signal: Existing Plus Project Conditions Synchro Outputs
C. California Avenue and Edgewater Mall/MST SURF! Busway – All-Way Stop Control: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions Synchro Outputs
D. California Avenue and Edgewater Mall/MST SURF! Busway – Signal: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions Synchro Outputs
E. 1st Avenue Side Street Stop Control – Background Plus Project Synchro Outputs F. 1st Avenue All Way Stop Control – Background Plus Project Synchro Outputs G. 1st Avenue Signal – Background Plus Project Synchro Outputs H. California Avenue & Playa Avenue PowerPoint
319
A. California Avenue and Edgewater Mall/MST SURF! Busway – All-Way Stop Control: Existing Plus Project Conditions Synchro Outputs
320
SURF BRT Existing Plus Project
9: California Ave & Project Driveway/RailRoad Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 9.4
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 146 0 32 0 0 12 24 28 0 12 128 225
Future Vol, veh/h 146 0 32 0 0 12 24 28 0 12 128 225
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 0 3 0 0 0 4 11 0 0 4 1
Mvmt Flow 157 0 34 0 0 13 26 30 0 13 138 242
Number of Lanes 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 1
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 1 2
HCM Control Delay 9.7 8.3 8.9 9.3

HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 72% 0% 100% 63% 0% 9% 0%
Vol Thru, % 28% 100% 0% 0% 0% 91% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 0% 37% 100% 0% 100%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 33 19 91 87 12 140 225
LT Vol 24 0 91 55 0 12 0
Through Vol 9 19 0 0 0 128 0
RT Vol 0 0 0 32 12 0 225
Lane Flow Rate 36 20 97 94 13 151 242
Geometry Grp 7 7 7 7 6 7 7
Degree of Util (X) 0.059 0.031 0.164 0.146 0.019 0.217 0.303 Departure Headway (Hd) 5.884 5.641 6.06 5.585 5.164 5.185 4.507 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 606 632 590 640 688 691 796
Service Time 3.643 3.4 3.818 3.342 3.235 2.923 2.244
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.059 0.032 0.164 0.147 0.019 0.219 0.304 HCM Control Delay 9 8.6 10 9.3 8.3 9.4 9.2
HCM Lane LOS A A A A A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.5 0.1 0.8 1.3
321
SURF BRT Existing Plus Project
9: California Ave & Project Driveway/RailRoad Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 12.1
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 275 0 51 0 0 12 37 171 0 12 207 296
Future Vol, veh/h 275 0 51 0 0 12 37 171 0 12 207 296
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles, % 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Mvmt Flow 286 0 53 0 0 13 39 178 0 13 216 308
Number of Lanes 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 1
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 1 2
HCM Control Delay 12.6 9.6 10.8 12.3

HCM LOS B A B B

Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 39% 0% 100% 68% 0% 5% 0%
Vol Thru, % 61% 100% 0% 0% 0% 95% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 0% 32% 100% 0% 100%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 94 114 165 161 12 219 296
LT Vol 37 0 165 110 0 12 0
Through Vol 57 114 0 0 0 207 0
RT Vol 0 0 0 51 12 0 296
Lane Flow Rate 98 119 172 168 12 228 308
Geometry Grp 7 7 7 7 6 7 7
Degree of Util (X) 0.178 0.209 0.331 0.304 0.022 0.38 0.452 Departure Headway (Hd) 6.533 6.35 6.928 6.526 6.439 5.991 5.272 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 548 564 519 550 554 600 681
Service Time 4.28 4.097 4.668 4.266 4.5 3.729 3.009
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.179 0.211 0.331 0.305 0.022 0.38 0.452 HCM Control Delay 10.7 10.8 13.1 12.1 9.6 12.4 12.3
HCM Lane LOS B B B B A B B
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0.8 1.4 1.3 0.1 1.8 2.4
322
B. California Avenue and Edgewater Mall/MST SURF! Busway – Signal: Existing Plus Project Conditions Synchro Outputs

323
SURF BRT Existing Plus Project - Signal
9: California Ave & Edgewater Mall/Busway Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 275 0 51 0 0 12 37 171 0 12 207 296 Future Volume (veh/h) 275 0 51 0 0 12 37 171 0 12 207 296 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1885 1900 1900 0 1900 1900 1900 1885 0 1900 1885 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 335 0 0 0 0 12 39 178 0 12 216 308 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Cap, veh/h 521 514 0 0 0 25 76 369 0 28 495 446
Arrive On Green 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.28 0.28 0.28 Sat Flow, veh/h 3591 1900 0 0 0 1606 623 3116 0 99 1781 1604 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 335 0 0 0 0 12 116 101 0 228 0 308 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1795 1900 0 0 0 1606 1854 1791 0 1880 0 1604 Q Serve(g_s), s 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.4 2.1 0.0 4.1 0.0 7.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 3.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 2.4 2.1 0.0 4.1 0.0 7.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.34 0.00 0.05 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 521 514 0 0 0 25 226 219 0 523 0 446 V/C Ratio(X) 0.64 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.51 0.46 0.00 0.44 0.00 0.69 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 850 974 0 0 0 267 249 240 0 1147 0 979 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 16.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 16.8 16.7 0.0 12.2 0.0 13.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.5 1.8 1.5 0.0 0.6 0.0 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.9 0.8 0.0 1.5 0.0 2.4 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 17.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.5 18.6 18.3 0.0 12.7 0.0 15.1 LnGrp LOS B A A A A C B B A B A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 335 12 217 536
Approach Delay, s/veh 17.8 33.5 18.5 14.1
Approach LOS B C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.9 10.4 5.1 9.5 15.6
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.0 9.7 6.8 5.5 21.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 9.0 5.6 2.3 4.4 0.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.2 0.5 0.0 0.1 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 16.3
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 324
SURF BRT Existing Plus Project - Signal
9: California Ave & Edgewater Mall/Busway Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 146 0 32 0 0 12 24 28 0 12 128 225 Future Volume (veh/h) 146 0 32 0 0 12 24 28 0 12 128 225 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1900 1856 0 1900 1900 1841 1737 0 1900 1841 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 189 0 0 0 0 13 26 30 0 13 138 242
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 0 3 0 0 0 4 11 0 0 4 1
Cap, veh/h 417 489 0 0 0 27 198 257 0 37 393 375
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.14 0.14 0.00 0.23 0.23 0.23 Sat Flow, veh/h 3563 1900 0 0 0 1593 1444 1957 0 158 1675 1598 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 189 0 0 0 0 13 30 26 0 151 0 242
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 1900 0 0 0 1593 1665 1650 0 1833 0 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.0 2.5 0.0 5.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 1.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.6 0.5 0.0 2.5 0.0 5.0 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.87 0.00 0.09 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 417 489 0 0 0 27 228 226 0 430 0 375 V/C Ratio(X) 0.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.13 0.11 0.00 0.35 0.00 0.65 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 929 1095 0 0 0 306 228 226 0 1283 0 1118 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 15.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.7 13.8 13.8 0.0 11.6 0.0 12.6 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.8 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.5 0.0 1.9 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.0 0.9 0.0 1.6 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 15.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.5 14.1 14.0 0.0 12.1 0.0 14.4 LnGrp LOS B A A A A C B B A B A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 189 13 56 393
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.8 30.5 14.0 13.5
Approach LOS B C B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 13.1 8.8 5.1 9.5 13.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.5 9.5 7.0 5.0 21.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 7.0 3.8 2.3 2.6 0.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.6 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 14.6
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 325
C. California Avenue and Edgewater Mall/MST SURF! Busway – All-Way Stop Control: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions Synchro Outputs
326
SURF BRT Cumulative Plus Project
9: California Ave & Project Driveway/RailRoad Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 10.4
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 147 0 57 0 0 12 25 46 0 12 236 257
Future Vol, veh/h 147 0 57 0 0 12 25 46 0 12 236 257
Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 0 3 0 0 0 4 11 0 0 4 1
Mvmt Flow 158 0 61 0 0 13 27 49 0 13 254 276
Number of Lanes 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 1
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 1 2
HCM Control Delay 10.3 8.8 9.2 10.6

HCM LOS B A A B

Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 62% 0% 100% 42% 0% 5% 0%
Vol Thru, % 38% 100% 0% 0% 0% 95% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 0% 58% 100% 0% 100%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 40 31 106 98 12 248 257
LT Vol 25 0 106 41 0 12 0
Through Vol 15 31 0 0 0 236 0
RT Vol 0 0 0 57 12 0 257
Lane Flow Rate 43 33 114 106 13 267 276
Geometry Grp 7 7 7 7 6 7 7
Degree of Util (X) 0.074 0.054 0.203 0.167 0.02 0.392 0.355 Departure Headway (Hd) 6.103 5.91 6.427 5.691 5.673 5.287 4.627 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 582 600 554 625 635 677 774
Service Time 3.897 3.704 4.216 3.48 3.673 3.043 2.383
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.074 0.055 0.206 0.17 0.02 0.394 0.357 HCM Control Delay 9.4 9 10.9 9.6 8.8 11.4 9.9
HCM Lane LOS A A B A A B A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.2 0.2 0.8 0.6 0.1 1.9 1.6
327
SURF BRT Cumulative Plus Project
9: California Ave & Project Driveway/RailRoad Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 14.1
Intersection LOS B
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 307 0 62 0 0 12 69 267 0 12 240 312
Future Vol, veh/h 307 0 62 0 0 12 69 267 0 12 240 312
Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Heavy Vehicles, % 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Mvmt Flow 320 0 65 0 0 13 72 278 0 13 250 325
Number of Lanes 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 1
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 2 2 2
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 2 2 2 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 2 2 1 2
HCM Control Delay 14.4 10.4 12.9 14.6

HCM LOS B B B B

Lane NBLn1 NBLn2 EBLn1 EBLn2 WBLn1 SBLn1 SBLn2
Vol Left, % 44% 0% 100% 66% 0% 5% 0%
Vol Thru, % 56% 100% 0% 0% 0% 95% 0%
Vol Right, % 0% 0% 0% 34% 100% 0% 100%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 158 178 187 182 12 252 312
LT Vol 69 0 187 120 0 12 0
Through Vol 89 178 0 0 0 240 0
RT Vol 0 0 0 62 12 0 312
Lane Flow Rate 165 185 195 189 12 262 325
Geometry Grp 7 7 7 7 6 7 7
Degree of Util (X) 0.315 0.344 0.401 0.366 0.025 0.468 0.515 Departure Headway (Hd) 6.884 6.679 7.402 6.969 7.245 6.419 5.7 Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 520 536 486 515 497 559 631
Service Time 4.657 4.451 5.169 4.735 5.245 4.185 3.465
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.317 0.345 0.401 0.367 0.024 0.469 0.515 HCM Control Delay 12.8 12.9 15.1 13.7 10.4 14.8 14.4
HCM Lane LOS B B C B B B B
HCM 95th-tile Q 1.3 1.5 1.9 1.7 0.1 2.5 3
328
D. California Avenue and Edgewater Mall/MST SURF! Busway – Signal: Cumulative Plus Project Conditions Synchro Outputs
329
SURF BRT Cumulative Plus Project - Signal
9: California Ave & Project Driveway/RailRoad Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 307 0 62 0 0 12 69 267 0 12 240 312 Future Volume (veh/h) 307 0 62 0 0 12 69 267 0 12 240 312 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1885 1900 1900 0 1900 1900 1900 1885 0 1900 1885 1900 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 381 0 0 0 0 12 72 278 0 12 250 325 Peak Hour Factor 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 0.96 Percent Heavy Veh, % 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Cap, veh/h 445 457 0 0 0 25 121 498 0 25 512 458
Arrive On Green 0.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.17 0.17 0.00 0.29 0.29 0.29 Sat Flow, veh/h 3591 1900 0 0 0 1606 713 3022 0 86 1795 1605 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 381 0 0 0 0 12 187 163 0 262 0 325 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1795 1900 0 0 0 1606 1850 1791 0 1881 0 1605 Q Serve(g_s), s 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 4.1 3.7 0.0 5.1 0.0 8.1 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 4.1 3.7 0.0 5.1 0.0 8.1 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.39 0.00 0.05 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 445 457 0 0 0 25 315 305 0 536 0 458 V/C Ratio(X) 0.86 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.48 0.59 0.54 0.00 0.49 0.00 0.71 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 445 1198 0 0 0 651 750 726 0 1080 0 922 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 19.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.7 17.0 16.8 0.0 13.2 0.0 14.2 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 15.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.8 1.8 1.5 0.0 0.7 0.0 2.1 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 1.6 1.4 0.0 1.9 0.0 2.8 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 34.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 35.4 18.8 18.3 0.0 13.9 0.0 16.3 LnGrp LOS C A A A A D B B A B A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 381 12 350 587
Approach Delay, s/veh 34.2 35.4 18.6 15.2
Approach LOS C D B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 17.2 10.0 5.2 12.1 15.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 25.5 5.5 18.0 18.0 28.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 10.1 6.6 2.3 6.1 0.0
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 2.4 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 21.7
HCM 6th LOS C
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 330
SURF BRT Cumulative Plus Project - Signal
9: California Ave & Project Driveway/RailRoad Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 147 0 57 0 0 12 25 46 0 12 236 257 Future Volume (veh/h) 147 0 57 0 0 12 25 46 0 12 236 257 Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 0.99 1.00 0.99 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1900 1856 0 1900 1900 1841 1737 0 1900 1841 1885 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 110 68 61 0 0 13 27 49 0 13 254 276 Peak Hour Factor 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 0.93 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 0 3 0 0 0 4 11 0 0 4 1
Cap, veh/h 198 288 259 0 0 153 132 262 0 22 434 397
Arrive On Green 0.11 0.31 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.12 0.12 0.00 0.25 0.25 0.25 Sat Flow, veh/h 1781 919 825 0 0 1590 1116 2302 0 89 1747 1598 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 110 0 129 0 0 13 41 35 0 267 0 276 Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1781 0 1744 0 0 1590 1681 1650 0 1836 0 1598 Q Serve(g_s), s 2.5 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.0 5.4 0.0 6.6 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 2.5 0.0 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.9 0.8 0.0 5.4 0.0 6.6 Prop In Lane 1.00 0.47 0.00 1.00 0.66 0.00 0.05 1.00
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 198 0 547 0 0 153 199 195 0 456 0 397 V/C Ratio(X) 0.56 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.09 0.20 0.18 0.00 0.59 0.00 0.70 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 316 0 743 0 0 226 199 195 0 804 0 700 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 17.8 0.0 10.7 0.0 0.0 17.4 16.8 16.8 0.0 14.0 0.0 14.4 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 2.4 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.4 0.0 1.2 0.0 2.2 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 1.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.0 2.0 0.0 2.2 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 20.2 0.0 11.0 0.0 0.0 17.6 17.3 17.2 0.0 15.2 0.0 16.6 LnGrp LOS C A B A A B B B A B A B
Approach Vol, veh/h 239 13 76 543
Approach Delay, s/veh 15.2 17.6 17.3 15.9
Approach LOS B B B B
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 3 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 15.0 9.2 8.6 9.5 17.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 18.5 7.5 6.0 5.0 18.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 8.6 4.5 2.3 2.9 4.3
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.9 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.5
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 15.9
HCM 6th LOS B
Notes
User approved volume balancing among the lanes for turning movement. 331
E. 1st Avenue Side Street Stop Control – Background Plus Project Synchro Outputs 332
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - SSSC
1: 1st Ave & I Street Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.7
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 0 2 3 0 4 2 196 4 7 140 6
Future Vol, veh/h 6 0 2 3 0 4 2 196 4 7 140 6
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 7 0 2 3 0 4 2 213 4 8 152 7
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 393 393 156 392 394 215 159 0 0 217 0 0 Stage 1 172 172 - 219 219 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 221 221 - 173 175 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 566 543 890 567 542 825 1420 - - 1353 - - Stage 1 830 756 - 783 722 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 781 720 - 829 754 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 560 539 890 562 538 825 1420 - - 1353 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 560 539 - 562 538 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 828 751 - 781 721 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 775 719 - 822 749 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.9 10.3 0.1 0.4

HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1420 - - 617 687 1353 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - - 0.014 0.011 0.006 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 - - 10.9 10.3 7.7 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - B B A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 0 0 - -
333
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - SSSC
2: 1st Ave & J Street Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.4
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 12 1 17 2 1 4 17 186 4 6 127 12
Future Vol, veh/h 12 1 17 2 1 4 17 186 4 6 127 12
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 13 1 18 2 1 4 18 202 4 7 138 13
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 402 401 145 408 405 204 151 0 0 206 0 0 Stage 1 159 159 - 240 240 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 243 242 - 168 165 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 559 538 902 554 535 837 1430 - - 1365 - - Stage 1 843 766 - 763 707 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 761 705 - 834 762 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 547 527 902 534 524 837 1430 - - 1365 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 547 527 - 534 524 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 831 761 - 752 697 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 745 695 - 811 757 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.4 10.4 0.6 0.3

HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1430 - - 703 671 1365 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.013 - - 0.046 0.011 0.005 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 - 10.4 10.4 7.7 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A - B B A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
334
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - SSSC
3: 1st Ave & Parking Access Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.2
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 23 22 1 184 140 2
Future Vol, veh/h 23 22 1 184 140 2
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 25 24 1 200 152 2
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 355 153 154 0 - 0
Stage 1 153 - - - - -
Stage 2 202 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 643 893 1426 - - -
Stage 1 875 - - - - -
Stage 2 832 - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 642 893 1426 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 642 - - - - -
Stage 1 874 - - - - -
Stage 2 832 - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.2 0 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1426 - 744 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.001 - 0.066 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.5 0 10.2 - -
HCM Lane LOS A A B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - 0.2 - -
335
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - SSSC
1: 1st Ave & I Street Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 0 2 4 0 6 2 108 1 2 214 6
Future Vol, veh/h 6 0 2 4 0 6 2 108 1 2 214 6
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 7 0 2 4 0 7 2 117 1 2 233 7
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 366 363 237 364 366 118 240 0 0 118 0 0 Stage 1 241 241 - 122 122 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 125 122 - 242 244 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 590 565 802 592 562 934 1327 - - 1470 - - Stage 1 762 706 - 882 795 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 879 795 - 762 704 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 584 563 802 588 560 934 1327 - - 1470 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 584 563 - 588 560 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 760 705 - 880 793 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 871 793 - 758 703 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.8 9.8 0.1 0.1

HCM LOS B A
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1327 - - 627 756 1470 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.002 - - 0.014 0.014 0.001 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 - - 10.8 9.8 7.5 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A - - B A A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0 0 0 - -
336
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - SSSC
2: 1st Ave & J Street Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 1.3
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 1 13 3 1 5 13 96 1 2 208 10
Future Vol, veh/h 10 1 13 3 1 5 13 96 1 2 208 10
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Stop Free Free Free Free Free Free RT Channelized - - None - - None - - None - - None
Storage Length - - - - - - - - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Grade, % - 0 - - 0 - - 0 - - 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 11 1 14 3 1 5 14 104 1 2 226 11
Major/Minor Minor2 Minor1 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 372 369 232 376 374 105 237 0 0 105 0 0 Stage 1 236 236 - 133 133 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 136 133 - 243 241 - - - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 7.12 6.52 6.22 7.12 6.52 6.22 4.12 - - 4.12 - - Critical Hdwy Stg 1 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Critical Hdwy Stg 2 6.12 5.52 - 6.12 5.52 - - - - - - - Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 4.018 3.318 3.518 4.018 3.318 2.218 - - 2.218 - - Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 585 560 807 581 557 949 1330 - - 1486 - - Stage 1 767 710 - 870 786 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 867 786 - 761 706 - - - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 575 553 807 564 550 949 1330 - - 1486 - - Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 575 553 - 564 550 - - - - - - -
Stage 1 759 709 - 860 777 - - - - - - -
Stage 2 851 777 - 745 705 - - - - - - -
Approach EB WB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.5 10 0.9 0.1

HCM LOS B B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT NBR EBLn1WBLn1 SBL SBT SBR Capacity (veh/h) 1330 - - 680 725 1486 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.011 - - 0.038 0.013 0.001 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.7 0 - 10.5 10 7.4 0 -
HCM Lane LOS A A - B B A A -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0 - - 0.1 0 0 - -
337
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - SSSC
3: 1st Ave & Parking Access Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour
HCM 6th TWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 3
Intersection
Int Delay, s/veh 0.6
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 1 24 108 195 25
Future Vol, veh/h 2 1 24 108 195 25
Conflicting Peds, #/hr 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sign Control Stop Stop Free Free Free Free
RT Channelized - None - None - None
Storage Length 0 - - - - -
Veh in Median Storage, # 0 - - 0 0 -
Grade, % 0 - - 0 0 -
Peak Hour Factor 92 92 92 92 92 92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 2 1 26 117 212 27
Major/Minor Minor2 Major1 Major2
Conflicting Flow All 395 226 239 0 - 0
Stage 1 226 - - - - -
Stage 2 169 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy 6.42 6.22 4.12 - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 1 5.42 - - - - -
Critical Hdwy Stg 2 5.42 - - - - -
Follow-up Hdwy 3.518 3.318 2.218 - - -
Pot Cap-1 Maneuver 610 813 1328 - - -
Stage 1 812 - - - - -
Stage 2 861 - - - - -
Platoon blocked, % - - -
Mov Cap-1 Maneuver 597 813 1328 - - -
Mov Cap-2 Maneuver 597 - - - - -
Stage 1 795 - - - - -
Stage 2 861 - - - - -
Approach EB NB SB
HCM Control Delay, s 10.5 1.4 0

