The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2025-11-12 PC PacketPage 1 of 2 Planning Commission Regular Meeting AGENDA (to be held both at the physical and virtual locations below) Civic Center Council Chamber ♦ 300 Seminary Avenue ♦ Ukiah, CA 95482 To participate or view the virtual meeting, go to the following link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83128884939 Or you can call in using your telephone only:  Call (toll free) 1-888-788-0099  Enter the Access Code: 831 2888 4939  To Raise Hand enter *9  To Speak after being recognized: enter *6 to unmute yourself Alternatively, you may view the meeting (without participating) by clicking on the name of the meeting at www.cityofukiah.com/meetings. November 12, 2025 - 5:15 PM 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 4. AB 2449 NOTIFICATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 5.a. Approval of the Minutes of October 22, 2025, a Regular Meeting. Recommended Action: Approve the Minutes of October 22, 2025, a Regular Meeting. Attachments: 1. 2025-10-22 PC Draft Minutes 6. APPEAL PROCESS All determinations of the Planning Commission regarding major discretionary planning permits are final unless a written appeal stating the reasons for the appeal is filed with the City Clerk within ten (10) days of the date the decision was made. An interested party may appeal only if he or she appears and states his or her position during the hearing on the decision from which the appeal is taken. For items on this agenda, the appeal must be received by [date]. 7. COMMENTS FROM AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS The Planning Commission welcomes input from the audience. If there is a matter of business on the agenda that you are interested in, you may address the Planning Commission when this matter is considered. If you wish to speak on a matter that is not on this agenda that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Planning Commission, you may do so at this time. In order for everyone to be heard, please limit your comments to three (3) minutes per person and not more than ten (10) minutes per subject. The Brown Act regulations do not allow action to be taken on audience comments in which the subject is not listed on the agenda. Page 1 of 165 Page 2 of 2 8. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION 9. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE 10. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS REPORT 11. DIRECTOR'S REPORT 11.a. Receive Community Development Director's Report (November 2025). Recommended Action: Receive Community Development Director's November 2025 Report and discuss questions with Staff. Attachments: 1. Planning Division Projects Report (November 2025) 12. CONSENT CALENDAR The following items listed are considered routine and will be enacted by a single motion and roll call vote by the Planning Commission. Items may be removed from the Consent Calendar upon request of a Commissioner or a citizen in which even the item will be considered at the completion of all other items on the agenda. The motion by the Commission on the Consent Calendar will approve and make findings in accordance with Administrative Staff and/or the Commission recommendations. 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 14. NEW BUSINESS 14.a. Conduct a Public Hearing for Consideration of Approval for a Major Site Development Permit for the Construction of a Single-Story Commercial Shell with Shared Site Improvements at 1294 and 1296 North State Street (APN 001-370-36 and 001-370-37); File No. 25-001039; PA25- 000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069). Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Deny the Major Site Development Permit application as proposed, based on the inability to make mandatory findings related to public safety and traffic circulation (UCC §9263E Findings 2 and 3) due to the inclusion of the drive-through component; and 3) Approve the Major Site Development Permit for the Construction of a Single-Story Commercial Shell at 1294 N. State Street (APN 001-370-36 and 001-370-37); File No. 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17- 3069), conditioned upon the removal of the drive-through component, based on the Findings in Attachment 1, and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Attachment 2. Attachments: 1. Draft Findings 2. Draft Conditions of Approval 3. Application Materials 4. Mendocino County LRSAP (2024) Excerpts 15. ADJOURNMENT Please be advised that the City needs to be notified 72 hours in advance of a meeting if any specific accommodations or interpreter services are needed for you to attend. The City complies with ADA requirements and will attempt to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities upon request. Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the Planning Commission after distribution of the agenda packet are available at the Civic Center 300 Seminary Ave. Ukiah, CA 95482; and online at: www.cityofukiah/meetings/ at the end of the next business day. I hereby certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing agenda was posted on the bulletin board at the main entrance of the City of Ukiah City Hall, located at 300 Seminary Avenue, Ukiah, California, not less than 72 hours prior to the meeting set forth on this agenda. Kristine Lawler, City Clerk Dated: 11/7/25 Page 2 of 165 Agenda Item 5a. Page 1 of 2 CITY OF UKIAH PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES REGULAR Civic Center Council Chamber ♦ 300 Seminary Avenue ♦ Ukiah, CA 95482 Virtual Meeting Link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83128884939 October 22, 2025 5:15 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER The City of Ukiah Planning Commission held a Regular Meeting on October 8, 2025. The meeting was legally noticed on October 16, 2025. The meeting was held in person and at the following virtual link: https://us06web.zoom.us/j/83128884939. Chair de Grassi called the meeting to order at 5:15 p.m. CHAIR de GRASSI PRESIDING. 2. ROLL CALL Roll was taken with the following Commissioners Present: Jacob Brown, Devery Montaňo, Rick Johnson, Mark Hilliker, and Alex de Grassi. Staff Present: Jesse Davis, Chief Planning Manager and Kristine Lawler, City Clerk. 3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Commissioner Brown. 4. AB 2449 NOTIFICATIONS AND CONSIDERATIONS No notifications or considerations received. 5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES a. Approval of the Minutes of October 8, 2025, a Regular Meeting. Motion/Second: Johnson/Hilliker to approve the minutes of the October 8, 2025, a Regular Meeting, as submitted. Motion carried by the following Roll Call votes: AYES: Brown, Montaňo, Johnson, Hilliker, and de Grassi. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 6. APPEAL PROCESS Chair de Grassi stated the appeals deadline date is November 3, 2025, before 5:00 p.m. 7. COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS Public Comment: Lauren Sinnott – Annual artist presentation request. 8. SITE VISIT VERIFICATION No site visit was necessary. 9. VERIFICATION OF NOTICE The Clerk noted that the agenda was properly noticed. 10. PLANNING COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS Presenter: Commissioner Johnson. Page 3 of 165 Minutes of the Ukiah Planning Commission October 22, 2025, Continued: Page 2 of 2 11. DIRECTOR’S REPORT a. Receive Community Development Director’s Report. Presenter: Jesse Davis, Chief Planning Manager. No public comment was received. The October 2025 report was received. 12. CONSENT CALENDAR No items on the Consent Calendar. 13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS No items on Unfinished Business. 14. NEW BUSINESS a. Consideration of Adoption of Resolution Providing the Planning Commission’s Recommendation on a Proposed Ukiah City Code Ordinance to Establish the Open Space (O-S) Zoning District. Presenter: Jesse Davis, Chief Planning Manager. No public comment was received. Motion/Second: Brown/Hilliker to adopt a Resolution (PC Reso 2025-05) making the Planning Commission’s report and recommendation to the City Council on a proposed amendment to the Ukiah City Code by adding Article 11.5 to Division 9, Chapter 2, to establish and regulate the Open Space (O-S) Zoning District and to include the discussed modifications. Motion carried by the following Roll Call votes: AYES: Brown, Montaňo, Johnson, Hilliker, and de Grassi. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 15. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 6:27 p.m. ____________________________ Kristine Lawler, CMC City Clerk Page 4 of 165 Page 1 of 1 Agenda Item No: 11.a. MEETING DATE/TIME: 11/12/2025 ITEM NO: 2025-1258 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Receive Community Development Director's Report (November 2025). DEPARTMENT: Community Development PREPARED BY: Craig Schlatter, Community Development Director PRESENTER: Craig Schlatter, AICP ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Division Projects Report (November 2025) Summary: Planning Commission will receive the Community Development Director's Report and discuss questions with Staff. Background: Director's Reports are bi-monthly oral reports given by the Community Development Director on the status of projects, primarily within the Planning Division, of the Community Development Department. Updates may include, but are not limited to, application status of major and minor discretionary permits, the implementation status of advanced planning and related 2040 General Plan programs and projects, and updates related to the activities of other divisions of the Department. Discussion: This report is expected to provide updates in the following areas: • November 2025 Planning Division Projects Report (Attachment 1) o This is a monthly report produced on the first of each month. The November 2025 report and previous monthly reports are located on the Planning Division Services web-page, under "Current Planning Reports": ▪ https://cityofukiah.com/community-development/planning-services • Any updates since the previous Director's report at the Planning Commission's meeting on October 22, 2025, will be provided verbally during the meeting. Recommended Action: Receive Community Development Director's November 2025 Report and discuss questions with Staff. Page 5 of 165 Permit #Site Address Date Submitted Summary of Project Status 17-3069 1294 N. State St. 7/11/23 Resubmitted Site Development Permit to allow for construction two retail suites (including one drive-through), within the Community Commercial (C-1) zoning district at the "Old Tackroom" location. Original submittal 9/13/17; initial DRB evaluation on January 25, 2018; Resubmittal 8/29/25. Planning Commission (PC) Public Hearing scheduled for 11/12/25. PA24-000020/21 534 E. Perkins St.12/23/24 Major Site Development Permit of APN 002-200-43 within the Pear Tree Center, approximately 150 feet west of the E. Perkins St./S. Orchard Ave. intersection. The proposal includes the construction of a ±1,700 sq. ft. Starbucks retail, operating as carry-out and drive-through only, with no interior dining, and a total gross building area, including the outdoor canopy, of approximately 2,885 sq. ft. Incomplete/awaiting applicant response - Limited Updates Since 02/01/25. PA25-000019 1240 Airport Park Blvd.9/10/25 Major Site Development Permit and Lot Merger of APNs (180-080-74; 180-080- 75) converting a ±7,129-square-foot structure into an ‘Urgent Care and Administrative Office’ within the AIP-PD Mixed-Use Airport Industrial Park Planned Development. Design Review Board recommended approval to the Planning Commission on 10/24/25. PC hearing tentatively scheduled for 12/10/25. #LLA25-000005 401 Cooper Lane.9/23/25 A Lot Merger that merges three contiguous parcels to facilitate the development of a 15-unit Inter-Tribal Elder Village: Parcel 1 (APN 003-582) – approximately 0.64 acres; Parcel 2 (APN 003-572-18) – approximately 1.75 acres; Parcel 3 (APN 003-572-17) – approximately 0.19 acres Awaiting review and approval by the City Engineer. City of Ukiah Submitted Planning Applications 11/1/2025 Page 1 of 5 ATTACHMENT 1 Page 6 of 165 General Plan Element Implementation Program Date Due Description Status / Comments Land Use E - Zoning Code Amendments 12/31/2025 Zoning districts and map consistency with the 2040 Land Use diagram. This Ordinance Amendment will facilitate the creation of an Open Space (O-S) zoning designation, as envisioned in the Ukiah 2040 General Plan. The designation seeks to preserve and manage areas of significant natural value, such as wildlife habitats, riparian corridors, creeks, and scenic resources, while supporting community resilience and sustainable land use practices. On 10/22/25. the Planning Commission (PC) recommended the Ordinance to the City Council (CC). CC Introduction and Public Hearing scheduled for 11/5/25. Land Use E - Zoning Code Amendments 12/31/2025 Zoning amendment to establish a consistent program for new signage, streamlining the application process and implementing design standards. This Ordinance Amendment addresses goals related to lighting, community character, and consistency across zoning designations, focusing on reducing poor signage that detracts from the built environment. Completed. Updated sign ordinance adopted by City Council (CC) on 6/4/25. Effective: 7/4/25. Public handouts and guidance available to the public on Planning Division website. Land Use E - Zoning Code Amendments 12/31/2025 The City shall amend the Zoning Code to address the following topics: Downtown Zoning Code and Design Guidelines In progress. Commissioner Hilliker selected by PC to provide input to Downtown Zoning Code City Council Ad Hoc Committee. Committee met in August 2025, and October 29, 2025. PC workshop tentatively scheduled for 12/10/25. Land Use E - Zoning Code Amendments 12/31/2025 Zoning Districts and map consistency with the 2040 Land Use Diagram. In progress. Working towards creating official zoning maps by updating parcel boundaries within City limits, integrating past lot line adjustments, compiling and rectifying past zoning inconsistencies, capturing past annexation boundaries, and Ukiah Municipal Airport Compatibility Plan (UKIALUCP) infill policy identification. City of Ukiah 2040 General Plan Implementation - Status 11/1/2025 Page 7 of 165 General Plan Element Implementation Program Date Due Description Status / Comments Economic Development A - Economic Development Strategy 12/31/2025 The City shall prepare, adopt, and regularly update an Economic Development Strategy, which shall be used as an operational guide to implement the economic development goals and policies of the General Plan. Economic Development Strategy currently deferred until the City's reorganization application is further progressed. Mobility Element L - Airport Parcels 12/31/2025 The City shall prepare a study to identify parcels on which new development could benefit the airport and support annexation of those parcels. (Policy MOB-6.3) Infill Policy for Compatibility Zones: The City shall work collaboratively with the County to develop an In-fill Policy within the Municipal Airport Compatibility Zones Identification for potential infill eligibility within Airport Compatibility Zone 2 in progress. Informational Item scheduled before Mendocino Airport Commission 11/4/25. Spring 2025 CC Introduction of Ordinance identifying infill zones. Environment & Sustainability H - Cultural and Historic Registry 12/31/2025 The City shall update the list of cultural and historic resources worthy of nomination to state or national preservation lists. In progress but will be deferred until after the historic preservation ordinance is developed and adopted. Environment & Sustainability I - Historic Preservation Ordinance 12/31/2030 The City shall adopt a Historic Archaeological Preservation Ordinance to review permanent changes to the exterior or setting of designated historic or impacts to Archaeological resources. Among other topics, the Ordinance should address the following: archaeological resource impact avoidance, new development in historically sensitive neighborhood, compatibility of energy conservation retrofitting, design review standards for new structures replacing demolished historic structures, and requirements for preservation of records and artifacts from demolished historic structures. In progress. Environment & Sustainability M - Adopt a Municipal Climate Action Plan (CAP) 12/31/2025 A Climate Action Plan (CAP) and a Climate Adaptation & Resilience Strategy (CARS) are currently being prepared. Together, the CAP and CARS will establish a strategic roadmap for how the City will reduce greenhouse gas emissions, prepare for climate hazards, & build a more resilient community. Completed. Climate Action Plan adopted by the City Council at a Public Hearing on 05/21/25. Page 8 of 165 General Plan Element Implementation Program Date Due Description Status / Comments Agriculture Element, Land Use Element C - Align Agricultural Standards Completed/Ongoing Align City Agricultural Standards with those of Mendocino County; and Development Pattern LU-7, to ensure the orderly and timely growth and expansion of the City. On 10/08/25, the PC considered and adopted a resolution recommending prezoning one unincorporated parcel, Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN) 167- 280-15, addressed as 1 Carousel Lane, to the Public Facilities (PF) Zoning District, applying the Public (P) land use designation under the City’s 2040 General Plan. The prezoning is proposed in anticipation of, and to facilitate, annexation of the property into the City of Ukiah. City Council Introduction and Public Hearing scheduled for 11/5/25. Agriculture E - Reduce Regulation for Local Agriculture 12/31/2025 Ordinance Amendment to bring consistency to create a new Administrative Use Permit (AUP) process in the City of Ukiah’s Zoning Code. The new process would allow certain low-impact uses, which are currently subject to a public hearing, to be reviewed and approved by City staff if they meet specific standards. The ordinance also introduces detailed criteria for uses such as noncommercial animal keeping, outdoor sales, community gardens, live entertainment, and specialty food and beverage tastings. The goal is to simplify the review process for qualifying projects while maintaining protections for neighbors and the surrounding community. Zoning Reform Ad Hoc Committee met to discuss the ordinance on 07/23/25. City Council Introduction and Public Hearing held 08/20/25. Adopted 09/03/25. Housing Element 3c - Explore other policies and regulations that facilitate new infill housing development 3d - Facilitate improvements to permit processing to streamline housing development Completed/Ongoing An ordinance amending the Ukiah City Code in response to comments from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). This ordinance updates the City’s zoning regulations to implement state law requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) pursuant to Government Code Section 65852.2, establishing and expanding ministerial allowances. The ordinance also amends, removes, and adds regulations in response to written findings issued by HCD on April 24, 2025. Zoning Reform Ad Hoc Committee met to discuss the ordinance on 07/23/25. City Council Introduction and Public Hearing held 08/20/25. Adopted 09/03/25. On 09/17/25, HCD reviewed the City of Ukiah’s ADU Ordinance No.1244 and found it to be substantially compliant with State ADU Law. Page 9 of 165 Permit #Site Address Approved Date Summary of Project Comments PA25-000015 1201 Airport Park Blvd.8/18/25 Minor Site Development Permit to facilitate façade and signage alterations to an existing restaurant in the Airport Industrial Park Planned Development (AIP-PD) Retail Commercial Land Use Designation Design Review Board (DRB) recommended approval on 9/25/25; Zoning Administrator (ZA) public hearing scheduled for 10/2/25, continued to a date certain and approved on 10/3/25. PA25- 000016 295 Brush St.8/29/25 Director's Determination to facilitate parking lot improvements to an existing facility used for religious assembly in a Heavy Commercial (C-2) zoning district per Use Permit No. 01-29 (Eastern Catholic Mission of Ukiah), approved in 2001 Approved by Community Development Director on 10/17/25. City of Ukiah Recently (Within Previous 90 Days) Approved Projects 11/1/2025 Page 10 of 165 Page 1 of 8 Agenda Item No: 14.a. MEETING DATE/TIME: 11/12/2025 ITEM NO: 2025-1257 AGENDA SUMMARY REPORT SUBJECT: Conduct a Public Hearing for Consideration of Approval for a Major Site Development Permit for the Construction of a Single-Story Commercial Shell with Shared Site Improvements at 1294 and 1296 North State Street (APN 001-370-36 and 001-370-37); File No. 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17- 3069). DEPARTMENT: Community Development PREPARED BY: Jesse Davis, Chief Planning Manager, Katherine Schaefers, Planning Manager PRESENTER: Katherine Schaefers, Planning Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Draft Findings 2. Draft Conditions of Approval 3. Application Materials 4. Mendocino County LRSAP (2024) Excerpts 5. 14a Presentation Given at Meeting Summary: The Planning Commission is requested to conduct a public hearing for approval consideration of a Major Site Development Permit for the construction of a single-story commercial shell with shared site improvements at 1294 and 1296 North State Street (APN 001-370-36 and 001-370-37); File No. 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069). Background: Project Overview The applicant proposes the construction of a new commercial shell building featuring a drive-through component at 1294 N. State Street. The proposal involves two parcels, APNs 001-370-36 and 001-370-37, historically recognized as the Tack Room Plaza. The combined site encompasses a total area of 39,273 square feet (0.90 acres) and is situated within “C1” Community Commercial Zoning District, which is intended to accommodate community-wide commercial-serving land uses, consistent with the General Plan’s "C" Commercial designation. The commercial shell is proposed within APN 001-370-36, while the drive-through lane and improvements would traverse through both parcels. The single-story structure would cover approximately 3,261 square feet. This speculative commercial shell building currently has no identified tenant. Architecturally, the contemporary-style structure is detailed with storefront glazing and a parapet roof, reaching a maximum height of 18 feet. The internal layout divides the building into two distinct spaces: Suite A, totaling 1,844 square feet and incorporating the drive-through element, and Suite B, covering 1,417 square feet. Site enhancements include reconfiguring pedestrian access, expanding walkways, introducing shading elements, and defining a potential area for outdoor dining. Circulation improvements involve the planned abandonment of two existing driveways and the reconfiguration of the Empire Drive encroachment to be limited to one-way, right-turn-only exiting. A major component of the plan involves establishing a new one-way stacking aisle positioned at the southwest corner of the parcel to serve the proposed drive-through. For vehicular accommodation, the plan proposes 32 total parking spaces, including two accessible stalls, and allocates eight stacking spaces specifically for the drive-through queue. To address aesthetic and zoning Page 11 of 165 Page 2 of 8 requirements, the proposal includes enhancing the site's landscaping, which is designed to meet the minimum threshold at 21% coverage of the combined parcel area and to specifically screen the drive-through lane. Site History The project was originally submitted in 2017 as a Major Site and Development Permit application proposing a two-story mixed-use structure (commercial/retail and residential) with a drive-through, located in the footprint of a previously demolished commercial building. Following initial Design Review Board (DRB) evaluation on January 25, 2018, the applicant halted the project’s advancement. The applicant re-engaged in July 2023, subsequently submitting a revised design (latest re-submittal date 08.25.25) that removed the second-story residential use, opting instead for the current proposed single-story commercial shell structure with a drive- through. A subsequent DRB meeting was held in 2024, resulting in recommendations for the Planning Commission’s consideration – See DRB Recommendation (April 25, 2024) below. The subject property, historically known as the Tack Room Plaza, comprises two parcels situated at the intersection of Empire Drive and North State Street: APN 001-370-37 (23,854 square feet) and APN 001-370- 36 (15,419 square feet). Presently, the site features a 4,200 square feet commercial structure, developed entirely on APN 001-370-37, hosting various commercial endeavors, including the Honey Fluff Donut Shop, TJ Nail & Spa, Honey Tea, and a recently vacant suite formerly housing Camille’s Boutique. Notably, a 2011 fire destroyed Diamond Jim’s Sporting Goods & Liquor, resulting in the demolition of the structure and leaving a portion of the shared plaza vacant (See Attachment 3 - Application Materials, for historical and current site images). The applicant's proposal entails a new single-story commercial shell structure in this space, inclusive of a drive-through adjacent to the existing commercial improvements. Location The subject parcel (APN 001-370-36) is approximately .32 acres in size and maintains a frontage along North State Street. The property can be considered a ‘Gateway’ to the city due to its location on a major arterial road within the city (State Street) and adjacent to the Mendocino County jurisdictional boundary. The parcel is accessed via an encroachment from North State Street but has historically maintained shared access and parking with the adjacent legal parcel (APN 001-370-37), which features multiple encroachments from Empire Drive, as well as North State Street, and is commercially developed. Existing Conditions Presently, the site contains either unmarked or faded parking stripes along the front and rear (east and west) of both project parcels, and a remaining pole sign that is now used for the adjacent parcel. The site is relatively flat, predominantly covered by paving. Four access points serve the site: two along State Street and two along Empire Drive. The site currently lacks safe pedestrian access as there are no sidewalk improvements along State Street and minimal sidewalk improvements along Empire Drive. DRB Recommendation (April 25, 2024) The DRB reviewed the revised plans on April 25, 2024. The Board generally endorsed the building’s contemporary design but raised several suggestions concerning site functionality. Concerns were specifically raised about the rationale for a vacant drive-through shell. Concerns were also raised regarding difficulties exiting north onto State Street and general traffic congestion near the intersection of Empire Drive, reinforcing the need for a traffic assessment. At the conclusion of the meeting, the Design Review Board (DRB) unanimously recommended transmittal to the Planning Commission, including the drive-through component, subject to several suggestions: 1. Traffic Study: Defer the associated traffic study until a specific tenant or use is identified. 2. Pedestrian Access: Provide more effective pedestrian access (e.g. stepping stones) through proposed perimeter landscaping. Page 12 of 165 Page 3 of 8 3. Shade Coverage: Reduce the required number of trees directly in front of the commercial units, allowing a reduction in the required percentage of shade coverage for paved areas, owing to the overhang of the existing structure and identified circulation constraints. Agency Review and Project Updates (2025) Updated plans were received in August 2025, providing site and landscape plans addressing DRB feedback (including shading elements and refined pedestrian connectivity) were submitted. The revised plans also note the deferred submittal of a Traffic Study. On September 18, 2025, comments were requested from several agencies, including Public Works, the Ukiah Police Department, Mendocino County Department of Transportation, and the Ukiah Valley Fire Authority. Table 1 below summarizes comments received. Table 1 - Agency Comments Agency Comment Mendocino County Department of Transportation Mendocino County Department of Transportation (MCDOT) reviewed the application and recommended four specific conditions of approval relating to required improvements within the County right-of-way on North State Street: 1. The applicant must re-construct the commercial driveway approach onto North State Street (CR 104), consistent with Mendocino County Road and Development Standards No. A50, A40B, or as modified and approved by MCDOT staff during field review. 2. The applicant must construct a concrete sidewalk along North State Street (CR 104) fronting APN’s 001-370-36 and 001-370-37, in accordance with Mendocino County Road and Development Standards No. A40A, A40B. The curb and gutter need to be re- constructed during the removal of the driveway approach and cannot be poured monolithically with the sidewalk. 3.The applicant must construct an ADA pedestrian ramp at the southwest corner of North State Street (CR 104) and Empire Drive (City of Ukiah). This ramp needs to be designed by a licensed civil engineer and approved by both MCDOT and the City of Ukiah. 