Agenda packet — Seaside City Council, July 7, 2022 (part 4 of 4)

I.2.4 POPULATION
The City of Pacific Grove has a population of 15,090 people, a marginal increase (0.3%) since 2010.

Packet Page 823
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-3 ANNEX I
I.2.5 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
Pacific Grove is a Charter city. The City Council consists of an elected Mayor holding a two‐year term and six Council Members elected at large for four‐year staggered terms. The City Council appoints the City Manager who is the administrative head of the municipal government.

I.2.6 ECONOMY AND TAX BASE
The economy of this primarily residential community is based on tourism and local services, many of which are available in its historic downtown. The City is home to Asilomar State Beach, a narrow 1-mile stretch of sandy beach and rocky coves which provides public access to the shoreline and includes Asilomar Conference Grounds, a National Historic Landmark.

I.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The City of Pacific Grove followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan. In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the City formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process. The City of Pacific Grove held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting to discuss vulnerabilities, mitigation activities that had occurred since the last plan update, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies on May 5, 2021. Key stakeholders present at the meeting included:
• Alyson Hunter, Senior Planner
• Anastazia Aziz, Director Community Development
• Commander Dave Santos, Pacific Grove Police Department • Mohammed Khasimi, IT Director
• Daniel Gho, Public Works Director
I.4 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
The Pacific Grove General Plan was adopted in 1994. The City of Pacific Grove’s land use pattern is well established. The City’s total area is approximately 1,830 acres, excluding that portion of the City that extends into Monterey Bay and Pacific Ocean. The predominant land use in the City of Pacific Grove is residential (46%), and most of the residences are single‐family dwellings. Commercial/Professional land uses account for approximately 5% of the land in the City. A small portion of the City along its south border is planned and zoned for industrial use. The City limits include a significant amount of land devoted to parks and natural areas (19%), including Pacific Grove Golf Course, Asilomar State Beach, and George Washington Park. 99% of the City’s coastline allows for public access. No significant agricultural areas exist in, or adjacent to, the City.

Pacific Grove is almost fully built out, with very little buildable vacant land remaining in the city. The land use issues in Pacific Grove, therefore, focus primarily on managing existing uses and infill, and potential intensification. The City prohibits new housing development on the seaward side of oceanfront streets, protecting unobstructed access and views for the public at large. The City’s coastal zone is 458 acres. The coastal zone includes numerous land use types, including residential and commercial development near its downtown core, as well as restored dune habitat located within Asilomar State Beach and to the north within the City’s limits. Pacific Grove’s Local Coastal Program Packet Page 824
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-4 ANNEX I
Land Use Plan was first certified by the Coastal Commission in 1988. At the time, the second component of the LCP, the Implementation Plan, was never certified. In 2014, with grant funding from the Coastal Commission, Pacific Grove began an update of their LCP. The updated LCP was adopted by City Council on January 15, 2020 and certified by the Commission on March 11, 2020.

Safe Growth
The purpose of the Safe Growth Survey was to evaluate the extent to which each jurisdiction is positioned to grow safely relative to its natural hazards. The survey covered 9 distinct topic areas and was also completed as part of the previous plan update process. This allowed survey results to be compared to help measure progress over time and to continue identifying possible mitigation actions as it relates to future growth and community development practices.

This survey was a subjective exercise used to provide some quantitative measures of how adequately existing planning mechanisms were being used to address the notion of safe growth. Each topic area included a number of statements, which were answered on a scale from 1 to 5 based on the degree to which the respondent agreed or disagreed with the statement as it relates to the City’s current plans, policies, and programs for guiding future community growth and development. Scores for each topic area statement were averaged to provide a topic area result and the topic area totals were averaged to provide an overall survey score. More information on the survey is provided in Capability Assessment in Volume 1. The Pacific Grove Safe Growth Survey was completed by Alyson Hunter, Senior Planner at the time of completion, and current Community Development Department Director for the City of Pacific Grove. The results are summarized in Table I-1.

Table I-1
City of Pacific Grove Safe Growth Survey Results
Topic Area 2021 2016
Land Use 2.50 2.50
Transportation 1.67 2.33
Environmental Management 3.00 4.00
Public Safety 2.33 3.33
Zoning Ordinance 4.00 2.50
Subdivision Regulations 2.67 2.33
Capital Improvement Program & Infrastructure Policies 2.00 2.67 Building Code 4.00 5.00
Economic Development 2.00 2.00
Average Survey Ratings 2.69 2.96
I.5 JURISDICTION SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile the City of Pacific Grove’s hazards and assess the City’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan. The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the County and describes the hazards, as well as their extent, magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences. Hazard vulnerability specific to the City of Pacific Grove is included in this Annex.

Packet Page 825
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-5 ANNEX I
The City of Pacific Grove’s Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The City’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Survey to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the City. Each variable was scored by hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16.

Each score was associated with a qualitative degree of risk ranking from Negligible (between 1 and 4) to Very High (between 14.1 and 16). The Survey is described in more detail in Risk Assessment Methods in Volume 1. Table I-2 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the City of Pacific Grove’s Planning Team.

Table I-2
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): City of Pacific Grove Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of
Risk
Agricultural Emergencies - - - - - -
Coastal Erosion 3.3 3.7 3.0 4.0 14.0 High
Coastal Flooding 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.7 12.7 High
Cyber-Attack 3.3 3.7 3.0 3.5 13.5 High
Dam Failure - - - - - -
Drought & Water Shortage 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 15.5 Very High Earthquake 2.7 3.7 2.7 3.0 12.0 Substantial
Epidemic 4.0 4.0 3.0 4.0 15.0 Very High
Extreme Cold & Freeze 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 8.5 Moderate
Extreme Heat 2.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 7.0 Possible
Flash Flood 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7.0 Possible
Hazardous Materials Incident 2.5 2.0 2.5 3.3 10.3 Substantial Invasive Species 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 11.0 Substantial
Levee Failure - - - - - -
Localized Stormwater Flooding 2.3 2.7 2.3 3.0 10.3 Substantial Mass Migration 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Pandemic 4.0 4.0 3.5 4.0 15.5 Very High
Riverine Flooding 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.5 8.5 Moderate
Sea Level Rise 3.0 3.5 3.0 4.0 13.5 High
Severe Winter Storms 3.3 3.3 3.0 3.7 13.3 High
Slope Failure 2.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 11.0 Substantial
Targeted Violence 2.0 2.5 2.5 2.7 9.7 Moderate
Terrorism 2.5 1.5 3.5 3.3 10.8 Substantial
Tsunami 3.5 2.0 3.5 3.3 12.3 High
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 3.5 3.5 3.0 3.3 13.3 High
Water Contamination 3.0 3.3 3.3 4.0 13.7 High
Wildfire 3.5 1.5 4.0 3.3 12.3 High
Windstorms 3.0 3.0 2.5 3.3 11.8 Substantial
Packet Page 826
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-6 ANNEX I
I.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
There is no agricultural land located within the City, so therefore an agricultural emergency does not pose a direct threat. Since agriculture is a major economic driver in the County, an agricultural emergency could have indirect economic impacts on the City.

I.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
To determine coastal erosion risk, USGS Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center (Coastal Storm Modeling System) CoSMos shoreline change, and cliff retreat projection data was used. For cliff retreat modeling an end of century (2100) forced sea level rise amount of 200 cm was used based on Ocean Protection Council (OPC) High Risk Aversion Guidance. For shoreline change, winter erosion uncertainty modeling was used to capture the degree of uncertainty associated with future shoreline erosion. Hold the Line scenario modeling was chosen for both types of erosion. Three sea level rise levels (25 cm, 75 cm, and 200 cm) to represent planning horizons based on OPC Sea Level Rise Projections for the Monterey Tide Gauge. 25 cm of sea level rise represents near term (2030) risk, 75 cm represent mid-term (2060) risk, and 200 cm represent long-term (2100) risk.

Table I-3 summarizes population and property exposure to coastal erosion risk.

Table I-3
Population and Property Exposed to Coastal Erosion Risk in Pacific Grove Sea Level Rise Scenario/
Erosion Type Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Cliff Erosion
Sea Level Rise (25 cm) 84 3 $17,342,399 42 $9,083,758
Sea Level Rise (75 cm) 138 3 $17,342,399 44 $10,632,164 Sea Level Rise (200 cm) 252 16 $33,183,479 58 $26,607,577 Shoreline Erosion
Sea Level Rise (25 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (75 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (200 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Pacific Grove’s shoreline is mostly dominated by exposed granitic rock that forms a relatively stable and durable barrier to protect shoreline development from the constant barrage of ocean waves.

Although wave activity can become intense during winter storms, the Pacific Grove shore has historically not retreated significantly. Sea level rise is expected to increase the susceptibility of Pacific Grove’s coastline to erosion, as higher sea levels will expose larger areas of the coast to more persistent erosional forces.

The City’s 2015 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, 2018 Shoreline Vulnerability Assessment, and 2020 Shoreline Management Plan identified a number of areas subject to erosion risk. Areas at risk to coastal erosion combined with sea level rise within Pacific Grove are shown in Figure I-1. The greatest increase in coastal erosion is expected to occur along the coastline along the Monterey Bay side of the Peninsula (Areas I through IV-B, in the map below). The main land use affected by coastal erosion in these areas will be residential. Other land uses expected to be affected include public parks Packet Page 827
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-7 ANNEX I
and trails (including Lovers Point), Hopkins Marine Station, Pacific Grove Golf Course, and commercial businesses along Ocean View Boulevard. In addition, the Monterey Interceptor pipeline, which transports all of the untreated sewage from the City to the Monterey One Water Regional Treatment Plant in Marina, is a critical facility deemed at risk to the long‐term effects of coastal erosion and sea level rise.

Figure I-1
Coastal Erosion Hazard in Pacific Grove
Source: City of Pacific Grove Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (2015) I.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
There is no population or property in the City located in a mapped dam inundation zone of any of the dams (Nacimiento, San Antonio, Los Padres, and Forest Lake) analyzed in this Plan.

Levee Failure
Based on the Leveed Area from the US Army Corps of Engineers, National Levee Database, there is no population or property in the City exposed to levee failure risk. Many levees in the County protect important agricultural lands and a significant levee failure could have an indirect economic impact.

Packet Page 828
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-8 ANNEX I
I.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
The entire population of the City is vulnerable to drought events. Drought can affect people’s health and safety, including health problems related to low water flows, poor water quality, or dust. Other possible impacts include recreational risks; effects on air quality; diminished living conditions related to energy, air quality, and hygiene; compromised food and nutrition; and increased incidence of illness and disease. Water shortages can affect access to safe, and relatively affordable water, with substantial impacts on low-income families and communities burdened with environmental pollution.

Water is already very expensive in the City, and therefore even small increases in prices could have a large effect on the population. Additionally, drought is likely to increase wildfire risk.

A prolonged drought could also cause economic impacts. Increased demand for water and electricity may result in shortages and higher costs of these resources. While economic impacts will be most significant on industries that use water or depend on water for their business, cascading economic effects can hurt many sectors of the economy. Agriculture, which will likely be impacted by drought conditions, is a major economic driver in the County, and the City could be impacted economically.

I.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
Although there are no mapped faults within the City, there are areas of liquefaction and erosion hazards. The entire population of the City is potentially exposed to direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes. Whether directly impacted or indirectly impacted, the entire population will have to deal with the consequences of earthquakes to some degree. Business interruption could keep people from working, road closures could isolate populations, and loss of utilities could impact populations that suffered no direct damage from an event itself. Similarly, all property and critical infrastructure in the City is potentially exposed to earthquake risk.

According to Monterey County Assessor records, there are 6,561 residential and non-residential buildings in the City, with a total value of $3,986,813,668. Since all structures in the City are susceptible to earthquake impacts to varying degrees, this represents the property exposure to seismic events.

Additionally, liquefaction risk was assessed. Table I-4 summarizes population and property in the City exposed to liquefaction risk.

Table I-4
Population and Property Exposed to Liquefaction Risk in Pacific Grove Liquefaction Risk Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
High Liquefaction Susceptibility 2,622 180 $195,836,698 154 $46,356,506 Moderate Liquefaction Susceptibility 0 0 $0 0 $0
I.5.6 FLOODING
FEMA flood zones were used to assess flooding risk. Table I-5 summarizes population and property in the City in the 100-year and 500-year floodplain.

Packet Page 829
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-9 ANNEX I
Table I-5
Population and Property Exposed to Flooding Risk in Pacific Grove FEMA Flood Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
100-Year Flood Zone 0 2 $10,524,893 36 $8,899,047
500-Year Flood Zone 0 0 $0 0 $0
The Hopkins Marine Station is located within an area that is prone to coastal flooding. Transportation routes in the City could be impacted by flooding. Much of Ocean View Boulevard/Sunset Drive between Esplanade Street and Asilomar Avenue is subject to coastal flooding. Although located outside of Pacific Grove, one especially critical transportation link that could be prone to flooding is the Del Monte Boulevard tunnel in Monterey, which provides one of two major access routes into the City.

I.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
To assess hazardous materials incident risk, buffer distances were used. The chosen buffer distance was based on guidelines in the US Department of Transportation’s Emergency Response Guidebook that suggest distances useful to protect people from vapors resulting from spills involving dangerous goods considered toxic if inhaled. The recommended buffer distance referred to in the guide as the “protective action distance” is the area surrounding the incident in which people are at risk of harmful exposure. For purposes of this plan, a buffer distance of one mile was used, but actual buffer distances will vary depending on the nature and quantity of the release, whether the release occurred during the night or daytime, and prevailing weather conditions.

To analyze the risk to a transportation-related hazardous materials release, a one-mile buffer was applied to highways in the US Dept of Transportation, National Transportation Atlas Database. The result is a two-mile buffer zone around each transportation corridor that is used for this analysis. Risk from a fixed facility hazardous materials release, was analyzed using a one-mile buffer was applied facilities identified in the Monterey County 2019 Hazardous Materials Plan. The result was a one-mile buffer zone around each facility.

There is no population or property in the City, based on the buffer distances that is exposed to a mobile or fixed hazardous materials incident.

I.5.8 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS
It is often quite difficult to quantify the potential losses from human-caused hazards. While facilities themselves have a tangible dollar value, loss from a human-caused hazard often inflicts an even greater toll on a community, both economically and emotionally. The impact to identified values will vary from event to event and depend on the type, location, and nature of a specific incident.

I.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
All citizens in the City could be susceptible to the human health hazards. A large outbreak or epidemic, a pandemic or a use of biological agents as a weapon of mass destruction could have devastating effects on the population. While all of the population is at risk to the human health hazards, the young and the elderly, those with compromised immune systems, and those with special needs are most Packet Page 830
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-10 ANNEX I
vulnerable. The introduction of a disease such as influenza or the COVID-19 virus have impacted the whole population of the City, specifically vulnerable populations.

I.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
All severe weather events profiled in this Plan have the potential to occur anywhere in the City.

Vulnerable populations are the elderly, low income or linguistically isolated populations, and people with life-threatening illnesses, Properties in poor condition or in high-risk locations may be susceptible to the most damage. All critical facilities in the City will likely be exposed to severe weather hazards.

The most common problems associated with severe weather are loss of utilities and compromised access to roadways. Prolonged periods of extreme heat could result in power outages caused by increased demand for power for cooling.

The FEMA National Risk Index calculates annualized frequency, exposure and annual expected loss of building value and population to some severe weather hazards identified in this Plan. Based on zip code and census tract Countywide data was used to identify annualized frequency, exposure, and annual expected loss in the City from severe weather hazards. Though the entire City is considered vulnerable to these hazards, the FEMA data was used in this risk assessment to provide scale for the potential risk and impacts.

FEMA National Risk Index data from frequency and exposure to severe weather hazards is summarized in Table I-6.

Table I-6
Annualized Frequency and Exposure to Severe Weather Events in Pacific Grove Hail Strong Wind
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.19 Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.03 Exposed Population 15,050 Exposed Population 15,050
Exposed Building Values $2,193,292,000 Exposed Building Values $2,193,292,000 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $0 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $708 Heat Wave Tornado
Frequency (Event-Days) 0.08 Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.88 Exposed Population 15,050 Exposed Population 13,648
Exposed Building Values $2,193,291,997 Exposed Building Values $1,985,240,194 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $1 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $34,301,461 Lightning Winter Weather
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.50 Frequency (Event-Days) 0.00 Exposed Population 15,050 Exposed Population 0
Exposed Building Values $2,193,292,000 Exposed Building Values $0 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $482 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $0 Source: FEMA National Risk Index
Packet Page 831
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-11 ANNEX I
The main risk associated with severe weather in Pacific Grove is coastal storm flooding and wave runup. Increases in the occurrence and intensity of severe storm events is a direct impact of climate change that has the potential to expose development and infrastructure to severe damage. This is of significant concern in Pacific Grove because, combined with sea level rise, intense storms pose one of the most significant climate change threats to the City.

I.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
Based on the FEMA National Risk Index, 2,370 people and $385,194,695 in property value in the City is exposed to landslide risk. The City is not susceptible earthquake induced to landslides.

I.5.12 TSUNAMI
Population and property in the City located in a mapped tsunami inundation zone is summarized in Table I-7.

Table I-7
Population and Property in Tsunami Inundation Zone in Pacific Grove Inundation Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Tsunami Inundation Zone 421 84 $168,639,771 69 $43,593,616 In Pacific Grove, a major concern is the impact a tsunami could have on utilities. A tsunami could impact the water lines along Ocean View Boulevard and wastewater infrastructure. Seven of the City’s wastewater pump stations could be inundated by coastal flooding. If flooding causes the pumps to fail, the wastewater system would backup behind the pump station, with potentially serious health consequences, e.g., possible illicit discharges caused by overflows. In an extreme situation, a tsunami could damage a pump station and result in spillage of wastewater, which would have citywide impacts.

I.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
All residents, visitors, and property in the City are exposed and vulnerable to utility interruptions. All critical facilities and infrastructure in the City that are operated by electricity are exposed and vulnerable to utility interruption. Widespread power outages are a concern for the City following major winter storms, mostly caused by downed trees.

I.5.14 WILDFIRE
For the purpose of this analysis, CAL FIRE Fire Threat data was used. Fire Threat combines expected fire frequency with potential fire behavior to create four threat classes, extreme, very high, high, and moderate. No portion of the City was determined to be in an area of extreme fire threat.

Table I-8 summarizes population and property in the City in very high, high, and moderate fire threat areas.

Packet Page 832
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-12 ANNEX I
Table I-8
Population and Property Exposed to Wildfire Risk in Pacific Grove CAL FIRE Wildfire Threat Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Very High Fire Threat 0 0 $0 0 $0
High Fire Threat 84 21 $48,540,893 12 $15,975,413
Moderate Fire Threat 7,145 1,026 $799,624,068 350 $110,840,221 Some areas in the City are also designated as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (VHFHSZ) by CAL FIRE, as mapped in Figure I-2. In Pacific Grove, areas with the highest risk of wildfire are located in the inland central portion of the City where neighborhoods are more forested and contain a higher density of mature trees. Risk of wildfire decreases as distance from the more forested central area of the City increases.

Figure I-2
Wildfire Severity Zones in Pacific Grove
Source: City of Pacific Grove Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (2015) Packet Page 833
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-13 ANNEX I
I.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
The effects of climate change are varied and include warmer and more varied weather patterns and temperature changes. Climate change will affect the people, property, economy, and ecosystems in the City and will exacerbate the risk posed by many of the hazards previously profiled in this Plan.

Climate change will have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards.

Increasing temperatures and rising sea-levels will have direct impacts on public health and infrastructure.

Drought, coastal and inland flooding, and wildfire will likely affect people’s livelihoods and the local economy. Changing weather patterns and more extreme conditions are likely to impact tourism and the rural economies, along with changes to agriculture and crops, which are a critical backbone of Monterey County’s economic success. There will also be negative impacts to ecosystems, both on land and in the ocean, leading to local extinctions, migrations, and management challenges.

Sea level rise risk exposure in the City was calculated based on the NOAA Office for Coastal Management sea level rise viewer projections. Three sea level rise levels (25 cm, 75 cm, and 200 cm) were chosen to represent planning horizons based on OPC Sea Level Rise Projections for the Monterey Tide Gauge. 25 cm of sea level rise represents near term (2030) risk, 75 cm represent mid-term (2060) risk, and 200 cm represent long-term (2100) risk.

Population and property exposed to sea level rise risk is summarized in Table I-9.

Table I-9
Population and Property Exposed to Sea Level Rise in Pacific Grove Sea Level Rise Amount Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
1 ft Sea Level Rise (2030) 0 1 $9,505,821 32 $8,899,047 3 ft Sea Level Rise (2060) 0 1 $9,505,821 35 $38,894,623 7 ft Sea Level Rise (2100) 0 2 $10,524,893 37 $38,894,623 The City’s 2015 Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment, 2018 Shoreline Vulnerability Assessment, and 2020 Shoreline Management Plan identified areas vulnerable to sea level rise risk. Figure I-3 identifies the potential extent of flooding due to sea level rise combined with a 100-year flood event.

The greatest increase in coastal flooding is expected to occur near Point Pinos and Otter Point, with notable increases at Lovers Point. No structures located within the mapped hazard areas that would experience inundation from sea level rise alone. Two factors account for this: first, the base elevation of developed areas in Pacific Grove is sufficiently high, due to the bluffs along the shoreline; secondly, relatively few structures are located immediately adjacent to the shoreline. However, when the effects of sea level rise and coastal flooding from storms are combined, about 75 houses in the Otter Point area would be subject to flooding. In the Lovers Point area, land uses affected would be mostly Lovers Point Park and nearby commercial businesses. Near Asilomar State Beach, development density is low and coastal flooding would have minimal effect on development.

Infrastructure including roads and water infrastructure could be impacted by sea level rise. Of major concern is the City’s significant wastewater infrastructure potentially at risk under combined sea level Packet Page 834
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-14 ANNEX I
rise and coastal storm flooding. Seven of the City’s wastewater pump stations could be inundated by coastal flooding. If flooding causes the pumps to fail, the wastewater system would backup behind the pump station, with potentially serious health consequences. In an extreme situation, storm surges could damage a pump station and result in spillage of wastewater.

Figure I-3
Potential Sea Level Rise and Flooding in Pacific Grove
Source: City of Pacific Grove Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment (2015) I.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The City of Pacific Grove performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table I-10 • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table I-11 • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table I-12 Packet Page 835
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-15 ANNEX I
• An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table 1-13 • Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table 1-14 • A summary of participation in and compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is provided in Section I.6.1 in Table I-15
• An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section I.6.2 in Table I-16 Table I-10
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Planning Documents
General Plan ☒ • Community Development Includes Safety Element Capital Improvement Plan ☒ • Public Works Approved Annually through the budget process
Floodplain Management Plan ☒ • Public Works
• Community Development
Open Space Management Plan ☒ • Public Works
Parks & Rec and Natural
Resources Elements in the General
Plan
Stormwater Management Plan ☒ • Public Works Storm Water Permit and Regional Effort
Shoreline Management Plan ☒ • Public Works
Local Coastal Program ☒ • Community Development Certified March 11, 2020 Climate Action/ Adaptation Plan ☒ • Community Development • Public Works
Shoreline Management Plan and
LCP
Emergency Operations Plan ☒
• City Manager
• Fire Department
• Police Department
Continuity of Operations Plan ☐ • Police Department There is interest in preparing one Community Wildfire Protection
Plan (CWPP) ☐ • Fire Department Effort underway to get this plan developed, no timeline as of yet Evacuation Plan ☐ • Fire Department
• Police Department
County OES working on this plan
and PG is included
Disaster Recovery Plan ☐ • IT
The City is working on a disaster
recovery policy for continuation of
tech infrastructure systems
following a disaster
Economic Development Plan ☒ • City Manager
• Administrative Services
Historic Preservation Plan ☒ • Community Development HRI Update underway Transportation Plan ☒ • Public Works
• Community Development Chapter 4 of the General Plan
Codes, Ordinances & Requirements
Floodplain Ordinance ☒ • Public Works Pacific Grove Municipal Code 11.97 Packet Page 836
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-16 ANNEX I
Table I-10
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Zoning Ordinance ☒ • Community Development Pacific Grove Municipal Code Title 23 Subdivision Ordinance ☒ • Community Development Pacific Grove Municipal Code Title 24 Site Plan Review Requirements ☒ • Community Development Ad-Hoc Committee review required for certain development projects
Unified Development Ordinance ☒ • City Manager Pacific Grove Municipal Code 1.19 Post-Disaster Redevelopment/
Reconstruction Ordinance ☒ • Community Development
Pacific Grove Municipal Code Title
23- addresses destroyed
buildings
Building Code ☒ • Community Development Pacific Grove Municipal Code 18.04 Fire Prevention Code ☒ • Fire Department Pacific Grove Municipal Code 18.32 Table I-11
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development
and land management practices
☒ • Community Development
• Public Works
Planners on staff with this
knowledge, City contracts with a civil
engineer for general engineering
assistance
Engineer(s) or professional(s)
trained in construction practices
related to buildings and/or
infrastructure
☒ • Community Development
City contracts with 4Leaf for building
inspection, plan check, and
additional engineering services
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with an
understanding of manmade or
natural hazards
☒ • Community Development
Planners on staff with this
knowledge, City contracts with a civil
engineer for general engineering
assistance
Building Inspector ☒ • Community Development
City contracts with 4Leaf for building
inspection, plan check, and
additional engineering services
Emergency Manager ☒ • Police Department
Floodplain Manager ☒ • Community Development
Land Surveyors ☐ Contract as needed
Resource development staff or
grant writers ☒
• Admin Services
• Public Works
• Police Department
Public Information Officer ☒ • Police Department Media Contacts, Website, City & Police Social Media platforms.

Packet Page 837
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-17 ANNEX I
Table I-11
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Scientist(s) familiar with the
hazards of the community ☐ Contract as needed
Staff with education or expertise
to assess the community’s
vulnerability to hazards
☒
• Community Development
• Public Works
• Fire Department
• Police Department
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) ☒ • IT/ Contract
Council is considering an IT Master
Plan, which includes training of staff.

Currently using contract services.

Maintenance programs to reduce
risk ☒ • Public Works Contract Arborist
Warning systems/services ☒ • Monterey County
• Police Department AlertMonterey, Social Media Alerts
Mutual Aid Agreements ☒ • Police Department
• Fire Department
Mutual Aid Agreements with Fire &
Law Enforcement Agencies
Table I-12
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds ☒ • Finance City has a reserve policy, which includes funds for emergencies
Capital Improvements Project
Funding ☒ • Public Works• Finance
Special Purpose Taxes ☒ • City Council
• Finance
The City could place an initiative on
the ballot for a special purpose tax
Stormwater Utility Fees ☐
Gas / Electric Utility Fees ☐
Water / Sewer Fees ☒ • Public Works
• Finance
The sewer fund balance could be
used to mitigate any damage to the
City’s sewer infrastructure
Development Impact Fees ☒ TAMC
General Obligation Bonds ☒ • Finance The City is eligible to issue General Obligation Bonds.

Special Tax and Revenue Bonds ☒ • City Council
• Finance
The City could place an initiative on
the ballot for a special tax. The City’s
current local tax is a general tax and
could be used for hazard mitigation
Community Development Block
Grants (CDBG) ☒ • Community Development CDD manages existing CDBG program funds Packet Page 838
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-18 ANNEX I
Table I-13
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit groups
focused on environmental
protection, emergency
preparedness, access and functional
needs populations, etc.
☒
• Human Resources
• Police Department
• Fire Department
City Volunteer Programs,
CERT, PGPD Citizens Academy
Alumni
Ongoing public education or
information program (e.g.,
responsible water use, fire safety,
household preparedness,
environmental education)
☒ • Police Department
• Fire Department
Utilize Social Media outlets
and community events to
share emergency
preparedness information
Natural disaster or safety related
school programs ☐
Public-private partnership initiatives
addressing disaster-related issues ☒ • Public Works
Table I-14
Community Classifications
Participating? Classification Effective Date
Community Rating System (CRS) No - -
ISO Building Code Effectiveness Grading Schedule Yes 3
ISO Public Protection Classification Yes 2
StormReady Certification Yes - -
TsunamiReady Certification Yes - -
Firewise Communities Certification No - -
I.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) COMPLIANCE Table I-15
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
Designated Floodplain Administrator: Alyson Hunter, Director, Community Development NFIP Community Number: 060201
Flood Insurance Policies in Force: 35
Insurance Coverage in Force: $11,144,000
Written Premium in Force: $14,846
Total Loss Claims: 1
Total Payments for Losses: $6,784
Adopted Regulations that meet NFIP Requirements:
• Pacific Grove Community Floodplain Management Municipal Code Chapter 11.97 [Ord. 09-006 § 2, 2009]
Packet Page 839
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-19 ANNEX I
Table I-15
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
Date of last NFIP Community Assistance Visit (CAV):

The City was visited by DWR staff on May 3, 2018. The result of the visit was the identification of new development within the SFHA (886 Cannery Row, aka, the Monterey Bay Aquarium). The DWR advised that a Substantial Improvement (SI) document be prepared to address this issue. This was resolved in June 2018. The second issue identified by the DWR during the CAV pertains to updating the City's Community Floodplain Management Ordinance (PGMC 11.97) to be in compliance with Title 44, CFR, Sec. 60.3 and reflect the current CA Model Floodplain Ordinance dated December 2006. The City adopted Ordinance 09-006 in 2009 to bring this chapter up to date.

Higher standards that exceed minimum NFIP requirement:

Although these may occur on a case-by-case basis, the City has not adopted "higher standards" that exceed NFIP minimum requirements. The City adopted a Substantial Improvement (SI) in a Special Hazard Flood Area (SHFA) procedure in 2018 to identify whether a property is within a designated SHFA and what sections need to be followed to be in compliance with FEMA regulations. The SI was prepared for the one area of the City's shoreline located in Flood Zone VE (FIRM Map Panel 06053C0307H (Revised June 21, 2017). There are no other developments within the VE zone.

Additional floodplain management provisions:

The City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) certified in March 2020 has coastal hazards policies to help ensure that new development and redevelopment is sited and designed to be safe from coastal hazards. The City’s Shoreline Management Plan (SMP) will be used to guide the management and maintenance of public infrastructure in the coastal zone.

Floodplain management activities performed that go beyond FEMA minimum requirements:

The City conducted a robust public outreach effort as part of the preparation of the SMP. These efforts included an online survey, an open house, and public workshops that highlighted the flood-related hazards along the coastline.

Existing impediments to running an effective NFIP program:

The City lacks operational capacity which results in impediments to running an effective NFIP program.

Specific actions that are ongoing or considered related to continued compliance with the NFIP:
• The City evaluates permit application forms to determine possible modifications focused on flood hazard prevention on an ongoing basis.
• The City maintains a map of areas that flood frequently and are subject to coastal hazards (Shoreline Management Plan). The City's Local Coastal Program (LCP) certified in March 2020 has coastal hazards policies to help ensure that new development and redevelopment is sited and designed to be safe from coastal hazards.
• The City will participate in local training efforts on floodplain management, the importance of participating in the NFIP, and the implications of failing to enforce the requirements of the program or failing to properly handle variance requests. • The City’s Building Official is trained on FEMA’s Substantial Damage Estimator and is interested in pursuing additional training.
• The City provides free sandbag supplies to the public during winter months.

Packet Page 840
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-20 ANNEX I
I.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table I-16
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability High
Administrative and Technical Capability High
Fiscal Capability Moderate
Education and Outreach Capability High
Political Capability Moderate
Overall Capability High
I.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES Planning, regulatory, fiscal, administrative, technical, education, and outreach capabilities can all be expanded or improved using a combination of the following strategies:
• Increase capacity through staffing
• Training, and enhanced coordination among all department and jurisdictions • Emergency management/hazard specific program enhancements, training, and exercising • Increased funding opportunities and capacity
• Implementation of mitigation actions and projects
• Continuous research on grant opportunities for emergency management, hazard mitigation, and infrastructure and community development.

Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

I.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Existing Integration
In the performance period since adoption of the previous hazard mitigation plan, the City made progress on integrating hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and actions into other planning initiatives.

Opportunities for Future Integration
The General Plan and the hazard mitigation plan are complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure. The General Plan is considered to be an integral part of this plan. An update to the General Plan may trigger an update to the hazard mitigation plan. The City, through adoption of a General Plan and zoning ordinance, has planned for the impact of natural hazards. The process of updating this hazard mitigation plan provided the opportunity to review and expand on policies in these planning mechanisms. The City will create a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and the General Plan by identifying a mitigation action as such and giving that action a high priority. Other planning processes and programs that may be coordinated with the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan include the following:
• General Plan, including the Safety Element
• Emergency Operations Plans
• Climate Action and Adaptation Plans
• Debris management plans
• Recovery plans
• Capital improvement programs
• Municipal codes
• Community design guidelines
• Water-efficient landscape design guidelines
• Stormwater management programs
• Water system vulnerability assessments
• Community wildfire protection plans
• Comprehensive flood hazard management plans
• Resiliency plans
• Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery action plans Packet Page 842
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-22 ANNEX I
• Public information/education plans
Some action items do not need to be implemented through regulation. Instead, these items can be implemented through the creation of new educational programs, continued interagency coordination, or improved public participation. As information becomes available from other planning mechanisms that can enhance this plan, that information will be integrated via the update process.

I.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the City of Pacific Grove Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern applicable to their jurisdiction. The Hazard Problem Statements were based on the risk assessment, the vulnerability analysis, and local knowledge.

Hazard Problem Statements helped the Planning Committee identify common issues and weaknesses, determine appropriate mitigation strategies, and understand the realm of resources needed for mitigation. Hazard Problem Statements for the City of Pacific Grove are identified below:
• The City is concerned with limited ingress/egress to the community following major disaster events and continues to review and update designated evacuation routes through its emergency operations plan (currently being updated). A related concern is the narrow design of many city streets, which will make mobility and evacuation difficult during major events. • The Monterey Interceptor pipeline, which transports all of the untreated sewage from the City of Monterey and Pacific Grove to the MRWPCA Regional Treatment Plant in Marina, is a critical facility deemed at risk to the long-term effects of coastal erosion and sea level rise, particularly between the Seaside Pump Station and Monterey Beach Resort.
• The public water supply is deemed a critical local issue for the city (and entire peninsula), particularly with regard to the supply available during future major fires. The City has seen hydrant pressure drops during past events.
• City staff asserts that the wildland fire hazard area for their jurisdiction is more expansive than previously mapped through FRAS and shown in the current plan. There are significant numbers of dead or dying trees in the heavily forested “Retreat” and park areas, which leads to higher risks, especially when combined with the fact that most surrounding residential construction is wood frame with Class C roofs (more combustible/ flammable). • Widespread power outages are a concern for the City following major winter storms. • The City relies solely on commercial internet service providers such as Comcast, AT&T, or Verizon for its communication network infrastructure. Connections from these providers is unreliable. The City should have access to a more reliable municipal broadband connection. • The City is concerned about public health outbreaks, particularly with the recent events of COVID19, for our significant at-risk population groups of both seniors and children. In addition, the City heavily relies on revenue sources related to tourism and additional closures could have detrimental impacts on local economic recovery, our small business community, and funding for basic City services.

Packet Page 843
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-23 ANNEX I
I.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

The City of Pacific Grove Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefit-cost analysis and consideration of mitigation alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the City’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix, in Table I-18 lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Status of Previous Plan Actions
All actions from the 2016 Plan were reviewed and updated by the City during the planning process.

Table I-17 includes the status of actions completed or removed from the previous plan. In order to improve the mitigation action plan for this Plan update and align with the countywide Mitigation Action Plan, the City added more specificity and detail to previous plan actions in addition to the new actions added to the Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix.

Table I-17
City of Pacific Grove Completed Mitigation Actions from 2016 MJHMP 2016
Action # Description Status Narrative Update
8 Adopt a Local Coastal Plan with the
implementation of dune protection,
stabilization, and nourishment to
provide floodplain protection in the
coastal areas. Additionally, wildlife
safety should be linked with other
environmental strategies throughout
the Local Coastal Plan.

Completed
The City’s updated Local
Coastal Program was certified
by the California Coastal
Commission on March 11,
2020.

Packet Page 844
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-24 ANNEX I
I City of Pacific Grove Hazard Mitigation Action Plan
Table I-18
City of Pacific Grove Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
1 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Develop a sustained public outreach program that
encourages consistent hazard mitigation content and
improves public awareness and knowledge regarding all types of hazards, preparedness, and mitigation measures.

Additionally, develop audience-specific hazard mitigation outreach efforts. Audiences include the elderly, children, tourists, non-English speaking residents, and home and
business owners.

Priority /
High
Disaster
Planning,
Community
Development,
Fire, CERT
General
Funds,
HMGP, and
PDM Grants
2 Ongoing/
Continuous Earthquakes
Develop an unreinforced masonry grant program that helps correct earthquake-risk nonmasonry building problems,
including chimney bracing and anchoring water heaters.

Additionally, ensure proper training on seismic codes for all buildings inspectors and encourage measures to reduce
earthquake damage risk.

Moderate
Community
Development,
Building
Division
General
Funds
3 Ongoing/
Continuous
Tsunami,
Winter Storms
Participate in the NOAA National Weather Service
TsunamiReady and StormReady Programs.

Priority /
High
Disaster
Planning
General
Funds
4 Ongoing/
Continuous Tsunami Maintain emergency vehicles with tsunami warning sirens and inform the public about the tsunami warning siren.

Moderate
Disaster
Planning, Police
Department
General
Funds
5 In Progress/
2-Years Wildfire Develop a Community Wildfire Protection Plan and implement recommended strategies.

Priority /
High Fire Prevention
General
Funds,
Grant Funds
6 In Progress/
5-Years
Coastal
Erosion,
Flooding, Sea
Level Rise
Implement Local Coastal Plan policies related to hazard mitigation.

Moderate Community
Development
General
Funds,
Grant Funds
Packet Page 845
CITY OF PACIFIC GROVE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | I-25 ANNEX I
Table I-18
City of Pacific Grove Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
7 In Progress/
2-Years
Coastal
Erosion,
Flooding
Complete the Point Pinos Trail Project, which will remove the trail and beach parking out of the 30-year flood zone. High Public Works General
Funds,
Grant Funds
8 Ongoing/
Continuous
Flooding, Sea
Level Rise,
Drought
Establish watershed-based planning to address flood hazards, sea level rise potentials and stormwater runoff problems and encourage techniques to reduces rainwater runoff, which can prevent flooding and erosion. Specifically, encourage major land alteration projects to include the use of pervious surfaces and rainwater collection technology.

High Community
Development
General
Funds,
Grant
Funds,
9 In Progress/
5-Years
Flooding, Sea
Level Rise,
Tsunami,
Coastal
Erosion,
Wildfire, Dam
Failure
Obtain and implement a GIS Master Plan. Use GIS to regularly calculate and document vulnerable areas such as: floodprone areas, sea level rise, tsunami inundation zones, coastal erosion zones, wildland fire areas, and areas affected by dam failure. This information shall be used to create an inventory of especially vulnerable zones, buildings, properties, and infrastructure. Additionally, use GIS as a tool to inform the public on hazard risk.

Moderate
Public Works,
Community
Development,
IT
General
Funds
10 New/ 5-
Years All
Increase the resiliency of the communication system by
creating redundancy so disruption to the system is minimized during and following disasters and to ensure continuity of government functions.

High IT
General
Funds,
Grant Funds
11 New/ In
Progress All
Continue to coordinate with the Navy, the City of Monterey, the Presidio of Monterey, and Naval Support Activity
Monterey on the Compatible Use Study, which looks at ways the military can better communicate and respond to
hazardous situations in concert with neighboring
municipalities.

Moderate Community
Development
General
Funds
Packet Page 846

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 847
J
ANNEX J:

CITY OF SALINAS
2021 Monterey County
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Packet Page 848
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-1 ANNEX J
J. CITY OF SALINAS
J.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact
Skylar Thornton
Battalion Chief/Fire Marshal
Salinas Fire Department
65 W Alisal Street., Ste 210
Salinas, CA 93901
(831) 758-7422
[email protected]
J.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE
J.2.1 LOCATION
Packet Page 849
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-2 ANNEX J
J.2.2 GEOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE
The City of Salinas is the County seat and largest city in Monterey County and on California’s Central Coast. Located at the northern opening of the Salinas Valley, it is situated ten miles west of Monterey Bay and the Pacific Ocean, approximately mid-way between Santa Cruz and the Monterey Peninsula.

The City encompasses an area of 37.9 square miles at an elevation of approximately 52 feet above sea level. Salinas’ weather is influenced by its proximity to Monterey Bay. The morning fog is generally cleared by afternoon breezes. Salinas enjoys a mild climate with an average high of 68°F and low of 46°F and annual rainfall of 15.47 inches.

J.2.3 HISTORY
Salinas' earliest inhabitants were small tribes of Native Americans who were largely undisturbed during the Spanish era. It was not until Mexico gained independence from Spain in 1822 that outside settlers began to arrive in Salinas. Named for a nearby salt marsh, Salinas became the seat of Monterey County in 1872 and incorporated in 1874.

In the mid-1800s, Salinas' agricultural industry began to grow. In 1867, several local businessmen laidout a town plan and enticed the Southern Pacific Railroad to build its tracks through Salinas City.

Agriculture continued as the area's major industry and by the end of World War I, the "green gold" growing in the fields helped make Salinas one of the wealthiest cities (per capita) in the United States.

During the growing seasons of the Great Depression, the volume of telephone and telegraph transmissions originating in Salinas was greater than that of San Francisco. This activity was reflected in a burst of building construction, many employing the streamlined shapes and organic patterns of Art Deco or Art Moderne.

J.2.4 POPULATION
The population of the City of Salinas is 163,542 people (2020 Census), an 8.7% increase since 2010.

Salinas is the largest city in Monterey County. More than one in three County residents lives in Salinas.

J.2.5 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
The City of Salinas is organized under the Council-Manager form of government. The City Council is composed of six Council Members who are elected by district for four‐year terms, and a Mayor elected at large for a two‐year term. The City Manager, who is appointed by City Council, is responsible for all City departments except the appointed City Attorney. The City Council legislates policies, enacts ordinances, approves the budget, and appoints advisory boards and commissions.

J.2.6 ECONOMY AND TAX BASE
The City of Salinas is the County’s center for agricultural activity and the headquarters to many large growing and shipping companies. Although agriculture forms the primary economic base, more than 100 manufacturing firms are also located in the city. Some of the largest employers in the area include Taylor Farms, Ramco, the County of Monterey, and Salinas Valley Memorial Hospital. The City has a large suburban community, which consists mostly of late 20th century single family residences, ranging from modest bungalows to spacious homes. The city’s historic Main Street has undergone recent revitalization and boasts an emerging arts scene
Packet Page 850
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-3 ANNEX J
J.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The City of Salinas followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan. In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the City formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process.

The City of Salinas held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting to discuss vulnerabilities, mitigation activities that had occurred since the last plan update, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies on July 13, 2021. Key stakeholders present at the meeting included:
• Steve Carrigan, City Manager
• Samuel Klemek, Deputy Fire Chief
• Skylar Thornton, Battalion Chief/ Fire Marshal
• David Jacobs, Public Works Director
• Jim Pia, Assistant City Manager
• Marina Horta-Gallegos, HR Director
• Adriana Robles, City Engineer
• Michele Vaughn, Fire Chief
• Courtney Grossman Planning Manager
• Andrew Myrick, Senior Economic Development Manager
• John C. Murray, Police Commander
• Chris Callihan, City Attorney
• Roberto Filice, Acting Police Chief
J.4 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
Over the past 50 years, the community of Salinas has grown significantly. In 1950, Salinas was a small agricultural community of 14,000 persons, but has expanded to become the largest city in the County.

The current Salinas General Plan was adopted in 2002 and the City is currently in the process of a General Plan update. At the time of the 2002 General Plan, about 33% of the City’s area was devoted to residential uses. Commercial retail uses were approximately 9% and industrial uses 6%. While Salinas is surrounded by lands considered as “prime farmland,” the lands to the south and west of the City are the most productive. In April 2008, the City Council adopted an Agricultural Land Preservation Program, which contains measures to preserve agricultural lands to the south and west.

Since 2015, the City of Salinas has completed over 12 major planning efforts, many of which focus on infill opportunities that direct development away from hazard areas. Two examples include the Downtown Vibrancy Plan (2015) and Alisal Vibrancy Plan (2019). Salinas has very little housing in its downtown core compared to other cities and the Downtown Vibrancy Plan calls for over 650 units, mostly on existing surface parking lots, to address this “housing desert.” Removing parking from a downtown is often a politically difficult proposition, but Council’s approval showed a willingness to enact policies supporting denser development in the urban core, away from potential hazards. The Alisal is a disadvantaged neighborhood in Salinas with a significant need for affordable housing. The Alisal Vibrancy Plan also calls for infill development to help meet its built environment needs, in particular better utilization of land along the Market Street and East Alisal Street commercial corridors, Packet Page 851
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-4 ANNEX J
and on vacant lots. The Alisal Vibrancy Plan also calls for more integration of Low Impact Design and green infrastructure in new development and public areas, which help manage stormwater and reducing flood risks. Implementation of the Downtown Vibrancy Plan and Alisal Vibrancy Plan is underway, and the City is in the process of rezoning multiple surface parking lots and other opportunity sites for mixed use development.

Safe Growth
The purpose of the Safe Growth Survey was to evaluate the extent to which each jurisdiction is in a position to grow safely relative to its natural hazards. The survey covered 9 distinct topic areas and was also completed as part of the 2016 Plan. This allowed survey results to be compared to help measure progress over time and to continue identifying possible mitigation actions as it relates to future growth and community development practices.

This survey was a subjective exercise used to provide some quantitative measures of how adequately existing planning mechanisms were being used to address the notion of safe growth. Each topic area included a number of statements, which were answered on a scale from 1 to 5 based on the degree to which the respondent agreed or disagreed with the statement as it relates to the City’s current plans, policies, and programs for guiding future community growth and development. Scores for each topic area statement were averaged to provide a topic area result and the topic area totals were averaged to provide an overall survey score. More information on the survey is provided in Capability Assessment in Volume 1. The Salinas Safe Growth Survey was completed by Adriana Robles, City Engineer for the City of Salinas Public Works Department. The results are summarized in Table J-1.

Table J-1
City of Salinas Safe Growth Survey Results
Topic Area 2021 2016
Land Use 4.00 4.50
Transportation 3.00 3.33
Environmental Management 4.33 3.00
Public Safety 3.00 4.00
Zoning Ordinance 3.25 4.25
Subdivision Regulations 2.67 3.00
Capital Improvement Program & Infrastructure Policies 2.33 3.00 Building Code 4.00 5.00
Economic Development 1.00 3.00
Average Survey Ratings 3.06 3.68
J.5 JURISDICTION SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile the City of Salinas’s hazards and assess the City’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan. The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the County and describes the hazards, as well as their extent, magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences. Hazard vulnerability specific to the City of Salinas is included in this Annex.

Packet Page 852
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-5 ANNEX J
The City of Salinas’s Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The City’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Survey to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the City. Each variable was scored by hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16.

Each score was associated with a qualitative degree of risk ranking from Negligible (between 1 and 4) to Very High (between 14.1 and 16). The Survey is described in more detail in Risk Assessment Methods in Volume 1. Table J-2 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the City of Salinas’s Planning Team.

Table J-2
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): City of Salinas Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of
Risk
Agricultural Emergencies 3.0 2.8 2.9 2.8 11.5 Substantial Coastal Erosion 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.3 4.9 Slight
Coastal Flooding 1.5 1.4 1.8 1.6 6.3 Possible
Cyber-Attack 3.0 3.2 3.1 3.4 12.7 High
Dam Failure 1.9 1.7 2.2 2.3 8.1 Moderate
Drought & Water Shortage 3.7 3.3 3.2 3.4 13.6 High
Earthquake 3.4 3.2 3.4 3.3 13.3 High
Epidemic 3.0 2.8 3.0 2.9 11.7 Substantial
Extreme Cold & Freeze 2.0 2.0 1.9 1.9 7.8 Possible
Extreme Heat 1.9 2.2 1.7 1.9 7.7 Possible
Flash Flood 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.3 8.5 Moderate
Hazardous Materials Incident 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.8 10.9 Substantial Invasive Species 1.6 1.5 1.7 2.0 6.8 Possible
Levee Failure 1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 5.3 Slight
Localized Stormwater Flooding 2.6 2.9 2.3 2.3 10.1 Substantial Mass Migration 1.9 1.9 1.8 1.8 7.4 Possible
Pandemic 2.8 2.3 3.4 3.2 11.7 Substantial
Riverine Flooding 1.8 1.9 2.0 1.9 7.6 Possible
Sea Level Rise 1.3 1.4 1.6 1.6 5.9 Possible
Severe Winter Storms 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.5 9.7 Moderate
Slope Failure 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.4 5.7 Slight
Targeted Violence 2.5 2.6 2.5 2.7 10.3 Substantial
Terrorism 1.8 1.6 2.5 2.5 8.4 Moderate
Tsunami - - - - - -
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 2.8 2.9 2.5 2.4 10.6 Substantial Water Contamination 2.5 2.3 3.2 3.1 11.1 Substantial
Wildfire 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 9.8 Moderate
Windstorms 2.3 2.2 2.3 2.3 9.1 Moderate
Packet Page 853
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-6 ANNEX J
J.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
The agricultural industry is a major economic driver in the City. Agricultural disasters pose a serious threat to the local economy and populations directly employed by the agriculture industry.

J.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
The City is not located on the coast, and therefore coastal erosion is not a major threat. Coastal erosion does threaten agricultural land in the Salinas Valley. Salinas is the hub for agriculture processing, therefore, if coastal erosion affects agriculture land outside the City, such affects could have indirect economic effects on the local economy. The City could also be impacted by other types of erosion not profiled in this Plan.

J.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
There are no population, property, or infrastructure in the City located in the dam inundation zones of the Los Padres and Forest Lake dams.

Salinas also has the potential for inundation due to the failure of the Nacimiento and San Antonio Dams. Table J-3 summarizes population and property in the City exposed to spillway and dam failure of the Nacimiento and San Antonio dams.

Table J-3
Population and Property Exposed to Dam Failure Risk by Dam and Failure Type in Salinas Dam Failure Scenario Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Nacimiento Spillway Failure 1,018 5 $2,329,906 8 $154,697 Nacimiento Dam Failure 10,545 2,425 $1,077,104,095 804 $245,485,534 San Antonio Spillway Failure 0 0 $0 0 $0
San Antonio Dam Failure 8,825 1,805 $812,166,160 701 $316,793,892 A failure of the Nacimiento dam would expose 3 medical facilities, 6 government facilities, 7 communication facilities, and approximately 33 miles of roads to inundation risk. Major roads and possible evacuation routes exposed includes Blanco Road, Davis Road, Harkins Road, and Highway 68 on south end of the City, as well as Highway 183 northwest of City limits.