HCM LOS B
Minor Lane/Major Mvmt NBL NBT EBLn1 SBT SBR
Capacity (veh/h) 1328 - 655 - -
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.02 - 0.005 - -
HCM Control Delay (s) 7.8 0 10.5 - -
HCM Lane LOS A A B - -
HCM 95th %tile Q(veh) 0.1 - 0 - -
338
F. 1st Avenue All Way Stop Control – Background Plus Project Synchro Outputs 339
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - AWSC
1: 1st Ave & I Street Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.3
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 0 2 3 0 4 2 196 4 7 140 6
Future Vol, veh/h 6 0 2 3 0 4 2 196 4 7 140 6
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 7 0 2 3 0 4 2 213 4 8 152 7
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay 7.8 7.6 8.5 8.1

HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 1% 75% 43% 5%
Vol Thru, % 97% 0% 0% 92%
Vol Right, % 2% 25% 57% 4%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 202 8 7 153
LT Vol 2 6 3 7
Through Vol 196 0 0 140
RT Vol 4 2 4 6
Lane Flow Rate 220 9 8 166
Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.249 0.012 0.01 0.19
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.078 4.772 4.515 4.113
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 876 754 797 865
Service Time 2.127 2.773 2.516 2.172
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.251 0.012 0.01 0.192
HCM Control Delay 8.5 7.8 7.6 8.1
HCM Lane LOS A A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 1 0 0 0.7
340
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - AWSC
2: 1st Ave & J Street Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.3
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 12 1 17 2 1 4 17 186 4 6 127 12
Future Vol, veh/h 12 1 17 2 1 4 17 186 4 6 127 12
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 13 1 18 2 1 4 18 202 4 7 138 13
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay 7.7 7.6 8.6 8.1

HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 8% 40% 29% 4%
Vol Thru, % 90% 3% 14% 88%
Vol Right, % 2% 57% 57% 8%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 207 30 7 145
LT Vol 17 12 2 6
Through Vol 186 1 1 127
RT Vol 4 17 4 12
Lane Flow Rate 225 33 8 158
Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.258 0.041 0.01 0.181
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.128 4.51 4.516 4.133
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 862 799 797 857
Service Time 2.193 2.511 2.518 2.213
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.261 0.041 0.01 0.184
HCM Control Delay 8.6 7.7 7.6 8.1
HCM Lane LOS A A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 1 0.1 0 0.7
341
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - AWSC
3: 1st Ave & Parking Access Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.3
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 23 22 1 184 140 2
Future Vol, veh/h 23 22 1 184 140 2
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 25 24 1 200 152 2
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay 7.8 8.5 8.2

HCM LOS A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 1% 51% 0%
Vol Thru, % 99% 0% 99%
Vol Right, % 0% 49% 1%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 185 45 142
LT Vol 1 23 0
Through Vol 184 0 140
RT Vol 0 22 2
Lane Flow Rate 201 49 154
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.231 0.061 0.178
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.137 4.513 4.163
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 859 798 850
Service Time 2.208 2.513 2.244
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.234 0.061 0.181
HCM Control Delay 8.5 7.8 8.2
HCM Lane LOS A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.9 0.2 0.6
342
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - AWSC
1: 1st Ave & I Street Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 1
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.3
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 6 0 2 4 0 6 2 108 1 2 214 6
Future Vol, veh/h 6 0 2 4 0 6 2 108 1 2 214 6
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 7 0 2 4 0 7 2 117 1 2 233 7
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay 7.8 7.5 7.9 8.6

HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 2% 75% 40% 1%
Vol Thru, % 97% 0% 0% 96%
Vol Right, % 1% 25% 60% 3%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 111 8 10 222
LT Vol 2 6 4 2
Through Vol 108 0 0 214
RT Vol 1 2 6 6
Lane Flow Rate 121 9 11 241
Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.139 0.011 0.013 0.271
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.147 4.725 4.441 4.045
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 858 762 811 886
Service Time 2.208 2.725 2.441 2.084
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.141 0.012 0.014 0.272
HCM Control Delay 7.9 7.8 7.5 8.6
HCM Lane LOS A A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.5 0 0 1.1
343
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - AWSC
2: 1st Ave & J Street Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 2
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.3
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 10 1 13 3 1 5 13 96 1 2 208 10
Future Vol, veh/h 10 1 13 3 1 5 13 96 1 2 208 10
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 11 1 14 3 1 5 14 104 1 2 226 11
Number of Lanes 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Approach EB WB NB SB
Opposing Approach WB EB SB NB
Opposing Lanes 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB NB EB WB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 1 1
Conflicting Approach Right NB SB WB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 1 1 1
HCM Control Delay 7.6 7.5 8 8.6

HCM LOS A A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 WBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 12% 42% 33% 1%
Vol Thru, % 87% 4% 11% 95%
Vol Right, % 1% 54% 56% 5%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 110 24 9 220
LT Vol 13 10 3 2
Through Vol 96 1 1 208
RT Vol 1 13 5 10
Lane Flow Rate 120 26 10 239
Geometry Grp 1 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.139 0.032 0.012 0.27
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.195 4.479 4.474 4.061
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes Yes
Cap 845 804 805 880
Service Time 2.268 2.479 2.475 2.113
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.142 0.032 0.012 0.272
HCM Control Delay 8 7.6 7.5 8.6
HCM Lane LOS A A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.5 0.1 0 1.1
344
SURF BRT Background Plus Project - AWSC
3: 1st Ave & Parking Access Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour
HCM 6th AWSC Synchro 11 Report
Kimley-Horn Page 3
Intersection
Intersection Delay, s/veh 8.2
Intersection LOS A
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Vol, veh/h 2 1 24 108 195 25
Future Vol, veh/h 2 1 24 108 195 25
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Heavy Vehicles, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mvmt Flow 2 1 26 117 212 27
Number of Lanes 1 0 0 1 1 0
Approach EB NB SB
Opposing Approach SB NB
Opposing Lanes 0 1 1
Conflicting Approach Left SB EB
Conflicting Lanes Left 1 1 0
Conflicting Approach Right NB EB
Conflicting Lanes Right 1 0 1
HCM Control Delay 7.7 8 8.4

HCM LOS A A A

Lane NBLn1 EBLn1 SBLn1
Vol Left, % 18% 67% 0%
Vol Thru, % 82% 0% 89%
Vol Right, % 0% 33% 11%
Sign Control Stop Stop Stop
Traffic Vol by Lane 132 3 220
LT Vol 24 2 0
Through Vol 108 0 195
RT Vol 0 1 25
Lane Flow Rate 143 3 239
Geometry Grp 1 1 1
Degree of Util (X) 0.166 0.004 0.264
Departure Headway (Hd) 4.154 4.677 3.978
Convergence, Y/N Yes Yes Yes
Cap 859 770 902
Service Time 2.199 2.677 2.012
HCM Lane V/C Ratio 0.166 0.004 0.265
HCM Control Delay 8 7.7 8.4
HCM Lane LOS A A A
HCM 95th-tile Q 0.6 0 1.1
345
G. 1st Avenue Signal – Background Plus Project Synchro Outputs 346
SURF BRT Background Conditions - Signal
1: 1st Ave & I Street Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 0 2 3 0 4 2 196 4 7 140 6
Future Volume (veh/h) 6 0 2 3 0 4 2 196 4 7 140 6
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 0 2 3 0 4 2 213 4 8 152 7
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 473 0 7 374 0 20 257 636 12 279 598 27
Arrive On Green 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 Sat Flow, veh/h 1174 0 335 680 0 906 7 1819 34 43 1711 77 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 9 0 0 7 0 0 219 0 0 167 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1509 0 0 1586 0 0 1860 0 0 1831 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.78 0.22 0.43 0.57 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.04
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 480 0 0 394 0 0 904 0 0 903 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.24 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 3180 0 0 3206 0 0 4016 0 0 3930 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.9 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.9 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A A A A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 9 7 219 167
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.9 6.9 3.6 3.4
Approach LOS A A A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 4.8 9.5 4.8
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.0 27.0 29.0 27.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 2.1 2.9 2.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.3 0.0 0.9 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 3.6
HCM 6th LOS A
347
SURF BRT Background Conditions - Signal
2: 1st Ave & J Street Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 12 1 17 2 1 4 17 186 4 6 127 12
Future Volume (veh/h) 12 1 17 2 1 4 17 186 4 6 127 12
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 13 1 18 2 1 4 18 202 4 7 138 13
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 375 2 43 338 12 48 291 581 11 268 554 51
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 Sat Flow, veh/h 625 48 866 477 239 955 80 1711 33 39 1632 150 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 32 0 0 7 0 0 224 0 0 158 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1539 0 0 1670 0 0 1824 0 0 1820 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.41 0.56 0.29 0.57 0.08 0.02 0.04 0.08
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 421 0 0 398 0 0 883 0 0 873 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.08 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.00 0.00 0.18 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 3123 0 0 3174 0 0 3799 0 0 3799 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.8 0.0 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.9 0.0 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A A A A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 32 7 224 158
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.9 6.7 3.8 3.6
Approach LOS A A A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 5.2 9.5 5.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.0 27.0 29.0 27.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.3 2.3 2.9 2.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.3 0.1 0.9 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 4.0
HCM 6th LOS A
348
SURF BRT Background Conditions - Signal
3: 1st Ave & Parking Access Timing Plan: PM Peak Hour
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 3
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 23 22 1 184 140 2
Future Volume (veh/h) 23 22 1 184 140 2
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 25 24 1 200 152 2
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 53 51 244 624 617 8
Arrive On Green 0.06 0.06 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.33
Sat Flow, veh/h 841 808 4 1864 1842 24
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 50 0 201 0 0 154
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1683 0 1868 0 0 1866
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.9
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.4 0.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.9
Prop In Lane 0.50 0.48 0.00 0.01
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 106 0 868 0 0 625
V/C Ratio(X) 0.47 0.00 0.23 0.00 0.00 0.25
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 3042 0 3865 0 0 3623
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.8 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 3.6
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 3.3 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 10.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 3.8
LnGrp LOS B A A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 50 201 154
Approach Delay, s/veh 10.0 3.8 3.8
Approach LOS B A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 5.4 9.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.0 27.0 29.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 3.2 2.4 2.9
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 1.1 0.1 0.8
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 4.6
HCM 6th LOS A
349
SURF BRT Background Conditions - Signal
1: 1st Ave & I Street Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 1
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 6 0 2 4 0 6 2 108 1 2 214 6
Future Volume (veh/h) 6 0 2 4 0 6 2 108 1 2 214 6
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 7 0 2 4 0 7 2 117 1 2 233 7
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 477 0 9 357 0 27 259 636 5 255 625 19
Arrive On Green 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.03 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 0.35 Sat Flow, veh/h 1186 0 339 573 0 1004 14 1830 15 7 1797 54 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 9 0 0 11 0 0 120 0 0 242 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1525 0 0 1577 0 0 1859 0 0 1858 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.78 0.22 0.36 0.64 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 486 0 0 383 0 0 901 0 0 898 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 3158 0 0 3194 0 0 3984 0 0 3991 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.8 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.9 0.0 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 3.3 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A A A A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 9 11 120 242
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.9 6.9 3.3 3.7
Approach LOS A A A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 4.9 9.5 4.9
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.0 27.0 29.0 27.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.6 2.1 3.4 2.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 0.0 1.4 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 3.7
HCM 6th LOS A
350
SURF BRT Background Conditions - Signal
2: 1st Ave & J Street Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 2
Movement EBL EBT EBR WBL WBT WBR NBL NBT NBR SBL SBT SBR Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 10 1 13 3 1 5 13 96 1 2 208 10
Future Volume (veh/h) 10 1 13 3 1 5 13 96 1 2 208 10
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Work Zone On Approach No No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 11 1 14 3 1 5 14 104 1 2 226 11
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 379 3 38 352 8 41 311 571 5 250 600 29
Arrive On Green 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 0.34 Sat Flow, veh/h 655 60 833 548 183 914 109 1674 15 7 1760 85 Grp Volume(v), veh/h 26 0 0 9 0 0 119 0 0 239 0 0
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1547 0 0 1645 0 0 1798 0 0 1852 0 0 Q Serve(g_s), s 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 Prop In Lane 0.42 0.54 0.33 0.56 0.12 0.01 0.01 0.05
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 419 0 0 402 0 0 888 0 0 879 0 0
V/C Ratio(X) 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.13 0.00 0.00 0.27 0.00 0.00 Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 3139 0 0 3172 0 0 3732 0 0 3904 0 0 HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 6.8 0.0 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 3.4 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 %ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 6.8 0.0 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 3.5 0.0 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 LnGrp LOS A A A A A A A A A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 26 9 119 239
Approach Delay, s/veh 6.8 6.7 3.5 3.8
Approach LOS A A A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6 8
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 5.2 9.5 5.2
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.0 27.0 29.0 27.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.7 2.2 3.4 2.1
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.6 0.1 1.4 0.0
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 4.0
HCM 6th LOS A
351
SURF BRT Background Conditions - Signal
3: 1st Ave & Parking Access Timing Plan: AM Peak Hour
HCM 6th Signalized Intersection Summary Synchro 11 Report Kimley-Horn Page 3
Movement EBL EBR NBL NBT SBT SBR
Lane Configurations
Traffic Volume (veh/h) 2 1 24 108 195 25
Future Volume (veh/h) 2 1 24 108 195 25
Initial Q (Qb), veh 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ped-Bike Adj(A_pbT) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Parking Bus, Adj 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Work Zone On Approach No No No
Adj Sat Flow, veh/h/ln 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870 1870
Adj Flow Rate, veh/h 2 1 26 117 212 27
Peak Hour Factor 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92 0.92
Percent Heavy Veh, % 2 2 2 2 2 2
Cap, veh/h 6 3 365 561 578 74
Arrive On Green 0.01 0.01 0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36
Sat Flow, veh/h 874 437 178 1578 1626 207
Grp Volume(v), veh/h 4 0 143 0 0 239
Grp Sat Flow(s),veh/h/ln 1748 0 1757 0 0 1833
Q Serve(g_s), s 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.4
Cycle Q Clear(g_c), s 0.0 0.0 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.4
Prop In Lane 0.50 0.25 0.18 0.11
Lane Grp Cap(c), veh/h 12 0 926 0 0 651
V/C Ratio(X) 0.32 0.00 0.15 0.00 0.00 0.37
Avail Cap(c_a), veh/h 3353 0 3783 0 0 3776
HCM Platoon Ratio 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Upstream Filter(I) 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 1.00
Uniform Delay (d), s/veh 7.0 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0 3.4
Incr Delay (d2), s/veh 14.2 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3
Initial Q Delay(d3),s/veh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
%ile BackOfQ(50%),veh/ln 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1
Unsig. Movement Delay, s/veh
LnGrp Delay(d),s/veh 21.2 0.0 3.2 0.0 0.0 3.7
LnGrp LOS C A A A A A
Approach Vol, veh/h 4 143 239
Approach Delay, s/veh 21.2 3.2 3.7
Approach LOS C A A
Timer - Assigned Phs 2 4 6
Phs Duration (G+Y+Rc), s 9.5 4.6 9.5
Change Period (Y+Rc), s 4.5 4.5 4.5
Max Green Setting (Gmax), s 29.0 27.0 29.0
Max Q Clear Time (g_c+I1), s 2.8 2.0 3.4
Green Ext Time (p_c), s 0.8 0.0 1.4
Intersection Summary
HCM 6th Ctrl Delay 3.7
HCM 6th LOS A
352
H. California Avenue & Playa Avenue PowerPoint
353
Playa Ave Intersection
Operations Analysis
SURF! BRT
December 5, 2023
354
Intersection Figures
355
Cumulative 2045 Volumes
AM Peak PM Peak
356
Cumulative 2045 Volumes
Weekend Midday Peak
357
Intersection Geometry
Scenario 1 ‐ Existing Geometry Scenario 2 ‐ 95% Design
Scenario 4 ‐ Single‐Lane RAB
Del Monte
Blvd
Playa Ave
Playa Ave Playa Ave
Playa Ave
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
Scenario 3 ‐ 95% Design + NBL (California)
SURF
BRT
SURF
BRT
358
2‐Lane Roundabout Concept (Playa/California)
359
Cumulative 2045 PM Peak LOS Summary
Del Monte
Blvd
Playa Ave
Playa Ave Playa Ave
Playa Ave
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
F
F
D
D
D
D
F
F

PM PMPM
PM
SURF
BRT
SURF
BRT
Scenario 2 ‐ 95% Design
Scenario 3 ‐ 95% Design + NBL (California) Scenario 4 ‐ Single‐Lane RAB Scenario 1 ‐ Existing Geometry
360
Cumulative 2045 AM Peak LOS Summary
Del Monte
Blvd
Playa Ave
Playa Ave
Playa Ave
Playa Ave
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
D
D
D
D
AM
AM
Note: Queues in AM less than PM
SURF
BRT
SURF
BRT
Scenario 2 ‐ 95% Design
Scenario 3 ‐ 95% Design + NBL (California) Scenario 4 ‐ Single‐Lane RAB Not Analyzed for AM
Scenario 1 ‐ Existing Geometry
Not Analyzed for AM
361
Cumulative 2045 Weekend Midday Peak LOS Summary
Del Monte
Blvd
Playa Ave
Playa Ave Playa Ave
Playa Ave
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
F
F
E
E
D
D
F
F
WKND
SURF
BRT
SURF
BRT
Scenario 2 ‐ 95% Design
Scenario 3 ‐ 95% Design + NBL (California) Scenario 4 ‐ Single‐Lane RAB Scenario 1 ‐ Existing Geometry
WKND
WKND
WKND
362
Cumulative 2045 PM Peak Queueing Summary
Del Monte
Blvd
Playa Ave
Playa Ave Playa Ave
Playa Ave
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave

PM PMPM
PM
Red = Exceeds Capacity
SURF
BRT
SURF
BRT
Scenario 2 ‐ 95% Design
Scenario 3 ‐ 95% Design + NBL (California) Scenario 4 ‐ Single‐Lane RAB Scenario 1 ‐ Existing Geometry
363
Cumulative 2045 AM Peak Queueing Summary
Del Monte
Blvd
Playa Ave
Playa Ave Playa Ave
Playa Ave
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
AM
AM
Red = Exceeds Capacity
Scenario 2 ‐ 95% Design
Scenario 3 ‐ 95% Design + NBL (California) Scenario 4 ‐ Single‐Lane RAB Not Analyzed for AM
Scenario 1 ‐ Existing Geometry
Not Analyzed for AM
SURF
BRT
SURF
BRT
364
Cumulative 2045 Weekend Midday Peak Queueing Summary
Del Monte
Blvd
Playa Ave
Playa Ave Playa Ave
Playa Ave
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
Del Monte
Blvd
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
California
Ave
Red = Exceeds Capacity
SURF
BRT
SURF
BRT
Scenario 2 ‐ 95% Design
Scenario 3 ‐ 95% Design + NBL (California) Scenario 4 ‐ Single‐Lane RAB Scenario 1 ‐ Existing Geometry

WKND WKND
WKND
WKND
365
Delay/LOS Summary Figures
366
Cumulative 2045 PM Peak LOS Summary
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% Design + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
No. Intersection Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS 1 California
Ave/
Playa Ave
AWSC 325.3 F Signal 50.5 D Signal 35.5 D Roundabout 619.3 F 2 Del Monte
Blvd/
Playa Ave
Signal 359.7 F Signal 37.3 D Signal 37.9 D Signal 145.6 F Bus AWSC 516.7 F Signal 36.9 D Signal 31.6 C Roundabout 238.6 F 367
Cumulative 2045 AM Peak LOS Summary
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% Design + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
No. Intersection Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS 1 California
Ave/
Playa Ave
Signal 37.8 D Signal 39.8 D
2 Del Monte
Blvd/
Playa Ave
Signal 39.4 D Signal 39.0 D
Bus Signal 25.7 C Signal 26.1 C
Not Analyzed for AM Not Analyzed for AM
368
Cumulative 2045 Weekend Midday Peak LOS Summary
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% Design + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
No. Intersection Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS Control Avg Delay (sec) LOS 1 California
Ave/
Playa Ave
AWSC 407.0 F Signal 56.8 E Signal 48.4 D Roundabout 757.1 F 2 Del Monte
Blvd/
Playa Ave
Signal 378.1 F Signal 58.9 E Signal 48.8 D Signal 112.8 F Bus AWSC 806.3 F Signal 47.8 D Signal 40.0 D Roundabout 310.6 F 369

50.5 37.8 35.5 39.8 37.3 39.4 37.9 39 36.9

25.7 31.6

26.1 0
20406080
100

PM PM AM PM AM PM
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane RAB
Delay (sec)

1. California/Playa 2. Del Monte/Playa Bus
AM
Cumulative 2045 PM Peak vs. AM Peak Delay Summary Graph F F F
>100 sec
F F F
>100 sec
D

D D D D C D D
C
D D
C

PM PM AM PM PM
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
1‐Lane RAB
370