4. The applicant must obtain an encroachment permit from the Mendocino County Department of Transportation for any work performed within the County right-of-way. Ukiah Police Department UPD provided recent traffic collision data for the area surrounding the project site, including records tied to the 100 block of Empire Drive and associated addresses (1310 N. State St, 100 Empire Dr, N State St/Empire Dr, and Empire Dr/N State St). Although North State Street is outside UPD jurisdiction, it is noted that collisions associated with these addresses likely occurred along the short Empire Drive corridor adjoining the site. The location is adjacent to the North State Street/Empire Drive (Ford Road) intersection, which is identified as a High-Injury Intersection in the Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan (Attachment 4). Discussion: This section evaluates the proposed project for its consistency with the City of Ukiah’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and assesses the required Site Development Permit (SDP) findings. The proposal meets most quantitative zoning standards (e.g., setbacks, height, parking) and numerous General Plan policies, particularly those promoting infill development and multi-modal access. However, the analysis identifies outstanding concerns regarding public safety and traffic circulation associated with the proposed drive-through component, which prevents the definitive satisfaction of two Site Development Permit findings related to hazards and safety. The subsequent detailed breakdown supports Staff's recommendation that the project, as modified to remove the drive-through, is the approvable version. General Plan Consistency The site at 1294 N. State Street is located within the Community Commercial (CC) land use designation and is associated with an existing commercial center on a major commercial corridor: Page 13 of 165 Page 4 of 8 Land Use Element • Goal LU-4: To encourage the growth and development of retail, office, service, and entertainment uses in Ukiah to provide jobs, support City services, and make Ukiah an attractive place to live. o The project supports this goal by providing a new ±3,261 sq. ft. commercial shell building intended for retail and/or restaurant uses, thereby expanding commercial capacity within the city. • Policy LU-8.4: Reuse of Underutilized Property. The City shall encourage property owners to revitalize or redevelop abandoned, obsolete, or underutilized properties to accommodate growth. o This policy is directly applicable as the project proposes construction on the portion of the former Tack Room Plaza site that has been vacant since 2012, when a fire destroyed the prior commercial building (Diamond Jim's). The proposal constitutes reinvestment and revitalization of this long-vacant commercial parcel. • Policy LU-11.2: Gateways. The City shall establish key gateways to Ukiah through landscape design, appropriately-scaled signage, and building form, and historic themes to create a unique sense of place. o The parcel can be considered a 'Gateway' to the city due to its location on a major arterial road into/within the city (State Street) and immediate adjacency to Mendocino County. The proposal includes modern architectural design, new monument signage, and enhanced landscaping treatments along North State Street, supporting the goal of enhancing the Gateway appearance. Staff notes that the provided landscaping would particularly improve the frontage along North State Street. • Policy LU-4.1: High-Quality Building Design. The City shall encourage distinctive and high-quality commercial building design and site planning that respects the character of Ukiah. o The Design Review Board generally endorsed the contemporary style of the design and supported its distinctiveness from the adjacent structure. The final design incorporates suggestions regarding window shading and pedestrian accessibility, demonstrating attention to design quality. Mobility Element • Policy MOB-2.3: Pedestrian Facilities. The City shall encourage new development and redevelopment that increases connectivity through direct and safe pedestrian connections to public amenities, neighborhoods, shopping and employment destinations throughout the city. o The updated proposal directly addresses this policy by including reconfiguration of the pedestrian circulation and modification of the former 6-ft wide planter area to establish improved pedestrian access and connectivity between the parking lot and the building frontage. • Policy MOB-1.2: Multi-modal Access. The City shall require that all new development and redevelopment projects include provisions for multi-modal access provisions such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and vehicle and transit where relevant. o The project integrates dedicated vehicular access, defined pedestrian walkways, and provision for bicycle parking, thus accommodating multiple modes of travel. In summary, the project is largely consistent with the General Plan goals and policies by promoting infill development on an underutilized commercial parcel within a major commercial corridor, and by incorporating desired design enhancements and multi-modal improvements, although potential traffic impacts remain an outstanding concern. Zoning Consistency Page 14 of 165 Page 5 of 8 The parcels (APNs 001-370-36 & 001-370-37) are located within the Community Commercial (C-1) Zoning District. The purpose of the C-1 district is to provide a broad range of commercial opportunities along primary transportation corridors. Restaurants and retail stores (the potential uses for the commercial shell) are allowed uses in the C-1 District and do not require a separate Use Permit. The proposed project generally complies with the quantitative development standards of the C-1 zone, as shown in Table 2 below. Table 2 - C-1 Zoning Requirements Requirement Standard Project Component(s) Consistency Allowed Uses Retail Stores, Restaurants Commercial Shell designed for Retail/Restaurant use Consistent Minimum Site Area Min. 6,000 sq. ft. Total Project Site Area (2 APNs) is 39,273 sq. ft. Consistent Building Height Limit Max. 50 ft. Proposed Max. Height: 18 ft. (to top of parapet) Consistent Front Yard Setback Min. 5 ft. Complies (5 ft. minimum setback provided) Consistent Parking Required Varies by commercial use category (e.g., Retail: 1 per 300 sq. ft.) Based on 3,261 sq. ft. of commercial space, the total parking required is 29 spaces Consistent Parking Provided - Total Provided = 32 Spaces (30 regular spaces + 2 accessible spaces) Consistent Bicycle Parking Min. 10% of vehicle spaces required 32 spaces x 0.1 = 3.2 spaces (Rounded up = 3) 3 bicycle parking spaces provided Consistent Landscaping Coverage Min. 20% of gross area Proposed coverage: 21% of parcel area Consistent Drive-Through Use Allowed Accessory Use (subject to SDP review) Proposed drive-through is subject to Major Site Development Permit Consistent, but must meet SDP Findings The proposed project also complies with the Ukiah City Code (UCC) §9198(D)(2) requirement for drive-in, drive-through, and takeout restaurants as presented in Table 3 below. Table 3 - Additional Parking Requirements Parking Requirement Standard/Calculation Project Component(s) Consistency Gross floor area of “Suite A” is ~1,844 sf 1,844 sf/100 = 18.44 spaces (Rounded up = 19 spaces) Consistent The overall project provides 32 total parking spaces for the combined site UCC 9198(D)(2) Drive-In, Drive-Through And Takeout Restaurants: Minimum of ten (10) parking spaces or one space for each one hundred (100) square feet of gross floor area, whichever is greater and stacking area for at least eight (8) vehicles for drive-up windows. 8 stacking spaces are identified in the drive-through Consistent Page 15 of 165 Page 6 of 8 Site Development Permit Pursuant to Ukiah City Code (UCC §9261B and D), a Major Site Development Permit is required for new commercial construction on vacant parcels. APN 001-370-36, where the new commercial shell is proposed, has remained vacant since the demolition of the previous fire-damaged commercial structure in 2012. Table 4 below provides the required findings for a Site Development Permit (UCC §9263E) and Staff’s analysis of project consistency based on available information. Table 4 - Site Development Permit Findings No. Site Development Permit Finding (UCC §9263E) Staff Analysis 1 The proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the City General Plan. Consistent. The proposed project is located in the Community Commercial (C) land use designation and zoning district. It supports the General Plan goal of revitalizing underutilized property (Policy LU-8.4) by proposing construction on a parcel that has been vacant since a fire destroyed the previous commercial building. The site can be considered a 'Gateway' to the city, and the contemporary building design, enhanced landscaping, and new monument signage support policies related to enhancing the aesthetic appearance and quality of gateways (Policy LU- 11.2). 2 The location, size, and intensity of the proposed project will not create a hazardous or inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern. Unknown/Not Supported. This finding cannot be definitively made at this time. Without a comprehensive traffic analysis or operational details, it is unknown if the planned location and intensity of the drive-through will avoid creating hazardous vehicular or pedestrian traffic patterns. The need for a traffic assessment is reinforced by Design Review Board concerns regarding difficulties exiting north onto State Street and congestion at the adjacent intersection (North State Street and South Empire Drive) during peak hours. This specific intersection (N State St & Empire Dr/Ford Rd) is explicitly identified in the Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan (LRS/AP) as a High Injury Intersection (2020- 2022), having recorded 3 total injury collisions and 1 severe injury during that period, necessitating safety improvements. Further review by Public Works and the Ukiah Police Department is highly recommended. 3 The accessibility of off- street parking areas and the relation of parking areas with respect to traffic on adjacent streets will not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or surrounding uses. Potentially Hazardous (Pending Traffic Review). Although the design includes eight dedicated stacking spaces for the proposed drive-through lane, satisfying the stacking requirement under UCC 9198(D)(2), full evaluation is constrained without a traffic study. The proposal has the potential to create a hazardous or inconvenient condition given the existing street layout and noted intersection congestion during peak travel times. 4 Sufficient landscaped areas have been reserved for purposes of separating or screening the proposed structure(s) from the street and adjoining building sites, and breaking up and Consistent (Subject to Final Design). The proposed project dedicates 21% of the total parcel area to landscaping, exceeding the minimum 20% required for new commercial developments in the C-1 district. The plan modifies the former 6-ft wide planter area to improve pedestrian access. The landscaping strategy is specifically intended to enhance the frontage along North State Street and screen the drive-through lane. The current status satisfies this finding contingent on final landscape approval. Page 16 of 165 Page 7 of 8 screening large expanses of paved areas. 5 The proposed development will not restrict or cut out light and air on the property, or on the property in the neighborhood; nor will it hinder the development or use of buildings in the neighborhood, or impair the value thereof. Consistent. The development features a modest maximum height of 18 ft., which will not restrict light or air. The project revitalizes a portion of the site that was vacant following a fire and is adjacent to existing commercial retail. The new construction serves to improve the neighborhood without detrimentally impacting surrounding uses or property values. 6 The improvement of any commercial or industrial structure will not have a substantial detrimental impact on the character or value of an adjacent residential zoning district. Consistent. The site is located within a commercial corridor along North State Street. The proposed commercial use maintains the site's historical function. While the property may abut a residential district, the commercial frontage and the context of the overall development are not expected to cause a substantial detrimental impact on the character or value of the adjacent residential zoning district. 7 The proposed development will not excessively damage or destroy natural features, including trees, shrubs, creeks, and the natural grade of the site. Consistent. The project site is a developed parcel. The site and landscape plans require that on-site trees be preserved where feasible and incorporate planting of new vegetation. There are no known creeks or watercourses located on the site, demonstrating that the project will not excessively damage critical natural features. 8 There is sufficient variety, creativity, and articulation to the architecture and design of the structure(s) and grounds to avoid monotony and/or a box- like uninteresting external appearance. Consistent. The Design Review Board unanimously endorsed the building’s contemporary style. The design incorporates articulation and variety, avoiding a monotonous or uninteresting external appearance. The revised plans submitted addressed previous feedback, specifically incorporating shading elements for glare reduction and enhancing pedestrian access, demonstrating responsiveness to design quality. As noted in the findings above, the project as submitted, which includes a drive-through component, does not satisfy the required Site Development Permit findings related to public safety and circulation (UCC §9263E, Findings 2 and 3). As a result, Staff cannot recommend approval of the project in its current form. However, if the drive-through is removed and associated site circulation is revised accordingly, the project meets applicable development standards and the required findings can be made. The Draft Findings included as Attachment 1 therefore reflect the project as modified to remove the drive-through component, which staff recommends as the approvable version of the project. Recommended Action: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Deny the Major Site Development Permit application as proposed, based on the inability to make mandatory findings related to public safety and traffic circulation (UCC §9263E Findings 2 and 3) due to the inclusion of the drive-through component; and 3) Approve the Major Site Development Permit for the Construction of a Single-Story Commercial Shell at 1294 N. State Street (APN 001-370-36 and 001-370-37); File No. 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069), conditioned upon the removal of the drive- Page 17 of 165 Page 8 of 8 through component, based on the Findings in Attachment 1, and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Attachment 2. Page 18 of 165 Planning Commission | Findings Major Site Development Permit 1294 and 1296 North State Street File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069) 1 ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT FINDINGS MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-STORY COMMERCIAL SHELL WITH ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS 1294 and 1296 N. STATE STREET, UKIAH, CA; APN 001-370-36 AND APN 001-370-37 FILE NO. 25-001039; PA25-000017 (FORMERLY FILE NO. 17-3069) These Findings pertain to the construction and operation of a new single-story, ±3,261-square- foot commercial shell building and associated site improvements located at 1294 and 1296 N. State Street (APNs 001-370-36 and 001-370-37) within the Community Commercial (C-1) Zoning District, approved via a Major Site Development Permit; File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069). The structure features a contemporary design with storefront glazing, parapet detailing, and a maximum height of 18 feet. This approval is explicitly conditioned upon the permanent removal of the originally proposed drive-through facility, eliminating all associated dedicated queuing, stacking (previously 8 spaces), and access aisle infrastructure. The development revitalizes a vacant commercial parcel previously destroyed by fire, incorporating comprehensive site enhancements, including 32 total vehicle parking spaces and 3 bicycle parking spaces; expanded pedestrian walkways to enhance connectivity from the parking lot to the building frontage (via modification of the former 6-ft wide planter area); provision for potential outdoor dining; installation of shading elements; and implementation of a new landscaping plan achieving 21% coverage of the total parcel area, ensuring the project is consistent with the City’s General Plan goals and exempt from further environmental review under a Categorical Exemption (Class 32, In-Fill Development). SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS (UCC §9263E) 1. The proposal is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the City General Plan. The project, consisting of a new commercial shell building, is compatible with the "C" Commercial land use designation and the C-1 Community Commercial Zoning District. It supports the goal of revitalizing underutilized property by proposing construction on the parcel area (APN 001-370-36) that has been vacant since a fire destroyed the previous commercial building. The proposed contemporary design and enhanced landscaping along N. State Street support the goal of establishing key City gateways with appropriate design and signage (Policy LU-11.2) 2. The location, size, and intensity of the proposed project will not create a hazardous or inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern. By removing the drive-through facility as a project component, the potential for significant hazardous traffic generation, vehicular queuing, and circulation problems onto adjacent streets and the congested intersection of N. State Street/S. Empire Drive is eliminated. The resulting project is a standard commercial/retail use, and the location, size (±3,261 sq. ft. commercial shell), and intensity are appropriate for the C-1 commercial corridor Page 19 of 165 Planning Commission | Findings Major Site Development Permit 1294 and 1296 North State Street File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069) 2 3. The accessibility of off-street parking areas and the relation of parking areas with respect to traffic on adjacent streets will not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or surrounding uses. The initial concern regarding hazardous conditions was directly tied to the drive-through stacking and queuing impacting the existing street layout. With the removal of the eight dedicated stacking spaces and the drive-through use, the ample provision of 32 total parking spaces for the site ensures adequate off-street vehicle accommodation for the new and existing commercial uses. This design avoids creating hazardous conditions related to parking accessibility or overflow onto adjacent streets. 4. Sufficient landscaped areas have been reserved for purposes of separating or screening the proposed structure(s) from the street and adjoining building sites, and breaking up and screening large expanses of paved areas. The project proposes 21% landscaping coverage for the combined parcel area, exceeding the minimum 20% requirement. Although the specific need to screen the drive-through lane is eliminated, the overall quantity and placement of planters and new street trees are sufficient to screen paved areas and enhance the frontage appearance along North State Street, which currently lacks vegetation. 5. The proposed development will not restrict or cut out light and air on the property, or on the property in the neighborhood; nor will it hinder the development or use of buildings in the neighborhood, or impair the value thereof. The proposed commercial shell structure has a maximum height of only 18 ft. to the top of the parapet, which is well below the 50 ft. C-1 maximum. This modest height and the construction on a vacant parcel previously occupied by a fire-destroyed building ensures the development serves to improve the neighborhood without restricting light, air, or impairing property values. 6. The improvement of any commercial or industrial structure will not have a substantial detrimental impact on the character or value of an adjacent residential zoning district. The site has historically featured commercial activities and is situated along a commercial frontage (N. State Street). The new commercial shell, designed for retail or office uses, maintains the site's commercial function and is not expected to cause a substantial detrimental impact on the character or value of the adjacent residential zoning district. 7. The proposed development will not excessively damage or destroy natural features, including trees, shrubs, creeks, and the natural grade of the site. The site is a developed parcel. There are no known creeks or watercourses on-site. The proposal includes provisions for preserving existing healthy mature trees where feasible and incorporating new vegetation, satisfying guidelines for preservation. 8. There is sufficient variety, creativity, and articulation to the architecture and design of the structure(s) and grounds to avoid monotony and/or a box-like uninteresting external appearance. The Design Review Board positively acknowledged the contemporary style of the design and supported its distinctiveness from the adjacent structure. The revised plans incorporate Page 20 of 165 Planning Commission | Findings Major Site Development Permit 1294 and 1296 North State Street File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069) 3 necessary architectural refinements, including the addition of shading elements for glare reduction and enhancing pedestrian access (by reconfiguring the former 6-ft wide planter), ensuring the design avoids a monotonous external appearance. CEQA FINDINGS The proposed project qualifies for a Categorical Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332 (Class 32), as it involves construction on a small, previously developed parcel within an urban area and satisfies all five of the exemption’s required criteria: a) The project is consistent with the applicable general plan designation and all applicable general plan policies as well as with applicable zoning designation and regulations. The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation of Commercial (C) and the Community Commercial (C-1) Zoning District. The proposed building height (18 ft. maximum) and density (retail/commercial use) comply with all applicable standards for the C-1 zone. The intent is to promote reuse of an underutilized commercial parcel. b) The proposed development occurs within city limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. The development occurs within the City of Ukiah limits on a project site that is no more than five acres in total area (±0.90 acres). The site is a historically developed location, previously housing a commercial building destroyed by fire. The site is substantially surrounded by urban uses (existing commercial enterprises along N. State Street/Empire Drive), meeting the definition of an infill site. c) The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare, or threatened species. It is an urban site that is predominantly covered by paving or was previously developed. The project does not abut any sensitive environmental resources (e.g., wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, historical resources) that would preclude the use of this exemption. d) Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. By requiring the elimination of the drive-through component as a condition of approval, the project avoids the potential for hazardous vehicular queuing and traffic patterns that previously prevented this finding. Any remaining project-specific impacts (such as construction noise or air quality) are expected to be temporary and are addressed through compliance with universally applied development policies, including City of Ukiah noise and grading regulations The modest size of the new structure (±3,261 sq. ft.) and the infill location confirm that traffic, noise, and air quality impacts will not be significant. e) The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The project site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. The site is already serviced by existing City water and wastewater infrastructure due to its history as a Page 21 of 165 Planning Commission | Findings Major Site Development Permit 1294 and 1296 North State Street File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069) 4 developed commercial property. The proposal does not expand the service area or capacity needed in a manner that would strain existing systems. Based on the above conditions, the Planning Commission's approval of the Major Site Development Permit (MaSDP) for the commercial shell structure, specifically conditioned on the removal of the drive-through element, is eligible for a CEQA Categorical Exemption (Class 32). PUBLIC NOTICE •Notice of the Public Hearing was provided in the following manner, in accordance with UCC §9231.3, 9263 and 9264: •Published in the Ukiah Daily Journal on November 2, 2025; and •Posted on the Project site on October 30, 2025; and •Posted at the Civic Center (glass case) 72 hours prior to the public hearing; and •Mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the Project parcels on October 29, 2025; and •Emailed to all agencies having jurisdiction: September 18, 2025. Page 22 of 165 Planning Commission | Conditions of Approval Major Site Development Permit 1294 and 1296 North State Street File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069) 1 ATTACHMENT 2 DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL MAJOR SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-STORY COMMERCIAL SHELL WITH ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS 1294 and 1296 N. STATE STREET, UKIAH, CA; APN 001-370-36 AND APN 001-370-37 FILE NO. 25-001039; PA25-000017 (FORMERLY FILE NO. 17-3069) The following Conditions of Approval shall be made a permanent part of the Site Development Permit, and shall remain in force regardless of property ownership, and shall be implemented in order for this entitlement to remain valid. Approved Project Description: The project consists of the construction and operation of a new single-story, ±3,261-square-foot commercial shell building and associated site improvements located at 1294 and 1296 N. State Street (APNs 001-370-36 and 001-370-37) within the Community Commercial (C-1) Zoning District, approved via a Major Site Development Permit; File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069). The structure features a contemporary design with storefront glazing, parapet detailing, and a maximum height of 18 feet. This approval is explicitly conditioned upon the permanent removal of the originally proposed drive-through facility, eliminating all associated dedicated queuing, stacking (previously 8 spaces), and access aisle infrastructure. The development revitalizes a vacant commercial parcel previously destroyed by fire, incorporating comprehensive site enhancements, including 32 total vehicle parking spaces and 3 bicycle parking spaces; expanded pedestrian walkways to enhance connectivity from the parking lot to the building frontage (via modification of the former 6-ft wide planter area); provision for potential outdoor dining; installation of shading elements; and implementation of a new landscaping plan achieving 21% coverage of the total parcel area, ensuring the project is consistent with the City’s General Plan goals and exempt from further environmental review under a Categorical Exemption (Class 32, In- Fill Development). CITY OF UKIAH STANDARD CONDITIONS 1. This approval is not effective until the 10-day appeal period applicable to this Planning permit has expired without the filing of a timely appeal. If a timely appeal is filed, the project is subject to the outcome of the appeal and shall be revised as necessary to comply with any modifications, conditions, or requirements that were imposed as part of the appeal. 2. All use, construction and the location thereof, or occupancy, shall conform to the application and to any supporting documents submitted therewith, including any maps, sketches, or plot plans accompanying the application or submitted by applicant in support thereof. 3. Any construction shall comply with the "Standard Specifications" for such type of construction now existing or which may hereafter be promulgated by the Department of Public Works of the City of Ukiah; except where higher standards are imposed by law, rule, or regulation or by action of the Planning Commission such standards shall be met. 4. Building permits shall be issued within two years after the effective date of the Planning Permit or same shall be null and void. 5. In addition to any particular condition which might be imposed; any construction shall comply with all building, fire, electric, plumbing, occupancy, and structural laws, rules, regulations, and Page 23 of 165 Planning Commission | Conditions of Approval Major Site Development Permit 1294 and 1296 North State Street File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069) 2 ordinances in effect at the time the Building Permit is approved and issued. 6. A Final Signage Plan shall be submitted prior to issuance of Building Permit. The Applicant shall obtain all required Sign Permits, in compliance with Division 3, Chapter 7, Signs, of the UCC. Prior to the placement/installation of any sign(s), the applicant shall make application for and receive approval of a sign permit. Any signage shall be in substantial conformance with the design and development standards of the Downtown Zoning Code. 7. A Final Landscaping Plan shall be submitted prior to issuance of Building Permit, in accordance with all applicable City codes. All landscaping shall be irrigated and maintained to a satisfactory condition throughout the life of the project. 8. The Applicant shall submit verification of all applicable permits or approvals in compliance with all local, state and federal laws to the Community Development Department prior to issuance of building permits. 9. All fees associated with the project planning permits and approvals shall be paid in full prior to occupancy. 10. As outlined in Article 20, Administration and Procedures, of the Zoning Code this planning permit may be revoked through the City’s revocation process if the approved project related to this Permit is not being conducted in compliance with these stipulations and conditions of approval; or if the project is not established within two years of the effective date of this approval; or if the established use for which the permit was granted has ceased or has been suspended for 24 consecutive months. 11. In accordance with Public Resource Code 21082, in the event that prehistoric archaeological features such as a concentration of flaked stone artifacts, or culturally modified soil (midden) or dietary shell are encountered at any time during preparatory grading or underground excavation to remove existing structures, all work should be halted in the vicinity of the discovery. A qualified archaeologist should be contacted immediately to make an evaluation and determine if the discovered material represents a definite cultural resource. If it is determined that a potentially significant feature has been revealed, a temporary suspension of earth disturbing activities should be enforced until an appropriate mitigation program can be developed and implemented to satisfy the Planning Division. An archaeological monitor shall observe all further work during construction activities that are located within or near an archaeological site area, and formal tribal consultation may be required. CITY OF UKIAH SPECIAL CONDITIONS 12. Plan Revision: Prior to the issuance of building permits to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, the applicant shall submit revised plans removing all elements of the drive-through, including the stacking lane, service window, etc. The paved area designated for queuing shall be converted to general maneuvering/parking area or incorporated into landscaping/pedestrian paths. 13. Compliance with Design Review: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director a final building and ‘Landscape Plan’ incorporating all previous design enhancements relating to pedestrian connectivity (e.g., modified planter beds for access) and window shading, consistent with the Design Review Board's input. 14. Final Onsite Circulation and Signage Plan: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the Department of Public Works and Community Development Department, a final, detailed ‘Onsite Circulation and Signage Plan’. Page 24 of 165 Planning Commission | Conditions of Approval Major Site Development Permit 1294 and 1296 North State Street File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069) 3 This plan must demonstrate compliance with all applicable standards of the Ukiah City Code (UCC) and adhere to the following specific requirements: A. Onsite Circulation and Traffic Safety The plan shall clearly define all vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian routes, ensuring safe, convenient, and predictable movement on the site. 1. Reconfiguration of the Drive-Through Area: The plan shall reflect the removal of all drive-through elements, including the stacking aisle and service window. The paved area formerly used for queuing shall be repurposed for general maneuvering, parking area, or incorporated into landscaping/pedestrian paths. 2. Safety Requirements: The location, size, and layout of all circulation elements shall be designed so as not to create a hazardous or inconvenient vehicular or pedestrian traffic pattern. 3. Cross-Access and Internal Movement: The plan shall clearly delineate all existing and proposed access points to improve site circulation and further distribute vehicular traffic. 4. Parking and Maneuvering: All off-street parking areas and maneuvering aisles shall be designed and positioned so that their accessibility and relation to traffic on adjacent streets will not create a hazardous or inconvenient condition to adjacent or surrounding uses. B. Pedestrian Facilities and Accessibility: The plan shall incorporate all required pedestrian improvements to enhance walkability and connectivity. 1. Walkway Delineation: All pedestrian facilities and pathways shall be clearly delineated. This includes the delineation of pedestrian sidewalks or marked pedestrian facilities within paved or parking areas. For areas with twelve (12) or more parking stalls, marked pedestrian facilities shall be no less than three feet (3') in width. 2. ADA Accessibility: The plan shall demonstrate enhanced ADA accessibility, including refining access points and walkways, and the installation of necessary improvements such as tactile warning surfaces, appropriate signage, and accessible routes. C. Signage Requirements: The plan shall include detailed specifications and locations for all permanent, directional, and informational signage, ensuring compliance with UCC Division 3, Chapter 7. 15. Cross-Access and Parking Easement: Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide evidence of a recorded cross-access and shared-parking easement between APNs 001-370-36 and 001-370-37 to ensure legal access, circulation, and parking across both parcels. The easement shall be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director and shall ensure continued shared vehicular and pedestrian access, parking use, and circulation between the two parcels as reflected in the approved site plan. If a recorded easement cannot be provided, the applicant shall revise the site plan to demonstrate independent site circulation, access, and parking consistent with Ukiah City Code requirements, subject to review and approval by the Community Development Director and Public Works Department. MENDOCINO COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION SPECIAL CONDITIONS 16. The applicant must re-construct the commercial driveway approach onto North State Street (CR 104), consistent with Mendocino County Road and Development Standards No. A50, A40B, or as modified and approved by MCDOT staff during field review. 