A failure of the San Antonio dam would expose 3 medical facilities, 2 educational facilities, 6 government facilities, 6 communication facilities, and approximately 31 miles of major to inundation risk. Major roads and possible evacuation routes exposed includes Abbot Street and Highway 101 on southeast end of the City, Blanco Road, Davis Road, Harkins Road, and Highway 68 on south end of the City, as well as Highway 183 northwest of City limits.

Dam inundation areas for the Nacimiento and San Antonio dams located in the City of Salinas is mapped in Figure J-1.

Packet Page 854
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-7 ANNEX J
Figure J-1
Dam Inundation Areas in the City of Salinas
Levee Failure
Based on Leveed Area from the US Army Corps of Engineers, National Levee Database, there is no population or property in the City exposed to levee failure risk. Many levees in the County protect important agricultural lands and a significant levee failure could have an indirect economic impact.

Packet Page 855
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-8 ANNEX J
J.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
The entire population of the City is vulnerable to drought events. Drought can affect people’s health and safety, including health problems related to low water flows, poor water quality, or dust. Drought also is often accompanied by extreme heat, exposing people to the risk of sunstroke, heat cramps and heat exhaustion. Other possible impacts include recreational risks; effects on air quality; diminished living conditions related to energy, air quality, and hygiene; compromised food and nutrition; and increased incidence of illness and disease. Water shortages can affect access to safe, affordable water, with substantial impacts on low-income families and communities burdened with environmental pollution. A prolonged drought could also cause economic impacts. Increased demand for water and electricity may result in shortages and higher costs of these resources. While economic impacts will be most significant on industries that use water or depend on water for business, cascading economic effects can hurt many sectors of the economy. Agriculture, which will likely be impacted by drought conditions, is a major economic driver in the County, and the City could be impacted economically.

J.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
No known active faults are located in the City and no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning has been established by the State for the City. Consequently, the potential for ground rupture is low. Although the potentially active King City and Gabilan Creek Faults (active within the last three million years, though not the last 11,000 years) are located within the City, they are not expected to generate seismic activity. The greatest seismic threat is related to the San Andreas and Calaveras Faults.

The entire population of the City is potentially exposed to direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes. Whether directly impacted or indirectly impacted, the entire population will have to deal with the consequences of earthquakes to some degree. Business interruption could keep people from working, road closures could isolate populations, and loss of utilities could impact populations that suffered no direct damage from an event itself. Similarly, all property and critical infrastructure in the City is potentially exposed to earthquake risk. According to Monterey County Assessor records, there are 32,057 residential and non-residential buildings in the City, with a total value of $12,421,420,074.

Since all structures in the City are susceptible to earthquake impacts to varying degrees, this represents the property exposure to seismic events.

Damage from earthquakes is often the result of liquefaction. Liquefaction occurs primarily in areas of recently deposited sands and silts and in areas of high groundwater levels. Especially susceptible areas include sloughs and marshes that have been filled in and covered with development. Salinas has several former wetland areas that have been "reclaimed" (drained and filled) and developed. In addition, Salinas rests on almost 1,800 feet of alluvium. Table J-4 summarizes population and property in the City exposed to liquefaction risk.

Table J-4
Population and Property Exposed Liquefaction Risk in Salinas Liquefaction Risk Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
High Liquefaction Susceptibility 40,954 2,233 $1,140,950,365 2,424 $1,255,332,144 Moderate Liquefaction Susceptibility 24,168 4,947 $2,249,148,956 3,114 $1,075,645,532 Packet Page 856
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-9 ANNEX J
Additionally, 2 emergency response facilities, 5 medical facilities, 24 government facilities, 67 communication facilities, some facilities containing hazardous materials, 5 miles of railroad, and about 80 miles of road are in a high liquefaction zone. Major roads and possible evacuation routes exposed includes portions of Highway 101, Abbot Street, Blanco Road, Highway 68, Davis Road, San Juan Grade Road, E Laurel Drive, and Old Stage Road, as well as Highway 183 northwest of City limits. Figure J-2 shows areas of liquefaction susceptibility within the City.

Figure J-2
Liquefaction Susceptibility in the City of Salinas
Packet Page 857
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-10 ANNEX J
J.5.6 FLOODING
FEMA flood zones were used to assess flooding risk. Table J-5 summarizes population and property in the City in the 1% annual chance and 0.2% annual chance floodplain.

Table J-5
Population and Property Exposed to Flooding Risk in Salinas FEMA Flood Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
1% Annual Chance 15,415 502 $343,901,823 704 $379,194,821

0.2% Annual Chance 130,440 22,355 $8,837,316,183 8,542 $2,803,988,821 Portions of the Salinas Municipal Airport, 3 educational facilities, 5 government facilities, 5 communication facilities, and approximately 21 miles of road is located in the 1% annual chance floodplain. Major roads and possible evacuation routes located in the floodplain include portions of Highway 101, Abbot Street, and E Laurel Drive, as well as Blanco Road west of City limits and Highway 183 northwest of City limits. Figure J-3 shows the extent of the 1% annual chance and

0.2% annual chance floodplain in the City.

The Salinas area topography includes creeks and lakebeds that are dry during most of the year and figure prominently as open space within the City. Except for the Salinas River creeks, streams, and lakes are seasonal. Four natural channels flow from the Gabilan Mountains into the Salinas area. These include Alisal, Natividad, Gabilan, and Santa Rita Creeks. The Gabilan Creek channel has experienced siltation problems between Boronda Road and Laurel Drive, and within Carr Lake reducing the capacity of the creek. All of these creeks are tributary to the Monterey County Water Resources Agency (MCWRA) Reclamation Ditch 1665, although the Santa Rita Creek intersects the Reclamation Ditch 3.5 miles west of the city limits. This channel serves as the primary drainageway for the City.

Flood-prone areas in the City generally fall into a wide band on either side of the creeks, in the vicinity of the airport, and a narrow strip along the Reclamation Ditch running northwestsouthwest through the City. The following areas in the City of Salinas have a known potential for flooding:
• Carr Lake
• Cesar Chavez Park
• Gabilan Creek
• Kern Street
• Market Street
• Merced Street
• Natividad Creek
• Reclamation Ditch
• Salinas River
• Williams Road
This is not a complete list of areas that are within flood zones, but rather a list of areas with documented flooding problems.

Packet Page 858
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-11 ANNEX J
Figure J-3
FEMA 1% Annual Chance and 0.2% Annual Chance Floodplain J.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
Hazardous materials are used in Salinas for a variety of purposes including manufacturing, agriculture, medical clinics, service industries, small businesses, schools, and households. The use Packet Page 859
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-12 ANNEX J
of pesticides in agricultural operations is a large source of hazardous materials within the planning area since the City is surrounded by agricultural operations, and there are agricultural activities in Carr Lake. Hazardous materials also pass through the City in route to other destinations via the freeway, rail, and surface street system. The major transportation routes through the City are Highway 101 and the Union Pacific railroad.

To assess hazardous materials incident risk, buffer distances were used. The chosen buffer distance was based on guidelines in the US Department of Transportation’s Emergency Response Guidebook that suggest distances useful to protect people from vapors resulting from spills involving dangerous goods considered toxic if inhaled. The recommended buffer distance referred to in the guide as the “protective action distance” is the area surrounding the incident in which people are at risk of harmful exposure. For purposes of this plan, a buffer distance of one mile was used, but actual buffer distances will vary depending on the nature and quantity of the release, whether the release occurred during the night or daytime, and prevailing weather conditions.

Table J-6 summarizes population and property that could be exposed to both mobile and fixed hazardous materials incidents.

Table J-6
Population and Property Exposed to Hazardous Materials Incident Risk in Salinas Hazardous Materials
Incident Type Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Mobile Source 82,575 12,974 $5,030,795,622 7,624 $2,888,369,090 Fixed Source 74,602 10,239 $3,740,878,882 5,872 $2,019,200,894 J.5.8 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS
It is often quite difficult to quantify the potential losses from human-caused hazards. While facilities themselves have a tangible dollar value, loss from a human-caused hazard often inflicts an even greater toll on a community, both economically and emotionally. The impact to identified values will vary from event to event and depend on the type, location, and nature of a specific incident. Of particular concern to the City of Salinas is the risk of both cyber-attacks and targeted violence.

The entire population of the City is exposed to cyber-attacks personally or at places of employment. All populations who use a computer or receive services from automated systems are exposed to cyberterrorism. Because it is difficult to predict the particular target of cyber-terrorism, assessing vulnerability to the hazard is difficult. All critical facilities and infrastructure that are operated by a computer system are exposed to cyber-attacks.

Packet Page 860
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-13 ANNEX J
A targeted violence event could range from an individual attack to a coordinated attack by multiple agents upon multiple targets. Large-scale incidents have the potential to kill or injure many people in the immediate vicinity and may also affect people a relative distance from the initial event.

All structures in the City are physically vulnerable to a targeted violence event. The emphasis on accessibility, the opportunity for roof access, driveways underneath some structures, unmonitored areas, the proximity of many structures to transportation corridors and underground pipelines, and the potential for an active shooter to strike any structure randomly all have an impact on the vulnerability of structures. Schools, churches, large event venues, and workplaces are known locations of previous targeted violence incidents and are likely more vulnerable to attack.

All critical facilities and infrastructure could be impacted by targeted violence. The economic impact price tag of potential losses from targeted violence could be huge if lives are lost, jobs are lost, and assets are damaged. Violence can cause fear in residents and visitors to go into public spaces in the City, which could affect the economy.

J.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
All citizens in the City could be susceptible to the human health hazards. A large outbreak or epidemic, a pandemic or a use of biological agents as a weapon of mass destruction could have devastating effects on the population. While all of the population is at risk to the human health hazards, the young and the elderly, those with compromised immune systems, and those with special needs are most vulnerable. The introduction of a disease such as influenza or the COVID-19 virus have impacted the whole population of the City, specifically vulnerable populations.

J.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
All severe weather events profiled in this Plan have the potential to happen anywhere in the City.

All critical facilities in the City likely exposed to severe weather hazards. The most common problems associated with severe weather are loss of utilities and compromised access to roadways. Prolonged periods of extreme heat could result in power outages caused by increased demand for power for cooling.

FEMA National Risk Index data from frequency and exposure to severe weather hazards is summarized in Table J-7.

Packet Page 861
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-14 ANNEX J
Table J-7
Annualized Frequency and Exposure to Severe Weather Events in Salinas Hail Strong Wind
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.34 Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.09 Exposed Population 143,754 Exposed Population 143,754
Exposed Building Values $10,738,627,000 Exposed Building Values $10,738,627,000 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $0 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $342 Heat Wave Tornado
Frequency (Event-Days) 0.37 Frequency (Distinct Events) 1.31 Exposed Population 142,690 Exposed Population 132,092
Exposed Building Values $10,655,330,097 Exposed Building Values $8,861,762,209 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $18 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $230,288,984 Lightning Winter Weather
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.50 Frequency (Event-Days) 0.00 Exposed Population 143,754 Exposed Population 0
Exposed Building Values $10,738,627,000 Exposed Building Values $0 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $1,086 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $0 Source: FEMA National Risk Index
J.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
Based on the FEMA National Risk Index, 5,295 people and $211,035,578 in building value in the City is exposed to landslide risk. Additionally, the City is not susceptible to earthquake induced to landslides.

Most of the City has slopes of 1 to 10%, although a few areas have slopes from 10 to 30%. To the east of the City, slopes increase toward the Gabilan Mountains; northeast of the City, slopes from 10 to 30% become more common. The risk of slope failure is associated with the hillsides surrounding the City. As development extends out closer to these areas, the risk of slope failure will increase. The fact that many homes are built on view property atop or below bluffs and on steep slopes subject to failure, further increases the risk. Slope failure events can block egress and ingress on roads and significantly impact bridges, causing isolation for neighborhoods, traffic problems, transportation delays.

J.5.12 TSUNAMI
The City is not located in a mapped tsunami inundation zone.

J.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
All residents, visitors, and property in the City is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruptions. All critical facilities and infrastructure in the City that is operated by electricity is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruption. Additional emergencies occurring during power disruptions can compound the effects of utility interruption and influence the timeline of restoration. Depending on the Packet Page 862
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-15 ANNEX J
circumstances surrounding the incident, utility disruption can impact transportation/fuel, communications, housing, critical infrastructure, first response, and the economy.

J.5.14 WILDFIRE
The location of historical fires surrounding the City of Salinas is mapped in Figure J-4.

Figure J-4
Historic Wildfires
Packet Page 863
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-16 ANNEX J
To assess wildfire risk, CAL FIRE Fire Threat data was used. Fire Threat combines expected fire frequency with potential fire behavior to create 4 threat classes, extreme, very high, high, and moderate.

Table J-8 summarizes population and property in the City in very high, high, and moderate fire threat areas.

Table J-8
Population and Property Exposed to Wildfire Risk in Salinas CAL FIRE Wildfire Threat Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Very High Fire Threat 0 0 $0 0 $0
High Fire Threat 3,812 27 $14,947,547 435 $49,467,844
Moderate Fire Threat 30,029 548 $414,954,233 1,403 $788,528,084 Though no critical facilities are located in very high or high fire threat zones, 1 fire station, 7 government facilities, and 11 communication facilities, and approximately 50 miles of road is located in a moderate fire threat area
Since Salinas is an urbanized community surrounded by agricultural lands, the greatest fire risk in Salinas is urban fires. Though no area within the City have been mapped as located in a Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) by CAL FIRE, some surrounding areas have been designated as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, as seen in Figure J-5. A risk of wildland fires is associated with these rangelands on the hillsides surrounding the City. As development extends out closer to these areas, the risk of wildland fires will increase.

Additionally, smoke and air pollution from wildfires can be a health hazard, especially for sensitive populations including children, the elderly, and those with respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.

Smoke generated by wildfire contains visible and invisible emissions comprising particulate matter such as soot and tar; gases such as carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen oxides; and toxics such as formaldehyde and benzene. Emissions from wildfires depend on the type of fuel, the moisture content of the fuel, the efficiency or temperature of combustion, and the weather. Wildfires occurring in areas surrounding the City could lead to secondary public health risks.

Agriculture, a key economic driver for the City, is also vulnerable to wildfire risk. Structures, irrigation systems, and equipment, crops, livestock, and stored commodities can be lost to wildfire. Fires can also affect soil quality and smoke can have many negative impacts on crops. Fires also create a high-risk environment for agricultural workers. In addition to the dangers of an active fire, wildfire smoke, ash, and chemicals used to treat fires negatively affect air and water quality.

Packet Page 864
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-17 ANNEX J
Figure J-5
Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones Surrounding the City of Salinas J.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
The effects of climate change are varied and include warmer and more varied weather patterns and temperature changes. Climate change will affect the people, property, economy, and ecosystems in the City and will exacerbate the risk posed by many of the hazards previously profiled in this Plan.

Climate change will have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards.

Increasing temperatures will have direct impacts on public health and infrastructure. Drought, Packet Page 865
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-18 ANNEX J
flooding, and wildfire will likely affect people’s livelihoods and the local economy. Changing weather patterns and more extreme conditions are likely to impact tourism and the local economy, along with changes to agriculture and crops, which are a critical backbone of the City’s economy.

J.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The City of Salinas performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table J-9 • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table J-10 • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table J-11 • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table J-12 • Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table J-13 • A summary of participation in and compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is provided in Section J.6.1 in Table J-14
• An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section J.6.2 in Table J-15 Table J-9
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Planning Documents
General Plan ☒ • City Admin
Capital Improvement Plan ☐ Unknown
Floodplain Management Plan ☒ • Public Works City Engineer Open Space Management Plan ☒ • Planning
Stormwater Management Plan ☒ • Public Works NPDES Permit Manager Coastal Management Plan ☐ • Not applicable
Local Coastal Program ☐ Not applicable
Climate Action/ Adaptation Plan ☒ • Public Works
• Community Development Needs update
Emergency Operations Plan ☒ • Fire Department Needs update Continuity of Operations Plan ☒
• Fire Department
• Police Department
• City Hall
Community Wildfire Protection Plan ☐ Not applicable
Evacuation Plan ☒ • Public Works
• Fire In the Dam Failure Plan
Disaster Recovery Plan ☐ • Unknown
Economic Development Plan ☒ • City Hall Economic Development Manager
Historic Preservation Plan ☒ • Community Development
Packet Page 866
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-19 ANNEX J
Table J-9
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
• City Hall
Transportation Plan ☒ • Public Works Traffic Engineer
Codes, Ordinances & Requirements
Floodplain Ordinance ☒ • Public Works
Zoning Ordinance ☒ • Community Development
Subdivision Ordinance ☒ • Community Development
• Public Works
Site Plan Review Requirements ☒ • Community Development • Public Works
Unified Development Ordinance ☐ Unknown
Post-Disaster Redevelopment/
Reconstruction Ordinance ☐ Unknown
Building Code ☒ • Community Development
Fire Prevention Code ☒ • Fire Department
Table J-10
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development and
land management practices
☒ • Public Works
Engineer(s) or professional(s) trained
in construction practices related to
buildings and/or infrastructure
☒ • Public Works
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with an
understanding of manmade or natural
hazards
☒ • Public Works
Building Inspector ☒ • Community Development
Emergency Manager ☒ • Fire Department Fire Chief
Floodplain Manager ☒ • Public Works City Engineer
Land Surveyors ☐
Resource development staff or grant
writers ☒ Each department handles its own grants.

Public Information Officer ☒ • Fire Department
Scientist(s) familiar with the hazards of
the community ☐
Staff with education or expertise to
assess the community’s vulnerability
to hazards
☒ • Public Works
• Fire Department
• Police Department
Packet Page 867
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-20 ANNEX J
Table J-10
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) ☒ • Public Works GIS Division Maintenance programs to reduce risk ☒ • Public Works
Warning systems/services ☒ Everbridge
Mutual Aid Agreements ☒ • Fire Department
Table J-11
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds ☒ • Finance
Capital Improvements Project Funding ☒ • Finance
Special Purpose Taxes ☒ • Finance
Stormwater Utility Fees ☒ • Finance
Gas / Electric Utility Fees ☒ • Public Works
• Finance
Water / Sewer Fees ☒ • Finance
Development Impact Fees ☒ • Public Works
General Obligation Bonds ☐
Special Tax and Revenue Bonds ☒ • Finance
Community Development Block Grants ☒ • Community Development Table J-12
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit groups
focused on environmental protection,
emergency preparedness, access and
functional needs populations, etc.
☒ • Community Development
Ongoing public education or
information program (e.g., responsible
water use, fire safety, household
preparedness, environmental
education)
☒ • Public Works
• Fire Department Social Media
Natural disaster or safety related
school programs ☒ • Fire Department Social Media
Public-private partnership initiatives
addressing disaster-related issues ☐
Packet Page 868
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-21 ANNEX J
Table J-13
Community Classifications
Participating? Classification Effective Date
Community Rating System (CRS) Yes 7 10/1/2013
ISO Public Protection Classification
StormReady Certification
TsunamiReady Certification No - -
Firewise Communities Certification No - -
Political Capability
Salinas has a General Plan in place, including a robust Economic Development Element. Additionally, the City has a variety of plans including:
• Public Art Master Plan (2020) • Central Area Specific Plan (2020) • Alisal Vibrancy Plan (2019) • Chinatown Revitalization Plan (2019) • Parks, Recreation, and Libraries Master Plan (2019) • West Area Specific Plan (2019) • Downtown Vibrancy Plan (2015) • Gateway Center Specific Plan (2011) • Salinas Ag-Industrial Center Specific Plan (2009)
All of these plans detail the outline of where City resources will be allocated to either improve quality of life, improve safety, or improve hazard mitigation.

J.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) COMPLIANCE Table J-14
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
Designated Floodplain Administrator: Adriana Robles, City Engineer NFIP Community Number: 060202
Flood Insurance Policies in Force: 317
Insurance Coverage in Force: $95,459,500
Written Premium in Force: $320,007
Total Loss Claims: 31
Total Payments for Losses: $160,884
Adopted Regulations that meet NFIP Requirements:
• Flood Damage Prevention, Chapter 9, Article VI of the Municipal Code, adopted October 19, 2010 • Flood Overlay District, Zoning Code, Chapter 37, Article IV of the Municipal Code, adopted July 23, 2013
• Flood Insurance, Subdivision Ordinance, Section 31-705 of the Municipal Code, adopted December 13, 2016
Date of last NFIP Community Assistance Visit (CAV):

September 2016. Provided building information on six (6) structures built in the floodplain.

Higher standards that exceed minimum NFIP requirement:
• Freeboard requirement is two (2) feet above the Base Flood Elevation. • General Plan includes requirement for a 100-foot setback to top of creeks near riparian areas.

Packet Page 869
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-22 ANNEX J
Table J-14
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
Additional floodplain management provisions:

Floodplain regulations are included in area plans such as the Central Area Specific Plan and West Area Specific Plan. The 2002 General Plan includes provisions for protections of wetland and riparian areas, along with floodplains and floodways.

Floodplain management activities performed that go beyond FEMA minimum requirements:

The City of Salinas maintains a monthly log of all the maintenance required of drainage systems and the yardage of any trash removal for all waterways, outfalls, inlet filters, ditches, and basins.

The City’s public education and outreach includes brochures for illicit discharges, annual flood insurance promotion to all residences within the floodplains and flood risk awareness and flood insurance social media posts and posters in our permit center.

Existing impediments to running an effective NFIP program:

The biggest challenges are funding and lack of staff to run a more effective program.

Specific actions that are ongoing or considered related to continued compliance with the NFIP:
• Maintain digital FEMA elevation certificates for all construction in the floodplain. • Evaluate permit applications to determine possible modifications focused on flood prevention. • Develop a checklist for review of building/development permit plans and for inspection of development in floodplains.
• Establish a goal to have each plan reviewer and building inspector attend a training periodically. • Encourage or require certain local staff positions to obtain and maintain Certified Floodplain Manager (CFM) certification.
• Maintain a map of areas that flood frequently and prioritize those areas for inspection immediately after the next flood. If outside FEMA special flood hazard areas, consider requiring existing NFIP regulatory standards through overlay zoning, etc. • Hold informative work sessions for newly elected officials and new appointees to planning commissions and appeals/variance boards, to provide an overview of floodplain management, the importance of participating in the NFIP, and the implications of failing to enforce the requirements of the program or failing to properly handle variance requests. • Obtain FEMA’s Substantial Damage Estimator and attend training; develop mutual aid agreements with other jurisdictions to augment local personnel after disasters. • Conduct a review of other regulatory programs and planning tools, and report on opportunities to improve consistency with the objectives of floodplain management. • Develop handouts for permit applications on specific issues such as installation of manufactured homes in flood hazard areas according to HUD’s installation standards, or guidance on improving/repairing existing buildings to better withstand potential hazards.

Packet Page 870
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-23 ANNEX J
J.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table J-15
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability High
Administrative and Technical Capability Moderate
Fiscal Capability Limited
Education and Outreach Capability Moderate
Political Capability Moderate
Overall Capability Moderate
J.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES City of Salinas can improve its capability at hazard mitigation by sharing the capabilities between departments. The City can place department specific capabilities in a shared folder that gets updated every 3-5 years. City personnel could drill on the occurrence of various hazards in the city and what the trigger points are for involvement of different departments; based on hazard type.

Planning, regulatory, fiscal, administrative, technical, education, and outreach capabilities can all be expanded or improved using a combination of the following strategies:
• Increase capacity through staffing
• Training, and enhanced coordination among all department and jurisdictions • Emergency management/hazard specific program enhancements, training, and exercising • Increased funding opportunities and capacity
• Implementation of mitigation actions and projects
• Continuous research on grant opportunities for emergency management, hazard mitigation, and infrastructure and community development.

Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

J.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Packet Page 871
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-24 ANNEX J
Existing Integration
In the performance period since adoption of the previous hazard mitigation plan, the City made progress on integrating hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and actions into other planning initiatives.

Opportunities for Future Integration
The General Plan and the hazard mitigation plan are complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure. The General Plan is considered to be an integral part of this plan. An update to the General Plan may trigger an update to the hazard mitigation plan. The City, through adoption of a General Plan and zoning ordinance, has planned for the impact of natural hazards. The process of updating this hazard mitigation plan provided the opportunity to review and expand on policies in these planning mechanisms. The City will create a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and the General Plan by identifying a mitigation action as such and giving that action a high priority. Other planning processes and programs that may be coordinated with the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan include the following:
• General Plan, including the Safety Element
• Emergency Operations Plans
• Climate Action and Adaptation Plans
• Debris management plans
• Recovery plans
• Capital improvement programs
• Municipal codes
• Community design guidelines
• Water-efficient landscape design guidelines
• Stormwater management programs
• Water system vulnerability assessments
• Community wildfire protection plans
• Comprehensive flood hazard management plans
• Resiliency plans
• Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery action plans • Public information/education plans
Packet Page 872
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-25 ANNEX J
Some action items do not need to be implemented through regulation. Instead, these items can be implemented through the creation of new educational programs, continued interagency coordination, or improved public participation. As information becomes available from other planning mechanisms that can enhance this plan, that information will be integrated via the update process.

J.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the City of Salinas Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern applicable to their jurisdiction. The Hazard Problem Statements were based on the risk assessment, the vulnerability analysis, and local knowledge.

Stormwater is tightly regulated by the state. The volume of people living in the City’s waterways is increasing. Tied to the increase in the volume of people is the associated debris and waste generated. The trash and associated living components create waste that can clog culverts and grates, leading to backing up the system and impacting residents, roads, and businesses.

Additionally, there is a human waste component leading to additional contamination of runoff. • The City of Salinas has steps in place to mitigate Cyber-attacks. Through external vulnerability tests and user "clicker" education, the City does provide mitigation to avoid attacks. The City has IDS/IPS protection on the edge of the network and implements 2FA. Cyber-attacks are challenging to avoid.

The City uses a scalable VDI environment for most every user, so a compromised system can be immediately isolated and wiped if needed. The City uses a zero-day attack vector protection on each virtual machine to help notify and mitigate attacks. The City also implements an email forwarding notification system and implements a Personal Identifiable Information (PII) mitigation blocking system to help keep any PII attacks/breaches to a minimum, or if PII is sent out of the Packet Page 873
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-26 ANNEX J
network. Additional education is needed to further improve recognizing various threats from all sources.
• The City of Salinas has a wide variety of hazardous materials in its jurisdiction. The City of Salinas has Southern Pacific Railroad and Highway 101 running through its jurisdiction. With that, there is a high volume of Hazmat moving through City limits daily. Most of the City’s fixed hazmat sources are related to agriculture, in the form of refrigerants and pesticides. The volumes and types of hazardous materials are regulated by Monterey County. The City of Salinas as a whole is vulnerable to attacks on our hazmat sources. The Salinas Fire Department in cooperation with Seaside Fire Department has a OES Type 1 Hazmat team that covers Monterey and San Benito Counties. This team is also on the statewide matrix for response to greater emergencies. The team is a defensive resource.
• The City of Salinas is vulnerable to targeted acts of violence given its proximity to several military institutions (Defense Language Institute, Naval Post Graduate School), and being a hub for local gangs (Nortenos in primis). Gangs, specifically, are targeting our youths with a radicalization campaign aimed at shaping the future of the gangs while inciting our youth to violence and encouraging them to strike in the heart of our vibrant city. • As a result of this consistent overdraft of groundwater levels in the Salinas Valley Groundwater Basin, basin levels have dropped below sea level, allowing seawater to intrude from the Monterey Bay into aquifers located 180 and 400 feet below ground surface. Drought conditions can lead to deeper and deeper groundwater pumping and this loss of groundwater increases sea water intrusion. Seawater intrusion of the 180 ft aquifer could lead to contaminated water and effect the water supply for the City of Salinas.
• Because of factors such as age, disability, income, and housing status, the population of the City of Salinas includes many residents that are vulnerable to risks associated with climate change. These risks amplify other hazards, such as severe storms, drought, and wildfire. Most of the housing stock in the City was designed for a mild climate, not for mitigating extreme heat days and other events.

J.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

The City of Salinas Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefit-cost analysis and consideration of mitigation alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the City’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix, in Table J-17 lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Packet Page 874
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-27 ANNEX J
Status of Previous Plan Actions
All actions from the 2016 Hazard Mitigation Plan were reviewed and updated by the City during the planning process. Table J-16 includes the status of actions completed or removed from the previous plan.

In order to improve the mitigation action plan for this Plan update and align with the countywide Mitigation Action Plan, the City added more specificity and detail to previous plan actions in addition to the new actions added to the Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix.

Table J-16
City of Salinas Completed Mitigation Actions from 2016 MJHMP 2016
Action # Description Status Narrative Update
1 Identify hazard-prone critical facilities and
infrastructure and carry out acquisition,
relocation, and structural and nonstructural
retrofitting measures as necessary.

Completed
All buildings meet current
earthquake standards. The
City has adopted the new
FEMA standards. Ongoing on
an as needed basis.
4 Develop an unreinforced masonry grant
program that helps correct earthquake-risk
nonmasonry building problems, including
chimney bracing and anchoring water heaters.

Deleted
Most buildings meet current
earthquake standards, and
the City does not currently
have the resources to
implement private property
grant program.
6 The police department is looking to enlarge
their office space. The city is planning to build
a new headquarters building on city owned
property.

Completed The City has completed the
new police headquarters.
7 Work with USACE to make the wastewater
treatment plant in Salinas more flood
resistant.

Deleted
A more detailed and
effective strategy to reduce
flood risk at the industrial
wastewater treatment plant
is included updated 2021
actions.

Packet Page 875
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-28 ANNEX J
J City of Salinas Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Table J-17
City of Salinas Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
1 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Develop a sustained public outreach program that encourages consistent hazard mitigation content and develop audiencespecific hazard mitigation outreach efforts. Audiences include the elderly, children, tourists, non-English speaking residents, and home and business owners.

Priority /
High
Administration,
Community
Services,
Various
HMGP and
PDM Grants,
General
Funds
2 In Progress Flooding
Identify and carry-out minor flood and stormwater
management projects that would reduce damage to
infrastructure and damage due to local flooding/inadequate drainage. These include the modification of existing culverts and bridges, upgrading capacity of storm drains, stabilization of streambanks, and creation of debris or flood/stormwater retention basins in small watersheds.

Priority /
High Maintenance HMGP and PDM Grants
3 In Progress/
3 years All Complete a written All Hazard Evacuation Plan especially for the risk of flood, dam failure, and earthquake. Moderate Law
Enforcement/
Deputy Police
Chief
General Fund
4 In Progress/
5 years All Complete a written Continuity of Government Plan. Low Law/Fire General Fund 5 In Progress/
5 years Flooding Reinforce the Industrial Wastewater Treatment Plant against the threat of flood in the 100-year floodplain. High Public Works Federal
Grant
Assistance
6 Ongoing Earthquake
Continue to adopt and implement current earthquake building standards and upgrade, remove, or replace unreinforced
masonry buildings, as feasible.

Medium Community
Development
Grants and
General Fund
7 New All Update the Emergency Operations Plan and increase training for staff in ICS. High Law/Fire General Fund
Packet Page 876
CITY OF SALINAS Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | J-29 ANNEX J
Table J-17
City of Salinas Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
8 New HumanCaused
Work with neighboring jurisdictions to increase the redundancy of IT infrastructure. Law General Fund
9 New Extreme
Heat
Develop strategies to prepare the community to adapt to more extreme heat days. This could include creating community cooling centers, more outdoor water features (splash pads, etc.), consideration for cooling without electricity as brown outs may accompany extreme heat, and extra precautions/resources for elderly and other vulnerable residents.

Moderate Various Grants and
General Fund
10 New
(ongoing) Drought
Coordinate with the Salinas Valley Groundwater Sustainability Agency and other water partners on reducing seawater
intrusion and over drafting in local aquifers, as well as on projects which will increase groundwater recharge or increase sustainable water availability.

High
Public Works,
Community
Development
Grant
assistance
11 New
(ongoing) Flooding
Build green infrastructure throughout the city which can protect against stormwater flooding, increase groundwater recharge, and provide other benefits through greening hardscape
environments.

High Public Works Grants and
General Fund
12 New Climate
Change
Support local community implementation of climate resiliency efforts outlined in the Monterey County Climate Resilience Plan. Moderate Various Grants and General Fund New Drought
Work with agriculture stakeholders on drought resiliency, water sustainability, and protecting farmworkers and crops from extreme heat.

High
Administration
(Economic
Development),
Community
Development
Grants and
General Fund
Packet Page 877

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 878
K
ANNEX K:

CITY OF SAND CITY
2021 Monterey County
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Packet Page 879
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-1 ANNEX K
K. CITY OF SAND CITY
K.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact
Chief Brian Ferrante
Chief of Police, Public Works Supervisor,
Emergency Response Coordinator
1 Pendergrass Way
Sand City, CA 93955
(831) 394-1451 ext. 218
[email protected]
K.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE
K.2.1 LOCATION
Packet Page 880
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-2 ANNEX K
K.2.2 GEOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE
The City of Sand City is a small City located on the Monterey Bay, and surrounded on most sides by the City of Seaside and a short distance northeast of the City of Monterey. The city has a total area of 2.9 square miles.

K.2.3 HISTORY
The City of Sand City is historically known for its industrial areas, notably coastal sand mining. Local business owners paved the way for the City’s incorporation on May 31, 1960, which created the public arena for local control over the City’s economic destiny and urban design. Recent history shows a steady progress toward redevelopment of the town, starting with the development of two shopping centers where there was once significant urban blight. Also, in 1996, the City reached an agreement to retain between 70 to 80% of its coastline for parks and open space, while maintaining two development areas primarily dedicated to coastal resort development which is allowed in the City’s certified local coastal plan. This blending of fiscal responsibility and coastal stewardship is also reinforced by the City’s ability to garner a larger percentage of property tax revenues within the redevelopment project plan area adopted in 1987. Redevelopment has given this small city the opportunity to redefine itself in a progressive, sustainable way.

K.2.4 POPULATION
The City of Sand City has a population of 334 people. The City of Sand City is the least populous city in Monterey County. While the residential population of the City is small, commercial, and industrial land uses draw an estimated daytime population of employees and shoppers that approaches 10,000.

K.2.5 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
Sand City has a Council-Manager form of government. The Council is composed of five members elected at large to staggered terms. Councilmember terms last for four years, though the Mayoral term is only for two years. The Council appoints the City Administrator, City Attorney, and members of advisory committees. The Council chooses one of its members as Vice-Mayor, who presides at the Council meetings in the absence of the Mayor.

K.2.6 ECONOMY AND TAX BASE
Sand City has a number of industrial businesses and has served the Monterey Peninsula as a commercial base and has a number of larger retail stores. The City currently provides jobs for approximately 3,000 and attracting 40,000 to 50,000 shoppers daily to the city’s businesses.

The West End area of Sand City, once an industrial area, hosts a growing artists' colony. The City of Sand City is continuously working to install public art around the City to celebrate the community, with the expressed goal to allow local and visiting artists to fully express themselves and build the foundation of an accessible public gallery. Every August, the artists of Sand City and neighboring areas hold a street fair called the "West End Celebration."
Packet Page 881
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-3 ANNEX K
K.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The City of Sand City followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan. In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the City formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process.

The City of Sand City held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting to discuss vulnerabilities, mitigation activities that had occurred since the last plan update, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies on August 24, 2021. Key stakeholders present at the meeting included:
• Aaron Blair, City Manager
• Brian Ferrante, Chief of Police
• Mark Parker, Public Works Supervisor
K.4 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
Overtime the City of Sand City has phased-out some of the initial heavy industrial uses for regional amenities such as shopping center. The Sand City General Plan: 2002‐2017 divides the City into six geographical districts. The Destination Commercial Planning District on the northeastern corner of the City, east of Highway 1, contains the largest destination commercial development on the Monterey Peninsula. Three planning districts that are east of Highway 1 and south of 7 the Destination Commercial Planning Area contain a mix of industrial and commercial uses with scattered single‐family dwellings, duplexes, and small apartment units. The East Dunes Planning District includes City Hall and vacant parcels that provide an opportunity for family‐oriented residential development.

In 2005, the City received unanimous coastal commission approval for a small desalination facility. This small facility allows the City to continue its redevelopment efforts without depending upon a sustainable regional water supply that has proven difficult to achieve. The City’s plant uses brackish water near the coast for purifying. Following a reverse osmosis process, the byproduct water that is not potable is injected into beach wells.

Two districts along the Monterey Bay, west of Highway 1, are primarily undeveloped and planned for development as State/regional parkland or visitor serving commercial development. The Sand City coastal zone extends from the southern boundary of Fort Ord Dunes State Park to the City of Seaside on the south. Sand City has about 1.5 miles of shoreline, comprised primarily of sand dunes. In 1996, the City entered a “Memorandum of Understanding” with California State Parks and the Monterey Peninsula Regional Parks District to allow visitor‐serving uses within a few remaining “development envelopes” on the coast. California State Parks and the Monterey Peninsula Regional Parks District are acquiring the remaining land for sensitive habitat reconstruction, public parks, and general open space.

Packet Page 882
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-4 ANNEX K
This survey was a subjective exercise used to provide some quantitative measures of how adequately existing planning mechanisms were being used to address the notion of safe growth. Each topic area included a number of statements, which were answered on a scale from 1 to 5 based on the degree to which the respondent agreed or disagreed with the statement as it relates to the City’s current plans, policies, and programs for guiding future community growth and development. Scores for each topic area statement were averaged to provide a topic area result and the topic area totals were averaged to provide an overall survey score. More information on the survey is provided in Capability Assessment in Volume 1.

The Sand City Safe Growth Survey was completed by Charles Pooler, City Planner in the City of Sand City Planning Department. The results are summarized in Table K-1.

Table K-1
City of Sand City Safe Growth Survey Results
Topic Area 2021 2016
Land Use 3.75 3.00
Transportation 3.67 3.67
Environmental Management 4.67 3.67
Public Safety 3.67 4.33
Zoning Ordinance 3.75 3.25
Subdivision Regulations 2.00 2.00
Capital Improvement Program & Infrastructure Policies 3.00 2.00 Building Code 4.00 5.00
Economic Development 3.00 3.00
Average Survey Ratings 3.50 3.32
K.5 JURISDICTION SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile the City of Sand City’s hazards and assess the City’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan. The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the County and describes the hazards, as well as their extent, magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences. Hazard vulnerability specific to the City of Sand City is included in this Annex.

The City of Sand City’s Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The City’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Survey to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the City. Each variable was scored by hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16.

Table K-2 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the City of Sand City’s Planning Team.

Packet Page 883
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-5 ANNEX K
Table K-2
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): City of Sand City Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of
Risk
Agricultural Emergencies - - - - - -
Coastal Erosion 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 9.0 Moderate
Coastal Flooding 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7.0 Possible
Cyber-Attack 2.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 9.0 Moderate
Dam Failure - - - - - -
Drought & Water Shortage 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 12.0 Substantial Earthquake 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 12.0 Substantial
Epidemic 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 Moderate
Extreme Cold & Freeze 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Extreme Heat 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Flash Flood 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Hazardous Materials Incident 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7.0 Possible Invasive Species - - - - - -
Levee Failure - - - - - -
Localized Stormwater Flooding 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible Mass Migration - - - - - -
Pandemic 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Riverine Flooding - - - - - -
Sea Level Rise 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Severe Winter Storms 2.0 2.0 1.0 1.0 6.0 Slight
Slope Failure 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0 Slight
Targeted Violence 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Terrorism 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Tsunami 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 9.0 Moderate Water Contamination 3.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Wildfire - - - - - -
Windstorms 3.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 8.0 Possible
K.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
There is no agricultural land located within the City, so therefore an agricultural emergency does not pose a direct threat. Since agriculture is a major economic driver in the County, an agricultural emergency could have indirect economic impacts on the City.

K.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
To determine coastal erosion risk, USGS Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center Coastal Storm Modeling System (CoSMos) shoreline change, and cliff retreat projection data was used. For cliff Packet Page 884
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-6 ANNEX K
retreat modeling an end of century (2100) forced sea level rise amount of 200 cm was used based on Ocean Protection Council (OPC) High Risk Aversion Guidance. For shoreline change, winter erosion uncertainty modeling was used to capture the degree of uncertainty associated with future shoreline erosion. Hold the Line scenario modeling was chosen for both types of erosion. Three sea level rise levels (25 cm, 75 cm, and 200 cm) to represent planning horizons based on OPC Sea Level Rise Projections for the Monterey Tide Gauge. 25 cm of sea level rise represents near term (2030) risk, 75 cm represent mid-term (2060) risk, and 200 cm represent long-term (2100) risk.

Table K-3 summarizes population and property exposure to coastal erosion risk.

Table K-3
Population and Property Exposed to Coastal Erosion Risk in Sand City Sea Level Rise Scenario/
Erosion Type Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Cliff Erosion
Sea Level Rise (25 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (75 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (200 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Shoreline Erosion
Sea Level Rise (25 cm) 0 0 $0 7 $76,930,836
Sea Level Rise (75 cm) 0 0 $0 6 $76,930,836
Sea Level Rise (200 cm) 0 0 $0 1 $70,358,090
K.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
There is no population or property in the City located in a mapped dam inundation zone of any of the dams (Nacimiento, San Antonio, Los Padres, and Forest Lake) analyzed in this Plan.

Levee Failure
Based on Leveed Area from the US Army Corps of Engineers, National Levee Database, there is no population or property in the City exposed to levee failure risk. Many levees in the County protect important agricultural lands and a significant levee failure could have an indirect economic impact.

K.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
The entire population of the City is vulnerable to drought events. Drought can affect people’s health and safety, including health problems related to low water flows, poor water quality, or dust. Other possible impacts include recreational risks; effects on air quality; diminished living conditions related to energy, air quality, and hygiene; compromised food and nutrition; and increased incidence of illness and disease. Water shortages can affect access to safe, affordable water, with substantial impacts on low-income families and communities burdened with environmental pollution.

A prolonged drought could also cause economic impacts. Increased demand for water and electricity may result in shortages and higher costs of these resources. While economic impacts will be most significant on industries that use water or depend on water for their business, cascading economic Packet Page 885
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-7 ANNEX K
effects can hurt many sectors of the economy. Agriculture, which will likely be impacted by drought conditions, is a major economic driver in the County, and the City could be impacted economically.

K.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
The entire population of the City is potentially exposed to direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes. Whether directly impacted or indirectly impacted, the entire population will have to deal with the consequences of earthquakes to some degree. Business interruption could keep people from working, road closures could isolate populations, and loss of utilities could impact populations that suffered no direct damage from an event itself. Similarly, all property and critical infrastructure in the City is potentially exposed to earthquake risk.

According to Monterey County Assessor records, there are 801 residential and non-residential buildings in the City, with a total value of $352,877,451. Since all structures in the City are susceptible to earthquake impacts to varying degrees, this represents the property exposure to seismic events.

Additionally, liquefaction risk was assessed. Table K-4 summarizes population and property in the City exposed to liquefaction risk.

Table K-4
Population and Property Exposed to Liquefaction Risk in Sand City Liquefaction Risk Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
High Liquefaction Susceptibility 0 0 $0 11 $76,931,932
Moderate Liquefaction Susceptibility 187 115 $24,334,617 356 $200,626,765 K.5.6 FLOODING
FEMA flood zones were used to assess flooding risk. Table K-5 summarizes population and property in the City in the 100-year and 500-year floodplain.

Table K-5
Population and Property Exposed to Flooding Risk in Sand City FEMA Flood Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
100-Year Flood Zone 0 0 $0 22 $76,933,577
500-Year Flood Zone 75 1 $173,008 3 $77,589,019
K.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
To assess hazardous materials incident risk, buffer distances were used. The chosen buffer distance was based on guidelines in the US Department of Transportation’s Emergency Response Guidebook that suggest distances useful to protect people from vapors resulting from spills involving dangerous goods considered toxic if inhaled. The recommended buffer distance referred to in the guide as the “protective action distance” is the area surrounding the incident in which people are at risk of harmful exposure. For purposes of this plan, a buffer distance of one mile was used, but actual buffer distances Packet Page 886
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-8 ANNEX K
will vary depending on the nature and quantity of the release, whether the release occurred during the night or daytime, and prevailing weather conditions.

Table K-6 summarizes population and property that could be exposed to both mobile and fixed hazardous materials incidents.

Table K-6
Population and Property Exposed to Hazardous Materials Incident Risk in Sand City Hazardous Materials
Incident Type Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Mobile Source 324 157 $32,386,952 644 $320,490,499
Fixed Source 0 0 $0 0 $0
K.5.8 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS
It is often quite difficult to quantify the potential losses from human-caused hazards. While facilities themselves have a tangible dollar value, loss from a human-caused hazard often inflicts an even greater toll on a community, both economically and emotionally. The impact to identified values will vary from event to event and depend on the type, location, and nature of a specific incident.

K.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
All citizens in the City could be susceptible to the human health hazards. A large outbreak or epidemic, a pandemic or a use of biological agents as a weapon of mass destruction could have devastating effects on the population. While all of the population is at risk to the human health hazards, the young and the elderly, those with compromised immune systems, and those with special needs are most vulnerable. The introduction of a disease such as influenza or the COVID-19 virus have impacted the whole population of the City, specifically vulnerable populations.

K.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
All severe weather events profiled in this Plan have the potential to happen anywhere in the City.

Vulnerable populations are the elderly, low income or linguistically isolated populations, people with life-threatening illnesses, and residents living in areas that are isolated from major roads. Properties in poor condition or in high-risk locations may be susceptible to the most damage. All critical facilities in the City likely exposed to severe weather hazards. The most common problems associated with severe weather are loss of utilities and compromised access to roadways. Prolonged periods of extreme heat could result in power outages caused by increased demand for power for cooling.

The FEMA National Risk Index calculates annualized frequency, exposure and annual expected loss of building value and population to some severe weather hazards identified in this Plan. Based on zip Packet Page 887
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-9 ANNEX K
code and census tract Countywide data was used to identify annualized frequency, exposure, and annual expected loss in the City from severe weather hazards. Though the entire City is considered vulnerable to these hazards, the FEMA data was used in this risk assessment to provide scale for the potential risk and impacts.

FEMA National Risk Index data from frequency and exposure to severe weather hazards is summarized in Table K-7.

Table K-7
Annualized Frequency and Exposure to Severe Weather Events in Sand City Hail Strong Wind
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.19 Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.03 Exposed Population 2,637 Exposed Population 2,637
Exposed Building Values $449,794,000 Exposed Building Values $449,794,000 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $0 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $5,030 Heat Wave Tornado
Frequency (Event-Days) 0.07 Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.84 Exposed Population 2,637 Exposed Population 1,750
Exposed Building Values $449,794,000 Exposed Building Values $298,534,461 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $0 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $5,026,212 Lightning Winter Weather
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.38 Frequency (Event-Days) 0.00 Exposed Population 2,637 Exposed Population 0
Exposed Building Values $449,794,000 Exposed Building Values $0 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $79 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $0 Source: FEMA National Risk Index
K.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
Based on the FEMA National Risk Index, 201 people and $69,740,156 in building value in the City is exposed to landslide risk. Additionally, the City is not susceptible earthquake induced to landslides.

K.5.12 TSUNAMI
Population and property in the City located in a mapped tsunami inundation zone is summarized in Table K-8.

Table K-8
Population and Property in Tsunami Inundation Zone in Sand City Inundation Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Tsunami Inundation Zone 0 1 $152,206 88 $76,933,577
Packet Page 888
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-10 ANNEX K
K.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
All residents, visitors, and property in the City is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruptions. All critical facilities and infrastructure in the City that is operated by electricity is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruption.

K.5.14 WILDFIRE
For purposes of this analysis CAL FIRE Fire Threat data was used. Fire Threat combines expected fire frequency with potential fire behavior to create 4 threat classes, extreme, very high, high, and moderate.

Table K-9 summarizes population and property in the City in very high, high, and moderate fire threat areas.

Table K-9
Population and Property Exposed to Wildfire Risk in Sand City CAL FIRE Wildfire Threat Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Very High Fire Threat 0 0 $0 0 $0
High Fire Threat 0 0 $0 0 $0
Moderate Fire Threat 228 86 $5,508,183 176 $181,098,970 K.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
The effects of climate change are varied and include warmer and more varied weather patterns and temperature changes. Climate change will affect the people, property, economy, and ecosystems in the City and will exacerbate the risk posed by many of the hazards previously profiled in this Plan.

Climate change will have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards.

Increasing temperatures and rising sea-levels will have direct impacts on public health and infrastructure.

Population and property exposed to sea level rise risk is summarized in Table K-10.

Packet Page 889
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-11 ANNEX K
Table K-10
Population and Property Exposed to Sea Level Rise in Sand City Sea Level Rise Amount Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
1 ft Sea Level Rise (2030) 0 0 0 10 $76,931,932
3 ft Sea Level Rise (2060) 0 0 0 13 $76,931,932
7 ft Sea Level Rise (2100) 0 0 0 17 $76,933,577
K.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The City of Sand City performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table K-11 • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table K-12 • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table K-13 • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table K-14 • Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table K-15 • A summary of participation in and compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is provided in Section K.6.1 in Table K-16
• An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section K.6.2 in Table K-17 Table K-11
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Planning Documents
General Plan ☒ • Community Development
Capital Improvement Plan ☒ • Administration Department Under continuous modification as situations/ priorities arise
Floodplain Management Plan ☒ • FEMA
Open Space Management Plan ☐ •
Stormwater Management Plan ☒ • Community Development
Coastal or Shoreline Management
Plan ☒ • Community Development The City has a certified Local Coastal Program Local Coastal Program ☒ • Community Development Certified 1984 Climate Action/ Adaptation Plan ☐
Emergency Operations Plan ☒ • Police Department
Continuity of Operations Plan ☐
Community Wildfire Protection
Plan ☐
Evacuation Plan ☐
Disaster Recovery Plan ☐
Packet Page 890
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-12 ANNEX K
Table K-11
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Economic Development Plan ☐
Historic Preservation Plan ☐
Transportation Plan ☐
Codes, Ordinances & Requirements
Floodplain Ordinance ☒ • Community Development Sand City Municipal Code 18.88 Zoning Ordinance ☒ • Community Development
Subdivision Ordinance ☒ • Community Development
Site Plan Review Requirements ☒ • Community Development Unified Development Ordinance ☐
Post-Disaster Redevelopment/
Reconstruction Ordinance ☐
Building Code ☒ • Community Development
Fire Prevention Code ☒ • Community Development
Table K-12
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development
and land management practices
☒ • Community Development
Planner- City Employee
Engineer- Contract with Harris &
Associates
Engineer(s) or professional(s)
trained in construction practices
related to buildings and/or
infrastructure
☒ • Community Development Engineer- Contract with Harris & Associates
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with an
understanding of manmade or
natural hazards
☒ • Community Development
Planner- City Employee
Engineer- Contract with Harris &
Associates
Building Inspector ☒ • Community Development
Plan check and inspection
service via contract with City of
Monterey and 4-leaf
Emergency Manager ☒ • Administration Department
Floodplain Manager ☒ • Community Development
Community Development
Director assigned Floodplain
Administrator per municipal
code 18.88
Land Surveyors ☒ • Community Development City Surveyor- Contract with Polaris Consulting
Packet Page 891
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-13 ANNEX K
Table K-12
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Resource development staff or
grant writers ☐
Public Information Officer ☒ • Administration Department City Mayor in conjunction with City Manager
Scientist(s) familiar with the
hazards of the community ☐
Staff with education or expertise
to assess the community’s
vulnerability to hazards
☐
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) ☐
Maintenance programs to reduce
risk ☒ • Public Works City Public Works crew consists of 3 employees Warning systems/services ☐
Mutual Aid Agreements ☒ • Police Department Agreement with Monterey County Sheriff
Table K-13
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds ☒ • Administration Department
If funds are available and not
committed, can be used for
hazard mitigation
Capital Improvements Project
Funding ☒ • Administration Department Funded through General Fund Special Purpose Taxes ☒ Eligible, but subject to voter
approval
Stormwater Utility Fees ☐
Gas / Electric Utility Fees ☐
Water / Sewer Fees ☐ Connection fees collected by
regional agencies, not City
Development Impact Fees ☒ City has a “Building Development Fee” for street work only
General Obligation Bonds ☒
Special Tax and Revenue Bonds ☒
Community Development Block
Grants (CDBG) ☒
Packet Page 892
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-14 ANNEX K
Table K-14
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit groups
focused on environmental
protection, emergency
preparedness, access and functional
needs populations, etc.
☐
Ongoing public education or
information program (e.g.,
responsible water use, fire safety,
household preparedness,
environmental education)
☐
Natural disaster or safety related
school programs ☐ No schools are located in the City.