50.5 56.8

35.5 48.4

37.3 58.9

37.9 48.8

36.9 47.8

31.6 40
0 20406080
100
PM Weekend PM Weekend PM Weekend PM Weekend
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane RAB
Delay (sec)

1. California/Playa 2. Del Monte/Playa Bus
Cumulative 2045 PM Peak vs. Weekend Midday Peak Delay Summary Graph F F F
>100 sec
F F F
>100 sec
F F F
>100 sec
F F F
>100 sec
D

D D D D C
E E
D D D
D
PM Weekend PM Weekend PM Weekend PM Weekend
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
371

50.5 35.5 37.3 36.9 37.9

31.6 0
20406080
100
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane RAB
Delay (sec)

1. California/Playa 2. Del Monte/Playa Bus
Cumulative 2045 PM Peak Delay Summary Graph
>100 sec

F F F F F F
D

D D D D C
>100 sec
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
372
Cumulative 2045 AM Peak Delay Summary Graph

37.8 39.4 39.8 39.0

25.7 26.1
0 20406080
100
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane RAB
Delay (sec)

1. California/Playa 2. Del Monte/Playa Bus
D D
C
D D
C
Not Analyzed
for AM
Not Analyzed
for AM
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
373
Cumulative 2045 Weekend Midday Peak Delay Summary Graph

56.8 48.4

58.9 47.8 48.8

40.0 0
20406080
100
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane RAB
Delay (sec)

1. California/Playa 2. Del Monte/Playa Bus

F F F F F F
E E
D D D
D
>100 sec >100 sec
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
374
Queueing Summary Tables
375
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% Design + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
(ft)
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
(ft)
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
(ft)
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
No. Intersection Movement (ft)
1 California Ave/ Playa Ave
NBL 300 336 300 336 300 84 300 368
NBT 300 336 300 336 300 284 300 368
NBR 100 327 100 324 100 98 300 368
SBL 230 1164 230 195 230 216 1450 1490
SBT 1450 1456 1450 268 1450 230 1450 1490
SBR 1450 1455 1450 271 1450 248 1450 1490
EBL 385 35 385 107 385 120 385 528
EBT 385 463 385 407 385 378 385 528
EBR 385 463 385 413 385 383 385 519
WBL 200 305 200 204* 200 198 100 241
WBT 200 306 200 204* 200 198 100 241
WBR 200 311 200 204* 200 198 100 241
2 Del Monte Blvd/ Playa Ave
NBL 520 2286 520 373 520 396 260 1883
NBT 400 2286 400 373 400 396 400 1883
NBR 400 2286 400 373 400 396 400 1888
SBL 150 53 150 59 150 59 150 57
SBT 380 650 380 236 380 231 380 329
SBR 380 653 380 239 380 233 380 329
EBL 200 208 200 182 200 208* 110 453
EBT 200 208 200 182 200 208* 150 453
EBR 200 211 200 186 200 212* 150 453
WBL 60 489 60 234 60 225 60 226
WBT 360 486 360 257 360 251 360 332
WBR 360 490 360 261 360 255 360 335
Cumulative 2045 PM Peak Queueing Summary by Movement
Red = Exceeds Capacity*Max Queue exceeds capacity, but is acceptable 376
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% Design + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
(ft)
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
(ft)
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
(ft)
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
No. Intersection Movement (ft)
1 California Ave/ Playa Ave
NBL 300 84 300 25
NBT 300 84 300 62
NBR 100 57 100 47
SBL 230 338 230 329
SBT 1450 181 1450 153
SBR 1450 184 1450 171
EBL 385 27 385 29
EBT 385 205 385 195
EBR 385 211 385 201
WBL 200 105 200 146
WBT 200 105 200 146
WBR 200 105 200 146
2 Del Monte Blvd/ Playa Ave
NBL 520 159 520 163
NBT 400 159 400 163
NBR 400 159 400 163
SBL 150 49 150 42
SBT 380 350 380 348
SBR 380 353 380 350
EBL 200 237* 200 153
EBT 200 237* 200 153
EBR 200 242* 200 157
WBL 60 107 60 101
WBT 360 142 360 131
WBR 360 146 360 135
Cumulative 2045 AM Peak Queueing Summary by Movement
*Max Queue exceeds capacity, but is acceptableRed = Exceeds Capacity 377
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% Design + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
(ft)
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
(ft)
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
(ft)
Capacity
(ft)
Max Queue
No. Intersection Movement (ft)
1 California Ave/ Playa Ave
NBL 300 342 300 334 300 140 100 369
NBT 300 342 300 334 300 327 100 369
NBR 100 333 100 325 100 99 100 369
SBL 230 1509 230 481 230 456 1450 1495
SBT 1450 1506 1450 477 1450 476 1450 1495
SBR 1450 1506 1450 480 1450 494 1450 1495
EBL 385 61 385 107 385 79 385 461
EBT 385 470 385 297 385 317 385 461
EBR 385 470 385 303 385 323 385 452
WBL 200 333 200 260* 200 256* 100 242
WBT 200 333 200 260* 200 256* 100 242
WBR 200 338 200 260* 200 256* 100 242
2 Del Monte Blvd/ Playa Ave
NBL 520 2288 520 427 520 453 260 1375
NBT 400 2288 400 427* 400 453* 400 1375
NBR 400 2288 400 427* 400 453* 400 1380
SBL 150 89 150 83 150 109 150 95
SBT 380 213 380 253 380 249 380 280
SBR 380 215 380 255 380 251 380 280
EBL 200 278 200 262* 200 240* 110 483
EBT 200 278 200 262* 200 240* 150 483
EBR 200 283 200 266* 200 245* 150 483
WBL 60 493 60 328 60 224 60 265
WBT 360 490 360 326 360 231 360 325
WBR 360 494 360 330 360 235 360 329
Cumulative 2045 Weekend Midday Peak Queueing Summary by Movement Red = Exceeds Capacity*Max Queue exceeds capacity, but is acceptable 378
Cumulative 2045 PM Simulation
Videos
379
Scenario 1 ‐ Existing Geometry PM
380
Scenario 2 ‐ 95% Design PM
381
Scenario 3 ‐ 95% Design + NBL (California) PM
382
Scenario 4 ‐ Single‐Lane RAB PM
383
Summary
Scenario 1
Existing Geometry
Scenario 2
95% Design
Scenario 3
95% Design + NBL (California)
Scenario 4
Single‐Lane Roundabout
Who Win‐Win‐Win?
SURF! No Yes
Acceptable LOS
Operations
Compared to Existing
Geometry
Minimal Queueing at
Both Intersections
Yes
15 sec Time Savings at
California/Playa vs.

Scenario 2 (PM)
5 Second Time Savings
for Bus vs. Scenario 2
(PM)
No
Sand City No Yes Yes+* No
Seaside No Yes Yes No
* NBL cannot be included in SURF project due to Right of Way requirements 384
March 2024 MST SURF! BRT NORTH

NORTH MULTI-USE ACCESS STAGING FOR ROUNDABOUT CONSTRUCTION - PHASE IMPROVEMENTS THIS STAGE MULTI-USE ACCESS

MULTI-USE ACCESS CLOSURE
DESCRIPTIONSTAGE 11. CONSTRUCT BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL EXTENSIONTO ROUNDABOUT.2. CONSTRUCT NORTHERN ROUNDABOUT APPROACH. 1 LEGEND DocuSign Envelope ID: 359F92B8-BCB5-42AC-B629-05D0551D4180 385
March 2024 MST SURF! BRT NORTH
NORTH MULTI-USE ACCESS STAGING FOR ROUNDABOUT CONSTRUCTION - PHASE 2 IMPROVEMENTS THIS STAGE MULTI-USE ACCESS MULTI-USE ACCESS CLOSURE DESCRIPTION STAGE 2 1. CLOSE CALTRANS RECREATIONAL TRAIL FROM CALIFORNIA AVENUE TO 5TH STREET. 2. CONSTRUCT EASTERN ROUNDABOUT APPROACH. 3. USERS CAN UTILIZE EXISTING CALTRANS RECREATIONAL TRAIL TO CONTINUE SOUTH OR CONNECT TO BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL GOING NORTH. LEGEND DocuSign Envelope ID: 359F92B8-BCB5-42AC-B629-05D0551D4180 386
March 2024 MST SURF! BRT NORTH
NORTH MULTI-USE ACCESS STAGING FOR ROUNDABOUT CONSTRUCTION - PHASE 3 IMPROVEMENTS THIS STAGE MULTI-USE ACCESS MULTI-USE ACCESS CLOSURE DESCRIPTION STAGE 3 1. CONSTRUCT OTHER ROUNDABOUT APPROACHES. 2. PERMANENTLY CLOSE RECREATIONAL TRAIL CONNECTION ALONG CALIFORNIA AVENUE. DIRECT USERS ONTO NEWLY CONSTRUCTED RECREATIONAL TRAIL/BEACH RANGE ROAD TRAIL. LEGEND DocuSign Envelope ID: 359F92B8-BCB5-42AC-B629-05D0551D4180 387
388
389
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration
Monterey County, California
Prepared for:

Prepared by:

MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
097541001 | Copyright © Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc. 10 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 1250
San Jose, California 95113
June 2021
55 Plaza Circle Suite B,
Salinas, California 93901
19 Upper Ragsdale Drive, Suite 200,
Monterey, CA 93940
390
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Environmental Initial Study
and
Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepared for:

Monterey-Salinas Transit District
and
Transportation Agency for Monterey County
June 2021
Prepared by:
391
This page intentionally left blank.
392
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page i
Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction & Purpose ....................................................................................................................1

1.1 Purpose and Scope of the Initial Study.........................................................................................1

2.0 Description of Proposed Project.......................................................................................................2

2.1 Project Background, Location, and Setting...................................................................................2 Location ................................................................................................................................................2 Project Background and Prior Studies ..................................................................................................2 Physical Site Conditions and Setting.....................................................................................................3 Land Use, Zoning, and Jurisdictional Boundaries .................................................................................3 Project Characteristics ..........................................................................................................................3 Operational Information.......................................................................................................................3 Project Phasing, Construction, and Staging ..........................................................................................4

2.2 Required Entitlements, Permits and Easements ..........................................................................4

3.0 Initial Study Checklist........................................................................................................................6

3.1 Project Information ......................................................................................................................6

4.0 Environmental Analysis ....................................................................................................................8

4.1 Aesthetics .....................................................................................................................................8

4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources............................................................................................10

4.3 Air Quality...................................................................................................................................12

4.4 Biological Resources ...................................................................................................................15

4.5 Cultural Resources ......................................................................................................................25

4.6 Energy .........................................................................................................................................28

4.7 Geology and Soils........................................................................................................................30

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions.........................................................................................................34

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..............................................................................................36

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality .....................................................................................................40

4.11 Land Use and Planning................................................................................................................43

4.12 Mineral Resources ......................................................................................................................44

4.13 Noise...........................................................................................................................................45

4.14 Population and Housing..............................................................................................................47

4.15 Public Services ............................................................................................................................48

4.16 Recreation...................................................................................................................................50

4.17 Transportation ............................................................................................................................51 393
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page ii

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................53

4.19 Utilities and Service Systems ......................................................................................................55

4.20 Wildfire .......................................................................................................................................57

4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance............................................................................................59

5.0 Report Preparers ............................................................................................................................61

6.0 References ......................................................................................................................................62 List of Figures
Note: All figures are attached within respective Appendices.

Figure 1: Regional Location
Figure 2: General Project Location
Figure 3A and 3B: Land Use and Coastal Zone Boundaries
Appendices to the Initial Study
Appendix 1: Final Mitigated Negative Declaration
Appendix 2: Traffic Impact Assessment
Appendix 3: Detailed Project Description
Appendix 4: Aerial Plots and Project Design Details
Appendix 5: Aesthetics and Visual Resources
Appendix 6: Air Quality Assessment
Appendix 7: Final Biological Resources Report
Appendix 8: Cultural Resources Assessment
Appendix 9: Consistency with Land Use Policy
Appendix 10: Geology and Soils
Appendix 11: Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis
Appendix 12: Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Appendix 13: Hydrology and Water Quality
Appendix 14: Noise Analysis
394
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page iii
Technical Attachments
Attachment 6A: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas CalEEMod Model Outputs Attachment 8A: CHRIS Results
Attachment 14A: Acoustical Data Outputs
TAMC, September 2011. Monterey Peninsula Light Rail Project Administrative Draft Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Report (SCH # 2009111044) including appendices incorporated by reference.
395
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION & PURPOSE

1.1 Purpose and Scope of the Initial Study
This Initial Study has been prepared specifically to support MST’s findings, as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), that the project under review would not result in significant environmental impacts with the application of existing regulations, design features and permit conditions. This study (and its supporting Appendices) has been prepared pursuant to CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, Section 21000, et seq.). The Initial Study is supported by a combination of new and prior studies, including the Administrative Draft Environmental Assessment/Environmental Impact Report (TAMC, 2011). This document and its supporting appendices are incorporated herein by reference.

CEQA requires a lead agency, as defined, to prepare, or cause to be prepared, and certify the completion of an environmental impact report on a project that it proposes to carry out or approve that may have a significant effect on the environment or to adopt a negative declaration if it finds that the project will not have that effect. CEQA also requires a lead agency to prepare a mitigated negative declaration for a project that may have a significant effect on the environment if revisions in the project would avoid or mitigate that effect and there is no substantial evidence that the project, as revised, would have a significant effect on the environment. This Initial Study and supporting documentation has concluded that all potential adverse environmental effects can be mitigated to a less than significant level.

The conclusions herein are based on CEQA standards, professional judgement, field review, projectspecific technical studies and available public documents. This Initial Study and its Appendices constitutes substantial evidence supporting the conclusion that preparation of an EIR is not required prior to approval of the project and that the environmental effects of the project have been fully considered.
396
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 2

2.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED PROJECT

2.1 Project Background, Location, and Setting
Location
The MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project (project) would be located between MST’s Marina Transit Exchange at Reservation Road and De Forest Road (northern terminus), and Contra Costa Street and Orange Avenue in Sand City (ultimate southern terminus). The project consists of approximately 6 linear miles of roadway surface and related improvements to provide dedicated express busway service between these points.

The majority of the alignment of the busway would be within the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) Monterey Branch Line rail corridor right-of-way (ROW), an approximately 100-foot wide corridor generally located between Beach Range Road and the Monterey Peninsula Recreation Trail on the ocean side of Highway 1. Given the length of the proposed busway and its physical location, the project would be located in and/or adjacent to the cities of Marina, Seaside, and Sand City, extending parallel to Highway 1 and Fort Ord Dunes State Park.

The project’s regional location is shown in Figure 1. The entirety of the project alignment is shown in Figure 2. More detailed location details are provided in Appendix 3.

Project Background and Prior Studies
The Monterey Branch Line was constructed by Southern Pacific Railroad Company (SPRR) in 1879, and extended 19.6 miles from Castroville to Lake Majella in Pacific Grove. Rail service on this standard-gauge line began in 1880, following eight years of narrow-gauge service operated by the Monterey and Salinas Valley Railroad Company. SPRR operated both freight and passenger rail service on the Del Monte Express between the Monterey Peninsula and San Francisco from 1881 to 1971. Over time, traffic on the line diminished and it fell into disrepair, and the remaining freight service on the branch line was discontinued south of Seaside in 1978.

In 1982, using State Senate Bill 620 funds the cities of Seaside and Monterey purchased the SPRR ROW between Contra Costa Street in Seaside and downtown Monterey. A highly popular pedestrian/bicycle multi-purpose trail (Monterey Bay Coastal Recreation Trail) has been constructed within this section of the ROW extending south from Canyon del Rey Boulevard along the coast into Pacific Grove. North of Contra Costa Street, SPRR continued operation of freight rail service through the 1990s. TAMC purchased this portion of the line from the Union Pacific Railroad in September 2003.

In response to continuing and increasing congestion on Highway 1, MST, in partnership with TAMC, the Association of Monterey Bay Area Governments (AMBAG), Caltrans, Santa Cruz METRO, California Highway Patrol and the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (SCCRTC) conducted a study to explore the potential for improving bus operations in the Highway 1 corridor, including a bus-onshoulder concept. The Final Project Report Monterey Bay Area Feasibility Study of Bus on Shoulder Operations on State Route 1 and the Monterey Branch Line (“Bus Study”) considered eight alternatives on or parallel to State Route 1, including the possibility of using the Monterey Branch Line rail corridor for bus rapid transit operations. The final study ultimately concluded that operating MST buses along the 397
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 3
Monterey Branch Line would be the most cost-effective solution to improving on-time performance in this critical corridor. This feasibility study was completed in 2018, and the “bus within branch line” concept analyzed is very similar to the project evaluated in this document. See Appendix 3 for more details on project background and prior studies.

Physical Site Conditions and Setting
The Monterey Branch Line corridor currently contains idle rail lines from the former Southern Pacific Railroad, including the railroad bed surface and aging facilities and utilities. Additional infrastructure associated with the former Fort Ord military base are located along the corridor, including concrete platforms, rail spurs, and access tunnels and bridges. The corridor is heavily disturbed by the rail lines, limited maintenance and regular practice of weed control; however, it is also wide enough to support native and non-native plant communities.

Land Use, Zoning, and Jurisdictional Boundaries
While the rail corridor is owned by TAMC, the underlying land uses are within the boundaries of the City of Marina, City of Sand City, and Monterey County. The rail right-of-way is immediately adjacent to, but outside of, the City of Seaside.

The project area consists of the following parcels:
 Portions of V69-1 (former Southern Pacific Railroad Monterey Branch Line owned by TAMC)  031-221-005 (MST 5th Street Station Parcel)
 031-221-001 (5th Street underpass/busway extension road) Additionally, the project extends along public roadways in the cities of Marina, Sand City and Seaside.

Project Characteristics
As mentioned above, the entirety of the project is approximately six miles in length. However, the area of potential affect, or APE, is 4.9 miles long. This is the portion of the project located within the TAMC ROW where most physical construction would occur. The APE is shown on Figures 3A and 3B.

For ease of discussion and analysis, the six-mile long project is broken down into the following segments. See Appendix 3 for details of each project segment.  Segment 1 – Marina Transit Exchange to Palm Avenue Corridor Entry and Platform  Segment 2 – Palm Avenue Corridor Entry to 5th Street Station  Segment 3 – 5th Street Station to California/Fremont/Monterey/SR 1 Interchange (California Avenue Roundabout Connection)
 Segment 4 – California/Fremont/Monterey/SR 1 Interchange to Playa Avenue  Segment 5 – Playa Avenue to Contra Costa Avenue (using public roadways) Operational Information
Busway Vehicles
Under the California’s Innovative Clean Transit (ICT) Rule, MST will be required to incorporate zero emission buses as part of its regular procurement schedule and transition to a 100% zero emission fleet by 2040. To meet environmental objectives of the project, MST plans to move to 100% zero emission 398
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 4
vehicle operation as soon as possible as procurements are made and fulfilled and as existing vehicles are replaced. The SURF! fleet is assumed to consist of 50 to 75 percent zero emission vehicles on day one of operations, moving to 100% as soon as practical as new zero emission vehicles enter the MST fleet.

Dedicated Busway Lanes, Transportation Controls and Technology The dedicated bi-directional bus lanes will consist of two 12-foot asphalt lanes, which will be separated from existing rail lines by 9 to 12 feet (from center of rail line), except when the busway must cross the rail line to avoid constraints. With busway operations, traffic control signals at crossing locations would be activated by on-board technology on buses.

Potential Ridership, Headways and Travel Times
Buses would operate to maximize ridership in the southbound direction during the morning peak commute period (6:00 AM to 10:00 AM) and the northbound direction during the evening peak commute period (4:00 PM to 8:00 PM). It is estimated that travel time along the route would be reduced from 15.1 minutes (no busway) to 4.5 minutes (with busway), plus time for the single stop at the 5th Street Station mid-way.

Project Phasing, Construction, and Staging
MST anticipates that the major components of the project would be constructed simultaneously, with sections of busway progressing in increments based on the flow and availability of construction materials. The primary phases of construction would include:
 Site grubbing and clearing
 Palm Avenue/Del Monte Boulevard bus and roadway improvements  California Avenue Roundabout
 Linear roadbed construction within the TAMC corridor between Palm Avenue and Playa Avenue  5th Street Station improvements
 Habitat restoration efforts
 Final finishes, fencing, lighting, signage and landscaping See Appendix 3 for a comprehensive Project Description.

2.2 Required Entitlements, Permits and Easements
The project is expected to require the following approvals:
 Approval by Federal Transit Administration (FTA) as the lead agency under NEPA prior to federal funding
 Approval by the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) for use agreements between MST and TAMC and any additional funding commitments towards final design or construction  Natural resource permits (e.g. take or other permits issued by United States Fish and Wildlife Services [USFWS])
 Consolidated Coastal Development Permit issued by the California Coastal Commission  Encroachment permit issued by Caltrans (e.g. completion of a Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER)). For eligible projects and actions, the DEER can be used in lieu of the PSR-PDS, PSRPR and Project Report process and provides an opportunity to streamlining Caltrans review 399
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 5

3.0 INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST

3.1 Project Information

1. Project title:

MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project

2. Lead agency name and address:

Monterey-Salinas Transit District, 19 Upper Ragsdale Drive, Suite 200, Monterey, CA 93940

3. Contact person and phone number:

Michelle Overmeyer, Director of Planning and Innovation, (831)264-5877

4. Project location:

The SURF! busway project would begin at MST’s Marina Transit Exchange at Reservation Road and De Forest Road (northern terminus), and end at Contra Costa Street in Sand City (southern terminus). The alignment of the busway would be primarily within the Transportation Agency for Monterey County’s (TAMC’s) Monterey Branch Line rail corridor, generally located west of Highway 1 between Beach Range Road and the Monterey Peninsula Recreation Trail. Public roadways would be used for the SURF! line at both ends of the route. The project would be located or adjacent to the cities of Marina, Seaside, and Sand City, running parallel to Highway 1 next to Fort Ord Dunes State Park. The project area consists of the following parcels:

Portions of V69-1 (former Southern Pacific Railroad Monterey Branch Line owned by TAMC), 031-221-005 (MST 5th Street Station Parcel), and 031-221-001 (5th Street underpass/busway extension road).

