Issuu

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Advancing Mobility 2045

CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. . FOUNDATION . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

WHAT IS A COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN?. . IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PUBLIC OUTREACH. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

VISION . .

17 18

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CURRENT PERFORMANCE . .

NAPA VALLEY TODAY . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

HOW WE LIVE AND WORK. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

HOW WE TRANSPORT. . HOW WE TRAVEL. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN. .

NAPA VALLEY TOMORROW . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES . . ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT . . TRANSIT. .

. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

HEALTH AND SAFETY. . SUSTAINABILITY. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

105

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 13

EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES. .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

INVESTING IN THE FUTURE . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PROJECT NEEDS AND EVALUATION. . TRAVEL FORECASTING . .

127

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

128

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

138

TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AND NEW REVENUE SOURCES. .

. . .

144

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

159

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

160

GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS. .

APPENDIX

1 18

PUBLIC OUTREACH PERFORMANCE METRICS FREIGHT FLOWS GREENHHOUSE GAS CALCULATIONS TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING – MODE SHARES FUNDING PROGRAMS

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This countywide transportation plan outlines priorities for the Napa Valley Transportation Authority and Napa County's transportation system to relieve congestion, improve traffic safety, create more active transportation infrastructure, provide more reliable and frequent bus service, and maintain and repair the existing transportation system.

60% INCREASING THE LOAD FACTOR ON NVTA WEEKDAY COMMUTER BUS ROUTES TO 80 PERCENT WOULD REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 1,100 AUTOMOBILE TRIPS EVERY WEEKDAY

OF TRIPS IN NAPA COUNTY ARE FIVE MILES OR LESS, WHICH DEMONSTRATES AN OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE BICYCLING AND WALKING

-1,100 LESS THAN ONE PERCENT OF NAPA VALLEY RESIDENTS TAKE PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION AS THEIR PRIMARY MODE TO GET TO WORK

4/5 NAPA VALLEY RESIDENTS WHO COMMUTE TO WORK DRIVE ALONE

THE COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN PROVIDES DIRECTION FOR NAPA COUNTY BY CONSIDERING LAND USE, ENVIRONMENTAL, POPULATION, AND FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS TO 2045

ONLY TWO IN FIVE PEOPLE IN NAPA COUNTY REGULARLY WALK FOR TRANSPORT, FUN, OR EXERCISE

EMERGING TRANSPORTATION TECHNOLOGIES, LIKE NVTA'S RIDE THE VINE APP, WILL CONTINUE TO EVOLVE AND DELIVER ALMOST ALL TRANSIT SERVICE ON-DEMAND

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

FOUNDATION WHAT IS A COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN?

Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA) is required to develop long-range countywide transportation priorities through a comprehensive planning process. The countywide transportation plan (CTP) provides a direction for the fourto five-year plan while taking into consideration land use, environmental, population, and financial projections over a 25-year planning horizon. NVTA last updated the countywide transportation plan in 2015. Advancing Mobility 2045 is part of a regional planning process that culminates in the publication of a Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). Programs and projects submitted to MTC for inclusion in the RTP – Plan Bay Area – must reflect financial constraints. This CTP also includes projects that are not yet funded to allow projects of merit to advance should additional funding be identified. This plan was prepared during a time of unprecedented and unanticipated impacts due to the COVID-19 pandemic and a wildfire season exacerbated by climate change. NVTA has striven to meet not only the challenges of today but to address the challenges of tomorrow in the programs, policies, and projects presented herein. ADVANCING MOBILITY 2045 IS AN UPDATE TO THE PREVIOUS COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN PUBLISHED IN 2015.

PUBLIC OUTREACH AT NVTA'S TRANSPORTATION SUMMIT IN SEPTEMBER 2019. PUBLIC OUTREACH

Gathering public input from Napa County's community members was crucially important in developing this plan. NVTA sponsored a series of workshops and outreach events between August 2019 and January 2020 designed to ensure that all community members had an opportunity to contribute but with particular focus on reaching disadvantaged groups and communities of concern in Napa County. A digital engagement platform and website— www.nvtatransportationplan.org —provided engagement opportunities for those unable to attend an in-person event and was promoted through various social media channels and text messaging.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

VISION

CURRENT PERFORMANCE

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

The Napa Valley Transportation Authority is responsible for developing long-range countywide transportation priorities through an integrated planning process. In this process, goals articulate the ultimate vision, objectives are strategies or methods of achieving that vision, and performance metrics help us track progress along the way. During preparation of the previous countywide transportation plan, NVTA conducted a needs assessment through various public engagement methods. To date, public outreach conducted for this latest iteration of the CTP confirms that the priorities have remained much the same, with new emphasis on creating a sustainable and equitable transportation system.

Performance measures allow us to track progress towards the transportation system goals and understand what it would take to achieve measurable change. Although the performance targets apply to the Plan’s horizon year of 2045, the intent is to recalculate the performance measures approximately every five years to track the progress. More information on the performance metrics and data sources can be found in the Current Performance section.

GOALS FOR NAPA COUNTY'S TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

GOAL #1: SERVE THE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY REGARDLESS OF AGE, INCOME, OR ABILITY

GOAL #2: IMPROVE SYSTEM SAFETY IN ORDER TO SUPPORT ALL MODES AND SERVE ALL USERS

GOAL #3: USE TAXPAYER DOLLARS EFFICIENTLY

GOAL #4: PROMOTE NAPA COUNTY’S ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

GOAL #5: MINIMIZE THE ENERGY AND OTHER RESOURCES REQUIRED TO MOVE PEOPLE AND GOODS

GOAL #6: PRIORITIZE THE MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

SUMMARY OF CURRENT PERFORMANCE GOAL

MEASURE

CURRENT PERFORMANCE

TARGET

Number of households below the County median income that are within a quarter of a mile of transit

85% of below median income households have transit access

100% of below median income households have transit access

Number of severe injury and fatal collisions

Fatal collisions from 2015–2018: 48 Injury collisions from 2015–2018: 291

Fatal collisions: 0 Injury collisions: 0

#1: Peak period delay index

Peak period delay index of 3.14 for the most congested roadway segment

Peak period delay index less than or equal to 2.0 for all monitored roadway segments

#2: Average weekday person hours of delay on Napa roadways

3,108 daily person hours of delay on Napa valley roadways

Reduce the daily person hours of delay on Napa valley roadways from baseline levels

#3: On-time bus performance weighted by ridership

69% average weighted on-time performance for all route types

90% average weighted on-time performance for all route types

#4: Number of users in NVTA’s Transportation Demand Management Programs

Number of registered V-commute users: 132 Number of registered Napa Valley Forward users: 150

Increase the number of users registered for both programs by targeting large employers

EQUITY

SAFETY

CONGESTION RELIEF

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

GOAL

ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

SUSTAINABILITY

MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION

MEASURE

CURRENT PERFORMANCE

TARGET

#1: Reliability of truck travel times

Overall truck travel times index: 2.09

Overall truck travel times index: maintain at 2.09 or reduce

#2: Number of jobs accessible by transit within one hour during the morning commute

Job accessibility by Vine Transit: American Canyon: 37,725 Calistoga: 8,831 Napa: 40,241 St. Helena: 8,475 Yountville: 29,521

Maintain or improve the baseline level of job accessibility by Vine Transit in American Canyon, Calistoga, Napa, St. Helena, and Yountville

#1: Greenhouse gas emissions

4.1 metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions per capita in Napa County in 2015

Reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 19% per capita in Napa County from the 2015 levels

#2: Vehicle miles traveled

Vehicle miles traveled: 17.3 miles per capita

15% reduction in vehicle miles traveled from baseline level

#3: Share of active transportation for commute trips

Percentage of work trips made by bicycling or walking for Napa County residents: 5%

Increase the percentage of work trips made by bicycling or walking for Napa County residents to 10% by 2045

#4: Transit ridership by annual boardings and alightings

Annual transit ridership (fiscal year 2018-2019): 952,089

Maintain or increase from baseline annual ridership

#1: Miles between bus road calls (breakdowns)

Average miles between road calls (2015-2018): 42,750

Maintain or improve the average number of miles between road calls

#2: Pavement condition index

Pavement condition index Score for Napa County: 58

Pavement condition index Score for Napa County: 80

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

NAPA VALLEY TODAY COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN

Acknowledging the unique needs of communities of concern is critical to building out the transportation network and providing services on an equitable basis. Communities of Concern are areas with higher than average concentrations of minority populations, low income households, low English proficiency, seniors, zero-vehicle households, single parent households, people with disabilities, and rent-burdened households. People living in Communities of Concern neighborhoods are more likely to use or need transit, bicycling, and walking to meet their mobility needs. In Napa County, a total of eight regionally significant or locally identified census tracts qualify as communities of concern. To identify and prioritize the transportation needs of communities of concern, NVTA has conducted a Community Based Transportation Plan that identified programmatic themes and projects.

ADVANCING MOBILITY 2045 PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS THAT RESPOND TO THE NEEDS OF COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN:

EXPANDING TRANSIT (RAPID BUS IMPROVEMENTS ON SR 29, EXTENDED SERVICE AND EXPANDED HOURS)

SUPPORTING COMPLETE STREETS EFFORTS

IMPROVING ACCESS TO TRANSIT AND SCHOOLS

EXPANDING SHARED VEHICLE AND BICYCLE PROGRAMS

BUILDING OUT THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK

SUPPORTING VAN AND CARPOOLING

SUPPORTING PROGRAMS THAT SUBSIDIZE THE NEEDS OF COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN

31% 23% OF NAPA WORKERS COMMUTE IN FROM ANOTHER COUNTY

OF NAPA RESIDENTS COMMUTE OUT OF THE COUNTY FOR WORK

HOW WE LIVE AND WORK

Transportation and the economy are intricately intertwined. The economy is a complex, multi-layered, and frequently unpredictable system in which our local circumstance is vitally dependent on influences at the regional, state, national, and global scales. A reliable transportation infrastructure is necessary for a healthy economy and is dependent on the efficient movement of people and goods. Napa’s economy is heavily reliant on the manufacturing, agriculture, tourism and hospitality sectors. Vineyard agriculture and wine production are, of course, linchpins of the Napa economy. The wine and tourism industries combined account for nearly 40 percent of the local labor force. Many Napa County jobs in agriculture and hospitality are modestly paid, meaning that workers will have difficulty finding affordable housing in Napa County. Conversely, many of the people who can afford to live in Napa must commute to other counties for higher paying jobs. The Travel Behavior Study found that 23 percent of Napa residents commute out of the county for work, while 31 percent Napa workers must commute in from where they live in another county. The transportation implications of these economic patterns include more commute traffic and the need to provide sustainable commute alternatives.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

HOW WE TRANSPORT

Napa County’s wine and tourism industries rely on the movement of materials needed to bottle and package wines as well as shipping of the final product. In addition, Napa County’s residents rely on the daily deliveries of a broad spectrum of consumer goods. Most consumer goods, as well as materials and supplies used in agriculture, manufacturing, and the hospitality industry, arrive in Napa County by truck along its roadway infrastructure. Traffic congestion in Napa adds significant cost to moving goods. Two possible options for improving freight movement in Napa include using existing rail and staggering freight movement peak times from typical commute traffic. NVTA has identified freight movement as a key topic for future study in collaboration with stakeholders.

ADVANCING MOBILITY 2045 PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS SUPPORTING GOODS AND MOVEMENT:

IDENTIFY AND IMPROVE KEY GOODS MOVEMENT ROUTES

DESIGN ROADWAYS AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES TO ENHANCE THE COEXISTENCE OF ALL MODES

ENSURE MEASURE T ROADWAY FUNDS ARE MAXIMIZED TO IMPROVE INFRASTRUCTURE, AS ALLOWED UNDER THE ORDINANCE, TO BENEFIT ALL TRANSPORTATION MODES

IDENTIFY INNOVATIVE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS THAT MINIMIZE COSTS, MAXIMIZE SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AND REDUCE TRAFFIC CONGESTION

NAPA COUNTY FREIGHT FLOW IN 2018 (THOUSANDS OF TONS) HOW WE TRAVEL

OUTBOUND 16,657

INTRA 111

INBOUND 10,030

Data is essential for planning and prioritizing projects and to understand the origin and destinations of people who drive in Napa, as well as why and when they are traveling. NVTA completed a Napa Travel Behavior Study (TBS) in 2020 to understand the travel patterns of Napa County workers, visitors, and residents. The study identifies how many trips per day are taken by visitors, residents, and employees, where those trips start and end, and the predominant modes and times of travel. The TBS takes into account seasonal variations, as well as weekday and weekend travel. The TBS builds on data received from the 2014 TBS using more costeffective and advanced data collections tools.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

NAPA COUNTY TRAFFIC DATA LOCATIONS KEY FINDINGS FROM THE TRAVEL BEHAVIOR STUDY:

WEEKDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS TOTALED ROUGHLY 185,000 VEHICLES

FRIDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS TOTALED ROUGHLY 188,000 VEHICLES

SATURDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS TOTALED ROUGHLY 160,000 VEHICLES

NAPA COUNTY

CALISTOGA ANGWIN SAINT HELENA

SUNDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS TOTALED ROUGHLY 153,000 VEHICLES

FRIDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS INCREASED ON AVERAGE BY 3.5 PERCENT, OR 0.7 PERCENT PER YEAR, COMPARED TO FRIDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2013 BEFORE THE JAMESON CANYON ROAD WIDENING JAMESON CANYON ROAD INCREASED BY 21 PERCENT

SR 121 AT THE SONOMA/NAPA COUNTY LINE INCREASED BY 12 PERCENT

SR 29 NORTH OF AMERICAN CANYON ROAD DECREASED BY SEVEN PERCENT

Another significant finding of the TBS is that 63 percent of all trips are less than five miles in length, and that 31 percent are less than two miles in length. This finding represents an opportunity to shift the transportation mode from driving to other non-auto modes for many of these short trips. The TBS also found that investments in operational improvements will also be necessary to accommodate the growing number of tourist and workers from outside Napa County.

128

YOUNTVILLE

121

NAPA

AMERICAN CANYON

WEEKDAY TRIP TYPES WITHIN NAPA COUNTY

3.4% NAPA COUNTY PASS-THROUGH TRIPS

15% TRIPS INTO NAPA COUNTY

14% TRIPS OUT OF NAPA COUNTY

Source for both graphics on this page: 2020 Napa Travel Behavior Study completed by Fehr & Peers, https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

67% INTRA-NAPA COUNTY TRIPS

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

NAPA VALLEY TOMORROW NVTA is using several strategies to work towards the goals for the transportation system. The following sections of Advancing Mobility 2045 explain each strategy and discuss how each can address congestion relief, improved traffic safety, increased active transportation infrastructure, provide more reliable and frequent bus service, and maintain and repair the existing system. ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Non-motorized modes of transportation, principally walking and biking, are increasingly seen as an important strategy to reduce congestion and green house gas emissions and to improve the health and well being of communities. Building and maintaining active transportation infrastructure can be significantly less costly compared to building highways and roads, while providing sustainable transportation solutions. Complete Streets is a transportation policy and design approach that requires jurisdictions to consider alternative transportation modes. A Complete Streets framework has been adopted by Caltrans and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and all Bay Area jurisdictions receiving federal funds are required to adopt a Complete Streets policy and/ or incorporate Complete Streets in their general plans. All of Napa Valley’s city and county jurisdictions have adopted Complete Streets policies and are incorporating Complete Streets in their road design and rehabilitation programs. IN NAPA COUNTY, OVER 60 PERCENT OF TRIPS ARE FIVE MILES OR LESS, WHICH DEMONSTRATES AN OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE BICYCLING AND WALKING MODE SHARES.

500+

OVER 500 MILES OF BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN FACILITIES ARE BEING PROPOSED THROUGHOUT NAPA COUNTY TO ACHIEVE A MORE COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK AND INCREASE THE NUMBER OF TRIPS MADE BY BICYCLE.

A number of planning initiatives support active transportation in Napa County. The Countywide Pedestrian Plan and Countywide Bicycle Plan outline strategies and projects for increasing pedestrian and bicycle trips countywide. Bridging gaps, developing “low stress” facilities that feel safe for all cyclists and pedestrians, and serving key destinations are key strategies. Safe Routes to School is a program that aims to increase the share of students who walk or cycle to school. NVTA is the partnering agency for the Napa County Safe Routes to School program, which is co-operated by the Napa County Office of Education and the Napa County Bicycle Coalition. Finally, the Community Based Transportation Plan identified pedestrian safety as an overarching priority. TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT

Travel Demand Management is a strategy that can alter how, where, and when people travel. Travel Demand Management combines policies, strategies, and methods that discourage driving alone, especially during peak travel times, to increase the overall efficiency of the entire transportation system. This approach is moderately inexpensive and effective for reducing traffic congestion and harmful emissions caused by autos. Travel Demand Management includes strategies such as staggered work schedules and school bell times, encouragement of trip chaining, shared mobility (car share, bicycle share), and commuter support programs.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

NVTA’s V-Commute program provides carpool and vanpool ride matching services and alternative commuter incentives for employees along with commuter benefits program management for employers. V-Commute is powered under a premier Mobility as a Service (MaaS) platform provider, Ride Amigos. NVTA is also participating in a two-year pilot program called Napa Forward, focused on ride-sharing options for employers in the wine and hospitality industry using the LUUM platform, another MaaS provider with expertise in commuter benefits management for large employers. Travel Demand Management is also supported by active transportation investments that increase access to transit and promote mode shift. TRANSIT

NVTA operates the Vine Transit System. The Vine network consists of regional, express bus, local fixed route, community shuttles, and ADA paratransit services. The transit system provides Napa County residents with connections to major population centers in the county, other destinations in the San Francisco Bay Area region and Sacramento. Transit provides one of the best alternatives to driving and therefore is a promising solution to traffic congestion and reducing harmful emissions that contribute to climate change. While transit may not be a solution for everyone, even modest shifts from single occupancy vehicle commuters to transit can have meaningful impacts.

Some of the key transit projects planned by NVTA include: y

A new maintenance facility featuring a photovoltaic system and electric bus charging stations.

Improvements to express bus and regional routes.

State Route 29 Corridor improvements such as passenger facilities, additional park and ride lots, and traffic signal upgrades that improve bus travel times and reliability.

NVTA will continue to improve its fixed route and shuttle services through efforts such as the Comprehensive Operations Analysis, completed in 2018. Although service changes recommended by the Comprehensive Operations Analysis were implemented in January 2020, temporarily restructured service has been in place due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Within the City of Napa, NVTA plans to continue the transition to bi-directional routes once demand increases and funding is identified. NVTA will also continue to evaluate use of on-demand services to improve mobility. Finally, NVTA will collaborate with other Bay Area agencies and transit operators on regional transit initiatives. These include the potential extension of the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit train to Suisun City and improved coordination and connections with Bay Area Rapid Transit, Capitol Corridor service, the San Francisco Bay Ferry, and Soltrans. INCREASING LOAD FACTORS ON NVTA COMMUTER ROUTES TO 80 PERCENT WOULD REMOVE APPROXIMATELY 1,100 AUTOMOBILE TRIPS FROM THE ROADWAYS EVERY WEEKDAY ALONG WITH

1,500 TONS OF GHG EMISSIONS PER YEAR

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

HEALTH AND SAFETY

How we travel not only influences our quality of life, but also our safety and our health. Certain modes of transportation promote good health, like walking, bicycling, and taking transit. Other modes can be harmful to our health and the environment, in particular, motor vehicles. Recognizing that health and transportation are intrinsically connected, transportation and health officials are partnering to encourage individuals to use more activebased and sustainable commute modes.

THE COMMUNITY HEALTH ASSESSMENT HIGHLIGHTS SOME OF THE CONDITIONS IN NAPA COUNTY THAT CONTRIBUTE TO HEALTH CHALLENGES:

• 7 9 PERCENT OF PEOPLE WHO COMMUTE TO WORK DRIVE ALONE • L ESS THAN ONE PERCENT OF PEOPLE LIST PUBLIC TRANSIT AS THEIR PRIMARY MODE OF TRANSPORTATION TO GET TO WORK • O NLY TWO IN FIVE PEOPLE SURVEYED STATED THAT THEY REGULARLY WALK FOR TRANSPORT, FUN, OR EXERCISE • M OST CITIES IN NAPA COUNTY ARE CONSIDERED MODERATELY “CAR-DEPENDENT” FOR ERRANDS AND ACTIVITIES

ADVANCING MOBILITY 2045 PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS THAT IMPROVE HEALTH AND FOSTER A CLEANER ENVIRONMENT:

SUPPORTING COMPLETE STREET EFFORTS (IMOLA CORRIDOR, STATE ROUTE 29 COMPREHENSIVE MULTIMODAL CORRIDOR PLAN)

EXPANDING TRANSIT (RAPID IMPROVEMENTS ON STATE ROUTE 29, IMOLA PARK & RIDE, EXTENDED SERVICE AND EXPANDED HOURS, AND ON-DEMAND TRANSIT)

BUILDING A NEW TRANSIT MAINTENANCE FACILITY TO INCLUDE ELECTRIC CHARGING FOR CLEAN AIR TRANSIT VEHICLES

EXPANDING THE ELECTRIC CAR CHARGING NETWORK

EXPANDING SHARED VEHICLE AND BICYCLE PROGRAMS

BUILDING OUT THE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK

SUPPORTING RIDESHARING THROUGH V-COMMUTE AND NAPA FORWARD

INVESTIGATING NEW TECHNOLOGIES THAT REDUCE AUTO EMISSIONS AND CONGESTION

IMPROVING HIGHWAY AND ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE TO REDUCE STOPS AND STARTS

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Safety and Vision Zero

SUSTAINABILITY

NVTA will be adopting a new approach to transportation safety known as vision zero. This approach is supported by implementing a policy of Complete Streets, that aims to serve the needs of all roadway users including pedestrians, bicyclists, transit vehicles, and motorists. In the Bay Area, Complete Streets implementation is a requirement for some regional funding sources.

NVTA is committed to reducing harmful mobile emissions to improve the environment and create a sustainable future for the Napa Valley community. Electrifying the bus fleet will allow NVTA to reduce its carbon footprint and provide sustainable transportation solutions for years to come.

TRADITIONAL VS VISION ZERO APPROACH

Transportation and the Environment

TRADITIONAL APPROACH • TRAFFIC DEATHS ARE INEVITABLE • PERFECT HUMAN BEHAVIOR • PREVENT COLLISIONS • INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY • SAVING LIVES IS EXPENSIVE

VS VISION ZERO • TRAFFIC DEATHS ARE PREVENTABLE • INTEGRATE HUMAN FAILING INTO APPROACH • PREVENT FATAL AND SEVERE CRASHES • SYSTEMS APPROACH • SAVING LIVES IS NOT EXPENSIVE Source: Visionzeronetwork.org

Transportation is the largest end-use sector emitting CO2, and the largest source of GHG emissions in the San Francisco Bay Area (about 45 percent). Shifting trips to transit, combined with bus electrification has the potential to significantly reduce GHG emissions associated with transportation. If 10 percent of the trips in the top five travel markets served by transit were shifted away from personal vehicles, this could result in a savings of over 10,000 tons of GHG emissions per year. Bus Fleet Electrification

One of NVTA’s signature projects is the planned electrification of the transit bus fleet. Bus fleet electrification will not only reduce NVTA’s carbon footprint but will be less expensive to operate and maintain. In addition, fleet electrification will make NVTA eligible for a number of grant programs. The major challenge with fleet electrification will be planning, funding, and installing the charging station equipment both at NVTA’s maintenance facility and at common transportation hubs such as BART stations. Inductive bus charging is one technology being considered for this purpose. Responding to Emergencies and Operating During Power Outages

The new maintenance facility planned by NVTA will also support sustainability goals, as well as providing resilience in case of natural disasters and power outages. Although the new facility will include solar panels, NVTA must also plan for a battery storage facility that will provide backup power for NVTA vehicles during power outages. This backup capability would be a vital resource during emergency evacuation events.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

The transportation and mobility industries are currently undergoing profound and rapid change resulting from the emergence of new technologies. These rapid changes in available transportation technologies and services represent both a challenge and an opportunity to shape Napa’s transportation network. NVTA is evaluating and incorporating a variety of technologies in its projects to serve the goals of equity, safety, efficiency, economic sustainability, and environmental sustainability. A signature technology project is a Traffic Operations Center, developed in partnership with local agencies and Caltrans. While signal operations would remain under local agency and Caltrans control, this Traffic Operations Center would serve as a clearinghouse for disseminating traffic operating conditions and would allow for enhanced emergency operations.

