Assistants Jane M. Scott

COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ

OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL 701 OCEAN STREET, SUITE 505, SANTA CRUZ, CA 95060-4068 (831) 454-2040 FAX: (831) 454-2115

DANA McRAE, COUNTY COUNSEL JASON M. HEATH, CHIEF ASSISTANT

Betsy L. Allen

0123

Marie Costa Jessica C. Espinoza Sharon Carey-Stronck

Tamyra Rice Jordan Sheinbaum

Shannon M. Sullivan T. Brooke Miller J. Omar Rodriguez

GOVERNMENT TORT CLAIM

RECOMMENDED ACTION

Agenda: __ --'A-"u=g=u=s.:,_t 4-'-''-=2=0-"1.:::::..5 __

To: Santa Cruz County Board of Supervisors

Re: David Tindel by Nicholas Holder, Esq., Claim No. 415-091

Original document and associated materials are on file at the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.

In regard to the above-referenced claim, this is to recommend that the Board take the following action:

1. __ Reject the claim of--------- and refer to County Counsel.

2. __ Deny the application to file a late claim on behalf of--------- and refer to County Counsel.

3. Grant the application to file a late claim on behalf of------- and refer to County Counsel.

4. Approve the claim of in the amount of ______ and reject the balance, if any and refer to County Counsel.

5. X Reject the claim of David Tindel by Nicholas Holder. Esq. as insufficiently filed and refer to County Counsel.

Enrique Sahagun Risk Manager

Jason M. Heath Chief Assistant County Counsel

'

L CLAIM AGAINST THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ RECEIVED

(Pursuant to Section 910 et Seq., Govt Code)

TO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ

ATTN: Clerk ofthe Board Governmental Center

701 Ocean Street, Santa Cruz, CA 95060

ClERK OF THE BOARD 4 Jl2

MAY 2 7 2015

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ

1. Cfaimant'sName: Dt\....CLQ 'TJNQcf .z

Address 5331 'SoG> ___ u .. t:,L ..... Q·OJ\'\IE;

BoQ\A.f:A 'l <LA 9-5 o:r:~ Phone No: (e>31) Lj't,\ ·-(p3-LjS 1o53 s~u.:ec C>t?--;~'t..Dlll

P.O. Box to which notices are to be sent: o/n Bu. t lbll..i. ~M '3:8ih~ \::k;J. oei=J ·; A~~-'1 CA qsoo:; 2. Occurrence: 856 "'AttACL\:~\')'"\~lT .A.'' &n:-AelA:\6{) b\-elbi5TD

Date: Nc·-t .. 2.1 )2d'-\ Place: See .t' AitAc.t\~ £)"' AtrA.Q...\."\e() \:\f::>--<b.er() 3. Circumstances of occurrence or transaction giving rise to claim: ----------------

4. General description of indebtedness, obligation, injury, damage or loss incurred so far as is now known:

see ''AnA"~~ t>·~A:tt-Ae~ ~

5. Name(s) of public employee(s) causing injury, damage or loss, if known: _____________ _

6.

7

8.

See> ":AnA.CJ-\~tt 6 '(\ AttA(!.t\reO ~"1:0

Amount claimed now . . . . . . . . . . . . .$ (;N'CiO\ ~ 21::h 000 , 9:2 1

Estimated amount of future loss, if known . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... $ _________ _

TOTAL $ O'\( ~ ;tj 25: 000,00 )

Basis for above computations: 8e:e> 1 ArrA<!..J-\ meA..l'f f::= "' A~.tte"O t\eJAa'rO

If the amount claimed is over $10,000, indicate the court of jurisdiction:

_____________ Municipal Court UNUQUJ"E{) CA\tLl. Superior Court

~--

CLAIMANT'S SIGNATURE: ~-- .:;.t C::.:::::~...::::~ "-'=""'

Note: Claim must be presented to Clerk, Board of Supervisors, within six (6) months after the act, which occasioned the ~~- . Americans with Disabilities Act questions or requests for accommodations may be directed to the ADA Coordinator at 454-2962 (TDD 454-2123).

PER5003

David Tindel v. County of Santa Cruz, et al. ol2.4a

Attachment A

Occurrence:

This claim is based on the deaths of Claimant's wife, Season Tindel, and his 17-year-old

daughter, Kaila Tindel, and severe personal injuries to Claimant's 14-year-old son, Jacob Tindel, all following an automobile collision while traveling westbound on SR-129 through the

Chittenden underpass to 491 feet west of Old Chittenden Road in an unincorporated area of

Santa Cruz.

David Tindel v. County of Santa Cruz, et al.

Attachment B

Place:

Westbound on SR-129 through the Chittenden underpass to 491 feet west of Old Chittenden

Road in an unincorporated area of Santa Cruz.

David Tindel v. County of Santa Cruz, et al.

Attachment C

Circumstances of occurrence or transaction giving rise to claim:

At approximately noon on November 29, 2014, Claimant's wife, Season Tindel, Claimant's 17 year-old daughter, Kaila Tindel, and Claimant's 14 year-old son, Jacob Tindel, departed from Thanksgiving festivities at Season's family's home in Clovis, CA. With Season

driving her 2000 Saturn sedan, Kaila riding in the front passenger seat, and Jacob in the right rear passenger seat, they set off for home in Santa Cruz, CA, a 150-plus mile trip that takes

about three to four hours.

That morning, the rain had been falling lightly, off and on, and the weather continued that way through the early-afternoon. The roads were wet, but Season's car was in good

working order and she was known as a careful, safe, and slow driver.

Less than one hour from home, at approximately 3:00 p.m., while proceeding westbound

on SR-129 through the Chittenden Underpass, Season lost control of her car when it veered toward the north shoulder, careened south in a sideways manner, crossed the center-line, and

collided with an oncoming vehicle. The collided vehicles came to rest approximately 491 feet west of Old Chittenden Road.

Both vehicles were total losses, but the personal injuries were most damaging. Season

and Kaila were pronounced dead at the scene. Jacob was severely injured and helicoptered to the intensive care unit at Regional Medical Center in San Jose, CA. The driver of the other car,

Antonin Guttman, was also injured and ambulanced to Regional Medical Center.

The segment of SR-129 where Season lost control of her car is known to be dangerous. In 2010, California conducted a Project Study Report ("Report") pertaining to the segment of

SR-129 at issue. The Report found that "the actual rate of fatalities and injuries in the segment

under consideration is significantly higher than the average for similar roadways throughout

the State." The Report continues, "[o]ver the 3-year period [under consideration], there were a

total of 13 reported accidents, which include 2 fatality and 7 injury collisions. Eleven out of 13

reported accidents were run-off-the-road and/ or cross-centerline collisions."

Prior to the initiation of the Study, centerline rumble strips and curve warning signs of

40 mph (eastbound) and 45 mph (westbound) were implemented ahead of the Chittenden

underpass. However, those implementations were substandard and inadequate to address the

Study's recommendation for more substantial improvements to address the route's substandard curve radius, substandard sight distance, substandard shoulder width, and substandard

horizontal, vertical, and center clearance at the Chittenden Underpass. In recognition of the

route's deficiencies, the Study commented on three alternative courses of action: (1) "Cut &

Fill," (2) "Retaining Wall," or (3) "No-build."

0 t1-b

According to the Study, the first two alternatives, cut-and-fill or retaining wall,

furthered the need and purpose of the project, viz. "to improve the safety of the segment" under

consideration "by providing an alignment [to the route] that better meets driver expectations,"

the need for which was demonstrated by the significantly higher than average rate of fatalities

and injuries and re-occurring "run-off-the-road and cross-centerline collisions." On the other

hand, as to the third alternative, the Study concluded that a "No-build" would "not address the

safety problemnor ... prevent run-off-the-road and cross-centerline collisions occurring at this

location." In the end, the Study recommended Alternative 2 for "programming" though both

Alternatives 1 and 2 were to be "reanalyzed" after receipt of survey data.

Ultimately, despite the passage of nearly five years since the Study and a projected start

date of June 2011, the estimated two-year realignment job has not been done. Neither the cut­

and-fill nor the retaining wall alternatives have been completed. Moreover, the centerline

rumble strips and curve warning signs implemented prior to the Study were substandard and

inadequate to address the safety problems during the interim. More should have been done.

As few examples of what should have been done: uniform advisory speeds should have been

implemented for both westbound and eastbound traffic, as is standard; flashing yellow lights

should have been placed on the advisory speed signs to draw drivers' attention to the advisory

speed signs as they approach the zone of danger; channelizers or delineators along with

chevrons should have been implemented on the outside of both lanes and at the centerline to

capture drivers' attention to the curve as they entered the zone of danger; and slippery-when­

wet signage should have been placed not only for eastbound traffic, but also for westbound

traffic, since it is standard to give notice of a road danger to those driving in either direction

along the same road.

As a result of the lack of realignment to the route and inadequate interim safety

measures, when Season drove through the zone of danger on November 29, 2014, the route still

failed to meet drivers' expectations and the known and substantial risk of a fatal cross-center

collision remained. Furthermore, Season, a prudent westbound driver entering the zone of

danger, could not have reasonably anticipated the extent or nature of the danger because the

signage was substandard and failed to provide adequate notice of the nature or extent of the

problems.

The Study predicted that re-alignment would avoid 24 collisions over a 20-year time

span. 7 If alignment had been completed prior to November 29, 2014, alignment's goal of

preventing Season's run-off-the-road and cross-centerline collision could have been achieved.

Instead, alignment was not completed and the interim safety measures were inadequate to

prevent or provide notice of the danger. As a result of lack of realignment and inadequate

interim safety measures, Season's run-off-the-road and cross-centerline collision was not

prevented, which resulted in the tragic deaths of Season and Kaila in addition to severe injuries

to Jacob.

David Tindel v. County of Santa Cruz, et al.

Attachment D

General description of injury, damage, or loss incurred so far as is now known:

This claim is based on the deaths of Claimant's wife, Season Tindel, and his 17-year-old daughter, Kaila Tindel, following an automobile collision while traveling westbound on SR-129

at 491 feet west of Old Chittenden Road in an unincorporated area of Santa Cruz.

As a result of Season Tindel's death, Claimant suffered economic damages, including but not limited to the financial support that Season would have contributed during the life expectancy of either Claimant or Season, whichever may have been shorter; the loss of gifts and benefits from Season that Claimant would have expected to receive; funeral and burial expenses

for Season; and the reasonable value of household services that Season would have provided to Claimant. Additionally, as a result of Season Tindel's death, Claimant suifered non-economic losses, including but not limited to the loss of Season's love, companionship, comfort, care,

assistance, protection, affection, society, moral support; loss of enjoyment of sexual relations;

and loss of Season's training and guidance Claimant's son, Jacob Tindel.

As a result of Kalla Tindel's death, Claimant suffered economic damages, including but not limited to the financial support that Kaila would have contributed during the life expectancy of Claimant; the loss of gifts and benefits that Claimant would have expected to

receive from Kaila; funeral and burial expenses for Kaila; and the reasonable value of household services that Kaila would have provided. As a further result of Kaila' s death, Claimant suffered

non-economic damages, including but not limited to the loss of Kaila' s love, companionship,

comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, and moral support during Claimant's

life, including retirement and old age.

David Tindel v. County of Santa Cruz, et al.

Attachment E

Name(s) of public employee(s) causing injury, damage or loss, if known:

County of Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (aka "SCCRTC"), District 5 Traffic Safety, Division of Traffic Operation, Office of Traffic Safety Program, and their employees, both named and unnamed.

David Tindel v. County of Santa Cruz, eta 1.

Attachment F

Basis for computation of amount now claimed:

This claim is based on the deaths of Claimant's wife, Season Tindel, and his 17-year-old daughter, Kaila Tindel, following an automobile collision while traveling westbound on SR-129

at 491 feet west of Old Chittenden Road in an unincorporated area of Santa Cruz.

As a result of Season Tindel's death, Claimant suffered economic damages, including but not limited to the financial support that Season would have contributed during the life

expectancy of either Claimant or Season, whichever may have been shorter; the loss of gifts and benefits from Season that Claimant would have expected to receive; funeral and burial expenses for Season; and the reasonable value of household services that Season would have provided to Claimant. Additionally, as a result of Season Tiildel' s death, Claimant suffered non-economic losses, including but not limited to the loss of Season's love, companionship, comfort, care,

assistance, protection, affection, society, moral support; loss of enjoyment of sexual relations;

and loss of Season's training and guidance Claimant's son, Jacob Tindel.

As a result of Kaila Tindel's death, Claimant suffered economic damages, including but

not limited to the financial support that Kaila would have contributed during the life

expectancy of Claimant; the loss of gifts and benefits that Claimant would have expected to receive from Kaila; funeral and burial expenses for Kaila; and the reasonable value of household

services that Kaila would have provided. As a further result of Kaila's death, Claimant suffered non-economic damages, including but not limited to the loss of Kaila' s love, companionship,

comfort, care, assistance, protection, affection, society, and moral support during Claimant's

life, including retirement and old age.

Claimant's losses reasonably exceed twenty-five thousand dollars ($25,000.00).

On Route 129

05-SCr-129, PM 9.5/10.0 Safety Improvement Program 20.XX20 1.010

EA 05-0T540K May 2011

0

Between OA-mile west of Old Chittenden Road And 0.1-mile east of Chittenden Underpass

APPROVAL RECOMMENDED:

Pro~ect M~ger

~~-.<%=.~0~/~/~~-~~-~~·-·~-·-/_) ____________ __ '-._~ ?, DEB L. LARSON

Traffic Safety Coordinator

District 5 Director

\

\

SANTA CRUZ COUNTY IJ/8 TIIIC T 05

/

"" t II> .... j ::.

' On Route 129

J

05-SCr-129, PM 9.5/10.0 20.XX.201.010 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

05-0T540K Curve lhudlgnment SCr-129 PM 9.5/10.0

fi -, r /

_:_ :.:·E ..... ~~--·_i_ .• ..

/

,/~-::,.r-l!!ll;ftf ' • -

Llll:lf!!ll!

Between OA-mile west of Old Chittenden Road And 0.1-mile east of Chittenden Underpass

DIZ.Ba

05-SCr-129, PM 9.5/10.0 20.XX201.010 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

This Project Study Report has been prepared under the direction of the following Registered Engineer. TbG registered civil engineer attests to the technical information contained herein and the engineering data upon which recommendations, conclusions. and decisions are based.

J DAi/E REGISTERED 7V!L EVGJNEER

0 I 'Z..tl

05-SCr-129. PM 9.5110.0 20.XX.20 LOlO SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. I 2. Background ................................................................................................................. 1 3. Purpose and Need ........................................................................................................ 3 4. Deficiencies ................................................................................................................. 3 5. Corridor and System Coordination ............................................................................. 4 6. Alternatives ................................................................................................................. 4 7. Co1nn1unity Involve1nent. ............................................................................................ 6 8. Environmental Detennination/Documentation ........................................................... 6 9. Funding ..................................................................................................... , .................. 8

10. Scheduling ....................................................................................... 9 11. Risk Management Plan ................................................................................................ 9 12. FHW A Coordination ........................................................................ J 0 13. District Contacts ........................................................................................................ IO 14. Project Reviews ......................................................................................................... 10 15. Attachn1ents ............................................................................................................... 11 16. Distribution List. .............................................................................. 12

1. INTRODUCTION

Brief Project .Description:

05-SCr-129, PM 9,5/JO.O 20.XX.20l.Ol0 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

This Project Study Report (PSR) proposes to improve the safety of State Route 129 from 0.4-mile west of Old Chittenden Road to 0.1-mile east of Chittenden Underpass (UP) in Santa Cruz County by realigning the higlnvay to the north approximately 60 feet, in order to ia1prove the curve radius, and sight distanct.:. The range of construction cost estirr:ates for the two ''Build'' alternatives vary from $7,962,000 to $11,464,000 (March 2011). The range of right of way cost estimates vary from $101,000 to $126,000 (escalated to 2014). This project falls into Project Development Category 4B and would be funded from the 20.XX.20L010 Safety Improvements Program of the 2010 SHOPP. The scope and cost of both alternatives generate a ftmdable Safety Index.

See the Cost estjmate for specific work items included in this project.

~- ,., ··--~.

' P!:~.i ~ct I:.!mi!~ _ of

for Pr~g-~am~~~lg:_ ... .... ___ .

05-SCr-129-PM 9.5/10.0 ·~. -~··· ..

Programmed or Proposed $12,527,000

,C~J:!!!~Lg21!~J:.f..!I(:!iol_l_~gs~~ _ _l_ ······-·· ... _ i Programmed or Proposed 1 $101,000 i!-;_apJ~~_B-igl:!~_!>l" \V~)~ ~osts: · j_ ¥!~~-~i-!!g_S_<!!!E~~} l _ _!yp_~_~_f ~a~_mt_~-- ___ _ i Nu~ber ~.§J:.ru£~.!:1.!"~~-=-- _____ .... ··--·-··· ________ ....... . ................ . :Anticipated Environmental l CEQA: Negative Declaration/Mitigated ND Determinatio~/Document ! NEPA: Finding ofNo $ignifi£ant Impact 'J::.~g~l !>,~~(;!iP~!!lll.. ______ _ ------~l!E~e l_<_e._~Ij_gm~e;r_l!_________ _ __ . _

I P~tJ.J~_<:!.~~~eg~!Y .. . . Saf~!:YJ~11p~~y~mcn.ts.

A project report will serve as approval of the "selected" alternative.

2. BACKGROlJND

District 5 Traffic Safety staff recommendation and concu!Tence was received from the Division of Trame Operation, Office of Traffic Safety Program to initiate a project that improves safety at this location after the District 5 Multifunctional Safety Improvement Tear:n reviewed and concurred with the proposed improvements. The Conceptual Report was approved on January 7, 2010.

In the kick-off mc~:·ting for the project held on March 2, 20 l 0, 1J1e Project Development Team (PDT) reached a consensus to proceed with a PSR due to the

05-SCr-129, PM 9.5/10.0 20.XX.201.010 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

risk of being unable to determine the scope and irnpacts of the project fully. The District Safety Coordinator, a member of the PDT, has therefore granted an exception to the combined PSR-PR requirement to ensure that there are adequate resources to identify and resolve issues for project approvaL

State Route 129, \Vithin the project limits, is a 2-lane conventional highway (minor arterial) with 12-foot lanes and 3-foot shoulders. There are two horizontal curves of 1 000 feet and 70) feet radii which reverse direction. The total ·width between edge of outside shoulders is 30 feet. There is a sag at Chittenden UP where downgrades greater than 3.5% from both directions meet at t1e structure location. The Pajaro River Bridge (Br. No. 43-13) is located east of the UP within a tangent The asphalt concrete pavement lays over an intennittent Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) base.

Chittenden UP (Bridge No. 36-35) carries Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) tracks over the highway and no structure deficiencies have been found in the Structure Replacement and Improvement Needs Report (STRAIN). The clearance diagram of the UP structure generated from Bridge Inspection Records of May 16, 1979 shows 2.8~foot westbound shoulder and 2.3-foot eastbound shoulder. Also it reveals vertical clearances of 14 feet 2 inches on the westbound shoulder, 14 feet 9 inches on the traveled way, and 15 feet 6 inches on the eastbound shoulder. The total clear width of the stmcture is 29.1 feet which is less than the approach roadbed width of 30 feet. The abutments are on arcs that are concentric to the 700-foot radius centerline. The footing of the east abutment is 2 feet higher than the footing of the west abutment. The as-builts show a superelevation rate of 0.08 on the 700-foot radius curve, which is consistent with the difference in footing elevations.

The receiving \Vater body for this project is Pajaro River. There is an 18-inch corrugated metal pipe cross culvert located 600 feet west of Chittenden UP. At the northwest end of the UP structure is an 18-inch downdrain pipe that drains into an inlet This inlet is connected to another inlet on the other side of the highway that drains into Pajaro River via a 24-inch corrugated metal pipe. Pajaro River, which ls an impacted stream for water quality, is located 520 feet east of the UP structure.