17. The applicant must construct a concrete sidewalk along North State Street (CR 104) fronting APN’s 001-370-36 and 001-370-37, in accordance with Mendocino County Road and Page 25 of 165 Planning Commission | Conditions of Approval Major Site Development Permit 1294 and 1296 North State Street File No.: 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069) 4 Development Standards No. A40A, A40B. The curb and gutter need to be re-constructed during the removal of the driveway approach and cannot be poured monolithically with the sidewalk. 18. The applicant must construct an ADA pedestrian ramp at the southwest corner of North State Street (CR 104) and Empire Drive (City of Ukiah). This ramp needs to be designed by a licensed civil engineer and approved by both MCDOT and the City of Ukiah. 19. The applicant must obtain an encroachment permit from the Mendocino County Department of Transportation for any work performed within the County right-of-way Page 26 of 165 CC C1 OAE N/AN/A ATTACHMENT 3 Page 27 of 165 Page 28 of 165 Site Views Figure 3 – Location Map Figure 4 – City/County Boundaries Street Views Figure 1 – 2012 Historical Image - View from N. State Street Diamond Jim’s Sporting Goods & Liquor can be seen post-fire and pre-demolition on the left of the image. Figure 2 – Current Project Site – View from N. State Street The new commercial shell building is proposed in the location of the former Diamond Jim’s. Page 29 of 165 Page 30 of 165 Page 31 of 165 Page 32 of 165 Page 33 of 165 Page 34 of 165 Page 35 of 165 Page 36 of 165 Page 37 of 165 Page 38 of 165 COUNTY OF MENDOCINO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 340 LAKE MENDOCINO DRIVE UKIAH, CALIFORNIA 95482-9432 VOICE (707) 463-4363 FAX (707) 463-5474 Howard N. Dashiell DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION Road Commissioner County Engineer, RCE 42001 County Surveyor, PLS 7148 FUNCTIONS Administration & Business Services Airports Engineering Land Improvement Roads and Bridges Solid Waste & Landfills Water Agency October 31, 2025 TO: Jesse Davis, AICP, Chief Planning Manager Department of Community Development – City of Ukiah FROM: Alexander Sequeira, Engineer I Mendocino County Department of Transportation SUBJECT: North State Street - Tackroom Mendocino County Department of Transportation has reviewed the referral for the above referenced permit application under the cover of your referral dated September 18, 2025, and recommends the following conditions of approval: 1. The applicant shall re-construct the commercial driveway approach onto North State Street (CR 104), in accordance with Mendocino County Road and Development Standards No. A50, A40B, or as modified by applicant and approved by Department of Transportation staff during field review. 2. The applicant shall construct a concrete sidewalk along North State Street (CR 104) fronting APN’s 001-370-36 and 001-370-37, in accordance with Mendocino County Road and Development Standards No. A40A, A40B. The curb and gutter shall be re-constructed at the removal of the driveway approach. The curb and gutter shall not be poured monolithically with the sidewalk. 3. The applicant shall construct an ADA pedestrian ramp at the southwest corner of North State Street (CR 104) and Empire Drive (City of Ukiah), to be designed by a licensed civil engineer, and approved by Mendocino County Department of Transportation and City of Ukiah. 4. Applicant shall obtain an encroachment permit from the Mendocino County Department of Transportation for any work within County right-of-way. If you have any questions regarding these recommended conditions, please contact me at (707) 234-2816. Page 39 of 165 From:Deven Castanon To:Max Brazill Cc:Katherine Schaefers Subject:Re: Tackroom - 1294 N State Street, Ukiah, CA; APN (APN 001-370-36) - File Number: 17-3069 - Agency Referral Date:Monday, November 3, 2025 11:06:09 AM Attachments:image001.png image002.png Traffic Collision Data Empire and State.xlsx Outlook-ns2qhz1r.jpg Good morning, You will find attached a list of calls for service for the 100 block of empire area. Please be aware that our previous dispatch system had limitations in searchable data which will not be present going forward. Any collision had to be tied to an address or intersection. Therefore I searched 1310 N State St, 100 Empire Dr, N State St//Empire Dr, and Empire Dr//N State St in an attempt to find all Traffic Collisions for the area. Keeping in mind that State St is outside our jurisdiction, it is reasonable to assume that most if not all traffic collision associated with these addresses occurred on the small Empire corridor you are seeking data for. If the collision had occurred outside our jurisdiction, it should have been routed to the Sheriff dispatch center. If you have any questions on how this data was collected or organized, please do not hesitate to reach out. Deven Castanon Crime Analyst / Evidence Tech Ukiah Police Department 300 Seminary Ave Ukiah CA, 95482 707 467-5770 Page 40 of 165 Complaint Date Received Call Number Actual Incident Location TRAFFIC COLLISION 05/30/2024 7:22:59 PM 240503041 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION INJ 12/02/2023 10:22:01 PM 231200187 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 12/02/2023 7:10:33 PM 231200176 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 08/22/2021 2:35:48 PM 210802362 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 01/23/2018 8:30:16 AM 180102552 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 01/23/2018 8:20:42 AM 180102551 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 08/11/2017 10:06:53 AM 170801429 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 06/04/2017 11:10:54 AM 170600434 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 03/30/2017 5:15:56 PM 170303545 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 02/06/2017 12:28:13 PM 170200655 1310 N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 01/12/2024 9:06:51 PM 240101212 EMPIRE DR // N STATE ST TRAFFIC COLLISION 10/04/2023 8:01:10 AM 231000334 EMPIRE DR // N STATE ST Page 41 of 165 Local Road Safety/Action Plan MENDOCINO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA September 2024 Final Report PREPARED BY ATTACHMENT 4 Page 42 of 165 ii The preparation of this report (or plan) was programmed through the Mendocino Council of Governments' FY 2023/24 Transportation Planning Work Program and funded with State (Regional Planning Assistance) Discretionary Grant funds. $89,707 is the dollar amount for the contract related to the preparation of this Final Report/Plan. Page 43 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan iii CONTENTS Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1 Safe Street and Roads For All (SS4A) Action Plan Components .................................... 4 1.Introduction ............................................................................................................... 5 What is a LRS/AP? ...................................................................................................... 5 Vision and Goals of the LRS/AP .................................................................................. 5 Study Area ................................................................................................................... 5 2.Safety Partners ......................................................................................................... 7 Leadership Commitment to Road Safety ................................................................... 10 3.Existing Planning Efforts ......................................................................................... 12 4.Collision Data Collection and Analysis .................................................................... 18 Demographic and Jurisdiction Characteristics ........................................................... 20 Collision Data ............................................................................................................. 23 Collision Data Analysis .............................................................................................. 23 Preliminary Analysis ................................................................................................... 25 KSI Collision Analysis ................................................................................................ 33 KSI Roadway Segment Analysis ................................................................................ 34 KSI Intersection Analysis ........................................................................................... 38 Geographic Collision Analysis .................................................................................... 41 Collision Severity Weight ........................................................................................... 48 High-Injury Locations ................................................................................................. 50 5.Emphasis Areas ...................................................................................................... 58 The Five E’s OF Traffic Safety ................................................................................... 58 Page 44 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan iv Existing Traffic Safety Efforts in Mendocino County .................................................. 59 Factors Considered in the Determination of Emphasis Areas .................................... 60 6. Equity ...................................................................................................................... 66 High Roadway Safety Risks in the County ................................................................. 67 Equity-Emphasis Communities .................................................................................. 67 Roadway Safety in Equity-Emphasis Communities ................................................... 70 7. Countermeasure Identification ................................................................................ 73 Identification of Countermeasures ............................................................................. 73 Draft Countermeasure Toolbox .................................................................................. 74 8. Safety Projects........................................................................................................ 77 9. Evaluation and Implementation .............................................................................. 84 Implementation .......................................................................................................... 85 Monitoring and Evaluation .......................................................................................... 86 LRS/AP Update .......................................................................................................... 88 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Mendocino County ........................................................................................... 6 Figure 2. Project Website ................................................................................................ 7 Figure 3. Public Comments Map – Mendocino County ................................................... 8 Figure 4. Mendocino County - Public Comments ............................................................ 9 Figure 5. All Injury Collisions on Mendocino County Roadways (2020 – 2022) ............ 19 Figure 6. Collisions by Severity (2020-2022) ................................................................. 23 Figure 7. Three-Year Collision Trend (2020-2022) ........................................................ 25 Page 45 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan v Figure 8. Intersection vs. Roadway Collisions - All Collisions (2020-2022) ................... 26 Figure 9. Intersection vs. Roadway Segment Collisions - KSI Collisions (2020-2022) .. 26 Figure 10. Collision Type – All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) ..................... 27 Figure 11. Primary Collision Factor: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) ........ 28 Figure 12. Motor Vehicle Involved With: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) . 29 Figure 13. Mode: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) ..................................... 30 Figure 14. Lighting Conditions: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) ............... 31 Figure 15. Weather Conditions: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) .............. 31 Figure 16. Time of the Day: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) ..................... 32 Figure 17. KSI Collisions: Roadway Segments and Intersections (2020-2022) ............ 33 Figure 18. KSI Collisions by Violation Category (2020-2022) ........................................ 33 Figure 19. Mendocino County KSI Collisions (2020-2022) ............................................ 34 Figure 20. KSI Roadway Collisions Collision Type vs Severity (2020-2022) ................. 35 Figure 21. KSI Roadway Collisions Collision Type vs Violation Category (2020-2022) 35 Figure 22. KSI Roadway Collisions by Type and Motor Vehicle Involved with (2020-2022) ...................................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 23. KSI Roadway Collisions by Motor Vehicle Involved with vs Violation Category (2020-2022) ................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 24. KSI Collisions by Collision Type vs Lighting Conditions (2020-2022) .......... 37 Figure 25. KSI Collisions on Roadway Segments by Collisions Type vs Time of the Day (2020-2022) ................................................................................................................... 37 Figure 26. KSI Intersection Collisions Unincorporated Mendocino County (2020-2022)38 Figure 27. KSI Intersection Collisions by Type and Violation Categories (2020-2022) . 38 Figure 28. KSI Intersection Collisions by Type and Motor Vehicle Involved with (2020- 2022) ............................................................................................................................. 39 Page 46 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan vi Figure 29. KSI Roadway Collisions by Motor Vehicle Involved with vs. Violation Category (2020-2022) ................................................................................................................... 39 Figure 30. KSI Intersection Collisions by Collision Type vs. Lighting Conditions (2020- 2022) ............................................................................................................................. 40 Figure 31. KSI Collisions on Intersection by Collisions Type vs. Time of the Day (2020- 2022) ............................................................................................................................. 40 Figure 32. Hit Object Collisions ..................................................................................... 43 Figure 33. DUI Collisions ............................................................................................... 44 Figure 34. Improper Turning Collisions ......................................................................... 45 Figure 35. Unsafe Speed Collisions .............................................................................. 46 Figure 36. Nighttime Collisions ...................................................................................... 47 Figure 37. Mendocino County EPDO Score .................................................................. 49 Figure 38. Mendocino County High Injury Network (2015-2019) ................................... 51 Figure 39. Mendocino County High Injury Network Insets ............................................. 52 Figure 40. Mendocino County High Injury Network (2020-2022) ................................... 57 Figure 41: Mendocino County Equity-Emphasis Communities ...................................... 69 Figure 42: Mendocino County Transportation Disadvantage ........................................ 70 Figure 43: Collision Share in Equity-Emphasis Community .......................................... 71 Figure 44: Top Four Violation Categories ...................................................................... 72 Page 47 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan vii LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Additional Community Comments ..................................................................... 9 Table 2. Document Summary ........................................................................................ 13 Table 3. Mendocino County: Population and Centerline Miles ...................................... 20 Table 4. Mendocino County Commute to Work Census Data ....................................... 21 Table 5. Jurisdiction Ranking ........................................................................................ 21 Table 6. Office of Traffic Safety Ratings 2021 ............................................................... 22 Table 7. Collisions by Severity and Fatality Type .......................................................... 24 Table 8. EPDO Score used in HSIP Cycle 12 ............................................................... 48 Table 9. High Injury Intersections (2015-2019) ............................................................. 53 Table 10. High Injury Corridors (2015-2019) ................................................................. 54 Table 11. High Injury Intersections (2020-2022) ........................................................... 55 Table 12. High Injury Corridors (2020-2022) ................................................................. 55 Table 13. Existing Programs Summary ......................................................................... 59 Table 14. Emphasis Area 1 Strategies .......................................................................... 61 Table 15. Emphasis Area 2 Strategies .......................................................................... 62 Table 16. Emphasis Area 3 Strategies .......................................................................... 63 Table 17. Emphasis Area 4 Strategies .......................................................................... 64 Table 18. Emphasis Area 5 Strategies .......................................................................... 65 Table 19. List of Viable Safety Projects ......................................................................... 78 Table 20. Cycle 11 HSIP Applications ........................................................................... 80 Table 21. Prioritization Matrix ........................................................................................ 82 Table 22: Priority Project List ........................................................................................ 83 Page 48 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan viii Table 23. Potential Funding Sources ............................................................................ 84 APPENDICES Appendix A: Summary of Public Comments Appendix B: Matrix of Planning Goals, Policies, and Projects Appendix C: Consolidated Collision Database Appendix D: Average Annual Fatality Rates Calculation Appendix E: Equity Emphasis Communities Collision Analysis Appendix F: LRSM 2024 Appendix G: HSIP Analyzers (2024) Appendix H: Project Prioritization Calculation Page 49 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 1 Executive Summary Mendocino County’s Local Road Safety/Action Plan (LRS/AP) is a comprehensive plan that creates a framework to systematically identify and analyze traffic safety related issues and recommend projects and countermeasures. The LRS/AP aims to reduce fatal and severe injury (KSI) collisions through a prioritized list of improvements that can enhance safety on local roadways within the unincorporated portions of the Mendocino County, excluding the cities of Fort Bragg, Point Arena, Ukiah, and Willits. This update to the previous Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) adopted in 2022 takes a proactive approach to addressing safety needs. It is viewed as a guidance document that can be a source of information and ideas. It is also a living document, one that is routinely reviewed and updated by County staff and their safety partners to reflect evolving collision trends and community needs and priorities. With the LRS/AP as a guide, the County will be able to apply for grant funds, such as the federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) and Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A). Chapter 1 – Introduction The Introduction presents the plan, describes how this report is organized, and summarizes the vision and goals, and the study area for the LRS/AP. Chapter 2 – Safety Partners This chapter covers Mendocino County's collaborative approach to road safety, detailing the involvement of various County departments, local organizations, and agencies in developing and implementing the Local Road Safety/Action Plan. It highlights the engagement of diverse stakeholders through meetings and online platforms, as well as the County’s leadership commitment to enhancing road safety through a multi-faceted approach. The chapter introduces Mendocino Council of Government (MCOG) Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) that will serve as the body to review and monitor the recommendations and Safety Project implementation and construction. Chapter 3 – Existing Planning Efforts This chapter summarizes existing County and regional planning documents and projects that are relevant to the LRS/AP. It ensures that the recommendations of the LRS/AP are in line with existing goals, objectives, policies, or projects. This chapter summarized the following documents: County of Mendocino FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget, Mendocino Council of Governments Transportation Planning Work Program FY 2023/2024, Mendocino Council of Governments 2024 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (2019), Mendocino County Pedestrian Facility Needs Inventory and Engineered Feasibility Study (2019), Mendocino County Regional Transportation Plan & Active Transportation Plan (2022), Mendocino Council of Governments Active Transportation Program Safe Routes to School Non-Infrastructure Grant Report (2018), Mendocino Page 50 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 2 County Safe Routes to School Plan (2014), Mendocino County (MCOG/GRTA) Rail-with- Trail Corridor Plan (2012), County of Mendocino General Plan (2009). Chapter 4 – Collision Data Collection and Analysis Collision data was obtained and analyzed for a five-year period from 2020 to 2022 from the California Highway Patrol’s Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) and the University of California at Berkeley SafeTREC’s Transportation Injury Mapping Service (TIMS) and compared with previous LRSP’s (2015-2019) collision trends. For the purpose of this update, California State Routes/Highways were not included as part of this collision data collection and analysis.  The collision analysis identified general trends of collisions in the Mendocino County. There were a total of 296 collisions reported Countywide from 2020 to 2022. Out of these 87 collisions (29 percent) led to complaint of pain injury and 121 collisions (41 percent) led to a visible injury. There were 88 fatal and severe injury (KSI) collisions, 75 collisions (25 percent) led to a severe injury, and 13 collisions led to a fatality.  KSI Collisions peaked during 10 a.m. - 11 a.m., 1 p.m. – 2 p.m. and 3 p.m. to 4 p.m. The highest amount of injury collisions were observed between 1 p.m. to 2 p.m.  Hit Object collisions (53 percent) have the highest rate of KSI collisions followed by overturned (22 percent) and head on (9 percent) collisions.  The highest violation categories contributing to KSI collisions were driving under influence of alcohol (DUI) (41 percent), followed by improper turning (25 percent) and unsafe speed with 19 percent.  Out of all KSI collisions, 51 percent collisions occurred in dark conditions including dusk or dawn. Chapter 5 - Emphasis Areas Emphasis areas are a focus of the LRS/AP that are identified through the various collision types and factors resulting in KSI collisions within Mendocino County. The five emphasis areas for Mendocino County are:  Roadway safety o Collisions further than 250 feet of intersections  Hit Object Collisions  Improper Turning Collisions  Nighttime Collisions  DUI Collisions Page 51 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 3 Chapter 6 – Equity The Equity chapter underscores Mendocino County’s commitment to advancing fair and equitable transportation safety improvements for all residents. It analyzes collision data with respect to equity-emphasis communities (EEC), which comprise 35 percent of the county's census tracts and 31 percent of its population. Key findings reveal that 41 percent of total collisions and 52 percent of KSI collisions occurred in EEC. The analysis considers various factors including collision types, modes of transportation, violation categories and lighting conditions to provide a comprehensive overview of safety challenges in vulnerable communities. Chapter 7 – Countermeasure Identification Engineering countermeasures were selected for each of the high-risk locations and for the emphasis areas identified in the 2022 LRSP. These were based off of approved countermeasures from the 2024 Caltrans Local Roadway Safety Manual (LRSM) used in HSIP grant calls for projects. The intention is to give the County potential countermeasures for each location that can be implemented either in future HSIP calls for projects, or using other funding sources, such as the County’s Capital Improvement Program. Non-engineering countermeasures were also selected using the E’s strategies, and are included with the emphasis areas. Chapter 8 – Safety Projects A set of five safety projects were created for high-risk intersections and roadway segments, using HSIP approved countermeasures. These safety projects are:  Project 1: Improve Safety at Signalized Intersections  Project 2: Improve Safety at Non-Signalized Intersections  Project 3: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments  Project 4: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments  Project 5: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments Chapter 9 – Evaluation and Implementation The LRS/AP is a guidance document that is recommended to be updated every two to five years in coordination with the safety partners. The LRS/AP document provides engineering, education, enforcement, and emergency medical service related countermeasures that can be implemented throughout the County to reduce KSI collisions. After implementing countermeasures, the performance measures for each emphasis area should be evaluated annually. The most important measure of success of the LRS/AP should be reducing KSI collisions throughout the County. If the number of KSI collisions does not decrease over time, then the emphasis areas and countermeasures should be re-evaluated. Page 52 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 4 Safe Street and Roads For All (SS4A) Action Plan Components SS4A defines nine action plan components that are integral to any safety action plan in order to satisfy SS4A grant requirements. Of these nine criteria, seven have to be met in order for SS4A grants to be submitted for funding. The table below describes SS4A Action Plan Components and the sections of the LRS/AP that satisfy the seven relevant components. Action Plan Component Section 1. Leadership Commitment and Goal Setting N/A 2. Planning Structure Ch-2, Ch-9 3. Safety Analysis Ch-4 4. Engagement and Collaboration Ch-2 5. Equity Considerations Ch-6 6. Policy and Process Changes N/A 7. Strategy and Project Selections Ch-7, Ch-8 8. Progress and Transparency Ch-9 and Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) website https://www.mendocinocog.org 9. Action Plan Adoption Date August 2024 Page 53 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 5 1. Introduction The Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) is assisting with updating the comprehensive Local Road Safety/Action Plans (LRS/AP) for unincorporated portions of Mendocino County. The updated LRS/AP will enable Mendocino County to enhance safety for all modes of transportation and all ages and abilities. What is a LRS/AP? The LRS/AP is a localized data-driven traffic safety plan that provides opportunities to address unique highway safety needs and reduce the number of KSI collisions. The LRS/AP creates a framework to systematically identify and analyze traffic safety-related issues, and recommend safety projects and countermeasures. The LRS/AP facilitates the development of local agency partnerships and collaboration, resulting in the development of a prioritized list of improvements that can qualify for HSIP and SS4A funding. The LRS/AP is a proactive approach to addressing safety needs and is viewed as a living document that can be constantly reviewed and revised to reflect evolving trends, and community needs and priorities. Vision and Goals of the LRS/AP  Goal #1: Systematically identify and analyze roadway safety problems and recommend improvements  Goal #2: Improve the safety of all road users by using proven effective countermeasures  Goal #3: Ensure coordination and response of key stakeholders to implement roadway safety improvements within Unincorporated Mendocino County  Goal #4: Serve as a resource for staff who continually seek funding for safety improvements  Goal #5: Recommend how safety improvements can be made in a manner that is fair and equitable for all Unincorporated Mendocino County residents Study Area Mendocino County is located on the North Coast of the State of California, covering a total area of 3,878 square miles. The population of the unincorporated regions of the County is 62,563 (as of 2020 census). Figure 1 shows the study area. Page 54 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 6 Figure 1. Mendocino County Page 55 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 7 2. Safety Partners Safety partners are vital to the development and implementation of an LRS/AP. For Mendocino County, these include representatives from Department of Transportation, Sheriff’s Office, Caltrans Planning - District 1, and other interested citizens and community members. Three stakeholder meetings among these departments/agencies were conducted to review project goals and findings, and to solicit feedback from the group during the project timeline. This stakeholder outreach was supplemented by a project website (www.mendoroadsafetyplan.com) with an interactive map input platform. As part of the project website, a public input platform called maptionnaire was published online and advertised on social media to solicit input public comments regarding traffic safety. The maptionnaire tool was open for public comments starting February 18, 2024 and closed on June 30, 2024. During this period, 66 comments/concerns were submitted for Mendocino County. Figure 2 shows the landing page of the LRS/AP website and Figure 3 shows the location of the public comments on the map. Figure 2. Project Website Page 56 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 8 Figure 3. Public Comments Map – Mendocino County The most commonly commented on traffic safety issue was pedestrian related safety followed by speeding. The most commented was speeding issues on California State Route 1/Highway 1 (SR-1). Figure 4 refer to the summary of public outreach by location and pertinent issue per location. Page 57 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 9 Figure 4. Mendocino County - Public Comments  Note: This summary does not list corridors with less than two comments. Each comment was assigned to the major road if at an intersection. Additional community comments collected from public workshops are list in Table 1. Table 1. Additional Community Comments Location Concerns Mode Gualala area - Old Stage Road between Ocean Ridge Drive (north intersection) and Moonrise Drive. High vehicle speeds (far in excess of posted limits), horizontal and vertical curves, narrow vehicle lanes, storm water damage, and uneven shoulder ground surface are issues for pedestrians walking along this segment between Pedestrian & Bicycle 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 SR - 1 Ma i n S t Ol d S t a g e R d Al b i o n S t Al b i o n R i d g e R d E H i l l R d Ho w a r d S t Lo w G a p R d Ra m s e y R d Ea s t L n Fo r t B r a g g - W i l l i t s R d In t e r s t a t e 1 0 1 N S t a t e S t Bicycle Safety Curve Unsafe Heavy Vehicle Intersection Safety Lighting Limited Visibility Narrow Road Pavement Condition Pedestrian Safety Road Safety School Safety Sign Upgrade Speeding Page 58 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 10 Location Concerns Mode residential areas and the heavily-used Bower Community Park. Gualala area – SR/Hwy 1 between Pacific Woods Road and Ocean Drive. As the only route for pedestrians between residential neighborhoods north of the Gualala village and sidewalk improvements intended by the SR/Hwy 1 Gualala Downtown Enhancements project (in design), safety of pedestrians who walk