5. Project sponsor's name and address:

Same as above

6. General plan designation:

Various. Project alignment identified as open space and transportation corridor in local general plans and local coastal plans.

7. Zoning:

Various per local agency zoning codes.

8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) The project consists of the following primary components:
 A bus-only entry into the TAMC right-of-way at Del Monte Boulevard and Palm Avenue in the City of Marina. This element requires upgraded intersection traffic and safety controls, as well as bicycle and pedestrian path improvements along Del Monte Boulevard and parallel to Marina Drive.
 Two lanes (one in each direction) of dedicated busway road surface within the TAMC Monterey Branch Line right-of-way. Work within the TAMC right-of-way to construct the bus lanes will 400
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 6
require grading, drainage improvements, retaining walls, fencing, recreation trail connections, utility relocations and other necessary improvements to create a safe, dedicated busway.  A new transit station (5th Street Station) located on MST property near 5th Street east of Highway 1. The station would include bus bays, public parking, drop off area and other amenities. Other improvements associated with the station include bicycle and pedestrian facilities to access the station from the Coastal Recreation Trail and new connections to the existing bike trail system adjacent to the station.
 A new roundabout in the public right-of-way at California Avenue and Highway 1 southbound ramp in Sand City to better accommodate buses re-entering the public right-of-way.  A stop at Playa Avenue in Sand City where SURF! riders could connect to the existing bus network. The Del Monte Boulevard/Playa Avenue and California Avenue/Playa Avenue intersections would include signalization and synchronization to improve traffic operations at this location. The route would continue to Contra Costa Street in Sand City via existing public roadways.

See Appendix 3 to this document for details.

9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings:

The majority of the alignment of the busway would be within the TAMC Monterey Branch Line rail corridor ROW, an approximately 100-foot wide corridor generally located between Beach Range Road and the Monterey Peninsula Recreation Trail on the ocean side of Highway 1. The project would be located in and/or adjacent to the cities of Marina, Seaside, and Sand City, extending parallel to Highway 1 and Fort Ord Dunes State Park. The northern and southern ends of the busway alignment utilize public roadways within an existing urban environment.

10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.)
 Approval by Federal Transit Administration (FTA) as the lead NEPA agency prior to federal funding
 Natural resource permits (e.g. take or other permits issued by United States Fish and Wildlife Services [USFWS])
 Consolidated Coastal Development Permit issued by the California Coastal Commission  Encroachment permit issued by Caltrans (e.g. completion of a Design Engineering Evaluation Report (DEER))

11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.? Outreach for consultation was conducted by the Lead Agency. No formal consultation was requested following outreach efforts.

NOTE: Conducting consultation early in the CEQA process allows tribal governments, lead agencies, and project proponents to discuss the level of environmental review, identify and address potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources, and reduce the potential for delay and conflict in the environmental review process. (See Public Resources Code section 21080.3.2.) Information may also be available from the California Native American Heritage Commission’s Sacred Lands File per Public Resources Code section 5097.96 and the California Historical Resources Information System administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation. Please also note that Public Resources Code section 21082.3(c) contains provisions specific to confidentiality. 401
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 7

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS

4.1 Aesthetics

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic
vista? X
a) Substantially damage scenic resources,
including but not limited to trees, rock
outcroppings, and historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
X
b) Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public views of the
site and its surroundings? (Public views are
those that are experienced from publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is in
an urbanized area, would the project conflict
with applicable zoning and other regulations
governing scenic quality?
X
c) Create a new source of substantial light or
glare which would adversely affect day or
nighttime views in the area?
X
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less than significant impact. There are several viewpoints near the busway corridor that could be considered scenic vistas based on the elevated nature of the views and/or visibility of a sweeping landscape. However, these vistas are not significantly affected or compromised by the project. See Appendix 5 for detailed discussion.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
No impact. The project site is not located within the viewshed of a state-designated scenic highway, and therefore would not impact or substantially alter scenic resources related to a scenic highway. While many segments of Highway 1 are officially designated as a scenic highway, the segment parallel to the busway is not.
402
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 8
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality? Less than significant impact. The visual quality of the alignment and lands on either side of the alignment is dominated by Highway 1, the existing railroad tracks and railbed, the coastal dune topography and the Monterey Bay beyond. Visual simulations of the pre-and post-project conditions from selected key viewpoints (KVPs) of the alignment are shown in Appendix 5. Based on the existing visual character of the public views and viewing experience from the selected KVPs, implementation of the project would not substantially degrade the existing visual character of the site or its surroundings.

Visual effects from construction would occur but are considered a temporary visual nuisance rather than a permanent adverse effect. See Appendix 5 for detailed analysis of construction and operational effects.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. The project would not result in unusual or permanent light sources that would significantly affect day or nighttime views in the area during construction activities. All lighting required for construction would be temporary, and no nighttime construction is proposed.

Regarding bus headlights, buses would have direct lighting from headlights and interior cabin lighting travelling along the busway lanes that would introduce a new source of light during nighttime hours.

However, these sources of light would be infrequent 10-minute headways and would not be considered a significant new source of lighting in the area compared to existing conditions and adjacent highway.

For safety purposes, limited overhead lighting would be required at key locations where the busway intersects with the bicycle/pedestrian trail network. The following mitigation measure will ensure that new sources of lighting at these locations would be controlled to minimize potential effects on the nighttime environment, coastal zone, and biological resources of the adjacent coastal dune habitat.

Mitigation Measure/Project Condition
MM AES-3.1 Limit New Sources of Lighting
The final construction drawing package shall include a final Lighting Plan indicating the type and location of proposed lighting sources. Construction lighting shall be directed away from sensitive habitat areas if required during evening hours. The Lighting Plan shall include specific products and photometric data demonstrating how new lighting sources necessary for project operational safety shall be shielded or baffled to minimize unwanted light spill and direct light away from the State Park. As the alignment is located within airport Safety Zone 7 of both the Marina Municipal and Monterey Regional airports, the project’s Lighting Plan shall also be submitted to the respective airport manager for of each airport for review and approval consistent with ALUC standard conditions.
403
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 9

4.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland,
or Farmland of Statewide Importance
(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural
use, or a Williamson Act contract? X
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause
rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public
Resources Code section 12220(g)),
timberland (as defined by Public Resources
Code section 4526), or timberland zoned
Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
X
d) Result in the loss of forest land or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use? X
e) Involve other changes in the existing
environment which, due to their location or
nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
X
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? 404
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 10
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
No impact. No portion of the project alignment is designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance by the State Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP). No Williamson Act contract applies to the project alignment. The project site does not currently support agricultural or forestry uses, and it is designated for transportation and public uses. There would be no impact to agricultural and forestry resources. 405
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 11

4.3 Air Quality

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management district or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
the applicable air quality plan? X
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net
increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air
quality standard?
X
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations? X
d) Result in other emissions (such as those
leading to odors adversely affecting a
substantial number of people?
X
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than significant impact. The MBARD’s 2008 CEQA Air Quality Guidelines provides criteria for determining cumulative impacts and consistency. The CEQA Air Quality Guidelines note that a project which is inconsistent with an Air Quality Plan would have a significant cumulative impact on regional air quality. The project is consistent with the Air Quality Management Plan for the Monterey Bay Region.

The project does not include any changes to land use or zoning designations. The proposed project would result in the construction and operation of a new busway project with zero emission vehicles and does not include new land uses or structures. In addition, the proposed project’s construction and operation emissions would not exceed MBARD thresholds. See Appendix 6 for detailed discussion. b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. As discussed above, the proposed project’s construction and operation emissions would not exceed MBARD thresholds. MBARD CEQA Guidelines state that construction activities (e.g. excavation, grading, on-site vehicles), which emit 82 pounds per day or more of PM10, would have a significant impact on local air quality when they are located nearby and upwind of sensitive receptors. As discussed in further detail in Appendix 6, construction emissions 406
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 12
associated with the project would not exceed this threshold for PM10. Given the proximity of sensitive receptors to the project site, the project would be required to comply with the standard conditions below, which would further ensure impacts would be reduced to a less-than-significant level for all construction activities on the project site. See Appendix 6 for additional details.

Standard Conditions and Requirements
SC AQ-2.1 Reduce Fugitive Dust
The project applicant shall implement the following measures to minimize nuisance impacts and to significantly reduce fugitive dust emissions, and the project applicant shall require all of the following measures to be shown on grading and building plans:
 Limit grading to 8.1 acres per day, and grading and excavation to 2.2 acres per day.  Water graded/excavated areas and active unpaved roadways, unpaved staging areas, and unpaved parking areas at least twice daily. Frequency should be based on the type of operations, soil and wind exposure.
 Prohibit all grading activities during periods of high wind (more than 15 mph).  Stabilize all disturbed soil areas as necessary using jute netting, gravel for temporary roads or other methods approved in advance by the APCD.  Sow exposed ground areas that are planned to be reworked at dates greater than one month after initial grading with a fast germinating, non-invasive grass seed, and water until vegetation is established.
 Plant vegetative ground cover in disturbed areas as soon as possible with non-invasive species.
 Use street sweepers, water trucks, or sprinkler systems in sufficient quantities to prevent airborne dust from leaving the site. Reclaimed (non-potable) water should be used whenever possible.
 Spray dirt stockpile areas daily as needed.
 Place gravel on all roadways and driveways as soon as possible after grading. In addition, construct building pads as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or frequent water application are used.
 Not exceed a 15-mph vehicle speed for all construction vehicles on any unpaved surface at the construction site.
 Cover or maintain at least 2 feet of freeboard (minimum vertical distance between top of load and top of trailer) on all trucks hauling dirt, sand, soil, or other loose materials in accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114.  Limit unpaved road travel to the extent possible, for example, by limiting the travel to and from unpaved areas, by coordinating movement between work areas rather than to central staging areas, and by busing workers where feasible. 407
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 13
 Install wheel washers where vehicles enter and exit unpaved roads onto streets, or wash off trucks and equipment leaving the site, and inspect vehicle tires to ensure free of soil prior to carry-out to paved roadways.
 Sweep streets at the end of each day, or as needed, if visible soil material is carried onto adjacent paved roads. Water sweepers with reclaimed water shall be used where feasible.

SC AQ-2.2 Designate a Dust Compliance Monitor
The project applicant shall require the contractor(s) or builder(s) to designate a person or persons to monitor the fugitive dust emissions and enhance the implementation of the measures as necessary to minimize dust complaints, reduce visible emissions below 20 percent opacity, and to prevent transport of dust off-site. Their duties shall include monitoring during holidays and weekend periods when work may not be in progress.

The name and telephone number of such persons shall be provided to the MBARD Compliance Division prior to the start of any grading, earthwork, or demolition. The project applicant shall provide and post a publicly visible sign that specifies the telephone number and name to contact regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond to complaints and take corrective action within 48 hours. The phone number of the MBARD shall also be visible to ensure compliance with Rule 402 (Nuisance). c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than significant impact. Under CEQA, residences, schools, daycare centers, and healthcare facilities, such as hospitals, or retirement and nursing homes, are considered sensitive receptors. For this project, Fort Ord Dunes State Park is also considered a receptor to be considered. Some portions of the busway facilities would be located approximately 120 feet from the nearest residential property line.

This distance, and the fact that the project would utilize zero emission vehicles, would not expose these residential receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations.

The proposed project involves roadway improvements that would not result in stationary emissions. The project would also include a transit center with approximately 181 parking spaces. However, the nearest sensitive receptors to the proposed transit center are over 2,300 feet away. Thus, the project would not result in a substantial increase in traffic-related pollutant concentrations that could affect sensitive receptors. Furthermore, the dust and equipment exhaust emissions created during construction would be minimal and would be controlled by compliance with MBARD Dust Construction Mitigation Measures. See Appendix 6 for additional detail.
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
Less than significant impact. Construction activities associated with the project may generate detectable odors from heavy duty equipment (i.e., diesel exhaust), as well as from architectural coatings and asphalt off-gassing. Any construction-related odors would be short-term in nature and cease upon project completion. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. See Appendix 6 for additional details.
408
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 14

4.4 Biological Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either
directly or through habitat modifications, on
any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local or
regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by
the California Department of Fish and Game
or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game or
US Fish and Wildlife Service?
X
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or
federally protected wetlands (including, but
not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling,
hydrological interruption, or other means?
X
d) Interfere substantially with the movement
of any native resident or migratory fish or
wildlife species or with established native
resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
X
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances
protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance?
X
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural
Community Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or state habitat
conservation plan?
X
409
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 15
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. Portions of the project are located within the Coastal Zones of the City of Marina and within land immediately adjacent to the City of Seaside and Fort Ord Dunes State Parks. The Coastal Zones support a diversity of environmentally sensitive habitats, such as coastal scrub and dune scrub that occur along the California coast. Special status species known to potentially occur within the project site include the Townsend’s big-eared bat, Monterey dusky-footed woodrat, Northern California legless lizard, Coast horned lizard, Smith’s blue butterfly, and nesting raptors and other protected avian species. Despite the disturbed condition of the site, there is the potential for these species to be present. To avoid potential impacts associated with project construction the following mitigation measures would be incorporated into the project to reduce impacts to special status species in the project area to a less than significant level. See Appendix 7 for detailed discussions on vegetation, sensitive habitats, and special status species within the project alignment.

Mitigation Measures/Project Conditions (For All Project Segments) MM BIO-1.1 Construction Best Management Practices
The following best management practices will be implemented during construction (i.e., pre-, during, and post-construction) to reduce impacts to special-status plant and wildlife species:
 A qualified biologist will conduct an Employee Education Program for the construction crew prior to any construction activities. The qualified biologist will meet with the construction crew at the onset of construction at the project site to educate the construction crew on the following: 1) the appropriate access route(s) in and out of the construction area and review project boundaries; 2) how a biological monitor will examine the area and agree upon a method which will ensure the safety of the monitor during such activities, 3) the special-status species and sensitive habitats that are known or may be present; 4) the specific mitigation measures that will be incorporated into the construction effort; 5) the general provisions and protections afforded by USFWS and CDFW; and 6) the proper procedures if a special-status species is encountered within the project site.
 Trees and vegetation not planned for removal or trimming will be protected prior to and during construction to the maximum possible through the use of exclusionary fencing, such as hay bales for herbaceous and shrubby vegetation, and protective wood barriers for trees. Only certified weed-free straw will be used to avoid the introduction of non-native, invasive species. A biological monitor will supervise the installation of protective fencing and monitor at least once per week until construction is complete to ensure that the protective fencing remains intact.  Following construction, disturbed areas will be restored to pre-project contours to the maximum extent possible and revegetated using locally-occurring native species 410
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 16
and native erosion control seed mix, per the recommendations of a qualified biologist.
 Grading, excavating, and other activities that involve substantial soil disturbance will be planned and implemented in consultation with a qualified hydrologist, engineer, or erosion control specialist, and will utilize standard erosion control techniques to minimize erosion and sedimentation to native vegetation (pre-, during, and postconstruction).  No firearms will be allowed on the project site at any time.  All food-related and other trash will be disposed of in closed containers and removed from the project area at least once a week during the construction period, or more often if trash is attracting avian or mammalian predators. Construction personnel will not feed or otherwise attract wildlife to the area.

MM BIO-1.2 Construction-Phase Monitoring
The applicant will retain a qualified biologist to monitor all ground disturbing construction activities (i.e., vegetation removal, grading, excavation, or similar activities) of the project to protect any special-status species encountered. Any handling and relocation protocols of special-status wildlife species will be determined in coordination with CDFW prior to any ground disturbing activities, and will be conducted by a qualified biologist with appropriate scientific collection permit. After ground disturbing project activities are complete, the qualified biologist will train an individual from the construction crew to act as the on-site construction biological monitor. The construction biological monitor will be the contact for any special-status wildlife species encounters, will conduct daily inspections of equipment and materials stored on site and any holes or trenches prior to the commencement of work, and will ensure that all installed fencing stays in place throughout the construction period. The qualified biologist will then conduct regular scheduled and unscheduled visits to ensure the construction biological monitor is satisfactorily implementing all appropriate mitigation protocols.

Both the qualified biologist and the construction biological monitor must work through the State Inspector to cease construction contractor work and/or redirect project activities to ensure protection of resources and compliance with all environmental permits and conditions of the project. The qualified biologist and the construction biological monitor shall complete a daily log summarizing activities and environmental compliance throughout the duration of the project. The log will also include any specialstatus wildlife species observed and relocated.

MM BIO-1.3 Non-Native, Invasive Species Controls
The following measures will be implemented to reduce the introduction and spread of non-native, invasive species:
 Any landscaping or replanting required for the project will not use species listed as noxious by the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) or invasive by the California Invasive Plant Council (Cal-IPC).
411
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 17
 Bare and disturbed soil will be landscaped with CDFA recommended seed mix or plantings from locally adopted species to preclude the invasion on noxious weeds in the project site.
 Construction equipment will be cleaned of mud or other debris that may contain invasive plants and/or seeds and inspected to reduce the potential of spreading noxious weeds, before mobilizing to arrive at the construction site and before leaving the construction site.
 All non-native, invasive plant species will be removed from disturbed areas prior to replanting.

MM BIO-1.4 Pre-Construction Surveys for Protected Avian Species Construction activities that may directly (e.g., vegetation removal) or indirectly (e.g., noise/ground disturbance) affect protected nesting avian species will be timed to avoid the breeding and nesting season. Specifically, vegetation and/or tree removal can be scheduled after September 16 and before January 31. Alternatively, a qualified biologist will be retained by the project applicant to conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting raptors and other protected avian species within 500 feet of proposed construction activities if construction occurs between February 1 and September 15. Pre-construction surveys will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of construction activities during the early part of the breeding season (February through April) and no more than 30 days prior to the initiation of these activities during the late part of the breeding season (May through August). Because some bird species nest early in spring and others nest later in summer, surveys for nesting birds may be required to continue during construction to address new arrivals, and because some species breed multiple times in a season. The necessity and timing of these continued surveys will be determined by the qualified biologist based on review of the final construction plans and in coordination with the CDFW, as needed.

If raptors or other protected avian species nests are identified during the preconstruction surveys, the qualified biologist will notify the project applicant and an appropriate no-disturbance buffer will be imposed within which no construction activities or disturbance should take place (generally 500 feet in all directions for raptors; other avian species may have species-specific requirements) until the young of the year have fledged and are no longer reliant upon the nest or parental care for survival, as determined by a qualified biologist.

Mitigation Measures (For Segments 1-4 and 5th Street Station) MM BIO-1.5 Pre-Construction Surveys for Monterey Dusky-Footed Woodrat Not more than thirty (30) days prior to the start of construction of Segments 1-4 and the 5th Street Station (including vegetation removal), a qualified biologist shall conduct a survey of suitable habitat within the work site to locate existing Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests. All Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests shall be mapped and flagged for avoidance. Graphics depicting all Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests shall be 412
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 18
provided to the construction contractor. Any Monterey dusky-footed woodrat nests that cannot be avoided shall be relocated according to the following procedures:
 Each active nest shall be disturbed by the qualified biologist to the degree that the woodrats leave the nest and seek refuge elsewhere.
 Nests shall be dismantled during the non-breeding season (between October 1 and December 31), if possible.
 If a litter of young is found or suspected, nest material shall be replaced and the nest left alone for 2-3 weeks, after this time the nest will be rechecked to verify that young are capable of independent survival before proceeding with nest dismantling.

MM BIO-1.6 Pre-Construction Surveys for Townsend’s Big-eared Bat To avoid and reduce impacts to Townsend’s big-eared bat, if the project construction is planned during the reproductive season (May 1 through September 15) MST will retain a qualified bat specialist or wildlife biologist to conduct site surveys to characterize bat utilization within and adjacent to the project site and potential species present (techniques utilized to be determined by the biologist) prior to construction. Based on the results of these initial surveys, one or more of the following will occur:
 If it is determined that bats are not present within or adjacent to the site, no additional mitigation is required.
 If it is determined that bats are utilizing the trees or abandoned buildings within or adjacent to the site and may be impacted by the proposed project, pre-construction surveys will be conducted within 50 feet of construction limits no more than 30 days prior to the start of construction. If, according to the bat specialist, no bats or bat signs are observed in the course of the pre-construction surveys, construction may proceed. If bats and/or bat signs are observed during the pre-construction surveys, the biologist will determine if disturbance will jeopardize the roost (i.e., maternity, foraging, day, or night).