Public-private partnership initiatives
addressing disaster-related issues ☐
Table K-15
Community Classifications
Participating? Classification Effective Date
Community Rating System (CRS) No - -
ISO Public Protection Classification Yes 2 6/17/2015
StormReady Certification No - -
TsunamiReady Certification No - -
Firewise Communities Certification No - -
K.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) COMPLIANCE Table K-17
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
Designated Floodplain Administrator: Aaron Blair, Community Development Director/ City Manager
NFIP Community Number: 060435
Flood Insurance Policies in Force: 3
Insurance Coverage in Force: $1,400,000
Written Premium in Force: $3,109
Total Loss Claims: 0
Total Payments for Losses: 0
Adopted Regulations that meet NFIP Requirements:
• Sand City Municipal Code (SCMC) Chapter 18.88 “Flood Protection.” Adopted by Ordinance 96-01 (June 4, 1996) and last updated by Ordinance 00-03 (December 5, 2000) Date of last NFIP Community Assistance Visit (CAV):

Packet Page 893
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-15 ANNEX K
Table K-17
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
Date of last visit unknown. Unaware of past compliance issues.

Higher standards that exceed minimum NFIP requirement:

None.

Additional floodplain management provisions:

None.

Floodplain management activities performed that go beyond FEMA minimum requirements:

None
Existing impediments to running an effective NFIP program:

None identified.

Specific actions that are ongoing or considered related to continued compliance with the NFIP:
• Maintain updates to City Municipal Code for continued compliance. • Maintain and update map of areas of potential frequent flooding during severe storm events. • Translate hard copy of flood maps to digital and post on City website (public outreach and education).
• Encourage Certified Floodplain Manager (CFM) Certification. • Continue to maintain supply of FEMA Floodplain maps at City Hall for staff and public reference.

K.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table K-18
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability Moderate
Administrative and Technical Capability Limited
Fiscal Capability Limited
Education and Outreach Capability Limited
Political Capability Moderate
Overall Capability Limited
K.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES Overall capabilities can be improved through mutual aid and cooperation with neighboring cities that have a wider range of resources and staff capabilities. Planning, regulatory, fiscal, administrative, technical, education, and outreach capabilities can all be expanded or improved using a combination of the following strategies:
• Increase capacity through staffing
• Training, and enhanced coordination among all department and jurisdictions • Emergency management/hazard specific program enhancements, training, and exercising • Increased funding opportunities and capacity
• Implementation of mitigation actions and projects
• Continuous research on grant opportunities for emergency management, hazard mitigation, and infrastructure and community development.

Packet Page 894
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-16 ANNEX K
Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

K.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Opportunities for Future Integration
The General Plan and the hazard mitigation plan are complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure. The General Plan is considered to be an integral part of this plan. An update to the General Plan may trigger an update to the hazard mitigation plan. The City, through adoption of a General Plan and zoning ordinance, has planned for the impact of natural hazards. The process of updating this hazard mitigation plan provided the opportunity to review and expand on policies in these planning mechanisms. The City will create a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and the General Plan by identifying a mitigation action as such and giving that action a high priority. Other planning processes and programs that may be coordinated with the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan include the following:
• General Plan, including the Safety Element
• Emergency Operations Plans
• Climate Action and Adaptation Plans
• Debris management plans
• Recovery plans
Packet Page 895
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-17 ANNEX K
• Capital improvement programs
• Municipal codes
• Community design guidelines
• Water-efficient landscape design guidelines
• Stormwater management programs
• Water system vulnerability assessments
• Community wildfire protection plans
• Comprehensive flood hazard management plans
• Resiliency plans
• Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery action plans • Public information/education plans
Some action items do not need to be implemented through regulation. Instead, these items can be implemented through the creation of new educational programs, continued interagency coordination, or improved public participation. As information becomes available from other planning mechanisms that can enhance this plan, that information will be integrated via the update process.

K.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the City of Sand City Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern applicable to their jurisdiction. The Hazard Problem Statements were based on the risk assessment, the vulnerability analysis, and local knowledge.

Packet Page 896
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-18 ANNEX K
• Several elevated storage tanks used for acid baths at Granite Rock (Dias Street) currently store an estimated 2,000+ gallons that may potentially be damaged or cause overflow/flood issues following an earthquake and local ground-shaking event.
• While the city’s population is low, it becomes one of the most densely populated areas in Monterey County during the daytime due to its two regional commercial shopping centers (Sand Dollar and Edgewater), creating a major warning and evacuation concern for the City. • The Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency (MRWPCA) operates a sewer pump station at West Bay Street in Sand City. This facility is located close to the shoreline and is potentially susceptible to tsunami. Furthermore, there is a 36-inch force main that extends from this pump station north along the west side of Highway 1 to the treatment plant in the City of Marina. Both the pump station and this 36-inch force main are susceptible to earthquakes. Damage to one or both of these facilities would have far reaching impacts to the sewer service of the Monterey Peninsula community, in addition to potential spills and contamination. The pump station and pipelines are the property and jurisdiction of the MRWPCA, and thus maintenance and repair are that Agency’s responsibility. However, during an emergency whereby the plant and/or infrastructure is damaged, the City of Sand City would be the immediate emergency responder for that infrastructure within Sand City’s boundaries.

K.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

The City of Sand City Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefit-cost analysis and consideration of mitigation alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the City’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix, in Table K-20 lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Status of Previous Plan Actions
All actions from the 2016 Plan were reviewed and updated by the City during the planning process.

Table K-19 includes the status of action previous plan completed or removed from the previous plan.

Packet Page 897
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-19 ANNEX K
Table K-19
City of Sand City Completed Mitigation Actions from 2016 MJHMP 2016
Action # Description Status Narrative Update
1 Identify hazard-prone critical facilities and
infrastructure and carry out acquisition, relocation,
and structural and nonstructural retrofitting
measures as necessary
Completed Completed
5 Maintain records and data to accurately reflect
existing utilities and critical facilities. Completed Completed 7 Continue to implement the most recent versions of
the California State-adopted construction and
building codes.

Completed
/ Ongoing
Completed and
ongoing as when
building code
updates are released.
8 Improve and expand the City’s website to include
the disbursement of hazard related information to
the general public, inclusive of mitigation measures.

Completed
The City recently
completed a full
update of their
website.
9 Promote information sharing among neighboring
cities, utilities, Monterey County, and State and
Federal agencies.

Completed
/ Ongoing
Completed and
ongoing as needed.
11 Explore mitigation opportunities for repetitively
flooded properties and, if necessary, encourage
property owners to carry-out acquisition,
relocation, elevation, and flood-proofing measures
to protect these properties.

Completed
Capital project in
progress that will
address major
flooding issues.
12 Ensure that new developments are designed to
reduce or eliminate flood by requiring properties
and rights-of-way to be designed for the approved
sewer and drainage facilities, providing onsite
detention facilities whenever possible.

Completed
/Ongoing
Completed and
ongoing as needed in
development review
process.
13 Continue to conduct current fuel management
programs (weed abatement programs) and
investigate and apply new and emerging fuel
management techniques.

Complete/
Ongoing
Completed and
ongoing as needed.
16 MRWPCA sewer pump station and force main are
vulnerable to tsunami and earthquake damage. This
infrastructure, though located within Sand City, is
the jurisdiction of another government agency. The
City can contact the MRWPCA to see if they have
emergency plans in place for such disasters.

Completed
The City of Seaside
removed the pump
station and installed
a larger sewer main.

Packet Page 898
CITY OF SAND CITY Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | K-20 ANNEX K
K City of Sand City Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Table K-20
City of Sand City Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
1 In
Progress/
Ongoing
Severe Weather,
Utility
Interruption,
Earthquake
Replace above-ground utility lines with underground utility lines. Ensure that utility lines are installed underground for new construction. This includes completing the
undergrounding of utilities on California Avenue between Tioga Avenue and East Avenue and on Tioga Ava. between
California Avenue and Metz Road.

Priority /
High
Building and
Engineering
General
Funds
2 In
Progress/
1-2 years
Drought
Drill two new groundwater wells further inland in order to draw in more brackish water to the desalination plant. This will mitigate the salinity of water extracted from aquifer for the City's desalination plant that can result in a shutdown of the desalination plant due to the resulting higher salinity brine that cannot be put back into the aquifer.

Priority /
High
Engineering
and Planning
Partnership
with CalAm Water
3 In Progress Flooding Complete Contra Costa and Catalina Stormwater Improvement Projects to mitigate flood risk.

Priority /
High
Building and
Engineering
Grants and
General
Funds
4 Ongoing/
Continuous All Continue to use the City's website and social media to share relevant hazard preparedness and mitigation information. Moderate Administration General Funds 5 New/ 0-5
years
All Update the General Plan and include relevant hazard information. Moderate Planning General Funds
Packet Page 899

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 900
L
ANNEX L:

CITY OF SEASIDE
2021 Monterey County
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Packet Page 901
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-1 ANNEX L
L. CITY OF SEASIDE
L.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact
Division Chief David Nava
Seaside Fire Department
1635 Broadway Ave.

Seaside, CA 93955
(831) 899-6790
[email protected]
Fire Chief Mary Gutierrez
Seaside Fire Department
1635 Broadway Ave.

Seaside, CA 93955
(831) 899-6790
[email protected]
L.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE
L.2.1 LOCATION
Packet Page 902
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-2 ANNEX L
L.2.2 GEOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE
The City of Seaside is the largest city on the Monterey Peninsula, and second largest in Monterey County. Seaside is a family-oriented community with a full range of housing, business, cultural, and recreational opportunities in a safe and attractive environment for residents and visitors. Seaside is home to California State University at Monterey Bay and the Monterey College of Law, both located on the former site of Fort Ord. The climate is a cool Mediterranean type, strongly influenced by the prevailing winds from the west, which blow over the Pacific Coast's cool ocean currents from Alaska.

L.2.3 HISTORY
Seaside began as the Hotel Del Monte began, as a part of the City of Monterey. Because the subdivision of Seaside was located just a mile to the northwest of the hotel, the subdivision of Seaside was initially conceived as an outgrowth of the resort community and identified as a tourist destination.

Like many other ambitious pioneers in the late nineteenth century, Seaside’s founder, Dr. John Roberts left New York in 1887 for California and settled near relatives in Pacific Grove. He and his uncle bought 160 acres from the David Jacks Corporation, which he divided into 1,000 lots for sale as vacation property. He also made his home in the new residential area that bordered Monterey and the Hotel.

In 1910, a Monterey County Supervisor successfully lobbied to locate the US Army Base Fort Ord in Seaside. This base housed over 20,000 infantry members and civilian workers. Fort Ord was considered one of the most attractive locations of any US Army post, because of its proximity to the beach and California weather. Due to Base Realignment and Allocation Closures, Fort Ord was closed in 1994.

Since that time, the land has been conveyed to different government and nonprofit organizations for development and preservation of open space. Seaside thrived as a center of diversity derived from its multicultural character as a military town throughout the decades of the twentieth century and became known as a forward-thinking model of political inclusion during the civil rights era.

L.2.4 POPULATION
The City of Seaside has a population of 32,366 people (2020 Census), a small decrease (2%) since 2010.

The population is projected to continue to grow modestly.

L.2.5 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
The City of Seaside is a General Law City with a Council/Manager form of government. The five‐ member City Council is a legislative and policy‐making body. The Mayor is elected every two years in a general election. Serving with the Mayor are four members of the City Council who have overlapping terms; every two years, two members of the City Council are elected in a general election. Members of the City Council, including the Mayor, are not subject to term limits. The City Manager is appointed by the City Council to manage the daily operations of the City and is responsible for making policy recommendations to the City Council and implementing City Council policy directives.

L.2.6 ECONOMY AND TAX BASE
While the foundation of the Seaside business community is made up of small family-owned establishments, the area hosts national retailers and restaurant groups as well as the Seaside Auto Center, one of the first auto malls in the country.

Packet Page 903
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-3 ANNEX L
L.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The City of Seaside followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan. In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the City formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process.

The City of Seaside held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting to discuss vulnerabilities, mitigation activities that had occurred since the last plan update, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies on June 28, 2021. Key stakeholders present at the meeting included:
• Craig Malin, City Manager
• Chief Mary Gutierrez, Fire Chief
• Chief Dave Nava, Division Chief, EOC Planning
• Sheri Damon, City Attorney
• Chief Abdul D. Pridgen, Chief of Police
• David Little, Chief Building Official
• Nisha Patel, Public Works Director and City Engineer
• Dave Fortune, Maintenance and Utilities Superintendent • Roberta Greathouse, HR Director / Risk Manager
• Trevin Barber, Assistant City Manager, Economic Development and Community Planning Director
• Dan Meewis, Recreation Director
• Gary Bartlett, IT Manager
• Haroon Noori, Admin. Analyst
• Victor Damiani, Finance Director
L.4 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
Traditionally a military town linked to Fort Ord, which closed in 1994, the city has experienced significant redevelopment and gentrification in recent years with projects ranging from golf courses, five-star resorts, conference facilities, new residential and commercial development, and plans for a mixed-use, transit-oriented, urban village that would transform the downtown.

The City of Seaside is in the processes of updating its General Plan and a full draft has been completed.

Approximately one-third of the total City land area is occupied by residential uses, the majority of which is single family or duplex housing. The former Fort Ord land for conservation at just under onequarter of the total land area in the City. The former Fort Ord lands that are planned for growth are about 16% of the total (about 830 developable acres of land). Public lands account for about onequarter of the total and commercial and industrial uses account for just 4% of the total land area of the City. Seaside has a unique urban form that includes established single-family residential areas and commercial corridors in the historic part of the City and vacant land and buildings in the former Fort Ord that will be converted to urban uses over time. The City’s core residential neighborhoods have a high building density, with minimal setbacks, while newer subdivisions have a more suburban building layout, with larger yards and less regular building placement. Most of the City’s commercial districts are developed in a strip commercial development style
Packet Page 904
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-4 ANNEX L
The Seaside coastal zone includes about 90 acres of land and 500 feet of shoreline. A former estuarine complex comprised of Robert’s Lake and Laguna Grande makes up the vast inland portion of the coastal zone. Land uses within the coastal zone include residential, commercial, and park/open space.

The Local Coastal Program was certified in 2013.

The Seaside Safe Growth Survey was completed by Gloria Stearns, Community Development Director for the City of Seaside Community Development Department. The results are summarized in Table L-1.

Table L-1
City of Seaside Safe Growth Survey Results
Topic Area 2021 2016
Land Use 4.25 4.25
Transportation 4.67 4.33
Environmental Management 3.67 3.67
Public Safety 4.33 3.67
Zoning Ordinance 3.75 4.75
Subdivision Regulations 2.00 3.00
Capital Improvement Program & Infrastructure Policies 3.00 2.33 Building Code 4.00 5.00
Economic Development 4.00 4.00
Average Survey Ratings 3.74 3.89
L.5 JURISDICTION SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile the City of Seaside’s hazards and assess the City’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan. The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the County and describes the hazards, as well as their extent, magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences. Hazard vulnerability specific to the City of Seaside is included in this Annex.

Packet Page 905
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-5 ANNEX L
The City of Seaside’s Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The City’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Survey to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the City. Each variable was scored by hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16.

Each score was associated with a qualitative degree of risk ranking from Negligible (between 1 and 4) to Very High (between 14.1 and 16). The Survey is described in more detail in Risk Assessment Methods in Volume 1. Table L-2 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the City of Seaside’s Planning Team.

Table L-2
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): City of Seaside Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of
Risk
Agricultural Emergencies 1.2 1.2 1.3 1.2 4.9 Slight
Coastal Erosion 2.4 2.4 2.3 2.3 9.4 Moderate
Coastal Flooding 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.9 10.7 Substantial
Cyber-Attack 3.5 3.2 3.3 3.5 13.5 High
Dam Failure 1.1 1.1 1.1 1.1 4.4 Slight
Drought & Water Shortage 3.4 3.3 3.4 3.5 13.6 High
Earthquake 2.8 3.1 3.0 2.9 11.8 Substantial
Epidemic 3.2 3.0 3.1 3.1 12.4 High
Extreme Cold & Freeze 1.8 1.8 1.8 1.8 7.2 Possible
Extreme Heat 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.9 7.9 Possible
Flash Flood 2.1 2.3 2.3 2.5 9.2 Moderate
Hazardous Materials Incident 2.2 2.4 2.4 2.4 9.4 Moderate Invasive Species 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.1 8.8 Moderate
Levee Failure 1.2 1.3 1.2 1.3 5.0 Slight
Localized Stormwater Flooding 2.7 2.8 2.4 2.8 10.7 Substantial Mass Migration 1.3 1.3 1.1 1.1 4.9 Slight
Pandemic 3.0 2.8 2.5 2.9 11.1 Substantial
Riverine Flooding 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.4 5.7 Slight
Sea Level Rise 2.5 2.8 2.7 2.6 10.6 Substantial
Severe Winter Storms 2.2 2.4 2.2 2.2 9.1 Moderate
Slope Failure 1.9 2.1 1.9 2.1 8.0 Possible
Targeted Violence 2.7 2.6 2.7 2.8 10.7 Substantial
Terrorism 2.1 2.4 2.3 2.8 9.5 Moderate
Tsunami 2.4 2.4 2.6 2.6 10.0 Moderate
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 2.8 2.9 2.4 2.6 10.7 Substantial Water Contamination 2.3 2.0 2.6 2.6 9.4 Moderate
Wildfire 2.8 3.1 3.3 3.3 12.4 High
Windstorms 2.8 2.8 2.7 2.7 10.9 Substantial
Packet Page 906
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-6 ANNEX L
L.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
There is no agricultural land located within the City, so therefore an agricultural emergency does not pose a direct threat. Since agriculture is a major economic driver in the County, an agricultural emergency could have indirect economic impacts on the City.

L.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
To determine coastal erosion risk, USGS Pacific Coastal and Marine Science Center Coastal Storm Modeling (CoSMos) shoreline change, and cliff retreat projection data was used. For cliff retreat modeling an end of century (2100) forced sea level rise amount of 200 cm was used based on the Ocean Protection Council (OPC) High Risk Aversion Guidance. For shoreline change, winter erosion uncertainty modeling was used to capture the degree of uncertainty associated with future shoreline erosion. Hold the Line scenario modeling was chosen for both types of erosion. Three sea level rise levels (25 cm, 75 cm, and 200 cm) to represent planning horizons based on OPC Sea Level Rise Projections for the Monterey Tide Gauge. 25 cm of sea level rise represents near term (2030) risk, 75 cm represent mid-term (2060) risk, and 200 cm represent long-term (2100) risk.

Table L-3 summarizes population and property exposure to coastal erosion risk.

Table L-3
Population and Property Exposed to Coastal Erosion Risk in Seaside Sea Level Rise Scenario/
Erosion Type Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Cliff Erosion
Sea Level Rise (25 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (75 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (200 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Shoreline Erosion
Sea Level Rise (25 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (75 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Sea Level Rise (200 cm) 0 0 $0 0 $0
Much of the City lies approximately 2,000 feet inland from the coastline, which provides sufficient distance and protection from coastal erosion risk. Sea level rise and erosion modeling is inherently uncertain, and therefore future modeling could identify people and property at risk to coastal erosion.

Sea level rise could worsen flooding in existing flood hazard areas and could also impact the area north of Broadway Avenue along Del Monte Boulevard. Miles of transportation infrastructure, beaches, recreation areas, and homes and businesses may be at risk to damage from sea level rise and coastal flooding. The City could also be impacted by other types of erosion not profiled in this Plan.

L.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
The is no population or property in the City located in a mapped dam inundation zone of any of the dams (Nacimiento, San Antonio, Los Padres, and Forest Lake) analyzed in this Plan.

Packet Page 907
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-7 ANNEX L
Levee Failure
Based on Leveed Area from the US Army Corps of Engineers, National Levee Database, there is no population or property in the City exposed to levee failure risk. Many levees in the County protect important agricultural lands and a significant levee failure could have an indirect economic impact.

L.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
The entire population of the City is vulnerable to drought events. Drought can affect people’s health and safety, including health problems related to low water flows, poor water quality, or dust. Other possible impacts include recreational risks; effects on air quality; diminished living conditions related to energy, air quality, and hygiene; compromised food and nutrition; and increased incidence of illness and disease. Water shortages can affect access to safe, affordable water, with substantial impacts on low-income families and communities burdened with environmental pollution. A prolonged drought could also cause economic impacts. Increased demand for water and electricity may result in shortages and higher costs of these resources. While economic impacts will be most significant on industries that use water or depend on water for their business, cascading economic effects can hurt many sectors of the economy. Agriculture, which will likely be impacted by drought conditions, is a major economic driver in the County, and the City could be impacted economically.

L.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
The entire population of the City is potentially exposed to direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes. Whether directly impacted or indirectly impacted, the entire population will have to deal with the consequences of earthquakes to some degree. Business interruption could keep people from working, road closures could isolate populations, and loss of utilities could impact populations that suffered no direct damage from an event itself. Similarly, all property and critical infrastructure in the City is potentially exposed to earthquake risk. Major highways and bridges would be major critical facility of concern if an earthquake were to occur. Seaside lies in one of three areas that have the highest susceptibility to ground shaking in the County. Approximately 93% of the City’s resident households and a number of critical facilities, highways, and bridges are located in a high shaking hazard area. Strong ground shaking due to earthquakes can cause soils to compact, resulting in local or regional settlement of the ground surface. This settlement can cause moderate to heavy damage to structures and underground utility lines in Seaside.

According to Monterey County Assessor records, there are 7,620 residential and non-residential buildings in the City, with a total value of $2,826,808,392. Since all structures in the City are susceptible to earthquake impacts to varying degrees, this represents the property exposure to seismic events.

Additionally, liquefaction risk was assessed. Table L-4 summarizes population and property in the City exposed to liquefaction risk.

Table L-4
Population and Property Exposed to Liquefaction Risk in Seaside Liquefaction Risk Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
High Liquefaction Susceptibility 115 0 $0 47 $56,085,622 Moderate Liquefaction Susceptibility 49 0 $0 20 $18,994,571 Packet Page 908
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-8 ANNEX L
The majority of Seaside has low relative liquefaction susceptibility, with the beach area of the City having moderate susceptibility. The southern portion of Seaside, near Roberts Lake and Laguna Grande Lake, has moderate, high, and/or variable liquefaction risk.

L.5.6 FLOODING
FEMA flood zones were used to assess flooding risk. The City is susceptible to flooding, particularly in a small coastal area west of Highway 1, and additional areas adjacent to Roberts Lake, Laguna Grande, and associated drainage areas. These areas are subject to a one-percent-annual-chance-flood, also referred to as a 100-year flood zone. The rest of the City is in a 500-year flood zone and is subject to a zero point two-percent (0.2 percent) chance-flood event. Table L-5 summarizes population and property in the City in the 100-year and 500-year floodplain.

Table L-5
Population and Property Exposed to Flooding Risk in Seaside FEMA Flood Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
100-Year Flood Zone 0 0 $0 25 $47,811,746
500-Year Flood Zone 25,549 5,461 $2,345,735,210 2,106 $460,720,029 L.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
To assess hazardous materials incident risk, buffer distances were used. The chosen buffer distance was based on guidelines in the US Department of Transportation’s Emergency Response Guidebook that suggest distances useful to protect people from vapors resulting from spills involving dangerous goods considered toxic if inhaled. The recommended buffer distance referred to in the guide as the “protective action distance” is the area surrounding the incident in which people are at risk of harmful exposure. For purposes of this plan, a buffer distance of one mile was used, but actual buffer distances will vary depending on the nature and quantity of the release, whether the release occurred during the night or daytime, and prevailing weather conditions.

Table L-6
Population and Property Exposed to Hazardous Materials Incident Risk in Seaside Hazardous Materials
Incident Type Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Mobile Source 22,109 3,485 $1,543,482,883 1,745 $452,468,201 Fixed Source 0 0 $0 0 $0
Packet Page 909
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-9 ANNEX L
As cities age, land uses associated with hazardous materials are often abandoned. These uses include former industrial properties, gasoline stations, and military sites. Uses such as this may have soils and groundwater that are contaminated and are often referred to as “brownfields.” Seaside has a number of hazardous waste sites located largely in the southwestern part of the City, as well as underground storage tanks located in the northeastern part of the City. Of the hazardous waste sites in Seaside, there is one Federal Superfund site, located on former Fort Ord lands, and two state response sites that have land use restrictions. Throughout the City, there are seven open or active cleanup sites (including leaking underground storage tank (LUST) sites), in addition to 28 closed LUST cases.

The Fort Ord Superfund Site was added to the Superfund National Priorities List of Hazardous Waste Sites on February 21, 1990. While most of the former Fort Ord is now part of the Fort Ord National Monument, much of the area located in Seaside has been or will be converted from military to civilian land uses. While many old military buildings and infrastructure remain abandoned, others have been demolished. Hazardous materials and toxic waste sites at the former Fort Ord consist of a wide variety of materials including industrial chemicals, petrochemicals, domestic and industrial wastes (as seen in landfills), asbestos and lead-based paint in buildings, above- and underground storage tanks, artillery and explosives.

The identification, remediation, and disposal of hazardous waste associated with the Superfund cleanup process of Fort Ord takes place under the Federal Facilities Agreement (FFA). The US Army is responsible for conducting the Superfund cleanup process, and the US EPA is the lead agency for regulatory enforcement and oversight of Superfund activities. Remnant safety hazard issues are also present on the former Fort Ord resulting from previous U.S. Army munitions training operations. In 2007, a remediation program was created to provide coordinated access for bikers, hikers, runners, and equestrians to the new Fort Ord National Monument
L.5.8 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS
It is often quite difficult to quantify the potential losses from human-caused hazards. While facilities themselves have a tangible dollar value, loss from a human-caused hazard often inflicts an even greater toll on a community, both economically and emotionally. The impact to identified values will vary from event to event and depend on the type, location, and nature of a specific incident.

L.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
All citizens in the City could be susceptible to the human health hazards. A large outbreak or epidemic, a pandemic or a use of biological agents as a weapon of mass destruction could have devastating effects on the population. While all of the population is at risk to the human health hazards, the young and the elderly, those with compromised immune systems, and those with special needs are most vulnerable. The introduction of a disease such as influenza or the COVID-19 virus have impacted the whole population of the City, specifically vulnerable populations.

L.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
All severe weather events profiled in this Plan have the potential to happen anywhere in the City.

Vulnerable populations are the elderly, low income or linguistically isolated populations, people with life-threatening illnesses, and residents living in areas that are isolated from major roads. Properties in Packet Page 910
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-10 ANNEX L
poor condition or in high-risk locations may be susceptible to the most damage. All critical facilities in the City likely exposed to severe weather hazards. The most common problems associated with severe weather are loss of utilities and compromised access to roadways. Prolonged periods of extreme heat could result in power outages caused by increased demand for power for cooling.

Table L-7
Annualized Frequency and Exposure to Severe Weather Events in Seaside Hail Strong Wind
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.27 Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.06 Exposed Population 22,668 Exposed Population 22,668
Exposed Building Values $1,665,961,000 Exposed Building Values $1,665,961,000 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $0 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $70 Heat Wave Tornado
Frequency (Event-Days) 0.08 Frequency (Distinct Events) 1.09 Exposed Population 22,668 Exposed Population 22,668
Exposed Building Values $1,665,961,000 Exposed Building Values $1,665,961,000 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $1 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $31,131,774 Lightning Winter Weather
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.41 Frequency (Event-Days) 0.00 Exposed Population 22,668 Exposed Population 0
Exposed Building Values $1,665,961,000 Exposed Building Values $0 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $305 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $0 Source: FEMA National Risk Index
L.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
Based on the FEMA National Risk Index, 3,296 people and $305,007,976 in building value in the City is exposed to landslide risk. Additionally, the City is not susceptible earthquake induced to landslides.

Seaside has low susceptibility to landslides, as it lacks hills and steep bluffs. However, landslides and surficial slope failure are most likely to occur in areas with a slope greater than 25% and along steep bluffs. Extensive areas in the southeastern portion of the City have slopes in excess of 30%. Certain areas have slopes approaching vertical. Development is limited in these areas because of the severe erosion and landslide hazard that exists.

Packet Page 911
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-11 ANNEX L
L.5.12 TSUNAMI
Population and property located in a mapped tsunami inundation zone is summarized in Table L-8.

Table L-8
Population and Property in Tsunami Inundation Zone in Seaside Inundation Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Tsunami Inundation Zone 49 0 $0 36 $51,541,447
Much of the City of Seaside lies approximately 2,000 feet inland from the coastline, which should provide sufficient distance and protection from tsunamis.

L.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
All residents, visitors, and property in the City is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruptions. All critical facilities and infrastructure in the City that is operated by electricity is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruption.

L.5.14 WILDFIRE
For purposes of this analysis CAL FIRE Fire Threat data was used. Fire Threat combines expected fire frequency with potential fire behavior to create 4 threat classes, extreme, very high, high, and moderate.

Table L-9 summarizes population and property in the City in very high, high, and moderate fire threat areas.

Table L-9
Population and Property Exposed to Wildfire Risk in Seaside CAL FIRE Wildfire Threat Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Very High Fire Threat 0 0 $0 0 $0
High Fire Threat 3,764 14 $14,211,519 36 $742,995
Moderate Fire Threat 10,121 183 $141,599,152 180 $56,893,553 The undeveloped areas in the northern and eastern portions of the City are highly prone to wildland fires. These areas contain grassland with many steeper areas with brushland and wooded slopes. The State of California Department of Forestry rates these areas as extreme wildfires hazard areas based on slope characteristics, climate, fuel loading, and water availability. These areas could create safety hazards for residents within the community.

L.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
The effects of climate change are varied and include warmer and more varied weather patterns and temperature changes. Climate change will affect the people, property, economy, and ecosystems in the City and will exacerbate the risk posed by many of the hazards previously profiled in this Plan.

Climate change will have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards.

Packet Page 912
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-12 ANNEX L
Increasing temperatures and rising sea-levels will have direct impacts on public health and infrastructure. Drought, coastal and inland flooding, and wildfire will likely affect people’s livelihoods and the local economy. Changing weather patterns and more extreme conditions are likely to impact tourism and the rural economies, along with changes to agriculture and crops, which are a critical backbone of Monterey County’s economic success. There will also be negative impacts to ecosystems, both on land and in the ocean, leading to local extinctions, migrations, and management challenges.

L.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The City of Seaside performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table L-10 • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table L-11 • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table L-12 • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table L-13 • Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table L-14 • A summary of participation in and compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is provided in Section L.6.1 in Table L-15
• An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section L.6.2 in Table L-16 Table L-10
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Planning Documents
General Plan ☒  Community Development Update to General Plan estimated for adoption in 2022.

Capital Improvement Plan ☒  Engineering
Floodplain Management Plan ☐  Engineering
Open Space Management Plan ☒  Public Works
Stormwater Management Plan ☐  Engineering
Coastal Management Plan ☒  Community Development
Local Coastal Program ☒  Community Development The LCP was certified in 2013 Climate Action/ Adaptation Plan ☐  Community Development The City will hire a consultant in 2022 to complete this work.

Emergency Operations Plan ☒  Fire Department
Continuity of Operations Plan ☒  Fire Department
Community Wildfire Protection
Plan ☐
Evacuation Plan ☒  Fire Department
 Police Department
Currently merging plan with
County’s plan
Disaster Recovery Plan ☒  Fire Department Part of EOP
Packet Page 913
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-13 ANNEX L
Table L-10
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Economic Development Plan ☒  Community Development
 Economic Development
Economic Opportunity Plan
(General Plan also has related
strategies and policies)
Historic Preservation Plan ☐ The City has no historic
buildings or designations.

Transportation Plan ☒  TAMC
Codes, Ordinances & Requirements
Floodplain Ordinance ☒  Engineering Seaside Municipal Code - Chapter 15.28 Flood Control
Zoning Ordinance ☒  Community Development
SMC 17. As part of General Plan
update, zoning code is being
updated.

Subdivision Ordinance ☒  Community Development SMC 16
Site Plan Review Requirements ☒
 Community Development
 Public Works
 Building Department
Unified Development Ordinance ☐
Post-Disaster Redevelopment/
Reconstruction Ordinance ☐
Building Code ☒  Building Department
Fire Prevention Code ☒  Fire Department
Table L-11
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development
and land management practices
☒
 Community Development
 Public Works
 Engineering
Engineer(s) or professional(s)
trained in construction practices
related to buildings and/or
infrastructure
☒
 Engineering
 Public Works
 Building Department
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
an understanding of manmade
or natural hazards
☒
 Community Development
 Engineering
 Public Works
Building Inspector ☒  Building Department
Emergency Manager ☒  Fire Department
Floodplain Manager ☒  Engineering
Packet Page 914
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-14 ANNEX L
Table L-11
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Land Surveyors ☐
Resource development staff or
grant writers ☒
 Community Development
 Public Works
 Engineering
Public Information Officer ☒  City Manager Department
Scientist(s) familiar with the
hazards of the community ☐
Staff with education or expertise
to assess the community’s
vulnerability to hazards
☒
 Community Development
 Engineering
 Fire Department
 Building Department
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) ☒  Community Development Engineering Maintenance programs to
reduce risk ☒  Public Works
Warning systems/services ☒  Monterey County
Mutual Aid Agreements ☒  Police Department
 Fire Department
PD, Fire has agreement with
County for Mutual Aid
Other
Environmental Services Cooperative Agreement (ESCA): this is a longterm implementation grant agreement from the Army. Under this grant, the City is responsible for the long term implementation and monitoring of land use controls that have been put in place, across more than 3300 acres of the former Fort Ord, to address residual safety issues that remain now that the cleanup of munitions has been completed. Land that has been cleared of munitions for their designated reuse has been transferred to the City of Seaside, the City of Del Rey Oaks, the City of Monterey, California State University, Monterey Bay (Marina), and the County of Monterey.

Table L-12
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds ☒  Engineering
 Public Works
Capital Improvements Project
Funding ☒  Engineering Public Works
Special Purpose Taxes ☒ If measure is introduced and
passes
Stormwater Utility Fees ☐ Under consideration
Packet Page 915
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-15 ANNEX L
Table L-12
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
Gas / Electric Utility Fees ☒  Finance Directed to general fund Water / Sewer Fees ☒  Finance Special District
Development Impact Fees ☐
General Obligation Bonds ☒  Finance For special specific projects Special Tax and Revenue Bonds ☒  Finance For special specific projects Community Development Block
Grants (CDBG) ☐  Community Development
City of Seaside gets CDBG,
CDBG-CV3 funds, but not
CDBG-MIT currently
Table L-13
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach
Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit
groups focused on
environmental protection,
emergency preparedness,
access and functional needs
populations, etc.
☒  Community Development
 Fire Department
Community Development has
contacts for various nonprofits
that may be of assistance. Fire
Department provides
emergency preparedness
Ongoing public education or
information program (e.g.,
responsible water use, fire
safety, household preparedness,
environmental education)
☒
 Police Department
 Fire Department
 Community Development
 Engineering
Participation in community
events. Fire Department Open
House, Sustainable Seaside
non-profit Earth Day event,
National Night Out.

Natural disaster or safety
related school programs ☐
Public-private partnership
initiatives addressing disasterrelated issues
☐
Table L-14
Community Classifications
Participating? Classification Effective Date
Community Rating System (CRS) No - -
ISO Public Protection Classification Yes 2
StormReady Certification Yes
TsunamiReady Certification No - -
Firewise Communities Certification No - -
Packet Page 916
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-16 ANNEX L
L.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) COMPLIANCE Table L-15
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
Designated Floodplain Administrator: Nisha Patel, Public Works Director/City Engineer NFIP Community Number: 060203
Flood Insurance Policies in Force: 10
Insurance Coverage in Force: $2,789,000
Written Premium in Force: $3,748
Total Loss Claims: 2
Total Payments for Losses: $125,032
Adopted Regulations that meet NFIP Requirements:
• Seaside Municipal Code - Chapter 15.28 Flood Control last revised by Ordinance 744 adopted July 21, 1988.]
Date of last NFIP Community Assistance Visit (CAV):

Unknown.

Higher standards that exceed minimum NFIP requirement:
• California Building Codes
• Regulations that require no use of fill for structural support of buildings • Within Zone E on the Flood Insurance Rate Map, a setback is required for all new development from the ocean, lake, bay, riverfront or other body of water to create a safety buffer consisting of a natural vegetative or contour strip. This buffer shall be designated according to the floodrelated erosion hazard and erosion rate, in relation to the anticipated “useful life” of structures, and depending upon the geologic, hydrologic, topographic, and climatic characteristics of the land. The buffer may be used for suitable open space purposes, such as for agricultural, forestry, outdoor recreation, and wildlife habitat areas, and for other activities using temporary and portable structures only.

Additional floodplain management provisions:
• Seaside Municipal Code Chapter 8.46, Urban Storm Water Quality Management and Discharge Control
• Seaside Municipal Code Chapter 15.32, Standards to Control Excavation, Grading and Erosion Floodplain management activities performed that go beyond FEMA minimum requirements:

The City routinely maintains storm drain catch basins; with the goal of cleaning each catch basin at least once annually.

Existing impediments to running an effective NFIP program:

None identified.

Specific actions that are ongoing or considered related to continued compliance with the NFIP:

None identified.

Packet Page 917
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-17 ANNEX L
L.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table L-16
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability High
Administrative and Technical Capability High
Fiscal Capability Limited
Education and Outreach Capability High
Political Capability Moderate
Overall Capability Moderate
L.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES Planning, regulatory, fiscal, administrative, technical, education, and outreach capabilities can all be expanded or improved using a combination of the following strategies:
• Increase capacity through staffing
• Training, and enhanced coordination among all department and jurisdictions • Emergency management/hazard specific program enhancements, training, and exercising • Increased funding opportunities and capacity
• Implementation of mitigation actions and projects
• Continuous research on grant opportunities for emergency management, hazard mitigation, and infrastructure and community development.

Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

L.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Opportunities for Future Integration
The General Plan and the hazard mitigation plan are complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure. The General Plan is considered to be an integral part of this plan. An update to the General Plan may trigger an update to the hazard mitigation plan. The City, through adoption of a General Plan and zoning ordinance, has planned for the impact of natural hazards. The process of updating this hazard mitigation plan provided the opportunity to review and expand on policies in these planning mechanisms. The City will create a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and the General Plan by identifying a mitigation action as such and giving that action a high priority. Other planning processes and programs that may be coordinated with the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan include the following:
• General Plan, including the Safety Element
• Emergency Operations Plans
• Climate Action and Adaptation Plans
• Debris management plans
• Recovery plans
• Capital improvement programs
• Municipal codes
• Community design guidelines
• Water-efficient landscape design guidelines
• Stormwater management programs
• Water system vulnerability assessments
• Community wildfire protection plans
• Comprehensive flood hazard management plans
• Resiliency plans
• Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery action plans • Public information/education plans
Some action items do not need to be implemented through regulation. Instead, these items can be implemented through the creation of new educational programs, continued interagency coordination, or improved public participation. As information becomes available from other planning mechanisms that can enhance this plan, that information will be integrated via the update process.

Packet Page 919
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-19 ANNEX L
L.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the City of Seaside Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern applicable to their jurisdiction. The Hazard Problem Statements were based on the risk assessment, the vulnerability analysis, and local knowledge.

Hazard Problem Statements helped the Planning Committee identify common issues and weaknesses, determine appropriate mitigation strategies, and understand the realm of resources needed for mitigation. Hazard Problem Statements for the City of Seaside are identified below:
• A critical flooding concern for the city exists in areas along Roberts Lake and Laguna Grande Lake, particularly during heavy rains during winter storms combined with high tides. City Hall and the Police Station are considered vulnerable to flooding due to their low-lying location and proximity to Laguna Grande Lake.
• The City continues to coordinate on potential alternative solutions to problems caused by the 90” outfall in Sand City, which continues to get plugged by shifting sands, preventing drainage of stormwater runoff from Seaside (and Sand City).
• City Hall and the Police Station are susceptible to liquefaction during a major earthquake event. • The City is concerned with the long-term effects of sea level rise, particularly in terms of exacerbating the effects of saltwater intrusion already being seen in Seaside’s aquifer to the north. • Ingress/egress to the city is limited to only several main transportation corridors (Highway 1 and Route 68) which creates evacuation concerns for the city in response to a major hazard event. • Climate change is likely to increase the magnitude and impact of storm events, which will exacerbate the impact and lead to more frequent flood events • The City is concerned about the high threat of wildland fire due to existing fuels in combination with large areas of urban/wildland interface and intermix. Areas of concern include former Fort Ord lands, which include areas where the City is developing. Future climate change and drought conditions is likely to increase wildfire risk.
• The City is concerned about exposure to hazardous materials leaks. This risk is likely to increase due to changing industries within Seaside.

L.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

The City of Seaside Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefit-cost analysis and consideration of mitigation alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the City’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix, in Table Packet Page 920
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-20 ANNEX L
L-18 lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Status of Previous Plan Actions
All actions from the 2016 Plan were reviewed and updated by the City during the planning process.

Table L-17 includes the status of action previous plan completed or removed from the previous plan.

Table L-17
City of Seaside Status of Previous Plan Actions
2016
Action # Description Status

1.07 Assure that evacuation is safe and efficient. Completed/ To Be Continued

1.08 Assure that shelters have adequate capacity. Completed/ To Be Continued

1.09 Assure that the City is prepared to shelter populations that the Red Cross will not (for example, those who are sick).

Completed/ To
Be Continued

1.1 Consider fire safety, evacuation, and emergency vehicle access when reviewing proposals to add secondary units or additional residential units in areas exposed to high fire threat.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

1.12 Ensure the safety of pets in an emergency. Completed/ To Be Continued

2.01 Maintain the Seaside Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (LHMP) and update it on a regular basis. This is to be accomplished by: making the LHMP a part of the City's General Plan; conducting quarterly meetings of the LHMP Working Group; reviewing the plan 2 years after final approval and conducting a major update of the plan within 4 years of approval.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

3.18 Identify areas susceptible to tsunami. Completed

3.19 Identify mitigation measures for tsunami. Completed

3.2 Identify areas susceptible to wildfire. Completed

3.21 Identify mitigation measures for wildfire. Completed

3.22 Ensure that all new construction in areas susceptible to fire is completed using fire resistant design techniques that will limit damage caused by fires. For example, require Class A roofing materials for all homes in areas susceptible to fires.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

3.24 Develop a defensible space vegetation program that includes the clearing or thinning of non-fire resistive vegetation, or all non-native species, within 30 feet of access and evacuation roads/routes to critical facilities.

Note: The roads that border the Army's Historic Impact Area were transferred with requirements related to the upkeep and maintenance Completed/ To
Be Continued
Packet Page 921
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-21 ANNEX L
Table L-17
City of Seaside Status of Previous Plan Actions
2016
Action # Description Status
of fuel breaks. This area has specific planning/design considerations.

The Army has a few areas that still require munitions cleanup. Other locations inside the area are proposed for future prescribed burns.

3.25 Require that development in high fire hazard areas provide adequate access roads (with width and vertical clearance that meet minimum standards of the Fire Code), onsite fire protection system, evacuation signage, and fuel breaks.

Note: The roads that border the Army's Historic Impact Area were transferred with requirements related to the upkeep and maintenance of fuel breaks. This area has specific planning/design considerations.

The Army has a few areas that still require munitions cleanup. Other locations inside the area are proposed for future prescribed burns.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

3.29 Maintain geographic information system and data to accurately reflect existing utilities and critical facilities.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

3.32 Improve the utilization of existing information in the forecasting of natural hazards. The City will continue to use NOAA information and to coordinate with Monterey County, along with other available data.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

4.01 Provide public information on locations for obtaining sandbags and deliver sandbags to locations throughout the City prior to and during the rainy season.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

4.04 Work with local schools (Monterey Peninsula Unified School District and private schools) on disaster preparedness for school children.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

4.07 Explore the feasibility of using "Reverse 911" technology to notify the public about impending disasters, Amber Alerts, etc. Completed

4.09 Use disaster anniversaries, such as October (Loma Prieta earthquake), to remind the public of safety and security mitigation activities.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

4.17 Provide information to the public related to family and personal planning for delays due to traffic or road closures.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

4.2 Provide information to residents on the availability of hazard maps on the City's website.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

6.02 Assure that the Emergency Operations Center is adequately equipped to handle a disaster. Completed

6.03 Maintain the Emergency Operations Center in fully functional state of readiness. Completed

6.04 Conduct an Emergency Operations Center full activation exercise at least annually.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

6.05 Ensure the protection of communications. Completed/ To Be Continued

6.07 Improve communications among all City departments. Completed Packet Page 922
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-22 ANNEX L
Table L-17
City of Seaside Status of Previous Plan Actions
2016
Action # Description Status

6.08 Ensure that Fire and Police personnel have adequate radios, breathing apparatus, protective gear, and other equipment needed to respond to a major disaster.

Completed

6.13 Assure temporary and/or mobile office space on high ground is available to the Police Department in the event of a flood or tsunami. Completed

6.15 Develop procedures for the emergency evacuation of areas identified on tsunami evacuation maps. Completed

6.2 Promote information sharing among neighboring cities, the county, the state and federal agencies.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

7.01 Assure that backup systems exist for critical utilities to the greatest extent possible.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

7.02 Talk with local utility companies about their hazard mitigation plans. Completed/ To Be Continued

7.05 Retrofit or replace critical lifeline facilities and/or backup facilities that are shown to be vulnerable to damage in natural disasters.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

7.09 Coordinate with PG&E and others to investigate ways of minimizing the likelihood that power interruptions will adversely impact vulnerable populations, such as the elderly and disabled.

Completed

7.07 Pre-position emergency power generation capacity (or have rental/lease agreements for these generators) in critical buildings to maintain continuity of government and services.

Completed/ To
Be Continued

7.11 Assure that utility lines are installed underground for new development. Completed

7.23 Update Sewer System Master Plan. Completed
Packet Page 923
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-23 ANNEX L
L City of Seaside Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Table L-18
City of Seaside Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazards(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
1 Ongoing/
Continuous Flooding
Provide sandbags and plastic sheeting to residents in
anticipation of rainstorms and deliver these materials to disabled and elderly residents on request.

High Public Works General Fund
2 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Ascertain historical incidence and frequency of occurrence of hazards through the development and maintenance of the
City of Seaside LHMP.

High All General Fund
and Grant
3 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Develop a matrix containing each mitigation goal and actions, relevant hazards, along with project status, funding, and responsible department. This matrix is to be reviewed 2 years after completion of the LHMP and updated within 4 years.

High All General Fund
and Grant
4 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Pursue grant opportunities to obtain funding for mitigation activities that protect the City's most vulnerable populations and structures.

High Finance Grants,
General Fund
5 Ongoing/
Continuous Earthquake
Continue to actively implement existing State law that
requires the City to maintain lists of addresses of unreinforced masonry buildings and inform property owners that they own this type of hazardous structure.

High Building General Fund
6 Ongoing/
Continuous Flooding
Continue to repair and make structural improvements to
storm drains, pipelines, and channels to enable them to perform their design capacity in handling water flows.

High Public Works General Fund
7 Ongoing/
Continuous Flooding
Continue maintenance efforts to keep storm drains and
channels free of obstructions to allow for the free flow of water.

High Public Works General Fund
8 Ongoing/
Continuous Flooding
Ensure that new development pays its fair share of
improvements to the storm drainage system necessary to
accommodate increased flows from the development.

High
Planning,
Public Works,
Building
General Fund
9 Ongoing/
Continuous Flooding Encourage homeowners in flood-prone areas to participate in home elevation programs. High Building General Fund Packet Page 924
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-24 ANNEX L
Table L-18
City of Seaside Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazards(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
10 Ongoing/
Continuous Flooding
Ensure that new developments are designed to reduce or
eliminate flood damage by requiring lots and rights-of-way are laid out for the provision of approved sewer and drainage facilities, providing on-site detention facilities whenever practical.

High Planning,
Building General Fund
11 Continuous Wildfire,
Drought
Develop a coordinated approach between fire jurisdictions and water supply agencies to identify improvements to the water distribution system, focusing on areas of highest wildfire hazard. Ensure a reliable source of water for fire suppression (meeting acceptable standards for minimum
volume and duration of flow) for existing and new
development. Continue the recently formed Fire Flow Task Force with Cal Am Water and other stakeholders.

High Fire, Public
Works
General Fund
and Grant
12 Ongoing/
Continuous All, Wildfire Maintain fire roads and public right-of-way roads and keep them passable at all times so that access to areas is assured. High Fire, Public Works General Fund 13 In progress/
1-4 years Earthquakes
Adopt a City ordinance that requires the following measures to reduce fire ignitions due to earthquakes: bracing of gasfired appliances and equipment; flexible couplings on gas appliances; and the bolting of homes to their foundations and strengthening of cripple walls.

High Building General Fund
14 Ongoing/ 1-
2 years All Build and maintain geographic information system and data to improve permitting and building construction. Moderate Public Works, Building General Fund 15 In progress/
1-2 years
Earthquake,
Tsunami,
Flooding,
Wildfire
Investigate HAZUS to estimate earthquake, tsunami, flood, and wildfire damage in the City. Moderate Finance, Public Works General Fund Packet Page 925
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-25 ANNEX L
Table L-18
City of Seaside Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazards(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
16 In progress/
1-2 years All
Explore training opportunities for City personnel in the use of the HAZUS program. Provide this training for key employees and obtain assistance in date entry for the HAZUS program.