Old Chittenden Road intersects with SR-129 between the Pajaro River Bridge and Chittenden UP. It is a County road that leads to the Chittenden community and becomes a dead end. On Old Chittenden Road, there is a daily traffic of 40 trucks coming in and out of Happy Boy farms which is located 400 feet from the junction with SR~ 129.

A design speed of 55 mph is adopted for this project because the highway survey inventory for design speed designates the segment at 55 mph. Safety improvement strategies, such as centerline mmble strips and curve warning signs

2

05-SCr- J 29, PM 9.5/J 0.0 20.XX.20L010 SHOPP Progr<Im

EA 05-0T54UK

of 40 mph in the eastbound and 45 mph in the westbound direction ahead of the Chittenden UP, were implemented prior to the initiation of this prczject.

3. PURPOSE AND NEED

Need: The proposed project location IS expeiiencing run-off-the-road and cross­

' centerline collisions.

Purpose: The objective of this project is to improve safety by providing an alignment that better meets driver's expectatjons.

4. DEFICIENCIES

Primary: The 700-foot curve radius and the sight distance provided are non-standard. The 3-foot shoulder widths on both sides of the highway are non-standard. The standard curve radius and stopping sight distance for a design speed of 55 mph arc 1000 feet and 500 feet respectively. The standard paved shoulder for this facility should be 8 feet.

Secondary: At the Chittenden UP, the horizontal clearance of 2.3 feet, vertical clearance of 14 feet 2 inches on the left shoulder and 14 feet 9 inches at the center are all non­standard. The standard minimum horizontal clearance is 8 feet. The standard minimum vertical clearance is 15 feet over the traveled way and 14 feet 6 inches over the shoulders for conventional highways.

Current and :Forecasted Traffic: The Design Hourly Volume (DHV) and the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) values within the project lirnits are shown in Table 1 below.

Year 2012

DHV 1,189

ADT 13,274

Trucks in ADT: 28%) Trucks in Peak Hour: 19% Directional Split: 60% Design Speed (V): 55 mph

2020 2028

1,375 1,561

14,040 14,806

10 Year TI: 20 Year TI:

/ /

15

3

oto{

Conision Analysis:

05~SCr-l29, PJV19.5/JO.O 20.XX.20LOIO SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

The summary of the selective collision data from the Traffic Accident Surveillance ar~d Analysis System (TASAS), Table ''B", for the 3-year period from January 1. 2006 to December 31, 2008 in Table 2 below reveals that the actual rate of f~HaHties and injuries in the segment under consideration is significantly higher than the average for similar roadvvays throughout the State.

TABLE 2- COLLISION RATE PER MILLION VEHICLE MILES

Location ' Actual Average ,. Fatal I F+I I Total Fatal ! F+l I Total

Route 129 I 0.3441 1.sso I 2.230 o.o3I I o.s9o I 1.280

Over the 3-year period, there were a total of 13 reported accidents, which bcludc 2 fatality and 7 injury collisions. Eleven out of 13 reported accidents were n:m­oft:the-road and/or cross-centerline collisions.

5. CORRIDOR AND SYSTEM COORDINATION

State Route 129 within the study section is classified as a 2-iane conventional highway. The study portion of the route is not included in the Freeway Express System (F&E), the National Highway System (NHS), or the Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET). It is a terminal access route on the National Network of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA). The design vehicle is a STAA truck. Likewise, the study area is not classified as a High Emphasis Route or Focus Route. It is located for the most part on a rolling terrain.

According to the 1985 State Route 129 Route Concept Report, the route concept for the study area portion is Peak Level of Service (LOS) D or better and a fhture concept of conslructing a 2~1ane facility with passing lanes where required. The proposed improvement is compatible with the fixture concept and does not in an)l\vay preclude any plans to improve or hinder the operation of the facility. There are no alternative routes within the project vicinity.

State Route 129 is a commercial and recreational route, also used as an access route to the Santa Cruz County and Monterey County beaches. A high percentage of truck traffic related to the area's agricultural industry utilize this route as a means to get to Route 101 from the Watsonville area. It is also a popular bike route as it is the most accessible corridor between Santa Clara County and the Watsonville/Santa Cruz area. The Santa Cruz County Bike Plan calls for bicycle lanes along this route.

6. ALTERNATIVES

Alternative 1 - & Fill This alternative proposes to imp;-ove the safety of the segment by realigning the

05-SCr-129, PM 9.5/10.0 20.XX.201.010 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

curves into the north hillside on the left with 2:1 slope and acquiring new right of way. Outside the UP structure limits. 8-foot shoulders with a 3-foot side gutter on the hillside will be provided. Existing culverts, dmvndrains, and inlets will be replaced or modi11ed as required.

Thickness of hot mix asphalt (HMA) and aggregate base (AB) adopted for this alternative is 1.0' and L85' .t·espectivel.y. It is also proposed to improve the vertical clearance at Chittende11 UP to meet the standard of 14 feet 6 incheE on the shoulders and 15 feet on the traveled way by lowering the pavement f:dshe.d grade. Depending on the thickness of the existing PCC base and asphalt concrete, a mill/overlay or remove/replace operation will be pursued. It is assumed that a profile correction to meet the standard vertical clearance wi11 have a negligible eftcct on the bearing capacity of the foundation of the UP structure. If agreement is reached with UPRR to remove the unused span on the bridge, the deficiency in vertical clearance will be minimized.

Existing metal beam guard railing (MBGR) at four comers of the UP structure will be removed and replaced with Type WB Transition Railing connected tO

Alternate Flared End Treatment at one end and Anchor Blocks at the UP structure end as appropriate.

Construction and right ofway costs are estimated at $7,962,000 (March 2011) and $126,000 (escalated to 2014) respectively.

Alternative 2- Retaining Wall This alternative proposes to improve the safety of the segment by realigning the curves into the north hillside on the left and constructing a retaining wall in order to minimize acquiring new right of way and environmental impacts. The type of \>v'all will be either a soil nail wall or a soldier pile wall with gutter and inlets on the top of the w:Jl and underdrain pipe/weep holes at the bottom of the wall. Outside the UP structure limits, 8-foot shoulder on the eastbound and 10-foot shoulder with a 3-foot side gutter on the westbound will be provided.

Existing culverts, downdrains, and inlets will be replaced or modified as required. Stmctural section thicknesses, improvements on railing and vertical clearance improvement at Chittenden UP will be adopted as in Altemative 1.

Constmction and right of way costs are estimated at $11,464,000 (March 2011) and $101,000 (escalated to 2014) respectively.

Alternative 3- No-build This alternative does not address the saiet.y problem nor does it prevent run-off­the-road and cross-centerline collisions from occurring at this location. It will not meet the project need and purpose.

5

Analysis of Proposals

05-SCr-129, PM 9.5/10.0 20.XX.20J.Ol0 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

In both Alternatives 1 and 2, the old roadbed will be removed and revegetaled. Replacement planting, with a temporary irrigation system and one year of plant establishment, will be required for both altematives. The scope and cost of both build alternatives produce a fundable Safety Index.

Fact Sheet Exceptions to Mandatory Design Standards for sight distance, shoulder width and horizontal clearance at the Chittenden UP was approved for both alternatives on December 1, 2010.

Alternative 2 is recommended for programming. After survey data is received, Alternatives 1 & 2 wi11 be reanalyzed.

7. COIVIMUNlTY INVOLVEMENT

A presentation will be made at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission (SCCRTC) to provide information on the purpose and need, schedule, and construction impacts of the project

8. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERi\1lNATIONIDOCUMENTATION

The anticipated environmental document for the proposed project is a Mitigated Negative Declaration/Categorical Exclusion. The California Department of Transportation would act as the lead agency in the preparation of a joint CEQA/NEPA (California Environmental Quality Act/National Environmental Policy Act) environmental document. The final environmental determination is projected to occur within 23 months from the start of environmental studies. Assuming a start date of June 2011, the environmental document is anticipated to be completed by Muy 2013.

A. Cultural Resources It is anticipated that cultural studies will be required to produce an Archaeological Survey Report (ASR), a Historic Resource Evaluation Report (HRER) and a Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR). There are no 4(f) properties within the project limits. State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) concurrence, a Native American coordination, and a Finding of Effect document are also required.

B. Visual Resources A Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) is warranted in order to assess and disclose any potential adverse effects of the project on the existing visual quality of the area. In the event that Alternative 2 is implemented, it is expected that some type of aesthetic treatment will be required for the retaining walL

C. Biological Resources It is anticipated that surveys for rederal and State endangered species, and species

6

05-SCr-129, PM 9.5/10.0 20.XX.20J.Ol0 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0TS-iOK

of concern will be required. Consultation with the California Department of Fish and Game and possibly 2 separate biological assesments will be required. Jt is currently estimated that biology will be the critical path for the delivery of the environmental document.

D. Air Quality, Noise, and Paleontology The total area of potential disturbance would be well within the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District (MBUAPCD) daily gn;ding threshold of 8 acres. Approprial.: minimization measures for air quality will be implemented.

The project will not add capacity, or change speeds on the highway and it will have no signifkent long-term effects on locai noise. Adverse noise impacts from construction are not anticipated either. However, noise abatement may be required for short-term construction-related impacts. If nighttime construction is necessary, the noisiest construction activity should be done nearest the residences as early in the evening as possible.

There is a possibility of encountering paleontological resources that need to be evaluated by a professional paleontologist prior to the start of construction, with continuous monitoring at certain locations during construction.

E. \Vater Quality and Storm \Vater Runoff A Water Quality Assessment (WQA) will be required for all alternatives to address any potential physical, chemical, or biological impacts to water quality within the project area. This project is exempt from incorporating permanent treatment BMPs because it creates less than one acre of new impervious surface. The WQA will address any critical temporary BMPs that must be incorporated into the SWPPP to eliminate any potential non-storm water discharges during construction.

F. Hazardous Wastefl\.<1aterials There are hazardous waste concerns in the project Categories of concern are lead based paint, yellow thermoplastic paint striping, asbestos containing materials and treated wood \Vaste. It is anticipated that an Initial Site Assessment (ISA) and a Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) will be required to identify and assess any hazardous cont~;ining material within 1he limits of the project.

For new construction such as this realignment, rubberized hot mix asphalt (RHMA) is not normally recommended for the entire HMA tl1ickness, due to lack of documented evidence of pavement pe.dormance of new construction designs. In addition, RHMA is not recommended for thicknesses more than 0.2'.

7

G. Permits and Approvals

05-SCr-119, PM 9.5/JO.O 20.XX.20 1.01 0 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0TS-tOK

The project is not within the County's Coastal Zone jurisdiction. Based on the Preiiminary Environmental Annlysis Report, the Department of Fish and Game may need to revie1.v the environmental document.

H. Right of '-Vay Right of way acquisition, utility involvement and potholing are anticipated. Right of Way lead time will require a minimum of 24 months after approved Ger eral Plans with detailed drawings showing what work will be done in th.::.railroad right of way are provided, 18 months lead time after Utility Conflict Plans are provided, and 12 months after Certified Appraisal Maps are received. Overhead electrical pole may need to be relocated. Fiber optics cables cross the highway on the bridge, 2 feet below the railroad tracks and are carried in two 5-inch Galvanized Steel Pipes.

UPRR has been notii1ed about the project and its purpose. California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) was also contacted and notified about the project. A diagnostic meeting with CPUC, UPRR and the County of Santa Cmz should be scheduled 6 months before construction. Subsequently, a General Order 88-B pennit shall be sub1nitted to CPUC which will require 45 days for review and upon approval will grant Caltrans 3 years to construct

I. Transportation Management Plan (TMP) A TMP is required for the construction of this project. A public information campaign will be utilized to inform the public about the construction project so commuters may avoid congestion, particularly during peak periods. In addition, the design engineer, resident engineer and the District 5 Traffic Management Center (TMC) will be responsible for the implementation of portable changeable message signs (PCMS) and construction area signs.

Primarily a reversible control lane closure will be utilized to manage traffic. A 5-day full closure will be required in order to improve the vertical clearance at the UP structure, whereby traffic will be detoured along State Route 101, San Juan Rd, Carpenteria Rd thm the City of Aromas and connecting to SR-129. It is assumed that the detour lane will be open or alternatively work can be scheduled to occur when it is open. Lane/road closure charts will be required to minimize traffic impacts.

9. FUNDING

This project is proposed for amendment to the 20 l 0 SHOPP with funding from the 20.XX.201.010 Safety Improvements Program in the 2013/2014 fiscal year. The safety index for this project is over 200. Improving horizontal alignment at this location yields a Safety Index Performance Measure of 24 collisions reduced over rhe 20-year life of tl1e improvement.

8

05-SCr-129, PM 9.5/10.0 20.XX.201.010 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

The escalated Construction, Right of Way, and Support Costs are summarized in the table below, followed by the proposed project schedule.

C . I d S .ap1ta an uppo rt c t s OS ummary PROJECT COST Fiscal Years COMPONENT I 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 Total l

iRfW Capital $101 $101

Constr. Capital $12,527 $12,527

PA&ED $641 $641

PS&E $1,497 $1,497

RfW Capital Support $155 $155

Construction Support $1,717 $1,717

I Total $641 $1,753 $14,244 $16,638

Note: (1) All costs X$!,000. Construction Capital Costs arc escalated at J.O% per year and Support Costs arc escalated at 3.1% per year. Right of Way Capital costs arc escalated at 5.0% (a&· appliclthle from R/W Data Sheet) per year.

(2) Support categories are the same as those identified by SB 45. (3) Consrruction support is shown in the RTL year and is escalated to the 2014115 when it

will be needed. (4) The suppmt to capital ratio is 32%.

10. SCHEDULING

HQ Milestones I Delivery Date (Month/Day/Year)

Begin Environmental 07/01/2011 Circulate DED 12/01/2012 PA&ED 06/01/2013 Reg Right of Way 06/01/2013 Project PS&E 01115/2014 Right of Way Certification 06/01/2014 Ready to List 06/01/2014 Approve Contract 11103/2014 Construction Acceptance 10/01/2016 End Project 10/01/2017

l L RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN

--

A Risk 1v1anagement Plan (RMP) has been prepared for this project The RMP identifies several high, moderate and low risks that could possibly delay the completion of this project. All identified risks are given specific risk response

I

05-SCr-129. PM 9.5/J(W :20.XX.201.010 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

plans and assigned to appropriate risk managers who will monitor and control the risks.

A 2-yr environmental process and a 2-yr right of way process miming in series outside the 4-yr SHOPP cycle is a risk identified with a very high probability occurring and a high impact on the schedule. The risk of not being able to complete appraisal and acquisition work in one year due to lack of qualified personnel is identifi ;;d with moderate probability occurring and a nigh impact on the schedule. The tJP structure requiring modifications due to a fatal flaw in the assumptions made hitne.rto is identified with low probability occurring but a very high impact on the scheduie, cost and scope.

12. FHWA COORDINATION

This project is delegated under our stewarship Agreement with FHW A.

13. DISTRICT CONTACTS

The following individuals may be contacted for inibnnation pertaining to this Project Study Report:

Doug Ifessing ................................... . (805) 549-3386 Project Manager

Matt C Fowler .......................................... (805) 542-4603 Environ menial

James Espinosa ........................................... (559) 243-3537 Design Manager

Petros Demoz ................................. ., ............ (559) 243-3538 Project Engineer

14. PROJECT RE'\!JE\VS

Field Review

District Maintenance

District Safety Review

Constructability Review

HQ Design Coordinator

Project Manager District Safety Review

Jim Espinosa/Petros Demoz

Michael Janzen

02/16!2010

01/27/l 1

11/17/10

10

ot74';;(

District SHOPP Progran1 Advisor

HQ SHOPP Program Advi<>or

HQ Traffic Operations Liaison

15. ATTACHMENTS

A. Vicinity Map B. Typical Cross Sections C Layout Plans D. Superelevation Diagram E. Construction Detail F. Preliminary Cost Estimates

05-SCr·l29, PM 9.5!10.0 20.XX.20l.010 SHOPP J>rogram

EA 05-0T540K

Deb Larson 12/01/10

Benton

Thomas Schriber 11/15/lO

G. Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report H. Constructability Review Attendance Roster I. R!W Data Sheet J. Stmm Water Data Report K. Traffic Management Plan Checklist L. Risk Management Plan

l I

05-SCr-129, PM 9.5110.0 20.XX.20l.Ol0 SHOPP Program

EA 05-0T540K

DISTRIBUTION LIST

C: HQ Division of Design HQ Division ofEngincering Services (5) HQ Transportation Programming- Rick Guevel HQ Environmental- Bob Pavlik

.HQ Safety- Janice Benton Project Manager- Doug Hessing Design lv1anager- James Espinosa (2) Resident Engineer- (held by Design Manager) District Maintenance- Lance Gorman

Kelly Mcclain District Traffic Safety - Scott Morris Region Traffic Design - Mohammed Qatami District Traffic Operations - Paul McClintic Region Materials -Doug Lambert Region Environmental - Sarah Gassner Region Landscape - Dennis Reeves Region Right of Way- Connie Shellooe District Planning- Claudia Espino PPM -Linda Araujo (scanned electronic copy only) Surveys - Hanna Kassis (electronic copy only)

Jere my Villegas Bob Fredricks

HQ DES OPPM -Andrew T S Tan District Records- Kristina Jaime (electronic copy only)

12

"""'

rve SCr-1

me t 9.5/ 10.0

I NOT TO SCALE

() i_ -·-(;)

t ,.., 0 L -· 12

._ro Sooto Crv~ 1 ' OS Jj ll{ ~<(1)_~ ~ /( !-'-~ '--:" 17 (I C o1)

""' lj ) ,,

·-(')

0 f-

......;;,:)

. ""~"-- (; ~hittenden . -4;_.,~~j // -y MONTEREY\\ • ~- 1-' ~-~-~. )) 0

.,_....... BAY \WATSO ~~---~~/-;;;·-/··._ v 0_~/ -""' ~ l/l0 7

..- 1 r;,-1{ ~ 0 : <{ PROJECT ~----=-~

"'\ / LOCATION //---0

('I

~

-v -z_

,1! I /"/

~ //~/ ,.., 5/ (J) '1\0 L so'' ~ ~ +­c:: 0 2

0 f-

t

/

ATTACH EN

~

0i ·~'

<0! ~()12 kOi 2<:><0 tOT 2028

1:},27~ '~~040 14180&

DIN ZO!Z DUV 2010 OH:V Z02:U

1•H!ti 1,375 1.$61

- ~~

~ 60Y. T 18Y. V SS nt>h

r!~~ c::.t tn~r ~ ~ ~~· I._ Vor:J E.S ETW "fl" ETW ES. ES ETW "A" £'fl'l ES

'l .l ~--!~:~"--------- -~.!,_._,, t t }1l£ ... L-lL.l.2?.~ ..... .lL~ '11_JL.l.~13~~ ~------ ~l--~F----_J ~- ----1,~,-~-- I I 1 rl - -· I - •

4. -- -L I I I

'--- ' ' I , ~" ' -;-------1 , I -----. -::::::::::::~ ~"·---- ....................... ,..,_ Vor ~

t--= "'·-- o-ss· ·1 J1 j . RWBI..E 'STRiP""-~ '

~= ! 'j L~ ·-------- -·E•I•+ A£ o •. 9S'J . T l ru• ,. --... ---~~:L!-s.?.::,s e~~~~~~. ;.... -f•s t.w ~ ~~ ---;--....:_3;~~ -"""'-"------------------------, I .... ,.... j,S•I$t r;;cc P~ !. YQ.r._~L:_f' ~-lNTE:R fif(Nl' .. 4 r~~ ____£.::1~

I'lL TERNATIVE 1 • CUT & Fll.l.