THE FUNCTIONS FOR THIS TRAFFIC OPERATIONS CENTER WOULD INCLUDE MONITORING AND MANAGEMENT OF:

• T RAVELER INFORMATION MESSAGING (USING CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGNS) • T RAFFIC SIGNAL OPERATIONS INFORMATION • R EAL-TIME CORRIDOR TRAFFIC CONGESTION • I NCIDENTS AND ROAD CONDITIONS (E.G., IDENTIFYING STALLS ON THE SHOULDER THAT COULD IMPEDE BUS OPERATIONS) • V EHICULAR SPEEDS, VOLUMES, AND OCCUPANCIES • T RAVEL TIMES • R OAD CLOSURES • W EATHER • E VACUATION AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE

RIDE THE VINE IS USED FOR BOOKING ON-DEMAND, DOOR-TO-DOOR TRANSIT TRIPS.

Transit operations and active transportation will also benefit from advanced technology. Some traffic signal technology examples would include Transit Signal Priority and enhanced video detection of bicyclists and pedestrians in crosswalks. Finally, NVTA continues to advance towards offering true Mobility as a Service with its Ride the Vine app, which supports bookings for on-demand, door-to-door transit rides. This service and associated technology will continue to evolve so that one day, almost all transit trips may be served on an on-demand basis with only the express or “trunk” routes operating as a fixed route service. Algorithms for routing and serving transit trips are expected to continue to improve, offering more efficient and responsive service to transit customers.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

INVESTING IN THE FUTURE

PROPORTION OF PROJECTS BY PREDOMINANT MODE

PROJECT NEEDS AND EVALUATION

Over 100 projects have been identified through a collaborative process among the cities, the County, NVTA, and other stakeholders to meet the goals and objectives for the transportation system. Unconstrained capital project costs total almost $708 million in capital costs with operational project costs of $56.6 million over the planning horizon.

12% 39%

15%

A complete project listing can be found in Table 23.

34%

Projects included in the plan represents all transportation modes, with almost a third of the projects including multimodal transportation improvements. Advancing Mobility 2045 is part of a regional transportation planning and programming cycle. Many of these projects are proposed to be included in Plan Bay Area 2050, the Regional Transportation Plan currently under development. The Napa projects included in Plan Bay Area 2050 total almost $688 million (2020 dollars), which includes over $56 million in operating costs for expanded transit services. NUMBER OF PROJECTS BY JURISDICTION JURISDICTION

NUMBER OF PROJECTS

American Canyon

Calistoga

City of Napa

Napa County

NVTA

St. Helena

Yountville

Grand Total

105

AUTO

MULTIMODAL

TRANSIT

BICYCLE/ PEDESTRIAN

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TRAVEL FORECASTING NVTA maintains a travel demand model that can be used to forecast future traffic levels given assumptions regarding population, employment, and the transportation network. This model, along with supplementary analyses, were used to test several hypothetical packages of projects to predict their impact on key performance metrics.

A BICYCLIST AND PASSENGER IN NAPA.

KEY FINDINGS FROM TRAVEL FORECASTING:

THE TOTAL DEMAND FOR TRANSPORTATION IS EXPECTED TO INCREASE BY ABOUT 19% BY 2045.

THE PROPOSED INVESTMENTS IN ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION (ALSO INCLUDING THOSE PROJECTS PROPOSED IN THE 2019 COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE PLAN), ALONG WITH KEY TRANSIT ENHANCEMENT PROJECTS, HAVE THE POTENTIAL TO SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE THE SHARE OF TRIPS MADE BY BICYCLING AND WALKING. THESE SHIFTS WILL MOVE TRANSPORTATION IN NAPA COUNTY TOWARDS A MORE SUSTAINABLE AND HEALTHY FUTURE.

ENHANCED TRANSIT SERVICE WILL NOT ONLY RETAIN TRANSIT’S SHARE OF OVERALL TRAVEL BUT WILL ALSO RESULT IN A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF NEW TRANSIT TRIPS THAT SHIFT FROM THE AUTO MODES. CONCENTRATED IN THE LONG-DISTANCE COMMUTE MARKET, THESE NEW TRANSIT TRIPS (BEYOND THOSE EXPECTED DUE TO POPULATION GROWTH) HAVE THE GREATEST POTENTIAL TO REDUCE VMT AND PERSON HOURS OF DELAY.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AND NEW REVENUE SOURCES Identifying the funding to pay for project needs is of critical importance. There are over $754 million in unfunded transportation needs in Napa County over the 25-year period of Advancing Mobility 2045. NVTA has limited control over how the majority of funding sources are allocated but does play a fundamental role in determining fund programming among its local jurisdictions and between Napa County and the rest of the Bay Area region.

HIGHWAY AND ROADS REVENUE PROJECTIONS FOR 2020–2045 BY SOURCE

58%

35%

TOTAL REVENUE: $1.002 BILLION

NVTA is exploring a variety of potential new funding sources to meet the transportation investment needs in Napa Valley.

REGIONAL/LOCAL

STATE

FEDERAL

TRANSIT REVENUE PROJECTIONS FOR 2020–2045 BY SOURCE

13%

20%

TOTAL REVENUE: $493 MILLION

REGIONAL/LOCAL

67%

STATE

FEDERAL

Foundation

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

WHAT IS A COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN? Napa Valley Transportation Authority is required to develop long-range countywide transportation priorities through a comprehensive planning process. The countywide transportation plan (CTP) provides a direction for the four- to five-year plan while taking into consideration land use, environmental, population, and financial projections over a 25-year planning horizon. It recognizes that what we decide to implement now has implications for the future of Napa Valley. NVTA last updated the countywide transportation plan in 2015. This Countywide Transportation Plan, Advancing Mobility 2045, includes a list of visionary transportation investments intended to improve conditions in Napa County and serve its residents, workers, and visitors. Constrained financial resources require that we take a critical look at which projects, programs, and policies are pursued and submitted to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) for inclusion in the Bay Area Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), Plan Bay Area. The RTP is a 25-year financially constrained plan that creates a framework for the regional planning process to establish consistent and sustainable planning goals throughout the nine-county Bay Area region. Plan Bay Area links transportation and land use policy, as well as addresses Senate Bill (SB) 375 requirements to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. SB 375, the 2008 California Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act, requires that regional transportation planning agencies, like MTC, consider greenhouse gas emissions in the long-range planning process.

NVTA maintains consistency with the regional process by completing a new countywide transportation plan roughly every four years. This countywide plan maintains consistency with regional and statewide sustainability goals by integrating and promoting transportation linkages to new development to foster walkable communities and providing more access to schools, local jobs, and retail. In addition, this plan encourages the use of alternative transportation modes, such as transit, walking, and bicycling. The projects submitted for consideration to MTC for inclusion in Plan Bay Area must be financially constrained. In order to ensure other projects can be included for funding not yet identified within the four- to five-year timeframe of the plan, NVTA separates the proposed projects into two categories: constrained and unconstrained. This allows projects to move forward within the planning period if additional funding is identified.

PANEL DISCUSSION AT NVTA'S TRANSPORTATION SUMMIT IN SEPTEMBER 2019.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 1. PLAN AREA

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES Advancing Mobility 2045 was developed during a historic pandemic and climate change manifested in an unprecedented wildfire season. These challenges have highlighted the necessity to plan for a more efficient, sustainable, equitable, and safe transportation system. This section describes NVTA's response and role in addressing these issues and concludes with the policy framework needed to address them. THE PANDEMIC AND SOCIAL CHANGE

Advancing Mobility 2045 was developed during a historic, worldwide pandemic that has altered how transportation planners and jurisdictions think about transportation. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) has caused a major economic and cultural disruption for the State of California, the statewide transportation system, and for the Bay Area. As of January 2021, COVID-19 had claimed over 400,000 lives in the United States. The economic fallout drove state unemployment to 25 percent1 at its peak, and caused a deep and sudden economic recession. The way people work and travel was abruptly transformed, with many workplaces closing in-person operations, causing employees to work from home. This made work very convenient for some, but it has also fostered a greater divide between middle-/uppermiddle-income and low-income earners. Concerns about how to address this new equity challenge are a focus of this plan. There was a 40 percent reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) in the Bay Area during the last two weeks of March 2020, the peak of the pandemic economic shutdown, which resulted in an 80 percent reduction in congestion.2 The pandemic also resulted in a 70 percent decline in Vine Transit ridership. COVID-19 had an even more profound impact on other Bay Area transit operators, particularly commuter systems like BART and the San Francisco Bay Ferry, which experienced a 90 percent reduction in daily ridership. At the same time, there

3 4 5 1 2

was a visible and measurable increase in bicycling and walking. Two possible reasons for this increase could be less congested roadways that were safer for non-auto users, or less time spent commuting that lead to more time for leisure.3 Consideration should be given to what may happen once the pandemic concludes and economic activity returns to normal. There are two perspectives about what could happen. One perspective suggests that automobile congestion may return and be worse than pre-COVID volumes. A research group from Vanderbilt University found that cities dependent on transit are at risk for extreme traffic because people will choose to take a single-occupant vehicle (SOV) instead of riding public transit, unless transit systems can resume safe, high throughput operations quickly. For San Francisco, the study found that a 25 percent mode shift from transit to SOV would result in 16.4 minutes of additional delay for commuters compared to pre-pandemic commute times.4 Another perspective suggests that more prevalent telecommuting may continue and reduced traffic could sustain increased levels of bicycle and pedestrian activities.5 The future of public transit is key in this discussion. NVTA’s priorities for managing congestion and expanding transit have not materially changed since the pandemic began. Nevertheless, there is a greater interest in “right-sizing” the system and in ensuring public safety.

California Employment Development Department, 2020 Institute of Transportation Engineers https://www.ite.org/about-ite/covid-19-resources/covid-19-traffic-volume-trends/ https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-06-25/bicycle-business-is-exploding-during-covid-19-will-it-last The Rebound: How COVID-19 Could Lead to Worse Traffic (V2) https://lab-work.github.io/therebound/ https://theconversation.com/the-office-is-dead-long-live-the-office-in-a-post-pandemic-world-138499

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

The pandemic provided NVTA with an opportunity to expand its on-demand technology to the City of Napa. The drop in transit ridership offered an opportunity for NVTA to reevaluate how it deployed transit within the city. On April 27, 2020, local routes A through H were suspended and the Vine began operating on-demand service for local trips Monday through Saturday, 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., using its on-demand Ride the Vine app. Since the implementation, weekday ridership has consistently increased every month. For the first half of August, the system carried 2.6 passengers per hour on weekdays, approaching the target of 4.0 passengers per hour. The increase in rider demand shows that many Vine riders are transit dependent. This has not been consistently true among other Bay Area systems. NVTA staff is hoping to sustain on-demand services, but may resume some fixed-route service when schools begin to hold in-person learning again. Nevertheless, the on-demand pilot project has been useful to understand the demand and the amount of resources that may be needed to sustain more innovative and convenient service for the residents of the City of Napa. It has also validated where people are traveling from and where ultimately they would like to go and when. This provides a peek at predictive, rather than reactive, planning which will ultimately provide better services for the riding public. NVTA, along with the other San Francisco Bay Area transit systems, has pledged to follow the Riding Together: Bay Area Healthy Transit Plan which prescribes specific cleaning protocols for vehicles and facilities, social distancing, data collection and sharing, and protection protocols for both transit employees and riders.

TRAIL MARKER FOR PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS IN WESTWOOD HILLS.

While studies have shown that COVID-19 infection rates among transit riders may actually be lower than the general population,6 public transit systems must also counter public perception that may be significantly different from reality. As part of this effort, the public is receiving additional information about what the Vine is doing to protect its riders and workers, and what they can do to help reduce the spread of the coronavirus.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/02/nyregion/nyc-subway-coronavirus-safety.html

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

RESILIENCE AND SUSTAINABILITY

Climate change is manifesting in rising sea levels, extreme heat, shifting snow and rainfall patterns, and more frequent and severe climate events that have led to wildfires and flooding in California. Recently, Napa County experienced unprecedented fire events, including the Atlas, Nuns, and Tubbs fires in 2017, and the Lightning Napa Unit Complex and Glass fires in 2020, with the former being the second largest fire in California State history. The wildfires have highlighted the importance of a safe, secure, and accessible transportation system during emergencies. This vital need was emphasized when large evacuation orders were mandated, including the entire City of Calistoga. The Lightning Napa Unit Complex fires also highlighted opportunities to enhance the highway and main arterials in Napa County with a more sophisticated Traffic Control Management system that works for both emergency

personnel and residents. NVTA plans to break ground on a new Vine Transit Maintenance Facility in 2021, which includes a dispatch and command center equipped as an emergency response center. Emergency response and fleet access is an essential duty that NVTA provides to the public during emergencies and the Traffic Management Center will be an invaluable asset during natural catastrophes. This project is still in conception and has been included in the CTP. Likewise, State Route (SR) 37 improvements have been a persistent focus for the four North Bay counties in recent years, and both the interim project and ultimate project will be included in their countywide plans, as well as MTC’s RTP. The interim project makes operational improvements along one segment of the 21-mile corridor, including the widening between SR 121 and Mare Island, and intersection improvements at SR 37 and SR 121 near the Sonoma Raceway. The ultimate project will make improvements along the entire corridor to accommodate the inevitable sea-level rise in the area. Improvements are also likely to include multimodal improvements, and the preservation of and access to the surrounding wetlands. As climate change continues to progress, NVTA will be looking to new technologies that reduce harmful mobile emissions and infrastructure designs that help reduce the impacts of rising sea levels. IMPLEMENTING THE PLAN

A PEDESTRIAN USING A CROSSWALK IN NAPA COUNTY.

The countywide transportation plan sets goals for the transportation system and identifies the projects needed to work towards the performance targets. With the exception of transit projects, local jurisdictions have a critical role in actually delivering most projects. NVTA will support local jurisdictions by helping secure competitive funding. NVTA also has a more direct role in working towards goals by promoting and improving transit service, providing Transportation Demand Management programs, and periodically monitoring system performance.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

POLICY FRAMEWORK

This countywide transportation plan was developed using a broad policy and goal-setting framework that acknowledges big picture challenges facing our communities and the environment. The framework includes goals and objectives that act as tools to help policymakers and staff to prioritize projects and programs. The CTP goals include:

GOAL #1: SERVE THE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY REGARDLESS OF AGE, INCOME, OR ABILITY

GOAL #2: IMPROVE SYSTEM SAFETY IN ORDER TO SUPPORT ALL MODES AND SERVE ALL USERS

GOAL #3: USE TAXPAYER DOLLARS EFFICIENTLY

This goal reflects the concept of equity and ensures that the transportation system serves the needs of the broader community, including seniors, youth, and transit-dependent populations.

This goal reflects the high priority placed on the safety of the transportation system with special emphasis on making the system safer for bicyclists and pedestrians.

This goal reflects the importance of maximizing available funding to reduce congestion and offer more attractive choices for how we travel.

GOAL #4: PROMOTE NAPA COUNTY’S ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

GOAL #5: MINIMIZE THE ENERGY AND OTHER RESOURCES REQUIRED TO MOVE PEOPLE AND GOODS

GOAL #6: PRIORITIZE THE MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM

This goal reflects the key importance that transportation has to Napa’s economy – both in providing access to jobs and services and in supporting freight-intensive industries.

This goal is concerned with the sustainability of the transportation network. Reduction of greenhouse gases associated with transportation is of critical importance in addressing climate change.

This goal reflects the priority placed on maintaining the existing transportation system in a state of good repair.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PUBLIC OUTREACH Gathering public input from Napa County's community members was a crucial component of this plan. NVTA staff worked closely with contractors from DKS and CivicMakers to create a strategic public outreach plan and to conduct a series of in-person and online engagement activities between August 2019 and January 2020. The outreach, while widely broadcasted to the general public, had a particular focus on reaching disadvantaged groups and communities of concern in Napa County. These community members are seniors, persons with disabilities, and non-native English speakers within the County. The purpose of the campaign was to ensure that we heard from and that all members of the community had an opportunity to share their concerns and desires for the transportation system in Napa County. PUBLIC WORKSHOPS AND MEETINGS The NVTA staff and program managers hosted a series of pop-up style workshops as both stand-alone public outreach meetings, and during popular community events in Napa, such as the NVTA Transportation Summit and the Napa local farmer’s market. Each event boasted oversized engagement posters and maps, which highlighted detailed project information, soliciting input on focus areas and measures for the Transportation Plan. NVTA provided all engagement materials in Spanish and Tagalog to reach the expanse of Napa County’s rich and diverse communities. Events matched for community members who identified as a part of the senior citizen population were held at the Napa City Senior Center. A similar event primarily for Spanish speaking residents was hosted at the Napa Up Valley Family Centers. The over-arching goal of these targeted outreach events was to open up opportunities for members of these disadvantaged communities to have a voice for change that benefits them and their peers.

THE POP-UP STYLE WORKSHOPS AND MEETINGS WERE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC ON THE FOLLOWING DATES AND LOCATIONS:

1 2 3 4 5 6

NVTA TRANSPORTATION SUMMIT

Copia, 500 First Street Napa, CA, 94559 NAPA FARMERS MARKET

195 Gasser Drive Napa, CA 94559 AMERICAN CANYON SENIOR CENTER

2185 Elliott Drive American Canyon, CA 94503 UP VALLEY FAMILY CENTER

500 Cedar Street Calistoga, CA 94515 CITY OF NAPA SENIOR CENTER

1500 Jefferson Street Napa, CA 94559 CARNEGIE BUILDING, ST. HELENA

1360 Oak Avenue St. Helena, CA 94574

September 18, 2019 4:00 – 6:00 p.m.

October 16, 2019 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m.

December 11, 2019 9:00 – 10:30 a.m.

December 19, 2019 12:30 – 1:30 p.m.

January 13, 2020 10:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.

January 16, 2020 4:30 – 6:30 p.m.

DIGITAL ENGAGEMENT A digital engagement platform was launched in parallel to the in-person pop-up workshops in an effort to expand the reach and encourage participation from populations who were unable to attend the in-person workshops. This effort was particularly important for reaching communities of concern. The website (www.nvtatransportationplan.org), which is available in English, Spanish, and Filipino, was set up as a hub for sharing project information and updates. Interactive maps, along with a survey, were available for residents to hone in on projects in specific areas. Participants had the flexibility to identify themselves or submit comments anonymously. Participants could also use the pin-drop

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

feature on the interactive maps or leave specific comments and suggestions. The CTP website allowed for the capture and aggregation of the public comments and suggestions. The digital engagement platform included the following elements, all of which were also available in analog form at community events: y SURVEY to assess community transportation needs y INTERACTIVE MAP to share ideas for

transportation improvements y POLL to gather data on current transportation usage

PROMOTIONAL CAMPAIGN To promote pop-up workshops and online engagement activities, NVTA used social media, email, press releases, printed poster ads on local buses, and advertisements posted at various bus stop shelters. Facebook was used to support and promote specific meetings through general posts and boosted (paid) advertisements. The social media campaigns were pre-scheduled and set to release at specific times determined by NVTA’s social media management platform, Hootsuite, based on hightraffic history and guidance from NVTA’s communications team. Pop-up workshops also appeared on Facebook under general events occurring in Napa County, accessible by all Facebook users, even if they did not specifically follow NVTA on social media. NVTA also engaged communities using Nextdoor, Instagram, and Twitter platforms promoting the CTP survey and interactive map tool, and to provide information about when meetings would be held and where. These social media platforms also served as sounding boards for Napa County residents. The comments and suggestions from these platforms were moved over to the NVTA CTP website for aggregation.

EXAMPLE OF AN INTERACTIVE MAP FROM WWW.NVTATRANSPORTATIONPLAN.ORG.

TEXT MESSAGING NVTA introduced text messaging for gathering public comments for the CTP. The text-to-reply survey service allowed participants to comment freely on transportation issues and concerns without the constraints of pre-set questions. Text messaging surveys also lower the barriers to entry for participants who have limited or no access to computers or smartphones. According to U.S. Census data, 75 percent of Napa County residents own a cellphone with texting capabilities.

SAMPLE OF A SOCIAL MEDIA AD THAT WAS USED FOR PUBLIC OUTREACH.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

FOLLOW NVTA ON THESE SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS:

FACEBOOK: @NVTA.CA @VINETRANSIT INSTAGRAM: @NVTA.CA @RIDETHEVINE TWITTER: @NVTA_NAPAVALLEY @VINETRANSIT

THE POWER OF STRONG PARTNERSHIPS NVTA staff worked closely with Public Relations Managers and Officers, and City Clerks in Napa County to share information about the Countywide Transportation Plan. Jurisdictions assisted NVTA by emailing their constituents, sharing and re-tweeting social posts, as well as posting CTP information in their weekly newsletters. PUBLIC OUTREACH PARTICIPATION DURING DRAFT PLAN DEVELOPMENT While we did not do a headcount at community events, we estimate that over 100 people attended in-person events based on the number of comments received. Table 1 provides details about the event comments and votes collected. Many more participants learned about the project without sharing input.

Table 1. COMMUNITY EVENT COMMENTS AND VOTES COLLECTED EVENT

NVTA TRANSPORTATION SUMMIT

NAPA FARMERS MARKET

AMERICAN CANYON SENIOR CENTER

UP VALLEY FAMILY CENTER

CITY OF NAPA SENIOR CENTER

CARNEGIE BUILDING, ST. HELENA

Napa • September 18, 2019

Napa • October 16, 2019

American Canyon • December 11, 2019

Calistoga • December 19, 2019

Napa • January 13, 2020

St. Helena • January 16, 2020 TOTAL

NUMBER OF MAP COMMENTS

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL

TOTAL VOTES71 COLLECTED

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL

28.04%

40.63%

35.45%

18.75%

19.58%

12.05%

7.41%

0.00%

3.17%

12.50%

6.35%

16.07%

189

224

Total Votes includes the number of pompoms collected to indicate primary travel mode (for which, participants could cast only one vote) and the number of DOT votes placed on important focus areas (for which, participants could cast one to three votes).

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

In total, there were over 500 online participants. Many more people learned about the countywide plan by visiting the project website. Each unique online participant provided roughly two comments. See additional details about online participation in Table 2. Table 2. PUBLIC OUTREACH ONLINE PARTICIPATION TYPES OF ONLINE VISITORS

PERCENTAGE

TOTAL SITE VIEWS

3,621

UNIQUE PARTICIPANTS (CONTRIBUTORS)

529

COMMENTS RECEIVED (SURVEY + MAP + POLL)

1,037

SURVEY COMMENTS

883 comments (a single survey contained 13 opportunities to provide a comment)

SURVEY UNIQUE COMMENTATORS

290 unique commentators • Range 1-10 comments • Average per respondent: 2.16 comments • Average per commentator: 2.88 comments

MAP AND POLL COMMENTS

124

MAP AND POLL COMMENTATORS

In total we estimate that nearly 900 people shared input during the development of the Transportation Plan. Table 3 summarizes all of the public outreach participation. Table 3. PUBLIC OUTREACH COMBINED IN-PERSON AND ONLINE PARTICIPATION ACTIVITY

IN-PERSON

ONLINE

SMS

TOTAL

374

—

385

INTERACTIVE MAP

189

281

TRANSPORTATION MODE POLL

—

FOCUS AREA PRIORITIZATION

152

—

152

TOTAL

424

456

899

TRANSPORTATION NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEY

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PUBLIC OUTREACH SUMMARY – PLAN DEVELOPMENT This section summarizes community sentiment from comments received via digital engagement and pop-up events during plan development. Community sentiment is characterized below according to the goals of the Countywide Transportation Plan 2045. Appendix A (Public Outreach Material) contains additional statistics from the transportation needs assessment activity, the interactive map, and the transportation mode poll that were conducted online and at in-person events.

GOAL #1: SERVE THE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY REGARDLESS OF AGE, INCOME, OR ABILITY

GOAL #2: IMPROVE SYSTEM SAFETY IN ORDER TO SUPPORT ALL MODES AND SERVE ALL USERS

GOAL #3: USE TAXPAYER DOLLARS EFFICIENTLY

Most comments related to equity emphasized the need to provide and maintain safe, reliable, and comfortable transportation options to schools for youth (e.g., increase bus service, expand bicycle routes, and maintain sidewalks). Some comments expressed a desire for better or alternative transportation options for seniors and persons with disabilities, such as on-demand rideshare services because existing transportation options are not considered accessible or comfortable.

Most comments expressed a desire to see more safety improvements for bicyclists and pedestrians (e.g. designated bicycle lanes, pedestrian signal crossings, etc.). Many comments raised concerns about dangerous vehicular traffic, identifying specific, unsafe intersections or crossings for safety improvements and calling for increased traffic calming measures and road enforcement. A few comments asked about planned evacuation routes in the case of an emergency or natural disaster.

The majority of comments (over 200) were concerned with traffic congestion. Over half of these comments advocated for more frequent, reliable public transportation services that better connect Napa County cities to each other as well as to San Francisco, East Bay, and Sonoma County (at least to the Vallejo Ferry or Richmond Bart). The other comments want traffic congestion alleviation via roadway improvements, such as via synchronized traffic signals, roundabouts, road widening, designated turning and passing lanes, and over/underpasses.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

GOAL #4: PROMOTE NAPA COUNTY’S ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

GOAL #5: MINIMIZE THE ENERGY AND OTHER RESOURCES REQUIRED TO MOVE PEOPLE AND GOODS

GOAL #6: PRIORITIZE THE MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM

Most comments related to economic vitality want to see better coordination with the wine and tourist industry to manage transportation demand. A few comments (also related to equity) want to see better public transportation options for existing residents/ workers and more reliable service to connect residents to economic opportunities inside and outside of Napa Valley.