Mitigation Measures (For Segments 1-4)
MM BIO-1.7 SBB Avoidance and Restoration
The host plant species for SBB (i.e. seacliff and dune buckwheat) shall be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. SBB habitat not scheduled for removal shall be protected prior to and during construction to the maximum possible extent through the use of exclusionary fencing or flagging, such as construction fencing or hay bales. Only certified weed-free straw will be used to avoid the introduction of non-native, invasive species.

An experienced biological monitor, trained by a qualified biologist will supervise the installation of protective fencing and monitor at least once per week until construction is complete to ensure that the protective fencing remains intact.

If avoidance is not feasible:
413
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 19
 The duff and/or associated soil and plant material underneath the presumedoccupied seacliff or dune buckwheat plants that will be impacted by the project will be removed by hand by a USFWS-approved biologist prior to disturbance, and will be placed as close as possible to, but not on, living seacliff or dune buckwheat plants not scheduled for removal, within the boundaries of exclusionary fencing/flagging.  The number of plants removed will be quantified and shall be replaced at a 1:1 success ratio for the acreage or individuals impacted. A Restoration Plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and implemented. The plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
o A description of the baseline conditions of the habitats within the work site, including the presence of any special-status species, their locations, and densities;
o Procedures to control and/or eliminate non-native invasive species within the work site;
o A detailed description of on-site and/or off-site restoration areas, salvage of seed and/or soil bank, plant salvage, seeding and planting specifications, which may include, but is not limited to, an increased planting ratio to ensure the 1:1 success ratio, if required by the USFWS; and o A monitoring program that describes annual monitoring efforts which incorporate success criteria and contingency plans if success criteria are not met.

MM BIO-1.8 Special-Status Plant Avoidance and Restoration Rare plants (i.e. Hooker’s manzanita, sandmat manzanita, Monterey spineflower, coast wallflower, and Kellogg’s horkelia) shall be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. Rare plants not scheduled for removal shall be protected prior to and during construction to the maximum extent possible through the use of exclusionary fencing or flagging, such as construction fencing or hay bales. Only certified weed-free straw will be used to avoid the introduction of non-native, invasive species. A biological monitor will supervise the installation of protective fencing and monitor at least once per week until construction is complete to ensure that the protective fencing remains intact.

If avoidance is not feasible, the impacted area for each species shall be quantified during final design and each species shall be replaced at a 1:1 success ratio for the acreage or individuals impacted (depending on species impacted) and a Restoration Plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and implemented. The plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
 A description of the baseline conditions of the habitats within the work site, including the presence of any special-status species, their locations, and densities;  Procedures to control and/or eliminate non-native invasive species within the work site;
414
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 20
 A detailed description of on-site and/or off-site restoration areas, salvage of seed and/or soil bank, plant salvage, seeding and planting specifications, which may include but is not limited to, an increased planting ratio to ensure the 1:1 success ratio; and
 A monitoring program that describes annual monitoring efforts which incorporate success criteria and contingency plans if success criteria are not met.

MM BIO-1.9 FESA Compliance
MST will comply with the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) and will obtain necessary authorization prior to construction of Segments 1-4.

Due to the presence and potential presence of federally listed species within the project site, including the SBB and Monterey spineflower, and Federal nexus (i.e., Federal funding), the Federal Transit Administration, acting as the NEPA lead agency for the proposed project, shall be required to initiate a Section 7 consultation with the USFWS and prepare a written analysis in the form of a Biological Assessment (BA) to determine whether their actions may affect a listed species. Based on the BA, the USFWS will issue a Biological Opinion (BO) regarding likely impacts as a result of implementing the project. Any further avoidance and minimization measures that may be required as a component of the BO will be implemented.

Mitigation Measures (For 5th Street Station)
MM BIO-1.10 Special-Status Plant Surveys and HMP Compliance A qualified biologist shall be retained to conduct surveys for Monterey spineflower and Yadon’s piperia within the 5th Street Station. The surveys shall be conducted during the appropriate identification period(s) to determine presence or absence, according to USFWS, CDFW, and CNPS protocol. The biologist shall prepare a report that provides the results of the survey, and, if found the number and locations of individuals/populations identified.
 If no Monterey spineflower or Yadon’s piperia are found, no further mitigation is necessary.
 If Monterey spineflower or Yadon’s piperia are found, salvage efforts for these species will be evaluated by a qualified biologist in coordination with the MST prior to construction to further reduce impacts per the requirements of the HMP and 2017 Programmatic BO. Where salvage is determined feasible and proposed, seed collection should occur from plants within the development site and/or topsoil should be salvaged within occupied areas to be disturbed. Seeds should be collected during the appropriate time of year for each species as determined by the qualified biologist.

The collected seeds and topsoil should be used to revegetate temporarily disturbed construction areas and reseeding and restoration efforts on- or off-site, as determined appropriate by the qualified biologist and MST. 415
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 21
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. The project could result in impacts to sensitive natural communities, however, no riparian habitat or waters of the U.S. and/or State were documented within the project site. The project area lies within the California Coastal Zone (Coastal zone), specifically within the boundaries of the Marina, Sand City, and Seaside Local Coastal Plans, as well as California Coastal Commission’s original jurisdiction. The LCPs from these agencies address coastal resources, including the protection of biological and wetland resources.

As noted above, some of these specific habitats include coastal scrub and dune scrub that occur along the California coast. Additional areas within the project site that may be considered ESHA include habitat for the Smith’s blue butterfly and areas supporting rare plants. To avoid potential impacts associated with project construction to these sensitive habitats, mitigation measures MMs BIO-1.1 through BIO-1.10 and BIO-2.11 would be implemented to reduce impacts to sensitive habitats and ESHA to a less-than-significant level. See Appendix 7 for detailed discussions on sensitive habitats and ESHA within the project alignment.

Mitigation Measure/Project Conditions
MM BIO-2.11 Dune Scrub Restoration
Dune scrub shall be avoided to the greatest extent feasible. If avoidance is not feasible, dune scrub habitat shall be replaced at a 1:1 success ratio for the acreage impacted and a Restoration Plan shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and implemented. The plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following:
 A description of the baseline conditions of the habitat that will be impacted;  A detailed description of on-site and/or off-site restoration areas, a planting palette, salvage of seed and/or soil bank, plant salvage, seeding and planting specifications, which may include, but is not limited to, an increased planting ratio to ensure the 1:1 success ratio;
 Procedures to control and/or eliminate non-native invasive species within the restoration site; and
 A monitoring program that describes annual monitoring efforts which incorporate success criteria and contingency plans if success criteria are not met. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological? No impact. No State or federally protected wetlands are present within the project area. For these reasons, these topics are not discussed further in this document. 416
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 22
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
Less than significant impact. The project site is not located within any significant wildlife movement corridors or linkages. See Appendix 7 for additional details. The majority of the project site is comprised of ruderal and/or developed areas and runs adjacent to existing roads, Highway 1, shopping centers, and other businesses, which in general isolates the project site from other undeveloped areas. As such, the project site provides little use as a corridor for wildlife movement. Therefore, the proposed project would not disconnect, fragment, or otherwise impeded wildlife movement in the primary, significant wildlife movement corridors in the area.
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. Construction of the proposed project could result in permanent impacts to trees within the project site; however, the number or type of trees to be removed have not been identified at this time. However, based on the biological resource surveys conducted (see Appendix 7) it is conservatively estimated for planning purposes that 60 to 90 regulated trees may require removal along the alignment if they cannot be avoided through design. Removal of native and other important trees are protected under local tree removal ordinances and impacts are typically addressed and mitigated under CEQA. Implementation of MM BIO-4.12 requires that native trees be avoided and protected during construction to the greatest extent feasible and that native trees removed be replaced at a 1:1 mitigation ratio. Implementation of this measure will ensure compliance with local policies or ordinances protecting trees, reducing potential impacts to less-than-significant. See Appendix 7 for detailed discussion.

Mitigation Measure
MM BIO-4.12 Native Tree Protection and Replacement Measures To maximize native tree retention and protection, a forester, arborist, or other tree care professional shall be involved in the review and development of final grading and construction plans wherever trees occur within the site or at the grading margins. To avoid unintended impacts to native trees outside the construction area, the following native tree protection measures shall be implemented:
 Temporary construction fencing shall be placed at approximately 10 feet from the trunk, limiting work within the dripline (e.g. and no grading, trenching, or vegetative alteration shall occur within this environmental exclusion zone). Grading, vegetation removal, and other ground disturbing construction activities may not commence until the project forester has inspected and approved the protective fencing installed by the contractor. No equipment or materials, including soil, shall be stored within the established environmental exclusion zone. Prior to grading within 25 feet of retained trees, the project forester, arborist, or other tree care professional shall be consulted to determine whether pruning is necessary to protect limbs from grading equipment. 417
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 23
 To avoid soil compaction from damaging the roots, heavy equipment shall not be allowed to drive over the root area. If deemed necessary and approved by the forester, equipment may drive across one side of the tree. To reduce soil compaction, wood chips shall be spread 6-12 inches deep to disperse the weight of equipment and plywood sheets shall be placed over the wood chips for added protection.  Roots exposed by excavation must be pruned and recovered as quickly as possible to promote callusing, closure, and healthy regrowth.
 Retained trees shall be watered periodically in accordance with species need to promote tree health. Transplanted trees and their intended planting areas shall be pre-watered. Post planting watering shall be done as needed to assure establishment.  When project design is completed, an estimate of the appropriate number of replacement trees shall be made based on available planting space. These replacement trees (minimum five-gallon specimens) shall be planted along boundaries and within landscape areas. Planting density for replacement trees shall be accurately detailed to allow for some unavoidable mortality over time.  Transplants are encouraged and shall be credited on a 1:1 basis. Final replanting numbers may be modified by additional tree retention and should be made part of the final landscaping plan.
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less than significant impact. The project site is not located within an approved Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) or Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) area. However, the 5th Street Station is located within the former Fort Ord and the plan area of the Fort Ord Habitat Management Plan (HMP).

See Appendix 7 for more detail regarding project’s consistency with the approved Fort Ord HMP. 418
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 24

4.5 Cultural Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a historical resource
pursuant to in § 15064.5?
X
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
X
c) Disturb any human remains, including
those interred outside of dedicated
cemeteries?
X
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to in § 15064.5?
Less than significant impact. Implementation of the proposed action would not result in operationalrelated impacts to historic architectural resources because the proposed action would not directly or indirectly affect any identified historic resource within or near the project alignment. While three historic era resources were identified – the MBL, Fort Ord loading platform and commercial structure on Del Monte Boulevard – these resources were determined in the historic resource evaluation to be ineligible for historic status or listing on any State, federal or local historic register. See Appendix 8 for detailed discussion.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5?
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries? Potentially significant Impact unless mitigation incorporated. While no prehistoric sites have been identified within or near the project alignment, the potential remains to uncover or disturb previously unknown resources during the construction phase of the project. To address this potential impact, the following standard mitigation measures are required.

Mitigation Measures/Project Conditions
MM CR-1 Preconstruction Archaeological and Paleontological Sensitivity Training Prior to construction, all personnel directly involved in project related ground 419
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 25
disturbance shall be provided archaeological and paleontological sensitivity training. The training will be conducted by a qualified Archaeologist and Paleontologist that meet the Secretary of the Interior’s standards for archaeology and CEQA qualifications for paleontology. The training will take place at a day and time to be determined in conjunction with the project construction foreman, and prior to any scheduled ground disturbance. The training will include: a discussion of applicable laws and penalties; samples or visual aids of artifacts and paleontological resources that could be encountered in the project vicinity, including what those artifacts and resources may look like partially buried, or wholly buried and freshly exposed; and instructions to halt work in the vicinity of any potential cultural resources discovery, and notify the archaeological or paleontological monitor as necessary.

MM CR-2 Procedures for Inadvertent Discovery
Inadvertent Discovery of Archaeological or Tribal Cultural Resources In the event archaeological resources are encountered during ground disturbing activities, contractor shall temporarily halt or divert excavations within a 100-foot radius of the find until it can be evaluated.

CEQA Guidelines requires that all potentially significant archaeological deposits be evaluated to demonstrate whether the resource is eligible for inclusion on the California Register of Historic Resources, even if discovered during construction. If archaeological deposits are encountered they will be evaluated and mitigated simultaneously in the timeliest manner practicable, allowing for recovery of materials and data by standard archaeological procedures. For prehistoric archaeological sites, this data recovery involves the hand-excavated recovery and non-destructive analysis of a small sample of the deposit. Historic resources are also sampled through hand excavation, though architectural features may require careful mechanical exposure and hand excavation.

Any previously undiscovered resources found during construction activities shall be recorded on appropriate California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) forms and evaluated for significance in terms of CEQA criteria by a qualified Archaeologist.

Significant cultural resources consist of but are not limited to stone, bone, glass, ceramics, fossils, wood, or shell artifacts, or features including hearths, structural remains, or historic dumpsites. If the resource is determined significant under CEQA, a qualified Archaeologist shall prepare and implement a research design and archaeological data recovery plan that will capture those categories of data for which the site is significant in accordance with Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.

If such resources or artifacts are determined to be of native tribal origin, any mitigation or recovery program shall include direction from Ohlone/Costanoan Esselen Nation (OCEN) tribal leadership for proper handling and treatment.

The Archaeologist shall also perform appropriate technical analyses, prepare a comprehensive report complete with methods, results, and recommendations, and provide for the permanent curation of the recovered resources. The report shall be submitted to MST, TAMC, the NWIC, and the State Historic Preservation Office, as 420
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 26
required.

Inadvertent Discovery of Paleontological Resources
A qualified Paleontologist (per CEQA definition) shall be retained to supervise monitoring of construction excavations and to produce a Paleontological Monitoring and Mitigation Plan for the project based on the location and depth of excavation.

Project related excavations that occur in surficial younger (Holocene-age) alluvial and fluvial deposits and/or topsoil (less than 10 feet in depth) will be monitored on a periodic basis to ensure that the potential underlying paleontologically sensitive sediments are not being affected. Paleontological resource monitoring will include inspection of exposed rock units during active excavations within sensitive geologic sediments, if present.

The paleontological monitor will have the authority to temporarily divert grading away from exposed fossils to professionally and efficiently recover the fossil specimens and collect associated data. All efforts to avoid delays to project schedules will be made.

Collected fossils will be transported to a paleontological laboratory for processing, identification, analysis and curation. The qualified Paleontologist shall prepare a final monitoring and mitigation report to be filed with MST and, if fossil resources are found, the repository.

Inadvertent Discovery of Human Remains
In the event that human remains (or remains that may be human) are discovered at the project site, Public Resource Code Section 5097.98 must be followed. All grading or earthmoving activities shall immediately stop within a 100-foot radius of the find. The project proponent shall then inform the Monterey County Coroner and the respective city (e.g. City of Marina, Sand City, or Seaside) immediately, and the Coroner shall be permitted to examine the remains as required by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b).

Section 7050.5 requires that excavation be stopped in the vicinity of discovered human remains until the Coroner can determine whether the remains are those of a Native American. If human remains are determined as those of Native American origin, the Applicant shall comply with the state relating to the disposition of Native American burials that fall within the jurisdiction of the NAHC (Public Resource Code [PRC] § 5097).

The Coroner shall contact the NAHC to determine the most likely descendant(s) (MLD).

The MLD shall complete his or her inspection and make recommendations or preferences for treatment within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The MLD will determine the most appropriate means of treating the human remains and associated grave artifacts, and shall oversee the disposition of the remains.

In the event the NAHC is unable to identify an MLD or the MLD fails to make a recommendation within 48 hours after being granted access to the site, the landowner or his/her authorized representative shall rebury the Native American human remains and associated grave goods with appropriate dignity within the project area in a location not subject to further subsurface disturbance.
421
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 27

4.6 Energy

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in potentially significant
environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of
energy resources, during project
construction or operation?
X
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local
plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency?
X
a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than significant impact. The Pacific Gas & Electric Company (PG&E) provides electricity and natural gas service to the Project area. The proposed project would reduce congestion on Highway 1 from local and inter-regional commuter traffic by providing an accessible 100 percent zero emission transit alternative. The project would result in a nominal increase in electricity and natural gas demand. This nominal increase represents an insignificant percent increase compared to overall demand in PG&E’s service area. Therefore, projected electrical and natural gas demand would not significantly impact PG&E’s level of service.

During construction, transportation energy use depends on the type and number of trips, vehicle miles traveled, fuel efficiency of vehicles, and travel mode. Transportation energy use during construction would come from the transport and use of construction equipment, delivery vehicles and haul trucks, and construction employee vehicles that would use diesel fuel and/or gasoline. The use of energy resources by these vehicles would fluctuate according to the phase of construction and would be temporary. Most construction equipment during demolition and grading would be gas-powered or diesel-powered, and the later construction phases would require electricity-powered equipment.

Impacts related to transportation energy use during construction would be temporary and would not require expanded energy supplies or the construction of new infrastructure; impacts would not be significant.

During operations, energy consumption associated with operation of the zero-emission busses would be nominal. Furthermore, the project site and surrounding areas are highly urbanized with numerous gasoline fuel facilities and infrastructure. Consequently, the proposed project would not result in a substantial demand for energy that would require expanded supplies or the construction of other 422
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 28
infrastructure or expansion of existing facilities. Additionally, fuel consumption associated with vehicle trips generated by the proposed project would not be considered inefficient, wasteful, or unnecessary.

The proposed project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources. Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant, and no mitigation is required. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than significant impact. The project is a transit facility designed to carry passengers that would utilize almost no energy, except what may be required for low intensity safety lighting along the corridor. The project is not anticipated to require natural gas. The project would result in 7 MTCO2e/yr from energy consumption. See Appendix 11 for discussion on the project’s energy consumption during operations and project consistency with policies and actions identified in the City of Marina, Seaside, and Sand City’s general plans.
423
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 29

4.7 Geology and Soils

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk
of loss, injury, or death involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on
other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines and Geology
Special Publication 42.

X
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? X
iii) Seismic-related ground failure,
including liquefaction?
X
iv) Landslides? X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss
of topsoil?
X
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as
a result of the project, and potentially result
in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
X
d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in
Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code
(1994), creating substantial direct or indirect
risks to life or property?
X
e) Have soils incapable of adequately
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water?
X
424
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 30

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature?
X
a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.

Less than significant impact. The project site is not located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map as mapped by the State Geologist. There are four faults that cross the project alignment:
the Chupines Fault, Seaside Fault, Ord Terrace Fault, and Reliz Fault. However, these faults are not considered sufficiently active or well-defined. The potential is very low that the individual traces of these faults could generate an earthquake and result in surface fault rupture. See Appendix 10 for additional details.
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking?
Less than significant impact. Four faults cross the project alignment, however, none of these faults are currently considered active and their potential for surface-rupture is considered very low to low. The largest ground motion would likely be the result of movement along the Monterey Bay-Tularcitos Fault.

However, the project is primarily a roadway project, and would be required to be designed and constructed to withstand substantial ground shaking in order to minimize seismic impacts. Compliance with currently structural codes to address the potential for ground shaking and structure stability would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level.
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than significant impact. Liquefaction generally occurs as a “quicksand” type of ground failure caused by strong ground shaking. The primary factors influencing liquefaction potential include groundwater, soil type, relative density of the sandy soils, confining pressure, and the intensity and duration of ground shaking. As shown in Exhibit 4.4.3 of the Monterey County General Plan EIR, the potential for liquefaction to occur at the project site is low. See Appendix 10 for additional discussion. iv. Landslides?
Less than significant impact. The majority of the project alignment traverses relatively flat terrain on existing roadways or adjacent to existing railroad tracks, where landslides and slope instability are not a 425
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 31
concern. Based on a search of the California Department of Conservation Landslide Inventory, the project site has gentle to low slope gradients. The potential for deep seated land sliding to occur in the bedrock is low to nil.
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than significant impact. The soils at the project site have a moderate to high soil erosion potential.

The majority of the project site is on existing hardscaped railway and is surrounded by coastal vegetation. The southern end of the project site is surrounded by hardscape surfaces, limiting the potential for downstream/off-site erosion impacts on neighboring property. Because the project site is already in a developed area and surrounded by vegetation, there is a lower potential for off-site erosion impacts to occur during construction. Construction and water quality best practices as required by existing codes and regulations will limit erosion on the relatively small construction footprint of the project. Design features such as footing placement away from slopes and footing depths will minimize erosion during and following construction.
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?
Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. The project site is located on soils that are good for use as roadway fills and firm overburden soils that are suitable for foundation support. However, the potential for soil erosion is high in areas where younger and older dune sand deposits are, especially if not covered by vegetation. While the geologic unit below the project is very stable, the site is nonetheless subject to common risks associated with the local soils. With implementation of Mitigation Measure (MM) GEO-5 and adherence to local building and engineering standards, the site’s geologic and soil constraints would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through construction-level geotechnical recommendations and compliance with all applicable codes and regulations. See Appendix 10 for detailed discussion on the potential for landslides, liquefaction and subsidence, lateral spreading, collapse, and expansive soils as a result of the project.