--·---------! ~-----·-sto~~~~-s~~~H'/0 j "" ""' ~,., '"'" F~----t?;~·-I----~~~;:k~~~~ ;,~~;-·-~--- ~~: m rs ~Es E~Tll' 'l !2' rr~ E~:. A1/W

-,;r5soi•<o-=-s••·s·••ro--.____ ~£1$ .nl" · 12· 1 ,L·n ·· · -L:t .,------l v., -'-, 1' !0 . - · Y··----· --............. _ ~ l ' ' -- - -25'·53 ------.!,_s!1 , w 0~ I •

1 ---iet.i£kl f;c.: sOIL nML ; j

- ___ not w•Lt i • ------ ' I I

cone a:orr•cr--..; ........ ...., vo~r;;;-------~ ITYf'E 6001 :..~65' I

I I u •aLE srR!J;----- r-<• •• •c c~•s ------ l .;;iJ':;;.Ji_ .. '_---_-~_---_- ---------1!:<1<1 AC 0.2~ •---- -----· ------------

~~~;5' .. Sh!d" •-· •• ..! l•or 2'-lJ..: aA!;X,tliG ~

AI. TERN A liVE 2 - RETAINING WAll..

TYPICAl CROSS SECTIONS

~f.tl>.~t\lf. BORN:"' SCAlE \$ It< 11<1::11£'!.

!) I l ) \ t ), _L _i UN If

00 SCALE X-1

PROJ£Ci NUMBER & PHASS: osoooooas n;

~ ~ (')

~ z 1--3

lJ:j

'> \.}) <:')">

?

CURVE DATA

22 .. ~·co" J 1!\fi~H:i' 16""15'11" l 251.1-S'

_, ___ , ______ _ .,.

------t:Pru:t

.,.

' . l '

-· "~···

lAYOUT I AI. TERIIIATIVE 1l

SCALE< l ''~5o' L -1

UNIT H~5 flROJlCT NUMtJER & PHASE osoooooas;r.

~ >-3 ;2 g 3: l;!j

~ n

0

oJ ~

~I ~

iS

•. 1.:.1 ~ .\!1 i I~ Ill '~ Q [!ij !~

-"-"--·"-~"

\

~RR RIW

RR IVtl,-.

I II

I

? ~-M,_

/

/I II

:/ , .. "¢-... ~ o,'?j"''

// ~

//

lAYOUT (A!. TERNATiVE 1>

SCALE: 1 "~so' L ~ 2

.•.... L---··------NUM8€R & Pf4ASE 050000085/K

:~ H l't' ee ~~~ l!!~

~'"

C>

~ ?-)

l- f;i ~ :::! ' ~

ow -J ,._ "' ,.~ ~ 0

<~ 0 0 g

..J z c 0: 0 lU "' 1- -/ I .... !: w I~ -' ·<

0 !/) ..

a:

~ iii

~ g ..

\ ~R RIW

.~

,_o

// //

1/

/

?}/

.• '1-X"

/~" "'<;

il-

l ,::; L~ I ~4

/ / E~Tt<t Rf# L-:: ;:

lAYOUT <AL TIJ!RNA TIVE :o ~~~

SCALE: 1 ""50' L- 4 ,:~J,

~~ ;···---------,·-----UN_!_T_I_4_G5-----r-----PR_O_J-EC_T_N_U-"B_E_R_&--PH->-St--------~------------~

~~!:~---~.-.!::::::~~~::!::='-----·-·····--·1 ·-------···--·· - ....................... . \.:)

<,_)-) S$l ~

"f ~'-··- -· ·-,·~-·~-- !..~.~ ,.

I f:B ETW & 'Shl<rr

... _ --~--f-·~-~~~·--q- -~- ! .. ·~ .tlX..."

"I

!

~- -~

i<d

_I J!l "

__ ,. ..... -~----1>-·--·--~·-·:::"k·-.. ·- ----+-~----+------·--+---·-·-·-·-·t--"--·-·--·i··--·7""· -~-·---- -_-t-;~_r~z_ff=~~-----4---- . I ; -+- ~t- --:

···----'-----+----·' ___ ................ ,.... ........ ........ ·+· .... . .. ! . ··~········ ···········J···-·············--·-·--- " J!ttU~ .. E .. .ElE.V_.!L~IQN_DJI\GRAM

SCAL : 1">:50' ' SE-1

li •!!i

&10 Sll sa 51$ $16 lli.___.-~---~W9__________ {'"'"""'~~

.l:)ll"tltlf <.A~r Rt\i!S£0 1/~/2010 UN!T 1465 & PHASE

!J;:I 1-:3

~ ~ t<:l

~ d

2 ~

I , gl~ ~ ~

""' [~ [? w >·· ::t It :;

~~ !I ! ' w

~ ~ ~ -~ ~

~ ~~, z ·r: 4!

·~ ;; - Ill ~~ Q

:iii lei ""

\ ---------v 4' C4P fono~eel hY.r, f!1

,--- ~~J~ ~'l" <lr'OC •olof I!?:

"'"om ; I, " .. ······ ··--·····················--- ""' ., I ~-~ /

.................. [<l•t ""'1 ~~'to z'>:4'>····--.... I ~ ...•..... ,. .. ~ '"··· - ·--- ·-- '

L...... , . ., •~"'' •,.,w~•-" ·······. ~ ... ~l ------···· .,;,;" • ., " .. 11 ·. ''

) //~ l;i/~' ,. p. ·· -;::.~?,f.;.:;--- .e t/ ! I,_ . t<--:==:=:::::~:::::~=-~======;:::::_~~~~~~'<""".·

piGt\."-'>

.--'o .. o•

Exftt ROUT{ 129

I

·-------------------------1------~~~~------~-----......... --...,.--------.,

t•sr A!l1JT~[Rf ••c~~ ! v•tsr ABU'!U!J<T FACE

·"' 1 Vc:"ltta t / L. ~-:~~

!,....12:...' -l.:t.....j ·~11' t>lst R/W_./

I ..... IE'S -R~ R/# l;:i\li £111

.... :"::O::!lQ:CA:.'::<:::ST:_.::Rt:::V::lS::EO::_,."'.:~.'::'':O::;O~ ... ---.L£!"_~,.::'~~~~~:;_---·-·-·-- j Fl:tt;.Al'IV~ ~l)fo!Qffl SCJ,!.~ ~· ~-···--~"' __ J_ .. _.. .. ,}s Jk INt:Mt:$

<) I t ~ L ..... t.. ___ l._ ____ J.. __ 1 ______ .!_ ... J

·---.J------------~--~·

./ ~f\?.

'~"" Rll RIW

/

NSTRUCTION DETAil !CHITTENDEN IJNDERPASSJ

SCALE!\ ",20' C-1

P~OJE:Ci NUM!lER & PliAS!Z 0500000657K

I

I

I

~ •-3

52 () ::r:

11 ~ • 1-j 5, ;! f?:j

"

C'>

~ ~

PROJECT STUDY REPORT COST ESTIMATE

PROJECT DESCRIPTION~

Dist~co-Rte: o.s~scr-129

PM: 9.5110,0 EA: OS..OT540K

Program Code:20.10.201.010

On SR·1~~. Mtt.E WEST OF 01..,0 CHITTENDEN ROAD TO 0.1 MILE EAST OF CHITIENDE;N UP iN CRUZ COUNTY

Proposed This proJ~ct propous to improv'$ the oomantal alignment to minimiz.ee the nm-off~the­improvernent: road and cross~nmrUne type ofcollislons. Alt&f'ruillve 1 realigns the curves to the h!H

•Scope of Work} sftki at 2:1 slope and a<'-<JUires new right of way. It widens the existing shoulders west of \ . thn railroad UliderpaS$ from 3' to 8'.

I j BUILD Al~&rnative 1

l. ROADWAY IL ROADSIDE l!l. ROADWAY

PROJECT

Sections 1 - 5 Seclioos 6 ~ i Saetions a -10

TOTAL ROADWAY Total ofSeetkms 1·10shown above

TOTAL STRUCTURES

SUBTOTAl CONSTRUCTION COSTS

TOTAL RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS (Escalated)

TOTAL PROJECT CAP!TALOUTlAY COSTS

Reviewad by District Program Manager;

( Sigriature)

Phone Nmnl:mr:

$ 4,793,5B.JL $ ___ ..........;...19;;,.;;8..:....4...::. 0.::;_0

$ ___ 2.:..:.,9;....7.0,228

$ 7,962,000 $ _____ 0 __ .

$ ___ 7,,_9_62....;.·,_00_0 __

$ ___ 1_2_;_6,:_,0...;.;.00_~ --

$ _ _:.8..:...;.,0..;;..88;;.,:.. ,0;;...;;0..;;..0 __

I. ROADWAY ITEMS

Section 1 - Earthwork Quantlh: Unlt Unit Price Item Cost Roadway Excavation 185,000 CY $15 $2,775.000

Imported Borrow 0 CY so $0 -Clearing & Grubbing 1 LS $20,000 $20,000

Develop Water Supply 0 LS $0 $0

Remove Concrete Pavement 1,300 CY $90 $117,000

Rounding (Contour Grading) ~ Subtotal Earthwork:

Section 2 - Pavement Structural Section*

PCC Pvmt Depth 0 CY $0 so PCC Pvmt Depth 0 CY $0 $0

Hot Mix Asphalt 6,000 Tons $90 $540,000

Lean Concrete Base 0 CY $0 lQ

Cement-Treated Base 0 CY $0 $0 --Aggregate Base 5,200 CY $70 $364,000

Treated Permeable Base 0 CY $0 iQ Aggregate Subbase 0 CY $0 iQ Pavement Reinforcing Fabric 0 '"FfT" $0 iQ --AC Dike 2,200 LF $10 $22,000

Shoulder Backing 55 Tons $90 $4,950

Subtotal Structural Section: Section 3 - Drainage

Large Drainage Facilities 0 LS $0 iQ Drainage Inlets 6 EA $4,000 $24,000

Project Drainage 1 LS $50,000 S50,000

(X-Drains, overside, etc.)

APC 600 LF $120 $72,000

Subtotal Drainage:

~ Reference sketch showing typical pavement structural section elements of !he roadway. Include (if available) T.L, R-Value and date when tests were performed.

0/4/)Ct

Section Cost

$2,912,000

$930,950

$'!46,000

6i41

Section 4 - Sj;lecialty Items Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Section Cog Retaining Walls 0 $0 so Noise Barriers 0 $0 so Concrete Median Barrier 0 LF $0 ~ Equipment/Anima! Passes 0 $0 £Q Water PoHution Control LS $160,000 $160,000

Haz. Waste Investigation LS $20,000 $20,000

and/or Mitigation Work

Environmental Compliance LS $155,000 $155,000

Resident Engineer Office 1 LS $20,000 $20,000

Barriers and Guardrails 100 LF $40 $4,000

Trans. Railing (Type WB) 4 EA $4,000 $16,000

Term. System {Type SRT) 2 EA $4,000 $8.000

iQ Subtotal Specialty Items: $383,000

Section 2- Traffic Items

Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe 6,100 LF $1 $6,100

(Sprayable)

Remove Painted Traffic Strip• 1,500 LF $1 $1,500

Pavement Marker 170 EA $4 $680

(Retroreflective)

Temp Traffic Stripe Paint 1,500 LF $1 $1.500

Traffic Control Systems 1 LS $180,000 $180,000

Traffic Management Plan 1 LS $15,000 $15,000

Construction Area Signs 1 LS $4,000 $4,000

Traffic Handling (CMS) LS $144,000 $144,000

Maintain Traffic LS $63,000 $63,000

Roadside Sign Ore Post 9 EA $600 $5,400

Object Marker EA $75 MQQ

Subtotal Traffic Items: $421,630

TOTAL ROADWAY ITEMS Sections 1 thru 5 $4,793,580

Oi4/ til

ll. ROADSIDE ;ITEMS Section 6 Plantlno and lrrigati Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Section Cost Highway Planting· 0 $0 iQ Replacement Planting 1 $180,000 $180,000

irrigation Modification 0 $0 iQ Relocate Existing Irrigation 0 $0 iQ Facilities 0 $0 ~ Irrigation Crossovers 0 $0 ~

0 $0 iQ 0 LS so iQ 0 so ~ 0 LS so iQ

jQ

Subtotal Planting and Irrigation Section: $180,000

Section 7: Roadside Manggement and Safet~ Section

Vegetation Control Treatmen· 0 LF $0 iQ Gore Area Pavement 0 LS $0 jQ

Pavement beyond the gore a1 0 LS -- $0 iQ Miscellaneous Paving 0 LS $0 ~ Erosion Control ACRE $8,000 $8,000

Slope Protection 1 LS $5,000 $5,000

Side Slopes/Embankment S!c 0 LS $0 iQ Maintenance Vehicle PulloutE 0 LS $0 ~ Off-freeway Access 0 LS $0 .$Q (gates, stairways, etc.)

COZEEP lS so iQ Points, Transit, Pf~rk & Ride}

Ground-In Rumble Strip 18 STA $300 $5.400

0 LS $0 iQ ____ ,;;.. 0 LS $0 .$Q -----

___ _...;:,.0 2.. $0 .$Q Subtotal Roadside Management and Safety Section: ____ ..:..$.;.;18..:...4.:.::0..:..0 ___ _

TOTAL ROADSIDE lTEMS Sections 6 thru 7 ___ _.::::.S..:..:i9:.::.8!...:..4.:.:00:...._ __ _

ROADWAY ADOlTJONS Section 8 - Minor Items

$4,991,980

{Subtotal Sections 1 thru 7)

Section 9 - Roadway Mqbilization

$5,491,178

{Subtotal Sections 1 thru 8)

Section 10 -Supplemental Work & Contingencies

Supplemental Work ______:?EA91, 178

(Subtotal Sections 1 thru 8)

Contingencies $5,491,178

(Subtotal Sections i thru 8}

Item Cost Section Cost

X 0.10 = $499,198 ---=------

X

X

X

(5 to 10%)

0.10

(10%)

Minor Items: $499,198 ----------~-------

= $549,118

Roadway Mobilization: $549,118 ______ ..;..._--~..;..._------

0.10 = $549,118

(5 to 10%)

0.25 = $1,372,795 {**%)

Supplemental Work & Contingencies: Si,92i,9i2 --------~~--------

TOTAL ROADWAY ADDITIONS Sections 8 thru 10: S2,970,228 ------~~~~------

Estimate Prepared by:

Estimate Checked by:

Petros Demoz (Print or Type Name)

James Espinosa (Print or Type Name)

**Use appropriate percentage per PDPM, Part 3 Chapter 20.

http://www .dot.ca.govlhg/opedfpdf?mlpdpm.htm • pdgm

TOTAL ROADWAY: $7,982,208 --------~~-------(Subtotal Sections 1 thru 10)

Phone: 559-243-3538 03/14/11 (Date)

Phone: 559-243-3537 03/14111 (Date)

II. STRUCTURE ITEMS

Bridge Name Structure Type

No.1

Width (out to out)- (ft) o Span length - (ft) o Total Area - ff o Footing Type (pile/spread)

Cost Per ff (incl. 1 0% mobilization & 25% contingencies $0

Total Cosf for Structure $0

Other so

* Add additional structures as necessary

Railroad Related Costs (Not incl. in R/W Est)

COMMENTS:•

Estimate Prepared by: Petros Demoz

(Print or Type Name)

(If appropriate, attach additional pages as backup)

STRUCTURE No.2

0

0

0

$0

No.3

0

0

0

$0

SUBTOTAL STRUCTURES ITEMS $0 --------~~-------

$0

TOTAL STRUCTURES ITEMS $0 --------~---------

Phone: 559-243-3538 03/14/i i (Date)

Ill. RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS

Current Year 2010

Acquisition, including excess lands and damages to remainder(s) and Goodwlll $40,000

Utility Relocatibn (State share) $33,750

Clearance/Demolition $0

RAP $0

Title and Escrow Fees $2,119

Mitigation $32,750

$108,619

TOTAL RIGHT OF WAY**

* Escalated to1assumed year of advertising ** Current total value for use on Sheet 1

Estimate Prepared by: Petros Demoz

(Print or Type Name}

Escalation Escalated Year Rates 2014*

5.0% $46,305

5.0% $39,070

5.0% $0 5.0% $0 5.0% $2,453

5.0% $37,912

$125,740

Phone: 559-243-3538 03/14/11 (Date)

(If appropriate, attach additional pages and backup including Right of Way Data Sheet and Environmental Mitigation and Compliance Cost Estimate Sheet).

Oisi.~Co-.R.te: 05~SCr-129

PM: 9.5/10.0 · 05-0T540K

10.201.010

On SR·129, 0.4 MILE WEST OF OLD CHITTENDEN ROAD TO 0.1 MILE EASTOFj CHITTENDEN UP IN S~NTA CRUZ COUNTY __ __J

Proposed O!!es to lmprov~ the hori~ontal alignment to minlmi2e th~ rurt~ off·th~road and cross-cenwrHne typ& of collre.ion:l>, A!ternatill'e 2 realigns thtt

Work} curves to the hill side but installs a soil naif wall to minimize- acqubritlon of new ' rlght of way. It the existing shoulders west of thl? railroad underpass

from 3' to 8' or1 the EB slde and 10' on the WB side where it is adjoined to a rotaining wall.

l. IL '"""'"U·UUJ

l!l. ROADWAY

COST ESTIMATE

Sections 1 -5 $ 2,754,580 :-o.,::,r'llt'H1<: 6- 7 $ ·- 12~~0 Sections 8- 10 .$ 1,711,803

TOTAL ROADWAY Total of SGctionsi ·10 $hown aoove

TOTAL STRUCTURES

CONSTRUCTION COSTS

RIGHT OFVVAY

TOTAL COSTS

R~vlawoo by

District Program Manager:

11

{Dale)

~-

i. ROADWAY ITEMS

Section 1 - EarthwqrJs Quantill: Unit Unit Price ltem Cost Roadway Excavation 25,000 CY $25 $62§.000

Imported Borrow 0 CY $0 ~ Clearing & Grubbing LS $20,000 $20.000 Remove concrete pavement 1,300 CY $90 ~117,000

Structural Excav (Ret Wall) 500 CY $75 $37,500

Structural Backfill (Ret Wall) 250 CY $125 ~ Subtotal Earthwork:

Section 2 - Pavement Structural Section·

PCC Pvmt Depth 0 CY $0 ~ ---PCC Pvmt Depth 0 CY $0 ~ Hot Mix Asphalt 5,850 Tons $90 ~526,500

Lean Concrete Base 0 CY $250 ~ Cement-Trea:ed Base () CY $0 ~ Aggregate Base 5,050 CY $70 §353,5QO Treated Permeable Base 0 CY $0 ~ Aggregate St:bbase 0 CY $0 .iQ AC Dike 800 LF $10 $8,000

Shoulder Ba6<ing 55 Ton $90 ~4.950

Subtotal Structural Section: Section 3 - Drainag§

large Drainage Facilities 0 LS $0 .iQ Drainage lnlets 8 EA $2,500 .$.f{l,OOO Gutter 1,450 LF $25 $36.250 Project Drainage LS $50,000 ~.000

(X-Drains, overside, etc.)

APC 600 lF $120 ~72,000

Subtotal Drainage:

• Reference sketch showing typical pavement structural section elements of the roadway. Jndude (if available) T.L, A-Value and date when tests were performed.

Section Cost

$830,750

$892,950

$178,250

Section 4 - Special!~ Items Quantity Unit Unit Price Item Cost Section Cost Retaining Walls 0 $0 m Noise Barriers 0 $0 m Concrete Median Barrier 0 LF $0 m Equipment/Animal Passes 0 $0 m Water Pollution Control 1 LS $115,000 ~i15,0QO

Hazardous Waste lnvestigati• LS $20,000 ~20,000

and/or Mitigation Work Environment~'~ Compliance LS $155,000 ~i25,000

Resident Engineer Office i LS $20,000 $20,000

Guardrails 100 LF $40 $4,000

Trans. Railing {Type WB) EA $4,000 $16,000

Term. System (Type SRT) 2 EA $4,000 $8,000

Type 600 Sa(ety Barrier 1,000 LF $50 !Jl50,000

Subtotal Specialty Items: $388,000

Section 5 - T!£!ffic Item§ Thermoplastic Traffic Stripe 6,100 LF $1 $6,100

(Sprayable); Remove Painted Traffic Strip 1,500 LF $1 $1,500

Pavement Marker 170 EA $4 $680

(Retroreflective)

Temp Traffic Stripe Paint 1,500 LF $1 $1,500

Traffic Control Systems 1 LS $200,000 ~200,QOO

T ratfic Management Plan i LS $15,000 $15,000

Construction Area Signs LS $4,000 $4,000

Traffic Handlihg {CMS) LS $i60,DOD ilQO.OOO

Maintain Traffic LS $70,000 $70,000

Roadside Slgn One Post 9 EA $600 $5.400

Object Marker 6 EA $75 MQQ Subtotal Traffic Items: $464,630

TOTAL ROADWAY ITEMS Sections 1 thru 5 $2,754,580

II. ROADSIDE ITEMS Section 6 Planting and lrrlgat Quantity Highway Planting 0

Replacement Planting Irrigation Modification

Relocate Existing Irrigation

Facilities

Irrigation Crossovers

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

Unit

LS

LS

Unit Price Item Qost $0 so

$100,000 ~100,000

$0 ~ $0 $0

$0 $0

$0 ~ $0 ~ $0 ~ $0 $0

$0 ~ ~

Subtotal Planting and Irrigation Section:

Qection 7: Roadside Management and Salei.J:: &~ctlon Vegetation Control Treatmen 0 LF $3 ~ Gore Area Pavement 0 LS $0 ~ Pavement beyond the gore a Q LS $0 ~ Miscellaneous Paving 0 LS $0 ~ Erosion Control LS $i2,000 $12,000

Slope Protection LS $5,000 $5,000

Side Slopes/Embankment Sl< 0 LS $0 ~ Maintenance Vehicle Pullout~ 0 LS $0 ~ Off-freeway Access 0 LS $0 ~ (gates, stairways, etc.)

COZEEP 0 LS $0 ~ Points, Transit, Park & Ride)

Ground-In R:.~mbie Strip STA $300 $5.400

0 LS $0 ~ -----0 LS $0 ~ -----________ o LS $0 ~

St;Jc!lon Cost

$100,000

Subtotal Roadside Management and Safety Section: ____ $::;:2:=2::..:A.:::.:OO::__ __ _

TOTAL ROADSIDE ITEMS Sections 6 thru 7 ___ __::.$1:.:::2:::2•c...:.4o:.:o:.__ __ _

m. ROADWAY ADDITIONS Section 8 -'Minor Items Item Cost Section Cost

$2,876,980 X 0.10 = $287,698 ___ ___;,......:___:..._

(Subtotal Sections 1 thru 7) (5 to 10%)

Minor Items: $287,698 -------:...~~-------

Section 9 - Roadway Mobilization

$3,164,678 X

(Subtotal Sections 1 thru 8) 0.10 = $316,468

(10%)

· Roadway Mobilization: ___ __::$..;;.3_;;16..:..,4...;.6.:....8 ___ _

Section 10- Supplemental Work & Contingencies

Supplemental Work

Contingencies

Estimate Prepared by:

Estimate Checked by:

$3,164,678 X 0.10 = $316,468 ------'--'---'--

(Subtotal Sections 1 thru 8) (5 to i 0%)

$3,164,678 X

(Subtotal Sections 1 thru 8) 0.25 = $791,170

{**%)

Supplemental Work & Contingencies: ___ .....;$_1'-, i_0?-,6_3_7 __ _

TOTAL ROADWAY ADDITIONS Sections 8 thru 10: $1,711,803 -----~'--~-------

TOTAL ROADWAY: $4,588,783 -------~-'--------(Subtotal Sections 1 thru 1 0)

Petros Demoz Phone: 559·243-3 03/14111 (Print or Type Name) (Date)

James Espinosa Phone: 559-243-3 03/14/11 {Print or Type Name} {Date)

**Use appropriate percentage per POPM, Part 3 Chapter 20.

htlg://www;dot.ca.gov/hg/ogpd/pdpm/pdQm.htm • pdQm

II. STRUCTURE ITEMS

STRUCTURE

Bridge Name Structure Type Width (out to out) - (ft) Span Length - (800 ft)

Total Area - ft2

Footing Type (pile/spread) Cost Per ft2 (incl. 1 0% mobilization & 25% contingencies) Total Cost for Structure Other

No.I

Soil Nail Wall

27,500

$250

~6,875,000

.$Q

* Add additional structures as necessary SUBTOTALSTRUCTURESITEMS

Railroad Related Costs (Not incl. in RfW Est)

No.2

0

0

0

$0

~ iQ

No.3

0

0

0 --

$0

~ $0

$6,875,000

$0

TOTAL STRUCTURES ITEMS ___ ..:..$6.:;..:.,8.:;.;.7...:;.;5,~00;;..;.0 __ _

COMMENTS:

Estimate Prepared by: Petros Demoz

(Print or Type Name)

(l'i appropriate, attach additional pages as backup)

Phone: 559-243-3 03/14/i 1 (Date)

m. RIGHT OF WAY ITEMS

Current Year 2010

Acquisition, including excess lands and damages to remainder(s) and Goodwill $19,250

Utility Relocation (State share) $33,750

Clearance/Demolition $0

RAP $0

Title and Escrow Fees $1,911

Mitigation $32,750

$87,661 TOTAL RIGHT OF WAY**

* Escalated to assumed year of advert'sing ** Current total value for use on Sheet i

Estimate Prepared by: Petros Demoz

(Print or Type Name)

Escalation Escalated Year Rates 2014*

5.0% $22,284

5.0% $39;070

5.0% $0

5.0% $0 5.0% $2,212

5.0% $37,912

$101,479

Phone: 559-243-3 03/14/i 1 (Date)

(If appropriate, attach additional pages and backup including Right of Way Data Sheet and Environmental Mitigation and Compliance Cost Estimate Sheet).

Preliminary Environmental Analysis Report

Project Information District ~ County ~gs__ Route 129 Post Mile 9.5110.0 EA OT540K Project Title: 129 Curve Realignment Project Manager: -'D=co;;:_t;_;;;tg~H:..::.'e:-:s:.:csi=n'"'g _______ _

Design Manager: _.!!!l_i_.:c£_-)>.._pl._· n_o.:...sa ____ _ Phone#: 805-549-3386 Phone#: 559~243-3537

Design Engineer: _P;;..L-""''1rc..:o..;;..s.;;:D...:.e...cm;;...;o.;;:z _______ _ Phone#: 559-243-3538 Environmental Manager: _M::..=a:.::.tt.:-.F..::.ow.:..:;:.:!e:.:.r ________ _ Environmental Planner: Julie McGuigan -----·

Phone#: 805-542-4603 Phone#: 805-549-31 J 8

PSR Summary Statement

'D1e anticipated environmental document for the proposed project is a Mitigated Negative Declaration/Categorical Exclusion. This document level has been selected based on the ability to avoid and/or minimize any impacts to potential Tiger salamander (and designated Critical Habitat, Burrowing owl habitat and steelehead designated Critical Habitat). Any visual impacts are anticipated to be mitigated below the threshold of significance as defined by CEQA The California Department of Transportation would act as the lead agency in the preparation of a joint NEPA/CEQA (Nationai Environmental Policy Act/California Environmental Quality Act) environmental document Caltrans will serve as the NEPA lead agency under its assumption of responsibility pursuant to 23 U.S. Code 327. The estimated time to obtain environm.ental approval is 23 months from the start of environmental studies. Assuming a start date of June 2011, environmental siudles would begin July 2011 after project preliminary maps and pennits to enter are completed. Final euvirolh"Ucntal document would be a<'lticipatcd by May 2013.