along this segment is critical Pedestrian Gualala area – SR/Hwy 1 intersection with Old State Highway The safety and function of this intersection and the effectiveness of motorist speed control Motor Vehicle Mendocino area – SR/Hwy 1 at Jug Handle Speeding at this location. Motor Vehicle Mendocino area – SR/Hwy 1 at Point Cabrillo Rd/Russian Gulch State Park Speeding at this location. Motor Vehicle In addition, five Public Workshops, three virtual and two in-person (in Fort Bragg and Ukiah), were held to introduce the project, present data information and recommendations, and provide a forum for comments and feedback. Leadership Commitment to Road Safety The Mendocino County is deeply committed to enhancing road safety and significantly reducing traffic fatalities and severe injuries for all road users. Recognizing the vital importance of safe streets, the County has made it a top priority to create a safer transportation environment for residents and visitors alike. This dedication to improving road safety is rooted in Mendocino County’s core values of prioritizing the well-being and quality of life for all community members, whether they drive, walk, bike, or use public transit. To achieve these road safety goals, the County is implementing a multi-faceted, evidence-based approach that addresses the various factors contributing to traffic incidents. This strategy includes:  Infrastructure improvements to enhance road design and safety features  Public awareness campaigns to educate residents on safe road use practices  Collaboration with local law enforcement to ensure traffic laws are effectively upheld Page 59 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 11 By adopting this comprehensive approach, the County is confident it can make substantial progress in reducing serious injuries and fatalities on County roadways. The County’s leadership team is fully committed to this safety initiative and have dedicated the necessary resources to drive meaningful change. Regular assessment of progress, analysis of traffic data, and engagement with community stakeholders will ensure Mendocino County stays on course to meet its safety objectives. Technical Advisory Committee The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), a committee of Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG), will serve as the body to review and monitor the recommendations and Safety Project implementation and construction. The TAC consists of nine (9) voting members or their authorized technical representatives, as follows: the County Director of Transportation, the County Director of Planning & Building Services, the Mendocino Transit Authority General Manager, the Caltrans Transportation Planning Branch Chief, one technical representative appointed by each of the four cities, and the County Air Pollution Control Officer. Additionally, one (1) non-voting member shall be a rail representative appointed by North Coast Railroad Authority. TAC meetings are typically once a month. The nine (9) voting members or their authorized technical representatives of TAC consists as follows:  City of Ukiah  City of Willits  City of Fort Bragg  City of Point Arena  Mendocino County Department of Transportation  Mendocino County Planning & Building Services  Mendocino Transit Authority  Caltrans  Air Quality Management District The TAC will ensure a comprehensive and equitable approach to safety improvements by fostering interagency coordination and community engagement. Regular monitoring and evaluation of safety metrics will allow for adaptive management, enabling the team to adjust strategies as needed. In addition, Mendocino County’s Department of Transportation will also be accountable for the progress made toward the plan goals. Page 60 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 12 3. Existing Planning Efforts This chapter summarizes the planning documents, projects underway, and studies reviewed for the Mendocino County LRS/AP. The purpose of this chapter is to ensure that the LRS/AP vision, goals, and E’s strategies are aligned with prior planning efforts, planned transportation projects, and non-infrastructure programs for the unincorporated County area. The documents reviewed are listed below:  County of Mendocino FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget  Mendocino Council of Governments Transportation Planning Work Program FY 2023/2024  Mendocino Council of Governments 2020 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (2024)  Mendocino County Pedestrian Facility Needs Inventory and Engineered Feasibility Study (2019)  Mendocino County Regional Transportation Plan & Active Transportation Plan (2022)  Mendocino Council of Governments Active Transportation Program Safe Routes to School Non-Infrastructure Grant Report (2018)  Mendocino County Safe Routes to School Plan (2014)  Mendocino County (MCOG/GRTA) Rail-with-Trail Corridor Plan (2012)  County of Mendocino General Plan (2009) The following sections include brief descriptions of these documents and how they inform the development of the LRS/AP. A short summary of each document is listed in Table 2. A detailed list of relevant policies and programs is in Appendix A. Page 61 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 13 Table 2. Document Summary Document Highlights County of Mendocino FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget The County’s fiscal year 2024 – 2025 Budget outlines the funds the County has allocated to various departments and project. Mendocino Council of Governments Transportation Planning Work Program FY 2023/2024 Identifies program transportation planning tasks for the coming fiscal year Mendocino Council of Governments 2020 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (2024) The Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) is a program of highway, local road, transit and active transportation projects that a region plans to fund with State and Federal revenue. Mendocino County Pedestrian Facility Needs Inventory and Engineered Feasibility Study (2019) The project’s goal is to improve sidewalks, paths, and safe crossings in Mendocino County so it’s easier to walk where pedestrians need to travel. Mendocino Council of Governments Active Transportation Program Safe Routes to School Non- Infrastructure Grant Report (2018) The project’s goal is to encourage increased walking and biking to schools and other locations, by developing and sustaining a wide range of educational and training activities. Mendocino County Regional Transportation Plan & Active Transportation Plan (2022) Details improvements on all modes of transportations on County significant corridors. Includes many detailed road safety projects. Mendocino County Safe Routes to School Plan (2014) Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is a program with a simple goal: helping more children get to school by walking and bicycling. Mendocino County (MCOG/GRTA) Rail-with-Trail Corridor Plan (2012) This plan identifies priority improvements for walking and biking facilities along the existing, currently unused rail line running through Mendocino County. County of Mendocino General Plan (2009) Circulation element of the General Plan details long range plans for the County of Mendocino including bicycle, pedestrian, vehicle and transit policies. Page 62 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 14 County of Mendocino FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget The Adopted Budget serves as the County's primary policy and budget document. It communicates the Board of Supervisors' priorities and how departments align their program goals and objectives to achieve them. The budget is structured to provide both high-level context and line item detail on Mendocino County's operations and how the County strives to serve the community. Mendocino Council of Governments Transportation Planning Work Program 2023/2024 The MCOG, as the Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA) for Mendocino County, annually adopts its Transportation Planning Work Program to identify and program transportation planning tasks for the coming fiscal year. The objectives and tasks contained within this 2023/2024 Work Program are developed in accordance with the goals and policies of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). Mendocino Council of Governments 2020 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (2019) The Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) is a program of highway, local road, transit and active transportation projects that a region plans to fund with State and Federal revenue programmed by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) in the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). Page 63 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 15 Mendocino County Pedestrian Facility Needs Inventory and Engineered Feasibility Study (2019) The Mendocino County Pedestrian Facility Needs Inventory and Engineered Feasibility Study has a simple goal: to improve sidewalks, paths, and safe crossings in Mendocino County so it’s easier to walk where you need to. This study covers all of Mendocino County; a vast amount of territory and many communities from large to tiny. This report describes all the potential pedestrian access improvement projects identified through the review of past studies, the inventory and analysis of existing conditions for pedestrian access, agency staff input, and the public input from workshops, meetings, and on-line surveys. Mendocino County Regional Transportation Plan & Active Transportation Plan (2022) This Plan identifies improvements for all modes of transportation within all jurisdictions of Mendocino County, which include the Cities of Ukiah, Willits, Fort Bragg and Point Arena and the unincorporated areas of the County of Mendocino. Mendocino Council of Governments Active Transportation Program Safe Routes to School Non- Infrastructure Grant Report (2018) The Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG), with funding from the Caltrans Active Transportation Program implemented a SRTS Non-Infrastructure Project to encourage increased walking and biking to schools and other locations, by developing and sustaining a wide range of educational and training activities. Two non-infrastructure grants (Countywide and Covelo) were awarded and subsequently combined into one comprehensive project. Page 64 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 16 Mendocino County Safe Routes to School Plan (2014) The SRTS is a program with a simple goal: helping more children get to school by walking and bicycling. The plan envisions active kids using safe streets, helped by engaged adults (from teachers to parents, engineers, planners, and police officers), surrounded by responsible drivers. The plan is the first area-wide SRTS plan in Mendocino County, designed to serve schools in the unincorporated areas of the County. The plan includes recommendations for a SRTS program that will strive to enhance children's health and well-being, ease traffic congestion near the school to improve safety, increase the number of students getting regular physical activity, improve air quality around schools and community members' overall quality of life, increase the number of students who walk and/or bike to and from school and provide clear projects and programs for implementation. Mendocino County (MCOG/GRTA) Rail-with-Trail Corridor Plan (2012) The Mendocino County Rail-with-Trail Corridor Plan provides an analysis of general conditions along the length of the 103-mile corridor and identifies priority RWT projects for the Cities of Ukiah and Willits and the County of Mendocino. Completed in conjunction with MCOG and Great Redwood Trail Agency (GRTA), the Plan provides jurisdictions along the rail corridor (City of Ukiah, City of Willits, County of Mendocino, and Caltrans) with information to assist with implementation of the RWT. This Plan is funded by Caltrans' Community Based Transportation Planning (CBTP) grant funds and local matching funds. For this Plan, MCOG consulted with representatives from the County of Mendocino, the cities of Willits and Ukiah, North Coast Railroad Authority (NCRA), and Caltrans. Page 65 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 17 County of Mendocino General Plan (2009) The General Plan presents a consolidated framework of decisions for guiding where and how development should occur in Mendocino County. The General Plan recognizes that the Circulation Element is crucial to improve Mendocino’s quality of life and economic prosperity. Circulation not only covers the movement of automobiles, but the whole range of transportation alternatives: pedestrian, bicycle, air, truck, and rail. Page 66 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 18 4. Collision Data Collection and Analysis This chapter presents the findings from the analysis conducted on collisions in unincorporated areas of Mendocino County from January 2015 to December 2019 as part of the LRSP adopted in 2022, along with an updated summary of collision analysis spanning from January 2020 to December 2022 to supplement and revise the earlier results as part of the plan update. The LRS/AP focuses on systemically identifying and analyzing safety issues and recommends appropriate safety improvements. The chapter starts with an analysis of the collisions of all severity for Mendocino County. Further on, a detailed analysis was conducted for KSI collisions that have occurred on Mendocino County’s roadways. After this data was segregated, a comprehensive evaluation was conducted based on factors such as collision severity, type of collision, primary collision factor, lighting, weather and time of the day. This chapter includes the following sections:  Demographic and Jurisdiction Characteristics  Data Collection  Collision Data Analysis  KSI Collision Analysis  Geographic Collision Analysis  High Injury Network  Summary Figure 5 illustrates all the injury collisions that have occurred in Mendocino County from January 2020 to December 2022. Page 67 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 19 Figure 5. All Injury Collisions on Mendocino County Roadways (2020 – 2022) Page 68 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 20 Demographic and Jurisdiction Characteristics This section provides an understanding of the demographics of Mendocino County, including characteristics like the population, centerline miles of roadway, and commute to work. The data was collected from the United States Census Bureau. Population According to the 2020 census data, the population of unincorporated areas of Mendocino County is 62,563, which is 68.3 percent of the County population. The population as well as the centerline miles of the County and other large jurisdictions is shown in Table 3. Table 3. Mendocino County: Population and Centerline Miles Jurisdiction Population Percent of County Population Centerline Miles Percent of County Centerline Miles Point Arena 460 0.5% 2.3 0.2% Willits 4,988 5.4% 20.5 1.8% Fort Bragg 6,983 7.6% 27.75 2.5% Ukiah 16,607 18.1% 58.9 5.3% Unincorporated 62,563 68.3% 1,009.9 90.2% Total 91,601 1,119.35 Commute to Work According to five-year estimates from the American Community Survey (ACS) 20221 from the U.S. Census, approximately 79 percent of Mendocino County residents travel by cars or vans to work, out of which 66 percent drive alone, and 13 percent carpool. About six percent of residents walk to work, one percent of resident’s bike to work and one percent of residents take transit. The different modes of transportation used to commute to work for the county as well as the other jurisdictions in Mendocino County are shown in Table 4. 1 https://data.census.gov/table/ACSDT5Y2022.B08541?q=mendocino%20county&t=Transportation Page 69 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 21 Table 4. Mendocino County Commute to Work Census Data Commute to Work Mendocino County Drive alone 66% Carpool 13% Public Transportation 1% Walked 6% Bicycle 1% Work from Home 12% Jurisdiction Rankings From 2020 to 2022, there were 59 fatal traffic collisions that occurred in Mendocino County with an annual traffic fatality rate of 21.47 per 100,000 populations for the County as a whole. These rates are much higher than the California average of 10.89 and the United States average of 12.52. These statistics are consistent with other rural areas. Table 5 shows the comparison of traffic fatality rates and population. Table 5. Jurisdiction Ranking Jurisdiction Fatal Traffic Collisions (2020- 2022) Population 3 year annual Fatality Rate per 100,000 Mendocino County 59* 91,601 21.47 California 12,921 39,538,223 10.89 United States 124,558 331,449,281 12.52 *Note: These numbers include all state route fatal collisions Source: TIMS, Census, NHTSA Office of Traffic Safety Rankings Additional information on collisions in Mendocino County is provided by the California Office of Traffic Safety (OTS). The OTS is designated by the Governor to receive federal traffic safety funds for coordinating California’s highway safety programs. These rankings take into account KSI crashes per population and per Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT). Overall Mendocino ranks 44 out 58 California counties in KSI collisions. Table 6 provides a summary of the 2021 rankings2. 2 California Office of Traffic Safety. (2021). Office of Traffic Safety Rankings 2021. https://www.ots.ca.gov/media-and- research/crash-rankings-results/?wpv-wpcf-year=2018&wpv-wpcf- city_county=Mendocino+County&wpv_filter_submit=Submit Page 70 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 22 Table 6. Office of Traffic Safety Ratings 2021 OTS 2021 Ranking Mendocino County Total Fatality and Injury 44/58 Alcohol Involved 18/58 Pedestrian (age less than 15 years) 12/58 Motorcycles 17/58 Night Time 28/58 Page 71 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 23 Collision Data Collision data helps understand different factors that might be influencing collision patterns and various factors leading to collisions in a given area. For the initial analysis, five-year jurisdiction-wide collision data, from 2015 to 2019 was retrieved from TIMS and SWITRS database. For the report update, collision data from 2020 to 2022 was included to update and refine preceding findings. Collisions that occurred on state route roadways were excluded from this analysis and the safety of local roadways has been the focus. The collision data was analyzed and plotted in ArcMap to identify high-risk intersections and roadway segments. Collision Data Analysis Collision Severity There were a total of 1,911 collisions and 144 KSI reported jurisdiction-wide from 2015 to 2019 and there were a total of 248 collisions reported jurisdiction-wide from 2020 to 2022. Out of these 73 collisions (29 percent) led to complaint of pain injury and 109 collisions (44 percent) led to a visible injury. There were 66 KSI collisions, 57 collisions (23 percent) led to a severe injury, and nine collisions (four percent) led to a fatality. Note that graphs and charts presented in this chapter include collisions from 2020 to 2022. Figure 6 illustrates the classification of all collisions based on severity. This collision analysis does not take into account collisions that occur on state routes/highways. Figure 6. Collisions by Severity (2020-2022) The analysis first includes a comparative evaluation between all injury collisions and KSI collisions, based on various factors including but on limited to the collision trend, primary collision factor, collision type, facility type, motor vehicle involved with, weather, lighting, and time of the day. Further on, a comprehensive analysis is conducted for only KSI Killed 4% Severe Injury 23% Visible Injury 44% Complaint of Pain 29% Page 72 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 24 collisions. KSI collisions cause the most damage to those affected infrastructure and the aftermath of these collisions lead to great expenses for jurisdiction administration. The LRS/AP process thus focuses on these collision locations to proactively identify and counter their respective safety issues. The collision data was segregated by fatality type, i.e. based on collisions occurring at intersections and roadway segments. For the purposes of the analysis, a collision was said to have occurred at an intersection if it occurred within a 250-feet radius of it. The reported collisions categorized by facility type and collision severity are presented in Table 7. Table 7. Collisions by Severity and Fatality Type Collision Severity 2015-2019 2020-2022 2015-2022 Killed 21 9 30 Severe Injury 123 57 180 Visible Injury 243 109 352 Complaint of Pain 179 73 252 Property Damage Only (PDO) 1345 0 1345 Total 1911 248 2,159 Note: Collisions on the State Routes/Highways were excluded from the analysis. Page 73 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 25 Preliminary Analysis Collision Severity by Year For the previously identified collisions, the number increased from 2015 to 2019, with a downward trend noted from 2020-2022. The highest number of collisions (416 collisions) were observed in 2019 and the lowest number of collisions (95) were observed in 2021. From 2020 to 2022, a total of 66 KSI collisions occurred in Mendocino County. The lowest number of collisions (20 KSI collisions) is observed in 2020 and 2022. Overall, KSI collisions were observed to decline from 2021 to 2022, with the highest number of KSI collisions (26 collisions) occurring in the year 2021. Figure 7 illustrates the three-year collision trend for all collisions and KSI collisions in 2020-2022. Figure 7. Three-Year Collision Trend (2020-2022) Intersection vs. Roadway Collisions (2020-2022) When evaluating roadways vs intersections, it was observed that the majority of collisions occurred on roadways between the years 2015-2022. From 2020-2022, 35% of all collisions (87 collisions) occurred at intersections whereas 65 percent (161 collisions) occurred on roadway segments. When only KSI collisions are considered, a slightly greater portion of collisions occurred on roadway segments, with 70 percent (46 collisions) occurred on roadway segments and 30 percent (20 collisions) occurred at intersections. This classification by fatality type can be observed in Figure 8 and Figure 9. 3 17 24 33 4 22 48 21 2 18 37 19 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Killed Severe Injury Visible Injury Complain of Pain 2020 2021 2022 Page 74 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 26 Figure 8. Intersection vs. Roadway Collisions - All Collisions (2020-2022) Figure 9. Intersection vs. Roadway Segment Collisions - KSI Collisions (2020-2022) Roadway Segment 65% Intersection 35% Roadway Segment 70% Intersection 30% Page 75 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 27 Collision Type Considering collisions of all severity collisions and KSI collisions in 2015-2019, the most commonly occurring collision type was hit-object collisions (53 percent). For 2020-2022, similar trend is observed where hit-object collisions account for the majority of all collision severity as well as KSI collisions. When only KSI collisions were considered, the second most commonly occurring collision type was overturned collisions (18 percent) in 2020-2022 with all other collision types making up less than 10 percent of collisions. Figure 10 illustrates the collision type for collisions of all severity as well as KSI collisions. Figure 10. Collision Type – All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) 7%5%8%7% 51% 18% 4%1% 8% 3%2% 6% 58% 18% 3%3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% He a d - O n Si d e s w i p e Re a r E n d Br o a d s i d e Hi t O b j e c t Ov e r t u r n e d Ve h i c l e / P e d e s t r i a n Ot h e r Total KSI Page 76 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 28 Violation Category Considering collisions of all severity in 2015-2019, the most common violation category was observed to be improper turning (38 percent) and unsafe speed (22 percent). For 2020-2022, the top categories were driving under the influence (32 percent), and improper turning (29 percent). When only KSI collisions were considered, unsafe speed (44 percent), and automobile right of way (23 percent) were observed to be major violation categories in 2020-2022. Figure 11 illustrates the violation category for collisions of all severity and KSI collisions. Figure 11. Primary Collision Factor: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) 32% 22% 1%2%0% 29% 6% 0%2%2%2% 44% 18% 0% 3% 0% 23% 3%2%0% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% DU I Un s a f e S p e e d Fo l l o w i n g T o o C l o s e l y Wr o n g S i d e o f R o a d Im p r o p e r P a s s i n g I m p r o p e r T u r n i n g A u t o m o b i l e R i g h t o f W a y P e d e s t r i a n R i g h t o f W a y P e d e s t r i a n V i o l a t i o n Tr a f f i c S i g n a l s a n d S i g n s Total KSI Page 77 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 29 Motor Vehicle Involved With Considering collisions of all severity in 2015-2019, 51 percent of the collisions were motor vehicles involved with fixed objects. A similar trend was observed during 2020-2022 where 52 percent of collisions involved fixed object. The remaining collisions include motor vehicle involved with other motor vehicles (25 percent) and non-collisions (15 percent). Considering only KSI collisions in 2020-2022, 60 percent of the collisions are fixed object collisions, 25 percent are motor vehicle involved with other motor vehicles and 15 percent are non-collisions. Figure 12 illustrates the percentage for all collisions as well as KSI collisions. Figure 12. Motor Vehicle Involved With: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) 15% 3% 25% 2%0%1% 52% 2% 15% 3% 14% 0%2%3% 60% 3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Non-Collision Pedestrian Other Motor Vehicle Parked Motor Vehicle Bicycle Animal Fixed Object Other Object Total KSI Page 78 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 30 Mode In addition to motor vehicle involved with, mode includes a more detailed breakdown of motor vehicles, including truck and motorcycle. Considering collisions of all severity in 2015-2019, 91 percent of the collisions are motor vehicle. The remaining collisions include motorcycle collisions (4 percent), pedestrian collisions (1 percent), bicycle (1 percent) and truck collisions (3 percent). In 2020-2022, 60 percent of collisions are observed as motor vehicle and 25 percent of pickup or panel truck collisions. . Considering only KSI collisions in 2020-2022, 54 percent of the collisions are other motor vehicle collisions. KSI collisions were more likely to involve a pickup truck (22 percent), motorcycle (21 percent) or a bicycle (2 percent) indicating these modes are more vulnerable to fatalities and severe injuries. Figure 13 illustrates the percentage for all collisions as well as KSI collisions by mode. Figure 13. Mode: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) 60% 10% 25% 1%0%2% 54% 21%22% 2%2%0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% P a s s e n g e r C a r / S t a t i o n Wa g o n Mo t o r c y c l e / S c o o t e r Pi c k u p o r P a n e l T r u c k Bi c y c l e Ot h e r V e h i l c e Pe d e s t r i a n Total KSI Page 79 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 31 Lighting For collisions of all severity, 58 percent of collisions have occurred in daylight and 32 percent of collisions have occurred in the dark on streets with no street lights in 2015- 2019 and 2020-2022. For KSI collisions in 2020-2022, 44 percent of collisions occurred in daylight and 56 percent of collisions occurred in the dark on streets with no street lights. Figure 14 illustrates the lighting condition for all collisions and KSI collisions. Figure 14. Lighting Conditions: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) Weather For all collisions in 2015-2019, 71 percent of the collisions have occurred during clear weather conditions and 20 percent of collisions were observed to occur during cloudy weather conditions. In 2020-2022, 84 percent of collisions occurred during clear weather conditions and 13 percent of collisions occurred in cloudy weather conditions For KSI collisions in 2020- 2022, 89 percent of the collisions occurred during clear weather conditions and 9 percent of collisions occurred during cloudy weather conditions. Figure 15 illustrates the percentage distribution of weather conditions during the occurrence of collisions of all severity as well as KSI collisions. Figure 15. Weather Conditions: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) 58% 6%4% 32% 0% 44% 11%9% 36% 0% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Daylight Dusk - Dawn Dark - Street Lights Dark - No Street Lights Dark- Street Lights Not Functioning Total KSI 84% 13%3% 89% 9%2% 0% 50% 100% Clear Cloudy Raining Total KSI Page 80 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 32 Time of the Day For collisions of all severity in 2015-2019, maximum number of collisions occurred between 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. (7 percent) and the minimum number of collisions occurred between 2:00 a.m. to 4:00 a.m. (1 percent). For 2020-2022, a maximum number of collisions occurred between 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. (11 percent) and the minimum number of collisions occurred between 2:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. (0 percent) in 2020-2022. For all KSI collisions in 2020-2022, maximum number (15 percent) of collisions occurred between 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. Figure 16 illustrates the percentage of collisions occurring during the day for all collisions as well as KSI collisions. Figure 16. Time of the Day: All Collisions vs. KSI Collisions (2020-2022) 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 1: 0 0 A M 2: 0 0 A M 3: 0 0 A M 4: 0 0 A M 5: 0 0 A M 6: 0 0 A M 7: 0 0 A M 8: 0 0 A M 9: 0 0 A M 10 : 0 0 A M 11 : 0 0 A M 12 : 0 0 P M 1: 0 0 P M 2: 0 0 P M 3: 0 0 P M 4: 0 0 P M 5: 0 0 P M 6: 0 0 P M 7: 0 0 P M 8: 0 0 P M 9: 0 0 P M 10 : 0 0 P M 11 : 0 0 P M Total KSI Page 81 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 33 KSI Collision Analysis This section describes a detailed collision analysis performed for KSI collisions occurring at roadway segments and intersections in the unincorporated regions of Mendocino County. Of the total 144 KSI collisions that occurred in these regions, 116 collisions (81 percent) occurred on roadway segments and 28 collisions (19 percent) occurred at intersections in 2015-2019. In 2020-2022, 66 KSI collisions occurred, out of which 46 collisions (70 percent) occurred on roadway segments and 20 collisions (30 percent) occurred at intersections. This distribution is illustrated in Figure 17. Figure 17. KSI Collisions: Roadway Segments and Intersections (2020-2022) Violation Category For KSI collisions in 2015-2019, driving under the influence (36 percent), improper turning (26 percent) and unsafe speed (19 percent) were observed to be major violation categories. For KSI collisions in 2020-2022, driving under the influence (44 percent), following too closely (18 percent) and improper turning (23 percent) were observed to be major violation categories. Figure 18 illustrates the violation category for KSI collisions. Figure 18. KSI Collisions by Violation Category (2020-2022) Roadway Segment 70% Intersection 30% 46% 15% 4% 24% 4%0%0% 40% 25% 0% 20% 0%5%10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% DUI Following Too Closely Wrong Side of Road Improper Turning Automobile Right of Way Pedestrian Right of Way Traffic Signals and Signs Roadway Intersection Page 82 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 34 KSI Roadway Segment Analysis A total of 116 KSI collisions occurred in unincorporated regions of Mendocino County on roadway segments between 2015 and 2019 and 46 collisions occurred on the roadway segments from 2020-2022. Figure 19 illustrates the KSI collisions that occurred in the jurisdiction during the study period. Figure 19. Mendocino County KSI Collisions (2020-2022) Page 83 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 35 Collision Type and Severity For roadway KSI collisions, the most common collision types were hit object collisions in 2015-2022. Hit-object collisions, overturned collisions, and vehicle-pedestrian types were more likely to be fatal in 2020-2022. Hit Object and overturned were more likely to result in a severe injury in 2020-2022. Figure 20 shows the severity of roadway KSI collisions as well as the collision type. Figure 20. KSI Roadway Collisions Collision Type vs Severity (2020-2022) Collision Type and Violation Category For all the roadway collisions that led to a fatality or severe injury in 2020-2022, the most common violation types were DUI, improper turning and, unsafe speed collisions that were also hit object collision types. Figure 21 illustrates the type of collision as well as the violation category for KSI roadway collisions. Figure 21. KSI Roadway Collisions Collision Type vs Violation Category (2020- 2022) 0%0%0%0% 67% 17%17% 0% 