Overall, there were few comments explicitly about sustainability. Of those related, some comments advocated for electric vehicles while others discouraged driving in favor of promoting alternative modes of transportation, such as public transit, e-scooters, biking, and walking, through improving efficiency and safety or providing incentives (e.g. free transit passes, helmets, etc.) to protect the environment.

Many commenters wanted to see roads maintained and repaved, biking and pedestrian networks continue to be expanded and maintained, and public transportation frequency improved to encourage ridership. Additionally, some commenters felt public transportation could be improved through easier, seamless payment methods and better real-time trip planning tools.

PUBLIC OUTREACH – DRAFT PLAN NVTA will be holding question and answer sessions, as well as accepting comments from the public on the Advancing Mobility 2045 website. Please visit www.nvtatransportationplan.org for more information and to provide comments on this draft.

Vision

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES The Napa Valley Transportation Authority is responsible for developing long-range countywide transportation priorities through an integrated planning process. This countywide plan, Advancing Mobility 2045, is an update to Vision 2040 Moving Napa Forward, published in 2015. During preparation of the 2015 countywide transportation plan, NVTA conducted a needs assessment through various public engagement methods. Overarching themes from the outreach in 2015 remain true today.

THE MOST PRESSING NEEDS OF THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM: CONGESTION RELIEF IMPROVED TRAFFIC SAFETY MORE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE MORE RELIABLE AND FREQUENT BUS SERVICE MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF THE EXISTING TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM

NVTA kicked off the update to the countywide plan in September 2019. Outreach conducted to date supports the priorities identified by the community in 2015. In addition, the outreach so far has highlighted additional priorities, such as creating a sustainable and equitable transportation system. NVTA will continue to engage the public on the countywide plan’s priorities and projects of interest. NVTA will also monitor progress towards the goals and objectives of the plan through performance metrics. In this update to the countywide transportation plan, baseline metrics summarize the existing conditions. The goals of the plan articulate the optimal outcomes for where Napa Valley’s transportation system should be in 2045. Objectives are how NVTA gets from the baseline to the goal. NVTA will then establish specific measurable performance metrics and targets to gauge how effective the plan is at reaching the established objectives. In reviewing the goals and objectives it is important to understand that there are many issues and challenges, and that some objectives may conflict with others. Nevertheless, the solutions must be balanced, so the proposed goals are considered of equal importance.

GOAL #1

GOAL #2

SERVE THE TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY REGARDLESS OF AGE, INCOME, OR ABILITY

IMPROVE SYSTEM SAFETY IN ORDER TO SUPPORT ALL MODES AND SERVE ALL USERS

OBJECTIVES

1. PROVIDE SAFE ACCESS TO JOBS, SCHOOLS, RECREATION AND OTHER DAILY NEEDS FOR NAPA’S RESIDENTS AND VISITORS.

1. DESIGN ROADWAYS AND OTHER TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES TO ENHANCE COEXISTENCE OF ALL MODES.

2. SERVE THE SPECIAL TRANSPORTATION NEEDS OF SENIORS, CHILDREN AND THE DISABLED.

2. EDUCATE ALL ROADWAY USERS SO THEY MAY SAFELY COEXIST.

3. COORDINATE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, SENIORS, CHILDREN AND OTHER GROUPS SO EACH SERVES AS MANY PEOPLE AS POSSIBLE.

3. WORK WITH NAPA JURISDICTIONS TO ADOPT SAFETY STRATEGIES SUCH AS VISION ZERO THAT ADDRESS THEIR NEEDS AND REQUIREMENTS.

4. PROVIDE AFFORDABLE TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS TO ENSURE ACCESS TO JOBS, EDUCATION, GOODS, AND SERVICES FOR ALL MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY.

4. ENSURE MEASURE T ROADWAY FUNDS ARE MAXIMIZED TO IMPROVE INFRASTRUCTURE, AS ALLOWED UNDER THE ORDINANCE, TO BENEFIT ALL TRANSPORTATION MODES. 5. PROMOTE PROJECTS THAT EXPAND TRAVEL OPTIONS FOR CYCLISTS AND PEDESTRIANS AS WELL AS THOSE PROJECTS THAT REDUCE CONGESTION AND IMPROVE SAFETY FOR VEHICLES, PEDESTRIANS, AND CYCLISTS.

GOAL #3

GOAL #4

USE TAXPAYER DOLLARS EFFICIENTLY

PROMOTE NAPA COUNTY’S ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

OBJECTIVES

1. CONTINUE TO PRIORITIZE LOCAL STREETS AND ROAD MAINTENANCE, CONSISTENT WITH MEASURE T. 2. INVEST IN TIMELY AND RELIABLE BUS SERVICE AND INFRASTRUCTURE, SO PUBLIC TRANSIT IS AN ATTRACTIVE ALTERNATIVE TO DRIVING ALONE. 3. IDENTIFY INNOVATIVE ALTERNATIVE SOLUTIONS THAT MINIMIZE COSTS, MAXIMIZE SYSTEM PERFORMANCE AND REDUCE CONGESTION. 4. EXPLORE NEW TRANSPORTATION FUNDING SOURCES, INCLUDING FEES ASSOCIATED WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT. 5. FOSTER PARTNERSHIPS WITH CALTRANS, CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (CTC), METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (MTC) AND NAPA’S STATE LEGISLATORS TO SUPPORT EXPANDED TRANSPORTATION FUNDING FOR LOCAL MOBILITY NEEDS AND TO ACCOMMODATE DEMAND FROM REGIONAL TRAFFIC THAT TRAVELS THROUGH NAPA COUNTY.

1. IDENTIFY AND IMPROVE KEY GOODS MOVEMENT ROUTES. 2. WORK WITH EMPLOYERS TO IMPROVE ACCESS TO EMPLOYMENT CENTERS, AS WELL AS DISPERSED AGRICULTURAL EMPLOYMENT SITES. 3. IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION SERVICES AIMED AT VISITORS, INCLUDING ALTERNATIVES TO DRIVING. 4. SUPPORT POLICIES THAT SHIFT TRAVEL FROM PEAK TO NON-PEAK HOURS.

GOAL #5

GOAL #6

MINIMIZE THE ENERGY AND OTHER RESOURCES REQUIRED TO MOVE PEOPLE AND GOODS

PRIORITIZE THE MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM

OBJECTIVES

1. PRIORITIZE PROJECTS THAT REDUCE GREENHOUSE GASES. 2. INCREASE MODE SHARE FOR TRANSIT, WALKING, AND BICYCLING. 3. REDUCE VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED (VMT). 4. ENCOURAGE THE PROVISION OF ALTERNATIVE FUEL INFRASTRUCTURE. 5. INVEST IN IMPROVEMENTS TO THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK THAT SERVE LAND USE, CONSISTENT WITH SB 375. 6. IDENTIFY REVENUES THAT SUPPORT INVESTMENTS IN PRIORITY DEVELOPMENT AREAS (PDAS) AND PRIORITY PRODUCTION AREAS (PPAS).

1. DELIVER MEASURE T PROJECTS EFFECTIVELY. 2. FOCUS FUNDING ON MAINTENANCE PRIORITIES.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

CURRENT PERFORMANCE WHY MEASURE SYSTEM PERFORMANCE? Performance measures allow us to track progress towards the goals of an equitable, safe, and sustainable transportation system, and understand what it would take to achieve measurable change. In addition, guidelines from the MTC call for a performance measurement framework, noting that such will help align investment decisions with established goals. Although the performance targets apply to the Plan’s horizon year (2045), the intent is to recalculate the performance measures approximately every five years to track the progress.

“MINIMIZE THE ENERGY/RESOURCES REQUIRED TO MOVE PEOPLE AND GOODS”

ESTABLISH GOALS

“INCREASE MODE SHARE FOR TRANSIT, WALKING, AND BIKING”

STATE OBJECTIVES

BICYCLE + WALK MODE SHARE

ADJUST

REPORT RESULTS

SET TARGETS

TARGET MODE SHARE: 10%

IDENTIFY PERFORMANCE MEASURES

ESTABLISH BASELINE

CURRENT MODE SHARE: 5%

Figure 2. THE PERFORMANCE BASED PLANNING PROCESS

Performance metrics should rely on readily available and reliable sources of data, and should measure matters that NVTA has jurisdiction over. The following sections describe the measures and sources of data, provide baseline performance measurements, and propose targets for each transportation goal.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

EQUITY

MEASURE: NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS BELOW THE COUNTY MEDIAN INCOME THAT ARE WITHIN A QUARTER OF A MILE OF TRANSIT

The performance measure for equity reflects the accessibility of transit to low-to-moderate income households (as defined by the median income of Napa County1). Transit accessibility is a key to ensuring that households that might not be able to afford private vehicles have the mobility to access jobs, healthcare, and other social and economic opportunities. The target is providing a fixed route transit stop within a quarter-mile (walking distance) to 100 percent of below median income households.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

85% OF BELOW MEDIAN INCOME HOUSEHOLDS HAVE TRANSIT ACCESS

TARGET

100% OF BELOW MEDIAN INCOME HOUSEHOLDS HAVE TRANSIT ACCESS

KEY DATA SOURCES

• American Community Survey (ACS) Five Year Estimates, 2014-2018; Table B19001 (Households by income bracket and block group) • Census block group geographic boundaries • Vine Transit stop locations

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS BELOW MEDIAN INCOME OF $75,000:

47%

19,951 1

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS BELOW MEDIAN INCOME WITHIN QUARTER MILE OF TRANSIT:

16,869

TOTAL NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS: 42,747

85% NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS BELOW MEDIAN INCOME OF $75,000: 19,951

Figure 3. PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLDS BELOW THE COUNTY MEDIAN INCOME THAT ARE WITHIN A QUARTER OF A MILE OF TRANSIT

The median income of Napa County is $84,753 but the American Community Survey reports households in income brackets. This measure counts all households below the income bracket of $75,000-99,999.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

SAFETY

MEASURE: NUMBER OF SEVERE INJURY AND FATAL COLLISIONS

To measure system safety, NVTA considered the number of fatal and severe injury collisions on Napa's roadways. The collision data includes pedestrian and bicycle-involved collisions, as well as those that involved motor vehicles. These collisions are shown by location in Figures 4 and 5, as well as in Table 4 below. The goal is to reduce the number of severe injury and fatal collisions to zero.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

FATAL COLLISIONS: 48 INJURY COLLISIONS: 291

TARGET

FATAL COLLISIONS: 0 INJURY COLLISIONS: 0

KEY DATA SOURCES

• Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS)a – injury and fatality collision records for Napa County, 2015-2018 a

eocoded data and mapping application of CHP’s Statewide Integrated G Traffic Records System – University of California, Berkeley SafeTREC

Table 4. SEVERE INJURY AND FATAL COLLISIONS BY JURISDICTION (2015–2018)

CITY

TOTAL SEVERE TOTAL ALCOHOL PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN BICYCLE BICYCLE FATAL INJURY INJURY INVOLVED INVOLVED FATALITIES INVOLVED FATALITIES

MOTORCYCLE INVOLVED

MOTORCYCLE FATALITIES

AMERICAN CANYON

324

–

CALISTOGA

–

NAPA

1,467

155

105

–

SAINT HELENA

133

–

202

2,198

190

180

–

291

4,195

380

140

176

261

UNINCORPORATED YOUNTVILLE TOTAL IN NAPA COUNTY

Note: Data in this table may differ from that contained in Local Road Safety Plans due to different time frames or queries of the data.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 4. FATAL AND SEVERE INJURY TRAFFIC COLLISIONS (2015-2018)

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 5. SEVERE INJURY AND FATAL COLLISIONS INVOLVING PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLES (2015-2018)

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

CONGESTION RELIEF

MEASURE #1: PEAK PERIOD DELAY INDEX

Two performances measures were identified to measure changes in traffic congestion. The first performance measure is the delay index for a roadway corridor, which is the ratio of congested travel time to free flow travel time along that corridor and reflects the reliability of a roadway. A delay index of 2, for example, means that a travel times are twice what they would be under uncongested conditions. The delay index reflects the extra time that people must build into their trips in order to arrive on time. Delay index measurements have been calculated to reflect conditions for both the morning (6–10 a.m.) and afternoon (3–7 p.m.) peak commute periods using outputs from the travel demand model for Napa County. Figures 6 and 7 show the delay index by roadway corridor.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

PEAK PERIOD DELAY INDEX OF 3.14 FOR THE MOST CONGESTED ROADWAY SEGMENT

TARGET

PEAK PERIOD DELAY INDEX LESS THAN OR EQUAL TO 2.0 FOR ALL MONITORED ROADWAY SEGMENTS

KEY DATA SOURCES

• Daily trip tables, free flow travel times and congested travel times from Napa Activity Based Model (baseline scenario – June 2020)

MEASURE #2: AVERAGE WEEKDAY PERSON HOURS OF DELAY ON NAPA ROADWAYS

Congestion on Napa roadways can also be quantified in terms of person hours of delay. This performance measure quantifies the delay experienced by people traveling on Napa’s roadways in excess of travel times under freely flowing conditions. The baseline measurement is calculated with outputs from the travel demand model developed for Napa County and includes travel by Napa County residents, workers, and visitors. The performance target is to reduce the overall number of person hours spent in congestion on a typical weekday from current levels.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

3,108 DAILY PERSON HOURS OF DELAY ON NAPA VALLEY ROADWAYS

TARGET

REDUCE THE DAILY PERSON HOURS OF DELAY ON NAPA VALLEY ROADWAYS FROM BASELINE LEVELS

KEY DATA SOURCES

• Daily trip tables, free-flow travel times and congested travel times from Napa Activity-Based Model (baseline scenario – June 2020)

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 6. DELAY INDEX BY STUDY CORRIDOR – AM PEAK PERIOD

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 7. DELAY INDEX BY STUDY CORRIDOR – PM PEAK PERIOD

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

MEASURE #3: ON-TIME BUS PERFORMANCE WEIGHTED BY RIDERSHIP

On-time bus performance is a strong indicator of service reliability and customer experience. To be considered on time, buses must arrive at the stop within five minutes of the scheduled time and not leave the stop before the scheduled time. The percent of on-time bus performance for each type of transit service is weighted by the ridership on each route. NVTA's Short Range Transit Plan sets a minimum standard for this performance measure as 90 percent of all trips are on-time.

CITY ROUTES

63% INTERCITY ROUTES

69% AVERAGE WEIGHTED ON-TIME PERFORMANCE FOR ALL ROUTE TYPES

TARGET

90% AVERAGE WEIGHTED ON-TIME PERFORMANCE FOR ALL ROUTE TYPES

KEY DATA SOURCES

• Vine Transit on-time performance data by route for 2018 (routes changed December 2019) • Vine Transit ridership data by route for year 2018

Figure 8. WEIGHTED ON-TIME PERFORMANCE BY ROUTE TYPE

79%

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

65% REGIONAL ROUTES

MEASURE #4: NUMBER OF USERS IN NVTA’S TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

V-Commute (formerly Solano-Napa Commuter Information) is Napa Valley’s Transportation Demand Management program that promotes alternatives to driving alone. V-Commute services include carpool matching, guaranteed ride home, and information about transit, bicycling, and walking. Employers with 50 or more full-time employees can register their commuter benefits program to comply with regulations of the Bay Area Air Quality Management District. V-Commute is currently complemented by the Napa Valley Forward program, a Transportation Demand Management program aimed at vintners and the hospitality industry. Currently, both these Transportation Demand Management programs are focused on commuter travel but it would be possible to create programs focused on the tourist market. The goal is to increase the number of registered users in both Transportation Demand Management programs.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

TARGET

NUMBER OF REGISTERED V-COMMUTE USERS: 132 NUMBER OF REGISTERED NAPA VALLEY FORWARD USERS: 150 INCREASE THE NUMBER OF USERS REGISTERED FOR BOTH PROGRAMS BY TARGETING LARGE EMPLOYERS a

KEY DATA SOURCES

• V-Commute Program registered user data (2019-2020) a

oth individuals and employers may register for V-Commute where each B registration for Napa Valley Forward is an employer.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

MEASURE #1: RELIABILITY OF TRUCK TRAVEL TIMES

Freight transportation is vital to the economic sustainability of Napa County. The Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR) index indicates the reliability of freight travel times as measured by historical truck speed data, comparing days with extremely high delay to days with average delay. The TTTR index for a corridor is the TTTR ratio weighted by the length of each study corridor. Figure 8 shows the recent decline in TTTR. The specific roadway corridors studied are shown in Figure 10.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

OVERALL TTTR INDEX: 2.09

TARGET

OVERALL TTTR INDEX: MAINTAIN AT 2.09 OR REDUCE

KEY DATA SOURCES

• National Performance Management Research Data Set (NPMRDS 2017-2019) obtained from RITIS at https://npmrds.ritis.org/analytics/

2.18 2.16

OVERALL TTTR

2.14 2.12

TARGET: 2.09

2.10 2.08 2.06 2.04 2017

2018

Figure 9. OVERALL TRUCK TRAVEL TIME RELIABILITY FROM 2017 TO 2019

2019

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 10. STUDY CORRIDORS FOR TRUCK TRAVEL TIME RELIABILITY MEASUREMENT

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

MEASURE #2: NUMBER OF JOBS ACCESSIBLE BY TRANSIT WITHIN ONE HOUR DURING THE MORNING COMMUTE

Access to employment opportunities is also key to Napa Valley’s economic sustainability. Job accessibility by transit is an important measure to ensure that households that might not be able to afford private vehicles have the mobility to access jobs. Note that this measure does not capture all the jobs that might be located along a transit route but only those that can be reached from the stops since passengers can only alight the bus stops. Figure 11 shows the transit coverage within 60 minutes of American Canyon, Calistoga, Napa, St. Helena, and Yountville.

JOB ACCESSIBILITY BY VINE TRANSIT: BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

TARGET

AMERICAN CANYON: 37,725 CALISTOGA: 8,831 NAPA: 40,241 ST. HELENA: 8,475 YOUNTVILLE: 29,521 MAINTAIN OR IMPROVE THE BASELINE LEVEL OF JOB ACCESSIBILITY BY VINE TRANSIT IN AMERICAN CANYON, CALISTOGA, NAPA, ST. HELENA, AND YOUNTVILLE

KEY DATA SOURCES

• Isochrones of transit coverage centered at jurisdictions from www.remix.com for: 6:40 AM, 7:00 AM, and 7:40 AM • Number of jobs shapefile from 2012-2016 Census Transportation Planning Products (CTPP); Table A202100 at TAZ level

VINE TRANSIT BUS ON IMOLA AVENUE.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 11. TRANSIT COVERAGE WITHIN 60 MINUTES

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

SUSTAINABILITY

MEASURE #1: GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

Achieving the NVTA sustainability goal can be measured by greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions that contribute to global climate change. This performance measure captures GHG emissions from transportation sources and is calculated based on the gallons of gasoline and diesel sales. Consistent with Plan Bay Area 2040—the most recent Regional Transportation Plan—the target is to reduce GHG emissions per capita from the 2015 levels by 19 percent.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

4.1 METRIC TONS OF GHG EMISSIONS PER CAPITA IN NAPA COUNTY IN 2015

TARGET

REDUCE GHG EMISSIONS BY 19% PER CAPITA IN NAPA COUNTY FROM THE 2015 LEVELS

KEY DATA SOURCES

• GHG emissions data for surface transportation from MTC Vital Signs: https://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/greenhousegas-emissions

700,000

METRIC TON

500,000

3.2

4.0

4.1 4

2.9 3

400,000 300,000

200,000 1 100,000 0

0 2010

201 1

2012

2013

2014

Figure 12. TRANSPORTATION-RELATED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS IN NAPA COUNTY

2015

METRIC TON PER CAPITA

3.9

600,000

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

MEASURE #2: VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED

The environmental sustainability of the transportation system is measured by Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) per capita. This metric aligns with energy consumption and the use of personal vehicles over more sustainable modes. The target is to reduce VMT per capita by 15 percent from baseline levels in accordance with state policy on climate change and GHG reduction. Figure 13 shows how the VMT varies by location of home and workplace for Napa Valley residents and workers.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED: 17.3 MILES PER CAPITA

TARGET

15% REDUCTION IN VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED FROM BASELINE LEVEL

KEY DATA SOURCES

• Napa Valley Transportation Authority VMT Tool, 2021

17.29

AVERAGE

AMERICAN CANYON

21.02 12.36

CALISTOGA NAPA CITY ST. HELENA

13.59 11.34

YOUNTVILLE

Source: Napa Valley Transportation Authority VMT Tool, 2021 Figure 13. HOME-BASED VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED PER CAPITA BY JURISDICTION, 2015

18.67

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

MEASURE #3: SHARE OF ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION FOR COMMUTE TRIPS

Active modes of transportation support a healthy lifestyle in communities and are environmentally friendly. The percentage of work trips made by bicycling or walking for Napa County residents is an indicator of overall active transportation use. Figure 14 examines the baseline percentage of work trips that Napa County residents made by bicycling or walking. The target is to increase the active transportation commute mode share to 10 percent.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

PERCENTAGE OF WORK TRIPS MADE BY BICYCLING OR WALKING FOR NAPA COUNTY RESIDENTS: 5%

TARGET

INCREASE THE PERCENTAGE OF WORK TRIPS MADE BY BICYCLING OR WALKING FOR NAPA COUNTY RESIDENTS TO 10% BY 2045 a

KEY DATA SOURCES

• American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates (2014-2018): Commuting Characteristics by Sex; Table S0801 a

BICYCLING: 510

WALKING: 2,740

T he current Napa Countywide Bicycle Plan calls for 10 percent of all trips to be by bicycle by 2035.

ALL MODES COMBINED: 68,275

Figure 14. MODE SHARE OF COMMUTE TRIPS BY BICYCLING AND WALKING IN NAPA COUNTY

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

MEASURE #4: TRANSIT RIDERSHIP BY ANNUAL BOARDINGS AND ALIGHTINGS

Improving transit infrastructure and service can lead to mode shift from cars to buses, thereby reducing congestion on roads. Transit is a more sustainable transportation mode than private vehicle use, especially when considering the planned electrification of the bus fleet. Figure 15 shows the most recent available ridership data by service type. The target is to maintain or increase transit ridership from baseline levels.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

ANNUAL TRANSIT RIDERSHIP (FISCAL YEAR 2018-2019): 952,089

TARGET

MAINTAIN OR INCREASE FROM BASELINE ANNUAL RIDERSHIP

KEY DATA SOURCES

• Vine Transit ridership data from NVTA

87,373

REGIONAL SERVICE

570,066

COMMUTER SERVICE

382,023 LOCAL ROUTES

Figure 15. TRANSIT RIDERSHIP BY SERVICE TYPE (FISCAL YEAR 2018-2019)

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

MAINTENANCE AND PRESERVATION

MEASURE #1: MILES BETWEEN BUS ROAD CALLS (BREAKDOWNS)

Miles between road calls is a maintenance performance indicator that measures the miles between mechanical failures of a public transit vehicle used during revenue service. Figure 16 examines the number of bus breakdowns in recent years. Road calls for bus breakdowns may cause a delay in service, and even lead to removing the vehicle from service until repairs are made. This performance measure reflects the maintenance and preservation of the bus fleet and is an indicator of adequate investment in transit service.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

AVERAGE MILES BETWEEN ROAD CALLS (2015-2018): 42,750

TARGET

MAINTAIN OR IMPROVE THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF MILES BETWEEN ROAD CALLS

KEY DATA SOURCES

• Miles between road calls data from National Transit Database (NTD) (2015-2018)

42,750 MILES AVERAGE

2018

33,775 51,374

2017 2016 2015

51,251 34,601

Figure 16. AVERAGE NUMBER OF MILES BETWEEN BUS ROAD CALLS BY YEAR

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

MEASURE #2: PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX

The Pavement Condition Index (PCI) is a numerical index between 0 to 100, used to indicate the general condition of a pavement section, with 0 being the worst possible condition and 100 being the best. This performance measure monitors the condition of road surfaces, identifies maintenance and rehabilitation needs, and demonstrates when road maintenance is needed. The target for this metric was set to align with SB1 funding rules – jurisdictions with an average PCI of 80 gain the flexibility to direct certain funds to projects other than repaving. Figure 17 shows the percentage of roadway segments in Napa County in each condition category. Figure 18 maps the condition of each roadway segment.