It is anticipated multiple environmental studies and reports will be required for this project including (but not limited to): archaeology survey report, historic resource evaluation report, historic property survey report, endangered species consultation with California Departmeni of Fish and Game 1md a Biological Assessment, and Section 7 consultations with a Biological Opinion issued by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). It is currently estimated that biology will be the critical path for the delivery of the environmental document.

ATTACHMENT G

Project Description

The California Department of Transportation is proposing to improve the safety of State Route 129 (SR-129) from 0.4 mile west of Old Chittenden Road to OJ mile east of Chittenden Underpass in Santa Cruz County by realigning the highway to the north approximately 60 feci in order to improve the curve radius, and sight distance. The range of construction cost estimates for the two "Build" alternatives vary from $7,962,000 to $11,464,000 (March 2011). The range of right-of-way cost estimates vary from $101,000 to Sl26,000 (escalated to 2014). This project falls into Project Development Category 4B and will be funded from the 20.10.201.010 Safety Improvements Program ofthe 2010 SHOPP.

:Purpose and Need

Need: The proposed project location is experiencing run-off-lhc-road and cross-centerline collisions.

JYm·pose: The objective of this project is to improve safety by providing an alignment that better meets driver's expectations.

Description of Work

The project proposes to improve safety within the project limits by realigning two non-standard curves anJ widening the shoulders.

Alternatives

Alternative 1 - Cut & Fill This alternative proposes to improve the safety of the segment by realigning the curves to the north hill side at a 2:1 slope and acquire new right of way. Shoulders will be widened to 8' outside the underpass structuxe limits. Construction and right of vvay costs are estimated at $7,962.000 (March 2011) and $126,000 (escalated to 2014) respectively.

Alternative 2 -Retaining This alternative proposes to improve the safety of the segment by realigning the curves to the north hill side and constructing a retaining wall in order to minimize acquiring new right of way and environmental impacts. The type of wall will be either a soil nail wall or a soldier pile walL Shoulders will be widened to 8' on the eastbound and to 10' on the westbound outside the underpass structure limits. Construction and right-of-way costs are estimated at $11,464,000 (March 2011) and $101 ,000 (escalated to 20 i 4) respectively.

Alternative 3 - Nowbuild This altemative does not address the safety problem nor does it prevent run-off-the-road and cross-centerline collisions from occurring at this location. It will not meet the project need and purpose.

Funding

[g]State [gjFederal This project is proposed for amendment to the 2010 SHOPP with funding from the 20.xx.201 ,010

614-1CL

Anticipated Environmental Approval

CEQA NEPA

Ocategorical Exemption/Statutory Exemption (83Categorical Exclusion ((836004/06005)

(83Ncgative Dcd~<~ration/Mitigatcd ND(0Appendix G) 0Finding of No Significant Impact

0Environmental Impact Report 0Envi:ronmental Impact Statement

Anticipated Environmental Schedule '··-·--· --·-~---· ~~- -- --Total Time for Environmental Approval 23months Start Date 6/l/201]

Begin Environmental 71112011

Draft Environrnentai Document 12/l/2012

Final Environmental Document 511/2013 "< ""-

PA&ED* 6/1/2013 -"

"'PA&ED is genera!~v I monthfollowmg the FED date

Assumptions and Risks

Assumptions: .. Schedule assumes that no archaeological work >vill occur beyond Phase I.

It is assumed that no wetlands or "other waters ofthe US" will be impacted. Schedule assumes that a Hydraulic Study wi11 be initiated at the beginning of P A&ED. It is assumed that under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Enviror..mental Policy Act (NEPA) a Mitigated Negative Declaration! Categorical Exclusion is the appropriate level of documentation.

• No Paleontological resources will be discovered

" There is a medium probability (3) that California Tiger Salamander (CTS) and California Red legged Frog (CRLF) or their habitat will be found resulting in a high impact lo cost and schedule hy extending it 12-24 months.

Risk Probability Ranking Ranking Probability of Risk Event

5 60-99% 4 40-59%

:---3 20-39% 2 10-19% 1 1-9%

Cost

..... Scope

Mitigation

Tnsignificant Schedule Slippage

Insignificant Costlncrease

Scope decrease is barely noticeable

Right ofWayCapital (050)

Low Delivery Plan Milestone Delay within quarter

<5%Cost Increase

Changes in pr~ject limits or features with <5%Cost Increase

Moderate Delivery Plan milestone delay

, of one quarter 1

5·l0%Cost Increase

Ch:illges in project limits or features with 5-10% Cost Increase

., Fish and Game Document Review Fee $2,200

I Dcliverv Plan milestone delay

. of more than 1 ' quarter

-~ 10-20% Cost Increase

Sponsor does not agree that Scope meets the purpose and need

,,, 'll) j

milestone delay outside fiscal l:ear >20%Cost Incwast:

I S ~ope does not

I meet purpose ar.d need

l

If a cultural resource is found to be eligible for the National Register, and if the proposed project has the potential to affect the resource in ways that would impair that eligibility, mitigation may be stipulated in a Memorandum of Agreement.

Potential (to be detennined) o 401 Permit Fee $20,000 o 1600 Permit Fee $4,000

Potential Construction Capital (04.2)

Paleontology Monitoring Biological Monitoring for California Red Legged Frog

• Biological Monitoring for California Tiger Salamander Preliminary Site Investigation

Disclaimer

$25,000 $48,000 $52,000 $15,000

This report is not an environmental document Preliminary analysis, deterrninations, and estimates of mitigation costs arc based on the project description provided in this report. The estimates and

IDisc~aimer

This report is not an environmental document. Preliminary analysis, determinations, and estimates of mitigation costs are based on the project description provided in this report. The estimates and conclusions provided are approximate and are based on cursory analysis of probable effects. This report is to provide a preliminary icve1 of environmenttl analysis to supplement the Project Initiation Document Changes in project scope, alternatives, or environmental laws will require a reevaluation of-tl:lis report.

0~-;;j/J Date: J ex:> rJJ._ '

Date: Project Manager

5ofl0

Environmental Technical Reports or Studies Requirfd

Required -requires analysis including field surveys, database ;earches, report, or memo to file ond brief explanation in the environmental document. Not Required -Issue is not applicable to the proposed project_ Possible Critical Path- Mt{ior issue thai has the potential to drive the schedule and determine !he length of time to reach PA&ED {can be more than one major issue).

Required Clc;mmce Not Possible Memo Jtequired Crilicnl

Received .Pnth Biology 0 C8J

Endangered Species (Federal) ~ c Endangered Species (State) (g1 0 Species of Concern {CNPS, USPS, BLM, S, F) cgj 0 Wetland Delineation 0 lZJ Natural Environment Study ~ 0 Biological Assessment (USF\VS, NMFS, State) ~ 0 Add others as necessary 0 0

Cultural Resources 0 ASR 129 0 HRER [81 0 HPSRJHRCR [81 0 Screening Memo 0 0 0 SHPO Concunence fg] 0 Native American Coordination !gJ 0 Finding of Effect Document (g1 0 Treatment Plan & MOA 0 0 Add others as necessary 0 0

Hazardous Waste 0 0 fSA (g1 0 PSI [81 0 ADL [81 0 Add others as necessary 0 0

Air Quality Analysis t8'J 0 Hot Spot Analysis 0 rgJ MSAT 0 l8l

Noise Study 0 l8l 0 0 Water Quality (8J 0 0 0 Community Impact Assessment 0

Environmental Justice 0 !Z1 Grov.'th Related Impacrs 0 !Z1

Cumulative Impacts 0 l8l 0 Fm·mfand (g1 0 0 Visual Resources 0 0

Scenic Resource Evaluation 181 0 Visual Impact Assessment f81 0

Floodplain Evaluation 0 t8:l 0 Paleontology !Z1 0 0 Section 4(f) Evaluation 0 [81 0 Wild and Scenic River Consistency 0 f2J 0 Greenhouse Emissions (g1 0 0

ivlwcil 13, 20 l J

Permits Anticipated fo.r Construction

40 l Permit Coordination (discharge into navigable waters) ?

?

0 0 404 Permit Coordination (dischcrgc into waters of the US including Wetlands) I

-f81- Nationwide - ··---· --------------+------+--------!

r---------0 -Individual

'1600 Permit (Streambed Alteration) ? [J

C:ty/County Coastal Permit Coordination 0 'Z)

State Coastal Permit Coordinatio11 0 I (81

Discussion ofTeclmicaJ Review

Biology

The pr~ject may affect special status species found in the region such as California Red-legged Frog, California Tiger Salamander, California Burrowing owl, Western pond twtle, Saline clover and Tri-colored blackbird. The California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) indicates that these species have been sited within l-5 miles of project area. ln addition, the Pajaro River is located adjacent to the pro[;oscd northern end of the project area and, if any design changes occur in this area, aquatic habitat and StceJhead habitat may also be impacted. (Pajaro River in this location is rated as "good" - for migratory habitat, also listed as Steelhead Critical Habitat area). A Natural Environment Study will be developed for this project Results of the biological su-:veys wiU determine the need for a Biological Assessment and appropriate coordination with resource agencies.

Although the California Natural Diversity Data Base (CNDDB) indicates sensitive biological resources are present within the region, the location for proposed construction lies within historically distw·bed areas. Land disturbance activities are related to agriculture and the original construction methods used to build the road and bridge over 40 years ago. Further field studies, in most cases will be required to establish presence/absence of special status species.

Wild and Scenic River

There are no Wild and Scenic Rivers within the project limits.

Cultural Resources

A field survey (Phase 1) of the proposed Area of Potential Effects (APE) is required. Project mapping that depicts the total project limits, construction easements, and specific construction activities (e.g., excavations, borrow sources, and equipment storage areas) are required prior to the initiation of Phase I archaeological study. This includes all proposed right of way acquisition, staging areas; borrow sources, utilities relocation, and temporary easements. Based on field inventories and additional archival research, an Archaeological Survey Report (ASR) will be prepared. Approximately two months will be needed to complete the necessary archaeological field studies and cultural resources report. Modifications in project plans may result in additional studies.

It is possible that an archaeological site wiH be identified during Phase I surveys which would require boundary definition if it is within the project APE. If an archaeological site is discovered within the project APE and cannot be avoided by the alternatives, Phase II excavations will be required to detennine the site's eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. If a site is determined to be eligible to the NRHP and it cannot be avoided through design, then an MOA would be prepared which would stipulate the mitigation requirements such as data recovery.

Native American Coordination

Native American Consultation with local members of the Ohlone community will be initiated, as project plans are refined.

Hazardous Waste

There are hazardous waste concerns for this project depending on the planned scope of work. Categories of concern are lead based paint, yellow thermoplastic paint stripping, asbestos containing materials, soils containing aerial deposited lead and Treated wood waste. Any bridgework would require a Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) to assess for any asbestos containing material.

flif_Quality Analysis

The total area of potential disturbance would be wd1 within the Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control District daily grading threshold of eight acres. Appropriate minimization measures will be implemented.

Water~

A Water Quality Assessment (WQA) will be required for Alternatives 1 and 2 to address any potential physical, chemical, or biological impacts to water quality within the project area.

Community Impact Assessment

There are no communities within the project area that vvould be negatively impacted by this project

Cumulative Imt~acts

Cumulative impacts to resources in the project area may result from highway, residential, commercial and industrial development. A discussion of cumulative impacts will be included in the environmental document

]<annland

If agricultural property wH! be acquired for this project a Farmland Impact Rating Form wiH be completed in coordination with the Naturdl Resource Conservation Service. The finding wiH be addressed in the environmental document

Noise

A noise report was received. There are a few residences near the highway in the vicinity of the project limits and short-term (construction) noise impacts could be ofminor concern.

Yisual Resources

A Visual Impact Assessment is warranted in order to assess and disclose the potential affects

from the project.

floodplain Evaluation

The project is not in the 1 00-ycar floodplain and has no reguiatory status.

tJ>Ifil

Paleontology

Based on the information provided, there appears to be a probability of encountering paleontological resources through the project In the event that paleontological resources are encountered, the sites will be evaluated by a professional paleontologist prior to the sta1t of construction. The determination may be made that construction monitoring by a professional paleontologist is required at ce1iain locations during construction. Furthermore, if any vertebrate fossil remains are found at any location during construction operations, it is required that construction be halted in th~ iL'lmediate vicinity of the discovery, until the District Archaeologist or District Paleontology Coordinator have the opportunity to review the sLe.

Section 4(i) Evaluation

There are no known 4(f) properties within the project limits.

Greenhouse Emissions

Greenhouse emissions will be t;ddressed in the environmental document.

List of Preparers

I Air Quali!}: Technical re2ort by Karl Mikel 4/15i20IO j Noise Technical Report by KarllVHkcl 4/15/2010 I .l?t~log~c.al ~cQpin~~pof!.l?y _ _!:~a. Schicker 6/15/2010 ·-----

Cultural Resource Scoping Report by Krista Kiaha 5/3/2010 Water Quality by Isaac Leyya 6/24/20 lO H~'!f,gous Waste Scop.ing Report by Isaac Leyva 6/24/2010 .

i Paleontology Scoping Report by Isaac Leyva 612312010 Visual Scoping Report by Bryan Parker 8/10/2010 ~elimin~ Environmental Anai;<Lsi~ Reeort b~ Julie McGuigan 2/4/2011

1

0152

Revised: 51121201

Central Region Environmental Division Mitigation Cost Compliance Estimate Form (MCCE)

This MCCE is for: PEAR

Disl -Co-Rte- PM: 05-SCR-129-9.5/9 9

Project Name: Hwy 129 Curve Realignment

Project Description: CURVE REALIGNMENT

Enwonmenta! Manager: .:.:M.:.::a~tt:...:.F..::O:..:.W:..:.:Ie::::.r __________ _

De_sfgn Manager: .::;J.::.im:.:..:::E:::::SPc;:i::..:no=.:s:.:a:.._ _________ _

Design Engineer: James Espino~,_a ________ _

Project Manager: =0'-"o=u ... g..;..H;..;:e;.;;;s""si.ng...._ _________ _

Date: 5/11/2010

MCCEPreparedBy: ~J~ut~ie~M~c~G~u~ig~a~n~-----------------

EA: 05..0T540

Alternative#: -------­(If applicable}

Phone Number: 805-542-4603

Phone Number: {559) 243-3537

Phone Number: (559) 243-3537

Phone Number: (805) s.t9-3386

Right of Way Capita! (Prior to Construction Capital (During & Construction 050-$'s} Post Construction 042-$'s) --y;;: ~C.:'¥k:!.;c.<' ,,_~y;;::;~:ri~:t<y'~~,;g;<f,;:

Archaeological

Historical

Paleontology

Hazardous Waste

Air Emissions Biological

Mitigation parcels (#of acres only) ---------­Mitigation/Bank Credits ($-only) Monitoring

Permit Fees

401 Permit Fee

404 Permit Fee

1600 Permit Fee

Coastal Development Permit Fee

DFG Fee

Bat/Swallow Exclusion

Other: -----------------------------------Other: ------------------------------

$20,000 $0

$4,000

$2,200

$50 000 $50.000 $5000

$20,000

~<~ ... )__,..--" TOTAL 1 ~ Approved By: ;fNt/ f:

$26,200 $175,000 Date: os/;.;;./'o

' Environmental Branch Chief Thill form is completed as part of the PEAR for aH candidate projects. at completion of the Draft Environmental Document, at completion of the Final Envtronmental Document, and during pr!lparation of the PS&E

Thts form is to be completed for aN SHOPP. STlP, and Minor A & 8 projects (even those without mitigation).

Include all costs necessary to complete the commitment including: capital outlay (non-staffing support costs); cost of right·of-way or easements; long-term monitoring and reporting by consultants during the construction phase; and any follow-up maintenance post constructi<ln.

Tim111g of Enhancement/Endowment funds will depend on which agency is requiring the mitigation, Funds may need to be available as 050 or as 042.

Long Form ~ Storm Water Data Report

Dist-County-Route: 05-SCr-129

Post Mile Limits: 9.5/10.0

Project Type: Curve Realignment

Project ID (or EA): 05-000(){)857-K (05-0T540K)

Program Identification: 20.10.201.010

Phase: [8l PID

D PA/ED

0 PS&E

Regional Water Quality Control Board(s): Central Coast, Region 3

Is the Project required to consider Treatment BMPs? Yes 0 No !8l No 0 If yes, can Treatment BMPs be incorporated into the project? Yes 0

If No, a Technical Data Report must be submitted to the RWQCB at least 30 days prior to the projects RTL date. List RTL Date: 02/28/2014

Total Disturbed Soil Area: 5.5 Acres Risk Level: 3

Estimated: Construction Start Date: 09/2014 Construction Completion Date: 08/2015 Notification of Construction (NOC) Date to be submitted: 08/2014

Erosivity Waiver

Notification of ADL reuse (if Yes, provide date) Separate Dewatering Permit (if yes, permit number)

Yes D Yes D Yes D

Date: ________ No !82 Date: No 181 Permit # No !82

This Report has been prepared under the direction of the following Licensed Person. The Licensed Person attests to the technical fnformatfo ontained herein and the date upon which recommendations, conclusions, and decision are based. Profess/a af ngineer or Landscape Architect stamp required at PS&E.

~

I have reviewed the stonnwater quality design issues and find this report to be complete, current and accurate:

~· , J/ I

Douglies~tMana~ )/ tfi/ If ~Datt!

3 [Stamp Required for PS&E only)

4(0~-

Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handbooks Project Planning and Guide July 2010 ATTACHMENT tJ

. .

CO~RTE-PM

R<ltumoo Had No Oe$ign REVIEWER DEPARTMENT ctlecklist C<>l'lll1lelll.ll Comments Re$P<>Ildl!<

~~----~·--. ~--~-~~~~~0~~ D D @' D D:::c_ IB l2r 0 0

lo D G m ~ @ D B D 0

D 0 0 D B B 0 D IZJ,EJ 0 D 0 0 0 0 D D. l4' D D BID D D 0 @ 0 0 B D D D OlD 0

!0 D 0 0 D D 0 0 0 0 D 0 -----·----+---------+-----------" 0 D 0 D 0 D D D D 0 0 0 D D D 0 D D 0 0 0 D 0'0 D D 0 0 D 0 D D D D D D 0 D D n -

-ATTACHMENT .....,_,_---:----::---,--":-:::::.:-::-:-'---·· Form laSt n:vised September 7, 2004 PJD Su pott Brancn

Hexnorandum

To: DOUG HESSING Date:

File: CD .:'. EA < ~~· • • ~ • .....

. l .. . ,-:,::; ' ' ~ .. A.lt

,m,1 ESPINOSA DESCRIPTION:

CURVE REAUGNMEN T

From: Departman t of Transportation

Subject: RIGHT OF WAY DATA SHEET

The foll.owing assu.nptions and lui tinjl condi tio~ns_ were identified:

Appraisal

Utility

Page 1 rif3

ATTACHMENT I

E:A: 05·0f540K

ALT: 1Hi::V5

Cost

Expert Wil<1ess:

Tille and Escruw:

Ad Sig:.s:

Total Currt::nt Value: f R'/./ Ccs~ ts~ rjekfs arc O!!irf<, Cost:; ~so

Cost Elroak Down

Pet Ho~a

Lanct

Bani\

PermitFEce

;; of Parcel Type X·

tt cl Parcel Type ;v 'Jss 11 ::n S1C,000 .P£:"'1·:cmp1ex

Parcel Data

(I

cf Parcel Ty~ c· 0 co;-,:pk::r. spCCl~j VC.i\.tJU~r:

#cfParc<:iT;pe D: 0 m~st comp:~v, and lime con.sumi'lg

c

Tot3ls:

Mise RJW Work

# o' RAP Displacements:

'-