Mitigation Measure/Project Conditions
MM GEO-5 Final Geotechnical Evaluation
A construction level geotechnical evaluation shall be prepared and implemented for the project based on the final engineering plans. The project shall be required to adhere to and incorporate all standards and recommended engineering measures to mitigate for liquefaction, expansive soils and other local soil constraints. The final geotechnical evaluation will be prepared by MST and provided to the affected land use agencies for review prior to the issuance of local building permits or related local approvals. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the subsurface profile of the site generally consists of Baywood sand and Oceano loamy sand. Based on a review of environmental databases, soils in the 426
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 32
project site, both Baywood and Ocean Series are composed of sand and have low water storage potential and a low potential for expansion. Thus, impacts would be less than significant. See Appendix 10 for additional details.
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? No impact. The proposed project would not require the extension or installation of wastewater connections as this service is not essential to busway operations. However, should restrooms be required for the 5th Street Station in the future, MST would seek water and wastewater connections from the City of Marina.
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. See Appendix 8. Based on the previous paleontological resource assessment covering the proposed project alignment, no paleontological resources were identified. The likelihood of encountering unique paleontological resources was determined to be low to high with increasing depth. Excavation depths for the project will be shallow.

Because there is the potential to uncover paleontological resources in previously undisturbed portions of the project area, ground disturbing activities during construction could potentially result in significant impacts to paleontological resources. Implementation of MM CR-1 and MM CR-2 would require all construction personnel involved in project-related ground disturbances to be provided archaeological and paleontological sensitivity training and effectively mitigate potential effects to paleontological resources.
427
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 33

4.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions,
either directly or indirectly, that may
have a significant impact on the
environment?
X
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
reducing the emissions of greenhouse
gases?
X
a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Less than significant impact. For the purpose of this environmental analysis, the project’s constructionrelated GHG emissions were forecasted based on the proposed construction schedule and applying the mobile-source and fugitive dust emissions factors derived from CalEEMod. The project’s constructionrelated GHG emissions would be generated from off-road construction equipment, on-road hauling and vendor (material delivery) trucks, and worker vehicles. Project construction-related activities would generate approximately 1,088 MTCO2e of GHG emissions over the course of construction. However, project construction-related GHG emissions would be short term and would cease once construction is complete. This is less than the CARB Mandatory Reporting applicability level of 2,500 MTCO2e per year.

See Appendix 11 for a detailed discussion on construction-related impacts from GHG emissions.

Operational or long-term emissions would occur over the project’s life. The project consists of approximately 6 linear miles of roadway surface and related improvements to provide dedicated express busway service that would ultimately be expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the Monterey Bay region. The majority of project emissions (approximately 100 percent) would occur from mobile and energy sources. Although MBARD does not have adopted GHG emission significance thresholds, the project’s estimated GHG emissions (about 219.19 MT/ CO2e year) is well below the significance threshold of 1,100 MTCO2e per year used in neighboring air districts and the 2,000 MT of CO2e/year threshold that had been under consideration by the MBARD. See Appendix 11 for a detailed discussion on operational-related impacts from GHG emissions. 428
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 34
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases?
Less than significant impact. As discussed above in Impact a), the project would not exceed significance thresholds for construction or operation of the project. The proposed BRT project would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. See Appendix 11 for a more detailed discussion.
429
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 35

4.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through the routine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials?
X
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment through reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment?
X
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
X
d) Be located on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
X
e) For a project located within an airport land
use plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted, within two miles of a public airport
or public use airport, would the project
result in a safety hazard or excessive noise
for people residing or working in the project
area?
X
f) Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
X
430
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 36

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
g) Expose people or structures, either directly
or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving wildland fires?
X
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
Less than significant impact. The normal operation of the SURF! busway along the right of way will not involve the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials other than may be required for routine maintenance. This project is a transit facility designed to carry passengers. Construction of the project would require staging, site preparation, grading and construction of the new busway and station. These activities may require the use of heavy equipment that would need refueling and/or limited maintenance on site, as well as the use of materials and chemical processes typical of roadway construction. However, as the project alignment is not in a heavily populated area and would not involve the routine transport or disposal of hazardous materials, construction effects are less than significant.

See Appendix 12 for detailed discussion.
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Less than significant impact. As discussed above, the busway project is a transit project that will transport people, not hazardous materials. For these reasons, normal project operations will not result in significant environmental hazards because the project will not use, transport, or expose people or property to such materials. However, based on the Phase I site investigations conducted along the alignment, hazardous wastes may be encountered during the construction process and hazardous materials may be used or generated during the construction process. Implementation of the following mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts related to reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment during project construction. See Appendix 12 for additional details.

Mitigation Measures/Project Conditions
MM HAZ-2.1: Soil and Groundwater Management Plan
A Soil and Groundwater Management Plan shall be prepared prior to ground disturbance, identifying the methods and procedures required to handle, store, transport and dispose of chemically impacted soil and groundwater. If groundwater is encountered during construction, groundwater sampling shall be conducted to determine contaminants and contamination levels. If contamination is found, a work 431
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 37
plan shall be developed and implemented by the project geotechnical engineer consistent with the Management Plan to protect the health of construction workers.

MM HAZ-2.2: Work Plan
Once the construction plans showing the depth and extent of the excavation are completed for all project segments, a targeted soil and groundwater sampling shall be conducted in areas of known or suspected contamination prior to the start of disturbance in those areas. If contamination is found, a work plan shall be developed by the project geotechnical engineer to protect the health of construction workers.

MM HAZ-2.3: Asbestos and Lead Paint Survey
Any hazardous materials or wastes encountered before or during the demolition stage of the project shall be disposed of according to current regulatory guidelines. If any structures are to be removed or demolished, an asbestos and lead paint survey shall be conducted for compliance with National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) regulations and air district rules.

MM HAZ-2.4 Worker Health and Safety Plan
A worker health and safety plan (HSP) that meets the provisions of California Code of Regulations (Title 22, Section 5192) shall be developed by the project contractor. HSP procedures will address the identification, excavation, handling, and disposal of hazardous wastes and materials that may be found in construction areas. The HSP shall include Best Management Practices (BMPs) that all contractors must employ during construction.
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Less than significant impact. The nearest school within one-quarter mile of the busway is Seaside High School. However, any hazardous materials encountered during construction would be addressed at the site and be subject to all existing and applicable regulations regarding the handling and disposal of such materials. If the handling and disposal of contaminated soils is encountered, it may need to be transported on roadways near the high school. With the application of existing regulations, there is no acute risk associated with transport. See Appendix 12 for additional discussion. 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?
Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. See Appendix 12 for a list of cleanup sites within 500 feet of the project site. As a transportation project, the busway is not considered a sensitive land use that would be affected by these conditions while in operation. Implementation of mitigation measures MM HAZ HAZ-2.1, HAZ-2.2, HAZ-2.3, and HAZ-2.4 would address residual environmental concerns if encountered during construction. See Appendix 12 for additional information. 432
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 38
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? Less than significant impact. The project alignment through the City of Marina and Sand City is located within the Airport Influence Area (Zone 7) of the Marina Municipal Airport and the Monterey Regional Airport. However, the aircraft accident risk level is considered to be low within this AIA zone. Marina Municipal Airport is used for general aviation aircraft operations, and the busway project operations result in little to no risk from these operations. As such, impacts would be less than significant. See Appendix 12 for additional information.
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
No impact. The busway project would create a dedicated bus lane running parallel to Highway 1 within the TAMC right-of-way. As one of the objectives of the project is to relieve highway congestion, such relief would be a benefit to any emergency response plan intended to quickly and efficiently move or evacuate people. Further, the project could potentially serve as an alternative travel corridor for emergency vehicles in the event that the highway is congested. For these reasons, the project could have beneficial impacts to locally adopted emergency response plans. g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires?
No impact. The entire length of the busway alignment contains only sparse vegetation in coastal dune habitat and is highly disturbed. The proposed project corridor is within a transportation corridor and not within a Very-High Fire Hazard Severity Zone as mapped by CALFIRE. Given this lack of fuel, the project would not be susceptible to wildland fires, nor would the project pose a risk as a source of fire. Because the project is not within an area identified as having a high potential for wildland fire, the project would have no impact related to exposing people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death from wildland fire, as per CEQA Guidelines.
433
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 39

4.10 Hydrology and Water Quality

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

X
i. Result in substantial erosion or
siltation on- or off-site? X
ii. Substantially increase the rate or
amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or
offsite?
X
iii. Create or contribute runoff water
which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
X
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones,
risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation?
X
434
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 40

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of
a water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan? X
a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality?
Less than significant impact. Construction associated with the project would include demolition, grading, excavation, and temporary land disturbance to bare areas which would displace soils and temporarily increase the potential for soils to be subject to wind and water erosion. Constructionrelated effects to water quality would be addressed through compliance with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permit (CGP). A Storm Water Pollutant Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which must include erosion-control and sediment-control BMPs for construction and post-construction conditions to control potential construction-related pollutants from migrating off site into the storm drain system and into or directly in receiving waters would be required to obtain coverage under the CGP. Compliance with these requirements would reduce potential impacts to water quality standards to a less-than-significant level. See Appendix 13 for additional details. b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
No impact. The project would not require the use of nor withdraw groundwater for use in construction or operation of the site, except for temporary use of privately purchased trucked water used for dust suppression during grading and construction. With appropriately designed stormwater detention, the increase in impervious surfaces from the busway lanes would not interfere with groundwater recharge.

Thus, the project would have no impact to existing groundwater supply. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
i. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ii. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite?
iii. Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff?
435
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 41
Less than significant impact. See Threshold 4.10 (a) above regarding existing controls and regulations already in place to manage water quality from site construction activity and post construction runoff. As noted above, project construction will require some earth moving and excavation for construction of the busway alignment. However, the project will be required to incorporate several BMPs into the project plans and implement those measures during construction, as already required by the local agencies’ stringent stormwater measures. As discussed above, the project would be required to comply with the CGP during construction and PCRs during project operation, which means the project would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or offsite or increase the rate of flooding on- or offsite. Similarly, as stormwater runoff would be captured and infiltrated to the extent feasible, and new stormwater facilities would be sized to meet local standards. As such, the project would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. See Appendix 13 for additional information. d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
No impact. The project site is located within Zone X, an Area of Minimal Flood Hazard. Thus, the project site is not located within the 100-year floodplain nor a special flood hazard area as defined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency and is not at risk from inundation. e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Less than significant impact. The project would not require groundwater use for project construction or operation of the site, except for temporary use of privately purchased trucked water for dust suppression during grading and construction. Thus, no conflict to groundwater supply would occur in this regard. As identified above, the project will be subject to the stringent water quality control measures during construction and will have no effect on groundwater resources. See Appendix 13 for additional information.
436
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 42

4.11 Land Use and Planning

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
community? X
b) Cause a significant environmental impact
due to a conflict with any land use plan,
policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
X
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No impact. The project is located within an existing transportation corridor and will not significantly disrupt or divide existing neighborhoods or communities. As the busway project is intended to improve overall mobility connections for residents and visitors traveling to and from the Monterey Peninsula, the project should result in beneficial impacts by providing a safe and reliable transit connection to employment, education, and health care centers along the corridor for visitors and residents, consistent with local land use policies. See Appendix 9 for additional information regarding consistency with local policies.
437
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 43

4.12 Mineral Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known
mineral resource that would be of value to
the region and the residents of the state?
X
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locallyimportant mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan or other land use plan?
X
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No impact. The project location and nature of the improvements will result in no impacts with respect to mineral resources. There are no known mineral resources located within the area of ground disturbance.
438
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 44

4.13 Noise

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or
permanent increase in ambient noise levels
in the vicinity of the project in excess of
standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
X
b) Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels? X
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a
private airstrip or an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels?
X
a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Less than significant impact. The project would involve construction activities which would be temporary and have a short duration resulting in periodic increases in the ambient noise environment.

Primary construction activities associated with development of the project would include site preparation, grading, retaining wall installation and paving. During construction, exterior noise levels could affect the residential neighborhoods and adjacent commercial and industrial uses at the north and south ends the construction area. Project construction would occur approximately 65 feet from existing commercial and industrial uses, and approximately 90 feet from the nearest residential uses to the north of the project site. These sensitive uses may be exposed to elevated noise levels during project construction. However, it is noted that construction activities would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated at a single point near sensitive receptors for an extended period of time.

Project construction would be required to comply with the allowable construction hours set forth in Seaside Municipal Code Section 9.12.030, Marina Municipal Code Section 9.24.040, and Chapter 10.60 of the Monterey County Code of Ordinances. In addition, all construction equipment would be equipped 439
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 45
with properly operating and maintained mufflers and other state required noise attenuation devices, helping to reduce noise at the source. See Appendix 14 for additional details. b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than significant impact. Project construction can generate varying degrees of groundborne vibration depending on the construction procedure and type of construction equipment used. The effect on buildings located near a construction site often varies depending on soil type, ground strata, and construction characteristics of the receiver buildings. The results from vibration can range from no perceptible effects at the lowest vibration levels, to low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibration at moderate levels, to slight damage at the highest levels. Groundborne vibrations from construction activities rarely reach levels that damage structures.

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has published standard vibration velocities for construction equipment operations (i.e., 0.20 inch/second). Groundborne vibration decreases rapidly with distance.

Based on the FTA data, vibration velocities from typical heavy construction equipment operations that would be used during project construction range from 0.003 to 0.210 inches per second peak particle velocity (PPV) at approximately 25 feet from the source of activity. The nearest off-site structures are commercial buildings located approximately 25 feet from the active construction zone for the proposed project. At this distance, construction vibration levels would be approximately 0.089 in/sec PPV.

Therefore, construction equipment vibration velocities would not exceed the FTA’s 0.20 PPV threshold or Caltrans’ human annoyance threshold of 0.1 in/sec PPV. In general, other construction activities would occur throughout the project site and would not be concentrated at the point closest to the nearest off-site structures. Therefore, vibration impacts associated with the project would be less than significant.

To determine potential project operational vibration impacts from the project, a General Vibration Assessment was prepared for project operational bus pass-bys, in accordance with the FTA Noise and Vibration Manual. The nearest off-site structure (a commercial building), and residence are located approximately 40 feet and 75 feet, respectively, from the proposed busway driving lane. At this distance and a maximum speed of 65 mph, vibration levels would be at a vibration velocity of approximately 72 VdB at the at the nearest commercial building and 66 VdB at the nearest residence, which would be below the FTA’s 75 VdB ground-borne vibration impact level for Land Use Category 3 uses (commercial) and Land Use Category 2 (residential) uses for frequent events. As a result, vibration levels from bus pass-bys associated with the proposed project would not cause structural damage at off-site structures or create human annoyance. See Appendix 14 for additional information. c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
No impact. The Monterey Regional Airport is located approximately 1.30 miles south of the project site and the Marina Municipal Airport is located approximately 1.90 miles east of the project site; there are no private airstrips in the project area. The project site lies outside the 65 dBA CNEL noise contour specified in the Monterey Regional Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Update (May 2018). As a transportation project aircraft noise would have no adverse effects. 440
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 46

4.14 Population and Housing

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial unplanned population
growth in an area, either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of roads or other
infrastructure)?
X
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing
people or housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere?
X
a) Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
No impact. The project, a linear busway facility located within TAMC’s Monterey Branch Line right-ofway, will not displace people or housing along the alignment that would necessitate the building of housing elsewhere. No relocation or condemnation actions are required. Nor would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth along the alignment. The adopted general plans for the affected land use agencies provide for planned growth within their jurisdictional boundaries. As such, the project would provide needed transit service for the planned population. 441
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 47

4.15 Public Services

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project result in:
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities,
the construction of which could cause
significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance
objectives for any of the public services:
i) Fire protection? X
ii) Police protection? X
iii) Schools? X
iv) Parks? X
v) Other public facilities? X
a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire protection?
ii. Police protection?
iii. Schools?
iv. Parks?
v. Other public facilities?
442
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 48
No impact. The busway project is a transportation facility that will not generate new population that would require additional public services such as schools, parks or government facilities. The busway will be maintained by MST and would not require maintenance by Marina, Sand City, Seaside, or Monterey County public works departments. In terms of fire and police protection, the project may provide enhanced vehicle access and/or an emergency access route to better serve the coastline from Marina to Sand City. Given these benefits, and the fact that no new public service facilities would need to be constructed because of the busway project, no impacts would be expected. 443
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 49

4.16 Recreation

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Would the project increase the use of
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
X
b) Does the project include recreational
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
X
a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Less than significant impact. The project would not generate additional population near existing parks and recreational facilities. An increase in people is typically what causes increased use and deterioration of existing facilities. As part of the busway project, there would be associated bicycle and pedestrian improvements that may allow for connections to the region’s existing and planned recreational trail facilities, such as Fort Ord Dunes State Park, Fort Ord Regional Trail and Greenway, and the Monterey Bay Coastal Recreation Trail. These connections would allow pedestrians or cyclists to more easily access the recreational areas, but any increase in usage caused by the project would be incidental and less than significant. Operation of the proposed project would increase public access to park and recreational facilities located along the proposed action alignment and would result in a beneficial effect. The project when completed will increase the total length of bicycle/pedestrian facilities over existing conditions.

Minor realignment of existing bicycle/pedestrian facilities and new connections will be planned to allow continued use of facilities during construction. The physical effects of constructing the project are addressed throughout this Initial Study.
444
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 50

4.17 Transportation

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or
policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
X
b) Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
X
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a
geometric design feature (e.g., sharp
curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
X
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? X
a) Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
No impact. One of the primary objectives of the project is to implement associated traffic, bicycle and pedestrian circulation improvements along the local network in conjunction with the dedicated busway.

Safe and reliable transit connections along the corridor is consistent with the TAMC, MST, City of Marina, City of Sand City, City of Seaside, and Monterey County’s planning documents, including the respective circulation elements of each jurisdiction’s general plans. As such, the project will have no significant environmental impacts with respect to program or plan conflicts. See Appendix 2 for more information.
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
No impact. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 addresses new requirements for analyzing vehicle miles traveled (VMT). However, SB 743 guidance issued by the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) states that initiation of new transit service would be exempt from new VMT requirements under CEQA. Transit projects would be expected to reduce regional VMT and therefore result in beneficial impacts. See Appendix 2 for additional information.
445
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 51
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than significant impact. The project will introduce SURF! buses along a new route where bus traffic currently does not exist. Along Palm Avenue and Marina Drive in Marina (Segment 1) buses would be traveling at low speeds through this section as they approach and depart the new platforms. Pedestrian crossings of the bus lanes in this location (as well as the crossings at the 5th Street underpass and near the new California Avenue roundabout) have been designed for safety by installing stops and lighting infrastructure, and by placing the crossings in locations where buses are traveling at slow speeds. Gates and other infrastructure have been designed to prevent inadvertent access onto the bus lanes by private vehicles, and the roundabout has been designed to meet standards for bus movements. New signalization at Playa Avenue/California Avenue should also result in better and safer traffic flow compared to the existing stop controls. With these design and safety features, potential impacts are less than significant.
d) Result in inadequate emergency access?
No impact. Where the SURF! route accesses public roadways, the 10-minute headways will have little effect on traffic operations and will not impede emergency access at any location or emergency vehicle movements. Within the TAMC corridor, the project may provide an alternative access for emergency vehicles if Highway 1 is closed or heavily congested.
446
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 52

4.18 Tribal Cultural Resources

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code section
21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in
terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to
a California Native American tribe, and that
is:
i) Listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)?
X
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency,
in its discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying
the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of
Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the
lead agency shall consider the significance of
the resource to a California Native American
tribe?
X
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
i)Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k)? 447
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 53
ii) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe?
Potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated. Please see Section 4.5 of this Initial Study (Cultural Resources) and Appendix 8. While no prehistoric sites have been identified within or near the project alignment (with the exception of one recorded that has not been located by current studies and is assumed to be destroyed), the potential remains to uncover or disturb previously unknown resources during the construction phase of the project. Mitigation measures MM CR-1 and MM CR-2 are in place if such resources are discovered during construction. See Appendix 8 for additional information. 448
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 54

4.19 Utilities and Service Systems

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project:
a) Require or result in the relocation or
construction of new or expanded water,
wastewater treatment or storm water
drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
X
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to
serve the project and reasonably
foreseeable future development during
normal, dry and multiple dry years?
X
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater
treatment provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has adequate
capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing
commitments?
X
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or
local standards, or in excess of the capacity
of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste reduction
goals?
X
e) Comply with federal, state, and local
management and reduction statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
X
a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects?
449
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 55
Less than significant impact. Construction of the project will not require the extension or installation of traditional wet utility systems (water and wastewater) as those services are not essential to busway operations. However, the project will require street/busway/pedestrian lighting (primarily at the Palm/Del Monte bus stop, 5th Street Station and California Avenue Roundabout). As discussed in Appendix 3, restrooms could be desired at the 5th Street Station in the future. Should restrooms be pursued, MST would seek water and wastewater connections from the City of Marina.