BASELINE PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT

PCI SCORE FOR NAPA COUNTY: 58 a

TARGET

PCI SCORE FOR NAPA COUNTY: 80

KEY DATA SOURCES

• Pavement Condition Index at street level and at county level from MTC Vital Signs (2018) a

Reflects overall PCI for all Napa County jurisdictions

22%

FAIR/GOOD

AT RISK

42%

OF THE ROADS IN NAPA VALLEY HAVE EXCELLENT OR GOOD PAVEMENT CONDITION

VERY GOOD/ EXCELLENT

CONDITION (PCI RANGE)

29%

FAILED/POOR

FAILED/POOR (0–49) AT RISK (50–59) FAIR/GOOD (60–79) VERY GOOD/EXCELLENT (80–100)

Figure 17. PERCENT NAPA VALLEY ROADWAY SEGMENTS BY PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 18. STREET-LEVEL PAVEMENT CONDITION IN NAPA COUNTY

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Napa Valley Today

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN Acknowledging the unique needs of Communities of Concern is the first step to identify ways to fill the gaps in the transportation network and achieve equity in the services that NVTA provides to vulnerable populations. Communities of Concern are predominately communities that have concentrations of low income, minority, elderly, and/or disabled populations. Providing equitable transportation for these populations has been a priority in recent years and several efforts across the county aim to bridge the disparity that these populations experience. Many people that live in Communities of Concern are transit dependent. To adequately serve Communities of Concern, reliable transit service with connections to lifeline services and the regional transportation network is needed. A safe and connected pedestrian infrastructure creates easy access to those lifeline services. The 2018 MTC Communities of Concern are based on eight ACS 2012–2016 U.S. Census tract-level variables that include: y

Minorities (70 percent threshold)

Low-Income (less than 200 percent of the poverty level, 30 percent threshold)

Level of English Proficiency (12 percent threshold)

Seniors (10 percent threshold)

Zero-Vehicle Households (10 percent threshold)

Single-Parent Households (20 percent threshold)

People with Disabilities (12 percent threshold)

Rent-Burdened Households (15 percent threshold)

In Napa County, NVTA expanded upon MTC’s definition of Communities of Concern that are eligible for Community Based Transportation Planning (CBTP) grants. The local criteria for identifying Communities of Concern must include at least one of the following three demographic characteristics: income, age (youth or seniors), or disability. NVTA identified four additional census tracts that had higher concentrations than county averages, in all three factors. NVTA staff focused on low-income households, residents with disabilities, and senior residents. People living in neighborhoods of Communities of Concern are more likely to have a higher demand for alternative transportation modes, such as transit, bicycling, and walking.

A VINE TRANSIT PASSENGER AT THE SOSCOL GATEWAY TRANSIT CENTER.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 5 shows the eight socio-economic factors, or disadvantaged factors, that MTC considers when identifying Communities of Concern. The regional averages of those factors is defined by the term concentration threshold. If a community exceeds the concentration threshold then it qualifies as a Communities of Concern.

MTC recognized four Communities of Concern in Napa County in the 2017 Plan Bay Area Equity Analysis. In 2018, NVTA identified four additional Communities of Concern. MTC used data from the 2012-2016 American Community Survey (ACS) Five-Year Estimates in Communities of Concern Equity Analysis for the Bay Area.

Table 5. MTC COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN FRAMEWORK AND NAPA COUNTY POPULATION COMPARISON

Table 6 displays the Napa County Communities of Concern determined by MTC. These Communities of Concern may be

DISADVANTAGED FACTOR

BAY AREA REGIONAL

CONCENTRATION THRESHOLD

NAPA COUNTY

MINORITIES

58%

70%

46%

LOW INCOME

25%

30%

26%

L IMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY

12%

ZERO-VEHICLE HOUSEHOLD

10%

SENIORS: 75 YEARS+

10%

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

12%

11%

SINGLE-PARENT FAMILY

14%

20%

13%

SEVERELY RENT BURDENED

11%

15%

Source: MTC’s Communities of Concern Framework from GitHub (https://github.com/BayAreaMetro/Spatial-Analysis-Mapping-Projects/ tree/master/Project-Documentation/Communities-of-Concern)

of greater significance because the MTC defined Communities of Concern exceed the regionally determined concentration thresholds. A Communities of Concern is defined by a census tract that exceeds both concentration threshold values for low income and minorities or exceeds the concentration threshold value for low income and exceeds the threshold values for three or more other factors. As a part of the Community-Based Transportation Planning process, NVTA staff reviewed these same data points and criterion thresholds, which allowed NVTA to determine that Napa County has four additionally qualifying Communities of Concern. Table 7 shows these additional NVTA-determined, locally significant Communities of Concern.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 6. REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT NVTA COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN LEVEL OF GEOGRAPHY: COUNTY | COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN (CENSUS TRACT NUMBER) CONCENTRATION THRESHOLD

SOUTH DOWNTOWN (06055200202)

WESTWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD (06055200804)

EAST IMOLA (06055200900)

SOUTH ST. HELENA (06055201601)

MINORITIES

70%

50.2%

75.6%

46.8%

44.5%

LOW INCOME

30%

36.3%

41.9%

65.9%

40.5%

LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY

12%

10.2%

23.2%

0.8%

14.6%

ZERO-VEHICLE HOUSEHOLD

10%

17.9%

5.5%

73.3%

2.8%

SENIORS: 75 YEARS+

10%

3.1%

3.0%

4.7%

11.5%

PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES

12%

16.5%

7.4%

31.2%

9.9%

SINGLE-PARENT FAMILY

20%

27.8%

24.3%

0.00%

15.9%

SEVERELY RENT BURDENED

15%

16.6%

11.7%

13.3%

14.3%

DISADVANTAGED FACTOR

Source: NVTA Community-Based Transportation Plan Needs Assessment Table for monitoring

Table 7. NVTA COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN LEVEL OF GEOGRAPHY: COUNTY | COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN (CENSUS TRACT NUMBER)

NAPA VALLEY

VINTAGE NEIGHBORHOOD (06055200602)

LINDA VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD (06055200707)

UNINCORPORATED YOUNTVILLE (06055201200)

CITY OF CALISTOGA (06055202000)

26.3%

27.2%

22.6%

27.0%

37.7%

$74,609

$67,664

$73,293

$59,024

$60,534

RESIDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

11.1%

13.9%

12.7%

13.8%

16.5%

SENIOR RESIDENTS

7.5%

9.8%

11.5%

13.8%

9.3%

RENT-BURDENED HOUSEHOLDS

8.2%

8.5%

20.4%

3.7%

6.2%

RESIDENTS WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY

8.8%

4.8%

3.4%

11.2%

24.1%

DISADVANTAGED FACTOR

LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME

Source: NVTA Community-Based Transportation Plan Needs Assessment Table for monitoring

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 19. NAPA COUNTY COMMUNITIES OF CONCERN

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

NVTA will continue to monitor geographic areas exhibiting higher concentrations of disadvantaged factors. Understanding where Napa County households are financially struggling is important, but compounding issues like limited English proficiency and/or no vehicles available can create additional mobility challenges for these residents. NVTA has embraced the community-based transportation planning process to understand mobility gaps and better serve under-represented communities. As noted, there are eight eligible Communities of Concern in Napa County using 2016 ACS Five-Year Estimates from MTC’s Communities of Concern Framework and the NVTAdetermined Communities of Concern methodology. Napa County census tracts show higher rates of characteristics associated with Communities of Concern. In order of significance:

To be eligible to receive MTC’s Lifeline Program funds, counties are required to develop a CBTP to identify and prioritize transportation needs in Communities of Concern. NVTA adopted the latest CBTP in July 2020. NVTA staff conducted an extensive outreach process to the eight identified Communities of Concern and identified transportation needs and projects for each community. NVTA also convened a steering committee comprised of community and non-profit members who provided input on the outreach approach and assisted in the CBTP project evaluation process. Programmatic themes and projects identified during the CBTP process can be found in Tables 8 and 9. Project considerations included in Advancing Mobility 2045 that respond to Communities of Concern needs: y

Expanding transit (Rapid Bus improvements on SR 29, extended service and expanded hours)

1. Persons with disabilities (C18108) at 11 percent compared to Bay Area average nine percent

Supporting Complete Streets efforts

Improving access to transit and schools

2. Seniors over the age of 75 (S0101) at seven percent compared to six percent

Expanding shared vehicle and bicycle programs

Building out the active transportation network

Supporting van and carpooling

Supporting programs that subsidize Communities of Concern needs

3. Low-income households (C17002) at 26 percent compared to 25 percent 4. Limited English proficiency (B16005) in Napa County is approximately the same proportion of the population at nine percent MTC has multiple planning and programming initiatives that support mobility in low-income communities, communities of concern, and other disadvantaged populations. MTC gives special consideration to the equity-related impacts of specific projects, with specific attention given to the “relationship between the spatial distribution of Plan investments and minority communities.”

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 8. COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLAN RECOMMENDED PROGRAMMATIC THEMES PROGRAM THEME

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN SAFETY

Improve pedestrian conditions to reduce traffic collisions and increase safety

PROJECT EXAMPLES

• High visibility Pedestrian crosswalks • Pedestrian crossing warning signage • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons • Leading Pedestrian Intervals • R epair and improve sidewalks around schools and transit stops

IMPROVE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO SCHOOLS AND TRANSIT

Improve, maintain, and repair pedestrian facilities around schools and transit stops to enable and encourage pedestrian mobility, walkability, and active forms of transportation

• C omplete sidewalk paths and missing links bridging network gaps around schools and transit stops • H igh visibility pedestrian crosswalks around schools and transit stops • P edestrian crossing warning signage around schools and transit stops • R ectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons around schools and transit stops • New sidewalks around schools and transit stops

IMPROVE TRANSPORTATION OPTIONS TO HEALTHCARE

Increase and promote transportation options to and around healthcare facilities

EXPAND MOBILITY OPTIONS FOR LOW-INCOME, SENIOR, AND DISABLED RESIDENTS

Introduce enhancements that improve service for residents of Communities of Concern

INCREASE LOCAL TRANSIT EVENING FREQUENCIES

Increase local transit frequencies into the evening hours serving higher frequency job centers

INCREASE TRANSIT AMENITIES

Increase while maintaining transitrelated amenities, like benches, shelters, restrooms, and pedestrian and bicycle facilities, to enable and encourage a significant Napa County transit mode shift

DECREASE TRANSIT FARES FOR LOW-INCOME INDIVIDUALS

Adapt policies and programs to lessen the financial burden of transit costs on low-income persons

INCREASE TRANSIT ADA ACCESS

Increase transit service enhancements that improve service for persons with disabilities

Source: Napa Valley Community-Based Transportation Plan

• N ew bus routes, connections, extended service hours • Bus stop amenities • Education and outreach activities • N ew bus routes, connections, extended service hours • Bus stop amenities • Education and outreach activities

• Extend transit service hours

• New bus stop benches, shelters • Secure bicycle parking

• E xpand free transit program from 85+ persons to 65+ • Expand mobility programs like TaxiScrip • New ADA curb ramps • New ADA transit amenities • High visibility Pedestrian crosswalks • Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 9. COMMUNITY-BASED TRANSPORTATION PLAN PROJECTS AND RANKINGS PROJECT NUMBER

ESTIMATED COSTS

BENEFIT

IMPLEMENTATION TIMELINE

STATUS

City of Napa

$350,000

Safety; Reduced Emissions; Improved Mobility; Improved Health Outcomes

Long-term

Identified

Enhanced pedestrian Crossing/RRFB on Trancas Street at Valle Verde Drive

City of Napa

75,000

Safety; Improved Mobility

Medium-term

Identified

Enhanced pedestrian crossing/RRFB at Jefferson Street and Rubicon Street

City of Napa

125,000

Safety; Improved Mobility

Medium-term

Identified

Enhanced pedestrian crossing at Jefferson Street and El Capitan Way

City of Napa

100,000

Safety; Improved Mobility; Improved school access

Medium-term

Identified

Bus shelter/benches at high usage stops

NVTA

250,000

Safety; Reduced Emissions; Improved Mobility

Medium-term

Identified

Hunt Ave Sidewalks/ Pedestrian improvements

City of Saint Helena

TBD

Safety; Improved Mobility

short-term

Underway

Pope Avenue Sidewalks/Pedestrian and Lighting improvements

City of Saint Helena

TBD

Safety; Improved Mobility

Medium-term

Identified

Expanded evening hours on local transit

NVTA

$200,000/ year

Reduced Emissions; Improved Mobility

Medium-term

Identified

Expanded TaxiScrip and Commute Options

NVTA

$25,000/ year

Reduced Emissions; Improved Mobility

Medium-term

Identified

Transit service from Saint Helena to Angwin and Saint Helena Hospital

NVTA; P3

$80,000/ year

Safety; Reduced Emissions; Improved Mobility; Improved Health Outcomes

Long-term

Identified

Transit service from Calistoga to Santa Rosa medical facilities like Kaiser and Sutter

NVTA; P3

$195,000/ year

Safety; Reduced Emissions; Improved Mobility; Improved Health Outcomes

Long-term

Identified

PROPOSAL

SPONSOR

Bicycle facility on Trancas Street from Jefferson Street to Soscol Avenue

*Project complete

Short-term: 1-2 years

Mid-term: 3-5 years

Source: Napa Valley Community Based Transportation Plan

Long-term: 6 or more years

PROJECT RANK

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

HOW WE LIVE AND WORK Transportation and the economy are intricately intertwined. The economy is a complex, multi-layered, and frequently unpredictable system in which our local circumstance is vitally dependent on influences at the regional, state, national, and global scales. A reliable transportation infrastructure is necessary for a healthy economy and is dependent on the efficient movement of people and goods. Perhaps the best single description of Napa County’s economy can be found in the County General Plan’s Economic Development element, which states “Napa County’s economy is based on agriculture, and in particular a highly specialized form of agriculture: grape-growing and wine-making. In addition, the county’s wineries draw visitors from California and beyond, creating a strong secondary economy in the form of tourism and hospitality.”1 In fact, the agriculture, wine, and

9% 16%

13%

tourism sectors account for nearly half of all employment in the County and directly affects the County’s fundamental economic health. Because the local economy is based so strongly on non-essential products—wine and tourism—it is influenced by the volatility of the regional, national, and global economy. It is also primarily dependent on a relatively high availability of discretionary spending. Napa’s economy is heavily influenced by the manufacturing and agricultural sectors, and the hospitality industry has grown up to support the wine sector and its globally recognized brand. Napa is the singular remaining Bay Area county for which agriculture is the top industry. Restaurants and hotels are abundant in Napa and are dependent on sustaining Napa Valley’s agricultural and open space, and the production of great wines. Tourism, spa and wellness, and retail stores are also heavily dependent on wine production and agriculture. The wine and tourism industries alone account for nearly 40 percent of the local labor force. Government, health care, education, construction, and retail businesses make up the balance of Napa’s economy and are necessary to support these industries and the people who live and work in Napa County.

47%

ACCOMMODATION AND FOOD SERVICES ADMINISTRATIVE/ SUPPORT AND WASTE MANAGEMENT/ REMEDIATION SERVICES ARTS, ENTERTAINMENT, AND RECREATION: 1% EDUCATIONAL SERVICES: <1% HEALTH CARE AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE

OTHER SERVICES (EXCEPT PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION): 2% PROFESSIONAL, SCIENTIFIC, AND TECHNICAL SERVICES: 3% REAL ESTATE AND RENTAL/LEASING: 2% RETAIL TRADE TRANSPORTATION AND WAREHOUSING: 3%

MANUFACTURING

Source: Economic Census of the United States Table EC1700BASIC for Napa County Figure 20. NAPA COUNTY'S ANNUAL PERCENTAGE OF SALES, SHIPMENTS, OR REVENUE BY SECTOR

Napa County Department of Conservation, Development & Planning, Napa County General Plan (2008).

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

KEY INDUSTRIES AND SECTORS THE NAPA VALLEY WINE INDUSTRY

The Napa wine industry includes both Napa Valley-branded wines from grapes grown in Napa, as well as other wines produced in Napa Valley from grapes shipped into the County from other regions. The total retail value of all the wine produced in Napa County, over 24 million cases, including wholesale, direct-to-consumer, and export sales, has been estimated at $10.5 billion annually, representing 17.6 percent of the retail value and 6 percent of the volume (cases) of all the wine sold in the U.S.

Including the industries that support this workforce, the Napa Valley wine industry has a major impact on local employment, resulting in 43,967 jobs countywide and a total annual local economic impact of more than $9.4 billion. The typical method of vineyard cultivation in Napa is particularly labor intensive and vineyard workers will on average tend each vine more than twenty times during the year—far more than most grape-growing regions. This approach promotes more year-round employment of agricultural workers in Napa.

More than 10,000 jobs in Napa’s labor force are directly related to the agricultural and wine production industry. Table 10 shows the most recent breakdown of employment associated with this industry. In addition to more than 8,000 jobs in “Wine-Related Tourism Including Restaurant & Retail,” Napa also has an additional 4,226 “Vineyard” jobs and 3,393 in “Supplier” jobs. Most of these are likely in industries that support the wine sector, including bottles, corks, equipment, wine shipping, storage, etc.2 VINEYARD WORKERS HARVESTING GRAPES.

U.S. TOTAL: $33.5B CALIFORNIA TOTAL: $17.2B NAPA VALLEY TOTAL: $9.4B

Source: Stonebridge Research Group, LLC. 2017 Figure 21. ECONOMIC IMPACT OF NAPA COUNTY'S WINE INDUSTRY

Information in this section is derived from the Stonebridge Research Group, LLC. 2017, The Economic Impact of Napa County’s Wine and Grapes, 2016.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 11. EMPLOYMENT IMPACT OF NAPA COUNTY RELATED WINE AND GRAPES NAPA COUNTY FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES

CALIFORNIA FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES

U.S. FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES

TOTAL DIRECT JOBS

10,578

12,936

13,116

WINE-RELATED TOURISM INCLUDING RESTAURANT & RETAIL

8,682

VINEYARD

4,226

6,468

SECTOR

DISTRIBUTORS

300

857

4,180

3-TIER (RESTAURANT & RETAIL)

130

12,900

76,981

3,393

6,419

7,249

661

2,249

3,398

OTHER INDIRECT

7,651

10,985

26,221

TOTAL INDIRECT

25,042

48,558

133,178

8,347

13,633

42,258

43,967

75,127

88,552

SUPPLIERS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES, EDUCATION, AND ASSOCIATION

INDUCED TOTAL

Note: California Totals include Napa; US totals includes all California. Source: Stonebridge Research Group, LLC.

TOURISM AND HOSPITALITY

The Napa Valley attracts nearly four million visitors annually (almost five million visitor days). 3 About 62 percent of visitors come for a one-day visit and most are from California. Over 1.2 million visitors stay overnight. In 2018, visitors generated $2.23 billion in direct spending into the local economy. The largest component of visitor spending was retail sales, which includes both wine and food. The next largest sector is lodging. To support visitor and tourism activity in 2018, an estimated 15,900 employees worked in restaurants,

hotels, and entertainment and sightseeing, with a payroll of $492 million and local tax revenue of $71.4 million, dominated by hotel tax. Many of the jobs in the agriculture and hospitality sector are relatively low paid. This is a significant factor for policy, transportation, and land use. The high cost of housing forces many workers to commute from neighboring counties where housing is more affordable, causing congestion on roadways in Napa Valley and other adjacent counties.

Information in this section is derived from the Destination Analysts. Visit Napa Valley, 2018, Napa Valley Visitor Industry 2018 Economic Impact Report.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

LOCAL GOVERNMENT

RETAIL TRADE

The government sector accounts for nine percent of the local labor force and includes significant employment at the Napa State Hospital (over 2,000 people counted as State Government employees), and several local school districts (3,200 people). Napa County employs 1,500 and Napa County’s cities, town, and special districts employ 900 people.

The retail sector provides critical support for the community and employs 6,600 people. This is also a relatively low wage job sector. Table 11 shows employment by industry and the percentage change since the last Countywide Transportation Plan.

HEALTH CARE

The health care sector in Napa County is comprised of major care providers, such as Queen of the Valley Hospital, St. Helena Hospital, Kaiser Permanente, and Clinic Ole. This sector employs 8,300 people, and includes many high wage occupations. Table 12. NAPA METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT AND LABOR FORCE SECTOR

2014

2019

PERCENTAGE CHANGE

GOODS PRODUCING

15,800

18,300

15.8%

LEISURE AND HOSPITALITY

12,000

14,000

16.7%

TRADE, TRANSPORTATION, AND UTILITIES

10,200

10,700

4.9%

EDUCATION AND HEALTH SERVICES

10,000

10,700

7.0%

GOVERNMENT

10,000

10,500

5.0%

PROFESSIONAL AND BUSINESS SERVICES

6,700

7,400

10.4%

FARMING

2,800

4,100

46.4%

FINANCIAL ACTIVITIES

2,300

2,200

-4.3%

OTHER SERVICES

2,000

2,100

5.0%

500

300

-40.0%

72,300

80,300

11.1%

INFORMATION TOTAL FOR ALL INDUSTRIES

Source: California Employment Development Department. Historical Industry Employment & Labor Force – comparison of historical data for November 2014 and November 2019.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

GENERAL ECONOMIC TRENDS AND INDICATORS IMPACT OF THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

One of the lasting effects of the pandemic is increased telecommuting. A survey reported by the Brookings Institution found that nearly one in five chief financial officers plan to keep at least 20 percent of their workforce working remotely.4 Stanford’s Institute for Economic Policy Research found that during May 2020, after the COVID-19 shutdown, 42 percent of Americans were working from home. For the 42 percent working from home, 58 percent had previously worked in a city. These workers who were previously commuting into work were spending money on transportation, cars, gas, transit, shops, and restaurants. Without the influx of workers into cities, the economy and many businesses are feeling the impact of telecommuting. Commuting to work has seen a big reduction since the pandemic began. The Bay Area experienced a decline of 40 percent vehicle miles traveled during the height of the pandemic, which resulted in congestion reduction by 80 percent.5 Due to pandemic regulations to socially distance, restaurants faced reduced capacity challenges with indoor dining and took their business outdoors, taking over sidewalks and parking to increase their seating capacity. The National Association of City Transportation Officials released a guide to convert curbside parking into “vibrant community spaces.” To assist restaurants in the City of Napa, the Napa Downtown Property and Business Improvement District set aside $140,000 for a parklet grant program, awarding $5,000 for each parking space. While the parklet trend was forced upon jurisdictions and restaurants by the on-going

pandemic, it is a practice that planners have been visibly proposing and advancing for over a decade. This could be another lasting outcome from the pandemic where restaurant and shops expand into the public right-of-way and reshape and repurpose the street landscape to foster a more vibrant outdoor dining and shopping scene. The pandemic revealed a great disparity among American workers, and ultimately, American socioeconomic classes. In May 2020, 42 percent of the U.S., roughly 70 million people were working from home, 26 percent continued to work on-site, and the remaining 33 percent were unemployed.6 Working from home is not an option for many low-wage workers, such as restaurant and service employees. People working blue-collar jobs, such as manufacturing, construction, nursing, retail, and food service, are required to work on location. The shift to working from home is disproportionately affecting workers in Napa since much of the Napa County economy is highly reliant on tourism and dining, and a large portion of the Napa County workforce is in the food service industry. In 2019, there were 7,600 workers in Napa County work in the food service sector, making up 9.5 percent of the Napa County workforce. A study from the University of Chicago discovered that people who had jobs that were harder to perform at home had lower incomes and wealth, and were more likely to be non-White, than those who had jobs that could more easily be done remotely. Consequently, there is a possibility that this economic gap will become greater postpandemic with wealthier, White people working from home, while disproportionate numbers of lower income and people of color work on-location. This is reflected in the food and hospitality industry throughout Napa County.

Guyot, Katherine and Isabel V. Sawhill. "Telecommuting Will Likely Continue Long After the Pandemic." Brookings Institute, April 2020, https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/04/06/telecommuting-will-likely-continue-long-after-the-pandemic/ 5 Institute of Transportation Engineers. “COVID-19 Traffic Volume Trends.” Institute of Transportation Engineers, www.ite.org/about-ite/covid-19-resources/covid-19-traffic-volume-trends/. 6 Bloom, Nicholas. How Working from Home Works Out. Stanford Institute for Policy Research, 1 June 2020, siepr.stanford.edu/research/publications/how-working-home-works-out. 4

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

NAPA COUNTY COST OF LIVING

The high cost of housing and corresponding low housing supply is making it increasingly difficult for Napa’s low-income workers and low-income families to find housing in Napa. The Insight Center, a national racial and economic justice organization, published a detailed cost of living calculator for California counties that calculates a self-sufficiency standard (SSS).7 The self-sufficiency standard for Napa County is reflected in Table 12. Table 10. NAPA COUNTY SELF-SUFFICIENCY STANDARD (2018) FAMILY TYPE

SINGLE, NO CHILDREN

STANDARD

$31,341

TWO ADULTS, NO CHILDREN

$43,603

TWO ADULTS, TWO CHILDREN (ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AGE)

$75,065

TWO ADULTS, TWO CHILDREN (ONE INFANT, ONE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AGE)

$85,739

Source: Insight Center, 2018.