10% 5%3%3% 55% 23% 0%3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% He a d - O n Si d e s w i p e Re a r E n d Br o a d s i d e Hi t O b j e c t Ov e r t u r n e d Ve h i c l e / P e d e s t r i a n Ot h e r Killed Severe Injury 0 5 10 15 20 25 Unknown DUI Unsafe Speed Wrong Side of Road Improper Turning Automobile Right of Way Other Than Driver (or Pedestrian) Head-On Sideswipe Rear End Broadside Hit Object Overturned Vehicle/Pedestrian Other Page 84 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 36 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Non-Collision Pedestrian Other Motor Vehicle Bicycle Animal Fixed Object Other Object Head-On Sideswipe Rear End Broadside Hit Object Overturned Vehicle/Pedestrian Other 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Non-Collision Pedestrian Other Motor Vehicle Bicycle Animal Fixed Object Other Object DUI Unsafe Speed Wrong Side of Road Improper Turning Automobile Right of Way Other Than Driver (or Pedestrian) Collision Type and Motor Vehicle Involved With For all roadway collisions that led to a fatality or severe injury in 2020-2022, the most common collision types were fixed object collisions and non-collisions. Most non collision types were overturned collisions. Figure 22 illustrates the type of collision as well as the motor vehicle involved with for KSI roadway collisions. Figure 22. KSI Roadway Collisions by Type and Motor Vehicle Involved with (2020-2022) Motor Vehicle Involved with and Violation Category For all roadway collisions that led to a fatality or severe injury in 2020-2022, the majority of collisions were DUI collisions, unsafe speed collisions, or improper turning collisions.. The majority of these collisions were also fixed object collisions. The results, with violation category and motor vehicle involved with, are shown in Figure 23. Figure 23. KSI Roadway Collisions by Motor Vehicle Involved with vs Violation Category (2020-2022) Page 85 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 37 Collision Type and Lighting Conditions For all roadway KSI collisions in 2020-2022, most collisions occurred in the daylight or the dark with no street lights. Hit Object collisions were more likely to occur in the daylight and overturned collisions were more likely to occur in the dark with no streetlights. Figure 24 illustrates the lighting condition and the collision type as observed for KSI roadway collisions. Figure 24. KSI Collisions by Collision Type vs Lighting Conditions (2020-2022) Collision Type and Time of the Day For all the KSI roadway collisions type in 2020-2022, the most common collision type was hit object collisions.. Hit object collision types were more likely to happen around 3:00 p.m. Overturned collisions were more likely to happen between 11:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Vehicle/pedestrian and sideswipe collisions happened throughout the day. Figure 25 illustrates the collision type by the time of the day for all KSI roadway collisions. Figure 25. KSI Collisions on Roadway Segments by Collisions Type vs Time of the Day (2020-2022) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 He a d - O n Si d e s w i p e Re a r E n d Br o a d s i d e Hi t O b j e c t Ov e r t u r n e d Ve h i c l e / P e d e s t r i a n Ot h e r Daylight Dusk - Dawn Dark - Street Lights Dark - No Street Lights 0 2 4 6 8 10 1:00 AM 3:00 AM 4:00 AM 5:00 AM 7:00 AM 9:00 AM 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 12:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 5:00 PM 7:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM Head-On Sideswipe Rear End Broadside Hit Object Overturned Vehicle/Pedestrian Other Page 86 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 38 KSI Intersection Analysis A total of 28 KSI collisions occurred in Mendocino County on intersections between 2015 and 2019 and 20 collisions were observed from 2020-2022. Collision Type and Severity For intersection KSI collisions in 2020-2022, the most common collision types were hit object collisions. Broadside, and vehicle/pedestrian collision types were more likely to result in severe injury. Figure 26 illustrates the severity of intersection KSI collisions as well as the collision type. Figure 26. KSI Intersection Collisions Unincorporated Mendocino County (2020- 2022) Collision Type and Violation Category For all the intersection collisions that led to a fatality or severe injury in 2015-2019, the most common violation types were DUI and improper turning violations that led to hit- object collisions. For 2020-2022, the most common violation types were DUI and unsafe speed violations that led to hit-object collisions. Figure 27 illustrates the type of collision as well as the motor vehicle involved with for KSI intersection collisions. Figure 27. KSI Intersection Collisions by Type and Violation Categories (2020-2022) 0%0% 100% 0%0%0%6% 18% 53% 12%6%6% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% Head-On Broadside Hit Object Overturned Vehicle/Pedestrian Other Killed Severe Injury 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 DUI Unsafe Speed Improper Turning Pedestrian Right of Way Traffic Signals and Signs Head-On Broadside Hit Object Overturned Vehicle/Pedestrian Other Page 87 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 39 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Non-Collision Pedestrian Other Motor Vehicle Fixed Object Other Object Head-On Broadside Hit Object Overturned Vehicle/Pedestrian Other Collision Type and Motor Vehicle Involved With For all intersection KSI collisions in 2020-2022, the most commonly occurring collision types were fixed object collisions due to hit-object collisions. The majority of collisions involving other motor vehicle were observed to occur due to broadside collisions. Figure 28 illustrates the type of collision as well as the motor vehicle involved in KSI intersection collisions. Figure 28. KSI Intersection Collisions by Type and Motor Vehicle Involved with (2020-2022) Motor Vehicle Involved with and Violation Category For all intersection KSI collisions in 2020-2022, the majority of collisions were DUI collisions in which a motor vehicle was involved with a fixed object. The results, with violation category and motor vehicle involved with, are shown in Figure 29. Figure 29. KSI Roadway Collisions by Motor Vehicle Involved with vs. Violation Category (2020-2022) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Non-Collision Pedestrian Other Motor Vehicle Fixed Object Other Object DUI Unsafe Speed Improper Turning Pedestrian Right of Way Traffic Signals and Signs Page 88 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 40 Collision Type and Lighting Conditions For all intersection KSI collisions in 2020-2022, eight collisions occurred in the daylight, while hit object collisions occurred in the dark with no streetlights and broadside, overturned, and vehicle/pedestrian collisions occurred in the daylight. Figure 30 illustrates the lighting condition and the collision type as observed for KSI collisions that occurred at intersections. Figure 30. KSI Intersection Collisions by Collision Type vs. Lighting Conditions (2020-2022) Collision Type and Time of the Day For all the KSI intersection collisions, highest number of collisions were hit object collisions in 2020-2022. Hit object collision types occurred between 12:00 p.m. and 4:00 p.m. and 7 p.m. to 12 a.m. Broadside collisions occurred between 7:00 p.m. to 8 p.m. Vehicle/pedestrian and overturned collisions occurred between 1:00 p.m. and 2 p.m. Figure 31 illustrates the collision type by the time of the day for all KSI intersection collisions. Figure 31. KSI Collisions on Intersection by Collisions Type vs. Time of the Day (2020-2022) 0 2 4 6 8 10 Daylight Dusk - Dawn Dark - Street Lights Dark - No Street Lights Head-On Broadside Hit Object Overturned Vehicle/Pedestrian Other 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 1:00 AM 12:00 PM 1:00 PM 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 7:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM 11:00 PM Head-On Broadside Hit Object Overturned Vehicle/Pedestrian Other Page 89 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 41 Geographic Collision Analysis This section describes a detailed geographic collision analysis performed for injury collisions occurring at roadway segments and intersections in Mendocino County for 2020-2022. The above collision analysis was used to identify five main collision factors that highlight the top trends among collisions in Mendocino County. These five collision factors were identified to be hit object collisions, DUI collisions, improper turning collisions, unsafe speed collisions, and nighttime collisions. Hit Object Collisions For KSI collisions in Mendocino County, 53 percent of collisions were hit object collisions. Figure 32 shows the distribution of hit object collisions throughout Mendocino County between 2020 and 2022. Branscomb Road near the unincorporated community of Branscomb, Comptche Ukiah Road near Mendocino Headlands State Park – Big River Property, and Vichy Springs Road near Vichy Springs have a higher concentration of hit object collisions, compared to other Mendocino County roads. DUI Collisions For KSI collisions in Mendocino County, 41 percent of collisions were DUI collisions compared to 32 percent of all injury collisions, meaning alcohol involved collisions have shown to result in a fatal or severe injury. Figure 33 shows the distribution of DUI collisions throughout Mendocino County between 2020 and 2022. Eastside Calpella Road and North State Street near the census-designated place Calpella, Vichy Springs Road near Vichy Springs, and Eel River Road near Potter Valley have a higher concentration of DUI collisions, compared to other Mendocino County roads. The OTS (2021) ranked Mendocino County 18th out of 58 California counties with high levels of alcohol involved collisions (one being the highest, or worst). Improper Turning Collisions For KSI collisions in Mendocino County, 25 percent of collisions were improper turning collisions. Figure 34 shows the distribution of injury from improper turning collisions throughout Mendocino County between 2020 and 2022. Branscomb Road near the unincorporated community of Branscomb, South State Street, south of Ukiah, and Babcock Lane east of Ukiah have a higher concentration of improper turning collisions, compared to other Unincorporated Mendocino County roads. Unsafe Speed Collisions For KSI collisions in Mendocino County, 19 percent of collisions were unsafe speed collisions. Figure 35 shows the distribution of unsafe speed collisions throughout Mendocino County between 2020 and 2022. North State Street near The Forks, Heeser Drive near Mendocino Headlands State Park, and Branscomb Road near the unincorporated community of Branscomb have a higher concentration of unsafe speed collisions, compared to other Mendocino County roads. The OTS (2021) ranked Page 90 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 42 Mendocino County 43rd out of 58 California counties with high levels of unsafe speed collisions (one being the highest, or worst). Nighttime Collisions For KSI collisions in Mendocino County, 51 percent of collisions were occurred in dark lighting conditions or during dusk or dawn. Figure 36 shows the distribution of nighttime collisions throughout Mendocino County between 2020 and 2022. Branscomb Road and West Road near the census-designated place Redwood Valley and unincorporated roads surrounding Ukiah and Willits have a higher concentration of nighttime collisions, compared to other Mendocino County roads. The OTS (2021) ranked Mendocino County 28th out of 58 California counties with high levels of nighttime collisions (one being the highest, or worst). Page 91 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 43 Figure 32. Hit Object Collisions Page 92 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 44 Figure 33. DUI Collisions Page 93 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 45 Figure 34. Improper Turning Collisions Page 94 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 46 Figure 35. Unsafe Speed Collisions Page 95 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 47 Figure 36. Nighttime Collisions Page 96 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 48 Collision Severity Weight A collision severity weight was used to identify the high severity collision network, using the Equivalent Property Damage Only (EPDO) method. The EPDO method accounts for both the severity and frequency of collisions by converting each collision to an equivalent number of PDO collisions. The EPDO method assigns a crash cost and score to each collision according to the severity of the crash weighted by the comprehensive crash cost. These EPDO scores are calculated using a simplified version of the comprehensive crash costs per HSIP Cycle 12 application. The weights used in the analysis are shown below in Table 8. Table 8. EPDO Score used in HSIP Cycle 12 Collision Severity EPDO Score KSI Combined 165* Visible Injury 11 Possible Injury 6 PDO 1 *This is the score used in HSIP Cycle 12 for collisions on roadways segments, to simplify the analysis this study uses the same score for all KSI collisions regardless of location The EPDO scores for all collisions can then be aggregated in a variety of ways to identify collision patterns, such as location hot-spots. The weighted collisions for Mendocino County were geolocated onto Mendocino County’s road network. Figure 37 shows the location and geographic concentration of collisions by their EPDO score. Page 97 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 49 Figure 37. Mendocino County EPDO Score Page 98 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 50 High-Injury Locations Following the detailed collision analysis the next step was to identify the high-risk roadway segments and intersections in Mendocino County. The methodology for scoring the high injury locations is the same method that was used in the collision severity weight section. Figure 38 and Figure 39 shows the top 14 high-collision roadway segments, and top 14 high-collision intersections identified in previous LRSP with collision history from 2015- 2019. This high collision network has a total of 145 injury collisions (other visible injury and complaint of pain) and 64 KSI collisions, which represents 28 percent of injury collisions and 44 percent of KSI collisions in Mendocino County that have occurred on only about 5 percent of Mendocino County’s roadway network. For the purposes of the high collision network analysis, intersections include collisions that occurred within 250 feet of it and roadways include all collisions that occurred along the roadway except for collisions that occurred directly at an intersection, or collisions that occurred at a distance of 0 feet from the primary and secondary street as listed the SWITRS collision database. Page 99 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 51 Figure 38. Mendocino County High Injury Network (2015-2019) Inset A Inset B Inset C Page 100 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 52 Figure 39. Mendocino County High Injury Network Insets Page 101 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 53 High Injury Intersections (2015-2019) Fourteen intersections were identified as high injury intersections. There were a total of 14 KSI collisions that occurred at these intersections. The intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Henderson Lane had the highest EPDO score. Table 9 lists the collision rate of the top 14 identified high-collision intersections along with their collision types and the number of KSI collisions. Table 9. High Injury Intersections (2015-2019) ID Intersection Total KSI Hit Object DUI Improper Turning Unsafe Speed Motor- cycle EPDO Score Collisions 1 Foothill Blvd and Henderson Ln 2 1 1 1 1 0 1 176 2 North State St and Kunzler Ranch Rd3 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 171 3 Pacific Woods Rd and Friendly Ave 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 171 4 Eastside Calpella Rd and Marina Dr 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 165 5 Pacific Woods Rd and Tiger Tail Trail 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 165 6 North State St and 101 On Ramp/Off Ramp 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 165 7 Tulip Dr and Buckeye Dr 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 165 8 Willow Rd and Primrose Dr 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 165 9 Tomki Rd and Fisher Lake Dr 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 165 10 Laws Ave and South Dora St 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 165 11 Birch St and Brooktrails Dr 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 165 12 Primrose Dr and Blue Jay Pl 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 165 13 Lansing St and Ukiah St 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 165 14 Chablis Dr and Carrigan Ln 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 165 3 Note: Kunzler Ranch Road is not a County road. Page 102 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 54 High Injury Corridors (2015-2019) Fourteen corridors were identified as high injury corridors. There were a total 52 KSI collisions on these corridors. The corridor with the highest amount of KSI collisions were on Branscomb Road with 13 KSI collisions. The corridor with the highest amount of KSI collisions per mile was Sherwood Road with 5 KSI collisions in 1.3 miles. Table 10 lists the EPDO scores of the top 14 identified high-collision corridors along with the number of KSI collisions and the characteristics of collisions that occurred. Table 10. High Injury Corridors (2015-2019) ID Corridors Total KSI Hit Object DUI Length (miles) EPDO Score Collisions A Branscomb Rd: Willis Ave to Kenny Creek Rd 34 13 26 9 13.3 2197 B Eastside Calpella Rd: Marina Dr to SR20 On ramp/Off ramp 10 5 4 6 2.3 870 C North State St: Moore St to Orr Springs Rd 27 4 11 6 4.3 853 D Sherwood Rd: Birch Terr to Willits City limits 7 5 3 1 1.3 837 E Comptche Ukiah Rd: Hwy 1 to Mendocino Headlands State Park - Big River Property 9 4 7 2 10.8 702 F Crawford Rd: Biggar Ln to Foothill Blvd 4 4 1 1 1 660 G Simpson Ln: Georges Ln to Hills O Home Ln 11 3 5 4 2 552 H Vichy Springs Rd/Redmeyer Rd: Oak Manor Dr to Redmyer Rd 7 3 5 4 1 529 I Valley Rd/Hearst Willits Rd: Bray Rd to Live Oak Rd 6 3 4 1 1.3 518 J South State St: Laws Ave to Beacon Ln 5 2 1 0 0.3 358 K Mountain View Rd: Between Manchester and Boonville 4 2 3 1 15.3 347 L Pudding Creek Rd: Tamborini Ln to John Hayman Rd 3 2 2 1 1.3 341 M Eel River Rd: Gibson Ln to Main St 3 1 2 2 1 187 N Henderson Ln: Henderson Rd to Foothill Blvd 2 1 1 1 0.5 176 Page 103 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 55 High Injury Intersections (2020-2022) Six intersections were identified as high injury intersections in 2020-2022. There were a total of six KSI collisions that occurred at these intersections. The intersection of Foothill Boulevard and Henderson Lane has the highest EPDO score. Table 11 lists the collision rate of the top 6 identified high-collision intersections along with their collision types and the number of KSI collisions. Figure 40 shows the top six high-collision intersections and top 10 high collision roadway segments from the 2020-2022 collision analysis. Table 11. High Injury Intersections (2020-2022) ID Intersections Total Injury Collisions Killed Severe Injury Pedestrian/Bicycle EPDO Score 1 Foothill Blvd & Henderson Ln* 4 0 1 0 193 2 N State St & Empire Dr /Ford Rd 3 0 1 0 177 3 Albion Ridge Rd & D Rd 1 0 1 0 165 4 E Hill Rd & Eastside Rd 1 0 1 1 165 5 Eastside Potter Valley Rd & E Rd 1 0 1 0 165 6 Riverside Dr/Eureka Hill Rd & Buckridge Rd 1 0 1 0 165 High Injury Corridors (2020-2022) Ten corridors were identified as high injury corridors in 2020-2022. There were a total 31 KSI collisions on these corridors. The corridor with the highest amount of KSI collisions was Sherwood Road from Poppy Drive to Willits city limits with 7 KSI collisions. Table 12 lists the EPDO scores of the top 10 identified high-collision corridors along with the number of KSI collisions and the characteristics of collisions that occurred. Table 12. High Injury Corridors (2020-2022) ID Corridors Total Injury Collisions Killed Severe Injury Pedestrian/Bicycle Length (miles) EPDO Score A Sherwood Rd: Poppy Dr to Willits City limits 15 3 4 0 3.8 1228 B Branscomb Rd: Bauer Rd to Wilderness Lodge Rd * 13 0 4 0 14.6 749 Page 104 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 56 ID Corridors Total Injury Collisions Killed Severe Injury Pedestrian/Bicycle Length (miles) EPDO Score C Old River Rd: Hwy 101 to Ruddick Cunningham Rd 8 2 2 0 12.7 704 D N State St: Hwy 101 to Orr Springs Rd 26 0 3 0 7.8 678 E Eel River Rd: Gibson Ln to Main St* 4 1 3 0 1.0 660 F Albion Ridge Rd: Hwy 1 to Middle Ridge Rd 4 1 1 0 4.2 347 G Vichy Springs Rd: Oak Manor Dr to Redmeyer Rd* 3 0 2 0 1.0 341 H Primrose Dr: Sherwood Rd to Clover Rd 3 0 2 0 1.1 341 I Crawford Rd: Biggar Ln to Foothill Blvd* 2 0 2 0 1.0 330 J Low Gap Rd: Ukiah City limits to Pine Ridge Rd 6 0 1 1 3.7 215 Note: (*) indicates locations identified as part of High Injury Network (2015-2019) Page 105 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 57 Figure 40. Mendocino County High Injury Network (2020-2022) Page 106 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 58 5. Emphasis Areas Emphasis areas are focus areas for the LRS/AP that are identified through the comprehensive collision analysis of the identified high injury locations within Mendocino County. Emphasis areas help in identifying appropriate safety strategies and countermeasures with the greatest potential to reduce collisions occurring at these high injury locations. In addition, traffic safety related concerns were heard at Stakeholder Meetings and Public Workshops. This chapter summarizes the top five emphasis areas identified for Mendocino County. These emphasis areas were derived from the consolidated high injury collision database (Appendix B) where top injury factors were identified by combining the data manually. Along with findings from the data analysis, stakeholder input was also considered while identifying emphasis areas specific to Mendocino County. The following are the identified emphasis areas: A. Roadway safety a. Collisions further than 250 feet of intersections B. Hit Object Collisions C. Improper Turning Collisions D. Nighttime Collisions E. DUI Collisions The Five E’s OF Traffic Safety LRS/AP utilizes a comprehensive approach to safety incorporating “5 E’s of traffic safety”: Engineering, Enforcement, Education, and Emergency Medical Services (EMS). While the fifth E, Equity is not discussed in this chapter, it is still an area that needs to be considered and addressed as outlined in Chapter 6. This approach recognizes that not all locations can be addressed solely by infrastructure improvements. Incorporating the 5 E’s of traffic safety is often required to ensure successful implementation of significant safety improvements and reduce the severity and frequency of collisions throughout a jurisdiction. Some of the common violation types that may require a comprehensive approach are speeding, failure-to-yield to pedestrians, red light running, aggressive driving, failure to wear safety belts, distracted driving, and driving while impaired. When locations are identified as having these types of violations, coordination with the appropriate law enforcement agencies is needed to arrange visible targeted enforcement to reduce the potential for future driving violations and related crashes and injuries. To improve safety, education efforts can also be used to supplement enforcement. Additionally, education efforts can supplement enforcement to improve the efficiency of each. Education can also be employed in the short-term to address high crash locations until the recommended infrastructure project can be implemented, addressed under Page 107 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 59 Engineering improvements and countermeasures. Similarly, EMS entails strategies around supporting organizations that provide rapid response and care when responding to collisions causing injury, by stabilizing victims and transporting then to facilities. Existing Traffic Safety Efforts in Mendocino County Mendocino County has already implemented safety strategies corresponding to the E’s of traffic safety. The strategies detailed in this chapter can supplement these existing programs and concentrate them on high injury collision locations and crash types. These initiatives are summarized in Table 13 below. Table 13. Existing Programs Summary Document/ Program Description E’s Addressed Mendocino Council of Governments 2020 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (2024) The Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) is a program of highway, local road, transit and active transportation projects that a region plans to fund with State and Federal revenue. Engineering Mendocino County Regional Transportation Plan & Active Transportation Plan (2022) Details bicycle and pedestrian improvements on County significant corridors. Includes detailed priority bike and pedestrian projects. Engineering Mendocino County Safe Routes to School Plan (2014) In addition to the Citywide programs, the countywide SRTS is also a resource to a program with a simple goal: helping more children get to school by walking and bicycling. Engineering Education Sheriff’s Department Ongoing Programs and Resources The Mendocino County Sherriff’s Department has an ongoing commitment to enforcing traffic violations at key location throughout the county. Enforcement Walk and Bike Mendocino Walk and Bike Mendocino promotes walking and biking as a primary transportation choice in short distance travel in Mendocino County. Education Mendocino County Traffic Safety Review The Traffic Safety Review program annually collects data and performs special traffic studies to improve the safety of the County maintained road system and cities street system by identifying traffic signing, marking deficiencies and other potential hazards on roads; updating the transportation database; and performing special traffic studies as needed. Engineering Page 108 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 60 Factors Considered in the Determination of Emphasis Areas This section presents collision data analysis of collision type, collision factors, facility type, roadway geometries, analyzed for the various emphasized areas. Emphasis areas were determined by factors that led to the highest amount of injury collisions, with a specific emphasis on KSI injury collisions. In addition to the collision data, emphasis areas were also determined by the feedback received from stakeholders. This section also presents comprehensive programs, policies, and countermeasures to reduce collisions in specific emphasis areas. Page 109 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 61 Emphasis Area 1 – Roadway Safety A total of 97 reported injury collisions occurred on the high injury network in Mendocino County. Of these collisions, 59 (61 percent) occurred at roadway segment or mid-block locations, including 26 KSI collisions. The following analysis findings is based on roadway injury collisions on the high injury network in Mendocino County. 64% Fixed Object collisions 34% Improper turning 26% DUI collisions Table 14. Emphasis Area 1 Strategies Objective: Reduce the number of KSI collisions at roadways Strategy Performance Measure Agencies/ Organizations Ed u c a t i o n Conduct public information and education campaign for intersection safety laws regarding unsafe speeds, distracted driving, improper turning and driving under the influence. Number of education campaigns County/ School District/ Police Department En f o r c e m e n t Targeted enforcement at high-risk roadways to monitor traffic law violations, speed limit laws, DUI checkpoints and other violations that occur along roadways. Number of tickets issued. Police Department En g i n e e r i n g  R01NT, Add segment lighting  R03, Install median barrier  R04, Install guard rail  R15. Widen shoulder  R21, Improve pavement friction  R22, Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning)  R26, Install dynamic / variable speed warnings  R27, Install delineators, reflectors and/or object markers  R28, Install edge lines and centerlines Number of roadways improved. County EM S SI04EV, Install emergency vehicle pre-emption systems EMS vehicle response time. Mendocino County Local Emergency Services Agency Page 110 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 62 Emphasis Area 2 – Hit Object Collisions A total 97 reported collisions occurred on the high injury network in Mendocino County. Of these collisions, 40 (41 percent) were hit object collisions, including 17 KSI collisions. The following collision analysis finding are based on hit object injury collisions on the high injury network in Mendocino County. 63% Roadway collisions 58% Occurred at night 60% DUI collisions Table 15. Emphasis Area 2 Strategies Objective: Reduce the number of KSI collisions that were hit object collisions Strategy Performance Measure Agencies/ Organizations Ed u c a t i o n Conduct public information and education campaign for intersection safety laws regarding, unsafe speeds, distracted driving, improper turning and driving under the influence. Number of education campaigns County/ School District/ Police Department En f o r c e m e n t Targeted enforcement at high-risk locations. Number of tickets issued. Police Department En g i n e e r i n g  R01NT, Add segment lighting  R03, Install median barrier  R04, Install guard rail  R15. Widen shoulder  R21, Improve pavement friction  R22, Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning)  R26, Install dynamic / variable speed warnings  R27, Install delineators, reflectors and/or object markers  R28, Install edge lines and centerlines Number of locations improved. County EM S SI04EV, Install emergency vehicle pre-emption systems EMS vehicle response time. Mendocino County Local Emergency Services Agency Page 111 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 63 Emphasis Area 3 – Improper Turning Collisions A total 97 reported collisions occurred on the high injury network in Mendocino County. Of these collisions, 24 (25 percent) were improper turning collisions, including eight KSI collisions. The following collision analysis findings are based on improper turning injury collisions on the high injury network in Mendocino County. 54% Hit object collisions 42% Occurred at night 83% Roadway collisions Table 16. Emphasis Area 3 Strategies Objective: Reduce the number of fatal and severe improper turning collisions Strategy Performance Measure Agencies/ Organizations Ed u c a t i o n Conduct public information and education campaign for safety laws regarding traffic lights, stop signs, and turning left or right. Number of education campaigns County/ School District/ Police Department En f o r c e m e n t Targeted enforcement at high-risk locations. Number of tickets issued. Police Department En g i n e e r i n g  SI02, Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number  SI03, Improve signal timing (coordination, phases, red, yellow, or operation)  SI07, Convert signal to mast arm (from pedestal- mounted)  SI08, Install raised pavement markers and striping (Through Intersection)  SI16RA/NS04RA/NS05RA, Convert intersection to roundabout  NS08, Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs  NS09, Upgrade intersection pavement markings (NS.I.)  R01NT, Add Segment Lighting  R22, Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning)  R27, Install delineators, reflectors and/or object markers Number of locations improved. County EM S SI04EV, Install emergency vehicle pre-emption systems EMS vehicle response time. Mendocino County Local Emergency Services Agency Page 112 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 64 Emphasis Area 4 – Nighttime Collisions A total 97 reported collisions occurred on the high injury network in Mendocino County. Of these collisions, 43 (44 percent) were nighttime collisions, including 17 KSI collisions. The following collision findings are based on nighttime collisions in the high injury network in Mendocino County. 