-#-·o_f_C_f_ea_r_a_n_ce_I_O_e_m_o_s_: _____________ ij .. I # cf Const Permits:

# ol Condemnatbns;

Request Date:

Re'tl$ed Dare:

Cttttftnt Ye:u CDnUng~ncy R<itr: ;'011

RigillofWay Esca!.:;tion Rat"

$22~750 25%-

$33,750 25%

so 25%

SHJ8,619

0 R/N LEAD TIME!Mo,

0

RR Involvement

Rai,road F<Jcllities or Ri!Jnl otWay Affec:ed?

Consl!Maml Agreement:

Service Cu-Jtract

Right of Entry'

Cl<lc.Ses;

U4·3:

Utilities

S\3!.: E:<pense, Fra~:wa; ::o Fed A!.

U4--4: Stale Ex~'""se, both ':fllh Fed Aid

U5·7: UhMy venf1c~it;on, no relocatton/p~thollnp

Uii·ll: Utility \fe:hfh::aHcn- wi some retc:;atH)n.-~pc:->:-;;-;mg

U5·9: U~!()t ~-.rif!cat'Jns ra!ccaiionipoHlCling !l'(jUired

S37,912

so

$0

so

'5125.740

YES

YES

YES

YES

24 r;lON

EA; OS·OT540K ALT: ·fRE\/5

Total RrW Req\iired: 22

Total Excess Area: 0

General Description of R!W and Excess Lands Required (:zoning, use, major improvemunts, critical or li>ensitive parcels, etc.); ONE RURAL GRAZiNG PARCH WITH EXTENSIVE FENCING.

General Description of Utility Involvement:

ROUT€ 129 IS DESIGNATED CONVENTIONAL. HIGHWAY lN PROJECT A.REA. 05 PERMIT ReCORD AND lNI"ORMATION PROVIDED DOES NOT ALLOW AN i'.CCURATE PREDICTION OF POSSIBLE UTILlTY CONFLICTS. ENCROACHMENT PERMITS PRIOR TO 1997 LOCATED !N .04 PERMITS OFFICE AN ACCURATE COST ESTIMATE IS NOT CURRENTLY POSSIBLE. FIELD REVIEWED ON 11/10110. FIBER OPTIC U!\E APPEARS TO BE IN RAILROAD RIGHT OF WAY-CONFIRMED PER EMAJL BY PROJECT ENGINEER IN 2!2011. PROJECT ENGINEER STATES NO POTHOLING NECESSARY.

ls \here a significant effect on assessed 'taluation: No

Were any previously unidentified sites with haz::mioc:s <uaste or material found: No

Are RAP displacements reqvired: No

#of single family: 0 #of muliti·family. 0 # of bt:sinessfnonprofii ·

Sufficient replacement housing will be available v.<thoullast resort housing:

Are matenal borrow er disposal s1tes required:

Are there potential relinquishments or aoandonmen!s:

Are there any existing or polenlial airspace sites:

Are environmental mitigation parcels required:

Data for evaluation provided by: Estimator:

Ra11road Liaison Agent:

UWt1y Relocation Coordinator:

No

JIM GENTRY

SAH

MARSHALL GARCJA

No

No

0 # offarms:

3/2/2011

212812011

3/1/2011

NIA

0

1 have personally reviewed this Right of Way Sheet and all supporting information. complete and current, subject to the limiting conditions set forth.

I find this Data Sheet

Date ENTERED PMCS

BY: R TABAREZ

3110/2011

r 1 I , \ lty.,,, ' ' •. '' 'i .~,..v.f +i("'~

CONNIE SHELLOOE Sr. Right of Way Agent, Right of Way

Page 3 of

, r

F:ile: CD • .• EA Alt.

Co;_'('

DESCRIPTION:

CURVE REALiGNMENT

ercn: D•apartment of Transportation

' .. ~ ' "~ ' c -;_;.

The fc::...lcwing assu .. -r.q?tions and lilni ting conditions ••ere idertti:fied:

.. ':' l" "' ~ .. ,,_}"•\t\o>.. f +'"1,;,'1,

Utility

Pagcicf3

fA U5-0T540K

ALT. 2REV5

Right Of Way Cost Estimate

Mitigation:

State Share of UtWties:

Expert Witness:

Demcliticm and Clearance:

Title and Escrow:

Ad Signs:

Total Current Value;

Current Year Contingency Rate 2011

S~9250 25%

S32.75C 2:f:fv

533,750 25%

so 25%

SJ 25%

20 25'::.

$1,9~ j 2$/:.

<::"' ""' 25'f/j

$87,661

0154

Request D«te: 217f2()11

Revised Date;

Right of Way Escalated Year Escalation Rate 2014

5':". $22,284

5o/..l $37,912

5'!/J $3!1,070

5~~, so

s:;.~ so

5o/o so 5"' ,, $2,213

_,, :1'7u so

$101,479

Estimated Construction Contract Work (CC'!J/ · ·· 0 RFW LEAD T!ME!Mo.

r--~-C-o_s_t_B-re_a_k_D_o_w_n ___ ..,

Poi Hc~e

M•tigatton Lnnd 0 Bank v

I Permit fe:e 25 :::Ot) ._ __________ " __ j

Patce.l Data

# of Parcel Type A: l9&S !ran SiO/iOO '~on-complex

# of Parcel Type B: 0

;: of Parcel Type C.

#of Pare<;! Type D. 0 # of Du<~!s Needed. m~ :.;1 complex a!l\1 hme cons-umlrr;

T¢!als:

4 of Excess Perce1s: 0

Mise RJW Work

I # of RAP D1spiacement~r C

#of Clearance/Demos:

# of Co.,sl Permits;

# of Cor1demnahons:

0

0

c

RR bwofvement

Railroad Fac;lit.es or Right of Way Affected?

Const/Maint Agreement

Right of E:-try:

Utilities U4·1: ()-,, ne1 ExpellSi:l

U4·Z

U<t-3· State Ex~se F'ree~my no Fed P.>ct

U4-4; State El!:pense bo~h ..-.;;;., Fed Aid

U5-7: i t.~t:;ty ver-fi~~j0~, no rt:k,"Ctfficr:'oc!'1::;tmg

US-8: l.lbltl} vetill<:<>l•on. wl $01111l ~ocatonlp¢lhc .ng

us-s: Ut.Hit--1 varifitat>:,~s- r;,;tocahontpo!holing required

YES

NO

YES

YES

24MCN

0

2

>j

Pag-:~ 2 uf3

ALT: 2REV5

0 &4

0

Gen~ral Dttsctiption ot R/W and Excuss limd:'. Re~JulretJ (zoning. usa. ma1cr irnprcvsments, ::rlUc;;l or sanslUve p~:'"CdZ, r;U;,):

Cn~e rural draz;n~1 pare&! v~;th *-<ten~ive fencx·g

General D,;-scriplioo of Utility lnvolv!lment;

J::oute 12£ ;S ae;ngnated con.-eoHiJtl<l! hif)hway in r~rc;ect ::~rea Alt 2Rev5 proposes a retammg wall. 05 Permit record snd ir.formstion t-tovded dc~s r:ot ai!O\V an ncc:;n;::e predfC!iCrt cf p~ss~bte ut1My cordHc\s_ Encrc.ocf',1r:ent perml·ts prtot to 1997 located ;t'l. 04 permit;: cffrc;;:~ P .. n <:CQ.Hate cost esHn1aie is n~t currertHJ pJss,·:>~t; Field r>?Vit~ed Cfl ·J 1i10i 1tl F·tbi;r op!i;' :Ine appears to be m tai1roz;d rrght of 'Nay h

Confotfr,eU Pi.H cmaij by project er-gineer tn 2/20! 1 ?·Jn pctho~ing necessar; at ft-",k; per design eng':n;;;eL

Were <my prcvlous!y umdentified sites with haz.;.rcvus wast~ or material fovnd No

J;..re RAP dlsolJc.ements required: N.?

(l 0

Data for evaluation provided by: Est:mator:

U::i:ly Relocation Coordinator:

No

No

Nc

J\m Gentry

SAH

Marshall Garcia

()

3>'212C1i

2/2812011

3!1/2011

NiA

llnwe pers::maliy reviewed this Right of Sheet end ail supportmg information. I find this Data Sheet complete and current S(Jbject to the fimi:fng conditions set forth.

I i \ i (;

Date CONNlE SHELLOOE

ENTERED p:·,!CS Sr. Right of Way Agent, Right of Way BY: R 1 cbarez

615h

Long Form ~ Storm Water Data Report

Dist-County~Route: 05-SCr-129

Post Mile Limits: 9.5/10.0

Project Type: Curve Realignment

Project lD (or EA): 05-0000.0857-K (05-0T540K)

Program Identification: 20.10.201.010

Phase: 1:8J PID

0 PA/ED 0 · PS&E

Regional Water Quality Control Board(s): Central Coast, Region 3

Is the Project required to consider Treatment BMPs? Yes 0 If yes, can Treatment BMPs be incorporated into the project? Yes 0

lf No, a Technical Data Report must be submitted to the RWQCB

No rgJ

NoD

at least 30 days prior to the projects RTL date. List RTL Date: 02/28/2014

Total Disturbed Soil Area: 5.5 Acres Risk Level: 3

Estimated: Construction Start Date: 09/2014 Construction Completion Date: 08/2015

Notification of Construction (NOC) Date to be submitted: 08/2014

Erosivity Waiver

Notification of ADL reuse (ifYes, provide date)

Separate Dewatering Permit (if yes, permit number)

Yes 0 Yes 0 Yes 0

Date: No !:81 Date: ________ No !:81 Permit No l81

This Report has been prepared under the direction of the following Licensed Person. The Licensed Person attests to the technicallnformatfo ontained herein and the date upon which recommendations, conclusions, and decisio are based. Profess/a af gineer or Landscape Architect stamp required at PS&E.

Petros l Demo ,

Doug HesSlnifO]eet Mana~ ~Dat~

Caltrans Storm Water Quality Handboov.s Project Planning and Guide

2010 ATTACHMENT J t•

DISTRICTS TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PLAN CHECK UST

Dlstrlct I EA: 05·0T540K ~-=~~-----------Project Engineer: ...;.J._irn-':-:'E,-.sp.,_,i,..n""'os_a _____ _

. Date Prepared:_..;;3::,;;/3/;;.;:2:.:0;..;.11,;._ ____ _

Check each box and reference your attachments to the item(s) number{s) shown pn the list.

1.0 Public Information 1 .1 Public Awareness Campaign 1.2 Other Strategies

2.!) Motorist Information Strategies 2.1 Changeable Message Signs 2.2 Construction Area Signs 2.3 Highway Advisory Radio(tixed and mobile) 2.4 Planned Lane Closure Web Site 2.5 Caltrans Highway Information Network (CHIN)

3.0 Incident Management 3.1 COZEEP 3.2 Freeway Service Patrol

4.0 Traffic Management Strategles 4.1 Lane/Ramp Closures Charts 4.2 Total Facility Closure 4.3 Coordination with adjacent construction 4.4 Contingency Plan

4.4.1 Material/Equipment Standby 4.4.2 Emergency Detour Plan 4.4.3 Emergency Notification Plan

4.5 SSP 12-220 and Others 4.6 Other Strategies:

•oetour must be approved by local agency *Include $350/day in Supplemental Items 066070 *Monitor delays and gueue length. If gueue length exceeds 1.5 miles or delay exceeds 15 minutes, modify operations. *Special Days: Watsonvl!le Air Show & Santa Cruz Co. Fair 'Use CMS to notify of lane closures 5 working days prlor to construction.

5.0 Anticipate Delays 5.1 Lane Closure Review Comm1ttee

{for anticipated delays over 30 minutes) 5.2 Planned highway closures

5.3 Minimal delay anticipated • no further action required provided above strategies are implemented

Shayne Sandeman District TMP Coordinator

CoAhe·PM: SCr-129·9.5/10.0 Description: Curve Realignment

Working Days: Alternative 1- i80 days

X

COMMENTS

Include $15,000 in 066063 {TMP- Public Info.)

Provided durin PS&E

Pick up lane closure if queue exceeds 1.5 mi. Construction/Contractor to rovide - as needed Construction/Contractor to rovide - as needed Construclion/Contractor to _erovide - as ne~e_d __ Standard

This is in addition to any other Maintain Tralllc funds.

SSP 12-128 ______ _

[gyes Ono If no, explain additional measures on attached sheet

ATTACHMENT K

DISTRICT 5 0157 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT PlAN CHECK liST

District I EA:-':0-:'-5.0~T5;;;..40~K"------­Project Engineer: ..:::J.::.im::::_,;::;Es:::fp~i::-;n.::.osa=------

Date Prepared: _..::313"-=/2:;;.;0;...;1...;;.1 _____ _

Check each box and reference your attachments to the item(s} number{s) shown on the list.

1.0 Public Information 1.1 Public Awareness Campaign 1.2 Other Strategies

2.0 Motorist Information Strategies 2.1 Changeable Message Signs 2.2 Construction Area Signs 2.3 Highway Advisory Radio (fixed and mobile) 2.4 Planned Lane Closure Web Site 2.5 Callrans Highway Information Nelwork (CHIN)

3.0 Incident Management 3.1 COZEEP 3.2 Freeway Service Patrol

4.0 Traffic Management Strategies 4.1 Lane/Ramp Closures Charts 4.2 Total Facility Closure 4.3 CoordinatiOn with adjacent construction 4.4 Contingency Plan

4.4.1 Materia!IEquipment Standby 4A2 Emergency Detour Plan 4.4.3 Emergency Notification Plan

4.5 SSP 12-220 and Others 4.6 Other Strategies:

·oetour must b local a enc ental Items 0.68070

•Monitor delays and queue length. If queue length exceeds 1.5 miles or delay excesds 15 minutes, modify opera1ions.

•special Days: Watsonville Air Show & Santa Cruz Co. Fair ·use CMS to notity of lane closures 5 working days prior to construction.

s.o Antlclpate Delays 5. i Lane Closure Review Committee

{for anticipated delays over 30 minutes) 5.2 Planned highway closures

5.3 Minimal dalay anticipated • no further action required provided above strategies are implemented

Shayne Sandeman District TMP Coordinator

Co.-Rte-PM: SCr-129-9.5/10.0 Description: Curve Realignment

Working Days: Alternative 2 - 200 days

COMMENTS

X Provided during PS&E X

X ~, .. _. ··---·-··-

X Pick up lane closure if queue exceeds 1.5 m(. ____ X Construction/Contractor to provide • as needed

~ Construction/Contractor to provide - as needed Construction!Contract<>r to provide ·as needed Standard

X

~ n;, •;, "'"'""' tc "'"""" """"" T~:..:--.•.

''"'""-·---X SSP 12-128 -· X

X - . --- ~---·~~---·- ··~.._,..

X 5 days full ctosure with detour

[!]yes Ono If no, explain additional measures on attached sheet

I

ATTACHMENT L

i

~; ~ ~

!0 ~

! ~ i I 1 ; i

t ' ~ I

~

"

'~ ~ If , l

" ~ 1 ·~·-/ -•

;j • ~ i ! ~·

g £

f

I +\ ~ ~

II ~ t l

l ll

i i i

I ,, ' }; I 11

~! i i! ~

J· r ~

~

1 ?

~ 'i

" li ~ ! li Ul . ~ .~

i ct ! •

~ ~

! I r~

}! ;:.:,

I 1 ~ ' l f

~ ,

l ,, pi ' !

~ $ ~ $.

~

r ~ ~ ' s

J i e

~ ] :l

~

g i ~ ~

I "

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CAL.lf'ORN!A HIGHWAY PATROl

TRAFFIC COLLISION REPORT CHP 556 PAGE 1 (R<=V 04 11) OPI 060 '"'

. PAG!':! l OF 24

SPECIAL CCNDlTIONS l=f lilT •• ,. I CitY ./CD!OIAL O!l!lii!CT l<Y'.Al. 1«£1'01\T NJMili!R FATAl. '[j' lJNlNCORPOUA nm SANTACRUZ 2014110235 00

-lltl<•"'-"' i~~!~'fi;-~ l OOUN'N R!POI!T:NG o:eTRICT !!EAT OIIYOFW1ii1K I TCWAWAY 2 0 !SANTACRUZ 035 SATURDAY @YES O.oo i

OOl.Llli!O!i OCCURRED ON: >.!0 OAY YEAR 1 m.tlt (lm! I<CIIlf I Ol'l'lCill!l.l),

SR·I29 ' 1112912014 ~458 9720 1 {118{;35 z 0 Wl!'i!'OST lltFORMATION: l .(lf'S COOR()!NAHlS PilOTOQAA!>ll5 !IV' D"O'"' ~ 114 FEET EAST OF MPM 129 SCR 9.83 LATI'TUOE 36.901432° lONlllrJDE • 121.$99495° J. Ll..l'fZ #18231 0 9 •ba 1\T~TERSECl'IONWITli: $TA11\tlffl'fREl. C. MICHEl;l . .S 1~5

""' 491 FEET WF..ST OF OLD Cl.fl'ITENDEN RD Iii YEll D NO BOOKED INTO EVIDENCE

f'AAT'f ORlVEII'& llel!NSE NUMBER I STATE I CLASS I M~BA'l I URI.T'f~QUf!'. ~li!OOI!l/CIJI.OII ~IC!Ol<I\E N\JM!IER )ST4TI!

1 "' CA c , N <4 I>OO;R BLK 4ZEM306 I CA

MIVSR NAA!E!FIRST, r.<IODLE, LAST) .

t;gr&ASON ERIN TINDEL CWHER'BNAME o·$1\MEAIIDIINER

STI!EiiT AllllJ!~S!I DA vm 11NDIY:~ 13ZStAVIEW AVE. APT 4 OWilEil'& AIIDJ!'!lSS _Q.8Al\IE All tlRl'IEI!

CITY ll!TiiTiillll' 3344 TIDE AVE. MORRO DAY CA 93442 SANTACRUZ . CA 95062 P'!SP0$1r!ON 01' \IENlOU Of,! Oi!P£R$ OF: [iJ OFFlCI;R Oo!l111ER 0 OTHER LaG rA!R j:vrs >!EIGHT WSIGHT l !IIRTHU/1 'ni : IAAC!i AUT0~2S-tl384 T MO OAY YSAA

IJLN 'llLIJ 5·02 140 ' 08!09/1974 w ' Lld HOM: APP, u Rfil'E~ 10 NAAI!A11\/E

OTHER I!Or.<E PHONE SU=r;N!ONE ll!i!UCU! IOEN'!WICAftCN N\IM!IHR: l G8Jll52F 4YY624446

D UNKNOWN NONE VEt-M:LETVFE 025C~B£V~~ED~(l£ SHAOEli!OM!.AG!roA~EA

INilUMNOE CAARIM l'OU<;YN\IM!!at DuM( Na O-oR 11'\'lW

NONE 01 I Dt.~co R DltOU..OVER

~ ll!ll OF TIIAV!l Of,! STREET OR lll:»>WAY [""~l)UMIT CA DOT l

W SR-129 55 CAJ...T TCPII'lf!l MCIMX

PARtY DRIVER'S LICE!i8E NUMI!l!R I STAT\! I t~ss l"'~eAO I SAFE~ f!.Q.\ltP. VEH. YEAR ~~K~~;'>IODI!l/ Cl)LOR l.IC!!Nlilli-S!m Sf liTe

2 K0888132 CA !996 ' 85() MAR 3RNP665 CA

DIW£f< W.MI!jF!Fl$T, MIDOJ..a,l.4$n l

[il ANTONIN GUTTMAN OWN!!~'$ NAME LxJ 8-I;S 01!1\/FiR

f.P£$· ln!UU:T ADDR~SS

0 425 WASHJ'NGTON ST.AP1'2J OW/.:E'I\'8 1\0D~ESS [ij :3AME All OI!IWR ' j

l~f'~'~"· l ' SANTACRUZ CA 95{}60 OISI'OSITION or \IENlOUl 0!1 O!\Ol!ljS Of: [iJ OFfiCER D O!Wl'.R D OTI!I:'R

sex j;l rm INSIGHT WEcGHl l emnmATE Jllhe! AUTO CARE· (831)72$-6384 MO PAY YEAR D M N GR"'i IM)l 170 OS!2Jil947 w PRIOR \fECHANICI\l D!!fl!C':ll Iil NOH!! AM>. . D REI'l!!HO IIARRATIVT!

'OTHER !1GMtil't!Oile lll.Jll!N£55 !'HOllE 1/illi!CI.I! lllfiN'r11'1CATlON N\1~ \: V1LSS544T133o756

D (831)272-4405 NONE VEHICU! T'IPl'i DEaalllliE \I'EiiiOLE DA.IfAGE: li!IAD£ IN M!IIAGDAREA

INMJMNC! OAAR!ER i'OlJCYl/llli!QE~ o VNK ~:: o~NOR lli'V.J¥

USAA GIC 271744557lill 01 l o MOO n JICLl,..{>VI'm • f Jt OIR CfTRA.VErlN STREET OR HIGHWAY I SI'EE!J UMII

I l nA oor l

!<: SR-129 l 55 CA~·T TCPfi'll¢ MCIMX 1 PARrY PRlVEII'S UCEJi$E ll!JMI!f.R J STATE I CL-ISS l!llRI!At; I >AfET'ff:CUlf. VEH. 't'EA.R l\IME IMOC!iliOPL0/1 L!Ci!NEEMJM!lS'< STA7li

3 DRIVER MMEjl'lruiT,JMDDUl, J.A$n

D O'/>''<liR1l NMIE U :sAMe 111 llRlVER

'!:!DES. &TR!~T AllORES! TRIAH

D """'f.WS A!ll>III!DG 0 &Mil! All DRIVER

~ CIW I&TATf I ZJP .

lli•NSlTlON 0!' \il?liJct.E ON ORoe~S 01': U Ol;'!CER U OFJVfR U OTHAA

IHMR '£YES l"f.'!3HT --·

JMO

ltf~THt:lATI: YEAR I F,AC£ &!'X \1\'*'IUHT

OilY PRIOR f>!ii:CHAtiC.II\l O~~ECT& Qt.!ONEAFI'. 0 REFill! TO AAI!ftAT~-~-

OTHER HOM~P!1GNa lHJfMA'£H~ i'H¢t~E VEilcC/.E ltll:llllrlCAllON'N\IMI!ER:

D VEifiCLE TYI'f CESQRISE VE!li(;J.E DA!AAGE fiHA::>EISllfl"'~CifilAAFA - DlJM( DooNE OwiNOft INaVRANCE CARRIER POLlCY NUMBER

! olfop OMAJOR f! ROLL.OVER '-'

UlR Of TRAHll 0.~ IIT~EI!T OR HlG>WIAY t $F!:EDU~T C..; i OCT

' CAVT 'fCP/I>SC

~ li!CiMX i

PltEPA~Hf& '!iMfJ'; l n@::~NoQohu RtVIIiWE!l'Sl\IAME

ft!J;wt_,,;;, r~:~~:\'> C l\1!CllEELS iil8i'i3S 0 L A:~ v.-''"' !;.. --~~---

A~!!> TERNATIONAU.YACCl!f~l'ffi~ 1\GEIIC'f I

&'TATE OF Ci\LIFORN'JA DEPARTMENT Of' Ci\LIFOI'<NIA HIGHWAY PATROL TRAFFIC COLLISION COOING CHP 566 CARS PAGE2 OPI o&O

NOIC*

9120

SAFElY EQUIPMENT

1· DRIVER 2 TO 6. PA$SIHIGERS 1· STATION WAGON REAR 8 ·REAR. OCC TRK OR VAN 11· POS!TlON UNKIIIOWN 0-CTHER

OCCUPANTS

A· NONE IN VEH!CI£ s. UNKNOY'<N C ·LAP61;LTUSEO 0 ·LAP BELT NOT USED E • SHOOlOCR HARNESS USED F • SHOU~OER HARNESS NOT I.JSED 0 ·I.APISHOULOER HARNESS USED H. LAPISHOULCER HARNESS NOT U$EO J ·I'ASSM!: RESTAA!NT USED

• PASSIVE RESTRAINT NOT USED ·NOT REOUlREO

CHILO RllSTRAlNT

Q • !N VEHICLE USED R -IN VEHICLE NOT USt;O S ·IN VEHICLE USE UNKNOWN T • IN VEHICLE !Ml'ROI'ER US£ U • NONE ;N VEHICLE

1\1 f C BICYCl..f!lfELMET

I'AS$1;NGER X·NO 'r-YES

~IRBAG

B·UNI<NOWN L • AIR BAG DEPLOYED M' AIR BAG NOT OEPLOYEI.l

0159 PAGE 2 OF24

INATTENTION CODES

A· CEll PHONE HANOHEUJ 8 ·CELL PHONE HANOSFREE C ·ELECTRONIC EOOIPMENT 0 ·llADIO I CO E -SMOKJNG F·Et;T!NQ G·CHILOOEN H·ANIMALS l • PERSONAL HYGIENE J• RE!;O!NG !<·OTHER

STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL

INJURED I WITNESSES I PASSENGERS CHP 555 CARS PAGE 3 (REV 04·11) OPI 065 "' OATil 01' COllUSION (1.10. OAY 'fl'..AA) TfME(2400) I NCIC. OFFICI!RUJ, NUMBER U/29/2014 1458 9720 018635 2014110235

WlTNf:~ PASSEI>KlER AOe S<;)( EXTENT OF INJURY('X' ONE} INJURED WAS ('X' ONE) PARTY ll>EAT AIH l>A"l!TV

CM ... Y f,lr.<;Tf:O OM.Y FATAl. ~ \>ll!I!<I..E C()V?!A~IT ~-oveR !PASS. I Pro. S!CYCUST l 0~ Nlll.llli!R l !'OS, WIG EOOP INJURY NJO!lY OfP!JN

D# D 4tl F [iJ Ol 0 0 !iliO!O 0 JO I j1 L G 0

NAME I 0,¢,8.1 ADDRESS TELEPHONE SEASON ERIN TINDEL (11!1/09/1974) 132 SEA VIEW AVE. APT 4 SANTA CRUZ CA 95062 UNKNOWN

(INJURE!> ON!. Y) TRANSPORTED l'lY: TAKEN TO: CORONER COUNTY MORGUE OESC!IIflE INJURIES;

PRONOUNCED DECEASED BY .BATf ALION CHIEF DITULLIO ON SCENE AT 1510 HOURS, MULTJl>U BWNT FORCE JN,TURIES. CORONER CASE f114-ll9699 .o VICTIM OF 1/!0U:NT CRlME NOTIFIED

D# 0 jt7JF [!!JOJ D t 0 o loo!o D ID l I 3 L G 0 NAMe f D.O. B.. I ADDRESS TELEPHONE KAlLA TINDEL (07fl5ft997) 488 TRINIDAD ST. MORRO BAY CA 93442 UNKNOWN {INJURED ONLY) TRANSPORTED BY: TAKEN TO:

CORONER COUNTY MORGUE '

OESCRlBI! INJURlES:

PRONOUNCED DECEASl:D BY Ilt\ITALION CHIEF DITULLIO ON SCENE AT 1510 HOURS. MULTIPLE BWNT FORCE INJURIES. CORONER CASE #14·0970(1 '[] VICTIM Of' lilOI.ENT CRIME NOTIFlED

0# D 167 I M DJ!]JI D D I oo loloJ D ID 2 I J L G 0

NAME I P,O,B.I ADDRESS TEI.EPliONI'i ANTONlN GUTTMAN (08/21!1947) 425 WASHINGTON ST. APT 21 SANTA CRUZ CA 95060 {831)272-4405 (INJUR!:!P ONLY) TRANSPORl"EO SY; TAKEN TO:

AMERlCAN .WEDICAL RESPONSE REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER OESCRli3EINJlJRlES:

FRACTURE TO LEFT COLLAR BONE, AND LEFT BIG TOE. '

CUTS TO RIGHT HAND, BRUISING TO CHEST, J'UNCTURR INJURY TO RIGHT Ki'IEE. COMI'LAJNT OF PAIN TO BACK AND CHEST. 0 VICTIM OF \IIOU:NT CRIMU NOTll'l!!P

0# I o· Ju ! M I 0 I 00 j D I 0 l l]ljDI 0 l_gj 1 j 6 p ! 0 I NAME I 0.0.13./ AOORESS TEI.EPHONI! JACOB TJNDEL (12128/2000) 488 TRINIDAD ST. MORRO BAY CA 9344Z VNKNOWN {INJURED ON!. Y) TRANSPORTED BY: TAKEN TO:

CALSTAR VALLE\:' MEDICAL CENTER OcSCRIIi!E l.NJURIES: FRACTURES TO BACK, PELVIC REGION, AND RIGHT Cl,AVICAL. '

CUTS TO HEAD; AND CONCUSION.

0 I VlC'TlM Of' 1/lOL!iiliT cruMe NOTIPIEO

[!]# t 0 I 42 I ~~ I o I o I D L 0 I DIDIO! 0 ID I l NAME i D.O.&. I ADDRESS TELEPHONE

ARGELIA MAClAS (07121/1972) 280 OSOORN RD. WATSONVILLE CA 95076 (831)262-6329 (INJURED ONLY) TRANSPORl"EO BY: TAKEN TO:

OESCRJSE INJURIES: '

l!:p.o:s.J~oR£sl 48 JM J 0 I D J 0 VICTJIII OF \IIOt:ENT CRIME NOT1FIEO

0 I 0 I D LDIDI 0 IO I I I TEi.EPflONE

DAVID ALU~NT!NDEL (1!2/28/l%6) 5331 SOQLEL I>H. SOQULLCA 95073 {831}43!-6745 (INJURED Oi>l Y) TAANSPORl"Eil BY: TMENTO:

DESCRIBE INJURIES:

n VICTIM Of VIOLENT Cf!IM!l NOnl'lEO

PR£PAREI!'S NP..ME t!.J.NUMBER r.:o. OAY YM!T~EVlEWER'S NMlE \MO. PAY YEA~

CMICHEELS 018635 11!29!2l.H4 ' "" ·~·~·

STATE OF CAUFORN!A DEPARTMENT 01' CALIFORNIA HIGHWAY PATROL

INJURED I WITNESSES I PASSENGERS PAGE 4 01' 24 CHf' 555 CARS PAGE 3 {REV 04-11 OAT!! OI'I!OI.LilliOM (MO, OAY Y!:l.f1) TIM