Near the Palm/Del Monte location, an existing storm drain outlet discharging onto Marina Drive may be routed to an existing storm drain to avoid potential conflicts with busway/platform construction and to improve localized drainage in this immediate area. No other major existing utility systems or major infrastructure will require relocation to construct the project. The railroad tracks will remain in place. b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years? c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
No impact. The project will not require a water supply or generate wastewater. As discussed in Appendix 3, restrooms could be preferred for the 5th Street Station in the future. Should restrooms be pursued, MST would seek water and wastewater connections from the City of Marina. d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
Less than significant impact. The project will result in small amounts of solid construction waste but will not create a permanent waste stream. This temporary and limited amount of construction waste will not exceed standards, local infrastructure, or negatively impact solid waste reduction goals and regulations. The solid waste from construction activities will be properly disposed of according to current law. As discussed above, the busway project is a transit project that will transport people when in operation and would not generate significant amounts of solid waste. Solid waste from operations would be limited to trash receptacles at the stations and stops. 450
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 56

4.20 Wildfire

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
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 adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
X
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other
factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and
thereby expose project occupants to,
pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or
the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
X
c) Require the installation or maintenance of
associated infrastructure (such as roads,
fuel breaks, emergency water sources,
power lines or other utilities) that may
exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the
environment?
X
d) Expose people or structures to significant
risks, including downslope or downstream
flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff,
post-fire slope instability, or drainage
changes?
X
a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? 451
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 57
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No impact. The busway project is located in an urbanized area and within the disturbed coastal dune environment parallel to Highway 1. The project is not located in a high fire hazard severity zone. With no significant sources of fuel – and the fact that the project will not introduce a permanent population – this issue has been removed from further analysis.
452
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 58

4.21 Mandatory Findings of Significance

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Issues
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Does the project:
a) Have the potential to substantially degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife
species, cause a fish or wildlife population to
drop below 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?
X
b) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects)?
X
c) Does the project have environmental effects
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
X
a) Have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below 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?
Less than significant impact with mitigation incorporated. As addressed under Biological Resources the project is immediately adjacent to environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) that include coastal 453
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 59
scrub and dune scrub habitats that occur along the California coastal zone. The project would impact rare and endangered plant species and potentially effect special status animal species during construction. However, the project as designed and mitigated through the federal Section 7 permit process will fully mitigate these species impacts through habitat restoration and other measures. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)? Less than significant impact. The project is a busway and bus rapid transit project that is unique in terms of use and geography. The incremental effects as described in this Initial Study are largely site specific and will not combine with the effects of other related projects to create cumulatively considerable effects. Other nearby, related or reasonably foreseeable projects could include the North Fremont Street roadway improvements that have recently been constructed, and the FORTAG regional trail that will be near the project along Canyon Del Rey Boulevard. These projects provide some level of cumulative benefit as they provide opportunities for non-motorized travel, reductions in greenhouse gasses and vehicle miles travelled, and enhanced trail connections. In terms of construction, construction timelines are not concurrent with these projects, limiting the potential to combine to create a cumulatively considerable effect.
c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Less than significant impact. As evidenced within this initial study and appendices to the NOE, the project has little potential to cause adverse effects on human beings from environmental concerns such as air quality, noise or exposure to geologic or hazardous materials risks. The nature of the project will not generate a new or permanent population that will be exposed to environmental concerns, will not use or transport hazardous materials, or adversely affect emergency response plans. 454
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 60

5.0 REPORT PREPARERS
Lead Agency
Monterey-Salinas Transit
Michelle Overmeyer, Director of Planning and Innovation Lisa Rheinheimer, Assistant General Manager
Responsible Agency
Transportation Agency for Monterey County
Madilyn Jacobsen, Transportation Planner
Consultants
Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
10 Almaden Boulevard, Suite 1250
San Jose, CA 95113
Frederik Venter, P.E., Vice President/Traffic Engineer
Tad Stearn, CEQA Project Manager
Ace Malisos, Technical Manager
Sophia Lai, Environmental Analyst
Noemi Wyss, Environmental Analyst
Denise Duffy & Associates
Jami Davis, Senior Environmental Scientist
Liz Camilo, Assistant Environmental Scientist
Erin Harwayne, Senior Project Manager/Environmental Planner/Scientist 455
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 61

6.0 REFERENCES
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 1987. California Vehicle Noise Emission Levels. _____. 2002. Transportation Related Earthborne Vibrations. _____. 2013. Technical Noise Supplement to the Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol. _____. 2013. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. _____. 2015. State Scenic Highway Program. Available at:
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/faq.htm, accessed September 14, 2015.
_____. 2020. Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol.

California Department of Water Resources. 2020. Water Data Library Station Map. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/2014_16state_ir_reports/categ ory5_report.shtml. Accessed December 12, 2020.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2016. California Emissions Estimator Model: User’s Guide, Version 2013.2. Available at: http://www.caleemod.com/ _____. January 2008. CEQA and Climate Change: Addressing Climate Change through California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Available at: http://opr.ca.gov/docs/june08-ceqa.pdf CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan, Framework for Change, as Approved December 2008, Pursuant to AB32. Available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scopingplan.htm
_____. 2010a. Current Air Quality Standards. http://www.arb.ca.gov/html/ds.htm. _____. 2010b. iADAM Air Quality Data Statistics. http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/. _____. 2007. Resolution 07-19 (July 19) regarding CCR Title 13, Article 4.8, Chapter 9, Section 2449:
http://info.sen.ca.gov
_____. 2017. California’s 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan. Available at:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping_plan_2017.pdf. _____. 2017. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data – 2017 Edition. Available at:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/data.htm
CAL FIRE (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection). 2008. Fire and Resource Assessment Program (FRAP) data set: “Fire Perimeters” Metadata version 07_1. http://frap.cdf.ca.gov/data/frapgisdata/download.asp?rec=fire California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) Records Search Results. September 2020. 456
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 62
Cal OES (California Office of Emergency Services). 2020. MyPlan Internet Mapping Tool. Available at:
https://www.caloes.ca.gov/cal-oes-divisions/hazard-mitigation/myplan-internet-mapping-tool.

Accessed December 22, 2020.

California Water Quality Control Board. 2019. Water Quality Control Plan for the Central Coastal Basin (Basin Plan). Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/publications_forms/publications/basin_plan/. _____. 2020. Watershed Management Zones and Spatial data Coverages for Monterey County. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/water_issues/programs/stormwater/docs/lid/lid _hydromod_charette_index.html#watershed_mgmt_zones
CDM Smith. Final Project Report for the Monterey Bay Area Feasibility Study of Bus on Shoulder Operations on State Route 1 and the Monterey Branch Line. June 2018.

City of Marina. 1982. Local Coastal Program Volume I Land Use Plan (certified 1982, amended November 2013).
_____. 2000. City of Marina General Plan.
_____. 2019. Marina Municipal Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. _____. 2013. City of Marina Local Coastal Program Volume I Land Use Plan. Certified 1982 and Reformatted November 2013.
_____. 2013. City of Marina Local Coastal Program Volume II Implementation Plan. Certified 1982 and Reformatted November 2013.
_____. 2020. Marina Municipal Code, current through Ordinance 2020-06, passed October 24, 2020.

County of Monterey. 1983. Carmel Area Land Use Plan. Certified 1983, as amended 1995. _____. 2008. Draft Environmental Impact Report for Monterey County 2007 General Plan. _____. 2010. Monterey County General Plan.
_____. 2019. Marina Municipal Airport ALCUP.
_____. 2019. Monterey Regional Airport Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. _____. 2019. Monterey Regional Airport ALUCP.

City of Seaside. 2004. Seaside General Plan.
_____. 2013. City of Seaside Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan (adopted June 2020). _____. 2020. Seaside Municipal Code, current through Ordinance 1083, passed April 2, 2020.

Cyril M. Harris. 1979. Handbook of Noise Control.

Denise Duffy and Associates. 2019. Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Proposed Modifications to the Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project. 457
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 63
_____. 2020. Monterey-Salinas Transit SURF! Busway and Rapid Transit Administrative Draft Biological Resources Report.

Department of Conservation (DOC). 2015. Fault Activity Map of California. Available at:
https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/cgs/fam/. Accessed December 17, 2020.

ESA. 2018. Final EIR/EIS for the CalAM Monterey Peninsula Water Supply Project.

Far Western Anthropological Research Group, Inc. Archaeological Survey Report for the Monterey Peninsula Light Rail Transit Project. December 2010. (on file with MST and TAMC) Federal Interagency Committee on Noise. 1992. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues, August 1992.

FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2019. FIRM Map. Available at:
https://msc.fema.gov/portal/search?AddressQuery=pacific%20grove%2C%20ca#searchresultsa nchor
FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2017. Noise Fundamentals. Available at: FHWA, Noise Fundamentals, 2017. Available at:
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environMent/noise/regulations_and_guidance/polguide/polguide02 .cfm
FTA (Federal Transit Administration). 2018. Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual.

Available at: https://www.transit.dot.gov/sites/fta.dot.gov/files/docs/researchinnovation/118131/transit-noise-and-vibration-impact-assessment-manual-fta-report-no0123_0.pdf HUD (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development). 2009. Noise Guidebook. Available at:
https://www.hudexchange.info/resource/313/hud-noise-guidebook/.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2007. Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report, the Fourth IPCC Assessment Report. Available at: http://www.ipccnggip.iges.or.jp/public/index.html _____. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report, the Fifth IPCC Assessment Report. Available at:
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar5/
James P. Cowan. 1994. Handbook of Environmental Acoustics.

JRP Historical Consulting, LLC. Draft Historic Resources Inventory and Evaluation Report for the Monterey Peninsula Light Rail Transit Project. November 2010.

Kimley-Horn. 2002. MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project Transportation Impact Analysis, December 2020.

Kimley-Horn. 15% Design Package for the MST SURF! Bus and Bus Rapid Transit Project. September 2020.

Kleinfelder. 2010. Geotechnical Evaluation Report for the Monterey Peninsula Light Rail Project. 458
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 64
_____. 2010. Preliminary Corridor Environmental Assessment, TAMC Monterey Branch Line. _____. 2010. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Fort Ord Transfer Parcels. _____. 2010. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, 1965 Del Monte Boulevard and Adjacent Lot.

Monterey County Water Resources Agency. 2006. Monterey County Groundwater Management Plan.

Monterey Fire Safe Council. 2016. Monterey County Community Wildfire Protection Plan.

Monterey One Water. Supplemental Environmental Impact report for the Proposed Modifications to the Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project. November 2019.

National Research Council. 2012. Sea-Level Rise for the Coasts of California, Oregon, and Washington:

Past, Present, and Future. National Academies Press, Washington D.C.

Natural Resources Conservation Service. Soil Survey of Monterey County, California. Available at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/WssProduct/4yx5fzzjfqacbogftignc040/4yx5fzzjfqacbogf tignc040/20191107_18253306636_31_Soil_Map.pdf. Accessed December 17, 2020. _____. 2020. Custom Soil Resource Report for Monterey County, California. Available at:
https://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/WebSoilSurvey.aspx. Accessed December 23, 2020.

Parsons. 2010. Hydrology, Floodplain, Water Quality, and Stormwater Runoff Impact Analysis for the Monterey Peninsula Light Rail Project.
_____. Paleontological Resource Assessment Report for the Monterey Peninsula Light Rail Project.

Pueblo Water Resources. 2013. Summary of Operations Monterey Peninsula ASR Project. Water Year 2012. Prepared for Monterey Peninsula Water Management District.

RWQCB (Central Coast Regional water Quality Control Board). 2019. Central Coast Region-Basin Plan.

Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/publications_forms/publications/basin_plan/doc s/2019_basin_plan_r3_complete_webaccess.pdf.

Rincon Consultants. 2020. Final Environmental Impact Report for the Fort Ord Regional Trail and Greenway Project.

Sand City. 1982. Sand City Local Coastal Program (certified 1982). _____. 2002. Sand City General Plan.

Sand City/EMC Planning Group. 2020. Sand City Sustainable Transportation Plan Existing Conditions Report.

State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). 2013. Post-Construction Stormwater Management Requirements for Development Projects in the Central Coast Region. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralcoast/water_issues/programs/stormwater/docs/lid/hy dromod_lid_docs/2013_0032_attach1_post_construction_requirements.pdf. Accessed December 18, 2020.
459
MST SURF! Busway and Bus Rapid Transit Project
Monterey-Salinas Transit Environmental Initial Study
June 2021 Page 65
_____. 2016. 2014 and 2016 California 303(d) List of Water Quality Limited Segments. Available at:
https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/tmdl/2014_16state_ir_reports/categ ory5_report.shtml.
_____. 2020. Geotracker - Saucito Land Co. (T0605300034). https://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/profile_report.asp?global_id=T0605300034. Accessed on January 8, 2021.

TAMC. Monterey Peninsula Light Rail Project EA/EIR (Administrative Draft - on file with MST and TAMC) USEPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency). 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety.

Available at: https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPDF.cgi/2000L3LN.PDF?Dockey=2000L3LN.PDF. _____. 1996. Press Release: EPA Takes Final Step in Phaseout of Leaded Gasoline. Available online:
http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-takes-final-step-phaseout-leaded-gasoline. January 29. _____. 2013. Policy Assessment for the Review of the Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards.

Available at:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/sab/sabproduct.nsf/46963ceebabd621905256cae0053d5c6/ab1476f9 7f51b242852578b90065bb04!OpenDocument
_____. 2015. 40 CFR Parts 50, 51, 52, 53 and 58. RIN 2060-AP38. National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone. Available online:
http://www3.epa.gov/airquality/ozonepollution/pdfs/20151001fr.pdf. _____. April 2018. Overview of Greenhouse Gases. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/overview-greenhouse-gases _____. April 2018. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks. Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/inventory-us-greenhouse-gas-emissions-and-sinks-1990- 2016
United States Geological Survey (USGS). 2020. Earthquake Hazards Program, National Seismic Hazard Map website. http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/. Accessed December 17, 2020. _____. 2016. I. Available at: https://nepassisttool.epa.gov/. Accessed December 23, 2020. _____. 2020. National Map Viewer. Available at: https://viewer.nationalmap.gov/advanced-viewer/.

Accessed September 28, 2020.
460
461
462

AGENDA ITEM
10A.

Consideration and Approval for the
Cancellation of the August 6, 2024 Regular
City Council Meeting
463

AGENDA ITEM
10B.

Approve a Resolution Establishing a
Façade Improvement Program
464
City of Sand City

STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Vibeke Norgaard, City Manager
SUBJECT: Business Façade Improvement Program
DATE: June 18, 2024
_______________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND:

On February 4, 2024, City Council Meeting, Council approved a five-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) that includes a Façade Improvement Program.

On May 7, 2024, the City Council allocated $47,245.50 of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding to support a Façade Improvement Program.

DISCUSSION:

Designed as an economic development incentive, the Façade Improvement Program is intended to help building owners and merchants keep storefronts looking attractive and inviting to the public.

The Sand City Façade Improvement Program is intended to reimburse participants for the cost of improvements that enhance the physical appearance of storefronts.

The City will reimburse up to a maximum of $5,000 for eligible building restoration activities as described more fully in Exhibit A1. Applications will be processed in the order received and funding is limited to the program allocation. Once funds are exhausted or fully allocated, no additional applications will be processed.

The process involves the following basic steps:
 Owner/tenant application
 City verification of project eligibility
 Applicant cost estimating (bids obtained including compliance with prevailing wage requirements), contracting, City permitting
 City/Owner/Tenant Agreement
 Project completion, inspection, cost verification
465
 Owner invoicing and City Reimbursement
CEQA STATUS:

This action does not constitute a "project" as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines section 15378. Individual repair and maintenance activities funded by the program are Categorically Exempt in pursuant to Guideline Section 15301 (existing facilities) and 15302 (replacement or reconstruction) FISCAL IMPACT:

The Fiscal Year 2024-2025 budget includes $47,245.50 of ARPA funding for the Façade Improvement Program.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the approval of the Sand City Façade Improvement Program ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Exhibit A1 Draft Program Details

3. Exhibit A2 Draft Program Application
5741064.1
466

CITY OF SAND CITY
RESOLUTION SC___, 2024
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAND CITY ESTABLISHING A FAÇADE

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
WHEREAS, on May 7, 2024 the City Council adopted Resolution SC 24-24 authorizing the City Manager to allocate $47, 245.50 to establish a business façade improvement program for eligible small businesses in Sand City; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed program elements for a façade improvement program identified in Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, in establishing the façade improvement program referenced in Exhibit A, it is the intent of the City Council to benefit the economic well-being of the City and individual businesses by facilitating improvements that contribute to the attractiveness of commercial areas and buildings through necessary repair and maintenance; and WHEREAS, the program outlined in Exhibit A is not a project pursuant CEQA Guidelines section 15378 (c), and is otherwise Exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.1 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15268 (ministerial projects). Individual repair and maintenance activities funded by the program are Categorically Exempt additionally pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (existing facilities) and 15302 (replacement or reconstruction).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council authorizes the City Manager to establish and administer a façade improvement program in substantially the same form as that outlined in Exhibit A.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the City Council that the City Manager is authorized to make procedural changes in the administration of the program outlined in Exhibit A as deemed necessary by the City Manager for effective and equitable distribution of funds consistent with the above stated intent of the City Council.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Sand City this 18, day of June, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN: APPROVED:
_______________________
Mary Ann Carbone, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED: ____________________
467
___________________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
5741073.1
468

Explanation
The City of Sand City is pleased to announce the availability of financial assistance to eligible participants to improve and enhance the physical appearance of the exterior of businesses within commercial areas throughout the City.

Environmental conditions result in the need for repair and maintenance of the buildings exteriors including paint, awnings, signs, windows, entries and doorways, and cladding are in constant need of maintenance and repair. The Façade Improvement Program is an economic development incentive that assists owners and merchants to keep storefronts looking attractive and inviting.

Sand City has designed the program to benefit both building owners and tenants by reimbursing some, or all, of the cost of maintenance and repair and construction, on a case - by - case basis. The City will reimburse up to a maximum of $5,000 upon completion of eligible improvements.

The City reserves the right to cancel or modify this Program at any time prior to funding approval, without notice.

All applications must be submitted to the City of Sand City Planning Department, 1 Pendergrass Way, Sand City, CA 93955, by 5:00PM Monday, September 30th, 2024.

Exhibit A1
Draft
City of Sand City Façade Improvement Program

469
Eligible Projects
A. Eligible Properties
Applications may be submitted for commercial properties, either owner or tenant occupied.  Property must be maintained for commercial use.
 Mixed use buildings with retail/commercial storefront uses may be considered.

B. Eligible Applicants
Commercial property and business owners located in any commercial zoning district may apply for assistance. Tenants must have an executed lease and the property owner's approval.

C. Eligible Project/Activities
Facade Improvement funds are for building improvement projects. All improvements must be permanent or fixed and must comply with applicable design standards, guidelines and Building Code regulations. Eligible improvements may include, but are not limited to:
 Complete facade rehabilitation;
 Replacement of broken window panes, aluminum or wood windows and broken store front glass;  Repointing of old brick;
 Removal of non-conforming signage;
 Scraping, priming, and painting of window frames, cornice and storefront;  Painting of surfaces that have been previouslypainted;  Repair or replacement of deteriorating signs and brackets when attached to the building;  Repair or replacement of missing or broken tile;
 Repair or replacement of worn awnings or canopies;
 Removal of metal slipcovers to expose original facade materials;  Rehabilitation of the upper facade and display areas or side walls of a building may also be eligible if street level improvements are approved.
 Other minor repairs when incidental to overall façade improvements suchas:

Professional, architectural, and City permit fees may be included in the total improvement costs.

D. Non Eligible Project/Activities
The following improvements are not eligible for reimbursement.  Parking lots;
 Landscaping;
 Fencing;
 Security improvements;
 Roofs or re-roofing when not visible from the street;  Work which has been performed or which has been placed under contract prior to approval of an application  Additions that increase the building footprint by 20% or more  Technology installation and upgrades
 Interior repairs and finish-out construction
470
Basic Procedures
STEP 1 – Applicant eligibility
 Business or commercial property owners are eligible to apply for Facade Improvement funds if the business is 1 - located within any commercial or mixed-use Zoning District; and 2 - utilized for commercial purpose (this does NOT include residences or apartments).
 For information on area boundaries see City’s Official Zoning Map.  Applicant meets with representatives of the Planning Department. • To be eligible for funds, applicant must have approval of the proposed work. • Planning Department staff will work with applicant, once selected, to create a design that satisfies all.
 If needed, a meeting at the site with the applicant, the applicant's contractor and staff can be arranged to discuss the application process, area design guidelines and/or to develop a preliminary design concept.

STEP 2 – Complete the Application
 The application (enclosed herein) is to be completed by the applicant (business owner, property owner or tenant).

A completed application must contain applicant information, property information, and project information.

Incomplete applications will not be accepted.
 A written bid per scope of work is required. If applicable, any bids should factor in prevailing wage, and any project for $1,000 or more must pay the general prevailing rate of per diem wages for work of a similar character pursuant to Labor Code section 1771.
 Contractor’s bidding must have the following:
 General Liability Insurance
 Not be suspended or debarred from the license
 Not be a family member of the applicant
 Must use AIA standard contract
 All applications must be submitted to the City of Sand City Planning Department by 5:00PM Monday, September 30th, 2024.
 Completed applications should be submitted in personat:

City of Sand City
Planning Department
1 Pendergrass Way
Sand City, CA 93955
 Once an application is received, staff will confirm eligibility of the site and the proposed scope of work, notify the applicant that the application has been received and is under review and arrange a Project Review meeting.  Projects that are eligible for funding will be considered on a first come, first served basis until funding is either exhausted or fully allocated. Following approval, projects will be required to show proof of payment prior to the issuance of a reimbursement.