53% Hit object collisions 56% DUI collisions 60% Roadway collisions Table 17. Emphasis Area 4 Strategies Objective: Reduce the number of KSI collisions that occur at nighttime Strategy Performance Measure Agencies/ Organizations Ed u c a t i o n Conduct public information and education campaign for safety laws regarding the larger risk of collisions during the nighttime. Number of education campaigns County/ Police Department En f o r c e m e n t Targeted enforcement at high-risk locations to monitor collisions that occur at nighttime. Number of tickets issued. Police Department En g i n e e r i n g  SI02, Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size and number  SI9, Install flashing beacon as warning  NSI08, Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs  R01NT, Add segment lighting  R22, Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning)  R27, Install delineators, reflectors and/or object markers  R26, Install dynamic/ variable speed warning signs Number of locations improved. County EM S SI04EV, Install emergency vehicle pre-emption systems EMS vehicle response time. Mendocino County Local Emergency Services Agency Page 113 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 65 Emphasis Area 5 – Driving Under the Influence Collisions A total 97 reported collisions occurred on the high injury network in Mendocino County. Of these collisions, 34 (35 percent) were driving under the influence collisions (DUI), including 20 KSI collisions. The following collision findings are based on DUI collisions on the high injury network in Mendocino County. 71% Hit object collisions 71% Nighttime collisions 62% Roadway collisions Table 18. Emphasis Area 5 Strategies Objective: Reduce the number of KSI collisions that are a result of driving under the influence Strategy Performance Measure Agencies/ Organizations Ed u c a t i o n Conduct public information and education campaign for safety laws regarding driving under the influence and publicize alternatives. Number of education campaigns County/ School District/ Police Department En f o r c e m e n t Targeted enforcement at high-risk locations to monitor driving under the influence. Number of tickets issued. Police Department En g i n e e r i n g  SI02, Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number  SI07, Convert signal to mast arm (from pedestal- mounted)  SI08, Install raised pavement markers and striping (Through Intersection)  SI16RA/NS04RA/NS05RA, Convert intersection to roundabout  NS08, Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs  NS09, Upgrade intersection pavement markings (NS.I.)  R01NT, Add Segment Lighting  R04, Install guard rail  R15. Widen shoulder  R22, Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning)  R27, Install delineators, reflectors and/or object markers Number of locations improved. County EM S SI04EV, Install emergency vehicle pre-emption systems EMS vehicle response time. Mendocino County Local Emergency Services Agency Page 114 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 66 6. Equity Through this LRS/AP update, Mendocino County seeks to advance equity in identifying and addressing its transportation safety needs. The County recognizes that transportation benefits and costs can accrue unequally across communities. Despite transportation’s ability to connect communities to opportunities, resources, and destinations, historical patterns of decisions and investments in transportation have not addressed, and even aggravated or created, inequalities in wealth, access, and health. Inequalities in transportation safety result in an undue concentration of collisions, unsafe roadways, or severe injury collisions in communities with social, economic, or other vulnerabilities. Data shows that roadway collisions disproportionately impact people who are Black, American Indian, and live in rural communities (USDOT’s National Roadway Safety Strategy 2022).4 Non-motorists, such as pedestrians and bicyclists, are more likely to be involved in a KSI collision than motorists. Traditional safety strategies such as enforcement face backlash for their discriminatory outcomes that burden racial minorities. These measures do not address policy or built environment limitations, resulting in safety hazards to roadway uses. Hence, a commitment to make roads safe for all users must consider equity seriously in analyzing roadway safety and recommending improvements. It is a core goal of this LRS/AP to recommend safety improvements in a manner that is fair and equitable for all the County’s residents, in line with a federal commitment to creating an equitable transportation system that is safe, efficient, and sustainable. Planning and decision-making processes followed in this LRS/AP update adequately consider inputs and feedback from communities with limited means or ability to participate effectively. Five stakeholder meetings were held with residents during the LRS/AP update to gather insights into safety burdens faced by communities, share data and findings, and gather feedback on safety countermeasures and recommendations. LRS/AP is also guided by public inputs received through the online public input platform and feedback from the safety partners. This chapter details how the safety data is analyzed with respect to equity-emphasis communities (EEC) to identify the impact of collisions in vulnerable communities. USDOT’s5 commitment to expanding “access and opportunity to all communities while focusing on underserved, overburdened, and disadvantaged communities” guides this plan in prioritizing safety projects to benefit the most vulnerable of the communities. The LRS/AP includes elements from the FHWA recommended Safe Systems Approach and prioritizes the needs of vulnerable road users such as bicyclists and pedestrians in 4https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-02/USDOT-National-Roadway-Safety- Strategy.pdf 5 https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-04/Equity_Action_Plan.pdf Page 115 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 67 identifying countermeasures and developing the countermeasure toolbox. The projects identified are also analyzed for their adherence to the Justice40 commitment to directing benefits of investments to vulnerable communities. High Roadway Safety Risks in the County Mendocino County residents are more likely to be killed in a collision as compared to the average Californian. The average annual fatality rate (AAFR) for Mendocino County is 31.23 persons killed per 100,000 residents for 2017-2021, which is higher than the comparable rate for the state of California at 10.12 persons killed per 100,000 residents. Considering 2018-2022, this rate has declined for the county to 28.24, yet remains 171 percent higher than the State. AAFR has been calculated based on the methodology provided by the Safe Streets for All grant program. The calculation worksheet and methodology are available in Appendix D. Equity-Emphasis Communities Equity-emphasis communities are communities facing disadvantages in climate and disaster risk burden, environmental burden, health vulnerability, social vulnerability, and transportation insecurity due to underinvestment in their transportation systems. The LRS/AP utilizes the concept of transportation disadvantage developed by the USDOT to identify EEC. The five areas, developed using data including the 2020 American Community Survey, capture various population characteristics indicating vulnerabilities as described below:6  CLIMATE AND DISASTER RISK BURDEN: measures current and future risks to an area from climate and natural disasters based on potential losses from existing hazard exposure and vulnerability.  ENVIRONMENTAL BURDEN: measures factors such as pollution, hazardous facility exposure, water pollution and the built environment.  HEALTH VULNERABILITY: measures the prevalence of health conditions such as asthma, cancer, high blood pressure, diabetes, and poor mental health  SOCIAL VULNERABILITY: identifies populations that are at a higher risk due to certain social conditions.  TRANSPORTATION INSECURITY: it is the condition in which people are unable to regularly and reliably satisfy the travel necessary to meet the needs of daily life. EEC are communities (census tracts) facing cumulative transportation disadvantages, as identified in USDOT’s Equitable Transportation Communities Explorer (ETCE). For each community, ETCE calculates a disadvantage ranking for all its census tracts. These 6 https://www.transportation.gov/priorities/equity/justice40/etc-explorer-indicator-table Page 116 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 68 rankings are reported as national percentiles, where a 65th percentile rank or above is considered disadvantaged. Thirty-five percent of census tracts in Mendocino County are EEC (Figure 41). These census tracts comprise 31 percent of the County’s 87.1K residents. Specifically, the county faces social vulnerability (69 percent) and transportation insecurity (70 percent). The county also ranks higher for these elements and health vulnerability (51 percent) than California, as shown in Figure 42. Page 117 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 69 Figure 41: Mendocino County Equity-Emphasis Communities Page 118 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 70 Figure 42: Mendocino County Transportation Disadvantage Roadway Safety in Equity-Emphasis Communities Roadway safety burdens in EEC in Mendocino County are identified after overlaying collision data on the equity data from ETCE. The data considered in this analysis is limited to collisions leading to a fatality or an injury and is available in Appendix E. Trends in roadway collision in EEC for collision severity, collision type, violation category, motor vehicle involved with, mode, and lighting conditions. Trends in roadway collision in EEC for collision severity, collision type, violation category, motor vehicle involved with, mode, and lighting conditions, as compared to other communities (non-EEC within the County), and to the overall County, are as follows: 28 26 51 69 70 62 61 48 55 38 65 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 Climate & Disaster Risk Burden Percentile Rank Environmental Burden Percentile Rank Health Vulnerability Percentile Rank Social Vulnerability Percentile Rank Transportation Insecurity Percentile Rank Pe r c e n t i l e R a n k Transportation Disadvantage Components Mendocino County California 65th Percentile Rank Page 119 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 71 Figure 43: Collision Share in Equity-Emphasis Community  EEC saw a higher share of collisions than their share in area or percentage. Forty- one percent of all collisions and 52 percent of KSI collisions in the County occurred in these communities (Figure 43), accounting for 35 percent of land area.  These communities face higher severity collisions. In EEC, 38 percent of collisions were KSI, compared to 24 percent in other communities and 29 percent in Mendocino County.  Hit Objects were the most common type of collision (50 percent). Higher share collisions were of the type overturned (23 percent of all collisions and 30 percent of KSI collisions) in EEC. The share for these in the other communities is 16 and 12 percent, respectively, and in the County, 19 percent for all collisions. 59% 48% 41% 52% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% Total KSI Collisions Sh a r e o f C o l l i s i o n s Other Communities Equity-Emphasis Communities Page 120 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 72 Figure 44: Top Four Violation Categories  The top four violation categories in EEC are DUI, improper turning, unsafe speed, and automobile right of way violations. These contributed to approximately 90 percent of all KSI collisions (Figure 44). In EEC, 36 percent of all collisions and 43 percent of KSI collisions are DUI, as compared to only 31 percent in the County.  EEC reported a higher share of collisions that involved a motorcycle or a scooter. Twenty percent of all collisions and 37 percent of KSI collisions were of this mode in EEC. The share of motorcycles or scooters in all collisions is only 12 percent in the County and 6 percent among other communities. In KSI collisions, it is 21 and 9 percent, respectively, in the county and other communities.  A greater share of collisions occurred in the dark in locations without a street light in EEC than in non-equity communities. Such collisions accounted for 34 percent of all collisions, 35 percent of KSI collisions in EEC, 28 percent of all collisions, and 33 percent of KSI in other communities. 36% 30% 20% 5% 43% 22%22% 2% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% DUI Improper Turning Unsafe Speed Automobile Right of Way Sh a r e o f C o l l i s i o n s Total KSI Collisions Page 121 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 73 7. Countermeasure Identification This section summarizes the process of selecting countermeasures on Mendocino County roadways as part of the analysis for the LRS/AP. Countermeasures were selected for each of the identified high-risk intersections and roadway segments based on extensive review of existing conditions at the site and characteristics of identified collisions on the High Injury Network. Identified collision factors and existing conditions were cross referenced with the Caltrans LRSM identified countermeasures that are HSIP approved. Countermeasures that best fit the site and had the highest opportunity for systemic implementation were selected. Countermeasures were selected not only for each high-risk location, but also for each identified countywide emphasis area. Identification of Countermeasures In 2010, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) published a set of three manuals for local and rural road owners to present a simple, data driven safety analysis framework for rural agencies across the country. In conjunction with these documents, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) developed the LRSM. The goal of this manual is to “maximize the safety benefits for local roadways by encouraging all local agencies to proactively identify and analyze their safety issues and to position themselves to compete effectively in Caltrans’ statewide, data-driven call-for-projects.”7 Although, the LRSM identifies all of California’s local roadway safety issues and the countermeasures that address them, this document only highlights the issues and countermeasures relevant to the local roads of Mendocino County. This section identifies the different solutions for the County from HSIP-qualified and non-HSIP countermeasures. It also provides a brief description along with their corresponding crash reduction factors (CRF), expected life and baseline cost. An excerpt of the LRSM, detailing each available HSIP countermeasure referenced in the recommendations tables, is included as Appendix F. The countermeasures have been divided into following categories:  Signalized (SI) – countermeasures only applicable for signalized intersections;  Non-Signalized (NS) – countermeasures only applicable to stop-controlled, or uncontrolled intersections;  Roadway Segment (RS) – countermeasures only applicable to roadway segments;  Other (O) – countermeasures that do not qualify for HSIP funding. 7https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/local-assistance/documents/hsip/2024/lrsm2024.pdf Page 122 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 74 Draft Countermeasure Toolbox Signalized Intersections Countermeasures SI03 – Improve signal timing (coordination, phases, red, yellow, or operation) Improve signal hardware: lenses, back-plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number. Includes adding phases, lengthening clearance intervals, eliminating or restricting higher-risk movements, and coordinating signals at multiple locations.  Crash Reduction Factor – 15%  Expected Life – 10 years SI09 - Install flashing beacons as advance warning. At signalized intersections with crashes that are a result of drivers being unaware of the intersection or are unable to see the traffic control device in time to comply.  Crash Reduction Factor – 30%  Expected Life – 10 years Non-Signalized Intersections Countermeasures NS08 – Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs. The visibility of intersections and, thus, the ability of approaching drivers to perceive them can be enhanced by installing larger regulatory and warning signs at or prior to intersections. A key to success in applying this strategy is to select a combination of regulatory and warning sign techniques appropriate for the conditions on a particular unsignalized intersection approach.  Crash Reduction Factor – 15%  Expected Life – 10 years NS11 – Install flashing beacons as advance warning. Non-Signalized Intersections with patterns of crashes that could be related to lack of a driver's awareness of approaching intersection or controls at a downstream intersection.  Crash Reduction Factor – 30%  Expected Life – 10 years Roadway Countermeasures R01NT – Add segment lighting. Providing roadway lighting improves the safety during nighttime conditions by (1) making drivers more aware of the surroundings, which improves drivers' perception-reaction times, (2) enhancing drivers' available sight distances to perceive roadway characteristic in advance of the change, and (3) improving non-motorist's visibility and navigation.  Crash Reduction Factor – 35%  Expected Life – 20 years R02 – Remove or relocate fixed objects outside of Clear Recovery Zone Provisions of a clear zone. A clear zone is an unobstructed, traversable roadside area that allows a driver to stop safely or regain control of a vehicle that has left the roadway. Removing or moving fixed  Crash Reduction Factor – 35%  Expected Life – 20 years Page 123 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 75 objects, flattening slopes, or providing recovery areas reduces the likelihood of a crash. R04 - Install Guardrail. Guardrail is installed to reduce the severity of lane departure crashes. However, guardrail can reduce crash severity only for those conditions where striking the guardrail is less severe than going down an embankment or striking a fixed object. Guardrail should only be installed where it is clear that crash severity will be reduced, or there is a history of run- off-the-road crashes at a given location that have resulted in severe crashes.  Crash Reduction Factor – 25%  Expected Life – 20 years R22 – Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning). The target for this strategy should be on roadway segments with patterns of head on, nighttime, non-intersection, run-off road, and sideswipe crashes related to lack of driver awareness of the presence of a specific roadway feature or regulatory requirement. Ideally this type of safety CM would be combined with other sign evaluations and upgrades (install chevrons, warning signs, delineators, markers, beacons, and relocation of existing signs per MUTCD standards).  Crash Reduction Factor – 15%  Expected Life – 10 years R23 – Install chevron signs on horizontal curves This strategy primarily addresses crashes caused by motorists traveling too fast around sharp curves. It is intended to get the drivers attention and give them a visual warning that they may be traveling over the recommended speed for the approaching curve. Care should be taken to limit the placement of these signs to help maintain their effectiveness.  Crash Reduction Factor – 40%  Expected Life – 10 years R24 – Install curve advance warning signs This strategy primarily addresses problem curves, and serves as an advance warning of an unexpected or sharp curve. It provides advance information and gives drivers a visual warning that their added attention is needed.  Crash Reduction Factor – 25%  Expected Life – 10 years R25 – Install curve advance warning signs (flashing beacon) This strategy primarily addresses problem curves, and serves as an enhanced advance warning of an unexpected or sharp curve. It provides advance information and gives drivers a visual warning that their added attention is needed. Flashing beacons are an added indication that a curve may be particularly challenging.  Crash Reduction Factor – 30%  Expected Life – 10 years R30 – Install centerline rumble strips/stripes Provisions of rumble strips in the centerline which provide  Crash Reduction Factor – 20% Page 124 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 76 an auditory indication and tactile rumble intended to help drivers who might leave the roadway.  Expected Life – 10 years Other Countermeasures Bulb outs/curb extensions. Curb extensions (also called bulb-outs) extend the sidewalk into the parking lane to narrow the roadway and provide additional pedestrian space at key locations; they can be used at corners and at mid-block. Curb extensions enhance pedestrian safety by increasing pedestrian visibility, shortening crossing distances, slowing turning vehicles, and visually narrowing the roadway. Speed Feedback Signs. Speed feedback signs, also known as dynamic speed displays, provide drivers with feedback about their speed in relationship to the posted speed limit. When appropriately complemented with police enforcement, speed feedback signs can be an effective method for reducing speeds at a desired location. In Road Yield/stop Signs. In-street pedestrian crossing signs (MUTCD R1-6 or R1-6a) are placed within the roadway, either between travel lanes or in a median. The sign may be used to remind road users of laws regarding right-of-way at an unsignalized pedestrian crossing. This countermeasure is used with other crosswalk visibility enhancements to indicate optimal or preferred locations for people to cross and to help reinforce the driver requirement to yield the right-of-way to pedestrians at crossing locations. Page 125 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 77 8. Safety Projects This chapter summarizes the process of selecting safety projects as part of the analysis for the Mendocino County LRS/AP update. The next step after the identification of high- risk locations, emphasis areas and applicable countermeasures was to identify location specific safety improvements for all high-risk roadway segments and intersections. Specific countermeasures and improvements were selected from the 2024 LRSM, where:  SI refers to improvements at signalized locations,  NS refers to improvements at non-signalized locations, and  R refers to improvements at roadway segments. The corresponding number refers to the countermeasure number in the LRSM (2024). The countermeasures were grouped into safety projects for high-risk intersections and roadway segments. A total of eight safety projects were developed. All countermeasures were identified based on the technical teams’ assessment of viability that consisted of extensive analysis, observations, and County staff input. The most applicable and appropriate countermeasures as identified have been grouped together to form projects that can help make high-risk locations safer. Table 19 lists the safety projects for high-risk intersections and roadway segments, along with total base planning level cost (2024 dollar amounts) estimates and the resultant preliminary Benefit-Cost (B/C) Ratio. The “Total Benefit” estimates were calculated for the proposed improvements being evaluated in the proactive safety analysis. This “Total Benefit” is divided by the “Total Cost per Location” estimates for the proposed improvements, giving the resultant B/C Ratio. The B/C Ratio Calculation follows the methodology as mentioned in the LRSM (2024). Appendix G lists the HSIP Analyzers for each project which includes the complete cost, benefit and B/C Ratio. In addition to the HSIP projects, Mendocino County has identified one more project to enhance road safety within the County. This project aligns with the County's safety goals and is described below: Countywide Traffic Calming Measure Policy Mendocino County will apply for policy-implementation grant funding in order to prepare a Countywide Traffic Calming Measure. This policy will review and address Countywide trends that relate to traffic calming safety measures and those corridors and areas of the County will suffer most from, and will benefit most from, traffic calming measures. Page 126 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 78 Existing County Projects Also, the County has started to implement several projects to address safety issue. These include:  Construction of two roundabouts on North State Street at the intersection with KUKI and at the southbound SR/Highway 101 interchanges. The project will include bicycle and pedestrian access/facilities.  Bridge replacement on North State Street over Ackerman Creek. This project will include bridge widening and sidewalks. The rest of North State Street has already been widenened, so this project will eliminate the bottleneck at the bridge that currently is unsafe for pedestrian and bike crossing.  The County also applied for an Action Transportation Plan (ATP) grant for a Safe Routes To School (SRTS) project in Covelo along Howard Street, Airport Road, and Foothill Boulevard. The project, if funded, will include installation of sidewalks, curbs, gutters, crosswalks, bike lanes, and other infrastructure methods to improve pedestrian and bicyclist safety along various school routes. The next step in the process will be to prepare grant ready materials for HSIP Cycle 12 applications. It should be noted that while the LRS/AP projects were based on high-risk locations, HSIP applications can be expanded to include many locations across the county. Once the three desired projects are selected, our team recommends three potential options for selecting locations to include in the HSIP applications:  Select the top projects ranked by crash cost  County identifies desired intersections  Apply for various intersections countywide with more generic cost estimates Table 19. List of Viable Safety Projects Location CM1 CM2 CM3 Cost per Location B/C Ratio Project 1: Improve Safety at Signalized Intersections. N State St & Empire Dr/Ford Rd SI03 SI09 $70,900 31.62 Project 2: Improve Safety at Non-Signalized Intersections. Foothill Blvd and Henderson Ln NS11 $98,000 22.56 Albion Ridge Rd & D Rd NS08 $1,500 E Hill Rd & Eastside Rd NS08 NS11 $56,975 Page 127 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 79 Location CM1 CM2 CM3 Cost per Location B/C Ratio Riverside Dr/Eureka Hill Rd & Buckridge Rd NS08 $2,700 Project 3: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments. Sherwood Rd: Poppy Dr to Willits City limits R04 $68,750 137.74 Branscomb Rd: Bauer Rd to Wilderness Lodge Rd R04 $115,250 N State St: Hwy 101 to Orr Springs Rd R04 R22 $63,500 Eel River Rd: Gibson Ln to Main St R04 R22 $18,125 Albion Ridge Rd: Hwy 1 to Middle Ridge Rd R04 $48,400 Vichy Springs Rd/Redmeyer Rd: Oak Manor Dr to Redmeyer Rd R04 $13,200 Primrose Dr: Sherwood Rd to Clover Rd R04 R22 $44,325 Crawford Rd: Biggar Ln to Foothill Blvd R22 $7,125 Low Gap Rd: Ukiah City Limits to Pine Ridge Rd R04 R22 $63,675 Project 4: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments* Sherwood Rd: Poppy Dr to Willits City limits R23 R25 $225,350 82.23 Branscomb Rd: Bauer Rd to Wilderness Lodge Rd R23 R25 $141,550 Old River Rd: Hwy 101 to Ruddick Cunningham Rd R23 R25 $272,400 Vichy Springs Rd/Redmeyer Rd: Oak Manor Dr to Redmeyer Rd R23 R24 $15,200 Primrose Dr: Sherwood Rd to Clover Rd R23 R24 $20,000 Low Gap Rd: Ukiah City Limits to Pine Ridge Rd R23 R24 $22,200 Eastside Potter Valley Rd: Burris Ln to Highway 20 R23 R24 $25,600 Project 5: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments. Sherwood Rd: Poppy to Willits City limits R30 $119,000 16.66 Page 128 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 80 Location CM1 CM2 CM3 Cost per Location B/C Ratio Branscomb Rd: Bauer Rd to Wilderness Lodge Rd R30 $535,500 Old River Rd: Redwood Hwy to Ruddick Cunningham Rd R30 $455,000 North State St: Redwood Hwy to Orr Springs Rd R30 $146,300 Eel River Rd: Gibson Ln to Main St R30 $73,500 Albion Ridge Rd: Shoreline Hwy to Middle Ridge Rd R30 $140,000 Vichy Springs Rd/Redmeyer Rd: Oak Manor Dr to Redmeyer Rd R30 $31,500 Primrose Dr: Sherwood Rd to Clover Rd R30 $25,200 Crawford Rd: Biggar Ln to Foothill Blvd R30 $36,400 Notes: CM – countermeasure. B/C ratio is the dollar amount of benefits divided by the cost of the countermeasure. For B/C ratio calculation, 5-year (2018-2022) collision data was utilized. *A ball bank study will be a part of Project 4. SI03 – Improve signal timing (coordination, phases, red, yellow, or operation) Improve signal hardware: lenses, back- plates with retroreflective borders, mounting, size, and number. SI09- Install flashing beacons as advance warning (S.I.) NS08 – Install/upgrade larger or additional stop signs or other intersection warning/regulatory signs. NS11 – Install flashing beacons as advance warning. R04- Install Guardrail R22 – Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning). R23 – Install chevron signs on horizontal curves R24- Install curve advance warning signs R25- Install curve advance warning signs (flashing beacon) R30- Install centerline rumble strips/stripes Table 20 mentions projects funded by the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) that the County submitted for consideration during the 2022 HSIP Cycle 11 funding round. These projects were awarded funding for Cycle 11. Table 20. Cycle 11 HSIP Applications Location CM1 CM2 CM3 HSIP Funds Requested B/C Ratio HSIP Application 1: Installation of Advance Curve Warning Signs, Installation of sidewalk/pathway, and Install/upgrade Pedestrian Crossing Branscomb Rd: Willits Ave to Kenny Creek Road R24 $91,600 73.63 Eastside Calpella Rd: Marina Dr to SR20 On ramp/off ramp R24 Page 129 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 81 Location CM1 CM2 CM3 HSIP Funds Requested B/C Ratio Comptche Ukiah Rd: Hwy 1 to Mendocino Headlands State Park - Big River Property R24 Mountain View Rd: Btwn Manchester and Boonville R24 Crawford Rd: Biggar Ln to Foothill Blvd R34PB South State St: Laws Ave to Beacon Ln R34PB R35PB HSIP Application 2: Installation and Removal of Signs, Sign Post and Object Markers, Delineators Posts, Reflectors and Upgrading the signs with new fluorescent sheeting Branscomb Rd: Willits Ave to Kenny Creek Road R22 R23 $305,280 278.40 Eastside Calpella Rd: Marina Dr to SR20 On ramp/off ramp R22 R23 North State St: Moore St to Orr Springs Rd R22 R27 Sherwood Rd: Birch Terr to Willits City limits R22 R23 Comptche Ukiah Rd: Hwy 1 to Mendocino Headlands State Park - Big River Property R22 R27 Simpson Ln: Georges Ln to Hills O Home Ln R22 Vichy Springs Rd/ Redmeyer Rd: Oak Manor Dr to Redmyer Rd R22 R27 Valley Rd/ Hearst Willits Rd: Bray Rd to Live Oak Rd R22 R27 South State St: Laws Ave to Beacon Ln R22 Mountain View Rd: Btwn Manchester and Boonville R22 R23 Pudding Creek Rd: Tamborini Ln to John Hayman Rd R22 R27 Eel River Rd: Gibson Ln to Main St R27 Henderson Ln: Henderson Rd to Foothill Blvd R22 R27 Notes: CM – countermeasure. B/C ratio is the dollar amount of benefits divided by the cost of the countermeasure. For B/C ratio calculation, 5-year (2015-2019) collision data was utilized. Costs requested include contingency, PS&E, environmental and construction costs. These HSIP application followed LRSM 2022 countermeasure codes which are described below: R22: Install/Upgrade signs with new fluorescent sheeting (regulatory or warning) R23: Install chevron signs on horizontal curves R24: Install curve advance warning signs R27: Install delineators, reflectors and/or object markers R34PB: Install sidewalk/pathway (to avoid walking along roadway) R35PB: Install/upgrade pedestrian crossing (with enhanced safety features) These projects address critical safety improvements on county roads. These projects have been further prioritized based on the goals and vision outlined in Chapter 1 in order to meet Strategy and Project Selection SS4A criteria. The six criteria for the prioritization are safety benefits, benefits to vulnerable road users, school safety impact, equity impact, Page 130 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 82 public engagement, and ease of implementation. Each criterion is scored separately and then weighed to arrive at the final scores for each project, as described in Table 21. A project can receive a maximum score of 100. The project prioritization worksheets are available in Appendix H. Table 22 presents the projects in the priority order. Table 21. Prioritization Matrix Criteria Description Weight Safety Benefits Safety benefits are evaluated using the Benefit-to-Cost (BCR) ratio. BCR is calculated based on five-year collision data and 2024 planning-level cost estimates, as per the HSIP norms. Projects are then grouped into three equal-range buckets based on the BCR and receive safety scores as follows:  Projects in the highest bucket - 100  Projects in the Middle bucket - 50  Projects in the Lowest bucket - 20 40% Benefit to Vulnerable Road Users Considers improvements benefiting pedestrians, bicyclists, transit users, or persons with disabilities.  Projects with benefits - 100  Projects without benefits - 0 15% School Safety Impact Considers safety improvements on roadways and intersections within 1/4 mile of an existing school.  Projects in proximity to schools - 100  Projects without proximity to schools - 0 10% Equity Impact Considers the location of a project entirely or partially in an equity-emphasis community (EEC).  Projects in EEC - 100  Projects outside of EEC - 0 15% Public Engagement Considers projects that have garnered community and stakeholder support during the LRS/AP outreach process.  Projects with community support - 100  Projects without community support - 0 10% Ease of Implementation Projects are scored based on the complexity of their countermeasures. For projects with multiple countermeasures, the lowest category score is applied.  