These figures include costs for local housing, transportation, food, childcare and healthcare costs, and factor in available tax credits. According to the California Center for Community Economic Development, over 27 percent of Napa County’s population is currently living below the SSS, and over 43 percent of families with children are below the SSS. Note that, these calculations assume a monthly housing cost of between $1,196 and $1,575 (depending on household characteristics) which is significantly below the actual current housing costs in Napa County with median rent at $1,621 and median monthly mortgage at $2,526.8

ECONOMIC DISRUPTION CAUSED BY THE CORONAVIRUS PANDEMIC

Since early 2020, the coronavirus pandemic has caused major disruptions to the local economy. Many businesses closed completely from March to June 2020. Retail sales shifted to on-line sales forcing some brick and mortar stores to close permanently. Napa’s hospitality industry experienced a 45.8 percent drop in hotel occupancy between January and July 2020. Through the first six months of 2020 in California, the number of individual hotel sales declined by 21 percent, the total dollar volume was down by over 53 percent. The Sonoma State University Wine Business Institute reports that California’s wine industry is projected to lose $4.2 billion in revenues in 2020, based on significant decreases in on-premise, tasting room, and direct sales. This is coupled with 16,369 direct job losses and 26,007 indirect job losses. The $4.2 billion loss in business revenues may generate a tax loss of $586 million for state and local governments in 2020. The Napa hospitality industry is not expecting wine country tourism numbers to return to pre-pandemic levels until 2022. Significant declines in local sales tax revenues have caused cities to make drastic budget cuts. The City of Napa is projecting a 20 percent decrease in general fund revenues for fiscal year 2020-21. The recent pandemic has demonstrated how dependent the local economy is on Napa Wine and Hospitality industries. As the economy in Napa has moved towards a full opening, early revenue declines were not sustained, and instead, projections may not be as grim as originally expected. Initial sales tax estimates indicated that revenue generations would be 15 to 25 percent less than the previous year. The actual revenue decline was less than 10 percent from prior year generations. Still, the recession is hitting some community members harder than others. Many hourly wage positions have disappeared. Napa median household income is significantly below the Bay Area average, which may be a marker that the county could experience a deeper and longer economic decline than other parts of the region and the state.

Insight Center. Family Needs Calculator (Formerly the Self-Sufficiency Standard). 2018, insightcced.org/2018-family-needs-calculator/. “U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts: Napa County, California.” Census Bureau QuickFacts, 2019, www.census.gov/quickfacts/napacountycalifornia.

7 8

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

NAPA JOB AND EMPLOYMENT PROFILE AND FORECASTS The California Employment Development Division reported that there were 72,900 jobs in Napa County in June 2020.9 Not surprisingly, almost a third of these jobs are in leisure and hospitality, and in manufacturing. Winemaking is classified as manufacturing by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Agriculture makes up nearly 7 percent of the total jobs, which is more than twice the national average. Almost 13 percent of the jobs in Napa are in leisure and hospitality. Nationally, leisure and hospitality accounts for just over 10 percent. The Employment Development Department reports 10-year employment projections from 2016 to 2026,10 estimating the changes in industry and occupational employment over time as a result of industry growth. The top five fastest-growing sectors per the Industry and Occupational Employment Projections report11 are described below and their wages are compared with the self-sufficiency standard. 1. ACCOMMODATIONS AND FOOD SERVICE: This

category includes nearly 60 specific job descriptions, including waiters, cooks and food preparation workers (e.g. fast food workers, bakers and bartenders), maids, housekeeping cleaners and janitors, hosts/hostesses, counter attendants, and cashiers. This category also includes massage therapists, recreation workers, and dry cleaners employed in the hospitality industry. The current employment in Napa County for this sector is 12,400 and annual median earnings are at $27,392. The average of the median wage for this category is still below the SSS for a single person in Napa.

2. MANUFACTURING: This sector, with nearly 200 distinct

job descriptions, currently has the largest number of employees in Napa County and will account for the second fastest-growing sector. The top 10 occupations, accounting for 30 percent of the total, include packaging machine operators (in Napa County mostly wineries), sales representatives, general managers, demonstrators and promoters (tasting rooms), laborers and material movers (wineries), and production workers. Napa County’s current employment for this sector is 13,200. Manufacturing is expected to grow by 11 percent from 2018 to 2026. This sector has an average median wage of $20.62 per hour or $42,897 per year. This amount is sufficient to meet the minimum income for a single person but is insufficient to support a family. 3. HEALTH CARE AND SOCIAL ASSISTANCE: With

over 8,500 jobs in Napa County this category is another major employment sector, accounting for nearly 150 job descriptions including medical personnel of all kinds, clerks and receptionists, preschool teachers, and social service workers. This is a relatively high paying sector, with the average median wage for the top occupations (including nurses, general managers, and dental technicians) at $53.00 per hour or $110,244 per year. The projected growth in this sector is seven percent from 2016 to 2026. 4. RETAIL TRADE: There are currently 6,300 retail trade

jobs in Napa County, a category that encompasses over 100 job descriptions, mainly retail salespersons, cashiers, stock and order fillers, managers, and laborers. Although this sector has seen a decline in the past year, expected overall growth in population will continue to stimulate

California Employment Development Department. “Industry Employment & Labor Force - by MONTH.” California Employment Development Department, Sept. 2020. www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/employment-by-industry.html 10 Department, Employment Development. Employment Projections, California Employment Development Department, 2020, www.labormarketinfo.edd. ca.gov/data/employment-projections.html. 11 North Bay Employment Connection. Workforce Alliance of the North Bay, 2014, Industry & Occupational Employment Projections: A Supplement to the Occupational Outlook Report for the North Bay Counties, 2014, www.workforcealliancenorthbay.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/NorthBay_IndustryOccupationalEmploymentProjections. 9

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

growth in this sector, expected at 3 percent between 2016 and 2026. The occupations in this sector earn an average median salary of $17.45 per hour or $36,291 per year. 5. ADMINISTRATIVE AND SUPPORT AND WASTE MANAGEMENT: With 4,000 workers in Napa County, this sector includes over 100 job descriptions, including janitors, landscapers and groundskeepers, security guards, laborers, general clerks, secretaries, bookkeepers and accountants, and numerous other miscellaneous jobs. It completes the list of the five fastest-growing job sectors. The average median wage of this category is $19.91 per hour or $41,415 per year, still insufficient to meet the selfsufficiency standard wages for a family in Napa County.

To put these details in the larger perspective, employment projections by the Association of Bay Area Governments12 expected Napa County employment to grow to 70,880 by 2015. The most recent reports from the State of California Employment Development Division indicate that the actual county job growth has far outpaced that rate with an employment base of 72,900, a level not previously expected to be reached for several more years. The MTC projects another 12,700 jobs over the next 20 years, which would mean Napa County, may see employment levels as high as 88,000 jobs by the end of the CTP planning horizon. NAPA HOUSING PROFILE AND FORECASTS As one of the nation’s premier destinations, coupled with minimal new housing starts, it is not surprising that Napa County has much higher housing costs than state and national averages. The Agriculture Preserve and the consequence of limiting growth have placed a premium on desirable home locations and have made it challenging to build housing to

accommodate lower income workers. Reflecting this basic setting, median house prices in Napa County, as of July 2020, were just under $782,50013 reflecting an increase in the past year of 13 percent. The California Association of Realtors has established a Housing Affordability Index that measures the percent of households that can afford a median-priced home. For California as a whole, the index is 30 percent for single-family homes, and 39 percent for condominiums and townhomes. In the San Francisco Bay Area, this drops to 21 percent, and for Napa County, it is also 21 percent. On the rental front, the picture is equally bleak, reflecting a national trend. A Harvard study observes that “significant erosion in renter incomes over the past decade has pushed the number of households paying excessive shares of income for housing to record levels…assistance efforts have failed to keep pace with this escalating need, undermining the nation’s longstanding goal of ensuring decent and affordable housing for all.”14 TRANSPORTATION IMPLICATIONS – MORE COMMUTE TRAFFIC One of the primary implications of the jobs and housing profiles is that the growing Napa County workforce will need to find housing in more affordable areas. Conversely, residents that wish to live in Napa County are likely to seek higher paying jobs elsewhere. This will force low-income workers to commute from neighboring, more affordable communities, such as Solano, Contra Costa, Lake, and Sonoma Counties. The Napa Valley Travel Behavior Study reported 22,900 commute trips into Napa County for work including 12,800 from Solano County. Tables 13 summarizes where Napa County workers live.

“Plan Bay Area 2040 Projections 2040; Forecasts for Population, Household and Employment for the Nine County San Francisco Bay Area Region.” Association of Bay Area Governments, 2017. http://projections.planbayarea.org/ 13 “Current Sales & Price Statistics.” California Association of Realtors, 2020. 14 “Harvard University Joint Center for Housing Studies, 2013, America's Rental Housing; Evolving Markets and Needs, www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/jchs.harvard.edu/files/jchs_americas_rental_housing_2013_1_0.pdf. 12

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Looking at the Napa County residents who commute out of the county for work, similar data indicates that over 16,000 local residents leave the county daily. Table 14 summarizes where Napa residents work.

Table 13. WHERE WORKERS IN NAPA COUNTY LIVE

Table 14. WHERE NAPA COUNTY’S RESIDENTS WORK

TOTAL NUMBER OF WORKERS

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL WORKERS

TOTAL NUMBER OF WORKERS

PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL WORKERS

NAPA COUNTY

55,200

69%

NAPA COUNTY

57,800

77%

SOLANO COUNTY

12,800

16%

SOLANO COUNTY

5,000

6.6%

SONOMA COUNTY

4,800

SONOMA COUNTY

2,700

3.6%

LAKE COUNTY

1,800

2.3%

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

2,100

2.8%

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY

1,800

2.2%

SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY

2,000

2.7%

MARIN COUNTY

500

0.6%

MARIN COUNTY

1,500

2.0%

SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY

300

0.4%

ALAMEDA COUNTY

1,200

1.6%

SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY

300

0.4%

SAN MATEO COUNTY

600

0.8%

SACRAMENTO COUNTY

300

0.4%

SANTA CLARA COUNTY

500

0.7%

ALAMEDA COUNTY

300

0.4%

SACRAMENTO COUNTY

500

0.7%

PLACE OF RESIDENCE

Source: Napa Valley Travel Behavior Study, Napa Valley Transportation Authority, 2020. www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

WORKPLACE LOCATION

Source: Napa Valley Travel Behavior Study, Napa Valley Transportation Authority, 2020. www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Building affordable housing for lower income workers and diversifying Napa’s economic base to offer higher paying jobs are the most logical solutions to the mismatch of income and housing affordability in Napa Valley, but there are immense hurdles to accomplish this. Developers that build expensive housing and commercial development receive significantly greater financial rewards than developers that build affordable housing. Municipalities also garner a much higher tax base by encouraging more expensive housing and commercial developments. Nevertheless, California mandates that jurisdictions create new housing through a process called the Regional Housing Need Allocation. Every eight years, the state identifies the number and types of housing that is needed based on population growth and demographics. Regional governments work with their city or county jurisdictions to develop a methodology for distributing that housing around the region. Each jurisdiction receives a total housing target and housing targets for low income and very low income.

THE VALLEY VIEW AFFORDABLE SENIOR HOUSING COMPLEX IN AMERICAN CANYON.

As the housing crisis in California grows, there has been a lot more focus on building housing to meet the needs of homeless and low-income workers by state, regional, and local governments. The state budget has included funding for grants to build affordable housing, and the MTC and Association of Bay Area Governments are looking at innovative ways to incentivize housing production and identify new revenue sources to solve the housing crisis. There has been a lot of pushback by residents to minimize growth and to prevent affordable housing developments in certain neighborhoods around the region. In Napa, the agricultural preserve has limited growth outside the urban growth boundaries. There is also a prevailing sentiment to maintain Napa’s rural landscape since it is an essential element in the promotion of the wine industry and tourism in the Valley. Most employers and many residents, as well as local governments, recognize the benefits of housing Napa’s work force. Creating a more diverse economy is also challenging. Employers look at affordable land, housing, government incentives, and good transportation infrastructure to both move workers and freight. Napa is relatively remote to other large cities in the central Bay Area and is one of the most expensive counties in which to buy land. On the other hand, Napa has two colleges that can foster entrepreneurial opportunities if the transportation infrastructure is available to support a new industry. The aim is to attract new office parks, tech incubators, biotech firms, manufacturing plants and distribution centers to Napa County.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

HOW WE TRANSPORT How We Live and Work provided an overview of Napa’s economy and highlighted the wine industry and associated tourism as the dominant economic activity in Napa County. It also examined the movement of the labor force for the county’s primary industries. The production of wine also involves the movement of materials needed to bottle and package wines, as well as output the final product. This section will summarize how freight moves in, out, and around Napa Valley, discuss the impact of congestion on trade, and identify strategies to improve goods movement. In addition to the wine and tourism industry, Napa County’s residents rely on the daily deliveries of a broad spectrum of consumer goods. The vast majority of food, clothing, shelter, household, and other goods consumed by local residents must be imported into the county, mostly by trucks, along its highway and road infrastructure. Further, the goods necessary to support Napa County’s numerous businesses, including supplies for lodging and restaurants, must also arrive by truck. In addition, all of the waste materials from these enterprises have to be transported to recycling facilities, composting yards, or landfills.

OUTBOUND 16,657

INTRA 111

INBOUND 10,030

COMMUTE TRAFFIC AT SOSCOL JUNCTION.

Source: Freight Analysis Framework 2018 Projections and DKS Associates. Figure 22. FREIGHT FLOW IN NAPA VALLEY 2018 (THOUSANDS OF TONS)

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Congestion associated with freight movement is likely to increase in the future due to the growing trends in consumer behavior and online purchasing. Online ordering of goods for home delivery continues to increase, a trend that has accelerated significantly during the 2020 pandemic. This may require careful management of curb space for deliveries in urban areas and a greater number of distribution hubs. The study of goods movement as a significant transportation issue has received considerable attention in recent years. In 2016, MTC published its San Francisco Bay Area Goods Movement Plan15 followed by a Northern California Megaregion Goods Movement Study.16 However, neither of these studies reported on goods movement in Napa County in detail. The following sections characterize goods movement in Napa County based on data drawn from the Federal Highway Administration’s Freight Analysis Framework. FREIGHT FLOWS The flow of freight can be viewed from several perspectives. Looking at freight flows by the direction of movement reveals three primary categories: 1.

INTRA COUNTY SHORT HAUL SHIPMENTS:

Including movements among manufacturers, local warehouse and distribution facilities, and retailers and wholesalers Including both domestic and foreign inbound materials

INBOUND FLOWS:

Comprised of goods produced by local manufacturers

A freight flow assessment was performed using projected 2018 flows from the Freight Analysis Framework (FAF) to estimate the goods flow by shipment weight and by shipment value. Freight flows from the FAF representing the nine county Bay Area were disaggregated to the county level by applying employment-based factors.17 BAY AREA COUNTIES FREIGHT FLOWS BY TONNAGE, 2018 The proportion of freight flows by weight that move into, out of, and within Napa County is fairly comparable to other Bay Area counties, as shown in Figure 20. Overall, for the Bay Area, 26 percent of freight flows by weight are outbound, 28 percent are inbound, and 47 percent are internal. In comparison, Napa County freight is moving outbound from the County at much higher proportions. Of the 26,798 tons of materials moving annually, 62 percent is outbound, 37 percent inbound, and only one percent internal to the county. BAY AREA COUNTIES FREIGHT FLOWS BY VALUE, 2018 Looking at the same flows by value, the picture is even clearer, with outbound freight accounting for 63 percent of the value, inbound for 36 percent and interior flows less than one percent. This reflects the relatively high value of products shipped from Napa, which is a characteristic shared by the entire Bay Area, as shown in Figure 24.

OUTBOUND FLOWS:

Metropolitan Transportation Commission. San Francisco Bay Area Goods Movement Plan Metropolitan Transportation Commission. Northern California Megaregion Goods Movement Study (June 2019) 17 For more information, see Appendix B (Freight Flow Analyses) 15 16

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

140,000

THOUSANDS OF TONS

120,000 100,000 80,000 60,000 40,000 20,000 0 ALAMEDA

CONTRA COSTA

MARIN

NAPA

SAN FRANCISCO

SAN MATEO

SANTA CLARA

SOLANO

SONOMA

INTRA

8,022

2,606

227

111

2,759

2,124

11,416

413

844

INBOUND

48,971

31,757

10,464

10,030

31,855

27,601

64,080

13,384

21,883

OUTBOUND

26,614

24,841

7,577

16,657

25,175

26,484

54,346

15,275

30,017

Source: Freight Analysis Framework 2018 Data (FAF4: Version 4.5.1); Analysis by DKS Associates Figure 23. BAY AREA COUNTIES FREIGHT FLOW BY SHIPMENT WEIGHT, 2018

250,000

MILLIONS OF DOLLARS

100,000

150,000

100,000

50,000

0 ALAMEDA

CONTRA COSTA

MARIN

NAPA

SAN FRANCISCO

SAN MATEO

SANTA CLARA

SOLANO

SONOMA

7,219

2,038

180

134

2,365

1,923

11,631

364

883

INBOUND

93,140

46,027

14,429

8,613

49,687

42,780

113,230

19,054

26,089

OUTBOUND

99,057

39,060

11,458

14,883

45,205

43,988

110,352

20,696

33,678

INTRA

Source: Freight Analysis Framework 2018 Data (FAF4: Version 4.5.1); Analysis by DKS Associates Figure 24. BAY AREA COUNTIES FREIGHT FLOW BY SHIPMENT VALUE, 2018

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

NAPA COUNTY FREIGHT FLOWS BY INDUSTRY, 2018

FREIGHT FLOW BY MODE

In Napa County, freight transport is needed for many types of commerce, including these key industries: y

Farming

Mining, logging, and construction

Manufacturing, wholesale, and retail trade

Transportation, warehousing, and utilities

Predictably, the large majority of outbound goods are from the farming sector, followed by mining, logging and construction, as shown in Figure 25. Farming is also among the biggest importer of goods, which could be linked to the import of farming supplies and equipment. In terms of value of goods, once again farming produces the highest value for outbound flow. This is closely followed by manufacturing and trade which also imports a big value of inbound goods. These findings are outlined in Figure 26.

The FAF also provides data on how freight transport is distributed among various modes: truck, rail, water, air, pipeline, and multiple. Predictably the large majority (62 percent by weight and 66 percent by value) of regional freight moves by truck. Because Napa County lacks substantial rail, air, or water transportation systems, freight moves almost entirely by truck. Nonetheless, California Northern Railway maintains infrastructure for rail shipments to and from Napa County, while the concentration of wine industry warehousing continues to grow along the rail alignments in the southern portion of the County and in the City of American Canyon. The limited highway throughput east and west between Solano, Napa, and Sonoma Counties, where the rail freight alignment operates, provides opportunities for warehousing expansion adjacent to the rail line in American Canyon.

17,500

THOUSANDS OF TONS

15,000 12,500 10,000 7,500 5,000 2,500 0 TOTAL FARM

MINING, LOGGING, AND CONSTRUCTION

MANUFACTURING, WHOLESALE TRADE, RETAIL TRADE

TRANSPORTATION, WAREHOUSING, UTILITIES

INBOUND

5588

2616

1381

446

OUTBOUND

11493

3016

1604

544

INTRA

Source: Freight Analysis Framework 2018 Data (FAF4: Version 4.5.1); Analysis by DKS Associates Figure 25. NAPA COUNTY FREIGHT FLOW BY INDUSTRY (BY SHIPMENT WEIGHT)

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

14,000

MILLIONS OF DOLLARS

12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 TOTAL FARM

MINING, LOGGING, AND CONSTRUCTION

MANUFACTURING, WHOLESALE TRADE, RETAIL TRADE

TRANSPORTATION, WAREHOUSING, UTILITIES

INBOUND

1180

1123

5715

595

OUTBOUND

6374

1384

6255

871

INTRA

Source: Freight Analysis Framework 2018 Data (FAF4: Version 4.5.1); Analysis by DKS Associates Figure 26. NAPA COUNTY FREIGHT FLOW BY INDUSTRY (BY SHIPMENT VALUE)

Traffic congestion in Napa adds significant cost to moving goods. Two possible options for improving freight movement in Napa include using existing rail and staggering freight movement peak times from typical commute traffic. NVTA has identified freight movement as a key topic for future study in collaboration with stakeholders. Such a study will be a critical next step to identify specific improvements that will benefit freight movement. Traffic congestion in Napa County has a profound impact on its ability to move freight efficiently and effectively. Furthermore, with its limited arterials, Napa’s ability to increase significant freight movement is severely hampered. Discussions at the national level have included policies that limit freight movement only during off-peak periods in order to improve throughput.

Given limited resources for infrastructure expansion, employing travel demand strategies and improving existing corridor management can go a long way towards significantly improving the prospects for moving freight in Napa. ADVANCING MOBILITY 2045 PROJECT CONSIDERATIONS SUPPORTING GOODS AND MOVEMENT INCLUDE:

Identify and improve key goods movement routes

Design roadways and other transportation facilities to enhance the coexistence of all modes

Ensure Measure T roadway funds are maximized to improve infrastructure, as allowed under the ordinance, to benefit all transportation modes

Identify innovative alternative solutions that minimize costs, maximize system performance and reduce traffic congestion

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

HOW WE TRAVEL Data is essential for planning and prioritizing projects. It is to understand the origin and destinations of people who drive in Napa, as well as why and when they’re traveling. NVTA completed a Napa Travel Behavior Study (TBS)18 in 2020 to understand the travel patterns of Napa County workers, visitors, and residents. The study identifies how many trips per day are taken by visitors, residents, and employees, where those trips start and end, and the predominant modes and times of travel. The TBS takes into account seasonal variations, as well as weekday and weekend travel. The primary study period for the TBS was March to May 2018. Two secondary study periods were selected to account for seasonal variation, June to August 2018 and August to November of 2018. The TBS builds on data received from the 2014 TBS using more cost-effective and advanced data collections tools. WHY IS THE TRAVEL BEHAVIOR STUDY VALUABLE?

KEY FINDINGS FROM THE TRAVEL BEHAVIOR STUDY

The information summarized in the TBS provides a data set for specific plans or projects that need to be evaluated based on travel impacts. Planners and engineers can use this information to make informed decisions about capital investments and travel demand management strategies. Policymakers can use this information to implement policies that reduce and alter congestion patterns.

WEEKDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS TOTALED ROUGHLY 185,000 VEHICLES

FRIDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS TOTALED ROUGHLY 188,000 VEHICLES

SATURDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS TOTALED ROUGHLY 160,000 VEHICLES

An example of valuable data gained from the TBS is the trip length information. The study determined that 31 percent of Napa County trips are less than two miles in length and 63 percent are less than five miles in length—both distances represent trips that could shift to active modes of travel. Data provided on trip lengths and trip generators is particularly useful for NVTA and its jurisdictions, indicating places that further alternative transportation investments are needed.

4. SUNDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS TOTALED ROUGHLY 153,000 VEHICLES

STUDY METHODOLOGY

The TBS used innovative data collection techniques, such as mobile device data and traditional traffic counts, to provide an enhanced dataset. NVTA’s consultants, Fehr & Peers, used StreetLight Data, which offers a quick, convenient, and flexible method for obtaining data, as well as their ability to provide advanced metrics, such as trip lengths, trip purposes, and demographic information based on observed home locations.

5. FRIDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018 AT 11 LOCATIONS INCREASED ON AVERAGE BY 3.5 PERCENT, OR 0.7 PERCENT PER YEAR, COMPARED TO FRIDAY TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2013 BEFORE THE JAMESON CANYON ROAD WIDENING JAMESON CANYON ROAD INCREASED BY 21 PERCENT 6. SR 121 AT THE SONOMA/NAPA COUNTY LINE INCREASED BY 12 PERCENT SR 29 NORTH OF AMERICAN CANYON ROAD DECREASED BY SEVEN PERCENT

Figure 27 shows middle filter roadway locations: 44 directional middle-filter locations, including 11 county gateway locations, where traffic counts were collected. The middle-filter location is a way to capture origin and destination of trips traveling through each roadway segment.