Moderate Finance,
Public Works General Fund
17 Ongoing/ as
Needed All Aid homeowners whose homes were damaged by disasters by providing a streamlined permitting process for the rebuilding. Moderate Building, City Manager General Fund
and Grants
18 Ongoing
Continuous Earthquakes Encourage the retrofitting of unreinforced masonry structures. Moderate Building General Fund 19 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Update Geographical Information System (GIS) database to integrate hazard risk areas with existing data. Continue to coordinate with the County to integrate their database.

Low Public Works General Fund
20 Ongoing/
Continuous All Review census data to locate vulnerable populations. Low Finance, Public Works General Fund 21 1-4 years All Pass a City ordinance that will limit building in high-risk areas. Low Building General Fund 22 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Work with critical health care facilities (long-term care, primary care, or specialty clinics such as home health
agencies, or group homes) to ensure that critical facilities are structurally sound and have nonstructural system designed to remain functional following disasters.

Low Public Works,
Building General Fund
23 Ongoing/
Continuous Earthquake Research funding options for the retrofit of seismically deficient City-owned bridges and road structures. Low Public Works General Fund and Grants 24 Ongoing /
Continuous Flooding Identify buildings at risk from 100-and 500-year floods. Low Public Works General Fund 25 Ongoing /
Continuous Wildfire
Develop a list of programs and resources that provide lowinterest loans for residents and businesses to retrofit with fire resistant materials.

Low Fire General Fund
and Grants
26 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Increase the level of knowledge and awareness for Seaside City residents on the hazards that routinely threaten the area through appropriate City public education outlets.

Moderate All General Fund
Packet Page 926
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-26 ANNEX L
Table L-18
City of Seaside Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazards(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
27 Ongoing/
Continuous All Obtain adequate funding for public outreach programs. Moderate Finance General Fund 28 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Encourage citizens to participate in the Community
Emergency Response Team (CERT) program through City
public education outlets.

Moderate Fire General Fund
29 In Progress All Develop materials related to disaster mitigation and preparedness in other languages. Moderate All General Fund 30 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Disseminate information on what to do during and after a hazard event through appropriate City public education
outlets, in cooperation with the County and State Offices of Emergency Services and the American Red Cross.

Moderate All General Fund
31 Ongoing/
Continuous All
Continue to identify Seaside's most vulnerable critical facilities and evaluate the potential mitigation techniques for
protecting each facility to the maximum extent possible.

High All General Fund
32 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-4 years
All
Conduct comprehensive programs to identify and mitigate problems with facility contents, architectural components, and equipment that will prevent critical building from being functional after major natural disasters.

High Public Works General Fund
33 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-4 years
Earthquake
Ensure that all critical facilities are seismically upgraded to the greatest extent possible, in accordance with the most recent building codes.

High Building General Fund
34 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-4 years
Flooding
Ensure that all critical facilities located in the floodplain are adequately protected from flooding to the greatest extent possible, in accordance with the most recent building codes.

High Building General Fund
35 Ongoing /
Continuous All Provide necessary repairs to maintain critical facilities in top physical condition. High Public Works General Fund 36 In Progress/
1 year All Develop a "Continuity of Government Plan" following FEMA guidelines. High Fire General Fund Packet Page 927
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-27 ANNEX L
Table L-18
City of Seaside Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazards(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
37 In Progress/
1-4 years All Upgrade the City's communications plan. High Fire, Police General Fund 38 In Progress/
1-4 years All Have back-up emergency power available for critical intersection traffic signals. High Public Works, Fire, Police) General Fund 39 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-4 years
Earthquake
Participate in the Office of Emergency Services Safety
Assessment Program which formalizes arrangements with
engineers, building officials and other qualified people to report to the City, assess damage, and determine if buildings can be reoccupied after a disaster.

High Building,
Public Works General Fund
40 In Progress/
1 year All
Prepare a recovery plan that outlines the major issues and tasks that are likely to be the key elements of community recovery, as well as integrate this planning into response planning.

High All General Fund
41 In Progress/
1 year All
Ensure that emergency services include more than the
coordination of Police and Fire responses, but also planning activities with providers of water, food, energy,
transportation, financial, information, and public health services.

High All General Fund
42 Ongoing/
Continuous/ All Provide a new, expanded Public Works Corporation Yard on City-owned former Fort Ord lands. High Public Works General Fund or Measure 43 Ongoing/
Continuous/ All Ensure the safety of data by adequately backing up essential records and financial information. Moderate City Manager General Fund 44 In Progress/
1-2 years All
Develop and maintain a system of interoperable
communications for first responders from cities, the county, the state and federal agencies.

Moderate Fire, Police Grant
Packet Page 928
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-28 ANNEX L
Table L-18
City of Seaside Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazards(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
45 In Progress/
1-4 years All
Improve emergency response communications, including
building redundant capacity into public safety alerting, replacing or hardening microwave and simulcast systems, adding digital encryption for programmable radios, and
ensuring a plug-and-play capability for amateur radio.

High Police, Fire General Fund
and Grants
46 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-4 years
All
Plan for speeding the repair and functional restoration of lifeline systems through stockpiling of shoring materials, temporary pumps, surface pipelines, portable hydrants, and other supplies.

High Public Works,
Fire, Police
Seaside
Sanitation
and Water
District Funds
47 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-4 years
All
Identify critical areas that would need portable facilities (such as hoses, pumps, generators, or other equipment) to allow pipelines to bypass failure zones such as fault rupture areas, areas of liquefactions, and other ground failure areas.

High Public Works
Seaside
Sanitation
District Funds
48 In the CIP/
1-10 years
All,
Earthquake
As funding becomes available, install portable facilities to allow pipelines to bypass critical failure zones such as fault rupture areas, liquefaction areas, and ground failure areas.

High Public Works
Seaside
Sanitation
District Funds
49 In the CIP/
1-4 years Earthquake Replace or retrofit water-retention structures that are determined to be structurally deficient. High Public Works Seaside
Water
District Funds
50 In the CIP Flooding,
Earthquake Repair 90" Storm Drain Outlet. High Public Works Seaside
Sanitation
District Funds
51 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-2 years
All Survey Seaside County Sanitation District facilities by remote TV. High Public Works
Seaside
Sanitation
District Funds
52 In the CIP/
1-4 years All Provide new emergency generator set for Seaside City Hall. High Public Works General Fund Packet Page 929
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-29 ANNEX L
Table L-18
City of Seaside Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazards(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
53 Ongoing/ 1-
4 years All Replace mainline sanitary sewer lines. High Public Works Seaside
Sanitation
District Funds
54 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-4 years
All Rehabilitate Sanitation District pump stations as needed. High Public Works Seaside
Sanitation
District Funds
55 Ongoing/
Continuous Flooding Ensure that utility systems in new development are constructed in ways that reduce or eliminate flood damage. Moderate Building, Public Works General Fund 56 1-4 years
Severe
Weather,
Wildfire,
Utility
Interruption
Establish underground utility district for Highland Avenue. Moderate Public Works General Fund 57 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-4 years
Earthquake
Encourage owners of buildings leased by special districts or utility companies to participate in a program similar to San Francisco's Building Occupancy Resumption Program. This program permits owners of buildings to hire qualified
structural engineers to create facility-specific post-disaster inspection plans and allows these engineers to become
automatically deputized as City inspectors for these buildings in the event of a disaster. This program allows rapid reoccupancy.

Moderate Public Works,
Building General Fund
58 Ongoing/
Continuous/
1-4 years
Earthquake
Encourage business owners to participate in a program similar to San Francisco's Building Occupancy Resumption Program.

This program permits owners of buildings to hire qualified structural engineers to become automatically deputized as City inspectors for these buildings in the event of a disaster.

This program allows rapid re-occupancy of the building.

High
Economic
Development,
Building,
Public Works
General Fund
Packet Page 930
CITY OF SEASIDE Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | L-30 ANNEX L
Table L-18
City of Seaside Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazards(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
59 Ongoing All Assist businesses in obtaining grant funding following a disaster. High Finance General Fund
60 New/ 1-4
years Flooding
Continue to repair and make structural improvements to
storm drains, pipelines, and channels to enable them to perform their design capacity in handling water flows.

High Public Works General Fund
61 New/ 1 year All
Continue to identify Seaside's most vulnerable critical facilities and evaluate the potential mitigation techniques for
protecting each facility to the maximum extent possible.

High All General Fund
62 New All Upgrade the City's communications plan. High Fire, Police General Fund 63 New/ 1-2
years
All Provide new emergency generator set for Seaside City Hall. High Public Works General Fund 64 New/ 1-4
years
All Rehabilitate Sanitation District pump stations as needed.

Replace mainline sanitary sewer lines. High Public Works Seaside
Sanitation
District Funds
Packet Page 931

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 932
MANNEX M:

CITY OF SOLEDAD
2021 Monterey County
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Packet Page 933
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-1 ANNEX M
M.CITY OF SOLEDAD
M.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact
Brent Slama
City Manager
248 Main Street
Soledad, CA 93960
831-223-5043
[email protected]
Chief George Nunez
Soledad Fire Department
525 Monterey Street
Soledad, CA 93960
(831) 223-5100
[email protected]
M.2 COMMUNITY PROFILE
M.2.1 LOCATION
Packet Page 934
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-2 ANNEX M
M.2.2 GEOGRAPHY AND CLIMATE
The City of Soledad is located approximately 25 miles south of Salinas on Highway 101 and along the Salinas River and in the heart of the famed Salinas Valley, known for its natural beauty and agricultural products. Soledad is located in a prime area for growing wine grapes and within a short distance to many vineyards and famous wineries. Soledad has a has a warm-summer Mediterranean climate, with very warm, mostly dry summers and cool, wet winters.

M.2.3 HISTORY
The first settlements at Soledad took place when small tribes of Native Americans settled in the Salinas Valley. These people were most likely members of the Costanoan tribe. Life for the Natives around the Soledad area changed dramatically in 1791 when Father Fermin Lasuen founded the thirteenth California Mission, the Mission Nuestra Señora de la Soledad at the site of an Indian village recorded by Pedro Font as Chuttusgelis. In spite of many difficulties, the mission did prosper for a brief period.

Eventually, the padres performed more than 2,000 baptisms and 700 marriages. The crops were bountiful and large herds of horses, cattle and sheep grazed the plains. The friars even managed to plant and cultivate the first crops of wine grapes the Salinas Valley ever seen near the Soledad Mission.

One of the major events in Soledad history of took place in Salinas. Eugene Sherwood, a cattle rancher understood the importance of the railroad in getting the agricultural products to market. Sherwood offered Southern Pacific Railroad free acreage for a right-of-way and a depot, which opened in 1872.

Soledad’s original agricultural base prospered on cattle, wheat, and barley until the 1890’s when an influx of Swiss and Swedish immigrants established dairy operations in the area. The community’s agricultural base changed in the 1920’s to the development of row crops.

The City of Soledad was incorporated on March 9, 1921. The City’s official name, Soledad meaning “solitude”, was derived from the Mission Nuestra Señora de la Soledad. The City’s economic base diversified again in the 1940’s, with the establishment of the California Department of Corrections’ Soledad Training Facility located 3 miles north of the City. The facility was annexed into the City in 1992 and expanded in 1996 with the addition of the Salinas Valley State Prison.

M.2.4 POPULATION
The City of Soledad has a population of 24,925 people, a slight decrease (3.1%) since 2010.

M.2.5 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
Soledad has a City Council/City Manager form of government. The City Council consists of an elected Mayor holding a two‐year term and four Council Members elected at large for four‐year overlapping terms. The City Manager, who is appointed by City Council, is responsible for all City departments. The City Council legislates policies, enacts ordinances, approves the budget, and appoints advisory boards and commissions.

M.2.6 ECONOMY AND TAX BASE
The City of Soledad is highly motivated to provide economic development for the community by delivering prompt and efficient access to resources to businesses. The city maintains some of the lowest development fees in the region and provides a competitive business license fee schedule.

Packet Page 935
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-3 ANNEX M
Soledad’s strategic location on US Highway 101 provides significant economic opportunities, offering a scenic north-south corridor for regional motor and rail travel and tourism. The City continues to invest in the Soledad Business Center at a prime downtown storefront location where existing and prospective business owners and entrepreneurs receive free or low-cost business counseling, financial planning services, and classroom learning opportunities. The Soledad Industrial Park offers light and heavy industrial manufacturers with a convenient location to build adjacent to the busiest highway and rail shipping lanes on the west coast.

M.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The City of Soledad followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan. In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the City formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process.

The City of Soledad held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting to discuss vulnerabilities, mitigation activities that had occurred since the last plan update, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies on August 18, 2021. Key stakeholders present at the meeting included:
• Brent Slama, City Manager
• Damon Wasson, Police Chief
• Oscar Espinoza, City Engineer
• George Nunez, Fire Chief
• Lynnelle Sanchez, Community Engagement Manager
• Rebecca J. Hall, Recreation Manager
• Bryan T. Swanson, Community and Economic Development Director M.4 LAND USE AND DEVELOPMENT
The Soledad General Plan was adopted in 2005. The City’s population experienced steady growth throughout the 1990s and the pace accelerated between 1997 and 2001. In 2003, Soledad ranked eight among the fastest growing cities in the State and residential development occurred at an accelerated pace between 1997 and 2003. The growth in population has stabilized since 2010 with no population growth between 2010 and 2019.

Excluding vacant land, 58% of Soledad is currently used for residential uses. Commercial and industrial uses consist of 6% and 11% of the available land. The City is surrounded by productive agricultural land, primarily categorized as “prime farmland” by the State Department of Conservation. A significant portion of neighboring lands is protected by Williamson Act restrictions. The existing City limits contain approximately 3,000 acres. The 2005 General Plan anticipates the development of five expansion areas on 3,254 acres that would more than double the City’s area.

Since the early 2000’s, the City of Soledad has played a major role in fostering and increasing muchneeded units of affordable housing to support the diverse needs of Monterey County’s growing workforce. Since 2015, the City has been working closely with developers to add single family and multi-family housing to areas approved for development before 2008. This housing development boom is increasing economic development opportunities for small businesses, franchise businesses, Packet Page 936
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-4 ANNEX M
service providers, medical facilities, entertainment venues, and large retailers who seek to expand to an untapped market.

The City of Soledad Safe Growth Survey was completed by Bryan Swanson, Community and Economic Development Director for the City of Soledad. The results are summarized in Table M-1.

Table M-1
City of Soledad Safe Growth Survey Results
Topic Area 2021 2016
Land Use 3.75 3.75
Transportation 3.67 3.33
Environmental Management 3.00 3.67
Public Safety 3.00 2.67
Zoning Ordinance 3.75 4.00
Subdivision Regulations 4.00 3.00
Capital Improvement Program & Infrastructure Policies 3.00 3.00 Building Code 5.00 4.00
Economic Development 4.00 3.00
Average Survey Ratings 3.69 3.38
M.5 JURISDICTION SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile the City of Soledad’s hazards and assess the City’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan. The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the County and describes the hazards, as well as their extent, magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences. Hazard vulnerability specific to the City of Soledad is included in this Annex.

The City of Soledad’s Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The City’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Survey Packet Page 937
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-5 ANNEX M
to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the City. Each variable was scored by hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16.

Table M-2 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the City of Soledad’s Planning Team.

Table M-2
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): City of Soledad Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of
Risk
Agricultural Emergencies 3.7 3.3 3.3 3.5 13.8 High
Coastal Erosion - - - - - -
Coastal Flooding - - - - - -
Cyber-Attack 3.0 2.8 3.3 3.5 12.7 High
Dam Failure 1.8 1.8 2.0 2.0 7.7 Possible
Drought & Water Shortage 3.5 3.5 3.3 3.5 13.8 High
Earthquake 3.7 3.5 3.8 4.0 15.0 Very High
Epidemic 3.5 2.8 3.5 3.5 13.3 High
Extreme Cold & Freeze 2.2 1.8 2.0 2.3 8.3 Moderate
Extreme Heat 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.7 10.2 Substantial
Flash Flood 2.2 2.0 2.3 2.5 9.0 Moderate
Hazardous Materials Incident 2.8 2.8 3.2 3.2 12.0 Substantial Invasive Species 2.5 2.2 2.7 2.7 10.0 Moderate
Levee Failure 2.5 2.5 2.8 2.8 10.7 Substantial
Localized Stormwater Flooding 2.3 2.7 2.7 2.7 10.3 Substantial Mass Migration 1.8 1.7 1.8 2.0 7.3 Possible
Pandemic 3.2 3.0 3.3 3.5 13.0 High
Riverine Flooding 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.3 8.8 Moderate
Sea Level Rise - - - - - -
Severe Winter Storms 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.3 8.7 Moderate
Slope Failure 2.3 2.3 2.5 2.5 9.7 Moderate
Targeted Violence 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.5 9.0 Moderate
Terrorism 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.2 8.2 Moderate
Tsunami - - - - - -
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 3.2 3.2 3.3 3.3 13.0 High
Water Contamination 2.2 2.2 2.8 2.8 10.0 Moderate
Wildfire 3.2 3.0 3.2 3.3 12.7 High
Windstorms 2.5 2.7 2.5 2.7 10.3 Substantial
Packet Page 938
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-6 ANNEX M
M.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
The agricultural industry is a major economic driver in the City. Agricultural disasters pose a serious threat to the local economy and populations directly employed by the agriculture industry.

M.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
The City is not located on the coast, and therefore coastal erosion is not a major threat. Coastal erosion does threaten agricultural land in the Salinas Valley, which if impacted could have indirect economic effects on the local economy. The City could also be impacted by other types of erosion not profiled in this Plan.

M.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
The is no population or property in the City located in the dam inundation zones of the Los Padres and Forest Lake dams. Table M-3 summarizes population and property in the City exposed to spillway and dam failure of the Nacimiento and San Antonio dams.

Table M-3
Population and Property Exposed to Dam Failure Risk by Dam and Failure Type in Soledad Dam Failure Scenario Population
Residential Property Non-Residential Property
# Value # Value
Nacimiento Spillway Failure 33 0 $0 6 $3,559,237
Nacimiento Dam Failure 33 1 $372,410 6 $3,559,237
San Antonio Spillway Failure 33 0 $0 4 $3,557,985
San Antonio Dam Failure 33 1 $372,410 6 $3,559,237
Levee Failure
Based on Leveed Area from the US Army Corps of Engineers, National Levee Database, there is no population or property in the City exposed to levee failure risk. A levee protects the City’s Sewer Plant, that if it were to fail could impact City services. Many levees in the County protect important agricultural lands and a significant levee failure could have an indirect economic effect on the City.

M.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
The entire population of the City is vulnerable to drought events. Drought can affect people’s health and safety, including health problems related to low water flows, poor water quality, or dust. Drought also is often accompanied by extreme heat, exposing people to the risk of sunstroke, heat cramps and heat exhaustion. Other possible impacts include recreational risks; effects on air quality; diminished living conditions related to energy, air quality, and hygiene; compromised food and nutrition; and increased incidence of illness and disease. Water shortages can affect access to safe, affordable water, with substantial impacts on low-income families and communities burdened with environmental pollution.

A prolonged drought could also cause economic impacts. Increased demand for water and electricity may result in shortages and higher costs of these resources. While economic impacts will be most Packet Page 939
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-7 ANNEX M
significant on industries that use water or depend on water for their business, cascading economic effects can hurt many sectors of the economy. Agriculture, which will likely be impacted by drought conditions, is a major economic driver in the County, and the City could be impacted economically.

M.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
The entire population of the City is potentially exposed to direct and indirect impacts from earthquakes. Whether directly impacted or indirectly impacted, the entire population will have to deal with the consequences of earthquakes to some degree. Business interruption could keep people from working, road closures could isolate populations, and loss of utilities could impact populations that suffered no direct damage from an event itself. Similarly, all property and critical infrastructure in the City is potentially exposed to earthquake risk.

According to Monterey County Assessor records, there are 3,472 residential and non-residential buildings in the City, with a total value of $1,196,653,437. Since all structures in the City are susceptible to earthquake impacts to varying degrees, this represents the property exposure to seismic events.

Additionally, liquefaction risk was assessed. Table M-4 summarizes population and property in the City exposed to liquefaction risk.

Table M-4
Population and Property Exposed to Liquefaction Risk in Soledad Liquefaction Risk Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
High Liquefaction Susceptibility 3,874 627 $240,528,528 80 $9,211,229 Moderate Liquefaction Susceptibility 4,359 344 $108,021,717 429 $111,083,587 M.5.6 FLOODING
FEMA flood zones were used to assess flooding risk. Table M-5 summarizes population and property in the City in the 100-year and 500-year floodplain.

Table M-5
Population and Property Exposed to Flooding Risk in Soledad FEMA Flood Zone Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
100-Year Flood Zone 33 1 $372,410 8 $7,973,126
500-Year Flood Zone 0 0 $0 0 $0
Areas of flood concern for the City include Stonewall Canyon and Bryant Canyon, areas that experienced serious flooding in the 90s and include more residential development today.

M.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
To assess hazardous materials incident risk, buffer distances were used. The chosen buffer distance was based on guidelines in the US Department of Transportation’s Emergency Response Guidebook that suggest distances useful to protect people from vapors resulting from spills involving dangerous goods considered toxic if inhaled. The recommended buffer distance referred to in the guide as the Packet Page 940
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-8 ANNEX M
“protective action distance” is the area surrounding the incident in which people are at risk of harmful exposure. For purposes of this plan, a buffer distance of one mile was used, but actual buffer distances will vary depending on the nature and quantity of the release, whether the release occurred during the night or daytime, and prevailing weather conditions.

Table M-6 summarizes population and property that could be exposed to both mobile and fixed hazardous materials incidents.

Table M-6
Population and Property Exposed to Hazardous Materials Incident Risk in Soledad Hazardous Materials
Incident Type Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Mobile Source 21,361 2,124 $749,768,786 652 $147,118,221 Fixed Source 139 18 $527,629.00 33 $4,381,502
M.5.8 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS
It is often quite difficult to quantify the potential losses from human-caused hazards. While facilities themselves have a tangible dollar value, loss from a human-caused hazard often inflicts an even greater toll on a community, both economically and emotionally. The impact to identified values will vary from event to event and depend on the type, location, and nature of a specific incident.

M.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
All citizens in the City could be susceptible to the human health hazards. A large outbreak or epidemic, a pandemic or a use of biological agents as a weapon of mass destruction could have devastating effects on the population. While all of the population is at risk to the human health hazards, the young and the elderly, those with compromised immune systems, and those with special needs are most vulnerable. The introduction of a disease such as influenza or the Covid-19 virus have impacted the whole population of the City, specifically vulnerable populations.

M.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
All severe weather events profiled in this Plan have the potential to happen anywhere in the City.

Packet Page 941
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-9 ANNEX M
The FEMA National Risk Index calculates annualized frequency, exposure and annual expected loss of building value and population to some severe weather hazards identified in this Plan. Based on zip code and census tract Countywide data was used to identify annualized frequency, exposure, and annual expected loss in the City from severe weather hazards. Though the entire City is considered vulnerable to these hazards, the FEMA data was used in this risk assessment to provide scale for the potential risk and impacts. FEMA National Risk Index data from frequency and exposure to severe weather hazards is summarized in Table M-7.

Table M-7
Annualized Frequency and Exposure to Severe Weather Events in Soledad Hail Strong Wind
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.36 Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.11 Exposed Population 21,563 Exposed Population 21,563
Exposed Building Values $976,282,000 Exposed Building Values $976,282,000 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $0 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $328 Heat Wave Tornado
Frequency (Event-Days) 1.05 Frequency (Distinct Events) 1.28 Exposed Population 21,563 Exposed Population 5,715
Exposed Building Values $976,282,000 Exposed Building Values $138,975,676 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $2 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $3,553,082 Lightning Winter Weather
Frequency (Distinct Events) 0.58 Frequency (Event-Days) 0.00 Exposed Population 21,563 Exposed Population 0
Exposed Building Values $976,282,000 Exposed Building Values $0 Expected Annual Loss of
Building Value $177 Expected Annual Loss of Building Value $0 Source: FEMA National Risk Index
M.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
Based on the FEMA National Risk Index, 662 people and $50,247,148in building value in the City is exposed to landslide risk. Additionally, the City is not susceptible earthquake induced to landslides.

M.5.12 TSUNAMI
The City is not located in a mapped tsunami inundation zone.

M.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
All residents, visitors, and property in the City is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruptions. All critical facilities and infrastructure in the City that is operated by electricity is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruption.

Packet Page 942
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-10 ANNEX M
M.5.14 WILDFIRE
For purposes of this analysis CAL FIRE Fire Threat data was used. Fire Threat combines expected fire frequency with potential fire behavior to create 4 threat classes, extreme, very high, high, and moderate.

Table M-8 summarizes population and property in the City in very high, high, and moderate fire threat areas.

Table M-8
Population and Property Exposed to Wildfire Risk in Soledad CAL FIRE Wildfire Threat Population Residential Property Non-Residential Property # Value # Value
Very High Fire Threat 0 0 $0 3 $5,672
High Fire Threat 141 18 $527,629 39 $6,522,413
Moderate Fire Threat 12,485 167 $30,168,583 132 $44,060,253 M.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
The effects of climate change are varied and include warmer and more varied weather patterns and temperature changes. Climate change will affect the people, property, economy, and ecosystems in the City and will exacerbate the risk posed by many of the hazards previously profiled in this Plan.

Climate change will have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards.

Increasing temperatures will have direct impacts on public health and infrastructure. Drought, flooding, and wildfire will likely affect people’s livelihoods and the local economy. Changing weather patterns and more extreme conditions are likely to impact tourism and the local economy, along with changes to agriculture and crops, which are a critical backbone of the City’s economy.

M.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The City of Soledad performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table M-9 • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table M-10 • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table M-11 • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table M-12 • Classifications under various community mitigation programs are presented in Table L-13 • A summary of participation in and compliance with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) is provided in Section M.6.1 in Table M-14
• An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section M.6.2 in Table M-15 Packet Page 943
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-11 ANNEX M
Table M-9
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document Department Comments
Planning Documents
General Plan ☒ • Community Development Will be updating the current General Plan in 2022.

Capital Improvement Plan ☒ • Public Works
Floodplain Management Plan ☐
Open Space Management Plan ☒ • Planning Department
Will need to updated with
the process of updating the
current General Plan in 2022.

Stormwater Management Plan ☒ • Public Works
Coastal Management Plan ☐ N/A
Local Coastal Program ☐ N/A
Climate Action/ Adaptation Plan ☒ • Community Development Will need to updated with
the process of updating the
current General Plan in 2022.

Emergency Operations Plan ☒ • Police Department
Continuity of Operations Plan ☐
Community Wildfire Protection Plan ☐
Evacuation Plan ☐
Disaster Recovery Plan ☐
Economic Development Plan ☐
Historic Preservation Plan ☒ • Community Development City registry of historic resources.

Transportation Plan ☒ • TAMC
Codes, Ordinances & Requirements
Floodplain Ordinance ☒ • Community Development
Zoning Ordinance ☒ • Community Development
Portions of the Zoning
Ordinance will be updated
via a SB 2 Grant.

Subdivision Ordinance ☒ • Community Development
Site Plan Review Requirements ☒ • Community Development Unified Development Ordinance ☐
Post-Disaster Redevelopment/
Reconstruction Ordinance ☐
Building Code ☒ • Building Department Adoption of New CA Codes every 3 years.

Fire Prevention Code ☒ • Building Department CA Fire Code adopted every 3 years.

Packet Page 944
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-12 ANNEX M
Table M-10
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development
and land management practices
☒ • Community Development
• Public Works
Engineer(s) or professional(s)
trained in construction practices
related to buildings and/or
infrastructure
☒ • Community Development
• Public Works
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with an
understanding of manmade or
natural hazards
☒ • Community Development
• Public Works
Building Inspector ☒ • Community Development
• Public Works
Emergency Manager ☐
Floodplain Manager ☒ • Community Development
Land Surveyors ☐
Resource development staff or
grant writers ☒ • Community Development
Public Information Officer ☒ • Community Engagement
Scientist(s) familiar with the
hazards of the community ☐
Staff with education or expertise
to assess the community’s
vulnerability to hazards
☐
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) ☒ • Public Works
Maintenance programs to
reduce risk ☐
Warning systems/services ☐
Mutual Aid Agreements ☒ Have mutual aid agreements
with neighboring cities.

Table M-11
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds ☒ • Finance
Capital Improvements Project
Funding ☒ • Finance
Special Purpose Taxes ☒ • Finance
Stormwater Utility Fees ☐
Packet Page 945
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-13 ANNEX M
Table M-11
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
Gas / Electric Utility Fees ☐
Water / Sewer Fees ☐
Development Impact Fees ☒
General Obligation Bonds ☒ • Finance
Special Tax and Revenue Bonds ☒ • Finance
Community Development Block
Grants (CDBG) ☐
Table M-12
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit groups
focused on environmental
protection, emergency
preparedness, access and
functional needs populations, etc.
☐
Ongoing public education or
information program (e.g.,
responsible water use, fire safety,
household preparedness,
environmental education)
☒ • Community Engagement
Natural disaster or safety related
school programs ☐
Public-private partnership
initiatives addressing disasterrelated issues
☐
Table M-13
Community Classifications
Participating? Classification Effective Date
Community Rating System (CRS) No - -
ISO Public Protection Classification
StormReady Certification No - -
TsunamiReady Certification N/A - -
Firewise Communities Certification No - -
Packet Page 946
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-14 ANNEX M
M.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP) COMPLIANCE Table LM14
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
Designated Floodplain Administrator: Bryan Swanson, Community/Economic Development Department Director
NFIP Community Number: 060204
Flood Insurance Policies in Force: 1
Insurance Coverage in Force: $350,000
Written Premium in Force: $467
Total Loss Claims: 0
Total Payments for Losses: 0
Adopted Regulations that meet NFIP Requirements:
• Ordinance 596 Adopted 2002 – Floodplain Management
• Resolution Adopted 2016 - Monterey County Multi-Hazard Mitigation Plan 2015 Date of last NFIP Community Assistance Visit (CAV):

Unknown.

Higher standards that exceed minimum NFIP requirement:

The City of Soledad follows minimum NFIP requirements, no additional requirements have been implemented.

Additional floodplain management provisions:

Some floodplain management provisions that are integrated into other plans or processes that the community uses to guide development within the City of Soledad would be our 2005 General Plan, within the Hazards Safety section. A new update on our 2005 General Plan will become available in 2025 where this topic will be updated to accommodate City’s future growth. The City of Soledad will also be updating its zoning ordinance code which the floodplain management could be a factor to consider as staff reviews new changes.

Floodplain management activities performed that go beyond FEMA minimum requirements:

The City of Soledad performs the minimum FEMA requirements for floodplain management.

Existing impediments to running an effective NFIP program:

An existing impediment to running an effective NFIP program in the community would be having adequate staffing resources and funding. With the proper staffing and funding, outreach within the community will help educate our residents but also help the City of Soledad understand other issues members of the community may have regarding other hazard activities.

Specific actions that are ongoing or considered related to continued compliance with the NFIP:

A specific action that the City of Soledad can take related to continued compliance with the NFIP would be to gather data in a digital format for easier recording and for easier data access. Other possible new actions considered include:
• Maintain digital FEMA elevation certificates for all construction in the floodplain. • Develop a checklist for review of building/development permit plans and for inspection of development in floodplains.
• Establish a goal to have each plan reviewer and building inspector attend a related training periodically.

Packet Page 947
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-15 ANNEX M
Table LM14
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) Compliance
• Maintain a map of areas that flood frequently (e.g., areas where repetitive loss properties are located) and prioritize those areas for inspection immediately after the next flood. If outside FEMA special flood hazard areas, consider requiring existing NFIP regulatory standards (compliance with existing ordinance) through overlay zoning, etc. • Obtain FEMA’s Substantial Damage Estimator and attend training to be prepared to use it when damage occurs; develop mutual aid agreements with other jurisdictions to augment local inspection personnel after major disasters.
• Develop handouts for permit applications on specific issues such as installation of manufactured homes in flood hazard areas according to HUD’s installation standards, or guidance on improving/repairing existing buildings to better withstand potential hazards.

M.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table M-15
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability Moderate
Administrative and Technical Capability Moderate
Fiscal Capability Limited
Education and Outreach Capability Moderate
Political Capability High
Overall Capability Moderate
M.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES More financial and service support from Federal, State and County jurisdictions. With the creation of the new General Plan, critical elements such as: Climate Action Plan, Hazard Mitigation Plan, Land Use Element and Circulation can serve as tools to gain more funding to offset any hazards that may come to Soledad. Being a small community in south Monterey County, Soledad could be on an “island” if an earthquake or other disaster would occur. With the establishment of these new elements will hopefully provide mitigation measures for Soledad as to when/if a disaster strike.

Packet Page 948
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-16 ANNEX M
Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

M.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Opportunities for Future Integration
The General Plan and the hazard mitigation plan are complementary documents that work together to achieve the goal of reducing risk exposure. The General Plan is considered to be an integral part of this plan. An update to the General Plan may trigger an update to the hazard mitigation plan. The City, through adoption of a General Plan and zoning ordinance, has planned for the impact of natural hazards. The process of updating this hazard mitigation plan provided the opportunity to review and expand on policies in these planning mechanisms. The City will create a linkage between the hazard mitigation plan and the General Plan by identifying a mitigation action as such and giving that action a high priority. Other planning processes and programs that may be coordinated with the recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan include the following:
• General Plan, including the Safety Element
• Emergency Operations Plans
• Climate Action and Adaptation Plans
• Debris management plans
• Recovery plans
Packet Page 949
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-17 ANNEX M
• Capital improvement programs
• Municipal codes
• Community design guidelines
• Water-efficient landscape design guidelines
• Stormwater management programs
• Water system vulnerability assessments
• Community wildfire protection plans
• Comprehensive flood hazard management plans
• Resiliency plans
• Community Development Block Grant-Disaster Recovery action plans • Public information/education plans
Some action items do not need to be implemented through regulation. Instead, these items can be implemented through the creation of new educational programs, continued interagency coordination, or improved public participation. As information becomes available from other planning mechanisms that can enhance this plan, that information will be integrated via the update process.

M.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the City of Soledad Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern applicable to their jurisdiction. The Hazard Problem Statements were based on the risk assessment, the vulnerability analysis, and local knowledge.

Hazard Problem Statements helped the Planning Committee identify common issues and weaknesses, determine appropriate mitigation strategies, and understand the realm of resources needed for mitigation. Hazard Problem Statements for the City of Soledad are identified below:
• The City’s wastewater treatment plant along the Salinas River is the critical facility deemed most at risk to flooding damage and service interruption. As a result of past floods, the river channel has moved closer to the plant and right up against the protective levee, which due to increased threat, should be raised and strengthened despite being designed for the 100-year flood event. Further, the plant’s electrical and mechanical equipment is not elevated so the levee is the only protective measure currently in place.
• Areas surrounding the Highway 101 overpasses, especially near shopping centers, are deemed vulnerable to flooding. The source of past flooding events wasn’t limited to the Salinas River, but also runoff from mountains as conveyed through the Bryant Canyon Channel managed by MCWRA. • The City frequently must respond to fires in the Salinas River bottom, mainly due to uncontrolled vegetation growth. The greatest threat to structures caused by wildland fire is to eastern portions of the city, although risk is managed through weed abatement and fuels reduction program, combined with local development regulations for any new construction along wildland/urban interface (sprinkler and roof type requirements, etc.). The most significant effect caused by the wildland fire hazard is deemed to be the public health threat created by smoke and reduction in air quality across the entire city during large events.

Packet Page 950
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-18 ANNEX M
• The City still has a number of old URM buildings located in its downtown area. While each has been posted with a warning placard the city’s inventory should be used to identify and prioritize structures for seismic retrofitting.
• Highway 101 is the only lifeline/ ingress egress route in the event of a major evacuation. No backup route exists or routes in the East/West direction. A closure of the freeway would severely limit movement. A mass casualty event, hazmat event, or failure of infrastructure on Highway 101 is a major concern.
• Cumulative and constant hazards, particularly as hazards are exacerbated by climate change, can quickly overwhelm the City’s limited response capability and resources. • Civil unrest is a genuine concern for the City of Soledad. Because of the ingress/egress issues leading to the City, activists and those with violent agendas could potentially isolate the City by blocking or limiting the entrance and exits. For a City with a small law enforcement presence blocking assistance coming to the City from outside aid could seriously damage City infrastructure and be potentially life-threatening to citizens.

M.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success. The City of Soledad Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefitcost analysis and consideration of mitigation alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the City’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix, in Table M-17 lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Status of Previous Plan Actions
All actions from the 2016 Plan were reviewed and updated by the City during the planning process.

Table M-16 includes the status of action previous plan completed or removed from the previous plan.

Table M-16
City of Soledad Completed Mitigation Actions from 2016 MJHMP 2016
Action # Description Status Narrative Update
3 Develop audience-specific hazard mitigation
outreach efforts. Audiences include the elderly,
children, tourists, non-English speaking
residents, and home and business owners.

Completed/
Ongoing
Completed and done on
a project-by-project
basis
Packet Page 951
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-19 ANNEX M
M City of Soledad Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Table M-17
City of Soledad Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
1 If Funding
Allows
All,
Wildfire,
Earthquake
Create incentives (e.g., rebates) to promote homeowner/ business owner disaster-resistant development (e.g., Class A roofing material).

Moderate Fire USFA, PDM, and
HGMP Grants
2 If Funding
Allows All
Identify hazard-prone critical facilities and infrastructure and carry out acquisition, relocation, and structural and
nonstructural retrofitting measures as necessary.

Priority / High Public Works PDM and HGMP
Grants
3 If Funding
Allows Earthquake
Develop an unreinforced masonry grant program that helps correct earthquake-risk nonmasonry building problems,
including chimney bracing and anchoring water heaters.

Low Community
Development
PDM and HGMP
Grants
4 If Funding
Allows Flooding
Identify and carry-out minor flood and stormwater
management projects that would reduce damage to
infrastructure and damage due to local flooding/inadequate drainage. These include the modification of existing culverts and bridges, upgrading capacity of storm drains, stabilization of streambanks, and creation of debris or flood/stormwater retention basins in small watersheds.

Priority / High Public Works PDM and HGMP
Grants
5 If Funding
Allows Wildfire
Create defensible space guidelines for both new and existing buildings that are in areas of very high and extreme fire hazard areas.

Moderate Fire USFA, PDM, and
HGMP Grants
6 New All
Work with County, State, and Federal Partners to determine ingress/egress improvements and to create back-up route options.

Priority / High Fire, Police,
Public Works Grants
7 New All Create and refine the City's Evacuation Plan. Priority / High Fire, Police General Funds 8 New All Explore possibility of creating a CERT Team. Priority / High Recreation, Admin
Grants, General
Funds
9 New All Update the City's General Plan and include refence to the Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. Priority / High Community Development Grants, General
Funds
Packet Page 952
CITY OF SOLEDAD Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | M-20 ANNEX M
Table M-17
City of Soledad Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
10 New All
Work with local schools on fire and disaster preparedness for school children and use social media to spread awareness of public engagement programs.

Priority / High Fire, Admin Grants, General
Funds
11 New Drought Provide public information on water conservation. Moderate Admin Grants, General Funds
Packet Page 953

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 954
N
ANNEX N: CARMEL

AREA WASTEWATER

DISTRICT
2021 Monterey County
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Packet Page 955
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-1 ANNEX N
N. CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER

DISTRICT (CAWD)
N.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact
Barbara Buikema
General Manager
3945 Rio Road
Carmel, CA 93922
(831) 624-1248
[email protected]
Patrick Treanor
Plant Engineer
3945 Rio Road
Carmel, CA 93922
(831) 624-1248
[email protected]
N.2 DISTRICT PROFILE
N.2.1 LOCATION
Packet Page 956
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-2 ANNEX N
N.2.2 SERVICE AREA
The Carmel Area Wastewater District (CAWD) provides sewer collections and wastewater treatment in the greater Carmel area. Sewer collections system infrastructure is located in the City of Carmel-bythe-Sea, unincorporated areas of Carmel, and extends east to serve lower portions of Carmel Valley, and south as far as Carmel Highlands. The existing CAWD treatment plant is on the south bank of the Carmel River approximately one-third of a mile west of the State Route 1 Bridge. The administration office is located at 3945 Rio Road, Carmel.

The District maintains eighty-one miles of sewers within the existing service area. The total service area consists of approximately 9.75 square miles with a permanent population of approximately 11,000 and a vibrant tourist industry. CAWD also provides treatment service by contract agreement with Pebble Beach Community Services District for an additional 4,500 people and businesses in Del Monte Forest.

Furthermore, CAWD provides recycled water to seven world famous golf courses in Del Monte Forest including Pebble Beach, Poppy Hills, and Spanish Bay. About 90% of the wastewater received at the treatment plant is treated to California recycled water standards and sent to the golf courses.

In 2021 CAWD anticipates completion of an annexation which will increase the size of the District to

11.3 square miles and will include additional area in the unincorporated communities of Carmel Valley and Carmel Highlands. After the annexation an additional 1,800 residents would be included within the District service area.

CAWD is also a partner in a project that supplies recycled water to the world-famous golf courses in Del Monte Forest including Pebble Beach Golf Links. The recycled water infrastructure project (known as the CAWD/PBCSD Reclamation Project) is co-owned by CAWD and Pebble Beach Community Services District (PBCSD). The CAWD/PBCSD Reclamation Project is a cooperative effort of three public agencies: PBCSD, the Carmel Area Wastewater District (CAWD), and Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD); and two private entities who manage the golf courses in Pebble Beach/Del Monte Forest: The Pebble Beach Company, and the Independent Reclaimed Water Users Group (IRWUG).

N.2.3 HISTORY
The Carmel Area Wastewater District was formed as the Carmel Sanitary District in 1908. At that time, the District provided septage facilities for the village of Carmel-by-the-Sea. The Carmel Area Wastewater District is one of the oldest sanitary districts in the state.

N.2.4 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
The Carmel Area Wastewater District (CAWD) is an independent special district organized under the Sanitary District Act of 1923. CAWD is owned, operated, and managed by the community via an elected Board of Directors.

Like the majority of public wastewater treatment facilities in California, CAWD is a Publicly Owned Treatment Works or POTW. The Elected Board sets policy, determines budget, plans for expansion or upgrade, authorizes large purchases, and in general controls the overall direction of the operation. Any resident of the District has the right to run for and be elected to serve office on the Board.

Packet Page 957
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-3 ANNEX N
N.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The Carmel Area Wastewater District followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan.

In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the District formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process. The Carmel Area Wastewater District held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting to discuss vulnerabilities, mitigation activities that had occurred since the last plan update, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies on August 2, 2021. Key stakeholders at the meeting included:
• Patrick Treanor, Plant Engineer
• Chris Foley, Maintenance Superintendent
• Ed Waggoner, Operations Superintendent
• Daryl Lauer, Collections Superintendent
• Rachél Lather, Principal Engineer
N.4 FACILITIES
The CAWD facilities include a network of hazard vulnerable critical infrastructure and assets included in three major infrastructure divisions within the District:
• Collection System
• Wastewater Treatment Plant
• Recycled Water Treatment Facilities
The purpose of the CAWD infrastructure is to protect public health and the environment by the control of sewage generated by the constituents. As such the CAWD facilities are regulated primarily by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) pursuant to the Clean Water Act.

N.4.1 COLLECTION SYSTEM
The collection system has been built up incrementally over the last 100+ years to support development of the community. The collection system provides the conveyance of wastewater from a business or residence to the wastewater treatment plant using underground pipes and lift stations. The CAWD collection system consists of approximately 81 miles of gravity sewers ranging in size from 6 inches to 27 inches in diameter, nearly 4 miles of force mains, 7 pump stations, and over 1,500 manholes.

The collection system is distributed over a range of geographic areas within the CAWD service area and thus can be subject to a wide range of local hazards depending on the specific location. For instance, collections pipelines can be located in inland areas on steep slopes which are subject to local erosion that undermines pipelines. Whereas some pump stations and pipelines within the collection system are located on or near the coastline and those may be subject to effects of coastal erosion, tsunami, and/or sea level rise.

The CAWD collection system infrastructure is important to protect the public health and the environment from the effects of sewage contamination. Hazard mitigation for the collection system should focus on: Coastal Erosion, Coastal Flooding, Cyber-Attack, Drought & Water Shortage, Packet Page 958
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-4 ANNEX N
Earthquake, Epidemic, Extreme Cold & Freeze, Extreme Heat, Flash Flood, Levee Failure, Localized Stormwater Flooding, Pandemic, Riverine Flooding, Sea Level Rise, Severe Winter Storms, Slope Failure, Tsunami, Utility Interruption/ PSPS, Water Contamination, Wildfire, Windstorms.

N.4.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT (WWTP)
The CAWD Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) includes a wide range of facilities and specialized equipment that cleans the wastewater for either disposal to the Pacific Ocean, or preparation prior to additional advanced recycled water treatment. The treatment plant utilizes clarifiers, aeration basins, chemical disinfection systems, pumping stations, digesters, solids dewatering equipment, and other processes. The WWTP operates under a National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit which stipulates water quality requirements for the treated water. The permitted capacity of the WWTP is 3 million gallons per day (MGD) of dry weather flow.

Current average dry weather flow (ADWF) is approximately 1.1 MGD. Approximately two-thirds of the flow into the WWTP is from CAWD customers and the remaining one-third is from Pebble Beach Community Service District customers. During large storm events the inflows can increase up to eight times the dry-weather rates. This requires the plant equipment and processes be designed to handle large peak hydraulic loads during the winter months.

The WWTP is located south of the Carmel River in a historic coastal floodplain and can be subject to short duration flood events during winter. The original design incorporated elevated structures to allow the WWTP to function uninterrupted during onsite flooding. The flooding onsite has been historically very rare, and structures are designed to operate at flood levels beyond the 100-year FEMA flood stage. However, onsite flooding may become more frequent as the effects of climate change unfold, and this is a major concern for the future of the WWTP in its current location.

The CAWD WWTP infrastructure is important to transform sewage into clean water to protect the public health and the environment from the effects of sewage contamination. Hazard mitigation for the WWTP should focus on: Coastal Flooding, Cyber-Attack, Dam Failure, Drought & Water Shortage, Earthquake, Epidemic, Extreme Cold & Freeze, Extreme Heat, Flash Flood, Pandemic, Riverine Flooding, Sea Level Rise, Severe Winter Storms, Terrorist Attack, Tsunami, Utility Interruption/ PSPS, Water Contamination, Wildfire, Windstorms.

N.4.3 RECLAMATION PLANT (RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES)
The Reclamation Plant provides the advanced treatment for the water used on the golf courses. It is located on the same site as the WWTP, and therefore shares in all the same hazards related to coastal flooding. The facilities at the site include tertiary treatment plant facilities, a microfiltration and reverse osmosis facility, a laboratory building, and a pump station and pipeline to convey the treated water north to Pebble Beach Community Services District.

Given the shrinking water supplies the golf courses are dependent upon the reclaimed water supplies.

Protection of CAWD’s ability to continue providing reclaimed water is of great importance to the community. Hazard mitigation for the Reclamation Plant should focus on: Coastal Flooding, CyberAttack, Dam Failure, Drought & Water Shortage, Earthquake, Epidemic, Extreme Cold & Freeze, Packet Page 959
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-5 ANNEX N
Extreme Heat, Flash Flood, Pandemic, Riverine Flooding, Sea Level Rise, Severe Winter Storms, Terrorist Attack, Tsunami, Utility Interruption/ PSPS, Water Contamination, Wildfire, Windstorms.

N.5 DISTRICT SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile the CAWD’s hazards and assess the District’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan.

The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the County and describes the hazards, as well as their extent, magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences. Hazard vulnerability specific to the CAWD is included in this Annex.

The CAWD’s Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The District’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Survey to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the District. Each variable was scored by hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16.

Table N-1 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the CAWD’S Planning Team.

Table N-1
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): CAWD Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of
Risk
Agricultural Emergencies - - - - - -
Coastal Erosion 2.5 2 2 2 8.5 Moderate
Coastal Flooding 2.5 3 2 3 10.5 Substantial
Cyber-Attack 2 2.5 2 2 8.5 Moderate
Dam Failure 2.5 2 2 3 9.5 Moderate
Drought & Water Shortage 1.5 1 2 1 5.5 Slight
Earthquake 2.5 2 2 2.5 9 Moderate
Epidemic 1.5 1 2 1 5.5 Slight
Extreme Cold & Freeze 1.5 1 2 1 5.5 Slight
Extreme Heat 1.5 1 2 2 6.5 Possible
Flash Flood 2.5 3 2 3 10.5 Substantial
Hazardous Materials Incident 1 3 1 1 6 Slight
Invasive Species - - - - - -
Levee Failure 1.5 1 2 2 6.5 Possible
Localized Stormwater Flooding 2 2 2 2 8 Possible
Mass Migration - - - - - -
Packet Page 960
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-6 ANNEX N
Table N-1
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): CAWD Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of
Risk
Pandemic 1.5 1 2 1 5.5 Slight
Riverine Flooding 2.5 3 2 3 10.5 Substantial
Sea Level Rise 3 3 3.5 3 12.5 High
Severe Winter Storms 2 3.5 2 2 9.5 Moderate
Slope Failure 2.5 3 2 2 9.5 Moderate
Targeted Violence - - - - - -
Terrorism 2 2.5 2 2 8.5 Moderate
Tsunami 2.5 2 2 2 8.5 Moderate
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 2.5 2 2 2 8.5 Moderate
Water Contamination 1.5 1 2 1 5.5 Slight
Wildfire 2 2 2 2 8 Possible
Windstorms 2 2 2 2 8 Possible
N.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
The CAWD infrastructure is unlikely to experience any impacts associated with agricultural emergencies.

N.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
As part of providing wastewater collection and treatment service to a coastal community, CAWD maintains assets that are located near the coastline that are susceptible to coastal erosion.

Notable facilities susceptible to coastal erosion are:
• 8th & Scenic Pump Station - Carmel
• Bay & Scenic Pump Station - Carmel
• Conveyance Pipelines located by the coastline
• Ocean Outfall
N.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
The San Clemente Dam was removed in 2015 thereby greatly reducing risk of dam failure for the District. However, the Los Padres Dam is another dam located upstream of the old San Clemente Dam site. The Los Padres Dam is about 25 miles upstream from CAWD facilities in the Carmel River watershed and holds up to about 3,000 acre-ft.

During development of this Hazard Mitigation Plan, CAWD did not find any reports that identify the extent of downstream impact that could occur from a failure of Los Padres Dam. It is possible that hydraulic modeling would reveal the extent of downstream impacts of a Los Padres Dam failure on Packet Page 961
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-7 ANNEX N
CAWD facilities. For the purposes of this report, CAWD is assuming that impacts would be similar to other flooding impacts associated with the Carmel River.