Applications may be limited due to funding availability.

STEP 3 – Project Review and Contract Execution
 A Project Review meeting is required to be conducted prior to contract execution and constructionbeginning.  Staff will conduct the Project Review meeting with the applicant to review the application. A site visit may also be helpful but is not required.
 The project will then be submitted the City’s Design Review Committee for final approval. Staff will discuss the merits of the project and form a recommendation based on the application review criteria to either fund the project or require the applicant to make changes and re-submit.  If approved, a Funding Agreement (contract) will be prepared by City staff. Applicant must furnish copies of all 471
required endorsements and an original completed Certificate(s) of Insurance to the Community Development Department prior to contract preparation of the Funding Agreement.  The applicant and the City sign the Funding Agreement. A fully executed Agreement will be returned to the applicant.
 Construction started prior to the signing of the contract will void the agreement. 472
STEP 4 - Construction
 If the improvements require a building permit, or approval from any other department or commission, the applicant must comply.
 Staff may monitor the progress and make periodic inspections during the project.

STEP 5 - Reimbursement
 Upon completion of the work, the applicant will contact staff to conduct a final inspection. If all are satisfied with the work, the City and applicant will sign off on completion of the improvement. Please note that this inspection is in addition to, and shall not substitute for any inspections required by the Building Division or any other department or agency.
 The applicant will complete the Project Completion form and submit it along with copies of invoices, cancelled checks (cash payments are not accepted as proof of payment), requesting reimbursement of applicable costs.

Applicant must submit a copy of any closed permit when requesting reimbursement.  When all work and documentation is received, City staff will process payment. A check will be sent to the applicant.
473
Application Review Criteria
Applications will be reviewed based on the program objectives and the following:

A. Project Location
Is this project located within a mixed-use or commercial Zoning District? B. Extent of rehabilitation work
Does this project promote consistency in design and create a fresh and aesthetically pleasing environment? Will this project entail appropriate exterior rehabilitation of a building and bring it up to code? C. Impact of project
Will this project visually impact the block and streetscape and eliminate blight? Will this project reduce the perception of lack of investment? Will the project help to reverse the deterioration of commercial structures in the area? Will the project stimulate new, private investment and economic growth? D. Additional investment
Does or has the applicant made additional investments in this property or business? E. Current/proposed use
Is the current or proposed use for retail, restaurant, or other retail or commercial serving purpose? 474
Exhibit A2

CITY OF SAND CITY
Façade Improvement Program Application
1 Pendergrass Way, Sand City, CA 93955
(831)394-3054 | [email protected] | www.sandcity.org A
P
P
LICA
N
T
/
O
W
N
E
R
Business Name:

Business Address: Business License #
Façade Improvement Description:
 Awning  Sign
 Paint  Door/Entry
 Woodwork  Cleaning
 Glass  Other
Project Cost:

Estimated cost of improvements
Estimated start and completion date
Who should the reimbursement check be made out to?
Applicant Owner (if different from owner)
Name: Name:

Phone: Phone:

Email: Email:

NO WORK TO BE CONDUCTED UNTIL CITY AUTHORIZES WORK.

P
LA
N
NIN
G
STA
F
F
Permit Information Yes No
Is an encroachment permit required?  
Does the work require a building permit?  
Does the work require a planning permit?  
Date application received:

CERTIFICATION – I, the undersigned, under penalty of perjury, depose and certify that I am the applicant for this request, property owner approves this application and that all statements contained herein, including all documents and plans sub in connection with this application, are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. I further acknowledge it is my responsibility to determine whether additional permits are required.

Applicant Signature: Date:

Owner Signature (required): Date: Updated:
7/1/2024
Date Received:
475

AGENDA ITEM
10C.

Approve a Resolution Approving the City's
Fiscal Year 2023-2024 General Employees
Salary Schedule and the City's 2022-2024
POA Salary Schedule
476
City of Sand City

STAFF REPORT
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: Vibeke Norgaard, City Manager
SUBJECT: Resolution to Approve Fiscal Year 2023-2024 Salary Schedule for General Employees, and 2022-2024 Salary Schedule for POA
DATE: June 18, 2024
_______________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

State law requires that Cities contracting with CalPERS adopt a publicly available pay schedule that identifies the title for every employee position at the City, shows the pay rate for each position, and indicates the effective date of any revisions. (2 CCR 570.5(a)(1)-(8)).

The schedule is required to be posted on the City’s website. The City established a pay schedule in 1991 (Resolution SC-29, 1991) and has updated it by resolution.

Per the employment contract with the Chief of Police effective July 1, 2023, Item E; Section

3. Salary and Compensation, the Chief’s salary can be reviewed annually and may be adjusted as determined by the City based on his performance, economic conditions, or other factors as may be determined by the City Manager. June 30, 2024, will mark one year that Chief Honda has held the Police Chief position with the City of Sand City. In this year, the Chief has shown that he is an asset to the City of Sand City. He has accomplished several internal audits, DOJ and POST audits, completed AB 481 requirements that had been past due, among many other accomplishments. Staff recommends that City Council recognize this exemplary performance with the requested salary schedule amendment of $199,734.50 annually for the Police Chief.

The City currently has a filled position titled, “Administrative Assistant/Account & Permit Technician” (annual salary $54,364.44-$69,384.33). This job title/classification is broad and creates difficulty in assigning appropriate tasks related to the position. Staff recommends eliminating the current title of Administrative Assistant/Account & Permit Technician” and create a new job title/classification of “Accounting Technician” that will have more defined and higher level responsibilities, as well as introducing higher level accounting work and the inclusion of more complex tasks.
477
The Accounting Technician position at nearby local agencies has an average salary range of $65,416-$79,075. Staff is recommending the Accounting Technician salary range with the City of Sand City be adjusted to $58,168-$74,239.

The resolution would authorize the City Manager to prepare a job description for this position. The essential functions and responsibilities of the new Accounting Technician would be to maintain, reconcile and analyze ledgers and accounting reports, perform complex tasks pertaining to accounts receivable, grants, and loans, maintain, review, and reconcile expenditure records, preparing purchase orders, maintain vendor and purchase order files, among other duties related to the current position.

The proposed FY 2023-2024 General Employees Salary Schedule reflects the following changes:
 Staff is requesting an amendment to the salary schedule to add an Accounting Technician (annual salary range of $58,168-$74,239).
 The amendment would remove the position of Administrative Assistant/Account & Permit Technician (annual salary $54,364-$69,384).

The proposed FY 2022-2024 POA Salary Schedule reflects the following changes:
 Staff is requesting an amendment to the salary schedule to adjust the Police Chief Salary to $199,734.50.

CEQA:

This action does not constitute a "project" as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines section 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The amendment for the new position of Accounting Technician will have an impact to the budget of $4,855 annually which has already been included in the FY 24/25 budget. The amendment to the Police Chief salary range will have an impact to the budget of $22,325 annually which has already been included in the FY 24/25 budget.

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the Council approve the FY 2023-2024 General Employees Salary Schedule and the FY 2022-2024 POA Salary Schedule Resolution.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. 2023-24 General Employees Salary Schedule

3. 2022-24 POA Salary Schedule
478

CITY OF SAND CITY
RESOLUTION SC 24-___, 2024
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAND CITY APPROVING THE CITY’S FISCAL YEAR 2023-2024 GENERAL EMPLOYEES SALARY SCHEDULE AND THE CITY’S 2022-2024 POA SALARY SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, California Code of Regulations, Title 2, Section 570.5 requires that governing bodies of local agencies contracting with CalPERS adopt a publicly available pay schedule; and
WHEREAS, the City of Sand City established a salary schedule for General City employees by Resolution SC-29, 1991 and revised the salary schedule in Resolutions SC 94-08, 1984; 97-66, 1997; 99-51, 1999; 01-61, 2001; 02-53,2002; 05-49, 2005; 07-99, 2007; 10-75, 2010; 15-46, 2015; 18-87, 2018; 18-92, 2018; 18-92, 2018; 20-86, 2020; 21- 46, 2021; 22-13, 2022; 23-23, 2023; 23-35, 2023; 23-52, 2023; and 24-25, 2024; and WHEREAS, the City of Sand City established a salary schedule for POA employees by Resolution SC-29, 1991 and revised the salary schedule in Resolutions SC 94-08, 1984; 97-66, 1997; 99-51, 1999; 01-61, 2001; 02-53, 2002; 05-49, 2005; 07-99, 2007; 10-75, 2010; 15-46, 2015; 18-87, 2018; 20-86, 2020; 21-46, 2021; 23-26, 2023; and 24-25, 2024.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of Sand City does hereby adopt the revised salary schedules attached to this resolution and authorizes the City Manager to take all necessary actions to create a position for a Police Administrative Analyst.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Sand City this ___, day of June, 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Mary Ann Carbone, Mayor
ATTEST:

DATED: ____________________
___________________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
479
Pay Period Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Maxium
Step 6
36 Maintenance Worker II Hourly 25.4840 26.7582 28.0961 29.5009 30.9760 32.5248 Monthly 4,417.23 4,638.09 4,870.00 5,113.50 5,369.17 5,637.63 Annual 53,006.76 55,657.10 58,439.95 61,361.95 64,430.05 67,651.55 39 Administrative Assistant/ Hourly 26.1360 27.4428 28.8149 30.2557 31.7685 33.3569 Account and Monthly 4,530.37 4,756.89 4,994.73 5,244.47 5,506.69 5,782.03 Permit Technician Annual 54,364.44 57,082.66 59,936.80 62,933.63 66,080.32 69,384.33 39 Accounting Technician Hourly 27.9655 29.3638 30.8320 32.3736 33.9922 35.6919 Monthly 4,847.35 5,089.72 5,344.21 5,611.42 5,891.99 6,186.59 Annual 58,168.24 61,076.65 64,130.48 67,337.01 70,703.86 74,239.05 40 Maintenance Worker III Hourly 27.4760 28.8498 30.2923 31.8069 33.3972 35.0671 Monthly 4,762.66 5,000.79 5,250.83 5,513.37 5,789.04 6,078.50 Annual 57,151.92 60,009.52 63,009.99 66,160.49 69,468.52 72,941.94 46 Records Administrative Hourly 33.2430 34.9052 36.6504 38.4829 40.4071 42.4274 Analyst Monthly 5,762.13 6,050.24 6,352.75 6,670.39 7,003.91 7,354.10 Annual 69,145.56 72,602.84 76,232.98 80,044.63 84,046.86 88,249.20 48 Deputy City Clerk Hourly 34.2730 35.9867 37.7860 39.6753 41.6590 43.7420 Monthly 5,940.68 6,237.71 6,549.60 6,877.08 7,220.93 7,581.98 Annual 71,288.16 74,852.57 78,595.20 82,524.96 86,651.20 90,983.76 50 Public Works Manager* Hourly 42.7010 44.8361 47.0779 49.4317 51.9033 54.4985 Monthly 7,401.67 7,771.75 8,160.34 8,568.36 8,996.78 9,446.62 Annual 88,820.04 93,261.04 97,924.09 102,820.30 107,961.31 113,359.38 52 Finance Manager* Hourly 42.7010 44.8361 47.0779 49.4317 51.9033 54.4985 Monthly 7,401.67 7,771.75 8,160.34 8,568.36 8,996.78 9,446.62 Annual 88,820.04 93,261.04 97,924.09 102,820.30 107,961.31 113,359.38 71 Risk Manager/* Hourly 42.7010 44.8361 47.0779 49.4317 51.9033 54.4985 Human Resources Monthly 7,401.67 7,771.75 8,160.34 8,568.36 8,996.78 9,446.62 Annual 88,820.04 93,261.04 97,924.09 102,820.30 107,961.31 113,359.38 54 City Planner* Hourly 39.7460 41.7333 43.8200 46.0110 48.3115 50.7271 Monthly 6,889.38 7,233.85 7,595.54 7,975.32 8,374.08 8,792.79 Annual 82,672.56 86,806.19 91,146.50 95,703.82 100,489.01 105,513.46 57 City Clerk* Hourly 42.7520 44.8896 47.1341 49.4908 51.9653 54.5636 Monthly 7,410.50 7,781.03 8,170.08 8,578.58 9,007.51 9,457.88 Annual 88,926.00 93,372.30 98,040.92 102,942.96 108,090.11 113,494.61 72 Dir. Of Community Dev/* Hourly 68.2440 71.6562 75.2390 79.0010 82.9510 87.0986 Assistant City Manager Monthly 11,829.03 12,420.48 13,041.51 13,693.58 14,378.26 15,097.17 Annual 141,948.36 149,045.78 156,498.07 164,322.97 172,539.12 181,166.07 Pay Period Rate
Monthly 18,000.00 *Denotes exempt positions
Annual 216,000.00
City Attorney* Monthly 16,032.89
Annual 192,394.65
Employees not on step plan
City Manager*
Amended: Resolution SC - 29, 1991; 94-08, 1994; 97-66, 1997; 99-51, 1999; 01-61, 2001; 02-53, 2002; 05-49, 2005; 07-99, 2007; 10-75, 2010; 15-46, 2015; 18-87, 2018; 18-92, 2018; 20-86, 2020; 21-46, 2021; 22-13, 2022; 23-23, 2023; 23-35, 2023; 23-52, 2023; 24-25, 2024; 24___, 2024 Effective June 18, 2024 2023-2024 General Employees
Range Placement Table

2.5% Between Ranges; 5% Between Steps
Range #
Recommended Title
6/11/2024
480
Pay Period Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5 Maxium
Step 6
36 Reserves Hourly 28.72 30.16 31.66 33.25 34.91 36.65
50 Police Officer 1 Hourly 48.5210 50.9471 53.4944 56.1691 58.9776 61.9265 Monthly 8,410.42 8,830.94 9,272.49 9,736.11 10,222.92 10,734.06 Annual 100,925.04 105,971.29 111,269.86 116,833.35 122,675.02 128,808.77 56 Police Sergeant Hourly 56.8160 59.6568 62.6396 65.7716 69.0602 72.5132 Monthly 9,848.19 10,340.60 10,857.63 11,400.51 11,970.54 12,569.06 Annual 118,178.28 124,087.19 130,291.55 136,806.13 143,646.44 150,828.76 62 Police Commander Hourly 65.8890 69.1835 72.6426 76.2748 80.0885 84.0929 Monthly 11,420.89 11,991.93 12,591.53 13,221.11 13,882.16 14,576.27 Annual 137,050.68 143,903.21 151,098.37 158,653.29 166,585.96 174,915.26 Exempt Employees:

Police Chief
Monthly $16,644.54
Annual $199,734.50
2022-2024 Police Officers
Range Placement Table

2.5% Between Ranges; 5% Between Steps
Recommended Title
Range #
Amended: Resolution SC - 29, 1991; 94-08, 1994; 97-66, 1997; 99-51, 1999; 01-61, 2001; 02-53, 2002; 05-49, 2005; 07-99, 2007; 10- 75, 2010; 15-46, 2015; 18-87, 2018; 18-92, 2018; 20-86, 2020; 21-46, 2021; 23-26, 2023; 24-25,2024; and 24-____ Effective Date:
06/18/2024
6/11/2024
481

AGENDA ITEM
10D.

Approve a Resolution Authorizing the City
Manager to Enter Into an Agreement with
Motorola Solutions for the Body Worn
Camera/In-Car Video System Purchase in
an Amount not to Exceed $71,170.00
482
City of Sand City

STAFF MEMO
TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council
FROM: David Honda, Chief of Police
SUBJECT: Approval authorizing the City Manager to execute the Motorola Solutions Body Worn Camera/In-Car Video Service Agreement
DATE: June 18, 2024
_______________________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:

In-car Video (ICV) and Body Worn Camera (BWC) systems have become commonplace in modern policing and are standard issued equipment with most California law enforcement agencies. Both systems provide the Sand City Police Department (SCPD) and the public an objective view of officer involved interactions with the public that are essential tools for holding the officers accountable, holding the public accountable, promoting transparency, all of which are important to maintaining trust between the police and the community they serve.

The SCPD currently utilizes an ICV system to monitor vehicle-based enforcement activities and a BWC system to monitor everyday contacts with members of the public.

Both systems are provided by Watch Guard, which is a subsidiary of Motorola Solutions, Inc. The BWC system has been in service with the SCPD since it was approved on April 17, 2018 supplementing the in-car system.

As with all electronic equipment, technological advancements occur rapidly, components become obsolete, and servicing capabilities cease to be available. Our current BWC camera system has become outdated with several upgrades introduced since acquiring the system in 2018. The batteries no longer remain charged between calls for service or other public interactions. The existing server is over 7 years old, and the cameras are over 8 years old. Generally, servers should be replaced every 4 to 5 years to avoid a catastrophic failure and moving to a cloud-based system would help rectify this issue.

The current ICV system is still operational and serviceable; however, two new camera systems are needed to outfit the new patrol cars that are currently on standby for equipment built up.

The BWC technological advancements improve police department operational efficiency and outcomes in providing BWC and ICV footage to the District Attorney’s Office (DA), the media and to the public as requested. When the DA’s Office requests video footage, a SCPD staff member must search the files, download the footage from the server, then upload the footage into a file for the DA’s Office to review. The proposed equipment 483
system upgrade is cloud-based, which allows the DA’s Office to access the footage immediately once permissions are granted. Rather than potentially taking days to provide the DA’s Office with bodycam footage, SCPD can grant them permission to view the footage online, allowing them to access it immediately. With quick access to digital evidence media (DEM), the adjudication of cases will be improved by dramatically cutting the current wait time. In the event there is an alleged use of excessive force, digital footage of the incident will be immediately accessible, limiting the potential for public protests and a media/social media frenzy.

The use of BWCs and ICVs within SCPD for the past 8 years has had a positive impact on officers and has enhanced their safety. BWC implementation has provided officers with improved awareness, safety procedures, and increased their ability to make ethical decisions. The primary goal is to continue to improve Department relations with the public through transparency and accountability. SCPD hopes to continue building trust in the organization through solid procedures and policies in using, retaining, and expunging DEM. SCPD follows best practices when it comes to recording, when and when not to release DEM to the public considering Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requirements and individual civil rights, and how to release that evidence when requested.

The department would purchase eight (8) BWC, two (2) in-car cameras, new docking stations, extra batteries, mounting accessories, software, other equipment necessary for the installation and operation of the system. This package is a 5-year subscription that includes cloud storage, access, extended warranty, and accidental damage replacement.

CEQA:

This action does not constitute a "project" as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines section 15378.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The total cost to the City would be $71,170.00. This includes the upfront cost and a fiveyear subscription. Upfront costs for hardware, accessories, and implementation, plus the year one subscription fee is $29,698.00. Subscription fees for years two through five would be $10,368.00 annually.

Labor for installation of the in-car cameras and office hardware is estimated to be an additional $4000.00.

The funds to cover the cost of this proposal are included in the approved fiscal year 24-25 budget and would be allocated from the General Fund Capital Outlay account (10-5010- 08).

RECOMMENDATION:

It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute the Motorola Systems BWC and In-Car Video agreement. 484
ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution

2. Motorola Solutions Body Worn Camera/In-car Video Quote and Service Agreement 485

CITY OF SAND CITY
RESOLUTION SC____ , 2024

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAND CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY

MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS FOR

THE BODY WORN CAMERA/IN-CAR VIDEO SYSTEM PURCHASE IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $71,170.00.

WHEREAS, the Sand City Police Department (SCPD) currently utilizes an In-Car Video (ICV) system to monitor vehicle-based enforcement activities and a Body Worn Camera (BWC) system to monitor everyday contacts with members of the public; and WHEREAS, the use of BWCs and ICVs within SCPD for the past 8 years has had a positive impact on officers and has enhanced their safety and BWC implementation has provided officers with improved awareness, safety procedures, and increased their ability to make ethical decisions; and
WHEREAS, one of SCPD’s primary goals is to continue to improve Department relations with the community it serves through transparency and accountability; and WHEREAS, on April 17, 2018, the City Council approved a resolution approving the purchase and installation of a Body Worn Camera (BWC) system manufactured by Watch Guard, which is a subsidiary of Motorola Solutions, Inc; and WHEREAS, SCPD’s current BWC camera system has become outdated and with all electronic equipment, technological advancements occur rapidly, components become obsolete, and servicing capabilities cease to be available; and WHEREAS, the existing SCPD server is over 7 years old and the cameras are over 8 years old and aging servers should be replaced every 4 to 5 years to avoid a catastrophic failure and moving to a cloud-based system would help rectify this concern.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Sand City hereby authorizes the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Motorola Solutions Body Worn Camera/In-Car Video system purchase and video as a service subscription in an amount not to exceed $71,170.00 and in substantially the same form as that attached as Exhibit A subject to review and approval by the City Attorney.

PASSED AND ADOPTED, at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Sand City, this 18th, day of June 2024 by the following votes:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:
486
-2
Mary Ann Carbone, Mayor
ATTEST:
_________________________
Kerry Lindstrom, City Clerk
487
488
489
490
491
492
493
494
495
496
497
498
499
500
501
502
503
504
505
506
507
508
509
510
511
512
513
514
515
516
517
518
519
520
521
522
523
524
525
526
527
528
529
530
531

Sand City City CouncilJune 18, 2024

Sand City City Council
June 18, 2024