~~~ OfFIO~R \J), NIJM!!~

tl/2912014 1458 018635 liH411ll23S

~ PASS~NOl!R I EXTENT OF INJURY('X' ONE) INJURED WAS {'X' ONE} ~AATr I AOE j 1>0( liE~! AIR Bl<f'I!TY l'JCCTEI: l O!l!.Y I Fomf>l1£R v,a;su; ,_'"Fo ·- 1'06. SAO eOVIP.

INJURY D~ 0 P~ ~ a~~r 0

~ I [!] fl 3 0 66 IF 0 ' l NAME I O.O.e. I AOORESS T!ai!PHOIJE ANGELA SWANSON (11/0l/1948) 821 DURGAN AVE. CLOVlS CA 93611 (559)299-1919

{lNJtlREO ON!. Y). TRANSPORTED flY: TAKEN TO:

lli!SCf!!BE INJURIES: ;

n VIOTtl\1 OF \IIO!.ENT CRIME NOTlFIEil

0# D I DID! 0 I D ID 0 0 0 0 I NAME I !l.O.B. I ADDRESS TELEPHONE

(lNJUREO ON!. Y) TRANSPORTED flY: TAKEN TO:

DESCRIBE INJURIES:

n VIDTtM OF VIOLENT CRIME NOTIFIED

[kL o I I Dlol 0 I 0 io 0 0 D 0 I I NAME I 0.0.1'!. I ADDRESS TELEPHONE

' l

(INJURI!O ONLY) TRANSPORTED BY: TAKEN 'TO:

OESCRIBS INJURIES:

n VICT!til OF\IIOLE'ff CRIME \IOTIFI!iD

0# 0 I I I I o I D I 0 I oiolo 0 D ! NAME I 0.0.1:!. I ADDRI!SS TfllEPHOt<E

(INJUR!!O ONl.Y) TRANSPORTED BY: 1AKI£N'l'O:

DESCRIBE INJURIES:

l n VIOT!M OF VlOL!iNT CRl.MI! NOTIFIED

ID# I 0 I I I DID I 0 I 0 I OID!DI o I D l i ' J l ~ I NAME/ O.O.S. f 1\00RE'SS TELEPHONE

!iNJURED ONLY) TRANSPORTED l:lY: TAKEN 'tO: i

D!:SCRIBE INJURI!!:S;

; .o ViCTIM 01' \IIOl.ENT CRiME NOTIFIED l

0# I 0 I I I DID! 0 I 0 I 0 !OLDJ D !DI I I I I l

"NAWE I O.O.B, I ADDRESS 'fF.LE?HOMa : '

(INJUR!!OONt Y) TRAN!lPORT!!O BY: TAKEN TO:

OI!SCRIBI!i INJUlli!!S;

n VIOTtM OF VlOL!!NT CJUME liO'riFlED

l'Rli.I>ARER'S NAME ,1.0. NUI\!BER I MO. OAY YEARJR£VIEWER'S NAMF I MO. PAY YE'AR !