Levee Failure
There are several levees (many of which are uncertified) in the vicinity of the Carmel River Lagoon which provide little if any flood control to the CAWD treatment plant facilities located south of the Carmel River. The treatment facility site relies on the design of the process structures and site topography as flood mitigations. However, the residential and commercial developments on the north side of the river are more reliant on levees for flood protection. Therefore, the corresponding sewer collection systems associated with these developments are reliant on levee protection. The levee system along the north side of the Carmel River has been known to be vulnerable to flood impacts, and flooding in these areas north of the river could lead to inundation of flood waters into sewers, overwhelming the system and causing sanitary sewer overflows.

N.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
Drought and water shortage can affect CAWD facilities in different ways. One way is that collections sewers can get solids build up due to lack of water flow to carry solids down the line. Another way that CAWD and the community would be affected is that CAWD provides irrigation water to all the golf courses in Pebble Beach. If inflow into the CAWD treatment plant declines due to potable water conservation, then CAWD will not have as much water to treat and send to the golf courses for irrigation. Currently the golf courses barely get by with the current water supply that CAWD provides and sometimes must purchase potable water. There could be other water resources that CAWD could take on developing to mitigate impacts of water supply shortages on the economy (such as aquifer storage and recovery, and desalination) if the regulatory environment allows it and funding is available.

N.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
CAWD facilities are designed to latest building codes to handle seismic events that are in effect at the time of construction. However, damage to multiple CAWD facilities could still occur in a large earthquake. Many facilities were originally built in the 1950s through 1970s when seismic standards were less intensive than they are today. To mitigate hazard risk more detailed review of existing facilities structures would determine how well they will withstand an earthquake so targeted improvements could be implemented. Some seismic review work has already been done on a select few structures recently, but the entire system has not been reviewed to confirm current seismic vulnerabilities.

N.5.6 FLOODING
A significant number of CAWD facilities are located in and around the Carmel River Lagoon Floodplain (a coastal floodplain). Flooding of the Carmel River Lagoon Floodplain during extreme river flow events can cause elevated water levels adjacent to the treatment plant and eventually floodwaters can enter onto the treatment plant site. This has occurred at the treatment facility in the past and has been a known hazard since before the current treatment facilities were built, thus the critical facilities were elevated and designed to operate continually during floods. Multiple less critical facilities are not as Packet Page 962
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-8 ANNEX N
protected from flooding including the Reclamation Plant Microfiltration and Reverse Osmosis Facility which does not have a significant freeboard over the 100-year flood elevation.

Low lying sewers in the collections system that serve the communities adjacent to the Carmel River Lagoon Floodplain are susceptible to flood impacts including damage to pump stations and infiltration of flood waters into the sewer that can cause sanitary sewer overflows (SSO).

The impacts associated with flash flooding and with riverine flooding are similar to that of coastal flooding. Sewer collection systems located throughout the CAWD service area can be impacted by localized stormwater flooding. If stormwater is not managed by the City or County, then stormwater can collect in streets and eventually find its way into the sewer system which can exceed the pipes capacity and lead to sewer overflows.

N.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
CAWD utilizes numerous hazardous chemicals at the treatment plant site for wastewater and recycled water treatment processes. The hazardous materials are managed by means of regulatory and safety standards to avoid any release. The hazardous materials are protected from hazards onsite such as flooding. However, just having these materials onsite at the treatment plant comes with some level of risk and further hazard mitigation could be implemented.

Additionally, water contamination can be an issue for the wastewater treatment plant as the collection system is prone to people or businesses dumping hazardous materials or contaminants into the sewer system. CAWD is required to conduct source control of the system to identify misuse of the sewer system. However, it requires significant investment to eliminate the possibility of illicit discharges into the sewer system.

N.5.8 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS
CAWD is heavily reliant on information technology (IT) and computerized process automation for the operation of the collection system pump stations and the wastewater treatment plant facilities. A cyber-attack could hamper the functioning of the critical service that CAWD provides, leading to sewer backups and discharge of untreated sewage. Given the prevalence of cyber-attacks in the US, CAWD takes cyber security very seriously and hires an outside network security company to provide system security updates, surveillance, geofencing, phishing training, off site backups, and setting up software password protocols. Furthermore, in house staff is working on eliminating legacy windows computers from use on the network and has created a task force of internal staff to build a cyber security culture.

However, given the dynamic nature of IT and cyber security, and the extensive use of IT and automation by CAWD, ongoing efforts are needed to keep up with the latest security measures, and this is anticipated to become even more difficult into the future as cyber security threats become more sophisticated. Implementing ongoing technology improvements and hiring experienced cyber security experts is needed.

As critical infrastructure with a high replacement cost, CAWD facilities could be a target for terrorism.

A terrorist attack could seriously jeopardize the continuous operations of sewer collections, treatment, and recycled water production. The CAWD infrastructure is unlikely to experience any impacts associated with mass migration and targeted violence.

Packet Page 963
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-9 ANNEX N
N.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
Based on the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic, there are improvements that CAWD could make to protect employees and maintain continuous wastewater collection and treatment through a pandemic or epidemic. CAWD facilities cannot be abandoned by staff for more than a few days before the system will begin to experience failures and ultimately catastrophic failure would occur if there were no staff to operate and maintain the systems.

Social distancing, creating segregated work environments, ventilation improvements, and stockpiling Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) are all potential mitigations in the event of another pandemic/epidemic.

N.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
Severe winter storms have the potential to create flooding issues as described in the flooding section.

Furthermore, severe storms in the area often involve high winds. Being located along the coast in California, the CAWD facilities are not designed for any extended duration freeze events. If weather patterns change as a result of climate change, CAWD facilities could be stressed and fail as a result of freezing pipes and failure of electrical systems without adequate heating and insulation.

A major hazard associated with windstorms is subsequent to the hazards of trees falling over. Falling trees can result in roots pulling out of the ground, pulling sewer pipes up along with the roots. Trees surrounding the wastewater treatment facility could fall on critical infrastructure in the facility because they are located in close proximity to buildings onsite. Furthermore, windstorms can cause prolonged and serious power outages, such as could happen if a tree damages the main PG&E aerial power feed to the treatment plant which traverses through a highly wooded area.

Being located along the coast in California where the weather is typically mild, the CAWD facilities are not designed for extreme heat. Because of the typical mild weather, most temperature sensitive facilities owned and operated by CAWD do not have air conditioning systems installed. If weather patterns change as a result of climate change, CAWD facilities could be stressed and fail as a result of overheating of electrical systems without adequate cooling systems.

N.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
Slope failure is an issue in many different locations in the CAWD collection system because the Carmel area contains hilly and steep topography. Many residential developments are located on hillsides which provide great views but locating buildings in these locations comes with infrastructure challenges. Many CAWD sewer lines were built on slopes to serve developments located in hilly areas.

Pipelines on a slope can easily fail as a result of a slope failure, and as time goes on the risk of erosion and slope stability issues slowly increases.

N.5.12 TSUNAMI
Packet Page 964
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-10 ANNEX N
According to the Tsunami Inundation Map for Emergency Planning – Monterey Quadrangle prepared July 1, 2009 by California Emergency Management Agency the following infrastructure is within, or at the edge of, the mapped tsunami hazard zone:
• West side of the CAWD Treatment Plant – mouth of Carmel River • 8th & Scenic Pump Station - Carmel
• Monte Verde & 16th Pump Station - Carmel
• Bay & Scenic Pump Station - Carmel
• Calle la Cruz Pump Station - Carmel
One concern is preventing infrastructure from becoming inundated by a tsunami event. Furthermore, structural damage from intense wave loading could be a concern for structures within the tsunami zone.

N.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
Much of the CAWD treatment and conveyance systems are reliant on electricity to function. Critical facilities must be maintained and operational 24/7 and therefore the most critical facilities have onsite backup power. However, there are improvements that could be implemented to further fortify and maintain function of critical systems with backup power sources, and to mitigate utility interruption.

For instance, the reclamation plant does not have any standby power and will not function in a power outage. Another potential hazard issue identified is that the main PG&E power line coming into the treatment facility goes through a forested area via aerial power lines. It would provide more resiliency to have the plant PG&E power come into the plant via an underground feeder.

N.5.14 WILDFIRE
The CAWD service area includes many rural areas that are susceptible to wildfire hazards. California continues to experience an increase in wildfire hazards due to climate change and an increase in excess fuel. The California Public Utilities Commission has developed a Fire Threat Map. The map identifies two tiers for fire hazards. Tier 2 is elevated fire hazard and tier 3 is extreme fire hazard.

The CAWD facilities that are the closest in proximity to tier 2 areas are listed below. Highlands pump station is in the tier 2 zone (elevated fire hazard).
• CAWD Treatment Plant – mouth of Carmel River
• Calle la Cruz Pump Station – Carmel
• Ribera Pump Station – Carmel
• Hacienda Pump Station- Carmel
• Highlands Pump Station – Carmel Highlands
N.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
The CAWD wastewater treatment plant was originally designed to continue to operate during and after flood events which were known to occur at the time of the design of the existing facilities. The CAWD plant has operated through multiple flood events in the past and has been continually treating sewage on site for over 100-years.

Packet Page 965
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-11 ANNEX N
According to a study performed by Environmental Science Associates (ESA) in December 2018 increased storm intensity as well as sea level rise will not detrimentally affect the CAWD facility before the year 2062 under the “Extreme Risk Aversion” scenario. This allows for over 40-years of continued operation in the existing location. The next 40 years will provide time for CAWD to evaluate future improvements of increasing flood resiliency at higher levels vs. potentially relocating the facility. In the near term, the sea level rise projections do not identify new hazards to the facility of greater concern than the 100-year flood risks that CAWD has planned for. However, in the long-term increased storm intensities as well as higher sea levels may increase the base flood elevations.

N.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The District performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table N-2 • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table N-3 • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table N-4 • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table N-5 • An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section N.6.1 in Table N-6 Table N-2
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document, Program, Requirement Department Comments
General Management Plan ☒ • Engineering Sanitary Sewer System Management Plan Capital Improvement Plan ☒ • All
Included in annual budget – 15-year Long Term
Capital Plan. Reviewed and modified annually
to anticipate necessary capital projects in
advance to allow time to secure funding
Stormwater Management Plan ☒ • Engineering Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Coastal Management Plan ☒ • Engineering
Coastal Hazards Monitoring Plan- establishes
data collection tools to evaluate progression of
local hazards related to sea level rise
Climate Action/ Adaptation Plan ☒ • Engineering
Completed Sea Level rise study in 2018.

Currently reporting to Coastal Commission on
changes in sea level rise at WWTP location
Emergency Operations Plan ☒ • All
Business Response Plan/Emergency Action
Plan. CAWD staff are Disaster Service Workers
and are trained to safely operate and maintain
the critical sewer infrastructure 24/7 and
during emergencies
Specific Emergency Response
Plans ☒ • Safety Business Response Plans, FAST Plan
Continuity of Operations Plan ☒ • All Maintain 24/7 service of sewer system Packet Page 966
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-12 ANNEX N
Table N-2
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document, Program, Requirement Department Comments
Evacuation Plan ☒ • All
Illness and Injury Prevention
Plan ☒ • Safety Employee Safety Programs (PPE/Trainings)Confined Space Program Business Response Plan ☒ • Safety
Hazardous Materials Plan ☒ • Safety
Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure
Plan
Hazardous Material Plans and Training
Site Plan Review Requirements ☒ • Engineering Performed by Plant Engineer when applicable Other:
• Hazard Communication Program (HAZCOM)
• Sanitary District Act of 1923
• CAWD Uniform Plumbing Ordinance
• Lateral Permits/Building Permit Review
Table N-3
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land
development and land
management practices
☒ • Engineering Plant Engineer, Principal Engineer
Engineer(s) or professional(s)
trained in construction
practices related to buildings
and/or infrastructure
☒ • Engineering Plant Engineer, Principal Engineer
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
an understanding of manmade
or natural hazards
☒ • Engineering Plant Engineer, Principal Engineer
Building Inspector ☒ • Engineering
• Source Control Plant Engineer, Principal Engineer
Emergency Manager ☒ • Safety General Manager, Safety & Compliance Officer
Resource development staff or
grant writers ☐
Public Information Officer ☒ • Admin Duty performed by General Manager Scientist(s) familiar with the
hazards of the community ☐
Staff with education or
expertise to assess the ☒ • Engineering• Safety
Plant Engineer, Principal Engineer, Safety
& Compliance Officer
Packet Page 967
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-13 ANNEX N
Table N-3
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
community’s vulnerability to
hazards
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) ☒ • Engineering
Plant Engineer, Principal Engineer, also
maintains a contract with Turf Image for
GIS services
Maintenance programs to
reduce risk ☒
• Engineering
• Maintenance
• Collections
Plant Engineer, Principal Engineer,
Collection Superintendent
Warning systems/services ☒
• Engineering
• Maintenance
• Collections
CAWD SCADA System/CAWD Website
Mutual Aid Agreements ☐
No written agreements currently in place;
however, several Informal connections
with other nearby water and wastewater
utility providers
Other: • Safety Committee- Safety Regulatory Compliance Administrator / Operations / Maintenance / Engineering
Table N-4
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds ☒ • Finance Principal Accountant, General Manager Capital Improvements Project
Funding ☒ • Finance
Principal Accountant, General Manager,
Funding associated with a CIP would also have a
Project Manager. $3.3 million per year in capital
improvement projects to ensure the continued
safe, hazard-resilient wastewater and water
recycling services to CAWD’s service area.

Special Purpose Taxes ☐
Stormwater Utility Fees ☐
Gas / Electric Utility Fees ☐
Water / Sewer Fees ☒ • Finance
All sewer utility fees collected are used in the
operation and maintenance of CAWD’s
infrastructure. This includes CIP projects and
maintenance functions which extend useful life.

Development Impact Fees ☐
General Obligation Bonds ☐
Special Tax and Revenue Bonds ☐
Packet Page 968
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-14 ANNEX N
Table N-5
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit
groups focused on
environmental protection, etc.
☒ • Manager
• Safety
CAWD participates in peninsula wide Fats,
Oils, and Grease Program
Ongoing public education or
information program ☒
• Manager
• Safety
• Collections
Educating the public about the valuable
services provided by CAWD and how these
relate to public health, environmental
protection, and drought resiliency in the
District’s service area. Multiple platforms for
customer and constituent interaction with
CAWD, which increases the ease of reporting
concerns resulting in quicker incident
response times and in some cases, incident
prevention.

Natural disaster or safety
related school programs ☒  Safety
Provides annual tours to local schools. Via
cawd.org, educators can access educational
resources for their students and interested
citizens can learn more about topics like best
management practices for household
hazardous waste and sewer maintenance,
both of which reduce the occurrences of
accidental exposure and/or sanitary sewer
overflows.

Public-private partnership
initiatives addressing disasterrelated issues
☐
Other:

Ongoing training for employees and contractors performing work for CAWD on prevention and mitigation of occupational hazard incidents and control of hazardous materials and other environmental pollutants Political Capability
The CAWD Board is very willing to engage on issues related to sanitary sewer systems and treatment facilities. They have begun working on Sea Level Rise and the impact on their facilities.

N.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP)
The Carmel Area Wastewater District is a Special District and is therefore not eligible for flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

Packet Page 969
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-15 ANNEX N
N.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table N-6
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability Moderate
Administrative and Technical Capability High
Fiscal Capability High
Education and Outreach Capability High
Political Capability High
Overall Capability High
N.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES CAWD does an excellent job as a Special District, but their jurisdiction is limited to sanitary sewer issues. Planning, regulatory, fiscal, administrative, technical, education, and outreach capabilities can all be expanded or improved using a combination of the following strategies:
• Increase capacity through staffing
• Training, and enhanced coordination among all department and jurisdictions • Emergency management/hazard specific program enhancements, training, and exercising • Increased funding opportunities and capacity
• Implementation of mitigation actions and projects
• Continuous research on grant opportunities for emergency management, hazard mitigation, and infrastructure and community development.

Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

N.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Existing Integration
In the performance period since adoption of the previous hazard mitigation plan, the District made progress on integrating hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and actions into other planning initiatives.

Opportunities for Future Integration
As this hazard mitigation plan is implemented, the Carmel Area Wastewater District will use information from the plan as the best available science and data on natural hazards. The capability assessment presented in this annex identifies codes, plans and programs that provide opportunities for integration. The area-wide and local action plans developed for this hazard mitigation plan include actions related to plan integration, and progress on these actions will be reported through the progress reporting process described in Volume 1. New opportunities for integration also will be identified as part of the annual progress report. The plans and programs listed in the Capability Assessment cover the majority of District operations where the hazard mitigation goals are addressed. However, the capability assessment identified the opportunity for future integration of recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan for all the plans and programs listed as they are updated periodically N.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the Districts’ Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern. The Hazard Problem Statements were primarily derived from CAWD’s Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee and informed by review of existing literature about CAWD’s assets and analysis using best available data relating to the vulnerability analysis for each piece of CAWD’s critical infrastructure. They were developed to assist in the identification and analysis of potential hazard mitigation actions for CAWD.

N.7.1 COLLECTIONS SYSTEM
• Infrastructure requires capital investment to ensure safe, reliable sewer collections services. • Collection’s systems must operate continuously (24/7) as wastewater doesn’t stop flowing. • Infrastructure is coastally located and thus vulnerable to sea-level rise, tsunami, coastal erosion, coastal flooding, and intense storm events.

Packet Page 971
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-17 ANNEX N
• The CAWD collection system is located in areas with a high level of environmental scrutiny and regulation. This makes completing projects more difficult due to the many regulatory requirements for doing projects even though they are necessary to maintain the sewers in good condition and improve resiliency of the system from hazards.
• Conservation in CAWD’s service area is reducing the amount of flow in sewers to move solids down gravity pipelines.
• Extending sewer collection service to remote areas of District which were originally developed by means of septic tanks.

N.7.2 WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT
• Infrastructure requires capital investment to ensure safe, reliable wastewater and water recycling services.
• Treatment systems must operate continuously (24/7) as wastewater doesn’t stop flowing. • Infrastructure is coastally located and thus vulnerable to sea-level rise, tsunami, coastal erosion, coastal flooding, and intense storm events.
• Conservation in CAWD’s service area is changing the characteristics of wastewater. • New regulations in the future could require changes in treatment process.

N.7.3 RECLAMATION PLANT (RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES)
• Infrastructure requires capital investment to ensure safe, reliable water recycling services. • Recycled water supply is largely dependent on resources that fluctuate with rainfall and are heavily influenced by conservation trends.
• Infrastructure is coastally located and thus vulnerable to sea-level rise, tsunami, coastal erosion, coastal flooding, and intense storm events.

N.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

The Carmel area is vulnerable to a wide range of hazards, both natural and manmade, which threaten the life and safety of residents and visitors. While complete elimination of the hazards facing CAWD’s infrastructure is not likely, adequate, proactive planning and preparation for such occurrences can greatly reduce the impact on the communities, environments, and economies it serves.

The District’s Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefit-cost analysis and consideration of mitigation alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the District’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan Matrices lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Packet Page 972
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-18 ANNEX N
Table N-8 contains the Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan for the CAWD Collection System and Table N-9 contains the Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan for the CAWD WWTP and Reclamation Plant.

Status of Previous Plan Actions
CAWD has experienced infrastructure damage from natural disasters in the recent past. The “Hatton Canyon Pipeline Replacement Project” was completed recently, and the work was funded through Cal OES hazard mitigation grant funding. CAWD is proven capable of successfully implementing hazard mitigation grant funds.

Packet Page 973
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-19 ANNEX N
N Carmel Area Wastewater District Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Table N-8
CAWD Collection System Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
1 3 – 5 years
Gravity Sewer
- Carmel
Meadows
Slope Failure,
Earthquake,
Water
Contamination
• Relocate the pipeline off the slope.
• Improve stability of slope via shoring or
retaining walls.
• Install seamless pipe so joints don’t fail.
• Install anchorage to keep pipe from
sliding.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
2 3 – 5 years
Gravity Sewer
- Pescadero
Creek
Slope Failure,
Earthquake,
Water
Contamination
• Relocate the pipeline off the slope.
• Improve stability of slope via shoring or
retaining walls.
• Install seamless pipe so joints don’t fail.
• Install anchorage to keep pipe from
sliding.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
3 3- 5 years Scenic Rd
Sewer Lines
Coastal Erosion,
Sea Level Rise,
Earthquake
• Relocate pipes farther inland.
• Replace pipe with seamless pipe so it is
less susceptible to failure at pipe joints.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
4 As Needed
Pump Station
– Calle La
Cruz
Flooding,
Riverine
Flooding, Sea
Level Rise, Flash
Flood, Slope
Failure
• Relocate the Pump Station to higher
ground or retrofit the pump station to
handle higher flood levels and slope
erosion.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 974
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-20 ANNEX N
Table N-8
CAWD Collection System Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
5 As Needed
Pump Station
- Monte
Verde and
16th
Coastal
Flooding, Sea
Level Rise, Flash
Flood, Levee
Failure, Storm
Water Flooding,
Dam Failure
• Waterproof the station structure and wet
well.
• Install flood walls.
• Increase Pump Station size to handle
flood inflows.
• Relocate electrical panels away from flood
impacts.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
6 3 – 5 years
Pump Station
- Bay and
Scenic
Coastal Erosion,
Sea Level Rise,
Tsunami
• Pump Station Retrofit to handle new
conditions caused by Sea Level Rise.
• Relocate Pump Station Inland or eliminate
Pump Station by requiring homes to
install residential sewer pumps stations.
• Move electrical panels to higher ground.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
7 As Needed
Pump Station
– 8th and
Scenic
Coastal Erosion,
Sea Level Rise,
Tsunami
• Pump Station Retrofit to handle new
conditions caused by Sea Level Rise.
• Relocate Pump Station Inland or eliminate
Pump Station by requiring homes to
install residential sewer pump stations.
• Move electrical panels to higher ground.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
8 As Needed All Pump
Stations
Utility
Interruption/
Public Safety
Power Shutoff,
Windstorms
• Pre-position emergency power generation
capacity (or have rental/lease agreements
for generators) in critical locations for
continuity services.
• Install 480V battery backup systems.
• Purchase a new engine driven bypass
pump for Highlands Pump Station.

Medium Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 975
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-21 ANNEX N
Table N-8
CAWD Collection System Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
9 As Needed All Pump
Stations Cyber-Attack
• Upgrade network hardware and software.
• Build a standby / backup server.
• Encrypting internal control system
network.
• Hire network security firm to implement
security improvements.
• Hire network security firm to monitor
network and manage security.

Medium Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
10 As Needed All Pump
Stations Earthquake
• Commission a structural analysis of the
most critical pump stations.
• Complete structural modifications for
earthquake safety as necessary.

Medium Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
11 In Progress
Low lying
sewers in
Carmel Point
and Mission
Fields
Flooding, Flash
Flood, Levee
Failure, Sea
Level Rise,
Localized
Stormwater
Flooding,
Tsunami
• Install watertight manhole lids to mitigate
inflow.
• Install seamless piping to mitigate
infiltration.
• Repairing manholes structures and/or
lining them to mitigate infiltration.

Medium Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 976
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-22 ANNEX N
Table N-8
CAWD Collection System Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
12 3 – 5 years
Low lying
sewers
around Rio
Rd East of
Hwy 1)
Riverine
Flooding,
Coastal
Flooding, Flash
Flood, Levee
Failure, Sea
Level Rise,
Localized
Stormwater
Flooding, Dam
Failure
• Install watertight manhole lids to mitigate
inflow.
• Install seamless piping to mitigate
infiltration.
• Repairing manholes structures and/or
lining them to mitigate infiltration.

Medium Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
13 As Needed
Sewer Lines
on Slopes
Greater than
2:1
Slope Failure
• Conduct detailed geological investigations
of facilities to determine the risk of
damage from slope instability.
• Improve stability of existing slope via
shoring or retaining walls.
• Install seamless pipe so joints don’t fail.
• Install anchorage to keep pipe from
sliding.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 977
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-23 ANNEX N
Table N-8
CAWD Collection System Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
14 Ongoing All Sewer
Lines
Severe Winter
Storms,
Localized
Stormwater
Flooding
• Continue to repair/replace and make
structural improvements to pipelines to
enable them to perform to their design
capacity.
• Televise gravity interceptors to identify
structural and joint problems and verify
the condition
• Continue maintenance efforts to keep
pipelines free of obstructions.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
15 As Needed All Sewer
Lines
Drought &
Water Shortage
• Expand in-situ sewer cleaning capabilities
to increase frequency of cleaning to avoid
backups due to poor solids conveyance.
• Purchase a cleaning truck that recycles
cleaning water in the truck to use less
water during cleaning.
• Expand sewer system to collect septic
tank water.

Low Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
16 Ongoing Sewer
Manholes
Severe Winter
Storms,
Localized
Stormwater
Flooding
• Replace or repair deficient manholes to
reduce infiltration.
• Ongoing inspections.
• Install watertight lids
Medium Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
17 As Needed All Pump
Stations
Extreme Cold &
Freeze
• Review electrical control systems for
major stations to determine if enough
independent operations exist between
each control system to ensure single
system failure cannot disable the station.

Medium Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 978
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-24 ANNEX N
Table N-8
CAWD Collection System Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
18 As Needed All Pump
Stations Extreme Heat
• Review electrical control systems for
major stations to determine if enough
independent operations exist between
each control system to ensure single
system failure cannot disable the station.
• Install odor control / hazardous sulfide gas
control.
• Add Air Conditioning to cool electrical
panels.
• Purchase an engine driven bypass pump
for Highlands Pump Station.

Medium Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
19 3 – 5 years Highlands
Pump Station Wildfire • Purchase an engine driven bypass pump for Highlands Pump Station. High Collections General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
20 Ongoing Personnel Pandemic,
Epidemic
• Establish formal mutual aid agreements.
• Install provisions for social distancing
employees.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
21 Ongoing Critical
Supplies
Pandemic,
Epidemic
• Construct or otherwise obtain additional
storage facilities to stockpile necessary
supplies that may be disrupted during a
global pandemic.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 979
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-25 ANNEX N
Table N-8
CAWD Collection System Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
22 As Needed
All Sewer
Lines not
under streets
Windstorms
• Remove trees with roots that may intrude
under sewer lines. Trees fall over in the
wind and can pull sewers out of the
ground with the roots ball.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
23 Ongoing
Sewer lines
near
waterbodies
or storm
drains
Water
Contamination
(i.e., protection
of natural
waters)
• Seal manholes and sewer lines to limit
exfiltration.
• Replace pipes and manholes
• Map all storm drains in the District to plan
containment strategies near storm inlets
in event of sewer overflow.

High Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
24 As Needed
Collections
Office and
Vehicle
Storage
Building
Coastal
Flooding,
Riverine
Flooding, Sea
Level Rise, Flash
Flood
• Relocate collections offices and vehicle
storage to a new location away from the
flood plain.

Medium Collections
General
Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 980
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-26 ANNEX N
Table N-9
CAWD Wastewater Treatment Plant and Reclamation Plant Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
1 As Needed
Ocean
Outfall
Pipeline
Coastal
Erosion
• Install a new Outfall deeper
underground High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
2 Ongoing /
As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Riverine
Flooding,
Coastal
Flooding,
Flash Flood,
Dam Failure
• All new construction within the 100-
year flood zone to be completed with
design that will limit damage from
floods.
• Adapt existing structures to handle
higher/more frequent floods onsite.
• Relocate treatment plant.
• Install area groundwater dewatering
pumps.
• Pump floodwaters to a new aquifer
storage well system offsite.

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
3 Ongoing /
As Needed
Treatment
Plant Access
Road
Riverine
Flooding,
Coastal
Flooding,
Flash Flood,
Dam Failure
• Provide secondary access into the
treatment plant by replacing or
renovating existing CAWD pedestrian
bridge over Carmel River.
• Relocate treatment plant.

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 981
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-27 ANNEX N
Table N-9
CAWD Wastewater Treatment Plant and Reclamation Plant Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
4 Ongoing
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Cyber-Attack
• Upgrade network hardware.
• Build a standby / backup server.
• Upgrade network software.
• Encrypting internal control system
network.
• Hire network security firm to
implement security improvements.
• Hire network security firm to monitor
network and manage security.

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
5 As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Drought &
Water
Shortage
• Install a smaller blower/aerator. Low Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
6 As Needed Reclamation
Plant
Drought &
Water
Shortage
• Implement an Aquifer Storage and
Recovery project to maximize water
recycling during wet weather flows.
• Add ocean desalination capabilities for
water resources.
• Expand dry weather stormwater
diversions into sewer system.

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
7 As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Earthquake
• Commission a structural analysis of
critical structures ability to withstand
earthquakes.
• Retrofit existing structures as
necessary.

Medium Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 982
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-28 ANNEX N
Table N-9
CAWD Wastewater Treatment Plant and Reclamation Plant Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
8 Ongoing /
As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Pandemic,
Epidemic
• Install new separate workspaces to
replace communal workspaces to allow
social distancing.
• Upgrade Process Automation.
• Add onsite housing for staff to
maintain facility without contact to
outside.
• Add ventilation improvements to treat
airborne vectors (HEPA, UV light,
Ozone, etc.).

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
9 As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Extreme Cold
& Freeze
• Insulate exposed piping.
• Enclose the MF/RO Reclamation
Facility.

Medium Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
10 As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Extreme Heat • Add Air Conditioning to cool electrical
panels and PLC panels. Medium Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
11 Ongoing
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Hazardous
Materials
Incident
• Provide training to employees in the
handling, storage, and control of
hazardous materials.

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 983
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-29 ANNEX N
Table N-9
CAWD Wastewater Treatment Plant and Reclamation Plant Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
12 Ongoing /
As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Sea Level Rise
• Adapt existing structures to handle
higher and more frequent floods
onsite.
• Relocate treatment plant.

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
13 Ongoing
Wastewater
Treatment
Plant
Severe Winter
Storms
• Maintain treatment plant conveyance
capacity to handle large wet weather
flows.
• Invest in collections system
improvements to reduce infiltration
and inflow during wet weather.
• Invest in additional flow equalization
facilities (i.e., storage) onsite and/or
offsite.

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
14 Ongoing /
As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Terrorist
Attack
• Install more security cameras.
• Install a secure fence around the site.
• Hire a specialist to do a threat
vulnerability risk assessment for
infrastructure.
• Hire a security firm to monitor site
outside normal business hours.
• Underground the main PG&E overhead
power line from Rio Rd to the
Treatment Plant site.

Medium Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 984
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-30 ANNEX N
Table N-9
CAWD Wastewater Treatment Plant and Reclamation Plant Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
15 As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Tsunami
• Commission a structural analysis of
critical structures ability to withstand
tsunami and retrofit existing structures
as necessary.

Low Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
16 As Needed
Ocean
Outfall
Pipeline
Tsunami • Install a new Outfall deeper
underground. Low Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
17 As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Utility
Interruption/
Public Safety
Power Shutoff
• Underground the main PG&E overhead
power line from Rio Rd to the
Treatment Plant site.
• Install standby power system (backup
generators) for Reclamation Plant.
• Install battery backup system.
• Increase diesel fuel storage capabilities.
• Provide for standby power generation
capacity using natural gas.
• Add a redundant Internet Service
Provider (ISP).

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
18 As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Water
Contamination
• Hire a dedicated Source Control
employee to investigate pollutants
entering sewer system.
• Implement more upstream sampling
equipment and analysis to enable
better Source Control.
• Create a Source Control GIS database.

Medium Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 985
CARMEL AREA WASTEWATER DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | N-31 ANNEX N
Table N-9
CAWD Wastewater Treatment Plant and Reclamation Plant Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
# Timeframe Asset / Location
Hazard
Mitigated Potential Mitigation Ranking / Prioritization Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
19 As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Wildfire
• Underground the main PG&E overhead
power line from Rio Rd to the
Treatment Plant site.
• Provide greater setback between
treatment plant structures and tall
eucalyptus trees used to hide
treatment plant from public view.

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
20 As Needed
Wastewater
Treatment
and
Reclamation
Plant
Windstorms
• Underground the main PG&E overhead
power line from Rio Rd to the
Treatment Plant site.
• Provide greater setback between
treatment plant structures and tall
eucalyptus trees used to hide
treatment plant from public view.

High Treatment
General Fund,
Grants,

HMGP, CIP,
Utility Fees
Packet Page 986

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 987
O
ANNEX O:

MONTEREY ONE WATER
2021 Monterey County
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Packet Page 988
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-1 ANNEX O
O. MONTEREY ONE WATER
O.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact
Sarah Stevens
Compliance Analyst
5 Harris Ct., Building D
Monterey, CA 93940
(831) 883-6109
[email protected]
Mike McCullough
Director of External Affairs
5 Harris Ct., Building D
Monterey, CA 93940
(831) 645-4618
[email protected]
O.2 AGENCY PROFILE
O.2.1 LOCATION AND SERVICE AREA
Monterey One Water (M1W), formerly Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency is a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) that provides wastewater and water recycling services to 11 member entities situated in the Monterey Bay Area. The Agency receives wastewater from the following areas:
• Boronda County Sanitation District • Marina Coast Water District • Castroville Community Services District • Unincorporated Areas of Monterey County • Del Rey Oaks • Monterey
• Salinas • Pacific Grove
• Seaside • Sand City
M1W’s service area encompasses 90.5 square miles and includes the operation and maintenance of a vast network of infrastructure and assets, most principally: the Regional Treatment Plant (RTP); pump stations; gravity and force mains; land/ocean outfall; the Salinas Valley Reclamation Project (SVRP); Castroville Seawater Intrusion Project (CSIP); Salinas River Diversion Facility (SRDF); and Pure Water Monterey (PWM) Advanced Water Purification Facility (AWPF) and Injection Well Facilities (IWF).

O.2.2 HISTORY
Before M1W’s establishment, every community in the Monterey Bay area had its own wastewater treatment plant. Most of the communities were discharging their sewage into the Monterey Bay with limited treatment and, in some cases, as little as 300 feet offshore. In 1972, the United States enacted the Federal Clean Water Act which protects against water pollution and regulates discharging of pollutants into waters of the US. This set of policies required communities to collaborate to increase treatment standards and bring regional efficiency to sewer system management.

A JPA formed the “Monterey Peninsula Water Pollution Control Agency” in 1972 by the Cities of Monterey, Pacific Grove, and the Seaside County Sanitation District. Its purpose was to seek joint solutions to water pollution. The membership has grown to include the cities of Seaside, Del Rey Oaks, Sand City, Salinas, Castroville County Sanitation District, Boronda County Sanitation District, County of Packet Page 989
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-2 ANNEX O
Monterey, Marina Coast Water District, and Fort Ord (ex-officio member). To reflect the larger service area, the name was changed to Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency 1979. Construction of the RTP, owned and operated by the Agency, was completed in 1990 with an average dry weather design capacity of 29.6 million gallons per day (MGD).

In addition to Federal Clean Water Act requirements, it became evident during the early 1970s that the quality of northern Monterey County’s groundwater supply was deteriorating due to extensive withdrawal for agricultural purposes. This overdraft increased seawater intrusion, which threatened the multibillion-dollar agricultural industry and the drinking water supply for the City of Salinas. It also presented an opportunity for water recycling to introduce new water supplies for the community.

Under a 1996 agreement with the Monterey County Water Resources Agency (MCWRA), the Agency constructed the 29.6 MGD SVRP to provide recycled water to growers in the Salinas Valley and to slow seawater intrusion. The distribution portion of the system, known as the CISP, delivers water through 45 miles of pipeline to 12,000 acres of farmland in the northern Salinas Valley nearly year-round.

Recently, to address state-ordered cutbacks in utilization of existing surface water supplies on the Monterey Peninsula, M1W, in partnership with the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District (MPWMD), developed the Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project (PWM/GWR) to inject 3,500 acre-feet per year (AFY) of purified recycled water to replenish the Seaside Groundwater Basin. The PWM/GWR Project will also provide recycled water for landscape irrigation in partnership with Marina Coast Water District (MCWD). The project includes an Advanced Water Purification Facility with a design capacity of 5 MGD, located adjacent to the RTP. The AWPF consists of ozone pretreatment, low pressure membrane filtration, Reverse Osmosis (RO), advanced oxidation, and product water stabilization. Purified recycled water from the AWPF is conveyed by pipeline to the Seaside Groundwater Basin for recharge using both deep injection and vadose zone wells. The injected purified recycled water subsequently mixes with native groundwater and is stored for future urban use, including use as a potable water source.

O.2.3 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
M1W is a public utility serving jurisdictions in northern Monterey County. The Agency is governed through a JPA. Each of the 11 member entities appoint a representative to the M1W Board of Directors to represent their jurisdictions. Current membership on the M1W Board includes elected officials from eight jurisdictions, a representative from the Monterey County Board of Supervisors, one member who is appointed by the Monterey County Board of Supervisors to represent the Boronda County Sanitation District, and an ex-officio representative from the US Army.

O.3 PLANNING PROCESS
M1W followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan. In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the Agency formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process.

M1W held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting on July 28, 2021 to discuss vulnerabilities, mitigation activities that had occurred since the last plan update, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies.

Packet Page 990
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-3 ANNEX O
Key stakeholders present at the meeting included:
• Tamsen McNarie, Assistant General Manager
• Jennifer Gonzalez, P.E., Engineering Manager
• Jose O. Guzman, Chief Plant Operator
• Jonathan Mungcal, Utilities and Maintenance Services Manager • Joanne Le, Laboratory and Environmental Services Manager • Darrele Harris, Utilities Supervisor
• David Bradley, Operations Supervisor
• Nathan Clark, Operations Supervisor
• Sarah Stevens, Compliance Analyst
O.4 FACILITIES
As mentioned previously, M1W’s facilities and infrastructure include: The RTP; pump stations; gravity and force mains; land/ocean outfall; the SVRP; CSIP; Salinas River Diversion Facility (SRDF); and PWM AWPF and IWF. Monterey One Water’s facilities are mapped in Figure O-1.

Figure O-1
Monterey One Water Facilities Map
M1W owns, operates, and maintains the RTP, located two miles north of the City of Marina and provides ‘trunk line’ wastewater conveyance services via a system of 14 M1W-owned pump stations Packet Page 991
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-4 ANNEX O
and 34.2 miles of force main and gravity pipeline (referred to collectively as the wastewater collection system, WCS). Additionally, M1W operates, under contract, 18 pump stations owned by its member entities. Wastewater within M1W’s service area is collected through City owned, operated, and maintained sewer systems and conveyed to regional pump stations for subsequent conveyance to the RTP. This network allows M1W to treat and recycle on average 18.5 MGD from 268,000 constituents (2010 census). Secondary treated effluent not utilized for recycling is discharged to the Bay through M1W’s outfall (land/ocean outfall), which consists of 2.5 miles of land and 2.1 miles of ocean pipeline.

The M1W-owned WCS includes three ‘trunk line’ interceptor systems and two river crossings. Each trunk line consists of a single pipeline, ranging in size from 6 to 60 inches in diameter that were constructed in several stages about 35 years ago. Line composition includes ductile iron; polyvinyl chloride pipe (PVC); high density polyethylene pipe (HDPE); vitrified clay pipe (VCP); reinforced concrete pipe (RCP); both lined and unlined concrete pipe. There are also 39 intermittent air/vacuum relief valves. Operating pressures vary from several hundred feet of head on the discharge side of large pump stations to un-pressurized gravity flows depending on system hydraulics. M1W’s WCS joins member entity sewer systems at influent manholes of the corresponding pump stations.

In 2018 M1W completed a comprehensive study (Conveyance System Condition Optimization Analysis) to assess the condition of its pump stations and WCS infrastructure, identify near-term risks and mitigation strategies, and support a long-term asset management program that identifies sustainable funding needs for a 22-year planning horizon (2019-2040). Results of the study have been incorporated into M1W’s Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Master Plan as necessary. A similar study is planned to assess the condition of the RTP.

As part of the Agency’s strategic goal to develop the use of recycled water within its service area, M1W has embraced the ‘one water’ approach which views all waters, drinking water, wastewater, stormwater, greywater, and others, as a resource that must be sustainably managed. Subsequently, in 2018 the Agency changed its name to Monterey One Water to reflect this principal. To that end, M1W jointly owns and operates two water recycling projects: one producing recycled water to supplement agricultural reliance on groundwater in the Salinas Valley, and one purifying water to drinking water standards for indirect potable reuse via groundwater replenishment on the Monterey Peninsula.

Agricultural Reuse
In 1992, M1W and the MCWRA formed a partnership to build the Monterey County Reclamation Projects (MCWRP): the SVRP recycled water plant and the CISP distribution system. Some years later in 2010, M1W and MCWRA again partnered to expand the MCWRP to include the SRDF to provide treated (filtered and chlorinated) river water for blending with SVRP recycled water when adequate releases from upstream reservoirs are available. These three facilities, paid for by Salinas Valley agricultural growers and property owners, provide irrigation water to 12,000 acres of Castroville farmland to assist in slowing seawater intrusion into local groundwater aquifers. Seawater intrusion threatens both agricultural water supply as well as urban/municipal drinking water supplies.

Indirect Potable Reuse and Groundwater Replenishment
Monterey County is isolated from state and federal water projects requiring the region to rely solely on its limited, local water resources. For Monterey Peninsula residents and businesses, water historically came from two sources: 1) the Carmel River and 2) the Seaside Groundwater Basin. Overuse Packet Page 992
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-5 ANNEX O
threatened water quality and habitats, leading to state and court-ordered reductions in reliance upon these resources. To help address this challenge, M1W and its partners collaborated to develop a drought-resistant and independent water supply: Pure Water Monterey. Using a proven, multi-stage treatment process, the PWM AWPF treats wastewater into a safe, reliable, and sustainable water supply that complies with or exceeds strict state and federal drinking water standards. After production, the purified water is conveyed to the Seaside Groundwater Basin for injection, groundwater replenishment, and eventual potable reuse.

Figure O-2
Monterey One Water Process
O.5 AGENCY SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile M1W’s hazards and assess the Agency’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan.

The M1W Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The Agency’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Survey to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the Agency. Each variable was scored by Packet Page 993
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-6 ANNEX O
hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16.

Each score was associated with a qualitative degree of risk ranking from Negligible (between 1 and 4) to Very High (between 14.1 and 16). The Survey is described in more detail in Risk Assessment Methods in Volume 1. Table O-1 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the M1W Planning Team.

Table O-1
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): Monterey One Water Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of Risk
Agricultural Emergencies 3.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 11.0 High
Coastal Erosion 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 13.0 High
Coastal Flooding 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 9.0 Moderate
Cyber-Attack 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 14.0 High
Dam Failure 2.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 9.0 Moderate
Drought & Water Shortage 4.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 13.0 High
Earthquake 4.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 14.0 High
Epidemic 4.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 9.0 Moderate
Extreme Cold & Freeze 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 Low
Extreme Heat 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 9.0 Moderate
Flash Flood 2.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 9.0 Moderate
Hazardous Materials Incident 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Low
Invasive Species 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 Negligible
Levee Failure - - - - - -
Localized Stormwater Flooding 2.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 9.0 Moderate Mass Migration - - - - - -
Pandemic 4.0 2.0 1.0 2.0 9.0 Moderate
Riverine Flooding 2.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 9.0 Moderate
Sea Level Rise 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 13.0 High
Severe Winter Storms 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 14.0 High
Slope Failure 1.0 3.0 2.0 3.0 9.0 Moderate
Targeted Violence 1.0 1.0 4.0 3.0 9.0 Moderate
Terrorism 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 14.0 High
Tsunami 4.0 3.0 2.0 4.0 13.0 High
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 4.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 11.0 Moderate Water Contamination 4.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 14.0 High
Wildfire 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0 Low
Windstorms 4.0 3.0 3.0 4.0 14.0 High
Note: Asterisks (*) indicate infrastructure jointly owned or operated by M1W with partner entities.

Packet Page 994
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-7 ANNEX O
O.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
The following M1W infrastructure has the potential to impact agricultural emergencies or be impacted by an instance of agricultural emergency, including drought and bio-contamination. • SVRP- Del Monte Boulevard, Marina
• CSIP- Castroville*
• SRDF- Salinas River, Marina*
• Castroville Pump Station- Highway 1 North, Castroville • Salinas Pump Station- Hitchcock Road, Salinas
• Farmworker Housing Pump Station #1 – Hitchcock Road, Salinas • Pond 3 Pump Station – South Davis Road, Salinas *
• Pipeline- 13.08 miles
Conjunctively the SVRP, the CSIP, and the SRDF provide recycled water to irrigate 12,000 acres of agricultural land in the Castroville area to supplement groundwater pumping with the intent to slow rates of seawater intrusion. As M1W and partner agency, MCWRA, recently observed, prolonged drought conditions adversely the impact the ability of these projects to perform their intended function. Principally, the SRDF remained non-operational during the drought from 2013 to 2016 due to limited in-stream flows for biological species downstream of the dam. This resulted in increases in groundwater pumping from supplemental wells in the area of seawater intrusion impact. However, since 1998 the projects have recycled more than 90 billion gallons of water for beneficial reuse. Should these services be interrupted again for an extended period, the 12,000 acres of crops would require an alternative water source, likely groundwater. This could result in worsened seawater intrusion into coastal aquifers which would potentially render agricultural land unfarmable.

M1W customers achieved remarkably high-water conservation benchmarks during this most recent drought period, resulting in less influent to the RTP for reclamation. In addition to reducing the volume of influent to the RTP, conservation has also changed the characteristics of the wastewater, possibly due to longer in-pipe retention times and higher concentrations. M1W is performing analyses and pursuing system-wide optimization to better understand and, where possible, adapt to the changing nature of wastewater.

The Castroville Pump Station, the Salinas Pump Station, and the Farmworker Housing Pump Station #1 are located directly adjacent to agricultural operations. If a sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) were to occur at one of these stations, wastewater could contaminate land, requiring bioremediation. M1W’s preventative maintenance program (PMP) and CIP jointly work to reduce this risk by performing routine maintenance and system upgrades/replacements. Concurrently, M1W’s Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system monitors pump stations and sends critical feedback to the Control Room at the RTP, which is manned 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. SCADA alarms alert M1W employees of conditions which might lead to an SSO prompting dispatch of any number of on-call employees to the site.

O.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
Several of M1W’s assets are located near the coastline, thus making them susceptible to coastal storms and erosion. Specifically, assets vulnerable to coastal erosion include:

Packet Page 995
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-8 ANNEX O
• Station 15- Coral Street, Pacific Grove
• Station 7- Reeside, Monterey
• Station 13- Fountain Avenue, Pacific Grove
• Monterey Pump Station- Del Monte Boulevard, Monterey
• Seaside Pump Station- Bay Street, Seaside
• Conveyance Pipelines- 13.28 miles (includes 2.1 miles of Ocean Outfall) During March 2016 extreme wave action was observed. This coupled with the high rate of coastal erosion documented in Southern Monterey Bay, the highest in the State of California, resulted in M1W’s Land/Ocean Outfall junction structure being exposed. The exposure required emergency protection work which included installation of sheet piling on both sides of the outfall pipe to prevent the sand from further eroding and undermining the pipeline. Emergency work was successful, and the site is closely monitored for changes. M1W is in the process of assessing the feasibility and appropriateness of various courses of action to ensure the long-term operability of the outfall. The technical memorandum recommendations have been included as mitigation measures in Table O-10.

Stations 15, 7, 13 and the Monterey and Seaside Pump Stations are all located directly adjacent to the Monterey Bay coastline near sea level. Mitigating potential SSO events, especially those in Pacific Grove adjacent to the Federally designated Area of Special Biological Significance (ASBS), is among the highest of M1W’s priorities. M1W’s preventative maintenance program, CIP, and SCADA system work together to identify vulnerabilities and mitigate them based on risk.

Conceptual projects addressing climate-related challenges at these locations, including but not limited to coastal erosion, are further described in Section O.5.15, Climate Change & Sea Level Rise.

O.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
The following M1W infrastructure is vulnerable in the event of an upstream dam failure:
• Regional Treatment Plant- Del Monte Boulevard, Marina • SRDF- Salinas River, Marina*
• SVRP- Del Monte Boulevard, Marina*
• Moss Landing Pump Station- Moss Landing Road, Moss Landing • Marina Pump Station- Reservation Road, Marina
• Fort Ord Pump Station- Marina Drive, Marina
• Salinas Pump Station- Hitchcock Road, Salinas
• Farmworker Housing Pump Station #1 – Hitchcock Road, Salinas • Pond 3 Pump Station – South Davis Road, Salinas *
• Castroville Pump Station- Highway 1 North, Castroville • Conveyance Pipelines - 18.37 miles
Releases from both the Nacimiento and San Antonio reservoirs flow northward towards the Monterey Bay through the channel of the Salinas River, adjacent to the location of the structures listed above.

Combined, both reservoirs have a storage capacity of approximately 712,900 acre-feet. Should one or both reservoirs fail, water released could place the aforementioned structures at risk of inundation or Packet Page 996
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-9 ANNEX O
other structural damage. New structures located in areas susceptible to flooding are built using the most current techniques guided by California Building Code to ensure operability through inundation events, while existing structures are retrofitted to withstand events to the highest extent possible.

Levee Failure
Levee failure does not currently pose a major risk to the Agency’s infrastructure or facilities.

O.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
Monterey County is isolated from state and federal water supplies and must rely solely on its local water resources, groundwater, and surface water from watersheds with negligible influence from snowpack. As extreme heat and extended drought become more frequent, the region must ensure access to sustainable water supplies. To that end, in addition to providing wastewater treatment services to the community, M1W recycles its wastewater to diversify local water supplies for the agricultural and urban sectors.

Both water recycling projects, the SVRP, and PWM/GWR Project, provide sustainable supplemental water sources to traditional supplies. However, both projects rely upon availability of source water and therefore could be affected adversely in the event of drought.

Drought and water shortage could affect the Agency’s operations in the following ways:

Conservation resulting in:
• Reductions in influent, resulting in less source water availability to meet recycled water obligations.
• Changing wastewater characteristics, possibly due to longer in-pipe retention times and higher concentrations (see Section O.5.1, Agricultural Emergency). • Collection’s system backups and possible SSOs due to lack of water flow to carry solids.

Reduced precipitation:
• Impacting reservoir storage and therefore limiting or precluding operation of the SRDF for agricultural use.
• Limiting seasonal surface water flows resulting in the inability to utilize the Blanco Drain and Reclamation Ditch surface water rights.
• Limiting the amount of stormwater diverted and stored in the Salinas Industrial Wastewater Treatment Facility (IWTF) ponds for later conveyance to the RTP for recycling.

O.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
A 1998 report by Dames and Moore detailed local geology, seismic setting, and historic seismicity of M1W facilities including pump station buildings, equipment, piping, and tanks. The study determined that there was a very low life-safety risk due to earthquake; however, that there could be economic and environmental impacts if an earthquake were to occur.

