Community demands fuller engagement as city and MST advance ITC planning and transit‑center relocation study

City staff and Monterey‑Salinas Transit (MST) presented planning studies for the Intermodal Transportation Center (ITC) and for potential relocation of the Salinas Transit Center at the June 11 Salinas Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting, generating sustained public comment about outreach and downtown planning.

Yenna Seiggovia, assistant planner in Salinas advanced planning, summarized the ITC draft existing‑conditions and opportunities memorandums. She said the documents build on earlier work (the 2015 downtown vibrancy plan and a 2017 memorandum with the Transportation Agency for Monterey County) and that additional outreach in April–May included stakeholder interviews and a May 11 community workshop. Staff reported outreach findings that users want improved restrooms, covered waiting areas, better wayfinding, and activation of the site (food vendors, events and possible mixed‑use housing). Seiggovia said staff is analyzing feedback and will bring final memorandums to the Historic Resources Board on July 6.

During the public comment period, several residents and stakeholders urged more transparent, earlier engagement. Eloise Shim, a Historic Resources Board member and nearby resident, said she had opposed renaming the site "Heritage Park" at the previous council meeting and welcomed the compromise to retain ITC while adding the heritage name. Frank Saunders, a long‑time downtown property owner, urged the commission to consider long‑term connections to downtown and referenced prior proposals (including studies for undergrounding Market Street) as options that could better integrate the ITC with downtown.

Peter Cavan (online) told the commission that the materials provided to the commission omitted broader elements of the city’s downtown vibrancy and general plans. "The ITC is a key opportunity area with significant potential for redevelopment, activation, and stronger physical and economic connections to downtown," he said, and recommended continuing the hearing so community representatives could present the broader vision.

MST planning director Michelle Overmmy described the Rapid Bus and transit‑center relocation study. She said the current Salinas Transit Center handles roughly 3,400 weekday riders, operates nine gates for 19 routes, and is at capacity; round‑one outreach produced 360 survey responses and confirmed high ridership and that many customers walk to the center. MST and city staff evaluated five candidate sites and narrowed the list to three under further study: the ITC, a surface parking lot on Alisal between Church and Lincoln, and a private site on John Street. MST also presented two corridor alternatives for bus priority on Alisal and Williams — side‑running dedicated lanes as the preferred alternative and a second option with targeted intersection and stop enhancements; a center‑running lane option was ruled out for further analysis.

Commissioners and the public pressed MST on details: future facility requirements (a site of over an acre with 12 gates and space for larger articulated buses), safety and circulation (avoiding unprotected left turns), impacts on parking and adjacent land uses, and study funding sources. Overmmy said the planning study is funded by a state planning grant with local match from MST, the City of Salinas and Taylor Farms; she estimated the city's contribution to the study at about $28,000 and said detailed cost and engineering estimates will be available in outreach round two planned for July–August.

Multiple public speakers and stakeholders, including a representative who identified themselves as president of the nonprofit Spark, called for the commission to pause or continue the discussion until the community’s vision for the ITC is fully presented and accounted for, and asked MST to include estimates for the "lost opportunities" if downtown redevelopment potential is reduced by siting a large transit facility in the ITC. Commissioners reiterated the need for wider public notice of technical advisory meetings and for more transparent outreach. No formal action was taken; staff and MST said they will return with additional analyses and outreach materials in coming months.