High-ease improvements like signs, lights, striping, and crosswalks - 100  Medium-ease improvements like sidewalks, medians, and new signals - 50  Low-ease improvements requiring lane/geometry changes, right-of-way acquisition, or utility or drainage work – 20 10% Page 131 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 83 Table 22: Priority Project List Priority Project Score 1 Project 3: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments 70 2 Project 4: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments 55 3 Project 2: Improve Safety at Non-Signalized Intersections 53 4 Project 5: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments 38 5 Project 1: Improve Safety at Signalized Intersections 28 Page 132 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 84 9. Evaluation and Implementation This chapter describes the steps the County may take to evaluate the success of this plan and steps needed to update the plan in the future. The LRS/AP is a guidance document and requires periodic updates to assess its efficacy and re-evaluate potential solutions. It is recommended to update the plan every two to five years in coordination with the identified safety partners. This document was developed based on community needs, stakeholder input, and collision analysis conducted to identify priority emphasis areas throughout the County. The implementation of strategies under each emphasis area would aim to reduce KSI collisions in the coming years. Funding is a critical component of implementing any safety project. While the HSIP program is a common source of funding for safety projects, there are numerous other funding sources that could be pursued for such projects. Potential funding sources are listed below in Table 23. Table 23. Potential Funding Sources Funding Source Funding Agency Amount Available Next Estimated Call for Projects Applicable E’s Notes Active Transportation Program Caltrans, California Transportation Commission ~$223 million per year 2024 Engineering, Education Can use used for most active transportation related safety projects as well as education programs Highway Safety Improvement Program Caltrans TBD 2024 Engineering Most common grant source for safety projects Surface Transportation Block Group Program FHWA (Administered through MCTC) Varies by FY TBD Engineering Typically used for roadway projects Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) FHWA (Administered through MCTC) Varies by FY TBD Engineering Focused on projects that improve air quality Office of Traffic Safety Grants California Office of Traffic Safety Varies by grant Closes January 31st annually Education, Enforcement, Emergency Response 10 grants available to address various components of traffic safety Affordable Housing and Sustainable Strategic Growth Council and Dept. of ~$405 million TBD Engineering, Education Must be connected to affordable housing projects; typically focuses on bike/ped Page 133 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 85 Funding Source Funding Agency Amount Available Next Estimated Call for Projects Applicable E’s Notes Communities Program Housing and Community Development infrastructure/ programs Urban Greening California Natural Resources Agency $23.75 million TBD Engineering Focused on bike/ pedestrian infrastructure and greening public spaces Local Streets and Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation CTC (distributed to local agencies) $1.5 billion statewide N/A; distributed by formula Engineering Typically pays for road maintenance type projects RAISE Grant USDOT ~$1 billion TBD Engineering Typically used for larger infrastructure projects Sustainable Transportation Equity Project California Air Resources Board ~$19.5 million TBD; most recent call in 2023 Engineering, Education Targets projects that will increase transportation equity in disadvantaged communities Safe Street for All (SS4A) USDOT $200k - $50 million 2026 Engineering Two types of SS4A grants available: Action Plan Grants and Implementation Grants Transformative Climate Communities Strategic Growth Council ~$90 million TBD; most recent call in 2022 Engineering Funds community-led projects that achieve major reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in disadvantaged communities Implementation The LRS/AP document provides engineering, education, enforcement, and EMS related countermeasures that can be implemented throughout the County to reduce KSI collisions. It is recommended that Mendocino County implement the selected project high- collision locations in coordination with other projects proposed for the County’s infrastructure development in their future Capital Improvement Plans. The success of the LRS/AP can be achieved by fostering communication among the County and the safety partners. Page 134 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 86 Monitoring and Evaluation For the success of the LRS/AP, it is crucial to monitor and evaluate the E-strategies continuously. Monitoring and evaluation help provide accountability, ensures the effectiveness of the countermeasures for each emphasis area, and help making decisions on the need for new strategies. The process would help the City make informed decisions regarding the implementation plan’s progress and accordingly, update the goals and objectives of the plan. After implementing countermeasures, the strategies should be evaluated annually as per their performance measures. The evaluation should be recorded in a before-after study to validate the effectiveness of each countermeasure. Pre-Implementation Data Collection Before any safety project is implemented, comprehensive baseline data should be collected within the project area to enable future before/after comparison analysis. Data to be compiled includes: Collision Data:  Collision types (pedestrian, angle, rear-end, etc.)  Collision severity levels  Locations and corridors  Contributing factors Traffic Data:  Vehicle traffic volumes  Pedestrian and bicycle traffic counts Operations Data:  85th percentile and pace speeds  Vehicle/pedestrian/bicycle conflict observations  Observable road user behavior and compliance levels Statistical Analysis Methodology Appropriate statistical techniques can be applied to account for regression-to-mean effects, traffic volume changes over time, and other potential biases. Recommended approaches include Empirical Bayes method and advanced regression modeling. Page 135 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 87 Using these techniques, an estimate of the predicted long-term safety performance should be calculated assuming no safety improvements were implemented. This becomes the baseline for comparison. Post-Implementation Data Collection After allowing sufficient time following project implementation (typically 1-3 years), the same scope of "after" data can be re-collected to enable before/after comparison. Performance Evaluation Measures The following key safety performance measures can be evaluated by comparing predicted vs. actual post-implementation conditions: 1. Total collisions 2. Fatal and serious injury collisions (KSI) 3. Collisions by type (pedestrian, intersection, roadway departure, etc.) 4. Operating speeds 5. Conflicts between modes (vehicle/pedestrian/bicycle) Supplemental Measures for Behavioral Safety Projects For safety initiatives focused on influencing driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist behavior (e.g. education campaigns, enforcement activities), leading indicators of compliance can be tracked, such as: 1. Speeding violations 2. Impaired driving arrests/citations 3. Distracted driving violations 4. Pedestrian and bicycle traffic counts 5. Observed yielding/compliance behavior Project Evaluation Report All findings from the before/after analysis should be documented in a comprehensive Project Evaluation Report containing:  Project scope and description of implemented countermeasures  Implementation costs  Data collection processes and sources  Statistical analysis methodology  Summary of before/after performance results  Assessment of whether intended benefits were achieved  Lessons learned and recommendations  Supplemental policy, program or design guidance as applicable Page 136 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 88 Continual Monitoring Process To ensure ongoing effectiveness evaluation, city should establish:  Routine schedules for MOE (Measure of Effectiveness) data collection and analysis  Designated staff responsibilities for MOE activities  Integration of MOE findings into annual performance reviews  Mechanism for refining project approach based on evaluation results LRS/AP Update The LRS/AP is a guidance document and is recommended to be updated every two to five years after adoption. After monitoring performance measures focused on the status and progress of the E’s strategies in each emphasis area, the next LRS/AP update can be tailored to resolve any continuing safety problems. Aside from the Technical Advisory Committee and County’s review and monitoring of the projects as outlined in Chapter 2, an annual stakeholder meeting with the safety partners is also recommended to discuss the progress for each emphasis area and oversee the implementation plan. The document should then be updated as per the latest collision data, emerging trends, and the E’s strategies’ progress and implementation. A copy of the final LRS/AP will be located on Mendocino Council of Governments (MCOG) website at https://www.mendocinocog.org/ Page 137 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 89 Appendices Page 138 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 90 APPENDIX A: SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS Page 139 of 165 Respondent ID lat lon LAT Long Intersection Primary Street Secondary Street Commnets Mode Pertinent Issues 6zj4u3y7xwi4 39.392973 ‐123.311757 POINT (‐123.311757 39.392973) N E Hill Rd Very narrow blind sharp curve, with steep bank on right, steep drop on left. Nowhere go to avoid head‐on collision. Some slippage. Much traffic to/from Pine Mt and the valley. Motor Vehicle Road Safety 6zj4u3y7xwi4 39.392973 ‐123.311757 POINT (‐123.311757 39.392973) N E Hill Rd Very narrow blind sharp curve, with steep bank on right, steep drop on left. Nowhere go to avoid head‐on collision. Some slippage. Much traffic to/from Pine Mt and the valley. Motor Vehicle Curve Unsafe 6zj4u3y7xwi4 39.392973 ‐123.311757 POINT (‐123.311757 39.392973) N E Hill Rd Very narrow blind sharp curve, with steep bank on right, steep drop on left. Nowhere go to avoid head‐on collision. Some slippage. Much traffic to/from Pine Mt and the valley. Motor Vehicle Narrow Road 7ex9ead8j33a 38.765386 ‐123.527116 POINT (‐123.527116 38.765386) Y Shoreline Hwy Old Stage Rd The intersection of SR1 and Old State Highway is the southern gateway of Gualala village. Southbound SR1 motorists frequently accelerate after passing the SR1 pull‐out at Center Street. Northbound SR1 motorists frequently ignore the posted 25 mph limit until approaching Center Street. Northbound and southbound turns from Old State Highway are often delayed by SR1 platooning, and eastbound moves from SR1 often cut off northbound SR1 motorists. The history of vehicle collisions at this intersection is likely under‐reported. The SR1 Gualala Downtown Enhancement Project and CA Coastal Trail Extension through Mill Bend Preserve are two state investments that would benefit substantially from the conversion of this T‐intersection to a rotary intersection. A roundabout would physically moderate motorist behavior in both SR1 directions, ensuring superior speed compliance over static or radar signs, and more orderly turning movements to and from Old State Highway. Motor Vehicle Curve Unsafe 7ex9ead8j33a 38.765386 ‐123.527116 POINT (‐123.527116 38.765386) Y Shoreline Hwy Old Stage Rd The intersection of SR1 and Old State Highway is the southern gateway of Gualala village. Southbound SR1 motorists frequently accelerate after passing the SR1 pull‐out at Center Street. Northbound SR1 motorists frequently ignore the posted 25 mph limit until approaching Center Street. Northbound and southbound turns from Old State Highway are often delayed by SR1 platooning, and eastbound moves from SR1 often cut off northbound SR1 motorists. The history of vehicle collisions at this intersection is likely under‐reported. The SR1 Gualala Downtown Enhancement Project and CA Coastal Trail Extension through Mill Bend Preserve are two state investments that would benefit substantially from the conversion of this T‐intersection to a rotary intersection. A roundabout would physically moderate motorist behavior in both SR1 directions, ensuring superior speed compliance over static or radar signs, and more orderly turning movements to and from Old State Highway. Motor Vehicle Intersection Safety 7ex9ead8j33a 38.765386 ‐123.527116 POINT (‐123.527116 38.765386) Y Shoreline Hwy Old Stage Rd The intersection of SR1 and Old State Highway is the southern gateway of Gualala village. Southbound SR1 motorists frequently accelerate after passing the SR1 pull‐out at Center Street. Northbound SR1 motorists frequently ignore the posted 25 mph limit until approaching Center Street. Northbound and southbound turns from Old State Highway are often delayed by SR1 platooning, and eastbound moves from SR1 often cut off northbound SR1 motorists. The history of vehicle collisions at this intersection is likely under‐reported. The SR1 Gualala Downtown Enhancement Project and CA Coastal Trail Extension through Mill Bend Preserve are two state investments that would benefit substantially from the conversion of this T‐intersection to a rotary intersection. A roundabout would physically moderate motorist behavior in both SR1 directions, ensuring superior speed compliance over static or radar signs, and more orderly turning movements to and from Old State Highway. Motor Vehicle Speeding 7ex9ead8j33a 38.802491 ‐123.53282 POINT (‐123.53282 38.802491) Y Old Stage Rd Ocean Ridge Dr The safety of this intersection of Old Stage Road and Ocean Ridge Drive is affected by limited sight lines and substandard pavement geometry. Sight lines are obscured by the horizonal curve on Old Stage Road southbound, particularly for motorists at and above the posted speed of 50 mph. The absence of transition flares on Ocean Ridge Drive constrains motorist sight lines of both lanes on Old Stage Road. Narrow street lanes with zero flare area provide no room for acceleration from Ocean Ridge Drive southbound or deceleration from Old Stage Road westbound. Installation of transition flares on Ocean Ridge Drive would substantially improve safety for motorists on both roadways, and help to resolve long‐ standing drainage defects on Old Stage Road. Motor Vehicle Pavement Condition 7ex9ead8j33a 38.802491 ‐123.53282 POINT (‐123.53282 38.802491) Y Old Stage Rd Ocean Ridge Dr The safety of this intersection of Old Stage Road and Ocean Ridge Drive is affected by limited sight lines and substandard pavement geometry. Sight lines are obscured by the horizonal curve on Old Stage Road southbound, particularly for motorists at and above the posted speed of 50 mph. The absence of transition flares on Ocean Ridge Drive constrains motorist sight lines of both lanes on Old Stage Road. Narrow street lanes with zero flare area provide no room for acceleration from Ocean Ridge Drive southbound or deceleration from Old Stage Road westbound. Installation of transition flares on Ocean Ridge Drive would substantially improve safety for motorists on both roadways, and help to resolve long‐ standing drainage defects on Old Stage Road. Motor Vehicle Narrow Street 7ex9ead8j33a 38.802491 ‐123.53282 POINT (‐123.53282 38.802491) Y Old Stage Rd Ocean Ridge Dr The safety of this intersection of Old Stage Road and Ocean Ridge Drive is affected by limited sight lines and substandard pavement geometry. Sight lines are obscured by the horizonal curve on Old Stage Road southbound, particularly for motorists at and above the posted speed of 50 mph. The absence of transition flares on Ocean Ridge Drive constrains motorist sight lines of both lanes on Old Stage Road. Narrow street lanes with zero flare area provide no room for acceleration from Ocean Ridge Drive southbound or deceleration from Old Stage Road westbound. Installation of transition flares on Ocean Ridge Drive would substantially improve safety for motorists on both roadways, and help to resolve long‐ standing drainage defects on Old Stage Road. Motor Vehicle Intersection Safety 7ex9ead8j33a 38.802491 ‐123.53282 POINT (‐123.53282 38.802491) Y Old Stage Rd Ocean Ridge Dr The safety of this intersection of Old Stage Road and Ocean Ridge Drive is affected by limited sight lines and substandard pavement geometry. Sight lines are obscured by the horizonal curve on Old Stage Road southbound, particularly for motorists at and above the posted speed of 50 mph. The absence of transition flares on Ocean Ridge Drive constrains motorist sight lines of both lanes on Old Stage Road. Narrow street lanes with zero flare area provide no room for acceleration from Ocean Ridge Drive southbound or deceleration from Old Stage Road westbound. Installation of transition flares on Ocean Ridge Drive would substantially improve safety for motorists on both roadways, and help to resolve long‐ standing drainage defects on Old Stage Road. Motor Vehicle Limited Visibility 9j77zgn99oh9 38.76693 ‐123.529263 POINT (‐123.529263 38.76693) N Shoreline Hwy Turning out of surf market when cars are parked near the exit Motor Vehicle Curve Unsafe 9j77zgn99oh9 38.768618 ‐123.530651 POINT (‐123.530651 38.768618) N Shoreline Hwy There is a new preschool on the east side of highway 1 here, and no crosswalk across the highway Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 9j77zgn99oh9 38.768618 ‐123.530651 POINT (‐123.530651 38.768618) N Shoreline Hwy There is a new preschool on the east side of highway 1 here, and no crosswalk across the highway Motor Vehicle School Safety 9j77zgn99oh9 38.768985 ‐123.531083 POINT (‐123.531083 38.768985) Y Shoreline Hwy Ocean Dr People often park in the walkway along the highway here, forcing pedestrians into highway 1 Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 9j77zgn99oh9 38.794863 ‐123.566762 POINT (‐123.566762 38.794863) Y Shoreline Hwy Collins Landing Rd exiting collins landing road is fairly blind and feels dangerous Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 9j77zgn99oh9 38.799157 ‐123.530452 POINT (‐123.530452 38.799157) N Old Stage Rd People drive far too quickly around Bower Park Motor Vehicle Speeding 9jir7ltr2dlj 39.259888 ‐123.225519 POINT (‐123.225519 39.259888) Y Uva Dr W School Way deep pot holes, bad enough to ruin tires Motor Vehicle Pavement Condition 8eoz29ix74x4 39.006754 ‐123.364926 POINT (‐123.364926 39.006754) Y SR 128 Haehl St A high tourist area that would benefit from traffic calming measures a more clear parking directions to aid in coming/going.Motor Vehicle Speeding 2t9ou7uwr339 39.420734 ‐123.807258 POINT (‐123.807258 39.420734) Y Main St Fort Bragg‐Willits Rd There is no sidewalk or bike lane on highway 1 heading north from highway 20. Pedestrians and bikes are directly in the path of the car traffic Turing onto highway 1 from highway 20 Bicycle Bicycle Safety 2t9ou7uwr339 39.420734 ‐123.807258 POINT (‐123.807258 39.420734) Y Main St Fort Bragg‐Willits Rd There is no sidewalk or bike lane on highway 1 heading north from highway 20. Pedestrians and bikes are directly in the path of the car traffic Turing onto highway 1 from highway 20 Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 2t9ou7uwr339 39.419357 ‐123.807654 POINT (‐123.807654 39.419357) Y Main St Fort Bragg‐Willits Rd The bridge is unsafe for bikes or pedestrians Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 2t9ou7uwr339 39.419357 ‐123.807654 POINT (‐123.807654 39.419357) Y Main St Fort Bragg‐Willits Rd The bridge is unsafe for bikes or pedestrians Bicycle Bicycle Safety 2t9ou7uwr339 39.437405 ‐123.805971 POINT (‐123.805971 39.437405) N Main St The speed limit is too high for a road that should accommodate bikes and pedestrians Bicycle Bicycle Safety 2t9ou7uwr339 39.437405 ‐123.805971 POINT (‐123.805971 39.437405) N Main St The speed limit is too high for a road that should accommodate bikes and pedestrians Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 6t2wbj6l9xk7 39.685757 ‐123.483815 POINT (‐123.483815 39.685757) N Ramsey Rd The highway lights in downtown Laytonville aren't functioning right, leaving town dark Many people speed through town and also in the subdivision area‐ especially around the school and Harwood Park‐ it would be great if there was more enforcement/signage Pedestrian Speeding 6t2wbj6l9xk7 39.685757 ‐123.483815 POINT (‐123.483815 39.685757) N Ramsey Rd The highway lights in downtown Laytonville aren't functioning right, leaving town dark Many people speed through town and also in the subdivision area‐ especially around the school and Harwood Park‐ it would be great if there was more enforcement/signage Pedestrian Sign Upgrade Page 140 of 165 Respondent ID lat lon LAT Long Intersection Primary Street Secondary Street Commnets Mode Pertinent Issues 6t2wbj6l9xk7 39.685757 ‐123.483815 POINT (‐123.483815 39.685757) N Ramsey Rd The highway lights in downtown Laytonville aren't functioning right, leaving town dark Many people speed through town and also in the subdivision area‐ especially around the school and Harwood Park‐ it would be great if there was more enforcement/signage Motor Vehicle Lighting 4mz9ktp9vnp4 39.271271 ‐123.24161 POINT (‐123.24161 39.271271) Y Redwood Hwy N State St I do not want a gas station in this location, as highway 101 ingress and egress could cause accidents.Motor Vehicle Intersection Safety 4mz9ktp9vnp4 39.263016 ‐123.221328 POINT (‐123.221328 39.263016) Y N State St West Rd This is a difficult left turn area and should be a roundabout. You have school traffic from Eagle Peak, Traffic to the Coyote Valley Gas Station and casino, and all of the traffic in and out of Redwood Valley. Motor Vehicle Intersection Safety 4mz9ktp9vnp4 39.263016 ‐123.221328 POINT (‐123.221328 39.263016) Y N State St West Rd This is a difficult left turn area and should be a roundabout. You have school traffic from Eagle Peak, Traffic to the Coyote Valley Gas Station and casino, and all of the traffic in and out of Redwood Valley. Pedestrian School Safety 26nd9s8eoh88 39.795123 ‐123.246217 POINT (‐123.246217 39.795123) N East Ln Impossible to safely walk or ride bikes. Most of the year there is no shoulder (blackberries and weeds right up to white line at side of road) with cars driving highway speeds. Bicycle Speeding 26nd9s8eoh88 39.795123 ‐123.246217 POINT (‐123.246217 39.795123) N East Ln Impossible to safely walk or ride bikes. Most of the year there is no shoulder (blackberries and weeds right up to white line at side of road) with cars driving highway speeds. Bicycle Bicycle Safety 26nd9s8eoh88 39.79422 ‐123.250262 POINT (‐123.250262 39.79422) Y Howard St Perry St Needs a couple of speed humps. One on east end (near library/post office/charter school). One near west end (near high school and elementary) school. Add bike lanes, a real sidewalk. Danger to life and limb, with cars driving freeway speeds in school zones and little to no policing. Bicycle Bicycle Safety 26nd9s8eoh88 39.79422 ‐123.250262 POINT (‐123.250262 39.79422) Y Howard St Perry St Needs a couple of speed humps. One on east end (near library/post office/charter school). One near west end (near high school and elementary) school. Add bike lanes, a real sidewalk. Danger to life and limb, with cars driving freeway speeds in school zones and little to no policing. Pedestrian School Safety 26nd9s8eoh88 39.79422 ‐123.250262 POINT (‐123.250262 39.79422) Y Howard St Perry St Needs a couple of speed humps. One on east end (near library/post office/charter school). One near west end (near high school and elementary) school. Add bike lanes, a real sidewalk. Danger to life and limb, with cars driving freeway speeds in school zones and little to no policing. Pedestrian Speeding 26nd9s8eoh88 39.7932 ‐123.249387 POINT (‐123.249387 39.7932) N Main St Traffic increase with unreasonable speeds due to traffic calming on 162. Needs sidewalks/bike lanes for school children.Bicycle Bicycle Safety 26nd9s8eoh88 39.7932 ‐123.249387 POINT (‐123.249387 39.7932) N Main St Traffic increase with unreasonable speeds due to traffic calming on 162. Needs sidewalks/bike lanes for school children.Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 26nd9s8eoh88 39.793534 ‐123.24819 POINT (‐123.24819 39.793534) Y Commercial St Greely St Needs cross walk for Charter school students crossing 162. Pedestrian School Safety 6dp2s42lr8v8 39.166118 ‐123.381286 POINT (‐123.381286 39.166118) N Low Gap Rd Low Gap Rd Bridge (the Location Approximate). The Low Gap Rd bridge has been closed. Closing the bridge turns Low Gap Rd, into a one way road. If there is a fire that happens closer to Ukiah, it will trap all residents on Low Gap Rd without a way to escape or evacuate. The bridge needs to be fixed, and the road opened. Another options is to use the Masonite Rd which is a private road and is closed with multiple locked gates and is owned by Mendocino Redwood Company. Motor Vehicle Intersection Safety 6dp2s42lr8v8 39.166237 ‐123.356535 POINT (‐123.356535 39.166237) N Low Gap Rd (Location Approximate) Shaded Fuel Break needed along this road. This area is a high‐risk fire zone, and a shaded fuel break is needed. When you drive down Low Gap there are many dead trees that are leaning over the road and dead trees along the side of the road, french broom is encroaching along the road and increasing the risk of a spark starting a fire. If there is a fire, this place will go up like a chimney, and the intensity and rate of spread will be so fast that it will be impossible to evacuate. Along with the bridge closure on Low Gap, this road is currently a one‐way road, and it will be impossible for residents to evacuate. Motor Vehicle Intersection Safety 2tg8hnu2af68 39.177277 ‐123.413816 POINT (‐123.413816 39.177277) N Masonite Industrial Rd Low Gap Rd bridge crossing over Masonite Rd is condemned and closed. This is an important secondary exit route for residents of Ukiah and specifically Low Gap Rd and Pine Ridge Rd in case of wildfire, landslide, tree fall, and other emergencies. For some residents this presents the only secondary passage not restricted by locked gates and private property. Furthermore, the closure of this route negatively impacts tourism and recreation opportunities for county residents and visitors. Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 2tg8hnu2af68 39.159387 ‐123.287098 POINT (‐123.287098 39.159387) N Low Gap Rd Erosion threatens washout and complete closure of Low Gap Road, possibly stranding residents, as no other public outlet exists. Location approximate, multiple locations exists, consult Mendocino County DOT for details as they have been advised of specific locations Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 9pp3j48emz88 39.355464 ‐123.809204 POINT (‐123.809204 39.355464) N Shoreline Hwy Excess traffic for using the dump on rd. 409. In particular the extra large dump trucks turning off Highway 1 with minimal pull off lane, very dangerous as well as increased traffic and destruction of Rd 409. Residents of this road are not able to safely walk for exercise or pleasure, dog walk, and especially for wheelchair users because the road has no shoulders. Add to that more traffic, bigger trucks, and trailers, continuing to ruin our neighborhood for residential/pedestrian quality. Strange that there's such a big push to make our cities more pedestrian oriented, but not our road. Because no one wants to have a dump in their backyard we get double the burden for being a public service without any benefits. Highway 20 was widened and improved specifically for a dump site. All garbage must eventually leave via 20, it's illogical to bring it to 409 only to have it inevitably end up back on 20. Original plan to relocate dump from residential to commercial roadway is safest overall. Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 9pp3j48emz88 39.355464 ‐123.809204 POINT (‐123.809204 39.355464) N Shoreline Hwy Excess traffic for using the dump on rd. 409. In particular the extra large dump trucks turning off Highway 1 with minimal pull off lane, very dangerous as well as increased traffic and destruction of Rd 409. Residents of this road are not able to safely walk for exercise or pleasure, dog walk, and especially for wheelchair users because the road has no shoulders. Add to that more traffic, bigger trucks, and trailers, continuing to ruin our neighborhood for residential/pedestrian quality. Strange that there's such a big push to make our cities more pedestrian oriented, but not our road. Because no one wants to have a dump in their backyard we get double the burden for being a public service without any benefits. Highway 20 was widened and improved specifically for a dump site. All garbage must eventually leave via 20, it's illogical to bring it to 409 only to have it inevitably end up back on 20. Original plan to relocate dump from residential to commercial roadway is safest overall. Motor Vehicle Heavy Vehicle 33xao9ipn866 LINESTRING (‐123.765 39.22238, ‐ 123.754918 39.224008, ‐123.746478 39.226338, ‐123.736204 39.227347, ‐ 123.725882 39.227018, ‐123.719273 39.22446, ‐123.715118 39.216706, ‐ 123.711227 39.21148, ‐123.708174 39.207488, ‐123.705573 39.205429) N Albion Ridge Rd It's impossible to walk on Albion Ridge Road. There's no shoulder, just ditches on both sides. Cars go very fast. It's a curvy road. It would be nice if there was a path on the other side of the ditches. In some small areas, locals have cut back the brush so a person can walk, but in most places I have to walk out in the road and cars don't slow down. Motor Vehicle Limited Visibility 33xao9ipn866 LINESTRING (‐123.765 39.22238, ‐ 123.754918 39.224008, ‐123.746478 39.226338, ‐123.736204 39.227347, ‐ 123.725882 39.227018, ‐123.719273 39.22446, ‐123.715118 39.216706, ‐ 123.711227 39.21148, ‐123.708174 39.207488, ‐123.705573 39.205429) N Albion Ridge Rd It's impossible to walk on Albion Ridge Road. There's no shoulder, just ditches on both sides. Cars go very fast. It's a curvy road. It would be nice if there was a path on the other side of the ditches. In some small areas, locals have cut back the brush so a person can walk, but in most places I have to walk out in the road and cars don't slow down. Motor Vehicle Speeding 33xao9ipn866 LINESTRING (‐123.765 39.22238, ‐ 123.754918 39.224008, ‐123.746478 39.226338, ‐123.736204 39.227347, ‐ 123.725882 39.227018, ‐123.719273 39.22446, ‐123.715118 39.216706, ‐ 123.711227 39.21148, ‐123.708174 39.207488, ‐123.705573 39.205429) N Albion Ridge Rd It's impossible to walk on Albion Ridge Road. There's no shoulder, just ditches on both sides. Cars go very fast. It's a curvy road. It would be nice if there was a path on the other side of the ditches. In some small areas, locals have cut back the brush so a person can walk, but in most places I have to walk out in the road and cars don't slow down. Pedestrian Pavement Condition 82u46vvf9gmh 39.686098 ‐123.48147 LINESTRING (‐123.48147 39.686098, ‐ 123.480437 39.685391, ‐123.479994 39.685757, ‐123.482623 39.68778, ‐ 123.483341 39.687699, ‐123.481461 39.686086) N Interstate 101 Pedestrians crossing the 101 at crosswalks in several location. Most of the time traffic does not stop for pedestrians. Adding a blinking light that a pedestrian can activate to alert traffic that someone wants to cross the street would help keep pedestrians safe. I have tried to cross several times only to have to wait for cars to stop, which they rarely do, or to dash across as fast as I can which is incredibly stressful. I've even gotten caught in the turn lane in the middle of the road because cars won't stop even when I'm in a crosswalk. Motor Vehicle Pedestrian Safety 82u46vvf9gmh 39.686098 ‐123.48147 LINESTRING (‐123.48147 39.686098, ‐ 123.480437 39.685391, ‐123.479994 39.685757, ‐123.482623 39.68778, ‐ 123.483341 39.687699, ‐123.481461 39.686086) N Interstate 101 Pedestrians crossing the 101 at crosswalks in several location. Most of the time traffic does not stop for pedestrians. Adding a blinking light that a pedestrian can activate to alert traffic that someone wants to cross the street would help keep pedestrians safe. I have tried to cross several times only to have to wait for cars to stop, which they rarely do, or to dash across as fast as I can which is incredibly stressful. I've even gotten caught in the turn lane in the middle of the road because cars won't stop even when I'm in a crosswalk. Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety Page 141 of 165 Respondent ID lat lon LAT Long Intersection Primary Street Secondary Street Commnets Mode Pertinent Issues 7ex9ead8j33a 38.870653 ‐123.654622 LINESTRING (‐123.654622 38.870653, ‐123.654194 38.870446, ‐ 123.653898 38.870147, ‐123.653751 38.869929, ‐123.653618 38.869538, ‐ 123.653529 38.869194, ‐123.653338 38.868826, ‐123.653057 38.868205, ‐ 123.652954 38.867803, ‐123.652924 38.867401) N Shoreline Hwy Schooner Gulch State Beach is a popular coastal access on the west side of SR1. Parking space in the state ROW and adjacent state parks property is very limited, leading visitor parking to overflow up Schooner Gulch Road on the east side of SR1. Visitors then walk across the highway, where the legal speed is 55 mph. Vertical and horizontal curves on SR1 obscure motorist sight lines to the pedestrian crossing and the visitor parking area in the SR1 ROW. The combination of legal speed, visual obstruction, and inadequate parking space has caused numerous vehicle collisions and pedestrian hazards, many of which are not reported to CHP or local law enforcement. Potential solution include reducing SR1 legal speed on both north‐ and south‐bound approaches to 35 mph and posting pedestrian crossing caution signs, such as deployed at other locations subject to frequent informal pedestrian crossing. Prohibiting left‐turn access to southbound SR1 at the Schooner Gulch Road intersection would help Pedestrian Sign Upgrade 7ex9ead8j33a 38.870653 ‐123.654622 LINESTRING (‐123.654622 38.870653, ‐123.654194 38.870446, ‐ 123.653898 38.870147, ‐123.653751 38.869929, ‐123.653618 38.869538, ‐ 123.653529 38.869194, ‐123.653338 38.868826, ‐123.653057 38.868205, ‐ 123.652954 38.867803, ‐123.652924 38.867401) N Shoreline Hwy Schooner Gulch State Beach is a popular coastal access on the west side of SR1. Parking space in the state ROW and adjacent state parks property is very limited, leading visitor parking to overflow up Schooner Gulch Road on the east side of SR1. Visitors then walk across the highway, where the legal speed is 55 mph. Vertical and horizontal curves on SR1 obscure motorist sight lines to the pedestrian crossing and the visitor parking area in the SR1 ROW. The combination of legal speed, visual obstruction, and inadequate parking space has caused numerous vehicle collisions and pedestrian hazards, many of which are not reported to CHP or local law enforcement. Potential solution include reducing SR1 legal speed on both north‐ and south‐bound approaches to 35 mph and posting pedestrian crossing caution signs, such as deployed at other locations subject to frequent informal pedestrian crossing. Prohibiting left‐turn access to southbound SR1 at the Schooner Gulch Road intersection would help Pedestrian Speeding 7ex9ead8j33a 38.775295 ‐123.538424 LINESTRING (‐123.538424 38.775295, ‐123.537379 38.774164, ‐ 123.537185 38.773953, ‐123.536566 38.77356, ‐123.535696 38.773168, ‐ 123.534883 38.772836, ‐123.5344 38.772595, ‐123.533897 38.772233, ‐ 123.533297 38.771645, ‐123.532562 38.77083, ‐123.531323 38.769352) N Shoreline Hwy SR1 provides the only public ROW link between the Gualala village and residential neighborhoods to the north. Pedestrians frequently walk along SR1 between Pacific Woods Road and Center Street for access to commercial and health services. The ROW north of Ocean Drive is constrained by topography and roadside drainage, where much of the paved or graded highway section ends at the fog lines. The absence of night lighting and presence of obscuring horizontal and vertical curves make pedestrian travel after dark very hazardous. Daytime pedestrian travel is limited to those who are highly tolerant of close vehicle travel and unstable footpaths. Pedestrian and motorist safety, and drainage competence, could be substantially improved by installing a 4' paved shoulder outside of the southbound lane fog line, continuously from Pacific Woods Road to Ocean Drive. This informal footpath would connect to the sidewalks and crosswalks proposed by the SR1 Gualala Downtown Enhancement project. Pedestrian Pavement Condition 7ex9ead8j33a 38.775295 ‐123.538424 LINESTRING (‐123.538424 38.775295, ‐123.537379 38.774164, ‐ 123.537185 38.773953, ‐123.536566 38.77356, ‐123.535696 38.773168, ‐ 123.534883 38.772836, ‐123.5344 38.772595, ‐123.533897 38.772233, ‐ 123.533297 38.771645, ‐123.532562 38.77083, ‐123.531323 38.769352) N Shoreline Hwy SR1 provides the only public ROW link between the Gualala village and residential neighborhoods to the north. Pedestrians frequently walk along SR1 between Pacific Woods Road and Center Street for access to commercial and health services. The ROW north of Ocean Drive is constrained by topography and roadside drainage, where much of the paved or graded highway section ends at the fog lines. The absence of night lighting and presence of obscuring horizontal and vertical curves make pedestrian travel after dark very hazardous. Daytime pedestrian travel is limited to those who are highly tolerant of close vehicle travel and unstable footpaths. Pedestrian and motorist safety, and drainage competence, could be substantially improved by installing a 4' paved shoulder outside of the southbound lane fog line, continuously from Pacific Woods Road to Ocean Drive. This informal footpath would connect to the sidewalks and crosswalks proposed by the SR1 Gualala Downtown Enhancement project. Pedestrian Lighting 7ex9ead8j33a 38.80256 ‐123.532697 LINESTRING (‐123.532697 38.80256, ‐ 123.53142 38.80063, ‐123.530259 38.799032, ‐123.52935 38.797765, ‐ 123.528151 38.795971, ‐123.527493 38.794991, ‐123.526525 38.793453, ‐ 123.525423 38.792352, ‐123.523856 38.790829, ‐123.523604 38.790497, ‐ 123.522946 38.788582, ‐123.522639 38.787937, ‐123.521818 38.786686) N Old Stage Rd Ocean Ridge Dr Old Stage Road is the only public ROW that connects residential neighborhoods within 1/4 mile of Bower Park, the only non‐fee public parkland with active recreation facilities south of Point Arena. Bower Park is heavily used year‐round by low‐income and historically disadvantaged communities who depend upon access to no‐ or low‐cost recreation for all age groups. Pedestrians attempting to access Bower Park on Old Stage Road are frequently forced to use vehicle travel lanes where pavement ends at the fog line (or less), or steeply uneven or inundated dirt along the road margins. Vertical and horizontal curves obscure motorist sight lines, which is particularly hazardous at typical vehicle speeds > 40‐50 mph. Installing a 4' paved shoulder outside of the southbound travel lane, with competent drainage, between Ocean Ridge Drive and Moonrise Drive, would provide stable, all‐weather footing and refuge for pedestrians, safe distance for vehicle movement, and benefit southbound bicyclists. Motor Vehicle Limited Visibility 7ex9ead8j33a 38.80256 ‐123.532697 LINESTRING (‐123.532697 38.80256, ‐ 123.53142 38.80063, ‐123.530259 38.799032, ‐123.52935 38.797765, ‐ 123.528151 38.795971, ‐123.527493 38.794991, ‐123.526525 38.793453, ‐ 123.525423 38.792352, ‐123.523856 38.790829, ‐123.523604 38.790497, ‐ 123.522946 38.788582, ‐123.522639 38.787937, ‐123.521818 38.786686) N Old Stage Rd Ocean Ridge Dr Old Stage Road is the only public ROW that connects residential neighborhoods within 1/4 mile of Bower Park, the only non‐fee public parkland with active recreation facilities south of Point Arena. Bower Park is heavily used year‐round by low‐income and historically disadvantaged communities who depend upon access to no‐ or low‐cost recreation for all age groups. Pedestrians attempting to access Bower Park on Old Stage Road are frequently forced to use vehicle travel lanes where pavement ends at the fog line (or less), or steeply uneven or inundated dirt along the road margins. Vertical and horizontal curves obscure motorist sight lines, which is particularly hazardous at typical vehicle speeds > 40‐50 mph. Installing a 4' paved shoulder outside of the southbound travel lane, with competent drainage, between Ocean Ridge Drive and Moonrise Drive, would provide stable, all‐weather footing and refuge for pedestrians, safe distance for vehicle movement, and benefit southbound bicyclists. Pedestrian Pavement Condition 9sw63rae9ab6 39.304163 ‐123.804063 LINESTRING (‐123.804063 39.304163, ‐123.795577 39.305611, ‐ 123.796157 39.307625, ‐123.79784 39.307322, ‐123.797316 39.305437, ‐ 123.798255 39.305189, ‐123.79855 39.306324, ‐123.801646 39.305766, ‐ 123.801313 39.304717, ‐123.801959 39.307049, ‐123.798888 39.307484, ‐ 123.79854 39.306379) N Main St Mendocino DOT has more precise locations, but the County has received claims for medical and other damages due to pedestrians tripping while walking in the public right‐of‐way in downtown Mendocino. DOT has limited funds, and so I am inquiring if it would be possible to secure safety funding to resolve the tripping hazards. Motor Vehicle Intersection Safety 9sw63rae9ab6 39.304163 ‐123.804063 LINESTRING (‐123.804063 39.304163, ‐123.795577 39.305611, ‐ 123.796157 39.307625, ‐123.79784 39.307322, ‐123.797316 39.305437, ‐ 123.798255 39.305189, ‐123.79855 39.306324, ‐123.801646 39.305766, ‐ 123.801313 39.304717, ‐123.801959 39.307049, ‐123.798888 39.307484, ‐ 123.79854 39.306379) N Main St Mendocino DOT has more precise locations, but the County has received claims for medical and other damages due to pedestrians tripping while walking in the public right‐of‐way in downtown Mendocino. DOT has limited funds, and so I am inquiring if it would be possible to secure safety funding to resolve the tripping hazards. Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 8ai27ewh9pa7 39.405686 ‐123.809426 LINESTRING (‐123.809426 39.405686, ‐123.810207 39.397794, ‐ 123.81489 39.383367, ‐123.813004 39.382914, ‐123.808516 39.39689, ‐ 123.808125 39.405837, ‐123.809556 39.405686) N Shoreline Hwy Due to the large number of streets in this area with no left‐turn lane, we would suggest continuing the 45 mph speed limit until just S of Gibney Lane. (The speed limit rises to 55 South‐bound at approximately the Botanical Gardens.) We have seen several accidents, and many, many more close calls in this area. Motor Vehicle Curve Unsafe 8ai27ewh9pa7 39.405686 ‐123.809426 LINESTRING (‐123.809426 39.405686, ‐123.810207 39.397794, ‐ 123.81489 39.383367, ‐123.813004 39.382914, ‐123.808516 39.39689, ‐ 123.808125 39.405837, ‐123.809556 39.405686) N Shoreline Hwy Due to the large number of streets in this area with no left‐turn lane, we would suggest continuing the 45 mph speed limit until just S of Gibney Lane. (The speed limit rises to 55 South‐bound at approximately the Botanical Gardens.) We have seen several accidents, and many, many more close calls in this area. Motor Vehicle Speeding 2t9ou7uwr339 39.415227 ‐123.766963 LINESTRING (‐123.766963 39.415227, ‐123.74736 39.411479)N Fort Bragg‐Willits Rd there is no bike lane or walking area for people at the campground. There is a volunteer path showing the existing need Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 2t9ou7uwr339 39.415227 ‐123.766963 LINESTRING (‐123.766963 39.415227, ‐123.74736 39.411479)N Fort Bragg‐Willits Rd there is no bike lane or walking area for people at the campground. There is a volunteer path showing the existing need Bicycle Bicycle Safety Page 142 of 165 Respondent ID lat lon LAT Long Intersection Primary Street Secondary Street Commnets Mode Pertinent Issues 4z9x4nxr2sx6 39.299563 ‐123.793917 LINESTRING (‐123.793917 39.299563, ‐123.730365 39.278681, ‐ 123.718856 39.28072, ‐123.699042 39.273949, ‐123.694573 39.275336) Y Shoreline Hwy Comptche Ukiah Rd Comptche Ukiah Rd is a rural road that is extremely dangerous to travel. There are no posted speed limits and due to a portion of the road being very straight, drivers routinely and daily exceed safe driving speeds. As indicated on the collision map, there have been multiple accidents on this road and more within the straightaways. I recommend both posting a speed limit of 45 mph or less comparable to Little Lake Rd across the way, adding bike lanes, and providing traffic calming measures that reduce speeding. This rural road should not be treated as a highway. Thanks Motor Vehicle Speeding 4z9x4nxr2sx6 39.299563 ‐123.793917 LINESTRING (‐123.793917 39.299563, ‐123.730365 39.278681, ‐ 123.718856 39.28072, ‐123.699042 39.273949, ‐123.694573 39.275336) Y Shoreline Hwy Comptche Ukiah Rd Comptche Ukiah Rd is a rural road that is extremely dangerous to travel. There are no posted speed limits and due to a portion of the road being very straight, drivers routinely and daily exceed safe driving speeds. As indicated on the collision map, there have been multiple accidents on this road and more within the straightaways. I recommend both posting a speed limit of 45 mph or less comparable to Little Lake Rd across the way, adding bike lanes, and providing traffic calming measures that reduce speeding. This rural road should not be treated as a highway. Thanks Motor Vehicle Sign Upgrade 3lv2nnl3ksf7 39.223892 ‐123.764658 LINESTRING (‐123.764658 39.223892, ‐123.752673 39.224291, ‐ 123.741333 39.227467, ‐123.720713 39.226893, ‐123.707985 39.20764, ‐ 123.680785 39.211786, ‐123.681253 39.228738) N Albion St Cars go very fast. There's no shoulder for walking, just ditches on both sides of the road. Someone was killed in a head on collision a couple of years ago and the other 3 people in the car were severely injured. It's unsafe to ride a bicycle or walk. Pedestrian Pedestrian Safety 3lv2nnl3ksf7 39.223892 ‐123.764658 LINESTRING (‐123.764658 39.223892, ‐123.752673 39.224291, ‐ 123.741333 39.227467, ‐123.720713 39.226893, ‐123.707985 39.20764, ‐ 123.680785 39.211786, ‐123.681253 39.228738) N Albion St Cars go very fast. There's no shoulder for walking, just ditches on both sides of the road. Someone was killed in a head on collision a couple of years ago and the other 3 people in the car were severely injured. It's unsafe to ride a bicycle or walk. Bicycle Bicycle Safety 3lv2nnl3ksf7 39.223892 ‐123.764658 LINESTRING (‐123.764658 39.223892, ‐123.752673 39.224291, ‐ 123.741333 39.227467, ‐123.720713 39.226893, ‐123.707985 39.20764, ‐ 123.680785 39.211786, ‐123.681253 39.228738) N Albion St Cars go very fast. There's no shoulder for walking, just ditches on both sides of the road. Someone was killed in a head on collision a couple of years ago and the other 3 people in the car were severely injured. It's unsafe to ride a bicycle or walk. Motor Vehicle Speeding 3lv2nnl3ksf7 39.223892 ‐123.764658 LINESTRING (‐123.764658 39.223892, ‐123.752673 39.224291, ‐ 123.741333 39.227467, ‐123.720713 39.226893, ‐123.707985 39.20764, ‐ 123.680785 39.211786, ‐123.681253 39.228738) N Albion St Cars go very fast. There's no shoulder for walking, just ditches on both sides of the road. Someone was killed in a head on collision a couple of years ago and the other 3 people in the car were severely injured. It's unsafe to ride a bicycle or walk. Pedestrian Pavement Condition Page 143 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 91 APPENDIX B: MATRIX OF PLANNING GOALS, POLICIES, AND PROJECTS Page 144 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 92 Matrix of Planning Goals, Policies, and Projects Document Highlights County of Mendocino General Plan (2009)  Policy DE-123 supports improving the effectiveness of alternative transportation modes within the county by developing inter-modal terminals for both freight and passenger services.  Policy DE-131 supports development of secondary neighborhood routes to alleviate congestion on major streets.  Policy DE-136 supports evaluating alternative transportation and system efficiency options before widening roads.  Policy DE-147 supports the connection of pedestrian, bicycle, and trail routes to form networks and maximize non-motorized transportation.  Policy DE-149 requires pedestrian and bicycle facilities (or in-lieu fees) be installed with new development.  Policy DE-152 promotes the development of trails and bicycle paths along abandoned railroad right-of-way.  Policy DE-154 promotes the use of transit and multi-modal transportation in community areas. Mendocino County Regional Transportation Plan & Active Transportation Plan (2022) Goals:  Provide an assessment of the current modes of transportation as well as identify potential new travel options for the region.  Predict future needs for travel and goods movement.  Identify specific actions and improvements in order to address the needs of mobility and accessibility.  Identify guidance and documentation of public policy decisions by local, regional, state and federal officials regarding transportation expenditures and financing.  Identify needed transportation improvements to serve as a foundation for development of other programs such as the Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP).  Promote consistency between other transportation plans developed by local, state and federal agencies in responding to statewide and interregional transportation issues and needs. Involve community-based organizations as part of the public, federal, state and local agencies, tribal governments, as well as elected officials, early in the transportation planning process so as to include them in discussions and decisions on the social, economic, air quality and environmental issues related to transportation. Mendocino County Safe Routes to School Plan (2014) Goal 1: Improve the health of Mendocino County children by focusing attention on and increasing active travel to school. Objective A: Increase the number of students walking and bicycling to school Objective B: Annually increase the number of children exposed to SRTS education and encouragement activities Objective C: Increase the number of county residents that are familiar with SRTS and resources available Goal 2: Support school travel routes that are accommodating, safe, convenient, and “complete” for all modes. Objective A: Increase funding for walking, bicycling and transit investments near schools Objective B: Review school connections and potential SRTS needs during project development for all county roads Objective C: Incorporate SRTS policies, priorities, and design guidance into future county general plan updates Page 145 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 93 Document Highlights Objective D: Limit traffic speeds and volumes along key routes to schools Goal 3: Maximize interagency cooperation in all SRTS project and programs in an effort to build a sustainable program. Objective A: Establish an ongoing countywide SRTS program that serves all interested schools in Mendocino County. Objective B: Seek and secure outside grant funding for SRTS programs and activities, and leverage local funding for school area improvements Mendocino County (MCOG/GRTA) Rail- with-Trail Corridor Plan (2012)  GOAL 1: Improve Non-Motorized Mobility and Accessibility - Expand and enhance non- motorized mobility for persons living in, working in, and visiting Mendocino County, including access to and connections with other transportation modes.  GOAL 2: Preserve the Transportation System - Design a RWT that will efficiently utilize the NWP corridor, support the region's current blueprint planning efforts which calls for improved options for bicycling, walking, and equestrians, and allow for future rail service along the NWP line.  GOAL 3: Enhance Public Safety and Security - Design the RWT segments to respond to safety and security needs as well as neighborhood privacy concerns.  GOAL 4: Reflect Community Values - Promote community values and identity, including use by multiple user groups, such as bicyclists, pedestrians, and equestrians (where feasible) and incorporate public involvement in decision making processes.  GOAL 5: Enhance the Environment - Assist in greenhouse gas reduction by encouraging and facilitating non-motorized vehicle trips.  GOAL 6: Allow for Regional Connections- Provide non-motorized connections to adjacent streets and land uses including transit, shopping, institutional, office, and residential areas.  GOAL 7: Implementation Funding - Develop a funding, financing, and implementation strategy identifying eligible grant sources and/or potential development requirements supporting construction.  Priority Project  Bush Street to Lake Mendocino Drive Mendocino Council of Governments Transportation Planning Work Program FY 2023/2024  Work Element 1 MCOG – Regional Government & Intergovernmental Coordination  Work Element 2 MCOG – Planning Management & General Coordination  Work Element 3 MCOG – MTA Feasibility Study for Ukiah Transit Center - Carryover  Work Element 4 MCOG – Sustainable Transportation Planning  Work Element 5 MCOG – Mobility Solutions – Feasibility Study for Rural Areas Carryover  Work Element 6 Co. DOT – Combined Special Studies  Work Element 7 MCOG – Planning, Programming & Monitoring  Work Element 8 MCOG – Regional Leadership Training  Work Element 12 Ukiah – Truck Route Study – Carryover  Work Element 13 Fort Bragg – Central Business District Parking – Carryover  Work Element 14 MCOG – Training  Work Element 15 Point Arena – Downtown Parking Master Plan (NEW)  Work Element 16 MCOG – Multi-Modal Transportation Planning  Work Element 18 MCOG – Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Activities  Work Element 20 MCOG – Grant Development & Assistance Mendocino Council of Governments 2020 Regional Transportation Improvement Program (2024) Projects  Gualala Downtown Streetscape - Construct new pedestrian walkways and Class II bike lanes on SR 1 through downtown Gualala. The 64’ wide streetscape will have two 12’ travel lanes, two 5’ bike lanes, two 1’ buffers between the bike lanes, two 8’ parking lanes, and two 6’ sidewalks.  North State Street Intersection and Interchange Improvements - Construction of a roundabout will reduce vehicle idling at the intersection. The project will improve operation at the US 101 off ramp that feeds into it. The STIP funded project will complete improvements to the location that will be partially funded through other sources.  Ukiah Downtown Streetscape, Phase 2 Page 146 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 94 Document Highlights  S. Main St Bicycle and Pedestrian Access Project – Fort Bragg  North Bush and Low Gap Road Roundabout Mendocino County Pedestrian Facility Needs Inventory and Engineered Feasibility Study (2019) Projects Tier 1 Unincorporated South Coast Communities  Gualala North Downtown Sidewalk and Crossing Improvements Project – State Highway  Central Elk Pedestrian Improvements – State Highway Tier 1 Unincorporated North Cost/Inland Areas  Laytonville Highway 101 Pedestrian Improvements  Southern Highway 162 Pedestrian Improvements  Laytonville Elementary School Pedestrian Improvements  Hopland Highway 101 Complete Street Improvements Mendocino Council of Governments Active Transportation Program Safe Routes to School Non-Infrastructure Grant Report (2018) Programs  Implement SRTS Activities  Develop SRTS Task Force  Revise School Wellness Policies  Provide technical assistance to institutionalize and sustain SRTS activities  Train crossing guards as needed  Increase Student Participation in SRTS Activities  Coordinate contests – e.g., mileage tracking  Increase access to bikes/helmets  Provide school-based safety education  Develop walk/bike maps for each site  Work with high school students to assist with and provide role models at events  Increase enforcement  Advocate for increased enforcement during school drop-off and pick-up hours  Advocate with Animal Control /law enforcement for enforcement of dog leash laws County of Mendocino FY 2020- 21 Adopted Budget  Complete construction of the pavement rehabilitation project.  Completed design and engineering for pavement rehabilitation project and secured funding for construction. Page 147 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 96 APPENDIX D: AVERAGE ANNUAL FATALITY RATES CALCULATION Page 148 of 165 Average Annual Fatality Rates Calculation Notes on Sources and methodology: Total Fatalities: NHTSA. 2017-2021 and 2018-2022 data on Persons Killed in Fatal Crashes. Accessed from: https://cdan.dot.gov/query Population, and Disadvantaged population share: Data from USDOT ETCE based on National Results, The population data from ETCE used for two time frame are constant 2020 ACS population data, hence there is no difference between 2017-2021 and 2018-2022 periods. Accessed from: https://experience.arcgis.com/experience/0920984aa80a4362b8778d779b090723/page/ETC-Explorer--- National-Results/ Average Annual Fatality Rate: Calculated per 100,000 persons. Methodology used as prescribed by the Safe Streets for All Grant 2024 instructions accessed from: https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2024-02/SS4A-FY24-Calculate-Fatality-Rate.pdf Average Fatalities per Year: Total Fatalities 5 Ci t y Ye a r To t a l F a t a l i t i e s Po p u l a t i o n % o f D i s a d v a n t a g e d ce n s u s t r a c t s Di s a d v a n t a g e d Po p u l a t i o n Av e r a g e A n n u a l Fa t a l i t y R a t e Av e r a g e Fa t a l i t i e s Pe r Ye a r California 2017-2021 19,894 39,300,000 37% 36% 10.4 3,978.8 Mendocino County 2017-2021 136 87,100 35% 31% 28.2 27.2 California 2018-2022 20,438 39,300,000 37% 36% 0.0 4,087.6 Mendocino County 2018-2022 123 87,100 35% 31% 2.4 24.6 Page 149 of 165 Mendocino County Local Road Safety/Action Plan 97 APPENDIX E. EQUITY EMPHASIS COMMUNITIES COLLISION ANALYSIS Page 150 of 165 Equity Emphasis Communities Collision Analysis USDOT Equitable Transportation Community (ETC) Explorer Census Tract Data Remarks: Census tract-wise data was downloaded from the explorer from the National Results section. Relevant columns have been retained in the table presented below. Ce n s u s T r a c t F I P S C o d e (2 0 2 0 ) Ce n s u s T r a c t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n I n s e c u r i t y Pe r c e n t i l e R a n k He a l t h V u l n e r a b i l i t y Pe r c e n t i l e R a n k En v i r o n m e n t a l B u r d e n Pe r c e n t i l e R a n k So c i a l V u l n e r a b i l i t y P e r c e n t i l e Ra n k Cl i m a t e & D i sa s t e r R i s k Bu r d e n P e r c e n t i l e R a n k Di s a d v a n t a g e d C o m m u n i t i e s In d e x S c o r e Di s a d v a n t a g e d C o m m u n i t i e s In d e x P e r c e n t i l e R a n k Di s a d v a n t a g e d C o m m u n i t i e s In d i c a t o r 6045010100 Tract 101 94 95 14 87 42 4 99 1 6045010200 Tract 102 100 88 8 77 46 4 98 1 6045010300 Tract 103 96 21 13 64 4 3 48 0 6045010400 Tract 104 23 80 64 81 47 3 63 0 6045010500 Tract 105 22 86 55 90 56 3 69 1 6045010601 Tract 106.01 96 8 20 80 3 3 53 0 6045010602 Tract 106.02 98 50 16 53 20 3 72 1 6045010700 Tract 107 71 41 58 83 26 3 79 1 6045010801 Tract 108.01 96 19 13 51 9 3 42 0 6045010802 Tract 108.02 80 76 13 72 37 4 83 1 6045010900 Tract 109 85 39 14 70 15 3 57 0 6045011001 Tract 110.01 96 14 6 59 2 3 35 0 6045011003 Tract 110.03 94 15 18 58 3 3 40 0 6045011004 Tract 110.04 68 52 10 43 11 3 22 0 6045011102 Tract 111.02 67 83 6 62 26 3 59 0 6045011200 Tract 112 94 21 10 70 6 3 49 0 6045011300 Tract 113 72 38 22 82 16 3 53 0 6045011501 Tract 115.01 64 17 84 73 45 3 78 1 6045011502 Tract 115.02 35 51 89 92 55 4 83 1 6045011600 Tract 116 15 80 81 87 81 4 84 1 6045011700 Tract 117 84 35 27 49 16 3 47 0 6045011800 Tract 118 79 86 12 72 37 4 86 1 Page 151 of 165 Collision Analysis Other Communities EEC Other Communities EEC Equity Indicator # Collisions Percentage All Collisions 179 123 59% 41% KSI Collisions 43 46 48% 52% Collision Severity All Collisions KSI Collisions Fatal Injury 3% 6% 14% 15% Serious Injury 21% 32% 86% 85% Minor Injury 40% 43% 0% 0% Complain of Pain 36% 20% 0% 0% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Type of Collision All Collisions KSI Collisions Head-On 8% 9% 12% 7% Sideswipe 4% 3% 2% 2% Read End 10% 5% 2% 0% Broadside 11% 4% 9% 4% Hit Object 47% 50% 58% 48% Overturned 16% 23% 12% 30% Vehicle/Pedestrian 3% 2% 2% 2% Other 1% 3% 2% 7% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Violation Category All Collisions KSI Collisions Unknown 2% 0% 2% 0% DUI 27% 36% 37% 43% Pedestrian Right of Way 1% 0% 2% 0% Pedestrian Violation 2% 1% 0% 0% Traffic Signals and Signs 3% 1% 2% 2% Hazardous Parking 1% 0% 2% 0% Other Hazardous Violation 1% 0% 0% 0% Other Than Driver (or Pedestrian) 1% 2% 0% 4% Unsafe Starting or Backing 1% 0% 0% 0% Other Improper Driving 0% 2% 0% 0% Unsafe Speed 24% 20% 16% 22% Page 152 of 165 Other Communities EEC Other Communities EEC Following Too Closely 1% 0% 0% 0% Wrong Side of Road 2% 5% 2% 4% Other Equipment 1% 0% 0% 0% Improper Turning 26% 30% 28% 22% Automobile Right of Way 9% 5% 7% 2% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Motor Vehicle Involved With All Collisions KSI Collisions Not Stated 0% 1% 0% 2% Non-Collision 10% 24% 7% 33% Pedestrian 3% 2% 2% 2% Other Motor Vehicle 31% 19% 16% 13% Parked Motor Vehicle 1% 2% 0% 0% Bicycle 1% 0% 5% 0% Animal 0% 2% 0% 4% Fixed Object 51% 49% 63% 46% Other Object 3% 2% 7% 0% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Mode All Collisions KSI Collisions Not Stated 3% 3% 2% 4% Passenger Car 60% 53% 56% 41% Motorcycle/Scooter 6% 20% 9% 37% Pickup or Panel Truck 26% 20% 26% 13% Pickup or Panel Truck with Trailer 1% 0% 0% 0% Truck or Truck Tractor 1% 1% 2% 2% Truck or Truck Tractor with Trailer 1% 1% 0% 0% Bicycle 2% 1% 5% 0% Other Vehicle 0% 1% 0% 2% Pedestrian 2% 1% 0% 0% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Lighting All Collisions KSI Collisions Daylight 63% 54% 47% 52% Dusk - Dawn 5% 6% 9% 11% Dark - Street Lights 4% 6% 12% 2% Page 153 of 165 Other Communities EEC Other Communities EEC Dark - No Street Lights 28% 34% 33% 35% Dark - Street Lights Not Functioning 1% 0% 0% 0% Total 100% 100% 100% 100% Page 154 of 165 Project Prioritization Calculation Buckets Value Highest Value 138 Lowest Value 17 Group Range 40 Bucket 1 below 57 Bucket 2 below 97 Bucket 3 below 138 Pr i o r i t y Pr o j e c t Sa f e t y B e n e f i t s Be n e f i t s t o Vu l n e r a b l e Ro a d U s e r s Sc h o o l S a f e t y Im p a c t Eq u i t y I m p a c t Pu b l i c En g a g e m e n t Ea s e o f Im p l e m e n t a t i o n Sc o r e 1 Project 3: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments 100 0 0 100 100 50 70 2 Project 4: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments 50 0 0 100 100 100 55 3 Project 2: Improve Safety at Non-Signalized Intersections 20 0 100 100 100 100 53 4 Project 5: Improve Safety at Roadway Segments 20 0 0 100 100 50 38 5 Project 1: Improve Safety at Signalized Intersections 20 0 0 100 0 50 28 Page 155 of 165 Major Site Development Permit CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-STORY COMMERCIAL SHELL 1294 AND 1296 NORTH STATE STREET Planning Commission: 11/12/2025 14a Presentation given at meeting. Page 156 of 165 Current Project Site View from N. State Street 1296 N. State St. 1294 N. State St. Page 157 of 165 City Gateway Page 158 of 165 Single-story commercial shell: 3,261 sq. ft. Two suites: Suite A (1,844 sf) w/ drive- through, Suite B (1,417 sf) Site area: 39,273 sq. ft. across two parcels Zoning: C-1 Community Commercial Proposal Page 159 of 165 Site History & Context Former Tack Room Plaza; partially vacant since 2011 fire Original 2017 2-story mixed-use with drive-through 2023 revised single-story shell with drive-through 2012 Historical Image - View from N. State Street Page 160 of 165 Design & Site Features •Contemporary architecture, 18-ft parapet •32 parking spaces, including 8 stacking spaces for drive-through •Pedestrian access, expanded walkways, enhanced landscaping (21% coverage) Page 161 of 165 Agency & Safety Review Reconstruct driveway, sidewalk, ADA ramp, encroachment permitMendocino County Department of Transportation High-Injury Intersection at N. State St & Empire DrUkiah Police Department 1. Traffic Study: Defer the associated traffic study until a specific tenant or use is identified. 2. Pedestrian Access: Provide more effective pedestrian access (e.g. stepping stones) through proposed perimeter landscaping. 3. Shade Coverage: Reduce the required number of trees directly in front of the commercial units, allowing a reduction in the required percentage of shade coverage for paved areas, owing to the overhang of the existing structure and identified circulation constraints. Design Review Board Page 162 of 165 General Plan & Zoning Supports infill, reuse of underutilized parcels, gateway enhancements, multi-modal access General Plan Meets setbacks, height, parking, landscaping requirements C1 - Zoning Allowed w/ SDP, but triggers safety concernsDrive- through Page 163 of 165 Site Development Permit Findings ConsistentFindings 1, 4-8 Not supported (Traffic & Circulation) Drive-through creates potential safety/congestion issues at High-Injury Intersection Findings 2 & 3 Page 164 of 165 Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1) Conduct a public hearing; and 2) Deny the Major Site Development Permit application as proposed, based on the inability to make mandatory findings related to public safety and traffic circulation (UCC §9263E Findings 2 and 3) due to the inclusion of the unanalyzed drive-through component. Staff further recommends that the Planning Commission: 3) Approve the Major Site Development Permit for the Construction of a Single-Story Commercial Shell at 1294 N. State Street (APN 001-370-36 and 001-370-37); File No. 25-001039; PA25-000017 (formerly File No. 17-3069), conditioned upon the removal of the drive-through component, based on the Findings in Attachment 1, and subject to the Conditions of Approval in Attachment 2. Page 165 of 165