Per that report, the following infrastructure would be vulnerable to earthquake-induced liquefaction of the following calibers:

Packet Page 997
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-10 ANNEX O
Moderate:
• Monterey Pump Station- Del Monte Boulevard, Monterey
• Seaside Pump Station- Bay Avenue, Seaside
• Fort Ord Pump Station- Marina Drive, Marina
• Marina Pump Station- Reservation Road, Marina
• Conveyance Pipelines- 15.47 miles
Moderate-to-High:
• Salinas Pump Station- Hitchcock Road, Salinas
• Moss Landing Pump Station- Moss Landing Road, Moss Landing • Castroville Pump Station- Highway 1 North, Castroville • Conveyance Pipelines- 9.62 miles
Another study prepared for M1W in 1991 concluded that seismic events are more likely to impact large stations than small stations because of the potential for a high-volume spill. High flows also preclude pump-arounds because flow rates exceed the capacity of portable pumps. Conversely, small pump stations like the Moss Landing Pump Station are likely to have a lower flow rates and a smaller mass of equipment.

More recently, seismic studies of the RTP have identified specific project needs for existing facilities within the plant and an effort has been made to complete those projects through the CIP. Seismic assessments are also conducted every 5 years for the chlorine system as required by the system’s Risk Management Plan.

O.5.6 FLOODING
In any one year, the probability of the occurrence of a 100- or 500-year flood affecting M1W facilities is low. However, there is a high probability that localized flooding will occur in areas that could affect pump stations. A 1991 C2MHill report explored the risk of damage to M1W facilities due to flooding.

According to that document and the most current floodplain maps, the following facilities are located in areas at risk of flooding:
• Salinas Pump Station- Hitchcock Road, Salinas
• SRDF- Salinas River, Marina*
• Pond 3 Pump Station- Hitchcock Road, Salinas
• Farmworker Housing Pump Station #1- Hitchcock Road, Salinas • Pond 3 Pump Station – South Davis Road, Salinas
• Castroville Pump Station- Highway 1 North, Castroville • Moss Landing Pump Station- Moss Landing Road, Moss Landing • Station 15- Coral Street, Pacific Grove
• Conveyance Pipelines - 19.9 miles
Both the Salinas and Castroville Pump Stations are designed to prevent inundation in the event of a 100-year flood event. They have both been equipped with flood protection enhancements to manage flood levels three feet above the surrounding terrain in order to increase resiliency during a major Packet Page 998
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-11 ANNEX O
storm event. This project has resulted in a 500-year flood safety factor. Additionally, emergency generators, portable pumps, and on-call staff are prepared for deployment to flood-prone areas during large storm events, while SCADA systems continuously report real-time data and information on station status allowing quick detection and response dispatch.

Localized flooding not correlated to floodplain, such as coastal flooding, storm surge, and wave run-up is also a concern for M1W. Particularly Station 15 (located on Coral Street in the City of Pacific Grove) has previously been inundated by wave run-up during storms from the adjacent Monterey Bay. Due to its low-lying position on the coast, it is possible the station with could be flooded with seawater; however, on average, the set of circumstances that must precipitate to enable such inundation occurs only about every 3-5 years.

As part of M1W’s wintertime readiness planning, sandbags and other protective equipment are stockpiled and made readily available to sites like Station 15, if necessary. Additionally, during storm events on-call staffing is increased to provide maximum resources for efficient incident response.

O.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
Hazardous materials utilized for the wastewater treatment and water recycling processes are managed in compliance with regulatory requirements and safety standards in order to avoid any accidental release. M1W maintains an up-to-date Hazardous Materials Business Plan (HMBP), including hazardous materials inventory and site plans in the Certified Environmental Reporting System (CERS). This information is readily available to first responders as well as the Monterey County Hazardous Materials Management Service (HMMS), which serves as the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for Monterey County. In addition, staff is routinely trained on the safe hazardous materials handling procedures and has ready access to Safety Data Sheets with important chemical safety information for all chemicals stored onsite.

Each M1W-owned pump station has a site-specific Emergency Response and Contingency Plan, and for those M1W facilities meeting the federal Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Rule and the state Aboveground Petroleum Storage Act thresholds, M1W maintains Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plans which are designed to eliminate or minimize the potential environmental risk of oil spills.

Additionally, per Clean Air Act Section 112(r) and California’s Accidental Release Program (CalARP) requirements, M1W maintains a Risk Management Plan for the chlorine system located at the RTP. The Risk Management Plan is designed to prevent accidental releases of regulated substances, minimize the damage if releases do occur, and satisfy community right-to-know laws by performing a detailed engineering analysis of potential accident factors and the mitigation measures to reduce accident potential. The Risk Management Plan contains safety information, hazard review, operating procedures, training and maintenance requirements, compliance audits, and incident investigation procedures.

The following M1W infrastructure is located within the 3-mile buffer zone around hazardous materials facilities and major transportation routes throughout Monterey County, including:
• Regional Treatment Plant- Del Monte Boulevard, Marina (Fixed Site Facility) • Salinas Pump Station- Hitchcock Road, Salinas (Fixed Site Facility) Packet Page 999
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-12 ANNEX O
• Pond 3 Pump Station- South Davis Road, Salinas
• Farmworker Housing Pump Station #1- Hitchcock Road, Salinas • Fort Ord Pump Station- Marina Drive, Marina (Fixed Site Facility) • Moss Landing Pump Station- Moss Landing Road, Moss Landing (Fixed Site Facility) • Castroville Pump Station- Highway 1 North, Castroville (Fixed Site Facility) • Monterey Pump Station- Del Monte Boulevard, Monterey (Fixed Site Facility) • Seaside Pump Station- Bay Avenue, Seaside (Fixed Site Facility) • Station 7- Reeside, Monterey (Fixed Site Facility)
• Station 13- Fountain Avenue, Pacific Grove (Fixed Site Facility) • Station 15- Coral Street, Pacific Grove (Fixed Site Facility) • Marina Pump Station- Reservation Road, Marina (Fixed Site Facility) • Conveyance Pipelines - 29.55 miles
The following M1W infrastructure is located within the 1-mile buffer zone:
• Regional Treatment Plant- Del Monte Boulevard, Marina (Fixed Site Facility) • Salinas Pump Station- Hitchcock Road, Salinas (Fixed Site Facility) • Pond 3 Pump Station- Hitchcock Road, Salinas (Fixed Site Facility) • Farmworker Housing Pump Station #1- Davis Road, Salinas (Fixed site Facility) • Moss Landing Pump Station- Moss Landing Road, Moss Landing (Fixed Site Facility) • Conveyance Pipelines- 9.81 miles
O.5.8 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS
M1W is heavily reliant on information technology (IT) and computerized process automation for the operation of the collection system, pump stations, and the wastewater treatment and water recycling facilities. A cyber-attack could hamper the function of the critical services that M1W provides, leading to sewer backups and discharge of untreated sewage.

As critical infrastructure with a high replacement cost, M1W’s facilities could be a target for terrorism.

A terrorist attack could seriously jeopardize the continuous operations of sewer collections, treatment, and recycled water production. M1W’s infrastructure is unlikely to experience any impacts associated with mass migration and targeted violence.

O.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
Wastewater collection, conveyance, treatment, and recycling services provided by M1W are critical through all public health crises. To maintain safe and compliant operations, the RTP is manned 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Without adequate staff available, the system may begin to experience failures that could result in SSOs and other adverse impacts to public health. However, as demonstrated during the recent COVID-19 pandemic, M1W is capable of adapting to and maintaining consistent levels of service throughout modified operations resulting from public health crises.

M1W developed the COVID-19 Exposure Control and Disease Preparedness Response Plan Meeting State and Federal regulatory requirements. The plan reduces the impact of COVID-19 on M1W, its workers, and the public, by addressing exposure risks, sources of exposure, routes of transmission, and other unique COVID-19 characteristics to allow workers to safely perform jobs required to maintain Packet Page 1000
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-13 ANNEX O
continuity of operations. The plan implements engineering, administrative, work practice controls, and personal protective equipment (PPE) to meet the provisions in Title 8, CCR §3205.

O.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
All severe weather hazards profiled in this Plan have the potential to impact M1W’s facilities and infrastructure.

O.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
Slope failure could affect some locations in the M1W collection system due to hilly and steep topography. Each M1W facility has undergone geotechnical survey to document site characteristics and identify risks of slope failure, erosion, and stability.

O.5.12 TSUNAMI
According to the most recent Tsunami Hazard Maps, the following coastally located M1W facilities and infrastructure are located within the tsunami hazard zone:
• Station 15- Coral Street, Pacific Grove
• Station 7- Reeside, Monterey
• Station 13- Fountain Avenue, Pacific Grove
• Monterey Pump Station- Del Monte Boulevard, Monterey
• Seaside Pump Station- Bay Street, Seaside
• Moss Landing Pump Station- Moss Landing Road, Moss Landing • Castroville Pump Station- Highway 1 North, Castroville • Pipeline- 21.33 miles (includes 2.1 miles of Ocean Outfall) Aside from the life-safety risk to residents and visitors to Monterey County, M1W’s greatest concern is preventing pump stations and coastally located infrastructure from becoming inundated by a heavy storm or tsunami event. To mitigate these risks to the highest degree feasible, M1W has implemented site-specific Emergency Response Plans (ERPs) and continues to make upgrades to coastal infrastructure to enhance resilience to inundation events.

O.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
M1W’s treatment and conveyance system is reliant on electricity to function. M1W’s facilities are all equipped with backup generator power that automatically transfers in the event of utility power outage. Each site is also equipped with above ground or underground stores of diesel fuel to provide a minimum of 21.9 hours of generator power during power outages. In addition, M1W maintains a fleet of portable, diesel-fueled emergency response equipment including generators and pumps.

Table O-2 summarizes the M1W Stationary Generators and Portable Fleet.

Packet Page 1001
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-14 ANNEX O
Table O-2
M1W Stationary Generators and Portable Fleet
Stationary Generators
Location Rating
(KW)
Fuel Tank
Capacity
(gal)
Fuel Consumption
Rate @ 100% Load
(gal/hr)
Runtime at
100% Load
(Hours)
Runtime on Typical
Station Load (50%)
(Hours)
Moss Landing 102 550 8.2 60.4 105.3
Castroville 350 1,000 28.6 31.5 51.4
Salinas1 2000 6,000 137 39.42 76.02
Marina 350 2,000 24.4 73.7 134.0
Fort Ord1 1200 6,000 102 52.92 83.02
Seaside1 1160 6,000 102 52.92 83.02
Monterey 1000 6,000 69.3 77.9 153.0
Station 7 135 250 10 22.5 45.9
Station 13 350 520 21.4 21.9 41.0
Station 15 217 428 15.2 25.3 50.7
Farmworker Housing 28 180 2.2 73.6 125.6
RTP – Main 1,500 1,100 103.6 9.5 12.43
RTP – Chlorine System 300 100 23 3.9 7.1
RTP – Headworks 40 110 3.4 29.1 55
Portable Fleet
Description Rating
(KW)
Fuel Consumption Rate @ 100%
Load (gal/hr)
750 kW Portable Emergency Generator Set (1440) 750 54.5 150 kW Portable Emergency Generator Set (1471) 150 11
70 kW Portable Emergency Generator Set (1485) 70 4.4
56 kW Portable Emergency Generator (1521) 56 4.4
10-inch Portable Emergency Pump Set (1410) -- 19.7
6-inch High Pressure Portable Pump Set (1429) -- 11.7
6-inch Low Pressure Portable Pump- FM (1509) -- 3.7
6-inch Low Pressure Portable Sewage Pump (1503 -- 4.52
10-inch Portable Emergency Pump Set (1410) -- 19.7
6-inch High Pressure Portable Pump Set (1429) -- 11.7
6-inch Low Pressure Portable Pump (1509) -- 3.7
6-inch Low Pressure Portable Sewage Pump (1533) -- 4.2 1 Two identical generators at station 2 Runtime with one generator online 3 70-80% load (80 gal/hr)
M1W operates an onsite cogeneration facility at the RTP consisting of three, 580 KW, dual-fueled engines (natural gas/onsite-generated biogas) which are capable of generating enough power for the primary and secondary treatment processes to meet ocean discharge standards. Coupled with stationary backup generator power, M1W is equipped to maintain continuous wastewater treatment Packet Page 1002
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-15 ANNEX O
in the event of an extended utility power outage. Due to severe winter storms interrupting utility power in February 2017, M1W did just that for 5 days with the only challenge being diesel fuel supply for the auxiliary stationary backup generators.

M1W and the Monterey Regional Waste Management District (MRWMD) have begun exploring coenergy management opportunities (e.g., developing a microgrid) to serve the dual purposes of assisting MRWMD in meeting state-mandated organics diversion targets (SB 1383, Short Lived Climate Pollutants), as well as further insulating M1W operations from utility power outage. M1W will continue to identify improvements that could be implemented to further fortify its operations for increased resiliency in the event of utility power outages.

O.5.14 WILDFIRE
Wildfire does not pose a major threat to M1W’s facilities but remains a possible risk. California continues to experience an increase in wildfire hazards due to climate change and this could lead wildfire risk to become higher in the near term.

O.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
In 2021, M1W initiated the process of developing a Climate Action and Adaptation Plan (CAAP). Part of the effort will include a climate vulnerability assessment and greenhouse gas (GHG) inventory that will provide a baseline for the plan. The plan will serve as a comprehensive policy and strategy document for addressing the impacts of climate change on M1W’s infrastructure by identifying targeted policies, programs, and projects that will both mitigate M1W’s contribution to GHG emissions and increase its adaptive capacity.

The Climate Action and Adaptation Plan will:
• Build upon existing M1W climate adaptation and mitigation efforts • Identify long-term management and adaptation projects to increase the reliability of the WCS and reduce economic and environmental risks
• Prioritize GHG reduction activities using a thorough analysis of existing energy use, opportunities and constraints, and thorough exploration of conservation and renewable energy technologies for the water industry
M1W is already a regional leader in the conservation of electricity and the reduction of GHG emissions exemplified by its use of solar energy to produce recycled water and utilization of biogas from decomposition of organic matter to power wastewater treatment processes. As climate change adaptation and mitigation requirements increase in California to meet state goals, M1W is poised to further reduce its carbon footprint, and is seeking additional sources of renewable energy to further reduce its reliance on fossil fuels to power facilities and reduce GHG emissions.

Spurred on by recent legislation requiring significant diversions of organics from landfills (SB 1383, Short Lived Climate Pollutants), M1W and neighboring MRWMD have renewed planning efforts for comanagement of organics for cogeneration and potential microgrid development. Benefits include increased local resiliency to PG&E power supply reliability challenges and power utility cost savings.

Packet Page 1003
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-16 ANNEX O
In addition, Monterey County is isolated from State and Federal water supplies and must rely solely on its local water resources – historically, groundwater and surface water from watersheds with negligible influence from snowpack. As extreme heat and extended drought become more frequent due to climate change, the region must also ensure access to sustainable water supplies. M1W supports climate resiliency of its service area by recycling wastewater to diversify local water supply for the agricultural, urban, and hospitality/tourism sectors.

As discussed in Section O.5.2 (Coastal Erosion), O.5.6 (Flooding), and O.5.12 (Tsunami), a significant portion of M1W’s infrastructure is located in the coastal zone in the region of the Monterey Bay coastline with the highest rates of coastal erosion in the State of California. M1W is required to comply with the California Coastal Act for its facilities in the designated Coastal Zone. Coastal Act compliance, along with the intense scrutiny of regional marine protection and research entities, will require M1W to fully explore and, if feasible, implement projects using a full suite of possible climate change adaptation measures, including managed retreat of infrastructure rather than simply armoring facilities.

Based on sea level rise projections, the following coastally located M1W infrastructure is within the sea level rise hazard zone for Monterey County:
• Station 15- Coral Street, Pacific Grove
• Station 7- Reeside, Monterey
• Station 13- Fountain Avenue, Pacific Grove
• Monterey Pump Station- Del Monte Boulevard, Monterey
• Seaside Pump Station- Bay Street, Seaside
• Moss Landing Pump Station- Moss Landing Road, Moss Landing • Castroville Pump Station- Highway 1 North, Castroville • Pipeline- 21.33 miles (includes 2.1 miles of Ocean Outfall) Projects have been identified and conceptually described in the context of M1W’s active participation in short and long-range planning processes (e.g., Integrated Regional Water Management Plans, City of Pacific Grove Shoreline Management Plan, etc.) and the pursuit of grant funding opportunities.

Examples of these conceptual projects which aim to enhance M1W’s climate resiliency include:

Coral Street Pump Station Climate Resiliency Project
Coral Street Pump Station is a subsurface wastewater pump station located on the ocean side of Ocean View Boulevard. As a result of its location, the station is subject to the effects of climate change including sea level rise, coastal erosion, and storm surges that can result in inundation of the wet well, and thus, electrical reliability challenges. The Coral Street Pump Station Climate Resiliency Project would involve engineering design, environmental review, permitting, and construction to waterproof the facilities by relocating key electrical components to a new location at nearby Esplanade Park.

Seaside Pump Station Climate Change and Erosion Adaptation Study Seaside Pump Station is situated within coastal dune habitat approximately 26 feet above mean sea level (MSL), 200 feet inland from the ocean on a property with a shallow grade sloping northwest towards the Monterey Bay. As is the case with Coral Street Pump Station, its location makes Seaside Pump Station increasingly vulnerable to climate-change impacts including coastal erosion and sea level Packet Page 1004
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-17 ANNEX O
rise. Separately, the station suffers operational challenges and excess energy use related to available pump capacity versus actual flow resulting in costly and labor-intensive maintenance, repair, and replacement caused by vibration and cavitation.

These operational challenges have been exacerbated by California’s prolonged droughts, the most recent of which caused Monterey Peninsula water users to achieve significant indoor water conservation and thus lower wastewater flows. The Seaside Pump Station Climate Change and Erosion Adaptation Study would include conducting a feasibility and alternatives analysis for solutions for protecting the M1W collection system in this area.

Options that could be evaluated include:
• Sand Replenishment/Beach Nourishment: Southern Monterey Bay has the highest rate of coastal erosion in the State. Various coastal communities, including nearby City of Monterey considered sand nourishment as a tactic for protecting coastally located assets from the effects of beach erosion. Although the site may be an ideal location for this application, the potential positive beach accretion resulting from the agreement reached between the Coastal Commission and CEMEX to sunset sand mining activities at their Marina location should be considered. This mine has been implicated as one of the major factors in the high rate of coastal erosion in southern Monterey Bay. Should it be determined that the station should remain in its current location, M1W would initiate design and engineering to upgrade and/or reconfigure the station to optimize the reception and conveyance of current and future potential wastewater and stormwater flows.
• Inland Station Retreat/Land Swap Agreement: During construction of Seaside Pump Station, California State Parks and M1W entered into an agreement for future land swap. Dated March 1991, that agreement states that in the event that M1W and State Parks agree that coastal erosion necessitates the relocation of the existing station, pipelines, and appurtenant facilities, State Parks will exchange the existing station site for one approximately equal in size within the confines of the parcel. State Parks would restore the site to native coastal dune habitat and enhance public beach access.
• Station Removal and Flow Reroute: In addition to long-term climate change vulnerability, Seaside Pump Station has historically had challenges with station design and pump capacities relative to actual flows. For this reason, maintenance of existing pumps and reliability of operations have led staff to consider the feasibility of rerouting the wastewater flow to an alternate existing pump station to allow for the removal of Seaside Pump Station altogether.

This project alternative would include in-depth hydraulic modelling and analysis.

The project will be designed to accommodate additional flows, including storm water from the City of Seaside’s nearby 90-inch stormwater outfall and other urban dry weather and storm flows that may be diverted to M1W’s infrastructure from the cities of Pacific Grove and Monterey. Any additional flows would then become influent to the RTP for beneficial reuse.

Ocean Outfall Beach Junction Structure Managed Retreat Project M1W’s land/ocean outfall pipeline was constructed and put into service in 1984 to convey secondary treated effluent from its Treatment Plant 2.1 miles out into the Monterey Bay. The land outfall consists of a 60-inch reinforced concrete pipe and transitions to the ocean outfall at the junction structure (a Packet Page 1005
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-18 ANNEX O
drop manhole structure) located on the beach adjacent to the CEMEX sand mining operation. Due in part to the El Nino-driven wave action during the 2015/2016 winter season, a portion of the land outfall pipeline at the junction structure was exposed on the beach adjacent to the CEMEX sand mining operation in Marina. The aforementioned high rate of coastal erosion in the Southern Monterey Bay region is believed to have contributed to the pipeline exposure. M1W staff acted quickly to install emergency protection measures (sheet piling and filter fabric on both sides of the land outfall pipeline upstream of the junction structure) to minimize risk of a potential pipeline failure. These temporary protection measures are planned to remain in place until M1W implements a permanent solution, most likely involving a managed retreat strategy to relocate this critical junction structure further inland.

M1W has performed a feasibility and alternatives analysis of options for protecting the junction structure and outfall pipeline through the year 2100. However, considering current and potential future conditions and changes to site activities per the June 2017 CEMEX/Coastal Commission sunset agreement, not the least of which is how cessation of sand mining activities will affect beach accretion local to the outfall junction structure, M1W is still in process of determining optimal design, retreat method, and location for replacement facilities for this project.

O.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
M1W performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table O-2 • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table O-3 • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table O-4 • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table O-5 • An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section O.6.1 in Table O-6 Table O-2
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document, Program, Requirement Department Comments
General Management Plan ☒ • Maintenance Sanitary Sewer System Management Plan Capital Improvement Plan ☒ • Engineering The Agency’s CIP is the Master Plan for future Projects.

Stormwater Management Plan ☒ • Monterey SEA
• Source Control
M1W is the administrative agent for
Monterey Stormwater Education Alliance
(SEA), a regional program to assist the County
of Monterey and Cities of Carmel-by-the-Sea,
Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand
City, and Seaside in meeting Clean Water Act
requirements for urban runoff to protect and
enhance environmental quality of
watersheds and beaches. The Stormwater
Packet Page 1006
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-19 ANNEX O
Table O-2
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document, Program, Requirement Department Comments
Management Plan identifies the regulations
each entity must implement and enforce
locally to protect the water quality of
waterways like the Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary. M1W Source Control staff
also provides contract stormwater inspection
services to several of its member entities.

Coastal Management Plan ☐
Climate Action/ Adaptation
Plan ☒  Community Relations
Development of a M1W Climate Action Plan
has been initiated and is anticipated to be
completed by the end of 2021.

Emergency Operations Plan ☒  Multiple
M1W is in the process of developing a
Business Plan including continuity of
operations in the event of emergency.

Specific Emergency Response
Plans ☒  Maintenance
M1W is in process of developing site-specific
Emergency Response Plans (ERPs) that may
be called upon in the event of an emergency
resulting in a Sanitary Sewer Overflow (SSO).

The ERPs include station-specific bypass
pump around operations, traffic control
plans, and other important information for
first responders to manage and reduce
impacts to public health and the
environment caused by an SSO.

Continuity of Operations Plan ☒  Administration
M1W is in the process of developing a
Business Plan including continuity of
operations in the event of emergency.

Evacuation Plan ☒  Safety
See M1W Business Response Plan (RTP and
Administration Offices), Chlorine Risk
Management Plan, and Hazardous Materials
Business Response Plans for the RTP and
Pump Stations.

Illness and Injury Prevention
Plan ☒  Safety M1W’s safety program maintains an up-todate Illness and Injury Prevention Plan (IIPP).

Business Response Plan ☒ • Multiple
M1W is in the process of developing a
Business Plan including continuity of
operations in the event of emergency.

Hazardous Materials Plan ☒  Safety
M1W’s Chlorine Risk Management Plan and
Hazardous Materials Business Response Plans
for the RTP and Pump Stations.

Packet Page 1007
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-20 ANNEX O
Table O-2
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document, Program, Requirement Department Comments
Site Plan Review Requirements ☒  Source Control
M1W Source Control reviews new
development in each Member Jurisdiction for
conformance to Member-Entity Programs
and sewer system requirements
Table O-3
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development
and land management practices
☒ • Engineering
M1W’s Engineering Department includes an
P.E. who also holds an American Institute of
Certified Planners (AICP) certification.

Engineer(s) or professional(s)
trained in construction practices
related to buildings and/or
infrastructure
☒ • Engineering
All of M1W’s Engineers are licensed Civil
Engineers in the State of California. The
Engineering Department also employs a
Construction Inspector on staff and
supplements staff with consultant expertise
when needed.

Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
an understanding of manmade
or natural hazards
☒ • Engineering
M1W’s Engineering Department includes one
P.E. with a B.S. in Environmental Engineering
and one employee with an M.S. in
Environmental Engineering.

Building Inspector ☒ • Engineering
M1W’s Engineering Department includes an
Engineering Tech who provides construction
inspection services.

Emergency Manager ☒ • Safety
M1W’s Safety Officer is the Designated
Emergency Manager; additionally, M1W has
a trained Emergency Response Team (ERT)
that can be deployed during any number of
emergency-situations.

Resource development staff or
grant writers ☒
• Engineering
• Government
Affairs
M1W has the in-house resources to regularly
pursue grant funding, including a diverse
team dedicated to researching and applying
for local, state, and federal opportunities.

Public Information Officer ☒ • Community
Relations
M1W’s Director of External Affairs and
Communication Services Manager jointly
provide this function for the Agency
Scientist(s) familiar with the
hazards of the community ☒ • Laboratory M1W’s Laboratory Department includes several professionals who understand the Packet Page 1008
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-21 ANNEX O
Table O-3
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
hazards of the community, specializing in
water quality and water resource issues.

Staff with education or expertise
to assess the community’s
vulnerability to hazards
☒ • Engineering M1W has 4 registered Profession Engineers who are skilled in this area.

Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) ☐ • Engineering
Maintenance programs to
reduce risk ☒ • Maintenance
M1W employs a Computerized Maintenance
Management System to track asset lifecycle,
in addition to Preventative and ReliabilityCentered Maintenance Programs to ensure that assets are properly maintained in good
working order to reduce likelihood of failure
in the event of a natural disaster.

Warning systems/services ☒ • Safety
• Maintenance
Examples include audible/visible alarms of
various types, SCADA and radio telemetry
communications for reporting conditions at
remote M1W infrastructure locations, and
radio communications systems.

Mutual Aid Agreements ☒ • Maintenance
M1W is a member of the CalWARN network,
a mutual assistance organization for water
and wastewater agencies.

Table O-4
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds ☒ • Finance
Capital Improvements Project
Funding ☒ • Engineering
Special Purpose Taxes ☐
Stormwater Utility Fees ☐
Gas / Electric Utility Fees ☐
Water / Sewer Fees ☒ • Finance
Development Impact Fees ☒ • Finance
General Obligation Bonds ☒ • Finance
Special Tax and Revenue Bonds ☒ • Finance
Packet Page 1009
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-22 ANNEX O
Table O-5
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit
groups focused on
environmental protection,
emergency preparedness, etc.
☐
Ongoing public education or
information program ☒ • Community Relations
Natural disaster or safety
related school programs ☐
Public-private partnership
initiatives addressing disasterrelated issues
☐
Other:

M1W is a public utility. Customers are billed bi-monthly for wastewater services. Customer notifications, billings, and communications are available to disseminate important
information.

Political Capability
M1W’s governing Board of Directors sets policies and guides staff in program development, but political capability is complicated due to the regional governance of M1W and the varied priorities and needs of each city or district. Fortunately, as a public and environmental health agency, the Board regularly identifies and supports regional efforts to protect and prepare the community for a sustainable future.

Examples include:
• Pure Water Monterey Groundwater Replenishment Project (Hazard Addressed: drought/ climate change)
• IRWM Implementation Grant Award Salinas Storm Water Management: Increasing Capture, Improving Treatment, Reducing Energy Use (Hazard Addressed: drought/climate change/flood vulnerability)
• M1W Compliance with State Directives to increase the use of recycled water. M1W operations include two water recycling and reclamation projects, the Salinas Valley Reclamation Project and Pure Water Monterey, which uphold this mission and strongly support local agricultural and tourist economies by providing sustainable water supplies. (Hazard Addressed:
drought/climate change, agricultural emergency)
O.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP)
Monterey One Water is a Joint Powers Authority and is therefore not eligible for flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

Packet Page 1010
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-23 ANNEX O
O.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table O-6
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability High
Administrative and Technical Capability High
Fiscal Capability Limited
Education and Outreach Capability Moderate
Political Capability Limited
Overall Capability Moderate
O.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES Planning, regulatory, fiscal, administrative, technical, education, and outreach capabilities can all be expanded or improved using a combination of the following strategies:
• Increase capacity through staffing
• Training, and enhanced coordination among all department and jurisdictions • Emergency management/hazard specific program enhancements, training, and exercising • Increased funding opportunities and capacity
• Implementation of mitigation actions and projects
• Continuous research on grant opportunities for emergency management, hazard mitigation, and infrastructure and community development.

Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

O.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Existing Integration
In the performance period since adoption of the previous hazard mitigation plan, the Agency made progress on integrating hazard mitigation goals, objectives, and actions into other planning initiatives.

The following plans and programs currently integrate components of the hazard mitigation strategy:
• Capital Improvement Plan: The capital improvement plan includes projects that can help mitigate potential hazards. The Agency will strive to ensure consistency between the hazard mitigation plan and the current and future capital improvement plan. The hazard mitigation Packet Page 1011
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-24 ANNEX O
plan may identify new possible funding sources for capital improvement projects and may result in modifications to proposed projects based on results of the risk assessment. • Sanitary Sewer System Management Plan: State regulatory requirement to ensure efforts are made to reduce risks to public health, property and the environment. • Monterey Stormwater Education Alliance (SEA): M1W is the administrative agent for Monterey Stormwater Education Alliance (SEA), a regional program to assist the County of Monterey and Cities of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Del Rey Oaks, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City, and Seaside in meeting Clean Water Act requirements for urban runoff to protect and enhance environmental quality of watersheds and beaches. The Stormwater Management Plan identifies the regulations each entity must implement and enforce locally to protect the water quality of waterways like the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. M1W Source Control staff also provides contract stormwater inspection services to several of its member entities. • Climate Action Plan: Highlights potential programs that could be implemented to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and discusses possible impacts of climate change. The development of a M1W Climate Action Plan has been initiated and is anticipated to be completed shortly. • Business Response Plan/Emergency Action Plan: M1W staff are Disaster Service Workers and are trained to safely operate and maintain the critical sewer infrastructure 24/7 and during emergencies.
• Illness and Injury Prevention Plan (IIPP): M1W’s safety program maintains an up-to-date Illness and Injury Prevention Plan (IIPP). The General Manager has authority and responsibility for plan implementation. The program includes facility and safety plans for sanitary facilities. • Chlorine Risk Management Plan and Hazardous Materials Business Response Plans: Reduce the risk of hazardous materials incidents.
• M1W Source Control reviews new development in each Member Jurisdiction for conformance to Member-Entity Programs and sewer system requirements Opportunities for Future Integration
As this hazard mitigation plan is implemented, Monterey One Water will use information from the plan as the best available science and data on natural hazards. The capability assessment presented in this annex identifies codes, plans and programs that provide opportunities for integration. The area-wide and local action plans developed for this hazard mitigation plan include actions related to plan integration, and progress on these actions will be reported through the progress reporting process described in Volume 1. New opportunities for integration also will be identified as part of the annual progress report. The plans and programs listed in the Capability Assessment cover the majority of Agency operations where the hazard mitigation goals are addressed. However, the capability assessment identified the opportunity for future integration of recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan for all the plans and programs listed as they are updated periodically O.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the Agency’s Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern. The Hazard Packet Page 1012
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-25 ANNEX O
Problem Statements were primarily derived from M1W’s Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee and informed by review of existing literature and best available data relating to the vulnerability of M1W’s assets. These Problem Statements were developed to assist in the identification and analysis of potential hazard mitigation actions for M1W and helped the Planning Committee identify common issues and weaknesses, determine appropriate mitigation strategies, and understand the realm of resources needed for mitigation. Hazard Problem Statements for the Agency are identified below:
• Infrastructure is aging and requires capital investment to ensure safe, reliable wastewater and water recycling services.
• Water supply is largely dependent on resources that fluctuate with rainfall and are heavily influenced by drought conditions (i.e., surface water and groundwater). • Infrastructure is coastally located and thus vulnerable to sea-level rise, tsunami, coastal erosion, and intense storm events.
• Conservation in M1W’s service area is reducing the amount of influent for recycling services and changing the characteristics of wastewater.
• The Ocean Outfall Beach Junction Structure is susceptible to coastal erosion and storm events.

O.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

M1W’s Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefit-cost analysis and consideration of mitigation alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the Agency’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix, in Table O-8 lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Status of Previous Plan Actions
All actions from the 2016 Plan were reviewed and updated by the Agency during the planning process.

Table O-7 includes the status of action previous plan completed or removed from the previous plan.

In order to improve the mitigation action plan for this Plan update and align with the countywide Mitigation Action Plan, the Agency added more specificity and detail to previous plan actions in addition to the new actions added to the Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix.

Table O-7
Monterey One Water Completed Mitigation Actions from 2016 MJHMP 2016
Action # Description Status Narrative Update
33 Commission a structural analysis of the
most critical pump stations. Completed Pump Station & Conveyance System Condition Packet Page 1013
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-26 ANNEX O
Table O-7
Monterey One Water Completed Mitigation Actions from 2016 MJHMP 2016
Action # Description Status Narrative Update
Optimization Study
completed.
38 Televise gravity interceptors to identify
structural and joint problems and verify
the condition of the protective linings.

Completed Project completed.
42 Update long‐range plans for
replacement/ upgrade of key equipment
and systems including future demand,
expected life, and equipment
performance, possibility of technical
obsolescence, and availability of parts.

Completed
Pump Station & Conveyance
System Condition
Optimization Study
completed.
43 Identify mitigation measures for impacts
to the Land/Ocean Outfall junction
structure due to coastal erosion and
coastal storms.

Completed
Study completed; additional
analysis may be conducted
commensurate with CIP
scheduled in 2024/25 -
2027/28 FY.
45 Implement new Computerized
Maintenance Management Software
Completed/
Ongoing
Implementation complete.

Continue to utilize CMMS for
tracking asset O&M.

Packet Page 1014
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-27 ANNEX O
O Monterey One Water Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Table O-8
Monterey One Water Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan Matrix Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
1 Ongoing All All M1W Personnel to be familiar with the written Illness and Injury Prevention Plan. High Safety Internal
2 Ongoing All All M1W personnel to be familiar with the Business Response Plan (BRP). High Safety Internal
3 Ongoing All Emergency Response Team members to have adequate training to respond to emergency. High Safety Internal
4 Ongoing All Ensure that evacuations are safe and efficient. High Safety/
Emergency
Response Team
Internal
5 Ongoing All Ensure communications (two‐way radios, interior and exterior paging system) are maintained and in good working order. High Utilities Internal 6 Ongoing All Ensure that warning devices (alarm bells, horns) are in working order. High Utilities Internal
7 Ongoing All
Locations of primary/ alternate evacuation routes, emergency exits, primary/alternate staging areas are prominently posted throughout facilities in locations that are visible to employees and visitors.

High Safety Internal
8 Ongoing
Hazardous
Materials
Incidents
Provide training to employees in the handling, storage, and control of hazardous materials. High Safety Internal
9 Ongoing
Hazardous
Materials
Incidents
Provide training to employees in the handling of chlorine (Cl2), use of breathing apparatus, and what to do in case of emergency. High Safety/Operations Internal 10 Ongoing
Hazardous
Materials
Incidents
All personnel who could be exposed to hazardous materials must be trained in proper use of PPE. High Safety Internal
Packet Page 1015
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-28 ANNEX O
Table O-8
Monterey One Water Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan Matrix Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
11 Ongoing All Identify hazards and assess risk for service area through maintenance of and participation in the MJHMP. High All Internal 12 Ongoing All Determine increased risk from specific hazards due to location for those hazards profiled in Table O‐1. High All Internal
13 Ongoing Earthquake All new construction is completed using latest earthquake‐resistant design techniques to limit damage caused by earthquakes. High Engineering Internal/CIP 14 Ongoing Flooding All new construction within the 100‐year flood zone to be completed with design that will limit damage from floods. High Engineering Internal/
CIP/
HMGP
15 Ongoing Earthquake Continue to repair and make structural improvements to pipelines to enable them to perform to their design capacity. High Field Maintenance Internal/
CIP
16 Ongoing All Continue maintenance efforts to keep pipelines free of obstructions. High Field Maintenance Internal
17 Ongoing All Develop and implement risk‐based hazard mitigation strategy through participation in MJHMP updates. High All Internal/ Grants 18 Ongoing All Enhance M1W’s capability to conduct hazard risk assessments through the continued participation in the MJHMP. High All Internal 19 Ongoing All Pursue available grant opportunities to obtain funding for mitigation activities. High Community Relations Grants
20 Ongoing
Severe
Weather,
Coastal
Erosion,
Flooding
Identify mitigation measures for facilities susceptible to coastal storms and erosion. High Engineering Internal
21 Ongoing Earthquake Identify mitigation measures for earthquake events. High Engineering Internal 22 Ongoing Earthquake Conduct more detailed geological investigations of facilities to determine the risk of damage from expansive soils. Moderate Engineering Internal Packet Page 1016
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-29 ANNEX O
Table O-8
Monterey One Water Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan Matrix Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
23 Ongoing Earthquake If evidence of expansive soils is found, identify mitigation measures for them. Moderate Engineering Internal
24 Ongoing Flooding Identify mitigation measures for facilities susceptible to flood. High Engineering Internal/ Grants
25 Ongoing Tsunami Identify mitigation measures for facilities susceptible to tsunami. High Engineering Internal/ Grants
26 Ongoing Tsunami Work with Tsunami Incident Response Plan Group and OES, to identify mitigation for facilities susceptible to tsunami. High Safety Internal 27 Ongoing Drought Continue to pursue drought protection projects for M1W’s service area. High Administration/ Engineering
Internal/
Grants
28 Ongoing All
Coordinate with member entities to increase level of public knowledge and awareness of hazards that routinely threaten the area and how they affect M1W facilities.

High Community
Relations Internal
29 Ongoing All, Utility
Interruption
Coordinate with member entities to provide info to the public on coping with disrupted sewage lines and wastewater service. High Emergency
Response Team/
Engineering/
Public Outreach
Internal
30 Ongoing All Ensure backup systems exist for critical facilities to the greatest extent possible. High Maintenance Internal/CIP
31 Ongoing All Plan for emergency response by stockpiling relevant materials. High Safety/
Emergency
Response Team/
Operations/
Maintenance
Internal
32 Ongoing All
Pre‐position emergency power generation capacity (or have rental/lease agreements for generators) in critical locations for continuity services.

High Maintenance/
Utilities Internal
Packet Page 1017
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-30 ANNEX O
Table O-8
Monterey One Water Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan Matrix Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
33 Ongoing/
As Needed All Commission new Geotech investigations for new facilities as applicable. Moderate Engineering Internal/CIP 34 Not yet
scheduled Earthquake Conduct seismic vulnerability assessment of all pump stations to identify areas of possible liquefaction. Moderate Engineering Internal/CIP 35 FY
2022/23 -
2025/26
All
Assess condition of external corrosion on transport system and develop long‐term program for maintenance of corrosion
protection system.

High Engineering Internal/
CIP
36 FY
2022/23 -
2025/26
All
Explore measures to extend useful life of wastewater transport system force mains beyond 100 years by implementing corrosion protection measures.

High Engineering Internal/
CIP
37 FY
2022/23-
2027/28
All Provide flexibility for the discharge force main at all pump stations. Moderate Engineering Internal/ CIP
38 Ongoing All
Review electrical control systems for major stations to determine if enough independent operations exist between each control system to ensure single system failure cannot disable the station.

High Utilities Internal/
CIP
39 FY
2022/23-
2027/28
All
Perform feasibility study to determine secondary containment is warranted, especially at stations where there are short detention times, environmental resources nearby, and where land is available.

Moderate Engineering Internal
40 FY
2024/25 -
2027/28
Severe
Weather,
Coastal
Erosion,
Flooding
Relocate the existing Land/Ocean Outfall Beach Junction Structure at least 650 ft. inland and install 650 ft. of new outfall pipeline at lower elevation to protect the Outfall from future erosion.

High Engineering CIP/Grant
Funding
41 Ongoing All Continue to utilize Computerized Maintenance Management Software (CMMS) for tracking asset O&M. High Engineering/ Maintenance CIP Packet Page 1018
MONTEREY ONE WATER Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | O-31 ANNEX O
Table O-8
Monterey One Water Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan Matrix Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
42 New/ FY
2021/22
Climate
Change
Develop Climate Action Plan (CAP) in order to outline strategies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. High Community Relations Internal 43 Ongoing All
All M1W Personnel to be familiar with the Sewer System
Management Plan (SSMP) and Sanitary Sewer Overflow Response Plan (SSORP) to ensure staff have adequate familiarity with emergency response and reporting measures for Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs) within M1W's collection system to minimize the potential for SSOs and mitigate severity of impacts to the environment.

High Maintenance Internal
44 Ongoing All
All Field O&M Staff to be trained on the SSMP and SSORP to ensure staff have adequate familiarity with emergency response and reporting measures for SSOs within M1W's collection system to minimize the potential for SSOs and mitigate severity of impacts to the environment.

High Maintenance Internal
45 Ongoing All
Conduct bypass pump-around testing at M1W and member-entity pump stations to ensure staff are adequately trained in bypass pump-around mobilization, set up, and takedown in preparation for potential emergency response or maintenance activities requiring bypass pumping to minimize the potential for SSOs.

High Maintenance Internal
Packet Page 1019

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 1020
P
ANNEX P: MONTEREY

REGIONAL WASTE

MANAGEMENT

DISTRICT
2021 Monterey County
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Packet Page 1021
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-1 ANNEX P
P. MONTEREY REGIONAL WASTE

MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
P.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact Alternate Point of Contact
David Ramirez
Senior Engineer
14201 Del Monte Blvd.

Monterey County, CA 93933
(831) 384-5313
[email protected]
Guy Petraborg
Principal Engineer
14201 Del Monte Blvd.

Monterey County, CA 93933
(831) 264-6385
[email protected]
P.2 DISTRICT PROFILE
P.2.1 LOCATION
Packet Page 1022
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-2 ANNEX P
P.2.2 SERVICE AREA
The Monterey Regional Waste Management District (MRWMD) covers a total of 853 square miles, including the cities of Carmel-by-the-Sea, Del Rey Oaks, Marina, Monterey, Pacific Grove, Sand City, Seaside, and the unincorporated areas of Big Sur, Carmel Highlands, Carmel Valley, Castroville, Corral De Tierra, Laguna Seca, Moss Landing, Pebble Beach, San Benancio, and Toro Park. The population currently served is approximately 170,000.

The District provides comprehensive, state-of-the-art waste management services. Their facility is located two miles northeast of Marina, in the Monterey Regional Environmental Park. In addition to a large landfill, their facilities include several important waste-reduction and waste diversion facilities that implement the District’s stated vision of “Turning Waste into Resources.” These include an indoor materials recovery facility to divert recyclable and reusable materials from the waste stream; systems that use landfill gas to generate electricity, and an innovative, anaerobic digestion food scrap composting project. The District also provides green waste processing and composting, household hazardous waste collection, reusable materials resale, and public outreach programs in support of its mission.

P.2.3 HISTORY
The Monterey Regional Waste Management District formed as the Monterey Peninsula Garbage and Refuse Disposal District in 1951. It formed after City leaders from Pacific Grove, Monterey, and Carmel united to petition the Monterey County Board of Supervisors to find a solution to the routine dumping and burning of waste on nearby coastal sand dunes. The District initially served a 75-square-mile area.

In 1966, the First Board pf the Monterey Peninsula Garbage and Refuse Disposal District purchased the property the District still occupies today. The large piece of land consists of 570 acres north of Marina and was the site for the new Monterey Peninsula Landfill.

The Monterey Peninsula Landfill opened in 1965 and over the years the District has added programs to reduce, reuse and recycle. From their early cardboard recycling in 1953, the first production of electricity from landfill gas in 1983, the establishment of the Last Chance Mercantile in 1991, to the Materials Recovery Facility that came on-line in 1996.” The District changed its name to the Monterey Regional Waste Management District in 1987. Over the years, the District has won numerous awards including being recognized in 1998 as the Best Solid Waste System in North America and in 2016 the California Resource Recovery Association recognized the District with a Zero Waste Achievement Award.

P.2.4 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
The District is an independent special district and governed by a nine-member Board of Directors. The Board consists of a representative from each of the seven cities within the District boundaries, plus one to represent unincorporated areas of the District, and a director-at-large. Board members are appointed to four-year terms. The Board maintains standing Finance and Personnel Committees, plus a Technical Advisory Committee that meets on an as-needed basis. The MRWMD Board meets monthly, and meetings are open to the public
Packet Page 1023
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-3 ANNEX P
P.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The Monterey Regional Waste Management District followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan. In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the District formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process. The Monterey Regional Waste Management District held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting to discuss vulnerabilities, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies on September 23, 2021. Key stakeholders present at the meeting included:
• Guy Petraborg, Principal Engineer
• Tim Brownell, Director of Operations
• David Ramirez, Senior Engineer
P.4 FACILITIES
The District’s facilities are located on its 475-acre property, 2 miles north of Marina, at the Monterey Regional Environmental Park, 14201 Del Monte Blvd. The property consists of a 315-acre permitted sanitary landfill site, a 126-acre buffer area (mostly Salinas River floodplain), 20 acres for the resource recovery facilities, a 12-acre Community Franchise Collection Facility, administrative offices, and maintenance buildings.

Monterey Peninsula Landfill
The 461-acre site began operating as a sanitary landfill two miles to the north of Marina in 1965. The District estimates the landfill to have a projected remaining lifespan of approximately 100-150 years of waste at current disposal rates. Currently, portions of the Landfill have been filled to an elevation of 130 feet, however the site is permitted to reach a final elevation of 264 feet. The entire Monterey Peninsula Landfill has been engineered with controls in place to separate waste safely from the environment. The landfill is composed of modules or cells that are filled in one at a time. The 23-acre module currently in use was completed in June 2013. The construction of a new module begins with an engineered composite liner made from a 2-foot-thick layer of clay, covered with a heavy plastic liner. Leachate collection pipes and sand are placed above the liner to catch any liquids draining from the waste – these are recirculated through the landfill. Finally, a 2-foot-thick layer of compost is placed over the sand drainage layer to protect the plastic liner from being damaged by heavy machinery.

Materials Recovery Facility (MRF)
The Materials Recovery Facility (MRF) is the centerpiece of the District’s publicly owned infrastructure for recycling and reuse. Over the last 20 years, the District’s first MRF diverted more than 1.6 million tons of recyclable and re-usable materials from landfill disposal. The new MRF 2.0 opened February 2018. The new facility dramatically expanded the District’s capacity to divert materials from disposal.

The MRF processes recyclables collected from the residential and commercial sectors of the Monterey Peninsula region, construction and demolition debris, and commercial mixed waste. The MRF also receives clean loads of source separated green and wood waste, mattresses, tires, and appliances. The MRF 2.0 supports local communities in compliance with State recycling requirements and helps achieve the 75% recycling goal by 2020. The construction and demolition material processing helps Packet Page 1024
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-4 ANNEX P
ensure compliance with the CalGreen 65% diversion requirement for new construction and demolition projects.
“Landfill Gas to Energy” Facility
In 1983, the District developed and began operating one of the nation’s first landfill gas-to-electric energy plants at its facility. The process of capturing methane gas begins after organic waste deposited into the landfill is digested by anaerobic bacteria. The bacteria produce methane gas, which is recovered via a series of wells placed into the landfill. The wells are connected by a pipe system that creates a vacuum and induces the gas into a compression facility. After further refining, the gas is pumped into internal combustion engines, powering four engine/ generators to make electricity.

Presently, the District’s four generators provide approximately 5 megawatts of clean alternative power, meeting all of the District’s own power needs and electrical power equivalent to the needs of 3,000 residences. The carbon savings realized from using this amount of landfill gas for power, rather than fossil fuel-generated power, is equivalent to removing emissions from an estimated 33,760 vehicles. The District sells excess power generated from this project to Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) and other power purchasers. Revenues from this project have generally exceeded expenses.

Anaerobic Digestion (Energy & Composting) Facility
The MRWMD dry anaerobic digestion (AD) pilot project, commissioned in 2013, was the first of its kind in the US This pilot project was a public-private partnership between MRWMD and Zero Waste Energy that ended in fall 2019. The four shop fabricated steel digesters accepted 5,500 tons per year of a blend of 70% of food scraps and 30% of yard trimmings, mixed and loaded into an air-tight chamber where naturally occurring microorganisms are introduced via a liquid “percolate.” Over a 21-day process, these organisms broke down the biodegradable materials to produce methane gas with a minor amount of carbon dioxide. These biogases were then filtered and cleaned to power a combined heat and power engine that produces electricity. Waste heat was captured and reused to maintain a constant 130-degree percolate temperature. Energy from the project supplied 10% of the electricity need for the neighboring Monterey One Water facilities. The “digestate” that came out of the digesters then underwent a complete windrow composting process by Keith Day Company to complete the decomposition process. The success of the Organics to Energy compost program was attributable to the program participants: the commercial businesses that diligently separated food scraps, the haulers that collected it, and the public-private partnership with Zero Waste Energy, Keith Day Company, and the Districts’ neighboring public agency Monterey One Water, who received the electricity produced through anaerobic digestion.

P.5 DISTRICT SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile the MRWMD’S hazards and assess the District’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan. The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the County and describes the hazards, as well as their extent, magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences. Hazard vulnerability specific to the MRWMD is included in this Annex.

The MRWMD’s Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The District’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Packet Page 1025
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-5 ANNEX P
Survey to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the District. Each variable was scored by hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16.

Table P-1 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the MRWMD’s Planning Team.

Table P-1
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): MRWMD Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of
Risk
Agricultural Emergencies - - - - - -
Coastal Erosion - - - - - -
Coastal Flooding - - - - - -
Cyber-Attack 1.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 7.0 Possible
Dam Failure 3.0 1.0 3.0 2.0 9.0 Moderate
Drought & Water Shortage 2.0 3.0 3.0 2.0 10.0 Moderate
Earthquake 3.0 3.0 2.0 2.0 10.0 Moderate
Epidemic 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 9.0 Moderate
Extreme Cold & Freeze - - - - - -
Extreme Heat - - - - - -
Flash Flood 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 11.0 Substantial
Hazardous Materials Incident 3.0 3.0 4.0 3.0 13.0 High
Invasive Species - - - - - -
Levee Failure 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 11.0 Substantial
Localized Stormwater Flooding 1.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 9.0 Moderate Mass Migration - - - - - -
Pandemic 1.0 1.0 3.0 3.0 8.0 Possible
Riverine Flooding 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 11.0 Substantial
Sea Level Rise - - - - - -
Severe Winter Storms - - - - - -
Slope Failure - - - - - -
Targeted Violence 3.0 1.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Terrorism 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 9.0 Moderate
Tsunami - - - - - -
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 3.0 2.0 2.0 3.0 10.0 Moderate Water Contamination 3.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 9.0 Moderate
Wildfire 3.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 6.0 Slight
Windstorms 3.0 3.0 1.0 1.0 8.0 Possible
Packet Page 1026
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-6 ANNEX P
P.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
The MRWMD facilities are unlikely to experience any impacts associated with agricultural emergencies.