2020 Napa Travel Behavior Study completed by Fehr & Peers, https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

3.4 percent of total Napa County trips pass through the County (3.3 percent from previous study)

10.3 percent of inter-county trips pass through Napa County, up from 9.0 percent from the previous study

Roughly 12,000 vehicle trips pass through Napa County on an average weekday (roughly 12,000 from previous study)

Roughly 353,000 vehicle trips touch Napa County on an average weekday (roughly 345,000 from previous study), up 2.3 percent or 0.5 percent per year from the previous study

NAPA COUNTY

CALISTOGA ANGWIN SAINT HELENA

128

IMPORTED AND EXPORTED TRIPS YOUNTVILLE

In the morning peak period 51 percent (15,600 trips) of inter-county trips are imported, 28 percent (9,800 trips) of inter-county trips are exported

Trips are primarily imported from Solano County (55 percent or 8,600 trips) and Sonoma County (21 percent or 2,100 trips)

Trips are primarily exported to Solano County (41 percent or 4,000 trips) and Sonoma County (29 percent or 2,800 trips)

121

NAPA

AMERICAN CANYON

Note: Traffic flowing along roadways at the indicated locations was characterized with respect to its orgins and destinations. Also indicated are county gateway locations where traffic counts were collected. Source: 2020 Napa Travel Behavior Study completed by Fehr & Peers, https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

KEY DAILY ORIGIN-DESTINATION PAIRS

Roughly 40 percent of total Napa County trips start and end in the City of Napa

54 percent of inter-county trips start or end in Solano County

20 percent of inter-county trips start or end in Sonoma County

Figure 27. NAPA COUNTY TRAFFIC DATA LOCATIONS

SPRING 2018 WEEKDAY TRAVEL PATTERNS DAILY TRIP TYPES:

On an average weekday (Monday to Thursday) in spring 2018 roughly 353,000 vehicle trips interacted with Napa County

TOP FIVE COUNTIES COMING INTO NAPA COUNTY ON A DAILY BASIS

Inter-county travel represents 33 percent of Napa County trips (32 percent from previous study)

Intra-county travel represents 67 percent of Napa County trips (68 percent from previous study)

Solano County: 28,900 trips or 55 percent of trips into Napa County

Sonoma County: 9,900 trips or 19 percent of trips into Napa County

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Contra Costa County: 4,300 trips or 8 percent of trips into Napa County

Alameda County: 2,000 trips or four percent of trips into Napa County

Sacramento County: 1,700 trips or three percent of trips into Napa County

3.4% NAPA COUNTY PASS-THROUGH TRIPS

15% TRIPS INTO NAPA COUNTY

WHAT TYPE OF TRIPS ARE OCCURRING IN NAPA COUNTY?

14% TRIPS OUT OF NAPA COUNTY

The percentage of trip types are examined in Figure 28 and are defined as: y

Intra-Napa County Trips: trips that start and end in Napa County

67% INTRA-NAPA COUNTY TRIPS

Trips into Napa County: trips that start outside Napa County and end in Napa County

Source: 2020 Napa Travel Behavior Study completed by Fehr & Peers, https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

Trips out of Napa County: trips that start in Napa County and end outside Napa County

Figure 28. WEEKDAY TRIP TYPES WITHIN NAPA COUNTY

Napa County Pass-Through Trips: trips that do not start or end in Napa County but travel through Napa County gateways

Table 15 is a summary of daily trip types that interact with Napa County. Table 15. DAILY TRIP TYPES IN NAPA COUNTY TRIPS (2020 TBS)

TRIPS (2014 TBS)

PERCENTAGE (2020 TBS)

PERCENTAGE (2014 TBS)

238,000

67%

68%

TRIPS INTO NAPA COUNTY

52,000

48,000

15%

14%

TRIPS OUT OF NAPA COUNTY

51,000

47,000

14%

NAPA COUNTY PASS-THROUGH TRIPS

12,000

3.4%

3.3%

353,000

345,000

100%

TRIP TYPE

INTRA-NAPA COUNTY TRIPS

TOTAL TRIPS INTERACTING WITH NAPA VALLEY

Source: 2020 Napa Travel Behavior Study completed by Fehr & Peers, https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

WHERE ARE TRIPS STARTING AND ENDING IN NAPA COUNTY?

Napa County vehicle trip origins and destinations are examined in Table 16. Table 16. NAPA COUNTY TRIPS ORIGINS AND DESTINATIONS TRIP ORIGINS

TRIP DESTINATIONS CITY

TRIPS

PERCENTAGE

TRIPS

PERCENTAGE

6,600

CALISTOGA

6,600

3,600

ANGWIN

3,600

11,800

SAINT HELENA

11,900

5,200

YOUNTVILLE

5,400

187,600

65%

NAPA

186,500

64%

33,100

11%

AMERICAN CANYON

33,400

12%

41,000

14%

UNINCORPORATED

43,000

15%

289,100

100%

TOTAL

290,300

100%

Source: 2020 Napa Travel Behavior Study completed by Fehr & Peers, https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

WHAT ARE THE LARGEST TRIP GENERATORS IN NAPA COUNTY?

The largest trip generators within Napa County are shown in Figure 29. In this instance, trip generation was estimated using origin and destination data scaled based on traffic count data. TRIP LENGTH

One surprising discovery of the TBS is that 63 percent of all trips are less than five miles in length, and that 31 percent are less than two miles in length. This data presents an opportunity to shift the transportation mode from driving to other non-auto modes for many of these short trips. The largest trip generator, Bel Aire Plaza, with 23,300 trips per day has 74 percent of its trips less than five miles in length. 50 percent of trips to Napa Junction Center in American Canyon, are less than five miles in length. NVTA is

PERCENTAGE OF COUNTYWIDE TRIPS TO EACH LOCATION

NAPA BEL AIRE PLAZA

SOUTH NAPA MARKET PLACE

NAPA JUNCTION CENTER NAPA OXBOW Source: 2020 Napa Travel Behavior Study completed by Fehr & Peers, https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study Figure 29. NAPA COUNTY TRIP GENERATORS

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

working with Caltrans and the City of American Canyon on multimodal improvements along SR 29 to build out bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Active transportation infrastructure could encourage mode shift for the 5,916 trips to the shopping center each day. TRIP PURPOSE WORK TRIPS

The Association of Bay Area Governments estimates that in 2018 there were 74,533 employed residents and 80,125 jobs in Napa County, a ratio of roughly 1.08 jobs per employed resident. Advanced metric statistics provided by StreetLight Data indicated that roughly 66 percent of Napa County employed residents both lived and worked within Napa County. When applied to the ABAG estimate of employed residents this resulted in roughly 49,000 residents who lived and worked in Napa County, representing an internal work trip. It was then assumed that the remaining 26,000 employed residents in Napa County traveled outside of Napa County for work, representing an exported work trip. It was also assumed that the remaining 31,000 jobs in Napa County were occupied by workers from outside Napa County, representing imported work trips. y

22 percent of daily Napa County trips are work-related

106,000 work trips start or end in Napa County on an average work-day

Roughly 40 percent of AM peak period Napa County trips are work-related

46 percent of work trips are generated by residents who live and work in Napa County

29 percent of trips are generated by employees who live outside Napa County

25 percent of work trips are generated by Napa residents who work outside of Napa County

16 percent of Napa County employees commute from Solano County

6 percent of Napa County employees commute from Sonoma County

VISITOR TRIPS

StreetLight Data was used to determine where visitors to Napa County come from. The visitor home and work analysis is first based on the determination of the home location for each mobile device that touched (traveled to, from, or through) Napa County during the spring 2018 data period. The home locations were then aggregated to Metropolitan Statistical Areas for reporting purposes. Figure 29 illustrates the home locations of all mobile devices that touched Napa County in spring 2018. Figure 30 shows the visitor home analysis indicated that on an average weekday 38 percent of mobile devices were from outside of Napa County and 43 percent on an average weekend day. It is important to note that this data considers a visitor to Napa County to be a device that does not have a home location in Napa County. Furthermore, the device could be traveling into Napa County for work or social WEEKDAY recreation, or could be traveling through the county, making it difficult to estimate the number of vehicle trips made by devices visiting for social recreation (tourists). However, this information can be combined with trip type, worker, and trip purpose information to estimate the number of devices visiting Napa County for social recreation (tourist) purposes. y

72,000 or 20 percent of weekday trips are for social recreation (tourist)

Source: StreetLight Data Figure 30. NAPA COUNTY VISITOR HOME LOCATIONS

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PASS-THROUGH TRIPS – REGIONAL TRAFFIC

TRAVEL BEHAVIOR STUDY CONCLUSIONS

A comparison of mobile device data indicated that origindestination patterns remained largely unchanged, including pass-through travel, which remained roughly 10 percent of total countywide trips and predominantly between Solano and Sonoma counties. The directionality of trips also remained largely unchanged, with a slight increase in the percentage of inbound trips in the morning, indicating that Napa County is importing more trips today than it was in 2014. The percentage of Napa County employees who live within the county also decreased by two percent, consistent with the increase in inbound trips in the morning to fill the jobs. The percentage of weekday trips made by social recreation visitors to Napa County increased by 3 percent, also consistent with the increase in inbound trips.

The Napa Valley Travel Behavior Study provides a snapshot of travel patterns in Napa County and thus only displays a fragment of the travel patterns, which can be volatile depending on many factors including, but not limited to the season of the year, weather, the day of the week and other factors. The resulting data provides NVTA and its member jurisdictions the basis for future planning efforts. Such uses may include updating and calibrating the Napa Travel Demand Model and better deploying transit and active transportation solutions based on trip data and purpose. To learn more about the study visit: nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study.

COMPARISON TO 2014 STUDY A comparison between the 2014 TBS and the 2020 TBS is shown in Table 17.

PROJECTS, POLICIES AND GOALS This summary of the 2020 Napa Valley Travel Behavior Study, gives insight into Napa County’s travel patterns, but does not necessarily underscore issues and challenges. It does suggest that we have a communication opportunity since residents and employees of Napa County, cause much of the traffic congestion. NVTA should also continue investing in the county’s Priority Development Areas to improve the jobs/housing balance. In addition, the study suggests that NVTA invest in alternative transportation to provide nonauto options to key destinations which experience a high percentage of short trip lengths. Investments in operational improvements that maintain the existing system but reduce congestion will also be necessary to accommodate the growing number of tourist and workers from outside Napa County and to ensure traffic moves more efficiently.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 17. NAPA METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREA INDUSTRY EMPLOYMENT AND LABOR FORCE FINDING

2020 TBS

2014 TBS

DIFFERENCE

DISCUSSION

TOTAL COUNTED VEHICLES ON FRIDAY AT ALL 11 STUDY LOCATIONS

188,000

181,000

7,000

Traffic counts increased by 3.5% , or 0.7% per year. 2014 TBS traffic counts were collected in 2013 before the Jameson Canyon Road widening.

TOTAL COUNTED VEHICLES ON FRIDAY ON JAMESON CANYON RD

38,000

32,000

6,000

Traffic counts increased by 21% or 4.2% per year.

TOTAL COUNTED VEHICLES ON FRIDAY ON SR 29 NORTH OF AMERICAN CANYON RD

49,000

53,000

-4,000

Traffic counts decreased by 7% or 1.4% per year.

25 million

200,000

24.8 million

2018 TBS findings based on 25 million data samples compared to 200,000 for 2014 TBS.

TOTAL WEEKDAY TRIPS INTERACTING WITH NAPA COUNTY

353,000

345,000

8,000

Total weekday trips increased by 2.3% , or 0.5% per year.

TOTAL WEEKDAY INTER-NAPA COUNTY TRIPS (SUBSET OF TOTAL WEEKDAY TRIPS INTERACTING)

127,000

125,000

2,000

Total weekday inter-Napa County trips increased by 1.4% , or 0.3% per year.

WEEKDAY INTER-COUNTY TRAVEL PERCENTAGE

33%

32%

Remained largely unchanged.

WEEKDAY INTRA-COUNTY TRAVEL PERCENTAGE

67%

68%

-1%

Remained largely unchanged.

WEEKDAY PASS-THROUGH TRAVEL PERCENTAGE (OF TOTAL COUNTYWIDE TRIPS)

3.4%

3.3%

0.1%

Remained largely unchanged.

WEEKDAY PASS-THROUGH TRAVEL PERCENTAGE (OF INTER-COUNTY TRIPS ONLY)

10.3%

1.3%

Remained largely unchanged.

WEEKDAY PASS-THROUGH TRIPS

12,000

Remained largely unchanged.

46%

52%

-6%

TRAFFIC COUNT DATA

MOBILE DEVICE DATA SAMPLES STREETLIGHT DATA SAMPLES MOBILE DEVICE DATA TRIP TYPES

PERCENT OF WEEKDAY PASSTHROUGH TRIPS THAT TRAVEL BETWEEN SOLANO AND SONOMA

The percentage of weekday pass-through travel between Solano and Sonoma counties decreased by 6% , but still accounts for roughly half of all countywide pass-through travel.

Source: 2020 Napa Travel Behavior Study completed by Fehr & Peers, https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

Napa Valley Tomorrow

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIES NVTA IS USING SEVERAL STRATEGIES TO ADVANCE THE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM’S GOALS. THIS SECTION WILL EXPLAIN EACH OF THE FOLLOWING STRATEGIES AND DISCUSS HOW EACH CAN ADDRESS CONGESTION RELIEF, IMPROVED TRAFFIC SAFETY, INCREASED ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE, MORE RELIABLE AND FREQUENT BUS SERVICE, AND MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OF THE EXISTING SYSTEM:

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

2 TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT

3 TRANSIT

4 HEALTH AND SAFETY

5 SUSTAINABILITY

6 EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Active transportation consists of any form of non-motorized travel, principally biking and walking. Policies and models for active transportation infrastructure, including the first statewide Active Transportation Plan, Towards an Active California (2017), are changing the transportation landscape and renewing the commitment towards walking and biking as a solution to congestion, greenhouse gas emissions, and improving the general health and well-being of communities. Building and maintaining active transportation infrastructure can be significantly less costly than building highways and roads, while providing sustainable transportation solutions, which make these types of investments appealing to local governments. Complete Streets is a transportation policy and design approach that requires jurisdictions to consider alternative transportation modes. A Complete Streets framework has been adopted by Caltrans and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and all Bay Area jurisdictions receiving federal funds are required to adopt a Complete Streets policy and/ or incorporate Complete Streets in their general plans. All of Napa Valley’s city and county jurisdictions have adopted Complete Streets policies and are incorporating Complete Streets in their road design and rehabilitation programs.

UNDERSTANDING THE MODE OF TRAVEL PEOPLE CHOOSE AND TRIP PURPOSE CAN HELP JURISDICTIONS DEVELOP EFFECTIVE AND TARGETED PROGRAMS TO BETTER SERVE RESIDENTS AND EMPLOYEES.

In an effort to improve active transportation planning and to assist jurisdictions with complete streets implementation, NVTA developed and adopted the first countywide Pedestrian Plan in 2016 and completed the third update to the countywide Bicycle Plan in 2019. Combined, these plans create a comprehensive framework for building and improving the active transportation network in every jurisdiction in Napa County. Both plans meet the requirements of the

California Active Transportation Program (ATP), the primary grant funding source for active transportation infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects and programs in the state. Trips less than one-half mile are typically considered viable for conversion to a walk trip, since, on average, it takes about 10 minutes to walk this distance. Trips of up to three miles in length are typically considered candidates for bicycle use. In Napa County, the average commute trip is 17 miles1 much farther than these thresholds, suggesting that a focus on noncommute trips (trips to school, for shopping, or for recreation, as well as visitor trips within commercial areas and hotel zones) will be important to support the active transportation mode shift goals in this plan. Conversely, the Napa Valley Travel Behavior Study2 indicated that 32 percent of average weekday trips are between one to two miles, as shown in Figure 31. This suggests that a number of these trips could be made using active modes. People are more willing to use active modes when infrastructure to support walking and biking is in place.

0-1 MILES

12%

1-2 MILES

19%

2-5 MILES

32%

5-10 MILES

15%

10-20 MILES

11%

20-30 MILES

30-40 MILES 40-50 MILES 50+ MILES

2% 1% 2%

Figure 31. AVERAGE WEEKDAY TRIP LENGTH

Plan Bay Area Draft Environmental Impact Report 2012 https://www.nvta.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019%20Napa%20Valley%20Travel%20Behavior%20Study_0.pdf

1 2

Source: 2020 Napa Travel Behavior Study

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Active transportation has great potential to reduce GHG emissions and support a more sustainable transportation system. Within Napa County, if 10 percent of all trips of less than three miles were shifted to walking or bicycling, this could result in an estimated GHG emission savings of 1,428 tons a year.3 COUNTYWIDE PEDESTRIAN PLAN The Countywide Pedestrian Plan4 vision aims to increase the number of pedestrian trips countywide and to set the groundwork for a shift in travel mode choice considering that non-motorized options are widely available, accessible, and convenient. Currently, the commute mode share for walking trips in Napa County is five percent. Napa County jurisdictions can increase active transportation modes by: y

Using performance measures such as multimodal level of service or built environment factors to facilitate complete streets implementation.

Prioritizing infrastructure projects that increase the walk mode share.

Adopting parking policies such as shared parking, parking maximums, parking fees, and identifying strategic parking locations to encourage a “park once” environment in commercial districts.

Connect key pedestrian desire lines5 via accessible sidewalks and marked crosswalks, focusing on: »

Downtown areas, transit stops, schools, senior housing, and destinations

Tourist destinations and lodging

Review new development proposals to ensure pedestrian access and circulation is maintained or improved, including during construction phases.

Walking is a common mode of transportation within the Napa County’s developed communities due to compact downtown business districts with inviting pedestrian environments. Neighborhoods located close to downtown areas allow residents to easily travel on foot between commercial and residential districts in the incorporated areas. An example of this is the Downtown Napa Abajo Neighborhood where 14 percent of residents walk to work. The unincorporated areas of the county, which comprise a large portion of land area, have a rural density and character. These regions offer fewer opportunities for pedestrian travel between destinations, requiring a vehicle for many trips. Upgrades to rural community bicycle facilities, like the Napa Valley Vine Trail, could help facilitate a shift from vehicles for trip distances too far for walking. The completion of the Oak Knoll section of the Napa Valley Vine Trail that closed the gap between the City of Napa and the Town of Yountville shows that people are willing to use alternative modes to access further distances when a safe and direct infrastructure is present.

A PEDESTRIAN ON WASHINGTON STREET IN CALISTOGA.

DKS Associates 2020; GHG emissions analysis using Streetlight Data and Senate Bill 1 Grant Programs Emissions Calculator. Refer to Appendix C (GHG Calculations) for methodology and calculations. 4 https://www.nvta.ca.gov/sites/default/files/NCPMP_Final_web.pdf 5 Desire lines is a planning term that identifies how users of a facility will likely travel which generally reflects the shortest path to a destination. 3

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

COUNTYWIDE BICYCLE PLAN The 2019 Napa Countywide Bicycle Plan6 builds upon the bicycle recommendations presented in the 2012 Napa Countywide Bicycle Plan. The field of bicycle planning and design has changed significantly over the last several years, and the Plan update incorporates current best practices and recommendations.

PEDESTRIANS WALKING ALONG HOWELL MOUNTAIN ROAD IN ANGWIN.

Napa County has a one percent commute by bicycle mode share.7 There are 142 miles of bicycle facilities in Napa County as shown in Table 18.

Table 18. BICYCLE NETWORK MILEAGE JURISDICTION

FACILITY TYPE

EXISTING MILEAGE

Vine Trail (Class I)

2.4

Shared-Use Paths (Class I)

7.3

Bicycle Lanes (Class II)

1.6

Bicycle Routes (Class III)

1.8

Vine Trail (Class I)

Shared-Use Paths (Class I)

0.4

Bicycle Lanes (Class II)

Bicycle Routes (Class III)

3.6

Vine Trail (Class I)

Shared-Use Paths (Class I)

7.9

Bicycle Lanes (Class II)

28.5

Bicycle Routes (Class III)

5.6

13.1

CITY OF AMERICAN CANYON

CITY OF CALISTOGA

CITY OF NAPA

https://www.nvta.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2019-10-10_Napa%20Countywide%20Bicycle%20Plan_FINAL_dm.pdf 2012-2016 American Community Survey 5-year Estimate

6 7

TOTAL MILEAGE

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TABLE 18. BICYCLE NETWORK MILEAGE (CONTINUED) JURISDICTION

FACILITY TYPE

EXISTING MILEAGE

Vine Trail (Class I)

–

Shared-Use Paths (Class I)

Bicycle Lanes (Class II)

1.3

Bicycle Routes (Class III)

0.2

Vine Trail (Class I)

1.3

Shared-Use Paths (Class I)

1.2

Bicycle Lanes (Class II)

1.2

Bicycle Routes (Class III)

0.5

Vine Trail (Class I)

3.8

Shared-Use Paths (Class I)

7.7

Bicycle Lanes (Class II)

54.3

Bicycle Routes (Class III)

1.7

TOTAL MILEAGE

2.5

CITY OF ST. HELENA

4.1

TOWN OF YOUNTVILLE

67.5

UNINCORPORATED NAPA COUNTY

COUNTYWIDE

TOTAL

142.2

Source: Napa Countywide Bicycle Plan, September 2019

The 2019 Napa Countywide Bicycle Plan approaches the bicycling environment with an eye toward making bicycling possible for a large part of the population – not just those who already ride or are already comfortable riding in most traffic conditions. Increasing the road comfort level for all members of the community is achieved by introducing different treatments that are appropriate for the speeds and traffic volumes of a particular street. The rider comfort typology shown in Figure 32 on the following page shows that a significant number of people would choose to ride bicycles if comfortable facilities were available.

There are a variety of bicycle facility types with different levels of separation from vehicle traffic. Shared-use paths (Class I) are completely separated from vehicle traffic, while rural bicycle routes (Class III) have the least separation and primarily consist of signage. A newer classification type, Separated Bicycle Lanes (Class IV), provides on-street facilities with vertical separation achieved in a variety of ways. This type of facility is often implemented in a phased approach as shown in Figure 33.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS 1

LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS 2

LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS 3

LEVEL OF TRAFFIC STRESS 4

NON-BICYCLIST

INTERESTED BUT CONCERNED

ENTHUSIASTIC & CONFIDENT

STRONG & FEARLESS

Most adults are comfortable riding on LTS 2 streets, where they have dedicated bicycle facilities separated from traffic

LTS 3 streets are tolerable for experienced adults who prefer separate bicycle facilities but are confident riding with traffic

Only the most skilled adult bicyclists will tolerate LTS 4 streets, where they share space with drivers on higher speed and higher traffic roadways

Almost all people, including children, feel comfortable riding on level of traffic stress (LTS) 1 streets and paths

Figure 32. ROAD COMFORT LEVEL OF BICYCLISTS

SEPARATED BIKE LANE CONCEPTS Separated bike lanes have been implemented in many cases as low-cost retrofit projects (e.g. using flex posts and paint within the existing right-of-way). More permanent forms of separation, such as curb-separated bike lanes, cost more and are less flexible once implemented. A phased implementation approach, where “pilot” projects transition to permanent separated bike lanes, may solve both of these problems by implementing the facility slowly and troubleshooting before permanent materials and high costs are necessary.

BIKE LANE WITH BUFFER (CLASS II BICYCLE LANE)

BIKE LANE WITH BUFFER & STAKES

BIKE LANE WITH BUFFER & PLANTERS

PROGRESSION FROM PILOT PROJECT TO SEPARATED BIKE LANE

Figure 33. BICYCLE FACILITY TYPES

BIKE LANE WITH CURB SEPARATION

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Over 500 miles of bicycle and pedestrian facilities are being proposed throughout Napa County to help achieve a more comprehensive transportation network and to increase the number of trips made by bicycle. Table 19. PROPOSED FACILITIES

FACILITY TYPE

NEW LENGTH (APPROXIMATE, IN MILES)

EXISTING LENGTH (APPROXIMATE, IN MILES)

VINE TRAIL (SHARED-USE PATH CLASS I)

42.9

15.5

SHARED-USE PATHS (CLASS I, EXCLUDING VINE TRAIL)

72.1

25.4

BICYCLE LANES (CLASS II)

175.1

87.8

BICYCLE BOULEVARDS (CLASS III)

37.2

–

256.9

13.5

SEPARATED BICYCLE LANES (CLASS IV)

0.9

–

CORRIDOR STUDY (NOT INCLUDED IN TOTAL)

12.3

–

585.1

142.2

RURAL BICYCLE ROUTES (CLASS III)

TOTAL NETWORK

Creating safe routes that designate ways for bicyclists to comfortably navigate between key locations (central business districts, schools, medical services, grocery stores, etc.) could significantly reduce congestion and harmful emissions. In Napa County, safe routes are focused on creating safer ways to get to schools and transit. The Safe Routes to Schools (SRTS) national partnership reports a significant decline in walking and biking over the last 40 years. In the late 1960s, forty-eight percent of children ages five to 14 walked or bicycled to school. That percentage dropped precipitously to thirteen percent for

the same age group by 2011.8 Increased congestion and safety issues around schools during bell times is evident, demonstrating that the trend to drive students to school is a concern locally. SRTS efforts seek to improve these conditions by educating students, teachers, and parents, assessing current conditions, and making recommendations for infrastructure improvements with the objective to create a sustainable mode shift in student transportation.

http://guide.saferoutesinfo.org/introduction/the_decline_of_walking_and_bicycling.cfm

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

The Napa County SRTS program is part of the solution to increase physical activity and improve unsafe walking and bicycling conditions and may also improve air quality and reduce congestion. NVTA is the partnering agency for the Napa County SRTS program, which is co-operated by the Napa County Office of Education and the Napa County Bicycle Coalition. The program includes in-classroom education, on-bicycle and pedestrian safety training, school site walk audits, evaluation, and surveys at public schools throughout Napa County. The SRTS team works closely with school parent groups and teachers, police departments, public health staff, and city traffic managers. Once the needs assessment is completed, next steps could include efforts to prioritize projects in school zones, such as: y

High visibility crossings

Traffic calming to reduce speeds

Shortened crossing distances,

Sidewalk gap closures

Protected bicycle lanes

Building out the local active transportation network is an important step towards improving access to transit and encouraging bicycle use. These improvements provide first and last mile connections for commuters, reducing the need to drive to transit hubs, as well as increase mobility for seniors and transit-dependent populations. NVTA recently completed an update to the Community Based Transportation Plan9, an effort that conducted specific outreach in local communities of concern in order to identify transportation gaps and needs. One overarching priority identified in the CBTP is to improve pedestrian safety. Programs, such as the Lifeline Transportation Program,10 are geared towards making transportation improvements specific to communities of concern. It provides funding opportunities to further the goals of improving transportation safety and access to transit by making improvements to sidewalks and crossings, bicycle lanes, and secure parking near transit. All these improvements are lower cost solutions with significant benefits for those who use transit.