C!IIICUJ::ELS 018635 11129!20!4 I Ml "N' •cc• '<AGPiC'

I j.

r I

STATE OF CALIFORNIA SKETCH DIAGRAM CHP 555 Page 4(Rev. 8-97) OPl 042

DATE OF INCIDENT 11/29/2014

TIME 1458

NClC NUMBER 9720

, PAGE 5 OF 24 OlfFICER J.D. NUMBER 01:8635 2014110235

ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE APPROXlMA TE AND NOT TO SCALE UNLESS StATED (SCALE=

''

PREPARED BY J. Lutz

Sketch

SR-129

Raised asphalt curb

'1- 1

L~

Old Chitt~Qgen Rd.

!.D. NUMBER 018231

DATE

11/29/2014

! Legf?nd

(,[) sotr White une

® Sot!a Double Yellow Unes

@) Roj>d Edge

® Upfiard Dirt Embankment

® Ad~lsory Sign

,ER'SNAME DATE

STATE OF CALIFORNlA FACTUAL DIAGRAM CHP 555 Page 4(Rev. 8-97} OPl 042

DATE OF INCIDENT 11/29/2014

TIME 1458

NCIC NUMBER 9720

0 161

, PAGE 6 OF 24 OF ICER 1.0. NUMBER 01 635 2014110235

ALL MEASUREMENTS ARE APPROXIMATE AND NOT TO SCALE UNlESS ST~ TED (SCALE=

Not to Scale

<I! MPM 129 SCR 9.83

PREPARED BY

J. Lutz

SR-129

Old Chittenden Rd.

!.0. NUMBER

018231 DATE

11/29/2014

@ Soiid Wll!e Life

® Solid Double renew Lines

@ RoadEdge :

@ Upward Dirt ~mbankment

® Advisory Slg~ I

Raised Asp~a!t Curb

Factual Diagram

I

STATE OF CALlfOR1\ifA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

NCIC NUMBER 9720

tJ/6/a:-

PAGE 7 OF 24 OFFICER I.D. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

1 FACTUAL DIAGRAM LEGEND 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

All measurements were obtained using rolatape, and taken by Officer J. Lutz #18231. All measurements were taken from SR-129 milepost marker 9.83, which was located approximately 605 feet west of the west roadway edge prolongation of Old Chittenden Rd. Measurements were taken in an easterly direction from the milepost marker, and taken to the left and right of the south roadway edge line of SR-129, which is a stationary painted solid white line.

10 VEHICLE POINTS OF REST: 11 12 Vehicle #1 {V1, Saturn} 13 14 15 16 17 18

Left front wheel was located approximately 106 feet east of milepost marker 9.83 and approximately 11 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129. Left rear wheel was located approximately 114 feet east of milepost marker 9.83 and approximately 8 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129.

19 Vehicle #2 (V2, Volvo} 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Left front wheel was located approximately 110 feet east of milepost marker 9.83 and approximately 2 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129. Left rear wheel was located approximately 105 feet east of milepost marker 9.83 and approximately 2 feet north of the south roadway edge line of SR-129.

27 PHYSICAL EVIDENCE DESCRIPTJON: 28 29 1 30 2 31 3 32 4 33 5 34 35

Debris field from V-1. Approximate 16 foot debris field. Approximate 4 foot debris field. Approximate 14 foot debris field. Trunk lid of V-1.

36 PHYSICAL EVIDENCE LOCATION: 37 38 1 39 40 41 2 42

Center was located approximately 42 feet east of milepost marker 9.83 and approximately 9 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129.

Began approximately 59 feet east of milepost marker 9.83 and approximately 9 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129.

PREPARED BY

C MICHEELS LD:·NUMBER

018635 DATE REVIEWER'S NAME DATE

11/29/2014

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NA ATJVE/SUPPLEMENTAL

INCIDENT Tl E 11/29/2014 1458

NCICNUM8ER 9720

PAG 0 FICER I.D.

c;/6 2-

01§635 2014110235

1 PHYSICAL EVIDENCE LOCATION CONTINUED 2 3 4 5 6 3 7 8 9

10 11 4 12 13 14 15 16 5 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

Ended approximately 75 feet east of milepost marker 9.83 and approximately 9 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129.

Began approximately 97 feet east of milepost marker 9.83 ~nd approximately 8 feet south of the south ro~dway edge line. of SR-12~. I . Ended approximately 101 feet east of milepost marker 9.83jand approxtmately 8 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129.

Began approximately 110 feet east of milepost marker 9.83'and approximately 8 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129. Ended approximately 124 feet east of milepost marker 9.831 and approximately 8 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129.

Center was located approximately 118 feet east of milepos~ marker 9.83 and approximately 10 feet south of the south roadway edge line of SR-129. I

PREPARED BY I.D. NUMBeR

018635 DAfi¥---···-··-RE""V;;;::lar{E:;;;;j'.,....,=:":.-"\J\~M11ME,..----~DA':"'lT"""E---

C MICHE.ELS 1

STATE OF CAUFORNJA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL

DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

NCIC NUMBER 9720

1 FACTS ·2 3 NOTIFICATION: 4

PAGE 9 OF 24 OFFICER 1.0. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

5 On 11/29/2014, I was on duty as CHP unit 26-30. At approximately 1458 hours, I was dispatched 6 to a traffic collision with emergency personnel responding. l responded from a stolen vehicle 7 recovery at 662 Hazel Dell Rd., and arrived at the scene of the collision at approximately 1535 8 hours. While I was en-route to the collision, Monterey dispatch notified me that the collision may 9 have two fatalities. All times, speeds, and measurements in this investigation are approximate.

10 Roadway lane direction and alignment as noted in this report may not reflect true compass north. 11 Measurements were taken by Officer J. Lutz #18231 using a rolatape. 12 13 14 SCENE: 15 16 The weather at the time of the collision was overcast being lit by sunlight. The roadway was wet 17 due to recent on and off rain. 18 19 SR-129 at the scene of the collision is a two-lane, paved asphalt roadway, maintained by 20 Caltrans. The roadway is aligned in an east-west direction. The east and westbound lanes are 11 21 feet in width. Both lanes are separated by a double yellow line. South of the eastbound lane is a 22 painted white line. South of the painted white line is a five foot paved asphalt shoulder. South of 23 the paved asphalt shoulder is a varying width dirt shoulder. South of the dirt shoulder is an uphill 24 dirt embankment. The embankment is covered with shrubs, trees, rocks, and grass. North of the 25 westbound lane is a white line. North of the white line is a five foot paved asphalt shoulder. North 26 of the shoulder is a raised (three inches) asphalt curb. North of the curb is a varying width dirt 27 shoulder. North of the dirt shoulder is an uphill dirt embankment. The dirt embankment is 28 covered with shrubs, trees, rocks, and grass. 29 30 East of the collision scene, SR,-129 travels under a railroad overcrossing/bridge. The bridge is 31 composed of concrete and steel. There is a slight left curve in the roadway on the west side of the 32 railroad overcrossing when traveling westbound. Prior to the railroad overcrossing there is a 33 yellow and black advisory sign indicating a left curve in the ro~dway with a safe speed of 45 MPH. 34 The collision occurred as SR-129 transltioned back into a straight roadway. 35 36 37 PARTIES: 38 39 Party #1 (P1, S. Tindel) was located in the driver seat of V1. P1 sustained fatal injuries as a 40 result of this collision, and was pronounced deceased at the scene of the collision by Battalion 41 Chief Ditullio on 11/29/2014 at 1510 hours. P1 was identified by her valid California driver license. 42

PREPARED BY

C M!CHEELS J.D. NUMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014 REVIEWER'S NAME DATE

STATE OF CALlFORNlA

NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 . 1458

1 PARTIES CONTINUED: 2

NCIC NUMBER 9720

0163

PAGE lOOF 24 .OFFICER !.D. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

3 P1 was placed as the driver of V1 by her resting position in the driver seat of V1, P2's verbal 4 statement, and W1 's verbal statement. 5 6 Party Profile of Party #1 (P1, S. Tindell 7 8 11/23/2014 P1 left her home with Pass1 and Pass2. P1 had driven V1 from the Santa Cruz area 9 to the Clovis area to visit family forThanksgiving. P1 remained with family until11/29/2014.

10 11 11/29/2014 P1 left the Clovis area (W3's home) at approximately 1200 hours. P1 began driving 12 V1 back to the Santa Cruz area with Pass1 and Pass2. 13 14 11/29/2014 at 1458 hours, P1 lost control ofV1 and was involved in a fatal traffic collision. 15 16 Vehicle #1 (V1, Saturn) was located on all four wheels, with the front-end of V2 still touching the 17 passenger side of Vi. V1 was facing in westerly direction, on the south dirt shoulder of SR-129. 18 V1 sustained major damage as a result of this collision. The passenger side had approximately 19 two to three feet of intrusion into the passenger compartment (measured at the 8 pillar). The 20 driver and passenger alrbags had deployed as a result of the collision. The right front passenger 21 seat had been pushed toward the driver side. The right front passenger seat was resting partially 22 behind the driver seat. The steering wheel had been pushed toward the driver side, and rotated to 23 face the driver door. V1 was impounded for evidence using Auto Care Towing per 22655.5VC. 24 25 Refer to Vehicle Inspection for full details (Pages 17 -20). 26 27 Party #2 (P2, A. Guttman) was located at the scene of the collision by Officer Ghiglia #20807. 28 P2 was sitting on the south shoulder of SR-129, near V1 and V2. P2 verbally identified himself by 29 his name and date of birth. P2 was placed as the driver of V2 by his verbal statement, W1 's 30 verbal statement, P2 is the registered owner of V2, and P2 had injuries consistent with being 31 involved in a traffic collision. 32 33 Vehicle #2 {V2, Volvo) was located on all four wheels, with the front-end still touching the 34 passenger side of V1. V2 was partially blocking the eastbound lane of SR-129, and blocking the 35 south shoulder, while facing in a southeasterly direction. V2 sustained major front-end damage as 36 a result of this collision. The right rear brake light was still illuminated. Inside of the vehicle, the 37 driver and passenger airbags had deployed. The driver seatbelt was locked in an extended 38 position, indicating P2 was wearing his seatbelt at the time of the collision. V2 was taken for 39 evidence using Auto Care Towing per 22655.5VC. 40 41 Refer to Vehicle Inspection for full details (Pages 21-24). 42

PREPARED BY

C MICHEELS J.D. NUMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014 REVIEWER'S NAME DATE

1

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

1 PHYSICAL EVIDENCE: 2

NC!CNUMBER 9720

3 See Physical Evidence Legend for full description. 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 11 12

• Damage to V1 (See Parties). e Damage to V2 (See Parties). • P1's fatal injuries (See page 3). • Pass1's fatal injuries (See page 3). e P2's injuries (See page 3). • Pass2 injuries (See page 3).

13 OTHER FACTUAL INFORMATION:

PAGE ll OF 24 O~FlCER I.D. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

14 ' 15 The following emergency personnel responded to the scene of the pollision: 16 i

17 Battalion Chief Ditullio 18 19 Engine 5111 (Aromas I California Fire Department) 20 492 Carpenteria Rd., Aromas, CA 95004 21 Captain Lynch 22 Engineer Barrett Anzar 23 24 Engine 4677 (Aromas I California Fire Department) 25 492 Carpenteria Rd., Aromas, CA 95004 26 Engineer Brent Rogers 27 Firefighter Arthur Holmsky 28 Firefighter Timothy Makanani 29 30 Engine 4511 (Pajaro Valley I CalifornJa Fire Department) 31 562 Casserly Rd., Watsonville, CA 95076 · 32 Engineer Nick Hermosillo 33 Engineer Tiffany Tracy 34 Firefighter Robert Sacher 35 36 Santa Cruz California Highway Patrol 37 10395 Soquel Dr., Aptos, CA 95003 38 Sergeant Grant Boles #17451 39 Officer Jeff Lutz #18231 40 Officer Chris Micheels #18635 41 Officer Paul Ghiglia #20807 42

PREPARED BY C MICHEELS

I.D. NUMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014 DATE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NARRA riVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TlME 11/29/2014 1458

NCIC NW 9720

1 OTHER FACTUAL INFORMATION CONTINUED: 2 3 Hollister Gilroy California Highway Patrol 4 740 Renz Ln., Gilroy, CA 95020 5 Officer E. Zuniga #19923 6 Officer J. Smith #20854 7 Officer P. Shaw #20742 8

tJ/64

018635

9 Party #1 (Season Tindel) and Pass1 (Kaila Tindel) were pronounced deceased at the scene of the 10 collision by Battalion Chief Ditullio on 11/29/2014 at 1510 hours. 11 12 13 STATEMENTS: 14 15 Party #1 (P1, S. Tindel) sustained fatal injuries as a result of this collision, and was unable to 16 provide a statement. 17 18 Party #2 (P2, A. Guttman) was initially contacted at the scene of the collision by Officer Ghiglia 19 #20807. P2 verbally identified himself by his name, date of birth, and related the following 1n 20 essence: P2 was driving V2 east in the eastbound lane of SR-129 at an approximate speed of 40 21 MPH, just west of Old Chittenden Rd. P2 was driving V2 to the Frasier Lake Air Park in Gilroy. 22 As P2 began to negotiate a right curve in the roadway, he observed V1 approaching in the 23 opposite direction (west on SR-129). P2 observed V1's rear tires begin to lose traction on the wet 24 roadway. V1 veered to the left (north) appearing to be out of control. V1 then abruptly veered 25 back to the right (south) with the rear of V1 sliding out of controL V1 crossed over the double 26 yellow line and entered the eastbound lane of SR~129, directly into the path ofV2. P2 must have 27 applied the brakes to V2, but was unable to recall any of the events after that. P2 was then 28 removed from V2 by emergency personnel, and given medical aid. ~ .

30 On 12/08/2014 at 1610 hours, l spoke with P2 over the telephone. P2 identified himself by his 31 name, date of birth, and related the following in essence: P2 had left Santa Cruz and was on his 32 way to a place near Gilroy. P2 was driving V2 east in the eastbound lane of SR-129 toward SR-33 101 at an approximate speed of 40 MPH. P2 was driving this speed due to the wet and curvy 34 roadway. Earlier on SR-129, P2 had pulled along the shoulder to let some faster moving vehicles 35 past his location. As P2 was approaching the railroad overcrossing, there were no vehicles in 36 front of V2. As P2 got closer to the railroad crossing V1 drove under the railroad crossing ln the 37 opposite direction (westbound). P2 then observed V1 drive onto the north shoulder of SR-129. 38 V1 then careened across (southerly direction) the roadway in a sideways manner directly in front 39 of V2. There was nothing P2 could have done, and the front-end of V2 collided into the passenger 40 side of V1. P2 was unsure if he had applied the brakes to V2, but felt instinctually he would have 41 done so. V2 immediately came to a stop upon impacting V1. P2 opened the driver door of V2 42

?l?,£1?;-f?rrJs?_______ w. NLiM'F£;;;:---·---r:s:il;i;~ !?.<=..:VIEWER'S NAME DATE

C MICHEELS 018635 11/29/2014 ========================~ ====================== ====-:

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/20~4 1458

1 STATEMENTS CONTINUED: 2

NC!C NUMBER 9720

t)j 6 4.tC-

PAGE 13 OF 24 OFFICER 1.0. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

3 and got out. P2 immediately thought that he was not going to get back to V2 for a while so he got 4 back in and took the keys to V2. P2 then walked to the south shoulder of SR~129 and sat down. 5 P2 remained on the shoulder until emergency personnel arrived. 6 7 Passenger #1 (Pass1, K. Tindel) sustained fatal injuries as a result of this collision, and was 8 unable to provide a statement. 9

10 Passenger #2 (Pass2, J. Tindel) was being given medical aid in the back of an ambulance at the 11 scene of the collision. Pass2 was very distraught, injured, and unresponsive. Pass2 was unable 12 to provide a statement at the scene of the collision. If Pass2 is able to provide a statement at a 13 later date and time, a supplemental report will be generated, and attached to this report. 14 15 On 12/03/2104 I responded to Valley Medical Center. I arrived at Valley Medical Center and 16 attempted to talk with Pass2 at approximately 1500 hours. Pass2 had sustained major injuries 17 and was under medication for his pain. Pass2 was unable to provide a verbal statement 18 19 Witness #1 (W1, Macias} was contacted at the scene of the collision. W1 identified herself with a 20 valid California driver license and related the following in essence: W1 was driving her vehicle 21 north in the northbound lane of Rogge Lane, approaching the intersection of SR-129. W1 stopped 22 her vehicle at the intersection of SR-129. W1 looked for approaching traffic to her left (west), and 23 observed V2 approaching at a slow rate of speed. W1 decided not to enter traffic and allowed V2 24 to pass. As V2 passed W1, P2 waved at W1 in a manner of thanking her for not pulling out in 25 front of him. After V2 passed, W1 pulled into the eastbound lane of SR-129. V2 and W1 were 26 traveling east in the eastbound lane of SR-129 at an approximate speed of 45-50 MPH. W1 was 27 approximately five car lengths (75 feet) directly behind V2. As W1 and V2 began to negotiate a 28 right curve in the roadway, W1 observed V1 sideways (facing south} in the eastbound lane of SR-29 129, directly in front of V2. W1 was unsure if she saw V2's brake lights illuminate, but observed 30 smoke come from V2's tires from trying to stop. W1 then smelt burnt rubber coming from V2. W1 31 then observed the front-end of V2 collide into the passenger side of V1. W1 immediately applied 32 the brakes to her vehicle, and came to a stop. W1 placed her vehicle into park, and exited the 33 driver door of her vehicle. W1 immediately called 911 to report the collision. While on the phone 34 with 911, other witnesses stopped and began checking on everyone. The other witnesses began 35 telling W1 what to tel! the 911 dispatcher. W1 remained at the scene of the collision until 36 emergency personnel arrived. W1 related that there was nothing P2 could have done to avoid this 37 collision, and that he was not at fault for it. 38 39 Witness #2 (W2, D. Tindel} was contacted at Valley Medical Center on 12/03/2014 at 40 approximately 1515 hours. W2 identified himself by his name, date of birth, and related the 41 following in essence: W2 used to be married to P1. W2 and P1 have two children in common 42 {Pass1 and Pass2). W2 had custody of Pass1 and Pass2. On 11/25/2014 P1 had picked up

.....,P=R=EP"'"'A-;:;:R"'E''o=-'"'s=y,.------- ---..,.!=.o.~N"'U""N""'m=ER:::---~o=A=TE-------;:R~E;-;;Vl""EW:-:;:E:-;:;R"""'S-;:;NA"M""E,..----~DA""'T=E---

C MICHEELS 018635 11/29/2014

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

1 STATEMENTS CONTINUED: 2

NClC NUMBER 9720

0165

PAGE 140F 24 OFFICER LD. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

3 Pass1 and Pass2. All three had gone to P1's mothers home in Fresno for Thanksgiving. P1, 4 Pass1, and Pass2 arrived at the location. W2 kept in contact with his family during their trip. On 5 11/29/2014 W2 received a phone call from his family relating that they were leaving Fresno and 6 on their way home. The last phone call W2 received, was from Pass1, approximately one hour 7 prior to the collision. Pass1 told W2 that they were approximately one hour from home. When 8 W2's family did not get home, he began calling all of their cells phone. W2 was worried because 9 his family was late, and Pass1 had work at 5pm. When P1, Pass1, and Pass2 did not answer