P.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
The District’s facilities are not located on the coast, and therefore are not likely to be impacted by coastal erosion. The District could be impacted by other types of erosion not profiled in this Plan. The main impact of erosion impact to the District is flooding, so erosion impacts are disused further in Section P.5.6, Flooding.

P.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
Releases from both the Nacimiento and San Antonio reservoirs flow northward towards the Monterey Bay through the channel of the Salinas River, adjacent to the MRWMD facilities. A dam or spillway failure of the Nacimiento or San Antonio dam could expose the MRWMD’s facilities to dam failure inundation risk.

Levee Failure
A levee along the Salinas River protects the Landfill from flood risk. A failure of this levee could have catastrophic impacts on the functioning of the landfill.

P.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
Drought and water shortage is unlikely to have a major impact on the District’s facilities or operations.

P.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
MRWMD facilities are designed to latest building codes to handle seismic events that are in effect at the time of construction. However, damage to multiple MRWMD facilities could still occur if a large enough earthquake were to occur. If an earthquake compromised the landfill, the impacts could be catastrophic. The District’s facilities are also located in an area that is suspectable to liquefaction risk and this could be a major risk if an earthquake were to occur.

P.5.6 FLOODING
Portions of the District’s landfill is located in the 100-year floodplain. This area is currently protected by a levee, but erosion on the north slope of the levee could cause levee failure, which could lead to flooding of the landfill. This risk is a serious concern to the District.

P.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
Hazardous materials incidents could be can concern for the District. Since the District collects waste, hazardous materials could be incorrectly disposed of in the landfill. Hazardous materials can also spark fires caused by hot ashes or other items received in solid waste delivery loads, and other occasional eventualities.

Packet Page 1027
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-7 ANNEX P
P.5.8 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS
It is often quite difficult to quantify the potential losses from human-caused hazards. While facilities themselves have a tangible dollar value, the impact to identified values will vary from event to event and depend on the type, location, and nature of a specific incident.

MRWMD is heavily reliant on information technology (IT). A cyber-attack could hamper the functioning of the critical service particularly if it caused a power outage, which impacted the District’s ability to provide services.

P.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
Based on the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is noted that it is important to maintain continuous solid waste collection services through a pandemic or epidemic.

P.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
All severe weather events profiled in this Plan have the potential to affect the district’s facilities, though are unlikely to have a major impact. Severe winter storms have the potential to create flooding issues as described in Section P.5.6, Flooding. Furthermore, severe storms in the area often involve high winds, which could make the District’s operations more difficult. Furthermore, windstorms can cause prolonged and serious power outages, which could cause a catastrophic impact to the District’s service.

P.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
Based on the topography of the surrounding area, slope failure does not pose a serious threat to the District’s facilities.

P.5.12 TSUNAMI
The District’s facilities are not located in a mapped tsunami inundation zone.

P.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
Much of MRWMD’S facilities are reliant on electricity to function. Critical facilities must be maintained and operational. Environmental control systems, which need power to function, are required to remain operational. Fueling of garbage trucks could also be limited be a utility interruption. Utility interruption is a major concern for the District, however, there are improvements that could be implemented to further fortify and maintain function of critical systems with backup power sources, and to mitigate utility interruption.

P.5.14 WILDFIRE
Wildfire does not pose a major threat to the District’s facilities but is a possible risk. hazards. California continues to experience an increase in wildfire hazards due to climate change and this could lead wildfire risk to become higher in the near term.

Packet Page 1028
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-8 ANNEX P
P.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
The effects of climate change are varied and include warmer and more varied weather patterns and temperature changes. Climate change will exacerbate the risk posed by many of the hazards previously profiled in this Plan and have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards.

Increasing temperatures and rising sea-levels will have direct impacts on public health and infrastructure. Drought, coastal and inland flooding, and wildfire will likely affect people’s livelihoods and the local economy.

P.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The MRWMD performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table P-2 • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table P-3 • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table P-4 • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table P-5 • An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section P.6.1 in Table P-6 Table P-2
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document, Program, Requirement Department Comments
General Management Plan ☒ Joint Technical Document, Operational Plan Capital Improvement Plan ☒ Investment Policy, Capital projects list in Joint Technical Document
Stormwater Management Plan ☐
Coastal Management Plan ☐ N/A
Climate Action/ Adaptation Plan ☐
Emergency Operations Plan ☒ Emergency Response Plan
Specific Emergency Response Plans ☒ Emergency Response Plan Continuity of Operations Plan ☐
Evacuation Plan ☒ Site Evacuation Plan, Muster Locations Illness and Injury Prevention Plan ☒
Business Response Plan ☐
Hazardous Materials Plan ☒
Other:  Solid Waste Facility Permit
Packet Page 1029
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-9 ANNEX P
Table P-3
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development and
land management practices
☒ • Engineering
Engineer(s) or professional(s) trained in
construction practices related to
buildings and/or infrastructure
☒ • Engineering
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with an
understanding of manmade or natural
hazards
☒ • Engineering
Emergency Manager ☒
Incident Commander
designation hierarchy identified
in Emergency Response Plan
Resource development staff or grant
writers ☒ • All Departments All departments can write grants as needed.

Public Information Officer ☒ • Communications
• Public Education
Scientist(s) familiar with the hazards of
the community ☒ • Engineering
Staff with education or expertise to
assess the community’s vulnerability to
hazards
☒ • Engineering
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) ☐ The District does not use GIS Maintenance programs to reduce risk ☒ Equipment Maintenance Program
Warning systems/services ☒ Radio communication
Mutual Aid Agreements ☐
Table P-4
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds ☒ • Finance
Capital Improvements Project Funding ☒ • Finance
Special Purpose Taxes ☐
Stormwater Utility Fees ☐
Gas / Electric Utility Fees ☐
Water / Sewer Fees ☐
Development Impact Fees ☐
General Obligation Bonds ☐
Packet Page 1030
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-10 ANNEX P
Table P-4
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
Special Tax and Revenue Bonds ☐
Other:
• Disposal Fees at Landfill
• Recycling Sales
• Power Sales
• Tenant rents/ lease agreements
Table P-5
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit groups
focused on environmental
protection, emergency
preparedness, etc.
☒ Veterans Transition Services operate the
Last Chance Mercantile
Ongoing public education or
information program ☒
MRWMD offers an array of free
workshops and events and communicates
through the newspaper and social media.

They also provide information on proper
waste disposal and have an app called
“What Goes Where.”
Natural disaster or safety related
school programs ☒
Tours are offered of MRMWD’s Resource
Facilities and Landfill to students. The
District also has Waste Free School
Support and donations program. The
District can assist with student volunteer
education and training for waste
reduction, recycling, and compost
projects.

Public-private partnership initiatives
addressing disaster-related issues ☐
Political Capability
The nine-member board of the MRWMD is supportive of hazard mitigation.

P.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP)
The Monterey Regional Waste Management District is a Special District and is therefore not eligible for flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

Packet Page 1031
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-11 ANNEX P
P.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table P-6
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability Moderate
Administrative and Technical Capability Moderate
Fiscal Capability Moderate
Education and Outreach Capability Moderate
Political Capability Moderate
Overall Capability Moderate
P.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES Planning, regulatory, fiscal, administrative, technical, education, and outreach capabilities can all be expanded or improved using a combination of the following strategies:
• Increase capacity through staffing
• Training, and enhanced coordination among all department and jurisdictions • Emergency management/hazard specific program enhancements, training, and exercising • Increased funding opportunities and capacity
• Implementation of mitigation actions and projects
• Continuous research on grant opportunities for emergency management, hazard mitigation, and infrastructure and community development.

Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

P.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Existing Integration
MRWMD was not previously a part of the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Opportunities for Future Integration
As this hazard mitigation plan is implemented, Monterey County Regional Waste Management District will use information from the plan as the best available science and data on natural hazards. The capability assessment presented in this annex identifies codes, plans and programs that provide Packet Page 1032
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-12 ANNEX P
opportunities for integration. The area-wide and local action plans developed for this hazard mitigation plan include actions related to plan integration, and progress on these actions will be reported through the progress reporting process described in Volume 1. New opportunities for integration also will be identified as part of the annual progress report. The plans and programs listed in the Capability Assessment cover the majority of District operations where the hazard mitigation goals are addressed.

However, the capability assessment identified the opportunity for future integration of recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan for all the plans and programs listed as they are updated periodically.

P.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the Districts’ Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern. The Hazard Problem Statements were primarily derived from MRWMD’s Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee and informed by review of existing literature about MRWMD’s assets and analysis using best available data relating to the vulnerability analysis for each piece of critical infrastructure. They were developed to assist in the identification and analysis of potential hazard mitigation actions for MRWMD.

P.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

The District’s Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefit-cost analysis and consideration of mitigation Packet Page 1033
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-13 ANNEX P
alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the District’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix, in Table P-7 lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Status of Previous Plan Actions
MRWMD was not previously a part of the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Packet Page 1034
MONTEREY WASTE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | P-14 ANNEX P
P Monterey Regional Waste Management District Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Table P-7
MRWMD Hazard Mitigation Plan Action Plan Matrix
Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department
Potential
Funding
1 In Progress Flooding,
Levee Failure
Complete needed levee upgrade to the levee which protects the landfill. High Engineering HMGP Grants
2 New All Install backup generators to ensure the continued function of critical services. High Engineering HMGP Grants, General Funds 3 Ongoing/
Continuous
All, HumanCausedConsider opportunities for integrating more redundancy and/or isolation into IT infrastructure. Moderate Engineering Grants, General Funds 4 New
Hazardous
Materials
Incident
Investigate the feasibility of a radiation detection system and response plan. Low Safety, Engineering
Grants,
General Funds
5 Ongoing/
Continuous All Continue to maintain appropriate deign of base liner/ cover liner system for the landfill. High Engineering, Maintenance Grants,
General Funds
6 New Earthquake Contingent on capital funding for seismic upgrades, complete a structural assessment of buildings. Moderate Engineering Grants, General Funds 7 New All, Utility
Interruption
Investigate the use a microgrid in order to mitigate the impacts to power supply. Consider a joint microgrid project with Monterey One Water who operates the Wastewater
Treatment Plant adjacent to the District’s facilities.

Moderate Engineering Grants,
General Funds
8 Ongoing/
Continuous All Continue to make investments in resilient infrastructure in order to ensure the sustainability of public services. High Engineering Grants, General Funds 9 Ongoing/
Continuous Wildfire Collaborate with jurisdictions with fire protection and suppression responsibility on response and recovery efforts. Low Operations Grants, General Funds Packet Page 1035

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 1036
QANNEX Q: MOSS

LANDING HARBOR

DISTRICT
2021 Monterey County
Multi-Jurisdictional
Hazard Mitigation Plan
Packet Page 1037
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-1 ANNEX Q
Q. MOSS LANDING HARBOR

DISTRICT
Q.1 HAZARD MITIGATION PLAN POINT OF CONTACT
Primary Point of Contact
Tommy Razzeca
General Manager/Harbor Master
7881 Sandholdt Road
Moss Landing, CA 95039
(831) 633-5417
[email protected]
Q.2 DISTRICT PROFILE
Q.2.1 LOCATION
Packet Page 1038
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-2 ANNEX Q
Q.2.2 SERVICE AREA
The Moss Landing Harbor is the number one commercial fishing harbor in the Monterey Bay with 600+ slips for recreational boaters and commercial vessels. Partnering with marine research and education institutions, the Moss Landing Harbor District provides full public access to the marine environment.

Designated as a year-round port of safe refuge, Moss Landing Harbor provides safe, reliable marine refuge and services to members of the boating public. The District covers 364 square miles and extends from the bay east to the San Benito County line, and from the Santa Cruz County line as far south as the Corral de Tierra area.

Moss Landing Harbor supports the research and educational endeavors of the Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute and Moss Landing Marine Laboratories. More than 100 active fishing vessels can be berthed in Moss Landing at any time along with 7 research and government vessels. Two eco-tour pontoon boats are docked as well as charter fishing boats, whale watching vessels, kayak rentals and ecotourism businesses.

The Harbor supports commercial fishing and recreational boating as well as restaurants. The Jetty Road sand spit is located along the northeast side of the harbor. The Harbor provides parking and other harbor and beach access facilities which are located within both the north and south harbor areas (north and south of the main harbor entrance). Moss Landing Harbor properties are surrounded by the ocean, Elkhorn Slough, Moro Cojo Slough, and the nearby Salinas River. The proximity to the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary and the ocean makes the Harbor a valuable maritime resource.

The Harbor District was designated a California Certified Clean Marina in 2007 and recertified in 2012.

Marinas meeting the criteria for this certification are verified as providing environmentally clean facilities and protecting the state’s coastal and inland waters from pollution through compliance with established best management practices.

Q.2.3 HISTORY
The land, submerged lands and tidelands comprising the Moss Landing Harbor were originally acquired by the State of California upon its admission to the US in 1850. In 1866, a wealthy Texan and retired ship captain named Charles Moss brought his family from Texas to the California shore where they built their new homestead. Realizing the potential of this location, Captain Moss, along with Portuguese whaler Cato Vierra, constructed a 200-foot wharf to establish shipping facilities and a pier for commercial water traffic. The locals thought enough of the captain to eventually call the place Moss Landing. Captain Moss later sold his holdings to the Pacific Coast Steamship Company.

The Moss Landing Harbor District was formed on June 22, 1943 for the purpose of developing a harbor at Moss Landing pursuant to the Federal Harbors and Navigation Code. The Harbor District Board executed an Easement and Franchise Agreement with landowner Wilbur C. Sandholdt granting the District easements and rights-of-way over approximately 13 acres of land through which the harbor channel would be cut.

In 1945, the United States Congress authorized construction of a harbor at Moss Landing by the United States Army Corps of Engineers. In 1947, dredging was completed, piers and wharves were built, and the harbor officially opened. The harbor’s early activity level varied over the years with local agricultural production, railroad connections, and commercial fishing and whaling.

Packet Page 1039
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-3 ANNEX Q
The State of California granted the Moss Landing Harbor District the Submerged and Tide lands of the Old Salinas River channel below the Potrero and Moss Landing tide gates and includes the main channel of Elkhorn and Bennet sloughs and the coastal tide lands to the north and south of the Moss Landing Harbor entrance.

Q.2.4 GOVERNING BODY FORMAT
The Moss Landing Harbor District (MLHD) is governed by the Board of Harbor Commissioners and they exercise the powers set forth in Sections 6070-6086 of the California Harbors and Navigation Code. The Board of Harbor Commissioners consists of five members, each of whom is a registered voter residing within the District. Members are elected by the registered voters of the District in a general election pursuant to California Elections Codes Section 32100 and are elected to four-year terms.

In addition to more typical special district legal rights and obligations, harbor districts—because they administer harbors, wharves, and channels—are authorized to pass ordinances and enforce regulations within their boundaries. The District’s personnel are authorized to enforce the California Harbors and Navigation Code. Violations of harbor-related ordinances are typically infractions.

Q.3 PLANNING PROCESS
The Moss Landing Harbor District followed the planning process explained in Volume 1 of the plan. In addition to providing representation on the Monterey County Hazard Mitigation Planning Steering Committee, the District formulated their own internal planning team to support the broader planning process. The Moss Landing Harbor District held a Hazard Mitigation Plan Stakeholder meeting to discuss vulnerabilities, key problem statements, and mitigation strategies on September 28, 2021. Key stakeholders present at the meeting included:
• Tommy Razzeca, General Manager/Harbor Master
• Jeff Pritchard, Executive Assistant
Q.4 FACILITIES
A large amount of harbor related infrastructure was built within the footprint of the historical Old Salinas River. The Harbor entrance is maintained by two large rock jetties that reach more than 1,500 feet out from the main harbor channel into the open Monterey Bay. The jetties and channel are under the jurisdiction of the Army Corp of Engineers. The harbor mouth and main harbor channel are dredged periodically to maintain operational depth. Most of the 2.5 km of the south harbor waterfront is man-made and or hardened with riprap or concrete. Only one quarter (0.5km) of the north harbor waterfront is protected or hardened.

Moss Landing Harbor District jurisdiction extends to the Elkhorn Slough at the “mean high water mark.” The District-owned harbor property is approximately 85 acres, not including submerged lands.

It berths over 600 boats, including 350 fishing boats, 200 pleasure craft, 12 research vessels, many transient vessels, and about six tour and charter boats. The District estimates that roughly half of these boats are owned by District residents. The District limits live-aboard boats to approximately 60. The harbor's commercial boats land Dungeness crab, halibut, king salmon, albacore, rockfish, squid, and a variety of other fish.

Packet Page 1040
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-4 ANNEX Q
Facilities include the Main Harbor, located south of the main channel to the Monterey Bay, where larger vessels are berthed. The Main Harbor houses the Harbor Master’s office, the Santa Cruz Cannery Building, parking, shower and laundry facilities for slip holders, and a small community park. Adjacent to this area, on District-owned land, is a recreational vehicle park that is open to the public, dry dock storage facilities, a maintenance dock, a maintenance shop building, and a bilge and oil pump-out facility that is available free of charge on a 24-hour basis. There are also new storage unit buildings, which are currently under ground lease. The Harbor has four boat launch ramps, five if the one in Kirby Park is included. The South Harbor includes the following docks: A Dock, B Dock, C Dock, G Dock, H Dock, I Dock, J Dock, E Dock, F Dock, K Dock
The North Harbor lies on the other side of the main channel and primarily serves recreational craft. The north side of the harbor includes a 900-foot public wharf, a 110-foot dock, paved parking, and a fourlane boat launch ramp. There is also a new 9,500 square foot waterfront building in the north harbor.

The District also owns and operates Kirby Park at the east end of Elkhorn Slough, about nine miles inland (via roads) from Moss Landing. This park provides parking and launch ramp for kayaks and other small vessels that can navigate the slough. A wheelchair-accessible nature viewing trail extends from the paved parking area. Other District-owned buildings at the harbor property include a 2,800-squarefoot commercial building that is leased to a pottery shop and Monterey Bay Kayaks, a 33,600-squarefoot cannery building leased to several marine-related and commercial fishing businesses, and a newly constructed seafood restaurant.

Q.5 DISTRICT SPECIFIC RISK ASSESSMENT
The intent of this section is to profile the Moss Landing Harbor District’s hazards and assess the District’s vulnerability distinct from that of the countywide planning area, which has already been assessed in Volume 1 of the plan. The hazard profiles in Volume 1 discuss overall impacts to the County and describes the hazards, as well as their extent, magnitude/severity, previous occurrences, and the likelihood of future occurrences. Hazard vulnerability specific to the Moss Landing Harbor District is included in this Annex.

The Moss Landing Harbor District’s Planning Team used the same risk assessment process as the Monterey County Steering Committee. The District’s Planning Team used the Threat Hazard Risk Assessment (THIRA) Survey to compare the impact of various hazards that could affect the District.

Each variable was scored by hazard by the Planning Team on a scale from 1 to 4, or negligible/unlikely to extensive/highly likely/ catastrophic. The score for each variable was calculated using a weighted average of all survey responses. Scores were then added together to determine an overall hazard score between 1 and 16. Each score was associated with a qualitative degree of risk ranking from Negligible (between 1 and 4) to Very High (between 14.1 and 16). The Survey is described in more detail in Risk Assessment Methods in Volume 1.

Table Q-1 displays the results of the hazard risk ranking exercise that was performed by the Moss Landing Harbor District’s Planning Team.

Packet Page 1041
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-5 ANNEX Q
Table Q-1
Threat Hazard Identification Risk Assessment (THIRA): Moss Landing Harbor District Hazard Geographic
Extent
Likelihood of
Occurrence
Magnitude/
Severity Impact TotalOut of 16
Degree of
Risk
Agricultural Emergencies 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.5 11.5 Substantial Coastal Erosion 4.0 4.0 3.0 3.0 14.0 High
Coastal Flooding 4.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 12.0 Substantial
Cyber-Attack 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Dam Failure - - - - - -
Drought & Water Shortage - - - - - -
Earthquake 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 12.0 Substantial
Epidemic 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Extreme Cold & Freeze - - - - - -
Extreme Heat - - - - - -
Flash Flood - - - - - -
Hazardous Materials Incident 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 12.0 Substantial Invasive Species - - - - - -
Levee Failure - - - - - -
Localized Stormwater Flooding 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible Mass Migration - - - - - -
Pandemic 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Riverine Flooding 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 8.0 Possible
Sea Level Rise 4.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 15.0 Very High
Severe Winter Storms 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 16.0 Very High
Slope Failure 3.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 11.0 Substantial
Targeted Violence - - - - - -
Terrorism - - - - - -
Tsunami 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.5 12.5 High
Utility Interruption/ PSPS 2.0 2.0 3.0 3.0 10.0 Moderate Water Contamination - - - - - -
Wildfire - - - - - -
Windstorms 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 10.0 Moderate
Q.5.1 AGRICULTURAL EMERGENCIES
Though the Harbor District’s facilities are unlikely to experience any impacts associated with agricultural emergencies, an agricultural emergency caused by a chemical spill along the Salinas River could have serious impacts on the waterways. Contaminated sediment is very difficult to dispose so an agricultural emergency could have critical impacts on dredging operations.

Packet Page 1042
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-6 ANNEX Q
Q.5.2 COASTAL EROSION
All Harbor facilities are at risk due to coastal erosion. Determination of assets at risk was based on analysis completed for the AB 691 Sea-Level Rise Assessment for Moss Landing Harbor (CCWG, June 2019). By 2030, coastal erosion of the sand spit that protects Moss Landing Harbor from ocean waves is predicted to be significant unless protective/adaptive actions are taken. Wave impacts along the beach are predicted to compromise dunes and coastal structures and reduce the long-term protection to the harbor.

By 2060, coastal erosion of the sand spit that protects Moss Landing Harbor from ocean waves is predicted to be significant and possibly jeopardize the harbor unless protective/adaptive actions are taken. Erosion of the dune barrier will likely lead to wave overtopping of the remaining dunes, allowing waves to enter the harbor, leading to vessel and dock damage and significant sedimentation. Failure of dunes are predicted along the entire stretch that parallels the harbor. Dunes adjacent to north harbor and dunes south of Sandholdt road have no structures or coastal armoring to reduce erosion, but also retain some natural dune building and migration capacity lost to development along Sandholdt Road. If dunes are allowed to migrate inland, these areas may retain their protective service. The impacts of sea level rise may also lead to significant erosion to Kirby Park launch ramp and parking area. By 2100, Winter storm waves and coastal erosion will likely bisect the sand spit above and below the Sandholdt Bridge, leading to limited use of the granted lands as a safe harbor marina.

Q.5.3 DAM AND LEVEE FAILURE
Dam Failure
Releases from both the Nacimiento and San Antonio reservoirs flow northward towards the Monterey Bay through the channel of the Salinas River, which outlets to the ocean near the Harbor. A dam or spillway failure of the Nacimiento or San Antonio dam could expose the Harbor’s facilities to dam failure inundation risk, but this risk is likely to be minor.

Levee Failure
Multiple levees protect agricultural land along Elkhorn, Moro Cojo, and Bennett Sloughs. A failure of any of these levees is unlikely to have a significant impact on the Harbor, but it could change the flood management regime in the area, which could cause long-term residual impacts that could not be predicted at this time. Additionally, a levee failure could lead to increases in sedimentation in the Harbor that could affect dredging operations.

Q.5.4 DROUGHT AND WATER SHORTAGE
Drought is unlikely to have a major impact on the Harbor District’s facilities or operations.

Q.5.5 EARTHQUAKE
Most of the Harbor’s facilities are designed to the latest building codes to handle seismic events.

However, damage to Harbor facilities could still occur if a large enough earthquake were to occur.

Additionally, the Harbor District Office Building was built before a number of seismic codes were in place and is likely vulnerable to seismic risks. An earthquake would also likely impact bridges surrounding the Harbor which could make it impossible to access the Harbor.

Packet Page 1043
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-7 ANNEX Q
The Harbor is also located in an area that is suspectable to liquefaction risk and this could be a major risk if an earthquake were to occur. In Moss Landing, following the Loma Prieta Earthquake, liquefaction destroyed the causeway that carried the Moss Beach access road across a tidewater basin, damaged the bridge linking Moss Landing spit to the mainland and cracked the paved road on Paul's Island. Another large earthquake occurrence is likely to cause liquefaction in this area.

Q.5.6 FLOODING
All Harbor facilities are at risk due to flooding as the Harbor is surrounded by water- the ocean, Elkhorn Slough, Moro Cojo Slough, and the nearby Salinas River. This risk is likely to increase with sea level rise.

Q.5.7 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INCIDENT
Highway 1 and a number of industrial and commercial facilities are in close proximity to the Harbor. Oil spills in the Harbor is another large concern. The largest impact of a hazardous materials incident would be the effect on water quality, as well as people and residents in the Harbor. A hazardous materials incident could contaminate sediment, which would complicate dredging operations since contaminated sediment is very difficult to dispose of.

Q.5.8 HUMAN CAUSED HAZARDS
It is often quite difficult to quantify the potential losses from human-caused hazards. While facilities themselves have a tangible dollar value, the impact to identified values will vary from event to event and depend on the type, location, and nature of a specific incident. The Harbor is unlikely to be a major target for terrorism or targeted violence, but it is a possibility.

Q.5.9 PUBLIC HEALTH HAZARDS
Based on the experience of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is noted that pandemic or epidemic could impact parking and tourism revenue, as well as effect businesses which operate out of the Harbor.

Q.5.10 SEVERE WEATHER
All severe weather events profiled in this Plan have the potential to affect the District’s facilities and infrastructure, but severe winter storms are the weather hazard of highest concern. Severe winter storms have the potential to create numerous flooding issues. Winter storms can cause riverbanks to fail and erode coastal dunes, which leads to more sedimentation in the Harbor. This then requires more frequent dredging of the Harbor and the need for bank stabilization projects. Flooding risks during winter storm events is predicted to increase significantly due to climate change and sea level rise. Data from the Sea-Level Rise Assessment for Moss Landing Harbor (CCWG, June 2019) indicates that by 2030, winter storms could lead to flooding of the parking areas of South and North Harbor and limit access to the Moss Landing island during storms.

Q.5.11 SLOPE FAILURE
The main impact to Harbor facilities and infrastructure from slope failure would be flood risk. The failure of coastal dunes and nearby riverbanks is likely to exacerbate flood risk in the Harbor.

Packet Page 1044
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-8 ANNEX Q
Q.5.12 TSUNAMI
All Harbor facilities are located in a mapped tsunami inundation zone. The largest impact of a tsunami would be the destruction of dock structures, but a large enough tsunami could have catastrophic impacts on the Harbor.

Q.5.13 UTILITY INTERRUPTION
All critical facilities and infrastructure that is operated by electricity is exposed and vulnerable to utility interruption. Much of Harbor’s facilities are reliant on electricity to function. The main concern of an extended utility interruption would be the impact to the Harbor’s pumps. If boats were to loose battery power, the pumps would be inoperable, and this could cause boats to sink.

Q.5.14 WILDFIRE
Wildfire does not pose a major threat to the Harbor District.

Q.5.15 CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL RISE
The effects of climate change are varied and include warmer and more varied weather patterns and temperature changes. Climate change will exacerbate the risk posed by many of the hazards previously profiled in this Plan and have a measurable impact on the occurrence and severity of natural hazards.

Sea level rise is likely to impact all Harbor facilities and infrastructure. Determination of assets at risk was based on analysis completed for the AB 691 Sea-Level Rise Assessment for Moss Landing Harbor. 3 By 2030, flooding is projected to effect portions of the main parking lot, Docks A and B, the small boat launch ramp, and the parking area of North Harbor. If the Moss Landing tide gates fail to restrict high tides, access to some of the harbor infrastructure will be compromised. The greatest tidal flooding impacts will occur during high tides (king tides) during storms that increase wave energy, local ocean levels, and increased river discharge. River discharge during winter storms is predicted to increase.

These increases in river flows are predicted to cause localized flooding as stormwater from the watershed meets higher winter ocean elevations in the harbor. Greater velocity discharge from the Old Salinas River into the Harbor is likely and may impact infrastructure in its path. Greater sedimentation of the Harbor due to greater erosion in the watershed is likely.

By 2060, flooding will occur monthly or daily in low-lying areas throughout the Harbor and storm and tidal flooding are predicted to compromise large portions of Harbor infrastructure. Flooding is projected to be extensive within parking areas, dock access ways, launch ramps, and access roads.

Flooding of portions of Moss Landing and Sandholdt roads are predicted and will limit access to the Harbor. This would significantly reduce the use of the Harbor and could pose a serious public safety challenge by restricting emergency service vehicles and staff. The Harbor mouth jetty is likely to be overtopped by winter waves, compromising the navigability of the Harbor. Over half of the land in the North Harbor is predicted to be flooded and access to much of the Harbor District’s State granted lands will be restricted during high tides. Wave overtopping of the dunes is possible, which would lead to ocean waves and sand draining into Moss Landing Harbor. Combined with loss of the tidal marshes of 3 AB 691 Sea-Level Rise Assessment for Moss Landing Harbor, Central Coast Wetlands Group (June 2019) Packet Page 1045
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-9 ANNEX Q
Elkhorn Slough, sedimentation within the Harbor will greatly increase. River discharge during winter storms is also predicted to increase. Increases in river flows are predicted to cause localized stormwater flooding as from the watershed meets higher winter ocean elevations. Sedimentation of the harbor is also likely to increase due to increased erosion within the watershed during high flow events. Increased discharge velocity under Sandholdt Bridge may impact vessels and Harbor infrastructure in south harbor.

By 2100, access to all Harbor infrastructure will be restricted/flooded during daily high tides. Winter storm waves and coastal erosion will likely bisect the sand spit above and below the Sandholdt Bridge, leading to limited use of the granted lands as a safe harbor marina. Table Q-2 summarizes the Harbor facilities and infrastructure identified by the Sea-Level Rise Assessment for Moss Landing Harbor 4 as vulnerable to various sea level hazards during future time horizons.

Table Q-2
Moss Landing Harbor District Facilities and Infrastructure Vulnerable to Sea Level Rise Hazards Structure Coastal Erosion Storm Flooding Tidal Flooding Fluvial Flooding 2030 2060 2100 2030 2060 2100 2030 2060 2100 2030 2060 2100 Harbor Office 1 1 1
Restroom & Laundry
Facilities 3 3 2
Maintenance Shop 1 1 1
Cannery Building 1 1 1 1 1
ML Storage Buildings 2 2 2
Sea Harvest Building 1 1 1
North Harbor Building 1 1
Old Pot Stop Building 1 1
MB Kayak Building 1 1 1
Used Oil Containment
Facility 1 1 1 1 1
Trash Enclosures 1 2 2 1 2 1 1 2
Launch Ramps 2 2 2 2 2 2
Sewer Lift Stations 2 1 1
Dry Storage 1 1 1 1 1 1
Maintenance Yard 1 1 1
Unimproved Lots 1 1 2 1 2 1 1
Moss Landing
Community Park 1 1 1
Pier 1 1 1 1 1 1
Storm Drains 0 0 0 7 12 16 2 7 15 2 8 8
Docks 0 0 1 12 13 13 12 13 13 10 10 11
Electric Meters 0 0 2 3 6 7 1 5 7 2 5 6
4 AB 691 Sea-Level Rise Assessment for Moss Landing Harbor, Central Coast Wetlands Group (June 2019) Packet Page 1046
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-10 ANNEX Q
Q.6 CAPABILITY ASSESSMENT
The Moss Landing Harbor District performed an inventory and analysis of existing capabilities, plans, programs, and policies that enhance its ability to implement mitigation strategies. This section summarizes the following findings of the assessment:
• An assessment of planning and regulatory capabilities is presented in Table Q-3 • An assessment of administrative and technical capabilities is presented in Table Q-4 • An assessment of fiscal capabilities is presented in Table Q-5 • An assessment of education and outreach capabilities is presented in Table Q-6 • An overall self-assessment of capability is presented in Section Q.6.1 in Table Q-7 Table Q-3
Planning and Regulatory Capability
Document, Program, Requirement Department Comments
General Management Plan ☒ • Admin Ordinance Code is basis of operations Capital Improvement Plan ☒ • Admin Capital projects included in the budget and new long range planning efforts are underway
Stormwater Management Plan ☒ • Admin
Coastal Management Plan ☒ • Admin
Climate Action/ Adaptation Plan ☒ AB 691 Sea-Level Rise Assessment for Moss Landing Harbor (CCWG, 2019)
Emergency Operations Plan ☒ • Admin Business Response Plan Specific Emergency Response
Plans ☒ • Admin Tsunami Harbor Maritime Playbook, Coastal Incident Response Plan, Business Response Plan Continuity of Operations Plan ☒ • Admin In Business Response Plan Evacuation Plan ☒ • Admin In Business Response Plan
Illness and Injury Prevention Plan ☒ • Admin In Business Response Plan Business Response Plan ☒ • Admin
Hazardous Materials Plan ☒ • Admin Spill Prevention Plan Other: • Dredge Materials Management Plan
Table Q-4
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with
knowledge of land development
and land management practices
☒ • Admin Use consultants as needed
Engineer(s) or professional(s)
trained in construction practices
related to buildings and/or
infrastructure
☒ • Admin Use consultants as needed
Packet Page 1047
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-11 ANNEX Q
Table Q-4
Administrative and Technical Capability
Staff/Personnel Resources Department Comments
Planner(s) or engineer(s) with an
understanding of manmade or
natural hazards
☒ • Admin Use consultants as needed
Building Inspector ☒ • Admin Use consultants as needed
Emergency Manager ☒ • Admin General Manager/ Harbormaster Resource development staff or
grant writers ☒ • Admin• Operations
Public Information Officer ☒ • Admin General Manager/ Harbormaster Scientist(s) familiar with the
hazards of the community ☒ • Admin Use consultants as needed Staff with education or expertise
to assess the community’s
vulnerability to hazards
☒ • Admin Use consultants as needed
Personnel skilled in Geographic
Information Systems (GIS) ☒ • Admin Use consultants as needed Maintenance programs to reduce
risk ☒ • Admin• Operations
Dredge Materials Management Plan, In-house
maintenance Program
Warning systems/services ☒ • Admin
• MoCo OES PA System, OES Reverse 911
Table Q-5
Fiscal Capability
Fiscal Resources Department Comments
General Funds ☒ • Admin
Capital Improvements Project
Funding ☒ • Admin General and trust lands accounts
Special Purpose Taxes ☐
Stormwater Utility Fees ☐
Gas / Electric Utility Fees ☐
Water / Sewer Fees ☐
Development Impact Fees ☐
General Obligation Bonds ☐
Special Tax and Revenue Bonds ☐
Other:
• Berth Rental and Parking Fees
• Permit Fees
• Services and Equipment Fees
• Lease Agreements
Packet Page 1048
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-12 ANNEX Q
Table Q-6
Education and Outreach Capability
Educational and Outreach Resources Department Comments
Local citizen or non-profit groups
focused on environmental
protection, emergency
preparedness, etc.
☐
Ongoing public education or
information program ☒ • Admin The District shares public information on their website
Natural disaster or safety related
school programs ☐
Public-private partnership initiatives
addressing disaster-related issues ☐
Political Capability
The Moss Landing Harbor District Board is non-partisan and supports reducing risk to Harbor facilities and infrastructure.

Q.6.1 NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP)
The Moss Landing Harbor District is a Special District and is therefore not eligible for flood insurance under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

Q.6.2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF CAPABILITY
Table Q-7
Self-Assessment of Capability
Capability Degree of Capability
Planning and Regulatory Capability Moderate
Administrative and Technical Capability Moderate
Fiscal Capability Limited
Education and Outreach Capability Limited
Political Capability Moderate
Overall Capability Moderate
Q.6.3 OPPORTUNITIES TO EXPAND/ IMPROVE MITIGATION CAPABILITIES Planning, regulatory, fiscal, administrative, technical, education, and outreach capabilities can all be expanded or improved using a combination of the following strategies:
• Increase capacity through staffing
• Training, and enhanced coordination among all department and jurisdictions • Emergency management/hazard specific program enhancements, training, and exercising • Increased funding opportunities and capacity
• Implementation of mitigation actions and projects
Packet Page 1049
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-13 ANNEX Q
• Continuous research on grant opportunities for emergency management, hazard mitigation, and infrastructure and community development.

Capabilities and abilities to expand or improve existing policies and programs will be re-evaluated during the next Hazard Mitigation Plan update and annual plan review meetings.

Q.6.4 INTEGRATION WITH OTHER PLANNING INITIATIVES
The information on hazards, risk, vulnerability and mitigation contained in this hazard mitigation plan is based on the best available data. Plan integration is the incorporation of this information into other relevant planning mechanisms, such as general planning and capital improvement planning. It includes the integration of natural hazard information and mitigation policies, principles and actions into local planning mechanisms and vice versa. Additionally, plan integration is achieved though the involvement of key staff and community officials in collaboratively planning for hazard mitigation. This section identifies where such integration is already in place, and where there are opportunities for further integration in the future.

Existing Integration
Moss Landing Harbor District was not previously a part of the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Opportunities for Future Integration
As this hazard mitigation plan is implemented, Moss Landing Harbor District will use information from the plan as the best available science and data on natural hazards. The capability assessment presented in this annex identifies codes, plans and programs that provide opportunities for integration.

The area-wide and local action plans developed for this hazard mitigation plan include actions related to plan integration, and progress on these actions will be reported through the progress reporting process described in Volume 1. New opportunities for integration also will be identified as part of the annual progress report. The plans and programs listed in the Capability Assessment cover the majority of District operations where the hazard mitigation goals are addressed. However, the capability assessment identified the opportunity for future integration of recommendations of the hazard mitigation plan for all the plans and programs listed as they are updated periodically.

Q.7 PROBLEM STATEMENTS
Problem Statements are statements of particular interest regarding primary hazards of concern, geographic areas of concern, or vulnerable community assets. As part of the planning process, the Districts’ Planning Committee identified key vulnerabilities and hazards of concern. The Hazard Problem Statements were primarily derived from Moss Landing Harbor District’s Hazard Mitigation Planning Committee and informed by review of existing literature about Moss Landing Harbor District’s assets and analysis using best available data relating to the vulnerability analysis for each piece of Moss Landing Harbor District’s critical infrastructure. They were developed to assist in the identification and analysis of potential hazard mitigation actions for Moss Landing Harbor District.

Packet Page 1050
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-14 ANNEX Q
Hazard Problem Statements helped the Planning Committee identify common issues and weaknesses, determine appropriate mitigation strategies, and understand the realm of resources needed for mitigation. Hazard Problem Statements for the District are identified below:
• Sea level rise has the potential to have catastrophic effects on the Moss Landing Harbor District and is likely to reduce access to many Harbor facilities during large storm events. • Coastal erosion combined with winter storm events and sea level rise is likely to have major impacts on the Harbor. By 2060, coastal erosion of the sandspit that protects Moss Landing Harbor from ocean waves is predicted to be significant and this could jeopardize the Harbor unless protective actions are taken. By 2100, Winter storm waves and coastal erosion will likely bisect the sand spit above and below the Sandholdt Bridge, leading to limited use of the granted lands as a safe harbor marina.
• A number of hazards in this Plan have the potential to significantly complicate dredging operation.

Winter storms can cause riverbanks to fail and erode coastal dunes, which leads to more sedimentation in the Harbor. This then requires more frequent dredging of the Harbor. Hazardous materials incidents can contaminate sediment, which can complicate dredging operations since contaminated sediment is very difficult to dispose of.
• Tsunami, flooding, and severe storms can create strong and unpredictable currents, sudden waterlevel fluctuations, amplified waves, along with a range of other secondary hazards all of which can severely impact docks, dock structures (piles, pile guides, moorings, cleats), and vessels. • Various County, State, and Federal agencies have jurisdiction over lands surrounding the Harbor District. This complicates mitigation activities to address many of the hazards discussed in this Plan since the effectiveness of the Harbor’s actions depends on the actions of other agencies.

Q.8 MITIGATION GOALS, STRATEGIES, AND ACTIONS
The mitigation strategy is the guidebook to future hazard mitigation administration, capturing the key outcomes of the MJHMP planning process. The mitigation strategy is intended to reduce vulnerabilities outlined in the previous section with a prescription of policies and physical projects. These mitigation actions should be compatible with existing planning mechanisms and should outline specific roles and resources for implementation success.

The District’s Planning Team used the same mitigation action prioritization method as described in Mitigation Strategy in Volume 1, which included a benefit-cost analysis and consideration of mitigation alternatives. Based upon the risk assessment results and the District’s planning committee priorities, a list of mitigation actions was developed. The Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix, in Table Q-8 lists each priority mitigation action, identifies time frame, the responsible party, potential funding sources, and prioritization, which meet the requirements of FEMA and DMA 2000.

Status of Previous Plan Actions
Moss Landing Harbor District was not previously a part of the Monterey County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Packet Page 1051
MOSS LANDING HARBOR DISTRICT Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan PAGE | Q-15 ANNEX Q
Q Moss Landing Harbor District Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Table Q-8
Moss Landing Harbor District Hazard Mitigation Action Plan Matrix Action
#
Status/
Timeframe
Applicable
Hazard(s) Description Ranking / Prioritization
Administering
Department Potential Funding
1 Ongoing
Flooding,
Tsunami, Severe
Winter Storms,
Coastal Erosion,
Earthquake
Update dock structures and old dock infrastructure
in order to reduce flood risks. Continue to improve
dock infrastructure by moving away from wooden
piles and docks and use more concrete.

High Admin
General and Trust
Lands Funds, Grants,
Emergency Funding
2 Ongoing
Flooding, Coastal
Erosion, Severe
Winter Storms,
Sea Level Rise
Armor parking lots, riverbanks, other vulnerable
infrastructure in order to reduce flood and sea level
rise risk and continue to implement erosion control
measures.

High Admin
General and Trust
Lands Funds, Grants,
Emergency Funding
3 Long-term Sea Level Rise Consider opportunities to raise infrastructure to address long-term sea level rise risks. Moderate Admin
General and Trust
Lands Funds, Grants,
Emergency Funding
4 Ongoing/
As Needed
Flooding, Severe
Winter Storms
Continue dredging operations as needed and as
storms continue to get worse due to climate change
continue to monitor the frequency of dredging.

High Admin
General and Trust
Lands Funds, Grants,
Emergency Funding
Packet Page 1052

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Packet Page 1053
Packet Page 1054

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.N.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Beth Rocha, Senior Planner
DATE: July 7, 2022
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION TO APPROVE A CONTRACT AMENDMENT

WITH ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL

EDUCATIONAL OUTREACH IN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED
$30,000.00

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a contract amendment with Environmental Innovations for an additional $30,000.00, for continued educational outreach to aid the transition to compostable goods and service ware for a total contract amount not to exceed $60,000.00.

BACKGROUND
The Community Development Department issued a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) on September 13, 2021, for a consulting firm to assist in the coordinated implementation of the Priority Impact Plastic Pollution Prevention Policy (PIP4) and other associated policies approved by the City Council on August 5, 2021, (effective enforcement date March 1, 2022). The deadline for submission of the statements of qualifications is September 24, 2021. The City received interest from Environmental Innovations.

On October 21, 2021, the City Council adopted a resolution to authorize a contract and scope of work (Attachment 2) with Environmental Innovations for the coordinated implementation of the Priority Impact Plastic Pollution Prevention Policy for an amount not to exceed $30,000.00.

Outreach updates were provided to the Council by staff on February 8, 2022, and by Environmental Innovations on May 5, 2022. The Council learned of the success of the outreach, which included outreach to 85 retail facilities and 70 food facilities. Nine of those food facilities are working toward Green Business Certification with two of them Packet Page 1055

Item No. 8.N. Page 2 of 2
already certified. In one case study, the team helped Red's Donuts switch to resuables for dining in and saved them an estimated $12,887.00, eliminated 186,810 disposable items, and diverted an estimated 3,728 pounds from the landfill per year.

In the 2022-2023 budget, Council approved additional funding for continued outreach in the amount of $30,000.00, as outlined in the Draft Amendment to the Consulting Agreement (Exhibit A) and Extended Outreach to Foodware Facilities (Exhibit B) from Environmental Innovations, which will run through April 2023. A Draft Amendment to the Consulting Agreement has been provided as Attachment 3.

FISCAL IMPACT
An additional $30,000.00 was included in the 2022-2023 Annual Budget, account number: 100-7110-8185.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Amendment to the Consulting Agreement

3. Extended Outreach to Foodware Facilities

4. Original Project Tasks and Estimated Costs
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 1056
1 RESOLUTION NO. 22-XX

A RESOLUTION OF CITY OF SEASIDE

APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONSULTING AGREEMENT BETWEEN

THE CITY OF SEASIDE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATIONS
WHEREAS, The City entered into a contract with Environmental Innovations to conduct business outreach regarding the Priority Impact Plastic Pollution Prevention Policy, Seaside Municipal Code 8.60; and
WHEREAS, The Council authorized an amount not to exceed $30,000.00; and WHEREAS, Environmental Innovations conducted successful business outreach, including assisting 155 local businesses and aiding some in becoming Green Business Certified; and
WHEREAS, The Council budgeted an additional $30,000.00 in the 2022-2023 Annual Budget for continued outreach work; and
WHEREAS, Environmental Innovations provided an updated scope of work in Exhibit A for continued outreach resuming in August 2022 and continuing through April 2023.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Seaside authorizes the City Manager or designee to execute a contract amendment (Exhibit A), including any non-substantive changes, with Environmental Innovations to provide for the additional work (Exhibit B) in an amount not to exceed $30,000.00 in additional funds, for a total contract amount of $60,000.00:

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside held on the 7th day of July 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: __ COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: __ COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: __ COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: __ COUNCIL MEMBERS
_____________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
Packet Page 1057
Exhibit A
Amendment to the Consulting Agreement between the
City of Seaside and Environmental Innovations
The Consulting Agreement entered into on October 21, 2021, is hereby modified as follows:

The originally approved Project Tasks and Estimated Costs is modified to increase the not to exceed amount by thirty thousand dollars ($30,000) to a total of sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00) and the revised scope of work to end in April 2023, as outlined in the Extended Outreach to Foodware Facilities (Exhibit B).

All other aspects of the agreement not modified by this amendment remain the same.

By: __________________________ By _________________________ Josephine Fleming, President Jaime Fontes, City Manager Environmental Innovations City of Seaside
Packet Page 1058
June 16, 2022
Beth Rocha, Senior Planner
City of Seaside
Seaside, CA 93955
Re: Foodware Awareness Engagement Contract Extension Request Dear Ms. Rocha:

As you know, we have completed our initial outreach to City of Seaside businesses and seen incredible impacts in a short period of time – the exact type of impacts the City of Seaside hoped to see when it passed the PPIP ordinance. We will be providing a summary of that effort to date once we have the final data from participating businesses and case studies to share, which we expect will be by September 2022.

Meanwhile we hope to build on our momentum and freshly developed knowledge so we can help the City reduce single use foodware waste and, where it is not possible to reduce it, help replace it with approved compostable ware. Please find a scope and strategic summary attached.

Please do not hesitate to reach out to us if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Brooke Wright
Director of Programs and Strategy
Environmental Innovations
Packet Page 1059
1 Extended Outreach to Foodware Facilities
To build on the work we began in the City of Seaside, we propose the following timeline to ensure as many foodware facilities as possible are provided our direct resources and training to reduce single use foodware waste. 1) August through December 2022: Direct 1:1 technical assistance to bring food businesses into ordinance compliance and beyond with reusable foodware and BPI compliant compostables. Have City of Seaside case studies in hand. Use remaining and new materials budget to provide reusables. Submit Plastic Free Restaurant reimbursement requests to fund additional purchases of
reusables.
2) January through March 2023: Collect final data and select up to three additional case studies for website and ongoing outreach resources.
3) April 2023: Final report and presentation for Earth Month to City Council
Project Tasks and Estimated Costs:

Billing Task No. Task Est. Hours Cost
Task 1 Marketing/Case Studies 20 $2,200.00
Task 2 Direct Technical Assistance to Food Services 274 $23,290.00 Task 3 Program Coordination and Administration 30 $3,000.00 Materials Materials: Miles and Expenses n/a $1,510.00
TOTAL $30,000.00
Assurances: EI services are done with Professional and General Liability insurance up to $2,000,000, Workers’ Compensation, and automobile insurances of up to $1,000,000. Although EI maintains the extensive insurances often required by government and institutional clients, EI has never been involved in any lawsuit or litigation for any of its work. EI will provide a Certificate of Insurance, naming the City of Seaside as additional insured upon request.

Rates: It is expected that most of this project will be completed by the Outreach Lead. However, we maintain the flexibility to involve an assistant or intern if appropriate.

Rate Table: Rate
Senior Staff (Marketing, Program
Management) $110
Outreach Lead $85
Outreach Assistant $65
Intern $55
Packet Page 1060
2 Project Tasks and Estimated Costs:
* If deemed more necessary and applicable, utilize part of this $5,000 to pay a community-based organization to do the outreach to a certain demographic. Additionally, external rebates from the California Green Business Network and Plastic Free Restaurants will be utilized at every opportunity. It is estimated that an additional $3,000 in rebates could come from these outside sources.

Assurances: EI services are done with Professional and General Liability insurance up to $2,000,000, Workers’ Compensation, and automobile insurances of up to $1,000,000. Although EI maintains the extensive insurances often required by government and institutional clients, EI has never been involved in any lawsuit or litigation for any of its work. EI will provide a Certificate of Insurance, naming the City of Seaside as additional insured upon request.

Rates: It is expected that this project will be completed by the Senior Scientist and Compliance Inspector. However, if speed or budget requires, a Staff Scientist or Student Intern could be utilized.

Labor Rate Sheet
7 Foodware Outreach City of Seaside Estimated Hours Cost Website/Campaign 48 5280
Resource Guide 12 1320
Rack Card: staff time 10 1100
Virtual Outreach 40 3400
Direct Technical Assistance for
outliers 60 5700
Case studies and Report 20 2200
Partner Org/Agency Coordination 40 4400
Meetings with Seaside Staff 9 990
Mileage and expenses 610
Subtotal $25,000
Rebates/Prebates for
Businesses approx. $300ea
for 23 businesses $5,000
Total $30,000
Staff Position Hourly Rate
Senior Scientist, Marketing and
Graphics
110
Staff Scientist (Virtual Outreach) 85
Staff Scientist (Field Outreach) 95
Packet Page 1061

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.O.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Nisha Patel, Public Works Director/City Engineer
DATE: July 7, 2022
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING A REGIONAL FUNDING

AGREEMENT FOR PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE WAYFINDING

PROGRAM WITH TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY
COUNTY

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving a Regional Funding Agreement for a Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program with the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC).