Funding for the SRTS program through 2022 is through the California Active Transportation Program (ATP) and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s One Bay Area Grant (OBAG) program. Although ATP provides a significant portion of funding for the SRTS program, this source is not sustainable for program continuation. ATP funding for noninfrastructure is primarily for program start-up, and guidance suggests using other sources of funding to sustain programs, making the need for local commitment necessary.

https://www.nvta.ca.gov/CBTP https://mtc.ca.gov/our-work/fund-invest/investment-strategies-commitments/transit-21st-century/lifeline-transportation

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TRAVEL DEMAND MANAGEMENT Travel Demand Management (TDM) is a strategy that can alter how, where, and when people travel. TDM combines policies, strategies, and methods that discourage driving alone, especially during peak travel times, to increase the overall efficiency of the entire transportation system utilizing various methods. This concept is moderately inexpensive and effective for reducing traffic congestion and harmful emissions caused by autos.

Many TDM strategies are simple and achievable, such as: y

Employer policies that encourage staggered work schedules: This concept allows the peak traffic times to be attained over a longer period to reduce the overall peak. The idea is to encourage some road users to adopt alternative schedules that are either outside or towards the beginning/end of traditional peak times. Stagger school bell times: School start times are generally aligned with commute times. Starting schools earlier or later would not only reduce congestion but would potentially create incentives for students to use alternative modes to school – especially those not old enough to drive – because parents may not be available to drive them. However, this must be balanced with considerations about a household’s ability to combine parent and child trips.

Trip chaining: This strategy encourages planning multiple purpose trips in sequence to minimize travel (school trip, grocery, gym, medical appointment, etc.).

Incentivizing alternate modes: Promoting alternative transportation modes (transit/biking/walking/scooters) through school and work programs is an effective means to encourage non-auto use. Providing first/last mile connections to transit through bicycle/scooter share,

improved/enhanced walking environments and safe places to park bicycles helps create safe, connected networks that encourage alternative modes. y

Shared mobility: Car and bicycle sharing, vanpool/ carpool provide options for commuters to accomplish errands during the day making leaving the car at home more practical.

Commuter Support Programs: Commuter support, such as guaranteed ride home programs, provides a fast way home in the event of an emergency. Commuters are provided a guaranteed ride home via TNC, taxi or rental car. Programs like these remove the concerns commuters have about getting home should they need to depart work early, or stay after hours.

TDM can also include disincentives for driving such as charging for transportation services (i.e. charging fees through registration, fuel, parking, and tolls or more recent policy discussions that would charge a mileage-based user fee). National adoption of these strategies has increased as the demand for new and expanded roadways persists and revenues to pay for them diminish. As federal funding sources become less reliable, the obligation to pay for infrastructure improvements and ongoing maintenance is becoming the responsibility of local communities through various taxation methods and user fees.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PUBLIC TRANSIT: THE VINE BUS SYSTEM

CAR SHARE AND BIKE SHARE

The Vine bus system is the core of public transportation in Napa County. It consists of an integrated network of public transit routes serving communities within Napa Valley and links the Valley along major commute corridors to the Vallejo Ferry Terminal, Capital Corridor and Solano County transit, and BART in the East Bay.

Constrained spaces, limited parking, and the high cost of car ownership foster car sharing in urban areas. Bike sharing was established as a means for traveling the last mile between urban rail systems and a final destination. The concepts no longer seem radical and these modes have spread to many suburban locations.

In two separate NVTA-sponsored studies, Napa commuters indicated an interest in using public transit for some or all of their trips if service was more frequent and direct to reduce travel times. In January 2020, NVTA implemented a new service structure that created more frequent service and improved system connectivity within the City of Napa. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, NVTA had to restructure the transit service to compensate for the reduction in bus ridership and moved to an on-demand system within the City of Napa. In Napa County’s smaller jurisdictions, NVTA operates on-demand service, accessible through a phone app or by calling to dispatch the vehicle. These changes are expected to result in an increase of Vine ridership.

Car sharing reduces the number of vehicles owned and subsequently the vehicle miles traveled because it requires that we think twice before getting in the car (renting versus having a vehicle sitting outside your front door). One barrier to using public transit to work is that many people use their lunch hours for completing errands or need to go to a doctor appointment in the middle of the day. Car sharing provides a convenient and affordable substitution to driving your own car. Bicycle sharing can offer the same convenience, particularly for shorter trips.

CARPOOLS AND VANPOOLS The NVTA V-Commute program, powered under a premier Mobility as a Service (MaaS) platform by Ride Amigos, provides information and ride matching for Carpools and Vanpools. Employers and individuals interested in using these commute options can register with V-Commute independently or through their employer. In early 2020, MTC, in partnership with local Napa Valley leaders, Visit Napa Valley and the Napa Valley Vintners, introduced a pilot program called Napa Forward. This program focuses on employers in the wine and hospitality industry using another MaaS platform called LUUM. The pilot will focus on combining employers into a larger employer units to help promote ride-sharing among that industry group.

CAR SHARE, BIKE SHARE, AND CARPOOL PROGRAMS CAN PROVIDE CONVENIENT ALTERNATIVES FOR COMMUTING AND OTHER TRAVEL NEEDS.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Active transportation consists of any form of non-motorized travel, principally biking and walking. In addition to congestion-mitigating benefits, concerns about greenhouse gas emissions and the general health of our communities are stimulating interest in active transportation solutions. Policies and models for active transportation infrastructure, including the first statewide Active Transportation Plan— Towards an Active California (2017)—are changing the transportation planning environment and renewing the commitment towards walking and biking as a solution to some transportation issues. Building and maintaining active transportation infrastructure can be significantly less costly than highways and roads, while providing sustainable transportation solutions, making these types of investments very appealing. NVTA adopted the first countywide Pedestrian Plan in 2016, and completed an update to the countywide Bicycle Plan in 2019. These plans combined create a comprehensive framework to build out and improve the active transportation network in all jurisdictions. Both plans meet the requirements of the California Active Transportation Program (ATP), the primary grant funding source for active transportation infrastructure and non-infrastructure projects and programs in the state. IN NAPA COUNTY, OVER 60 PERCENT OF TRIPS ARE FIVE MILES OR LESS,11 WHICH DEMONSTRATES AN OPPORTUNITY TO INCREASE THE BICYCLING AND WALKING MODE SHARES.

https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study

New data from the Travel Behavior Study allowed us to better answer questions left unanswered in the previous TBS. Home and work location information allowed the study to determine that 106,000 work trips start or end within Napa County on an average work day and that roughly half of total work trips are from residents who live and work within Napa County. Trip length information allowed the study to determine that 31 percent of Napa County trips are less than two miles in length and 63 percent are less than five miles in length, representing trips that could shift to active modes of travel, indicating places that further alternative transportation investments may be warranted. Traffic congestion caused by inter-county commuters is likely to get worse over the next 25 years as housing prices in Napa are expected to remain high and much of the job growth projected for Napa County is expected to be low-wage jobs, especially in the faster growing agricultural, hospitality, and retail segments. Development of additional affordable housing for Napa’s workforce could have a significant impact on traffic congestion. While the current COVID-19 pandemic poses a challenge to employ the full potential of these strategies even a small shift from driving to transit, carpool, or active transportation modes could make a significant difference. V-commute will play an important role in incentivizing people to undertake one of these travel demand strategies.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TRANSIT NVTA operates the Vine Transit System. The Vine network consists of regional, express bus, local fixed route, community shuttles, and ADA paratransit services. The transit system provides Napa County residents with connections to major population centers in the county, other destinations in the San Francisco Bay Area region and Sacramento, which virtually allows Napa’s transit riders connections across the globe providing connections to international airports and other transportation hubs. Specifically, the Vine Express Bus routes connect to Fairfield (Fairfield and Vacaville Transit), Suisun City (Amtrak/Capital Corridor), Vallejo (San Francisco Bay Ferry), and El Cerrito (El Cerrito del Norte BART station). on traffic congestion and the environment. For example, if five percent of commuters elect to shift their transportation mode to non-single occupancy vehicle mode, there can be a significant reduction in traffic congestion.

A COMMUTER LOADING HER BICYCLE ONTO A VINE TRANSIT BUS.

Stop-and-go traffic results in unnecessary auto emissions – cars are effectively sitting in one place and not going anywhere. Reducing congestion and maintaining optimum speeds (55 miles per hour) can reduce emissions and greatly improve the quality of life for commuters. Data from the most recent NVTA Travel Behavior Survey illustrates the potential for a mode shift to transit to reduce GHG emissions. This data shows that there is a sizeable commuter travel market that can be served by transit. If load factors on the NVTA commuter routes were increased to 80 percent, this would remove approximately 1,100 automobile trips from the roadways every weekday and almost 1,500 tons of GHG emissions per year.12 Table 20. NAPA COUNTY COMMUTER TRIPS TO TRANSIT

Transit provides one of the best alternatives to driving and therefore is a promising solution to traffic congestion and reducing harmful emissions that contribute to climate change. While transit may not be a solution for everyone, if there is a slight incremental shift from single occupancy vehicle commuters to transit, it can have meaningful impacts

FROM NAPA TO OUTSIDE COUNTY

TOTAL

See Technical Appendix C for more details on methodology and calculations.

AVERAGE TRIP LENGTH

118,654

15.35

SAVINGS WITH TRANSIT MODE SHIFT TO 80% LOAD FACTORS

• 17,497 VMT FROM OUTSIDE COUNTY TO NAPA

ESTIMATED VMT OF COMMUTER TRIPS DIVERTIBLE TO TRANSIT

126,145

15.54

244,799

15.44

• 1,456 tons/yr

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

NVTA OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE FACILITIES

NVTA owns and/or operates four bus facilities and one maintenance facility. A fifth park and ride, the Imola Park & Ride in the City of Napa, will become operational in 2021. NVTA’s park and rides are equipped with secure bicycle parking facilities and are easily accessible for pedestrians. NVTA’s maintenance facility at Jackson Street is owned by the City of Napa. The facility is obsolete and NVTA has invested in property on Sheehy Court in the County of Napa and plans to break ground in 2021 on a new facility. NVTA’s park and rides: y

Soscol Gateway Transit Center. 625 Burnell Street, Napa. This facility serves as the main transfer hub serving all routes for the Vine Transit system. It is also NVTA’s operating center and houses the offices and board room for the agency. This facility is located 1/8 mile from the Vine Trail, a Class 1 bicycle and pedestrian path that when completed, will be a 47-mile long facility connecting the Vallejo Ferry Terminal to Calistoga.

Redwood Park & Ride. Located adjacent to SR 29 at Redwood Road and Solano Avenues in the City of Napa serves the Routes E, 10, 10X, 11, 11X, 29. This facility is located on the Vine Trail.

Yountville Park & Ride. Located adjacent to SR 29 at Washington and Solano Avenue in Yountville serves the routes 10, 10X and as well as the Yountville Trolley. This facility is located on the Vine Trail.

American Canyon Park and Ride. Located adjacent to SR 29 at Crawford and James Road. This facility is less than ¼ from the Vine Trail and roughly ¼ mile from the proposed Bay Trail alignment.

Imola Park & Ride. Located adjacent to SR 29 at Imola Avenue (SR 121) the Imola Park and Ride is currently owned and operated by Caltrans. NVTA has completed the design to reconfigure the park and ride to make it more safe and functional for users and to streamline the board/alighting process by adding passenger facilities to the southern off/on ramps at Imola Avenue and SR 29 in the City of Napa. The park and ride will be in construction in spring 2021. Imola Avenue has been designated as the Bay Trail route and connects the Bay Trail to the Vine Trail.

NVTA’s maintenance facilities: y

720 Jackson Street. This facility is owned by the City of Napa and leased to NVTA. It is an outdated maintenance facility that can no longer efficiently support the Vine’s expanded fleet. It has three bus maintenance bays, a prefabricated mobile unit that serves as an office, an obsolete bus wash, and open parking for the bus fleet.

Sheehy Court Facility. NVTA has fully designed a new maintenance facility that will be located on Sheehy Court in southern Napa County. The facility will have six bus service bays, offices, a meeting room for regional partners, a modern bus washer, a photovoltaic system and charging stations to accommodate NVTA’s zero emission fleet transition. The facility will also serve as a backup emergency operation center. The project will begin construction once the funding package has been finalized.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

EXPRESS BUS AND REGIONAL ROUTE IMPROVEMENTS

PLANNED CAPITAL AND OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS

NVTA completed an Express Bus Study in December 2017, which culminated in Express Bus service expansion that was implemented in April 2019. The Express Bus Study also included recommendations for future service modifications and infrastructure improvements to meet the growing demand and to encourage commuters to choose transit as their preferred transportation mode.

NVTA is working with Caltrans, City of Napa, City of American Canyon and the County of Napa to make improvements on State Route 29 (SR 29), the County’s main highway that connects Napa’s communities and Napa Valley to the central Bay Area. All of NVTA’s express bus routes currently operate on SR 29 for a portion of the route but when regional routes and express bus routes traverse the City of Napa and the City of American Canyon, buses must deviate into the cities’ streets to safely board and alight passengers. To improve system running speeds and reliability, NVTA has planned corridor and system improvements.

Regional route changes were approved by the NVTA Board in March 2019. The service changes were recommended by the Comprehensive Operations Analysis that was completed and adopted by the Board in 2018. As of January 2020 Express Bus system consists of the following routes: y

Route 10X – Service between Napa Valley College and Calistoga. The route 10 serves the same area but differs from the 10X because it has more frequent stops.

Route 11X – Service between the Redwood Park and Ride and the Vallejo Ferry Terminal. The route 11 serves the same area but differs from the 11X because it has more frequent, local stops.

Route 21 – Service between the Soscol Gateway Transit Center in downtown Napa to the Suisun Amtrak/Capital Corridor station and Fairfield Transit Center.

Route 29 – Service between the Redwood Park and Ride in the City of Napa and El Cerrito del Norte BART station.

SR 29 corridor improvements will include passenger facilities, additional park and ride lots along the highway, upgraded pedestrian access, high occupancy queue jumps13 with dedicated advanced bus signal phases and transit signal priority. Express services (Route 29, 10X and 11X) will be rerouted to align with the corridor and service through the center of the City of Napa will be eliminated which will greatly reduce running times. In addition, the agency will transition its fleet to zero emission electric vehicles by 2040, five years before the end of the Vision 2045 planning horizon. System electrification is discussed in the Sustainability Chapter of this plan. Finally, NVTA plans to increase frequencies on all express bus routes in the future. This change will include service of 30-minute headways on all regional routes during the AM and PM peak periods.

A queue jump is a dedicated lane for bus or high occupancy vehicles to provide preference to vehicles in the queue jump at intersections, often found in bus rapid transit systems and many times coupled with a leading bus interval or transit signal priority.

100

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

CALISTOGA

ST. HELENA

Rutherford 10X

Santa Rosa

Oakville

YOUNTVILLE

SO NA N

Sonoma

TY UN TY CO UN CO

A M O

Vacaville

Redwood Park & Ride

Soscol Gateway Transit Center

NAPA 121

NAPA COUNTY SOLANO COUNTY

FAIRFIELD

Petaluma

101

Cordelia

121

Route 10 Up Valley Connector

11X

Route 10X Up Valley Express

SUISUN CITY

AMERICAN CANYON 80

Route 11 Napa Vallejo Connector

680

RouteNovato 11X Napa Vallejo Express

VALLEJO

780

Route 21 Napa Solano Express

Benicia

Route 29 Napa BART Express

101

San Rafael 580

Richmond

EL CERRITO El Cerrito del Norte BART

Figure 34. EXPRESS BUS AND REGIONAL ROUTE SYSTEM MAP

Concord 680

101

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

FIXED ROUTE AND SHUTTLE SERVICES

writing, Vine Transit service is operating buses on-demand (stop-to-stop) using the Ride the Vine App in lieu of fixed route service within the City of Napa. The approach to the COA is consistent with service changes being made across the country in urban, suburban, and rural areas – focus on transit demand instead of geographic coverage. Transit planners now have the tools at their fingertips to identify where transit propensity exists in their communities and where transit users are going. This makes it possible to implement focused improvements that will provide better transit for users and ultimately increase transit ridership on the system.

BUS PASSENGERS LOADING AND UNLOADING AT THE SOSCOL GATEWAY TRANSIT CENTER.

NVTA completed a Comprehensive Operations Analysis (COA) in 2018 which included four components: 1) Market Assessment, 2) Technical Analysis, 3) Needs Assessment, and 4) Implementation Plan. The COA evaluated the fixed route service in Napa and the Shuttle services in American Canyon, Calistoga, St. Helena, and Yountville, culminating in system changes that were implemented in January 2020. The COA was primarily focused on local fixed route service in the City of Napa. The purpose of the study was to analyze travel patterns among current riders and determine how to attract new riders to use the Vine routes in the City of Napa. The study resulted in identifying more linear routes with the intention of shortening transit trips throughout the City of Napa. Service changes were implemented on January 5, 2020. As of this writing, the system changes have not been in effect long enough to fully assess the impacts of the service changes and the COVID-19 pandemic has further limited data collection due to temporary service reductions and reduced ridership on fixed route service. At the time of

NVTA’s shuttle services are on-demand door-to-door services deployed in Napa County’s four smaller city jurisdictions. Riders have the option to call dispatch directly or use the “Ride the Vine” app to order a ride. The app identifies a rider’s location and allows the rider to identify their destination. The app notifies the rider when the vehicle will pick them up and the arrival time at their final destination. Depending on the shuttle, riders may also be picked up at designated stops or hail a vehicle if they are in a central location when the vehicle is nearby.

A RIDER IDENTIFYING THEIR DESTINATION ON THE RIDE THE VINE APP.

102

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

r Av

ado

Salv

on ers Jeﬀ

y wa By

121

Vichy E.S.

Vintage H.S.

e wer Av

Tro

S on ers Jeﬀ

on St

Ave

Napa High School e oln Av

Lincoln Ave

Soscol Ave

3rd

Ave

ver

St S Coo

121

col

Old Sonoma R d Foster

Clinic Olé

Imola Ave 121

121 29

Figure 35. FIXED ROUTE AND SHUTTLE SERVICES SYSTEM MAP

Silverado M.S.

Sos

Soscol Gateway Transit Center

D mbs

Premium Outlets

See Inset Mira el Recuardo

Terrace Dr

City Hall

Harvest M.S.

Napa Ri

rel

Lau

121

New Tech H.S.

on St

East Ave

H Jeﬀers

Valle y Rd

1st S

121

Jeﬀers

Vista A

Browns Valley E.S.

Br owns

River

Linc

Soscol Ave

Clinic Olé

Pueblo

Napa

Kaiser Permanente

Linda

A n

od Rd

Redwo

Bel Aire Plaza s St Tranca

Villa L

Redwood M.S.

Queen of the Valley Hospital

D South Napa Marketplace Napa Valley College

Imola Ave

Napa State Hospital

Chamberlain High

103

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Existing 2020 Vine Transit service consists of the following routes: LOCAL FIXED ROUTE SERVICE – CITY OF NAPA

COMMUNITY SHUTTLE SERVICES

ROUTE A – BROWNS VALLEY | NORTH NAPA

AMERICAN CANYON SHUTTLE

ROUTE B – WESTWOOD |SOUTH NAPA

CALISTOGA SHUTTLE

ROUTE C – JEFFERSON | CENTRAL NAPA

ST. HELENA SHUTTLE

ROUTE D – SHETLER | SHURTLEFF | IMOLA

YOUNTVILLE TROLLEY

ROUTE E – NORTHWEST NAPA ROUTE F - SOUTHWEST NAPA ROUTE G – COOMBS | SOUTH NAPA ROUTE H – NORTH NAPA

PLANNED CAPITAL AND OPERATIONAL IMPROVEMENTS

NVTA will continue transitioning the fixed route system in the City of Napa towards bi-directional routes with increased frequency if demand grows as anticipated and financial resources are identified. The agency will also continue to monitor the system using onboard and online surveys and collection of transit performance data to validate the existing system structure and to develop concepts for future changes, expansions, or reductions. NVTA is working to implement bus signal priority on select corridors, which will extend signals’ green phase time on major corridors for buses that are running behind schedule. In addition, the agency will fully transition its fleet to zero emission electric vehicles over the Vision 2045 planning horizon. NVTA is currently exploring use of on-demand services in the City of Napa to improve mobility. Continued technology and resource barriers may pose challenges in deploying on-demand service in the City during normal operating conditions. However, since April 2020 NVTA has been operating stop-to-stop on-demand service in the City of Napa due to the COVID-19 pandemic. A large reduction in ridership, spurred by the pandemic, has allowed the Vine to operate on-demand citywide with only about 200 rides per day. This is an 80% reduction of normal fixed route ridership in the City of Napa. This has allowed for the Vine system to operate on-demand without excessive wait times, currently

running about 10 minutes citywide. As ridership demand increases, and fixed route is phased back in, NVTA staff will look at retaining some on-demand service in areas with lower ridership. Future transit technologies may also assist with transit being deployed on-demand. Transit technologies are discussed in detail in the Emerging Technologies section along with other advancements that are being developed or anticipated to be developed over the 25-year planning horizon of Advancing Mobility 2045. OTHER SERVICES SMART SERVICE FROM NOVATO TO SUISUN CITY

NVTA is collaborating with the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit (SMART), and the Marin, Solano, and Sonoma county transportation agencies to support expansion of the system between the Novato Hamilton SMART station, the Suisun Amtrak/Capital Corridor Station, and the Vallejo Ferry Terminal. SMART received a planning grant from the California State Transportation Agency to complete an engineering study to extend the system to the Suisun Amtrak station. The engineering study estimated the cost to extend the system to Suisun at roughly $1 billion but that does not include stations or operations. The Solano Transportation Authority also recently completed a feasibility study that examined potential rail station locations along with Union Pacific/SMART corridor within Solano County.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

As of this writing, the Vallejo Ferry expansion has not been studied, but there is an existing rail line to make a connection to the San Francisco Bay Ferry System feasible.

104

and possible adoption. The Plan is to describe the actions needed to re-shape the region’s transit system into a more connected, more efficient, and more user-focused mobility network across the entire Bay Area. NVTA’s Vine Transit system is already ahead of the curve in many ways as the sole transit operator in Napa County. In many of the Bay Area counties there are several transit operators. For example, in neighboring Solano County, there are five transit operators that run on different schedules, with different labor unions, fare structures and system standards. Napa Valley Transportation Authority as the operator of the Vine is fully integrated, operating all local fixed route, regional routes, paratransit and community shuttles.

PASSENGERS BOARDING THE SMART TRAIN AT ROHNERT PARK.