10 their cell phones, W2 became very worried. W2 then called 911 to see if P1 had been involved in 11 a collision. W2 did not remember much after that until Deputy Baldridge arrived at his home to 12 notify him of the events that had occurred. W2 responded to Valley Medical Center to be with his 13 son. W2 has since been at Valley Medical Center. 14 15 W2 related that V1 was originally his, but P1 had owned V1 for the past 10 years. Approximately 16 one year ago P1 had been involved in a traffic collision. P1 had since had the damage fixed at a 17 repair shop. To W2's knowledge, there was nothing wrong with V1. W2 would not have let his 18 children go with P1 if something was wrong with V1. W2 also related that P1 was a good driver to 19 his knowledge. When P1 and W2 were together he typically drove. W2 knew that P1 was having 20 financial trouble but she had been taking care of her stuff. W2 related that P1 had some mental 21 issues which was part of the reason they had split apart. 22 23 Witness #3 (W3, Swanson) was contacted over the telephone on 12/12/2014 at approximately 24 1045 hours. W3 identified herself by her name, date of birth, and related the following in 25 essence: P1 had arrived at her home in Clovis on 11/25/2014 with Pass1 and Pass2. P1, Pass1, 26 and Pass2 spent several days with W3 for Thanksgiving break. On 11/29/2014 P1, Pass1, and 27 Pass2 had left her home around noon to head back to Santa Cruz. Pass1 had to be back to go to 28 work at 5pm. Later that night W2 called asking where his kids (Pass1 and Pass2) were. W3 29 related that they had left at noon and she had not heard from them since. W3 was later notified of 30 the accident. W3 only saw P1 drive V1 away from her home to head back to Santa Cruz. W3's 31 husband had mentioned that V1 was running better than it had before. W3 related that P1 was a 32 good driver and she never drove fast. 33 34 35 OPINIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 36 37 SUMMARY: 38 39 P1 was driving V1 west, in the westbound lane of SR~129, at an unknown rate of speed. P1 had 40 just driven past Old Chittenden Rd., and was driving under a railroad overcrossing. Pass1 was 41 sitting in the right front passenger seat of V1. Pass2 was sitting in the right rear passenger seat of 42 V1. P2 was driving V2 east, ln the eastbound lane of SR-129, at a stated speed of 40 MPH. P2

PREPARED BY

C MICHEELS LD. NUMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014 REVIEWER'S NAME DATE

12

STATE OF CALJFORNIA

NARRA TIVEISUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

1 SUMMARY CONTINUED: 2

NCIC NUMBER 9720

o;t seL

PAGE 15 OF 24 OFFICER I.D. NUMBER 018635 . 2014110235

3 was approaching the same railroad overcrossing. P1 was driVing at an unsafe speed for the wet 4 roadway conditions as she began to negotiate a left curve in the roadway. Due to P1's unsafe 5 speed for the roadway conditions, P1 lost control of V1. V1 began to spin out of control, while 6 traveling in a southwest direction. V1 traveled across the double yellow line into the eastbound 7 lane of SR-129, while facing in a southerly direction, directly in front of V2. P2 observed V1 8 spinning in front of V2. P2 applied the brakes to V2 in an attempt to avoid a collision with V1. P2 9 was unable to avoid V1 as the front-end of V2 collided into the passenger side of V1. The impact

10 caused major intrusion into the passenger side of V1. V1 and V2 both traveled in a southeasterly 11 direction. V1 came to rest on the south paved asphalt and dirt shoulder of SR-129, on all four 12 wheels, while facing in a westerly direction. V2 came to rest with its front-end stuck to the 13 passenger side of V1. V2 was blocking the eastbound lane and south shoulder of SR-129. V2 14 was on all four wheels facing in a southeasterly direction. P1 and Pass 1 sustained fatal injuries 15 as a result of the collision. 16 17 18 AREA OF IMPACT: 19 20 The area of impact was determined using physical evidence and statements obtained from P2, 21 and W1. 22 23 All measurements were obtained using ro!atape, and taken by Officer J. Lutz #18231. All 24 measurements were taken from SR-129 milepost marker 9.83, which was located approximately 25 605 feet west of the west roadway edge prolongation of Old Chittenden Rd. Measurements were 26 taken in an easterly direction from the milepost marker and taken to the left and right of the south 27 roadway edge line of SR-129, which is a stationary painted solid white line. 28 29 AOI #1 (V1 vs. V2) was located 114 feet east of MPM 129 SCR 9.83 and six feet north of the 30 south roadway edge of SR-129. 31 32 33 INTOXICATION NARRATIVE: 34 35 Officer Lutz #18231 and Officer Ghiglia #20807 contacted P2 at the scene of the collision. Officer 36 Lutz and Officer Ghiglia began obtaining information from P2 regarding the collision. During this 37 time, Officer Lutz and Officer Ghiglia did not observe any signs or symptoms of alcohol or drug 38 intoxication on P2. 39 40 No signs or symptoms of alcohol or drug intoxication were observed on P1. 41 42

PREPI\RED BY

C MICHEELS I.D. NUMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014 REVIEWER'S NAME DATE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL PAGE 160F 24 DATE OF INCIDENT TIME NCICNUMBER

9720 OFFICER 1.0. NUMBER

11/29/2014 1458 01$635 2014110235

1 CAUSE: 2 3 The cause was determined using physical evidence and statements obtained from P2, and W1. 4 . 5 P1 (Season Tindel) was at fault for this collision by driving V1 in violation of California Vehicle 6 Code section 22350, which states in part: 7 8 No person shall drive a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable or prudent 9 having due regard for weather, visibility, the traffic on, and the surface and width of, the highway,

10 and in no event at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property. 11 12 Due to P 1 driving V1 at an unsafe speed for the roadway conditions; P1 lost control of V1, spun 13 into the opposing lane (eastbound) of SR"129, directly into V2's path, and was subsequently 14 broadsided by V2. · 15 16 17 RECOMMENDATIONS: 18 19 None. 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

PREPARED BY C MICHEELS

!.D. NUMBER 018635

DATE

11/29/2014 REVlEWER'S NAME DATE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

NC!C NUMBER 9720

PAGE 170F 24 OFFICER LD. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

1 2

VEHICLE INSPECTIONS

3 Vehicle #1 (V1, Saturn) 4 5 Year: 6 Make: 7 Model: 8 Type: 9 Color:

10 License Plate Number: 11 Vehicle Identification Number (VIN): 12 13 14 Description of Damage: 15

Saturn Sedan Four Door Black 4ZEM306 1G8JU52F4YY624446

16 There was damage to the entire vehicle. Starting at the back of the vehicle the trunk was 17 detached. The left side of the rear bumper was up while the right side was down. The rear 18 window was shattered and missing. Both brake lights had been damaged and were missing the 19 red covers. The driver side of the vehicle had scrapes, scratches, and dents. The front and rear 20 door of the vehicle did not open and close properly due to damage. The roof on the driver side 21 appeared to have been pushed down. The left fender was pushed upward in the front. The 22· fender broke in the middle and was pointing down toward the ground. The hood was lifted up 23 from the fender. The wheel well was touching the !eft front tire. From the front of the vehicle the 24 hood was lifted up and bent on the passenger side. Both headlight assembly's were damaged 25 and the passenger side was missing. The windshield was cracked and folded in on the passenger 26 side. The passenger side of the vehicle had the greatest amount of intrusion. The right front door 27 was hanging to the vehicle and barely attached. The left rear door was not attached to the 28 vehicle. The right front wheel was bent outward and down toward the ground. The "B" pillar had 29 been cut at the roof and on the bottom near the floor board. The right rear wheel was damaged 30 with the rear tire barely holding air. The roof of the vehicle was bent inward and upward. The 31 passenger airbag was deployed. I ran a string line from the right rear quarter panel over the front 32 of the vehicle at what appeared to be the body line. Measuring in from the string line there was 33 28" of intrusion to the "B" pillar. At the front-end, the right front axle was 16" outward from the 34 string line. The intrusion caused the passenger compartment to shift left, while the engine 35 compartment shifted right. The right front passenger seat had shifted at an angle to be next to the 36 driver seat, while angled behind it. 37 38 Wheelbase: 39 40 Driver side: 41 Passenger side: 42

PREPARED BY

C MICHEELS !.D. NUMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014

116" 84"

REVIEWER'S NAME DATE

STATE OF CALfFORNIA

NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

1 Steering: 2 3 Steering intact/functional: 4 Steering wheel moveable: 5 Damaged steering linkage: 6 Power steering intact: 7 Adequate fluid: 8 Belt in place: 9 Signs of pre-existing conditions;

NCIC NUMBER 9720

0167

PAGE 180F 24 OFFICER !.D. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

No No Yes Yes Yes Yes No

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

The steering on V1 had been severely damaged as a result of this collision. The steering column had been bent toward the driver side of the vehicle. The steering wheel was not attached to the steering column. There was a clean break where the steering wheel connected to the steering column. There was major damage to the passenger side of the vehicle. Thls damage caused the steering linkage to be effected. ! was unable to move the wheels in a left or right manner due to the damage and detached steering wheel. All of the damage appeared to be as a result of the collision.

20 TIRES AND WHEELS: 21 22 Left Front: 23 Brand: 24· Model: 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40

Size: Tread Condition: Tread Depth: Pressure:

Right Front: Brand: Model: Size: Tread Condition: Tread Depth: Pressure:

Left Rear: Brand: Model:

41 Size: 42 Tread Condition:

PREPARED BY !.D. Nl!!i4F.lF~P. - DATE.

Han kook Kinergy ECO 195/65/R 15 91 H Fair Inner: 6mm, Center: 6mm, Outer: 5mm 28 PSI

Han kook Kinergy ECO 195/65/R15 91 H Fair Inner: 4mm, Center: 6mm, 19 PSI

Michelin Weatherwise II 195/65/R15 89T Fair

Outer: 5mm

·---R""'E"'V=IEW~E;:-;:R""''Sc-;;N~AM.-:;;E=-.. ---";:;'DA-:;-:;T"""E ·----

C MICHEELS 018635 11129/2014 ~~~~===~~====~~~==========·- -·-

l

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

1 TIRES AND WHEELS CONTINUED: 2 3 Tread Depth: 4 Pressure: 5 6 Right Rear: 7 Brand: 8 Model: 9 Size:

10 Tread Condition: 11 Tread Depth: 12 Pressure: 13 14 15 BRAKES: 16 17 Brake pedal intact and functional: 18 Damaged from the collision: 19 Emergency Brake intact and functional: 20 Master cylinder intact: 21 Adequate fluid: 22 23 left front: 24 Disc or Drum: 25 Brakes functioning: 26 Collision damage: 27 Condition: 28 Signs of pre-existing conditions: 29 30 Right front: 31 Disc or Drum: 32 Brakes functioning: 33 Collision damage: 34 Condition: 35 Signs of pre-existing conditions: 36 3 7 left rear: 38 Disc or Drum: 39 Brakes functioning: 40 Collision damage: 41 Condition: 42 Signs of pre-existing conditions:

NCIC NUMBER 9720

PAGE 90P 24 ORFlCER I.D. 016635 2014110235

Inner: 6mm, Center: 6mm~ Outer: 5mm 26PSI

Negotiator NH65 195/65/R 15 89H M+S Poor Inner: 1mm; Center:· 2mm, Outer: 3mm 28 PSI

Yes/No Yes No/No Yes, detached from firewall Yes

Disc Unknpwn (pedal stuck) No · Fair, $ilver in color. No

Disc Unknown (pedal stuck) No Fair, !:;ilver in color. No

Drum Unknown {pedal stuck) No Fair. No

C MlCHEELS 018635 11/29/2014 =======

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

1 BRAKES CONTINUED: 2 3 Right rear: 4 Disc or Drum: 5 Brakes functioning: 6 Collision damage: 7 Condition: 8 Signs of pre-existing conditions: 9

10 11 ACCELERATOR: 12 13 Intact and functioning: 14 Collision damage: 15 Signs of pre-existing conditions: 16 17 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:

NCICNUMBER 9720

18 '

PAGE OOF 24 OFFICER I.D. 01!8635 2014110235

Drum Unknown (pedal stuck) No Fair.

·No

Yes/No Yes No

19 The damage to the passenger side and front-end of the vehicle wa13 major. The intrusion 20 ·damaged numerous mechanical items which prevented me from testing them. 21 22 23 OPINION: 24 25 After inspecting the vehicle, I formed the opinion that the vehicle was in working order. The tire 26 tread on the right rear of the vehicle was insufficient and may have; been an associated factor in 27 the collision. 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

PREPARED BY

C MICHEELS !.D. NUMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014 REVIEiJIJER'S NAME DATE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL

DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 '1458

NCIC NUMBER 9720

PAGE 21 OF 24 OFFICER !.D. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

1 Vehicle #2 {V2, Volvo) 2 3 Year: 4 Make: 5 Model: 6 Type: 7 Color:

Volvo 850 Four Door Red

8 License Plate Number: 3RNP665 YV1LS5544T1336758 9 Vehicle Identification Number (VIN):

10 11 12 Description of Damage: 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Starting at the rear of the vehicle I observed that it was leaning toward the right front. The model emblems were missing. The rear bumper had scratches and peeling paint. The passenger side of the vehicle had damage on the front-end. The right front door did not align, and the hood was bowed up. The right front fender was barely attached. The right front wheel had been pushed back toward the firewall, and the tire was flat. The right side of the front bumper was detached and folded forward. The hood had been pushed up in the middle and backwards toward the firewall. The front of the vehicle was flat and pushed back toward the firewall. Both headlights were damaged along with the grille. The hood would not release and was stuck in the closed position. The windshield was cracked in numerous spots on the driver side. The passenger side of the vehicle also had damage at the front-end. The left fender was pushed backward and up in the middle. The left front wheel was pushed backwards toward the firewall. The driver door was damaged toward the front and did not open or close properly. The roof was dented downward at the "B" pillar. There was a dent behind the "C" pillar on the rear quarter panel. Inside of the

27 vehicle the driver and passenger airbags had deployed. 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42

Wheelbase:

Driver side: Passenger side:

Steering:

Steering intact/functional: Steering wheel moveable: Damaged steering linkage: Power steering intact: Adequate fluid:

PREPARED BY

C MICHEELS LD. N[iMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014

100" 103"

Yes/No No Yes Unknown Unknown

REVIEWER'S NAME DATE

+

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

1 Steering Continued: 2 3 Belt in place: 4 Signs of pre~existing conditions: 5

NClCNUMBER 9720

0169

PAGE 220F 24 OFFICER 1.0. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

Unknown No

6 The steering on V2 had been damaged as a result of this collision. There was major damage to 7 the front-end of the vehicfe (intrusion). This damage caused the wheels and steering linkage to be 8 effected, preventing movement. I was unable to move the wheels in a left or right manner using 9 the steering wheel due to the damage. All of the damage appeared to be as a result of the

10 collision. I did note small movement in the direction with the limited amount I could turn the 11 steering wheeL The small amount was a couple inches. This did not provide an adequate test of 12 the steering. 13 14 15 TIRES AND WHEELS: 16 17 Left Front: 18 Brand: 19 Model: 20 Size: 21 Tread Condition: 22 Tread Depth: 23 Pressure: 24 25 Right Front: 26 Brand: 27 Model: 28 Size: 29 Tread Condition: 30 Tread Depth: 31 Pressure: 32 33 Left Rear: 34 Brand: 35 Model: 36 Size: 37 Tread Condition: 38 Tread Depth: 39. Pressure: 40 41 Right Rear: 42 Brand:

PREPARED BY

C MICHEELS !.D. NUMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014

Primewell PS830 195/65/R 15 88H Fair Inner: Bmm, Center: 7mm, Outer. 7mm 30PSI

Primewell PS830 195/65/R15 88H Fair Inner: 7mm, Center: 8mm, Outer: 7mm Flat due to damage from the collision

General Altimax HP 195/65/R15 · 88V Poor-Fair Inner: 3mm, Center: 5mm, Outer: 29PSI

General

REVIEWER'S NAME .DATE

3mm

1

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014 1458

1 TIRES AND WHEELS CONTINUED: 2 3 Model: 4 Size: 5 Tread Condition: 6 Tread Depth: 7 Pressure: 8 9

10 BRAKES: 11 12 Brake pedal intact and functional: 13 Damaged from the collision:

PAGE 23 OF 24 NCIC NUMBER 9720

OFFICER LD. NUrv1BER 018635 2014110235

Altimax 195/65/R 15 88V Poor-Fair Inner: 3mm, Center: 4mm. Outer: 3mm 28 PSI

14 Emergency Brake intact and functional: 15 Master cylinder intact:

Yes/No Yes YesNes Unknown Unknown 16 Adequate fluid:

17 18 Left front: 19 Disc or Drum: 20 Brakes functioning: 21 Collision damage: 22 Condition: 23 Signs of pre-existing conditions: 24 25 Right front: 26 Disc or Drum: 27 Brakes functioning: 28 Collision damage: 29 Condition: 30 Signs of pre-existing conditions: 31 32 Left rear: 33 Disc or Drum: 34 Brakes functioning: 35 Collision damage: 36 Condition: 37 Signs of pre-existing conditions: 38 39 Right rear: 40 Disc or Drum: 41 Brakes functioning: 42 Collision damage:

PREPARED BY

C MICHEELS 1.0. NUMBER

018635 DATE

11/29/2014

Disc Unknown (pedal stuck) No Fair, silver in color. No

Disc Unknown (pedal stuck) No Fair, silver in color. No

Disc Unknown (pedal stuck) No Fair. No

Disc Unknown (pedal stuck) No

REVIEWER'S NAME DATE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA NARRATIVE/SUPPLEMENTAL DATE OF INCIDENT TIME 11/29/2014· 1458

NCIC NUMBER 9720

PAGE 240F 24 OFFICER 1.0. NUMBER 018635 2014110235

1 BRAKES CONTINUED: 2 3 Condition: Fair.

No 4 Signs of pre-existing conditions: 5 6 7 8 9

There was major damage to the front-end as a result of the collision. The collision trapped the brake pedal in the pressed mode. I was unable to move the brakes using the brakes pedal. l was unable to open the hood which prevented me from checking the Master Cylinder or Fluid level.

10 ACCELERATOR: 11 12 13 14 15

Intact and functioning: Collision damage: Signs of pre-existing conditions:

Yes/No Yes No

16 Due to the major damage, I was unable to move the accelerator pedal. I also was unable to open 17 the hood to check for movement at the carburator or throttle body. 18 19 20 ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34

The damage to the front-end of the vehicle was major. The intrusion damaged numerous mechanical items which prevented me from testing them. Inside of the glovebox !located a pill bottle with three different types of pills. There were 12 brown pills with l-2 on one side. This pill was identified as Ibuprofen, which is not a controlled substance. This pill is an anti-inflammatory. There were eight small white pills with 54 on one side and 024 on the other side. This pill was identified as Flecainide acetate. This pill is not a controlled substance, and is used for antiarrhythmics. There were four white pills with A2 on one side and asprin on the other side. This pill was identified as Asprin which is not a controlled substance. I also located an Oracle Identification card inside of the vehicle. The identification card had the name Anton in Guttman with a photo on it. The name on the identification card was the same as the registered owner of the vehicle.

35 OPINION: 36 37 After inspecting the vehicle, l formed the opinion that the vehicle was in working order. I did not 38 see any signs or pre-existing conditions that would have attributed to this coHision. 39 40 41 42

PREPARED BY I.D. NUf>1BEH ---bATE REVIEWER'S NAME DATE

CM.ICHEELS 018835 11/29/2014 ======