BACKGROUND
The need for a wayfinding plan was identified in the Transportation Agency's 2011 Master Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan as a means for promoting bicycling and walking throughout the County. Wayfinding signs can ease navigation for bicyclists and pedestrians, reduce travel times and enhance a region's brand by publicizing key regional destinations. When combined with secure bicycle storage and a network of bicycle paths and lanes, a wayfinding system can attract more bicyclists.

In 2016, TAMC adopted the Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County. The plan was developed in coordination with a Wayfinding Plan Advisory Committee with representatives from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee, the County of Monterey, local cities, the Monterey County Health Department, Building Healthy Communities, the Fort Ord Reuse Authority, the Velo Club, Green Petal Couriers, Fort Ord Recreation Trails Friends, the Pebble Beach Company, and te Monterey-Salinas Transit. In addition, TAMC staff solicited public input on the proposed routes and sign designs using an interactive web page. The Wayfinding Plan specifies routes to be signed throughout Monterey County to enhance connections between neighboring cities and to various destinations in the region. The plan also provides Packet Page 1062

Item No. 8.O. Page 2 of 3
standard sign design guidelines. Local jurisdictions are encouraged to use the sign guidelines to sign their own bicycle and pedestrian routes beyond those contained in the plan.

On December 1, 2021, TAMC executed a contract with Statewide Traffic Safety and Signs in an amount not to exceed $456,990, with an anticipated completion date of December 2022, for construction of the Regional Wayfinding Program Signs project throughout Monterey County.

In March 2021, the TAMC Board authorized executing funding agreements with participating jurisdictions (Attachment 2). The agreement outlines the responsibilities of the Transportation Agency and the underlying jurisdictions TAMC fund the fabrication and installation of the wayfinding signs and the underlying jurisdictions will issue permits and accept ownership and maintenance of the installed signs.

Based on previous meetings between the City and TAMC, parties have concurred with the design of wayfinding signs presented in Exhibit B of Attachment 2. Thus, the agreement requires the City to allow the placement of at least 25 and up to 35 signs within its jurisdiction, generally at the locations designated in Exhibit C of Attachment 2.

This agreement is written to be effective until completion of the project, which is ten years after the installation of the last Wayfinding sign.

Staff recommends the City Council adopt a Resolution approving a Regional Funding Agreement for a Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program with the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC), and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement subject to final review and approval by the City Attorney.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact at this time. However, the agreement states the City shall bear all the costs related to the issuance of permits, and the maintenance and repair of Wayfinding signage within its jurisdiction. According to past records for sign maintenance, the staff anticipates $1,750.00 annually for maintenance expenses of the signs pursuant to this agreement. Maintenance of the signs is an eligible gas tax expenditure.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Regional Funding Agreement
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:

Packet Page 1063

Item No. 8.O. Page 3 of 3
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 1064
RESOLUTION NO. 22-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

APPROVING A REGIONAL FUNDING AGREEMENT FOR A PEDESTRIAN AND

BICYCLE WAYFINDING PROGRAM WITH THE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR

MONTEREY COUNTY
WHEREAS, the need for a wayfinding plan was identified on the Transportation Agency’s 2011 Master Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan as a means for promoting bicycling and walking throughout the County; and
WHEREAS, Wayfinding signs can ease the navigation for bicyclists and pedestrians, reduce travel times and enhance a region’s brand by publicizing key regional destinations.

When combined with secure bicycle storage and a network of bicycle paths and lanes, a wayfinding system can attract more bicyclists; and
WHEREAS, in 2016, TAMC adopted the Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County; and
WHEREAS, on December 1, 2021, TAMC executed a contract with Statewide Traffic Safety and Signs in an amount not to exceed $456,990, with an anticipated completion date of December 2022, for construction of the Regional Wayfinding Program Signs project throughout Monterey County; and
WHEREAS, in March 2021, the Board authorized the Agency to execute funding agreements with participating jurisdictions (Exhibit A). This agreement outlines the responsibilities of the Transportation Agency and the underlying jurisdictions. TAMC will fund the fabrication and installation of the wayfinding signs, and underlying jurisdictions will issue permits and accept ownership and maintenance of the installed signs; and WHEREAS, based on previous meetings between the City and TAMC, parties have concurred the design of Wayfinding signs presented in Exhibit B. Thus, the agreement requires the City to allow the placement of at 25 and up to 35 signs within the jurisdiction, generally at the locations designated in Exhibit C. This agreement is written to be effective until completion of the project, which is ten years after installation of the last Wayfinding sign; and
WHEREAS, there is no fiscal impact at this time. However, the agreement states that the City shall bear the costs related to the issuance of permits, and the maintenance and repair of Wayfinding signage within its jurisdiction. According to past records for sign Packet Page 1065
maintenance, staff anticipates less than $1750 annually for maintenance expenses of the signs pursuant to this agreement; and
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council of the City of Seaside authorizes the City Manager to execute the Regional Funding Agreement for a Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program with the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (TAMC) subject to final review, minor edits, and approval by the City Attorney.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular City Council meeting of the City of Seaside duly held on the 7th day of July, 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
______________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
Packet Page 1066

PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE WAYFINDING PROGRAM

REGIONAL FUNDING AGREEMENT
between the

TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR MONTEREY COUNTY
and the

CITY OF SEASIDE
This Regional Funding Agreement for Pedestrian and Bicycle Wayfinding Program (“Agreement”) is effective the ______ of __________________, 2022, and is entered into by and between the Transportation Agency for Monterey County (“TAMC”) and the City of Seaside (“RECIPIENT”).

RECITALS

1. On May 25, 2016, the TAMC Board of Directors adopted the Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan for Monterey County (“Wayfinding Plan”) and authorized the submission of grant applications to implement the Wayfinding Plan.

2. The Wayfinding Plan was determined to be exempt from CEQA under 14 CCR Section 15301: Existing Facilities, as affecting minor alterations to existing public structures and facilities. All applicable statutes of limitations concerning the approval of the Wayfinding Plan under CEQA have been exhausted.

3. TAMC has been awarded Local Transportation Funds and State SB1 Local Partnership Program funds in the amount of One Million Nine Hundred Thirty‐one Thousand Dollars ($1,931,000) for the development and implementation of the Wayfinding Plan within TAMC’s jurisdictional boundaries.

4. RECIPIENT desires to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety within its jurisdiction, and concurrent with this Agreement, has also determined that TAMC’s Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan is one means to achieve that desire.

5. This Agreement delineates the obligations of the Parties to this Agreement with respect to the implementation of the Regional Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan, adopted by the TAMC Board, within the jurisdiction of RECIPIENT.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the Parties as follows:

Article I:

Covenants of Recipient

1.1. Project Description. The complete Project Description is specified in Exhibit “A” and incorporated herein by this reference. The Project consists of the acceptance of Wayfinding signage, the identification of appropriate locations for Wayfinding signage and the installation and maintenance of such signage.

Packet Page 1067
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 2 OF 12

1.2. Change In Project Scope. No change in the Project scope as described in Exhibit A may be approved or implemented until it has been reviewed and approved in writing by an amendment to this Agreement approved by the TAMC Board of Directors.

1.3. Eligible Costs. Eligible costs to be funded by TAMC pursuant to this Agreement are those related to the solicitation and award of one or more contract by TAMC for the manufacture and installation of Wayfinding signage approved by RECIPIENT, as set forth below.

RECIPIENT shall bear all costs related to Recipient’s actions related to this Agreement, including the issuance of permits, and the maintenance and repair of Wayfinding signage within its jurisdiction.

1.4. Acceptance of Signage. RECIPIENT hereby accepts the designs relative to the Wayfinding signage as shown in Exhibit “B,” and incorporated herein by this reference.

RECIPIENT shall allow the placement of at least 25 and up to 35 signs within its jurisdiction, generally at the locations designated in Exhibit “C,” and incorporated herein by this reference.

RECIPIENT agrees to work diligently and in good faith to provide and issue necessary permits for such signage at or near the designated locations, as physical conditions permit.

1.5. Timing of Installation. RECIPIENT shall permit and allow the installation of at least 30 signs within the first six (6) months after notification by TAMC.

1.6. Maintenance and Repair. RECIPIENT shall, at its cost, maintain the installed signage in good repair and visibility throughout the period of this Agreement.

Article II:

Covenants of TAMC

2.1. TAMC shall develop, award and fund one or more contracts for the fabrication and installation of Wayfinding Signage in generally the following manner:

2.1.1. A customized “Sign Topper” portion approved by RECIPIENT that incorporates agreed upon logos and color scheme that helps to establish a regional wayfinding brand. A rendering of the Jurisdictional Sign Topper selected by RECIPIENT is shown as Exhibit B.

2.1.2. A standardized “directional/distance” portion shared by all Wayfinding signage pursuant to the TAMC Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan that assists a traveler in determining directions/distance to relevant locations. A rendering of the Directional/ Distance signage is shown as Exhibit B.

Packet Page 1068
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 3 OF 12

2.1.3. Installation of Wayfinding Signage, suitable to the location and manner of installation of such Wayfinding signage. Such installation may be by new post(s) or pole(s), or installation on an existing structure.

2.1.4. In addition, a standardized “confirmation” portion shared by all Wayfinding signage pursuant to the TAMC Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan that indicates travelers are on a designated regional route. A rendering of the Confirmation signage is shown as Exhibit B.

2.2. In entering into a contract for the fabrication and installation of Wayfinding Signage for RECIPIENT, TAMC shall call for the fabrication of one and one‐half (1.5) times the number of Jurisdictional Sign Toppers. The additional Jurisdictional Sign Toppers above the number to be installed pursuant to this Agreement shall be directed to be delivered to RECIPIENT for use in RECIPIENT’s maintenance responsibilities.

Article III:

Mutual Covenants

3.1. Term. This Agreement shall remain in effect until discharged or terminated as provided in Section 3.2 or Section 3.15.

3.2. Discharge/Termination. This Agreement shall be subject to discharge as follows:

3.2.1. Termination by Mutual Consent. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by mutual consent of the Parties. At the time of any such mutual termination, TAMC shall receive or retain any Jurisdictional Sign Toppers and standardized Directional signs which may be the subject of an executed contract as described in Section 2.1, but not yet installed.

3.2.2. Discharge Upon Completion of Project. Except as to any rights or obligations which survive discharge as specified in Section 3.14, this Agreement shall be discharged, and the Parties shall have no further obligation to each other, upon completion of the Project, which shall continue for a ten (10) year period after installation of the last Wayfinding Sign pursuant to this Agreement.

3.3. Indemnity. It is mutually understood and agreed that RECIPIENT shall, to the full extent permitted by law, fully defend, indemnify and hold harmless TAMC, its Board and Directors, and any officer, agent, or employee of TAMC, against any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RECIPIENT under the Agreement. It is also fully understood and agreed that, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, RECIPIENT shall fully defend, indemnify and hold TAMC, its Board and Directors, its officers, agency and employees, harmless from any liability imposed for injury as defined by Government Code Section 810.8 occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RECIPIENT under this Agreement or in connection with any work, authority, or jurisdiction delegated to RECIPIENT or funded by RECIPIENT under this Agreement.

Packet Page 1069
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 4 OF 12

3.4. Liability. As TAMC is only acting with the approval of RECIPIENT with respect to the design, designated location and installation of Wayfinding signage herein identified, TAMC is not liable for any loss, cost, liability, damage, claim, lien, action, cause of action, demand or expense which may arise as a result of the acts or omissions of RECIPIENT or its agents, contractors, consultants, engineers, or representatives. Nor shall TAMC be liable for any loss, cost, liability, damage, claim, lien, action, cause of action, demand or expense which may arise as a result of TAMC’s provision of funds or materials which may be utilized in, but not limited to the acquisition of, the design, implementation, or construction of the Project herein described.

3.5. Notices. Any notice which may be required under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be given by personal or electronic (delivery receipt enabled) service, or by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, to the addresses set forth below:

TAMC RECIPIENT
Todd A. Muck Jamie Fontes
Executive Director City Manager
55B Plaza Circle 440 Harcourt Avenue
Salinas, California 93901 Seaside, California 93955
[email protected] [email protected]
Either Party may change its address by giving notice of such change to the other party in the manner provided in this Section 3.5. All notices and other communications shall be deemed communicated as of actual receipt or after the second business day after deposit in the United States mail.

3.6. Additional Acts and Documents. Each Party agrees to do all such things and take all such actions, and to make, execute and deliver such other documents and instruments, as shall be reasonably requested to carry out the provisions, intent, and purpose of the Agreement.

3.7. Integration. This Agreement, together with the Pedestrian and Bicyclist Wayfinding Plan, represents the entire Agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.

No representations, warranties, inducements, or oral agreements have been made by any of the Parties except as expressly set forth herein, or in other contemporaneous written agreements.

3.8. Amendment. This Agreement may not be changed, modified, or rescinded except in writing, signed by all Parties hereto, and any attempt at oral modification of this Agreement shall be void and of no effect.

3.9. Independent Agency. RECIPIENT renders its services under this Agreement as an independent agency and TAMC is also an independent agency under the Agreement. None of Packet Page 1070
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 5 OF 12
the RECIPIENT's agents or employees shall be agents or employees of TAMC and none of TAMC’s agents or employees shall be agents or employees of RECIPIENT.

3.10. Assignment. The Agreement may not be assigned, transferred, hypothecated, or pledged by any Party without the express written consent of the other Party.

3.11. Binding on Successors. This Agreement shall be binding upon the successor(s), assignee(s) or transferee(s) of TAMC or RECIPIENT, as the case may be. This provision shall not be construed as an authorization to assign, transfer, hypothecate or pledge this Agreement other than as provided above.

3.12. Severability. Should any part of this Agreement be determined to be unenforceable, invalid, or beyond the authority of either Party to enter into or carry out, such determination shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this Agreement which shall continue in full force and effect; provided that, the remainder of this Agreement can, absent the excised portion, be reasonably interpreted to give effect to the intentions of the Parties.

3.13. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts and shall become effective when one or more counterparts have been signed by the Parties; each counterpart shall be deemed an original, but all counterparts shall constitute a single document.

3.14. Survival. The following provisions in this Agreement shall survive discharge:

As to both Parties, the following section shall survive discharge: Section 3.3. (indemnity) and Section 3.4 (Liability), until the expiration of all relevant statutes of limitations.

3.15. Time. Time is and shall be of the essence of this Agreement and each of its provisions in which performance is a factor.

3.16. Remedies Cumulative. No remedy or election of remedies provided for in this Agreement shall be deemed exclusive but shall be cumulative with all other remedies at law or in equity. Each remedy shall be construed to give the fullest effect allowed by law.

3.17. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the State of California.

3.18. Captions. The captions in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not a part of this Agreement. The captions do not in any way limit or amplify the provisions of this Agreement and shall not affect the construction or interpretation of any of its provisions.

3.19. No Continuing Waiver. The waiver by any Party of any breach of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall not constitute a continuing waiver or a waiver of any subsequent breach of the same, or of any other provision of this Agreement.

Packet Page 1071
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 6 OF 12

3.20. No Rights in Third Parties. Nothing in this Agreement, express or implied, is intended to confer any rights or remedies on any third‐party, nor is anything in this Agreement intended to relieve or discharge the obligation or liability of any third‐party to any Party to this Agreement, nor shall any provision of this Agreement give any third‐party any right of subrogation or action over or against any Party to this Agreement.

3.21. Signatory’s Warranty. Each Party warrants to each other that he or she is fully authorized and competent to enter into this Agreement in the capacity indicated by his or her signature and agrees to be bound by this Agreement as of the day and year first mentioned above upon the execution of this Agreement by each other Party.

3.22. List of Exhibits. This Agreement contains the following Exhibits:

Exhibit A: Project Description
Exhibit B: Wayfinding Sign Designs
Exhibit C: General Locations of Wayfinding Signs

** SIGNATURES ON THE NEXT PAGE **
Packet Page 1072
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 7 OF 12
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned parties have executed this Agreement on the day and year first written above.

CITY OF SEASIDE (RECIPIENT) TRANSPORTATION AGENCY FOR
MONTEREY COUNTY (TAMC):

By: By:

Jamie Fontes    Todd A. Muck
City Manager    Executive Director
Dated:    Dated:

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

By: By:

Sheri L. Damon    Robert Brayer
City Attorney    TAMC Counsel
Dated:    Dated:

Packet Page 1073
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 8 OF 12

EXHIBIT A

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Installation and maintenance of signs at the locations generally described in Exhibit C, in order to encourage and facilitate active transportation to and around locations in Monterey County, with an emphasis on the City of Seaside.

Packet Page 1074
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 9 OF 12

EXHIBIT B

WAYFINDING SIGN DESIGN ACCEPTED BY RECIPIENT

1. CUSTOMIZED SIGN TOPPERS (to be used in conjunction with confirmation and direction signs) Full Color

2. CONFIRMATION SIGNS

3. DIRECTION SIGNS

Packet Page 1075
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 10 OF 12

EXHIBIT C

GENERAL LOCATION OF WAYFINDING SIGNS
Overall Map

Packet Page 1076
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 11 OF 12
Detail Map 1 (Noche Buena St. and Playa Ave.)

Packet Page 1077
Regional Funding Agreement
City of Seaside, June 24, 2022
PAGE 12 OF 12
Detail Map 2 (General Jim Moore Blvd.)
Packet Page 1078

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 8.P.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Sheri Damon, City Attorney
DATE: July 7, 2022
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

ACCEPT A REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT FROM CRUACHAN

CAPITAL FOR THE EXTENSION OF A SEASIDE MUNICIPAL

WATER LINE TO SERVE THE ASCENT PROJECT

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to accept a Reimbursement Agreement from Cruachan Capital for an amount not to exceed $1,500,000.00 in order to extend the Seaside Municipal Water pipeline to serve the Ascent project while there is a Cal Am moratorium against serving the project and authorize the City Manager to take all actions necessary to implement such service.

BACKGROUND
On or about March 4, 2020, the City approved a Density Bonus and Inclusionary Housing Agreement for the Ascent Project. The Ascent project includes the new construction of nine (9) multifamily buildings and one (1) mixed use building for a total of 106 residential units and 4,079 square feet of commercial floor area. The Project site is comprised of fourteen parcels located generally on the north side of the 1100 block of Broadway Avenue between Terrace Street, San Lucas Street and Olympia Avenue.

Sixteen (16) of those units are to be restricted to low income households for a period of 55 years. The project is located within an opportunity zone, meaning that the developers will receive a limited amount of tax benefits associated with investment in the project. The original developers received land use entitlements and an allocation of water to advance the project, but never received a will serve letter from the California American Water Company. From the time of approval of the Ascent project, the original developers sold the project to Cruachan Capital, a company that specializes in apartment construction. Cruachan Capital received a water release permit and an upsize water meter permit from the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District Packet Page 1079

Item No. 8.P. Page 2 of 3
(MPWMD). However, California American Water has refused to honor those permits, contending that any service to those parcels will violate the Cease and Desist Order.

The Developer will not need access to water until the construction is complete in approximately 18-24 months, but they need certainty that water will be provided to the project in order to protect their investment in getting construction underway. The grading plans have already been reviewed and are ready for the permit to be issued and upon receipt of the conditional will serve letter by Seaside Municipal Water Company, the developer is anticipating a Fall start date (September/October 2022).

The City explored various potential opportunities to work through the issues with California American but were unable to come to an acceptable resolution. Cal-Am contends that they would not accept anything less than the City's APA golf course water, even though the City's SPA has provisions that allow it to provide water anywhere within the City's boundaries and also has multiple water credits available to transact and will have even more by the time the Ascent project is ready to come on line.

This Reimbursement Agreement provides that Seaside Municipal will extend a water line on Broadway to the project for potable water and will be reimbursed up to $1.5 million dollars for the cost of the project and Seaside Municipal Water will provide up to 13 acre feet per year for the project. This is anticipated to be a temporary solution until such time as California American is able to serve this project. The City currently has two reclaimed water projects on tap to obtain ongoing water credits: the golf course in lieu project which will generate up to 450 acre feet per year in water credits (anticipated to come on line mid July 2022) and the HEM Plaza storm drainage percolation project which is anticipated to generate approximately 14 afy in water credits (currently under construction). Additionally, Seaside Municipal Water Company and its consultants have verified that its existing well has more than enough capacity to serve the additional 13 AFY to the Ascent project.

FISCAL IMPACT
Potential shortfalls in construction costs and potential for eminent domain/temporary taking of Cal Am customer.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Packet Page 1080

Item No. 8.P. Page 3 of 3
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 1081
RESOLUTION NO. 22-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO ENTER INTO AND ACCEPT A

REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE ASCENT DEVELOPERS AND

TAKING ALL SUCH OTHER ACTIONS TO IMPLEMENT THE REIMBRUSEMENT

PROJECT AND WILL SERVE
WHEREAS, the City approved the Ascent project on or about March 2020 to construct 106 residential units with 16 deed restricted low income units; and WHEREAS, the Ascent project is located within a tax-qualified Opportunity Zone which is afforded to certain census tracks in disadvantaged communities; and WHEREAS, the Developer has obtained from the MPWMD water release and upsize meter permits to allow water service to the project; and WHEREAS, the Project is currently located within California American’s service area; and
WHEREAS, the California American Franchise Agreement expires in October 2022 and no replacement agreement has yet been reached; and
WHEREAS, the Public Utilities Code section 1502 and 1504 provide for extension of municipal water service into franchised areas so long as compensation is paid to the public utility to protect its investment in serving the project; WHEREAS, California American Water is unable and unwilling to serve the project at this time; and
WHEREAS, the Seaside Municipal Water Company is a water company that may provide water anywhere within the City boundaries and is willing to extend a pipeline and provide potable water service to advance the Ascent project; and WHEREAS, the Developer of the Ascent project is willing to reimburse the City up to $1.5 million dollars to extend the pipeline to the project.

Packet Page 1082
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Seaside hereby makes the following findings:

The City Manager is authorized to accept a Reimbursement Agreement, in an amount not to exceed $1.5 million and in a form as attached as Exhibit A, as any such revisions and clarifications may be reviewed and approved by the City attorney, and to take all steps necessary to implement the spirit and intent of the Reimbursement Agreement, including without limitation, extending the Seaside Municipal water service to the Ascent project, until such time as California American is no longer subject to a moratorium or is able to serve the project potable water, so that the project may begin construction this Fall.

This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and shall be effective for thirty (30) days, unless extended by the City Council.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by meeting of City of Seaside duly held on the 16th day of July, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS
APPROVED:
_______________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Packet Page 1083
______________________________
Sheri L. Damon, City Attorney
Packet Page 1084

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 9.A.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Ashley Collick, Assistant City Manager
DATE: July 7, 2022
SUBJECT: APPROVE SISTER CITY MEMORANDUM OF INTENT WITH

OAXACA DE JUAREZ, MEXICO AND TRAVEL COSTS FOR THE
CITY OF SEASIDE DELEGATION NOT TO EXCEED $25,000.00
FOR JULY 22 - 26, 2022.

RECOMMENDATION
Approve a Sister City Memorandum of Intent and a City of Seaside Delegation to visit Oaxaca De Juarez, Mexico.

BACKGROUND
On June 17, 2021, Council member Garcia-Arrazola requested that staff look into a sister city relationship with Oaxaca de Juarez, Mexico.

On July 1, 2021, the Council adopted a plan that sets forth how the sister city program will operate, and approved Seaside to become a participating member of Sister Cities International.

The Sister City Program will provide opportunities for people in both cities to learn and experience other cultures through long-term relationships; creating an atmosphere in which economic development and trade can be explored, implemented and strengthened; opening a dialogue and addressing issues ranging from the cultural to the technical, from the municipal to the medical, from the environmental to the educational and beyond; and stimulating environments through which partnerships can creatively learn, work, and solve problems together.

Approximately 43% of Seaside residents are of Mexican heritage. It's estimated that approximately half of those residents have migrated from Oaxaca, Mexico. Oaxaca is in southwestern Mexico, and has a significant coastline on the Pacific Ocean. As of 2020 Packet Page 1085

Item No. 9.A. Page 2 of 3
the population is estimated to be 715,000. Many generations of Oaxacan's live in Seaside California.

Once the program was approved, City staff immediately reached out to the municipality in Oaxaca de Juarez and began discussing next steps. The staff were made aware of the upcoming elections and the change in government that was occurring:
 July 20, 2021, Mayor Oglesby sent an official invitation to partner with Oaxaca.

Unfortunately, due to a change in government, that letter wasn't answered by the previous administration.
 April 1, 2022, Mayor Oglesby sent a second official invitation to partner with Oaxaca. Mayor Neri responded to the letter and accepted the request to become Sister Cities.
 Staff began meeting with Oaxaca de Juarez to discuss areas of interest and received an official invitation to attend the Guelaguetza festivities in Oaxaca from July 22 - 26, 2022.

Staff is requesting that Council approve the memorandum of intent to enter into a Sister City Partnership with Oaxaca de Juarez, Mexico, and a delegation of Seaside City Council and staff to travel to Oaxaca de Juarez from July 22 - 26, 2022.The memo will be signed at the joint ceremony during the Guelaguetza festivities in Oaxaca de Juarez.

Once the intent is approved and signed by both Cities; staff can begin working with Oaxaca on an official Memorandum of Understanding with the goal of having an official signing of the Sister City MOU during Seaside's Oaxaca by the Sea event tentatively scheduled for September 18, 2022.

The City of Seaside delegation would consist of two Council members and two staff. It's estimated that the cost person is approximately $5,000.00. $10,000.00 was budgeted for FY22/23, staff is requesting an additional $15,000.00 from the general fund to cover the cost of the delegation.

It's a customary practice that the visiting City bring a gift to present to their future sister city. If the trip is approved, staff will work on an appropriate gift to bring to Oaxaca de Juarez.

Tentative Oaxaca Visit Details
 July 22, 2022: Travel to Oaxaca
 July 23, 2022: Signing Ceremony for the Intent to Partner  July 24-25: City Tours and attending the Guelaguetza festivities  July 26, 2022: Depart Oaxaca for Seaside
Packet Page 1086

Item No. 9.A. Page 3 of 3

FISCAL IMPACT
Travel Estimates (per person)
Flight- $ 2,500.00
Hotel 5 days/ 4 nights - $ 1,800.00
Food - $ 330.00
Total - $ 4,630.00 (per person)
$4630.00 x 4 = $18,520
Staff is requesting an additional $15,000 from the general fund to be transferred into the community relations budget account. $10,000 has been budgeted for FY 22/23.

Due to the fluctuation in flight and hotel costs over time, staff is requesting the authority to not exceed $25,000 for the delegation to travel to Oaxaca de Juarez for the signing of the intent memo and attending the Guelagetza festivities from July 22 - 26, 2022.
100-2010-1024 (Community Relations budget code)

ATTACHMENTS

1. Resolution

2. Letter 1

3. Letter 2

4. Oaxaca reponse

5. Oaxaca Memo of Intent
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 1087
RESOLUTION NO. XX-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE

APPROVE SISTER CITY MEMORANDUM OF INTENT WITH OAXACA DE JUAREZ,

MEXICO AND TRAVEL COSTS FOR THE CITY OF SEASIDE DELEGATION NOT TO EXCEED $25,000.00 FOR JULY 22 - 26, 2022.

WHEREAS, On July 1, 2021, the Council adopted a plan that sets forth how the sister city program will operate, and approved Seaside to become a participating member of Sister Cities International; and
WHEREAS, entering into a Sister City agreement with Oaxaca de Juarez, Mexico will formalize and strengthen the relationship between our two cities; and WHEREAS, Approximately 43% of Seaside residents are of Mexican heritage and estimated that approximately half of those residents have migrated from Oaxaca, Mexico; and WHEREAS, establishing a Sister City Program will provide opportunities for people in both cities to learn and experience other cultures through long-term relationships:
• Creating an atmosphere in which economic development and trade can be explored, implemented and strengthened
• Opening a dialogue and addressing issues ranging from the cultural to the technical, from the municipal to the medical, from the environmental to the educational and beyond; and
• Stimulating environments through which partnerships can creatively learn, work, and solve problems together; and
WHEREAS, on April 1, 2022, Mayor Oglesby sent an invitation to collaborate with Oaxaca de Juarez. Mayor Neri responded to the letter and accepted the request to become Sister Cities; and
WHEREAS, Staff immediately began meeting with Oaxaca de Juarez to discuss areas of interest and received an official invitation to attend the Guelaguetza festivities in Oaxaca from July 22 - 26, 2022; and
WHEREAS, Staff is requesting that Council approve the Memorandum of Intent to enter into a Sister City Partnership with Oaxaca de Juarez, Mexico, and a delegation of Seaside City Council and staff to travel to Oaxaca de Juarez from July 22 - 26, 2022; and WHEREAS, Once the intent is approved and signed by both Cities; staff can begin working with Oaxaca on an official Memorandum of Understanding with the goal of having an Packet Page 1088
official signing of the Sister City MOU during Seaside's Oaxaca by the Sea event tentatively scheduled for September 18, 2022; and
WHEREAS, The City of Seaside delegation would consist of two Council members and two staff. It's estimated that the cost person is approximately $5,000; and WHEREAS, $10,000 was budgeted for FY22/23, staff is requesting an additional 15,000 from the general fund to cover the travel costs of the delegation; and WHEREAS, It's a customary practice that the visiting City bring a gift to present to their future sister city. If the trip is approved, staff will work on an appropriate gift to bring to Oaxaca de Juarez; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Seaside do hereby adopt the resolution approving Sister City Memorandum of Intent with Oaxaca de Juarez, Mexico and travel costs for the City of Seaside delegation for July 22 - 26, 2022, not to exceed $25,000.00. Authorizing the Finance Director to allocate an additional $15,000 from the general fund.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Seaside duly held on the 7th day of July 2021 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS:

______________________________
Ian N. Oglesby, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________
Dominique L. Davis, City Clerk
Packet Page 1089

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
440 Harcourt Avenue
Seaside, CA 93955
www. d. seaside, ca. us
Telephone 831-899-6703
Fax 831-624-5839
July 20, 2021
The Honorable Oswaldo Garcfa Jarqufn
Mayor, Oaxaca de Juarez
Plaza de la Danza s/n, Centro, 68000
Oaxaca, Oax. C. P. 68000 Mexico
Dear Mayor Gara'a Jarqufn,
It is with great pleasure that I invite the City of Oaxaca de Juarez to enter into a sister city affiliation with The City of Seaside. This invitation is on behalf of the many citizens of our community who have immigrated from and have come to know and love the City of Oaxaca de Juarez. Approximately 43% of Seaside residents are of Mexican heritage and estimated that approximately half of those residents have migrated from City of Oaxaca de Juarez, Oaxaca, Mexico. TTie City of Seaside Council has voted unanimously in favor of the affiliation.

A Sister City Partnership will provide opportunities for our communities to learn and experience cultures through long-term relationships, creating an atmosphere in which economic development and trade can be explored, implemented and strengthened. We will also have an opportunity (D open a dialogue, addressing issues ranging from the cultural to the technical, from the municipal to the medical, from the environmental to the educational and beyond.

Stimulating environments through which partnerships can creatively learn, work, and solve problems together.

As we look to the future of this alliance, we envision a growing awareness and appreciation of each other's culture and people. From small beginnings, we hope this partnership will continue for many generations, fostering educational economic and professional exchanges. We look forward to the limitless possibilities of this relationship.

We hope that the City of Oaxaca de Juarez will consider the opportunity to collaborate with our wonderful City. We eagerly await a decision.

Respectfully,
lan N.

Mayor, City of "easide
Include, Innovate, Inspire
Packet Page 1090

OFICINA DEL ALCALDE
440 Harcourt Avenue
Seaside, CA 93955
www. ci.seaside. ca. us
Telefono 831-899-6703
Fax 831-624-5839
20 de julio, 2021
Honorable Oswaldo Garcfa Jarqufn
Alcalde, Oaxaca de Juarez
Plaza de la Danza s/n, Centro, 68000
Oaxaca, Oax. C. P. 68000 Mexico
Estimado Alcalde Gara'a Jarqufn,
Es un gran placer para mi el invitar a la Ciudad de Oaxaca de Juarez a realizar una afiliadon de ciudades hermanas con la Ciudad de Seaside, California. Esta invitacion es par parte de los muchos ciudadanos de nuestra comunidad que han inmigrado de alia y que han llegado a conocer y amar a la Ciudad de Oaxaca de Juarez. Aproximadamente el 43% de los residentes de Seaside son de descendencia mexicana y se estima que aproximadamente la mitad de esos residentes han emigrado de la Ciudad de Oaxaca, Oaxaca, Mexico. El Concilio de la Ciudad de Seaside ha votado de manera unanime a favor de esta afiliacion.

Una Asociacion de Ciudades Hermanas brindara oportunidades para que nuestras comunidades aprendan y experimenten culturas a traves de relaciones a largo plazo, creando una atmosfera en la cual el desarrollo economico y comercio pueda ser explorado, implementado y fortaleddo. Tambien tendremos la oportunidad para abrir un dialogo, donde tocaremos temas que abordaran desde lo cultural a lo tecnico, de lo municipal a lo medico, de lo ambiental a lo educacional y mas alia.

Estimulando entornos a traves de los cuales las partes involucradas puedan aprender creativamente, trabajar y resolver problemas juntos.

Al mirar hacia el futuro de esta alianza, nosotros visualizamos una credente condencia y apreciacion de cada una de nuestras culturas y nuestra gente. Partiendo de un comienzo pequeno, nosotros esperamos que esta alianza continue por muchas generaciones, fomentando intercambios educativos, economicos y profesionales. Esperamos con anticipacion las posibilidades ilimitadas de esta reladon.

Esperamos que la Ciudad de Oaxaca de Juarez considere la oportunidad de colaborar con nuestra maravillosa Ciudad. Esperamos ansiosamente su decision.

Respetuosamente,
'lan N. Ogle
Alcalde, q Seaside
Include, Innovate,
Packet Page 1091
Packet Page 1092
Packet Page 1093
CamScanner
Packet Page 1094

OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
440 Harcourt Avenue Telephone 831-899-6703
Seaside, CA 93955 Fax 831-624-5839
www.ci.seaside.ca.us
Include, Innovate, Inspire
C.P. Francisco Martínez Neri
Mayor
Oaxaca de Juárez
June 22, 2022
THE CITY OF SEASIDE - OAXACA DE JUÁREZ

MEMORANDUM OF INTENT
It is the intent of the City of Seaside, California, United States of America, and the City of Oaxaca de Juárez, Mexico, to form a Sister City partnership that will foster mutually beneficial solutions to the common challenges of these two great cities. Consequently, the Sister City relationship will be important for both cities as they strive to:
 Identify common activities, that can generate new initiatives to further nurture and explore economic ties, tourism, education / training and strengthen cultural relationships;
 Open a dialogue, addressing issues ranging from cultural to technical, from the municipal to the medical, from environmental to educational and beyond; and  Commit to mutual support for organizing and developing the experiences, common activities, and future programs of a Sister City relationship on the basis of memorandums of mutual cooperation and understandings declarations.

With the above purposes in mind, the Mayor of the City of Seaside and the Mayor of Oaxaca de Juárez solemnly confirm that these two cities are united by an official Sister City partnership by the protocol of this Memorandum of Intent.

This document goes into effect on the date of the signature, and as written in both English and in Spanish. Both texts have equal power.

Signed (Month, Day, Year)
______________________ _______________________
Ian N. Oglesby
Mayor
City of Seaside
Packet Page 1095

CITY OF SEASIDE

STAFF REPORT
Item No.: 9.B.

TO: City Council
FROM: Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
BY: Sheri Damon, City Attorney
DATE: July 7, 2022
SUBJECT: CONSIDER PLACING A CITY COUNCIL MEASURE BANNING ALL

FIREWORKS EXCEPT FOR CITY-SPONSORED EVENTS ON THE

NOVEMBER BALLOT AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO STAFF AS TO

MEASURE PROVISIONS (WIZARD)

RECOMMENDATION
Consider placing a Measure on the November 2022, General Election ballot prohibiting all fireworks within the City of Seaside and if Council decides to move forward, provide direction to staff as to pertinent terms for the measure.

BACKGROUND
At the June 17, 2022 City Council meeting, Council member Wizard requested that the City Council discuss placing a measure banning fireworks on the November ballot. This council might recall that the City Council adopted an Ordinance 1095 in August of 2020 banning all fireworks. However, that ordinance received a sufficient number of signatures in opposition to referend it. The City Council at its meeting of November 5, 2020 chose to rescind the ordinance in order to save the City the substantial costs of conducting a special election (Est. over $200,000 at that time). The cost to put a measure on the 2022 general election ballot is based upon registered voters and is estimated between $110,730 and $147,650.

The process for a City-initiated Measure involves the City Council adopting the Measure text to be submitted to the voters and then adopting a resolution transmitting the Measure to the County Elections Department and calling for a consolidated election. The resolution will need to give the Monterey County Elections Office clear instructions on what portion of the Resolution or Ordinance is considered:
the Full Text of the Ballot Measure, whether or not the text is to be printed in the voter information guide; a 75-word Ballot Question, and finally the voter approval Packet Page 1096

Item No. 9.B. Page 2 of 3
requirement for the measure to pass . In this case, the voter approval requirement would be a majority vote. The resolution outlining the information contained in this paragraph must be submitted to the County Elections office no later than August 12, 2022 (88 days prior to the election). The City Council has two regular meetings, July 21, 2022, and August 4, 2022, to complete the Measure text and Resolution should it decide to move forward with placing a measure on the ballot.

The process for a Citizen-sponsored initiative on the November ballot is much more complicated. Citizens will need to take certain steps in order to successfully submit a measure for the ballot. A citizen-sponsored initiative can take as long as 383 days, given all the steps (Notices, petition language, review by officials, etc.) required to qualify the initiative for the ballot and obtain the certifications of the elections officials as to the requisite number of signatures and then moving it forward for the ballot.

Once a duly signed initiative is received by the City, the City can choose to adopt the initiative, place it on the ballot or ask for a report. Given the August 12, 2022 date for placing matters on the November 2022 ballot, there is insufficient time for a Citizensponsored initiative to meet the deadlines.

The City Council has the following options in moving forward.

1. Choose not to move forward with a ballot measure. Costs associated with this staff report and the draft measure is included with staff time. No additional costs.

2. Direct staff to prepare a Measure (Ordinance) for inclusion on the November 2022 ballot. In order to provide for a robust and transparent discussion, a DRAFT measure has been included with this staff for the report. Staff would need to receive any input from Council, public and staff prior to bringing the finalized Measure Language and Resolution back to Council at the July 21, 2022, or August 4, 2022, meeting. The estimated costs are between $110,000-$140,000 to place a Measure on the ballot.

3. Choose to revise/review the existing Fireworks Ordinance and let changes be subject to referendum again. Although the Council previously decided to rescind Ordinance 1095, this Council could decide upon a different revision to Chapter 8.32 and allow any subsequent referendum on the next ballot or call for a special election. Should the Council choose this option, the costs anticipated for a stand-alone City-wide special election would likely exceed $350,000 and may even exceed $400,000 depending upon the costs established by the Monterey County Elections office. Should the Council receive a referendum and choose to place upon the next General Election, the current information available is that date would not be until November 7, 2023. However, the possibility exists for the opportunity to place a referendum on another consolidated election, though the date has not yet been determined. The costs for a consolidated election, no matter what the date, are estimated between $110,000 and $140,000.

FISCAL IMPACT
Packet Page 1097

Item No. 9.B. Page 3 of 3
If placed on the Ballot

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Ordinance
Reviewed for Submission to the City Council by:
__________________________________
Roberta Greathouse, Acting City Manager
Packet Page 1098
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEASIDE REPEALING AND REPLACING CHAPTER 8.32 OF THE SEASIDE MUNICIPAL

CODE TO PROHIBIT THE SALE AND USE OF FIREWORKS
WHEREAS, pursuant to the police powers set forth in Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution, the City of Seaside (“City”) may make and enforce laws that promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its residents; and WHEREAS, the use of fireworks, including the use of prohibited illegal fireworks is prevalent through the City of Seaside is prevalent throughout the City throughout the year and increases during the Fourth of July holiday period every year, and law enforcement responses to gatherings where fireworks are used cause a significant drain of law enforcement resources and, in some cases, leave other areas of the City with inadequate law enforcement protection; and
WHEREAS, large gatherings to set off fireworks result in conditions where illegal fireworks are likely to be used, as large gatherings make it more difficult for law enforcement officers to enforce prohibits on illegal fireworks; and WHEREAS, large gatherings to set off fireworks result in conditions where illegal fireworks are likely to be used, as large gatherings make it more difficult for law enforcement officers to enforce prohibits on illegal fireworks; and WHEREAS, illegal and dangerous fireworks create a significant risk of fire and prohibiting the use of all fireworks in the city including safe and sane fire is necessary to deter the use of illegal and dangerous fireworks; and WHEREAS, the widespread use of any fireworks, including safe and sane fireworks, increases litter deposited into the enformnet as well as increases the risk of fire; and
WHEREAS, the City is located in a climatic zone that places the City at significant risk of large fires as evidenced by the 2020 River Fire, Carmel Fire and Dolan Fire which burned together approximately 179,917 acres within Monterey County. The City is located adjacent to approximately 15,000 of open habitat in the Fort Ord National Monument which increases the risks posed by wildfire is anticipated to magnify due to climate change, further making action by the city of Seaside to prohibit use of all fireworks necessary.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Seaside, does ordain as follows:

Packet Page 1099
Section 1. Recitals. The above recitals are adopted as findings in enacting this ordinance.

Section 2. Repeal and Replacement of Chapter 8.32 – Chapter 8.32 of the Seaside Municipal Code is hereby repealed and replaced to read in its entirety as follows:

CHAPTER 8.32 FIREWORK REGULATIONS

8.32.010 – Purposes and scope.

A. The City of Seaside has deemed the use of dangerous and safe and sane fireworks, as defined in Health and Safety Code sections 12500, and following, to pose a risk to public health and safety and prohibits the use of any kind of fireworks by members of the general public. The provisions of this chapter are intended to regulate the use of all fireworks to provide for the safety of the community and the prevention of fires.

B. This chapter provides for the regulation of the manufacture, transportation, possession, use and sale of fireworks within the City of Seaside and the imposition, enforcement, collection and administrative review of administrative e fines, related to the possession, use, storage, sale and/or display of fireworks, including those classified as “dangerous fireworks” and “safe and and fireworks” as defined in California Health and Safety Code sections 12500 and following with the exception of the use of fireworks with a pyrotechnic licenses when operating pursuant to and accordance with the terms of that license.

C. The issuance of citations imposing administrative fines may be performed at the discretion of the officials of the city authorized under this chapter, and the issuance of a citation to any person constitute but one remedy to redress violations of this Code by any person. By adopting this chapter, the City does not intend to limit its authority to employ any other remedy, civil or criminal, to redress any violation of this Code or state law by any person.

D. The imposition of fines related to “dangerous fireworks” under this chapter shall be limited to persons who possess, sell, use and/or display, or the seizure of, twenty-five pounds or less (gross weight) of such dangerous fireworks.

E. Fires collected pursuant to this chapter related to “dangerous fireworks” shall not be subject to Health and Safety Code section 12706. However, the city shall provide cost reimb ursement to the state fire marshal for the transportation and disposal of “dangerous fireworks” seized by the city where applicable. These costs will be included in addition to any administrative fines imposed under this chapter.

Packet Page 1100

8.32.020 Definitions.

As used in this chapter, the following words and phrases shall have the following meanings:

A. “Dangerous fireworks” shall mean dangerous fireworks as defined in Health and Safety Code Sections 12505 and 12561 and the relevant sections of Title 19, Code of Regulations, and Subchapter 6 which are hereby incorporated by reference.

B. “Fireworks” shall mean either dangerous fireworks or safe and sane fireworks.

C. “Pyrotechnic displays” means public firework displays or displays used in conjunction with special effects for motion pictures, theatrical and group entertainment productions operated by a professional California state licensed pyro technician, provided such displays secure a permit from the fire code official and meet all applicable requirements of the California Health and Safety Code.

D. “Safe and Sane fireworks” and “state-approved fireworks” shall mean stateapproved fireworks defined in Health and Safety Code sections 12529 and 12562 and the relevant sections of Title 19, Code of Regulations, Subchapter 6, which are hereby incorporated by reference.

E. “Social Host” means:
a. Any owner of private property as listed on the most recent assessment roll;
b. Any person who has the right to use, possess, or occupy a public or private property under a lease, permit, licenses, rental agreement, or contract; or
c. Any person who hosts, organizes, supervises, officiates, conducts, or sponsors a gathering on public or private property, and if such person is a minor, then that person’s parents or legal guardians.

F. “Strictly liable” means liable for a wrongful act irrespective of such person’s intent, knowledge, negligence or lack thereof in committing the wrongful act.

8.32.030 – Manufacturing and transport of fireworks.

The manufacturing and/or transportation of any fireworks I prohibited except by a person who has been issued a permit by the office of the state fire marshal or is otherwise permitted to do so pursuant to the provisions of state law, and such manufacturing or transportation is being performed in compliance with applicable requirements of the California Fire Code and Vehicle Code. Travel outside of Packet Page 1101
state-approved routes shall be subject to the approval of a permit issued by the fire code official in accordance with Health and Safety Code section 12652.

8.32.040 – Prohibition on possession, storage, sale or use of fireworks.

The possession, storage, sale and use of any dangerous or safe and sane fireworks, shall be prohibited by any person throughout the City of Seaside except when a permit is issued in advance, by the fire code official or his designee for the exceptions below:

A. Storage and handling of fireworks in accordance with Section 5605 of the California Fire Code.

B. The use of fireworks for pyrotechnic displays in accordance with Section 5608 of the California Fire Code.

The prohibition on the possession of fireworks in this section shall not apply to manufacturing and transportation activities permitted under section 8.32.030.

8.32.050 – Supervision of Minors
A. It shall be unlawful for any person having the care, custody or control of a minor (under eighteen years old) to permit such minor to discharge, explode, fire, or set off any fireworks, at any time.

B. Any person having the care, custody, or control of a minor shall be strictly liable for any unlawful ignition, use, or discharge of any fireworks.

8.32.060 – Social host liability
A. No social host shall suffer or permit any persons to use fireworks (1) on property that is either owned by the social host or occupied or otherwise used by the social host pursuant to a lease, permit, license, rental agreement or contract; or (2) at any gathering on public or private property that is hosted, organized, supervised, officiated, conducted or sponsored by the social host, except for pyrotechnic displays that are permitted in accordance with section

8.32.040.

B. It is the duty of any social host who knowingly hosts, permits, or allows any gathering to take place to take all reasonable steps to prevent the use of fireworks by that social host’s guests or invitees.

C. No social host shall, with respect to private property where fireworks are used, be liable for a violation of this section if the social host can demonstrate that at the time of such violation the social host (i) had rented or leased the property to another; (ii) was not present; (iii) had no prior knowledge of the violation; and (iv) can demonstrate the reasonable steps taken to prevent the use of fireworks on the property hosted.

Packet Page 1102
D. No person who has the right to use, possess or occupy a unit in a multifamily residential property under a lease, rental agreement or contract shall be liable under this section for violations occurring in the common areas of the property.

E. Nothing in this section shall limit the liability of any social host for a violation of Section 8.32.040 or 8.32.050 by the social host.

8.32.070 – Enforcement.

A. This chapter shall be enforced pursuant to the procedures set forth in Chapter 2.56 and 2.58 of this Code. The amount of the administrative penalty for violations of this chapter pertaining to fireworks shall be governed by Section 8.32.080.

B. The fire code official, law enforcement, code enforcement or any other person designated pursuant to Chapter 2.58 shall enforce the provisions of this Chapter 8.32.

8.32.080 – Determining Violations; Penalties for violations.

A. Causing, permitting, aiding, abetting or concealing a violation of any provision of this chapter shall also constitute a violation of this chapter.

B. Each person who violates any provisions of this chapter by possession, using, storing, and/or selling, displaying of any safe and sane fireworks or stateapproved fireworks, or violates sections 8.32.050 or 8.32.060 and such violation involves dangerous fireworks, shall be subject to the imposition and payment of an administrative fine of one thousand dollars ($1,000) per occurrence, a later charge of two hundred fifty dollars if the fine is not timely paid in accordance with Chapter 2.56.

C. Each person who violates any provisions of this chapter by possessing, using, storing, and/or selling, displaying of any safe and sane fireworks or stateapproved fireworks, or violates sections 8.32.050 or 8.32.060 and such violation involves and safe and sane fireworks or state-approved fireworks, shall be subject to the imposition of payment of an administrative fine and a late charge if the fine is not timely paid in accordance with chapter 2.56, as provided below:

Number of
Offenses in any
12-month
consecutive
period
Amount of
Administrative
Penalty
Late Charge Total Amount of
Penalty plus late
charge
First $300 $75 $375.00
Second $600 $150 $750.00
Third $900 $300 $1250.00
Packet Page 1103
D. In addition to such administrative penalties, each violator shall be liable for all costs incurred by the office of the state fire marshal for the transportation and disposal of any fireworks seized from the person. The costs incurred by the office of the state fire marshal will be calculated based upon the regulations promulgated by that office. If those regulations have not been adopted by the office of the state fire marshal at the time a person is cited for possession of dangerous fireworks under this Code the city will reserve twenty-five percent of any fine collected under this provision to cover the actual cost of disposal to the office of the state fire marshal.

E. Nothing in this section shall be intended to limit any of the penalties provided for under the California Health and Safety Code or Penal Code with regard to the sale, use, possession, delivery, storage, and/or transportation of dangerous fireworks. The penalties set forth herein are intended to be nonexclusive and are intended to be in addition to any other remedies provided in this article or any other law, statute, ordinance or regulation.

Section 4. Environmental Review. [If Measure Can be removed]. The City Council finds the approval of this ordinance is exempt under Section 15061(b) (3) of the CEQA guidelines because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the adoption of this ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment. In the alternative, the City Council determines that the basic purpose of this action is to prohibit the use of safe and sane fireworks within the City, which will reduce litter and lessen the risk of fire, and therefore is an action for the protection of the environment and is categorically exempt pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines section 15308 (actions by regulatory agencies for the protection of the environment).

Section 5. Severability. The City Council hereby declares that every section, paragraph, sentence, clause, and phrase of this ordinance is severable. If any section, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason found to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity, or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining sections, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases.

Section 6. Effective Date This ordinance shall be in full force and effective 30- days after its adoption.

Section 7. Publication. The City Clerk is directed to cause this ordinance to be published in the manner required by law.

Packet Page 1104

Seaside City CouncilJuly 7, 2022

Seaside City Council
July 7, 2022