BAY AREA CONNECTIVITY

There has been a lot of interest in the Bay Area to make the Bay Area transit experience more seamless and connected. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission created a Blue Ribbon Task Force in part as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, to distribute federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act funding, and to provide a uniform front in how transit operators were dealing with transit operations amidst COVID. The task force is also a way to start the conversation on a seamless Bay Area transit system. The task force has been charged with submitting a Bay Area Public Transit Transformation Action Plan to the MTC Commission by mid-2021 for its consideration

The Vine system connects to several regional systems such as Capitol Corridor in Suisun, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) in El Cerrito, and San Francisco Bay Ferry in Vallejo. The Vine also travels to Vallejo connecting with Soltrans at the Sereno Transit Center. There are many opportunities to improve connectivity and coordination with Soltrans along the SR 29 Corridor since there are frequent trips between Vallejo and American Canyon. Coupled with other commute trips, such as to Napa Valley College, and recreational trips to downtown Napa, there is significant demand and interest to improve coordination between the two systems by Solano and Napa residents. The Task Force is also identifying ways to improve connectivity between systems to improve the rider experience and to identify system efficiencies. In addition, many Napa residents go to Kaiser Vallejo for medical services. NVTA is currently reviewing how the VineGo paratransit system can better coordinate between Napa and Vallejo. Over the next year, the Bay Area Blue Ribbon Task Force will drive a vision for a Regional Express Bus Network that will include defining a regional network, local network and feeder network and specific standards for each network. The task force will also prepare a Comprehensive Operations Analysis for these networks that will inform a long-range Master Plan focused on transit operations.

105

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

HEALTH AND SAFETY How we travel not only influences our quality of life, but also our safety and our health. Certain modes of transportation promote good health, like walking, bicycling, and taking transit. Other modes can be harmful to our health and the environment, in particular, motor vehicles. Recognizing that health and transportation are intrinsically connected, transportation and health officials are partnering to encourage individuals to use more active-based and sustainable commute modes. It was not until well into the 20th century that most American households had cars. While cars have undoubtedly provided greater mobility and individual travel independence that enhances personal freedom and facilitates expanded access to work and recreation options, it has come at a significant price to our health and environmental well-being. Land use patterns have contributed significantly to transportation-related health issues. New developments have separated workers from jobs, central shopping districts from housing, and communities from public transit. Origins and destinations have become further apart because of the convenience of the automobile. To connect these more distant locations, we have built roadways, many of which cannot accommodate bicycle and pedestrian traffic, that facilitate greater automobile use. Health considerations and policy initiatives have emerged in multiple sectors to address the adverse health and safety impacts of transportation. Transportation planners and public health officials have forged alliances to discover how strategic transportation planning can contribute to public health goals. The Community Health Assessment (CHA, 2018) developed by the Napa County Public Health Department used an in-depth cooperative process to create the Live Healthy Napa County (LHNC) collaborative which acknowledges that how people travel and their access to mobility plays a role in both physical and mental health. The CHA, in which NVTA plays an active role, will guide the development of the Community Health Improvement Plan (CHIP) to establish specific goals for improving the health and well-being for people who live and work in Napa County.

LHNC embarked on this most current strategic planning process in 2017. Since the completion of the first health assessment and improvement plan in 2014, LHNC has increasingly focused on addressing social determinants of health and health inequities among Napa County residents. The social determinants of health include economic, social, physical, and environmental factors, and are the strongest predictors of illness and mortality. LHNC adapted the Livable Communities Framework14 strategies developed by the World Health Organization, describing eight domains that address the social determinants of health: TRANSPORT

OUTDOOR SPACE & BUILDINGS

COMMUNICATION & INFORMATION

SOCIAL DETERMINANTS

SOCIAL PARTICIPATION

RESPECT & SOCIAL INCLUSION

COMMUNITY SUPPORT & HEALTH

Napa County Department of Public Health. 2018 Napa County Community Health Assessment. http://www.livehealthynapacounty.org/uploads/5/1/4/4/51449431/cha_exec_summary_eng.pdf.

HOUSING

CIVIC PARTICIPATION & ENJOYMENT

106

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Each of these domains is grouped into three segments: SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT SOCIAL PARTICIPATION, CIVIC PARTICIPATION AND EMPLOYMENT, AND RESPECT AND SOCIAL INCLUSION BUILT ENVIRONMENT HOUSING, TRANSPORTATION, AND OUTDOOR SPACES AND BUILDINGS COMMUNITY HEALTH ENVIRONMENT COMMUNITY AND HEALTH SERVICES, AND COMMUNICATION AND INFORMATION

The focus on addressing local health concerns related to transportation falls within the Built Environment.

HEALTH EFFECTS OF TRANSPORTATION America’s current transportation system has resulted in several significant health challenges. The CHA community survey highlights some of the conditions in Napa County that contribute to health challenges including but not limited to: y

79% (nearly four out of five people) who commute to work drive alone

Less than one percent of people list public transportation as their primary mode of transportation to work

Only two in five people surveyed stated that they regularly walk for transport, fun or exercise

Most cities in Napa County are considered moderately “car-dependent” for errands and activities

This last bullet is corroborated in NVTA’s 2020 Travel Behavior Study15 (see Figure 31) which shows the majority of trips (63 percent) are five miles or less and that 31 percent of trips are under two miles. Many shorter trips could be converted to active modes, such as walking or bicycling, if the right infrastructure were in place. The geographic environment is conducive to active mode trip making, since most of Napa’s population resides on the Valley floor where it is flat and the climate is relatively moderate, and the central business districts are relatively small.

Napa Valley Transportation Authority. Napa Valley Travel Behavior Study. May 2020. https://www.nvta.ca.gov/sites/default/files/NapaValley_TBS_Document_final%20May%202020.pdf

107

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

SAFETY AND VISION ZERO In the U.S. during 2018, there were 36,560 people killed and more than 2.7 million injured in motor vehicle collisions.16 In California, nearly 3,600 people die each year in traffic collisions and more than 13,000 people are severely injured.17 Collectively, these traffic collisions cost California over $53.5 billion.18 Napa County had 90 serious collisions in 2018; 14 were fatal, while 76 collisions resulted in severe injuries.19 More than 50 percent of the Napa County collisions in 2018 occurred on a state highway, 7.8 percent involved bicycles and 10 percent involved pedestrians. In Napa County, a total of 14 people were killed and 131 were severely injured in 2018. These conditions are prompting a new approach to eliminate collisions on highways and roadways called Vision Zero. WHAT IS VISION ZERO?

Vision Zero is a policy-based strategy that seeks to eliminate fatalities and serious injuries from roadways. Sweden was the first country to introduce the concept in 1997 and it has achieved significant success in reducing severe and fatal injuries on roadways using various proven countermeasures. A significant achievement for Vision Zero occurred in 2019 when both Oslo20 and Helsinki21 reduced severe and fatal injuries among bicyclists and pedestrians to zero. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is committed to making safety a top priority on the nation’s roadways and coordinates efforts with the states under the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP).22 FHWA has determined that nearly 40 percent of severe and fatal roadway collisions occur

on local roads, and encourages local stakeholders to form task force teams using data-driven, proven countermeasure approaches to affect change. Teams should include, but not be limited to: y

Public Health

Law Enforcement

Elected Officials

Transportation Departments

Emergency Medical Services

Vision Zero requires multi-faceted coordination to be successful. Typically there is a government leader champion who drives the change, and government agencies play an instrumental role in the approach. These local stakeholder teams can pool knowledge, data, and resources to create local roadway safety plans that use data-driven approaches towards improving safety on local streets and highways. The elected public official who champions the Vision Zero strategy and promotes its implementation is often the catalyst for change. A NEW APPROACH TO ROADWAY SAFETY

The traditional notion that roads should be designed to maximize vehicle travel is increasingly challenged as cities and counties rethink the function and purpose of their streets to accommodate all types of road users, including bicyclists and pedestrians.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Traffic Safety Facts Annual Report Tables. https://cdan.dot.gov/tsftables/tsfar.htm. California Office of Traffic Safety. California Highway Safety Plan 2019. https://www.ots.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/sites/67/2019/06/2019-Highway-Safety-Plan-HSP.pdf. 18 This estimate was calculated by the University of California, Institute for Transportation Studies using Strategic Highway Safety Plan data and the National Safety Council’s Guide to Calculating Costs of Motor-Vehicle Injuries. 19 Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC). Transportation Injury Mapping System. (University of California Berkeley, 2020). https://tims.berkeley.edu 20 Walker, Alissa. “How Oslo Virtually Eliminated Pedestrian and Cyclist Deaths.” Curbed. Curbed, January 3, 2020. https://archive.curbed. com/2020/1/3/21048066/oslo-vision-zero-pedestrian-cyclist-deaths. 21 SmartCitiesWorld. “Zero Pedestrian Fatalities in Helsinki Traffic in 2019.” Smart Cities World. https://www.smartcitiesworld.net/news/news/zero-pedestrian-fatalities-in-helsinki-traffic-in-2019-5002. 22 Federal Highway Administration. “Zero Deaths – Saving Lives through a Safety Culture and a Safe System.” https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/zerodeaths/ 16 17

108

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Statistical data points to speed as the number one cause of severe injury and fatalities in motor vehicle collisions. Moreover, traffic fatalities and serious injuries exponentially increase with vehicle speed. This holds particularly true for auto-pedestrian and auto-bicycle collisions. Figure 36 illustrates the severity of a vehicle versus pedestrian collision related to speed.

IF HIT BY A VEHICLE MOVING AT:

PERSON SURVIVES THE COLLISION:

RESULTS IN A FATALITY:

90%

10%

20 MPH 60%

40%

30 MPH 20%

80%

40 MPH Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, Literature Reviewed on Vehicle Travel Speeds and Pedestrian Injuries, March 2000. Figure 36. HOW VEHICLE SPEED IMPACTS THE SEVERITY OF A COLLISION

Bicyclists and pedestrians have particular challenges when sharing the road with cars and trucks. Collisions involving bicyclists and pedestrians tend to be under-reported since most do not require emergency room visits or cause significant vehicle damage. Nonetheless, collision data shown in Figure 37, indicates that reported bicycle collisions account for almost eight percent and reported pedestrian collisions account for nine percent of the total severe or fatal injury collisions within the county.

74% 9% 7% OTHER

PEDESTRIAN

BICYCLE

Source: Transportation Injury Mapping System, 2020. Figure 37. NAPA COUNTY SEVERE AND FATAL COLLISIONS BY TYPE (2018)

109

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

SAFETY AND SPEED

SAFETY FIRST POLICY

While roadway safety has long been the primary consideration in establishing speed limits, speeding-related fatalities continue to represent a large portion of California’s total traffic fatalities. Current procedures for setting speed limits in California rely on the 85th percentile methodology,23 an approach developed decades ago for vehicles primarily on rural roads. While the California Manual for Setting Speed Limits was updated in February 2020, no substantial changes were made to how speeds are calculated and the 85th percentile methodology is still the most common method.

Vision Zero is a straightforward approach to reducing trafficrelated deaths and severe injuries; however, achieving it requires a fundamental paradigm shift in the way traffic collisions are viewed, how streets are designed, and how public agencies work together to improve driver behavior.

Greater flexibility to allow local jurisdictions to establish speed limits would provide an expanded toolbox to address rising traffic fatalities and injuries, especially for the most vulnerable roadway users.

A simple step forward is to stop describing crashes as “accidents,” which suggests they are not preventable. Authorities and stakeholders should acknowledge that preventing severe and fatal collisions begins with examining the main causes and locations using a data-driven and systematic approach. Data often shows that these collisions involving severe or fatal injuries occur on only a small percentage of roadways, typically highways, arterials, and other higher speed roadways, allowing efforts and limited resources to be focused on the highest injury networks.

WE MUST AFFIRM THE FACT THAT EVERY ROADWAY DEATH AND LIFE-ALTERING INJURY IS PREVENTABLE. — THE VISION ZERO NETWORK

Vision Zero applies to all roadway users, traffic collision injuries, and traffic-related deaths. It is a particular focus to protect vulnerable users, including people walking; elderly persons or persons with disabilities; people using skateboards, scooters, or electric-assist vehicles; people riding bicycles; and those using other mobility devices. This requires a change in the traditional approach to roadway safety. SPEED FEEDBACK SIGNS PROVIDE MOTORISTS WITH INFORMATION ABOUT THEIR SPEED TO COMPARE TO THE SPEED LIMIT.

California Department of Transportation, Division of Traffic Operations. 2020 California Manual for Setting Speed Limits. https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/safety-programs/documents/2020-california-manual-for-setting-speed-limits-a11y.pdf.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 38 shows how Vision Zero differs from traditional traffic safety approaches:

110

3. A Vision Zero plan or strategy is in place, or elected officials have committed to doing so in a clear timeframe 4. Key departments (including police, transportation, and public health) are engaged in the effort

TRADITIONAL APPROACH • TRAFFIC DEATHS ARE INEVITABLE • PERFECT HUMAN BEHAVIOR • PREVENT COLLISIONS • INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY • SAVING LIVES IS EXPENSIVE

The Advancing Mobility 2045 plan will establish the framework to achieve a zero severe and fatal injury goal in Napa County using a data-driven, cooperative approach. The Vision Zero Network notes that programs that are successful in meeting a Vision Zero goal include the following criteria: 1. A clear goal of eliminating traffic fatalities and severe injuries has been set 2. Elected officials are committed to Vision Zero

COMPLETE STREETS ARE HEALTHY STREETS The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) adopted a complete streets directive in 2010, which requires the design and implementation of facilities that support all modes of transportation, including biking, walking, and transit. The implementation of Complete Streets in the Bay Area is a requirement to receive regional funding. All Napa County jurisdictions have adopted complete streets policies into their general plans. Improving multimodal infrastructure is key in achieving a zero fatality goal. This includes ensuring adequate bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. Efforts to build out the bicycle and pedestrian network in Napa County have been successful in recent years. To date NVTA has been successful in securing over $9 million through the Active Transportation Program for multiuse Class I facilities that will provide safe corridors for walking and bicycling. The County, Cities, and Town have also made significant progress identifying gaps in their pedestrian networks which is reflected in the adopted Countywide Pedestrian Plan (2016). The 2019 update to the Countywide Bicycle Plan includes recommendations for over 500 miles of new bicycle infrastructure to create a safer, more connected network with a focus on reducing the level of traffic stress (a measure used to reflect the perceived stress by bicyclists on roadways).

111

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

HEALTH The obesity epidemic is prevalent throughout the entire population, affecting both adults and children. Locally, the obesity rate for adults is on the rise. In Napa County, the adult obesity rate, measured using body mass index, rose from 26.4 percent in 2011–2013 to 29.3 percent in 2014–2016 — an increase of 11 percent. The 2014–2016 Napa County adult obesity rate is also higher than the statewide level of 27.6 percent.

A key strategy in the 2014 CHIP is to build capacity for people to be more physically active each day by walking or biking to school, to work, or on short trips. To implement this strategy the CHIP recommends: y

Providing opportunities for the community to learn how to safely ride bicycles for increased exercise and active transportation

Increasing the proportion of individuals who use active transportation for trips of two miles or less

OBESITY

TRANSPORTATION AND RESPIRATORY ILLNESS

The County Department of Health and Human Services has identified obesity as one of the County’s high priority health issues. Although diet plays a major role in this phenomenon, a sedentary lifestyle is also major factor. Studies have shown a correlation between communities with high automobile ownership and poor health.

Vehicle emissions are a primary cause of respiratory diseases, such as asthma and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, as well as other health-related effects, including cancer. While automobiles are much cleaner today than earlier generations, the steady increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) means that local air quality continues to be negatively affected.

As reported in the 2018 Napa County Community Health Assessment (CHA)24, “obesity is a serious, chronic disease that increases the risk of heart disease, stroke, type 2 diabetes, certain cancers, infertility, mental health, and death (all-causes). In fact, if the obesity epidemic is not addressed, the current generation of children, for the first time in 100 years, is expected to have a shorter life expectancy than their parents.” The CHA will inform the update of the Community Health Improvement Plan (CHIP) which is currently being updated.

Figure 39. PERCENTAGE OF THE ADULTS THAT ARE OBESE IN NAPA COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA

Figures 39 and 40, show the obesity rate charts for Adults and Children in Napa County. While all these figures are alarming, active transportation modes provide an opportunity to improve the general health of the community and help curb these illnesses. Building and expanding infrastructure for bicyclists and pedestrians such as sidewalks and bicycle paths can encourage the population to use alternatives modes of transportation and maintain a healthy lifestyle.

29%

NAPA COUNTY

CALIFORNIA

Source: California Health Interview Survey, 2014–2016

Napa County Department of Health. 2018 Community Health Assessment. https://insight.livestories.com/s/v2/cha-homepage/9caa1d21-346b-4095-bb95-e3adee664960/

28%

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 40. PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS WITH AN UNHEALTHY BODY COMPOSITION IN NAPA COUNTY AND CALIFORNIA

17%

NAPA COUNTY

20%

CALIFORNIA

Source: California Board of Education, 2017

In fact, Napa County is in the worst quartile of counties in California with respect to asthma prevalence.25 The Bay Area as a whole has a non-attainment status for California air quality standards for ozone and particulate matter, including PM 2.5, which has been shown to be a leading contributor to respiratory disease in children. NVTA’s efforts to reduce overall VMT in the county are an important local contribution to the regional (and even global) efforts to reduce air pollution.

112

LONG COMMUTES AND TRAFFIC CONGESTION CAN CONTRIBUTE TO STRESS AND MENTAL HEALTH ISSUES

Studies have linked stress levels to commute satisfaction and specifically the level and frequency of traffic congestion. Individuals who endure traffic congestion report significantly higher levels of stress than those subject to infrequent traffic congestion. Similarly, individuals with longer commutes report higher levels of stress compared to those with shorter commutes. More importantly, those who are satisfied with their commutes are the least likely to be stressed.26 The average commute to work time for Napa County residents (2014-2018) was 24.9 minutes, a few minutes less than the statewide average of 29.3 minutes. This ranks Napa County 33rd among the 58 California counties.27 Stress, especially chronic stress, has been linked to a wide range of negative health effects. The biochemistry of stress lowers immunity and disrupts the normal functioning of digestion, excretory, and reproductive systems. Over extended periods, routine chronic stress can promote more frequent and severe viral infections, such as the flu or common cold, as well as render certain vaccines, such as the flu shot, less effective. According to the National Institute of Mental Health, over time, routine stress may lead to serious health problems, such as heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, depression, anxiety disorder, and other illnesses.28 Reducing traffic congestion and commute times will result in healthier communities. This can be achieved by rethinking how we commute and how we plan our communities so that walking, bicycling, and taking public transit are more enjoyable, safe, and practical ways to travel for daily needs.

California Department of Public Health. County Asthma Data Tool. https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CCDPHP/DEODC/EHIB/CPE/Pages/CaliforniaBreathingCountyAsthmaProfiles.aspx 26 Haider, Murtaza & Kerr, Kenneth & Badami, Madhav. (2013). Does Commuting Cause Stress? The Public Health Implications of Traffic Congestion. SSRN Electronic Journal. 10.2139/ssrn.2305010. 2013. 27 Statistics from American Community Survey 2018: 5 Year Estimates, United States Census Bureau Table DP03 as found on California Average Commute Time by County. http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/united-states/quick-facts/california/average-commute-time#map 28 National Institute of Mental Health. “5 Things You Should Know About Stress.” http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/publications/stress/index.shtml 25

113

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PROJECTS, POLICIES, AND GOALS While Advancing Mobility 2045 includes a number of projects that will improve safety, local jurisdictions are also advancing a variety of safety improvements through their Local Roadways Safety Plans (LRSPs) and other efforts. Every jurisdiction is required to have an LRSP to qualify for federal Highway Safety Improvement Program funding. Project considerations included in Advancing Mobility 2045 that foster improved health and cleaner environment include: y

Supporting complete street efforts

Expanding transit

Building a new transit maintenance facility to include electric charging for clean air transit vehicles

Expanding the electric car charging network

Expanding shared vehicle and bicycle programs

Building out the active transportation network

Supporting ridesharing through V-Commute and Napa Forward

Investigating new technologies that reduce auto emissions and congestion

Improving highway and road infrastructure to reduce stops and starts

These project areas meet the following Advancing Mobility 2045 Plan goals: y

Serve the transportation needs of the entire community regardless of age, income, or physical ability.

Improve system safety in order to support all modes and serve all users

Minimize the energy and other resources required to move people and goods

A TRANSIT RIDER ENJOYS THE BENEFITS OF COMMUTING BY BUS.

114

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

SUSTAINABILITY NVTA is committed to reducing harmful mobile emissions to improve the environment and create a sustainable future for the Napa Valley community. Electrifying the bus fleet will allow NVTA to reduce its carbon footprint and provide sustainable transportation solutions for years to come. TRANSPORTATION AND THE ENVIRONMENT The combustion of fossil fuels is the source of nearly 97 percent of transportation greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Transportation is the largest end-use sector emitting CO2, and the largest source of GHG emissions in the San Francisco Bay Area. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the transportation sector directly accounts for about 28 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions, making it the leading sector.29 In the San Francisco Bay Area, the transportation sector accounts for 45.5% percent of GHG emissions.30 Burning fossil fuels through combustion engines emits other harmful pollutants into the air, resulting in overall reduced air quality. Harmful emissions can lead to various health issues and other negative environmental impacts. While automobiles have become much cleaner in recent decades, the sheer volume of cars and trucks still significantly contribute to

degraded air quality. This is particularly significant in the Napa River Valley portion of the county, as the natural topography can trap air pollutants. Consequently, Napa’s general population has a higher rate of asthma at 26.7 percent, as compared to the statewide average of 14.8 percent.31 Shifting trips to transit, combined with bus electrification has the potential to significantly reduce GHG emissions associated with transportation. If 10 percent of the trips in the top five travel markets served by transit were shifted away from personal vehicles, this could result in a savings of over 10,000 tons of GHG emissions per year, as shown in Table 21. The State has made nationally recognized strides towards reducing harmful emissions from the transportation sector. NVTA is aggressively transitioning its fleet to zero emission in response to the State’s efforts.

Table 21. POTENTIAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSION SAVINGS WITH MODE SHIFT TO TRANSIT VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED

AVERAGE TRIP LENGTH

POTENTIAL ANNUAL EMISSIONS SAVINGS

TRIPS TO AND FROM NAPA COUNTY

479,143

15.76

3,986 tons

TRIPS WITHIN NAPA COUNTY

802,895

4.75

6,907 tons

DAILY TRIPS

Note: Estimate of year one savings in CO2 emissions if 10 percent of divertible trips identified from the 2020 Travel Behavior Survey shift to transit and fleet is fully electrified using the SB1 Emissions Calculator. See Technical Appendix C for methodology and calculations.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, https://www.epa.gov/ghgemissions/sources-greenhouse-gas-emissions Metropolitan Transportation Commission Vital Signs Greenhouse Gas Emissions 31 Napa County Comprehensive Community Health Assessment, https://www.countyofnapa.org/DocumentCenter/View/249/Napa-County-Comprehensive-Community-Health-Assessment-PDF 29 30

115

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

BUS FLEET ELECTRIFICATION The

Innovative

Clean

Transit

Regulation32

requires California’s public transit agencies to begin transitioning diesel, compressed natural gas (CNG), and liquid natural gas public transit fleets to zero emission. As a result, NVTA is working to transition its fleet to all electric vehicles. With fewer than 100 buses in its fleet, NVTA is considered a small transit agency, so the program requires that the transition to a zero emission fleet must begin on January 1, 2026 when 25 percent of new bus purchases must be zero emission buses. The next milestone in the program is that 50 percent of new bus purchases must be zero emission buses, beginning on January 1, 2029.

Electric buses cost roughly 50 percent more than standard diesel vehicles, and while that cost margin continues to narrow, the capital investment in an all-electric fleet, with necessary charging stations, will be substantial. In order to secure the funding needed, NVTA’s strategy is to replace traditional fuel buses with electric buses prior to the mandate, in order to be eligible for grant programs that would otherwise exclude funds for buses being replaced due to the Innovative Clean Transit Regulation.

Certain types of vehicles are exempt from the Innovative Clean Transit Regulation, primarily because no zero emission fuel vehicles are currently available on the market for these types of buses. These include buses that NVTA currently operates and/or may operate in the future, including cutaway buses and over-the-road coaches. NVTA currently operates 40 standard diesel or CNG vehicles. The count also includes eight Electric-Gasoline hybrid vehicles that were retired early because of design issues that could not be resolved. Heavy-duty vehicles have a 12-year useful life, as defined by the federal government. NVTA replaces its fleet on average between 12 and 16 years, depending on the type of vehicle. Based on that vehicle life, NVTA hopes to secure funding to replace its diesel buses with electric buses, as determined by their scheduled replacement dates (roughly 13-14 year intervals).

EXAMPLE OF AN ELECTRIC BUS. NVTA PLANS TO TRANSITION THEIR BUS FLEET TO ZERO EMISSION ELECTRIC BUSES BY 2030.

California Air Resources Board, December 14, 2018, Title 13, CCR, Sections 2023, 2023.1-2023.11

116

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

The timeline to the right summarizes the existing NVTA fleet and indicates when buses are scheduled to be replaced with a zero emission vehicle, or when buses would require replacement by the Innovative Clean Transit Regulation. Based on NVTA’s proposed electric fleet replacement schedule, all 40 buses will be replaced with zero emission electric vehicles by 2028, roughly 13 years prior to when the agency is required to do so. An all-electric bus fleet is likely to result in significantly improved fuel efficiency, estimated at roughly two and a half times more efficient33

REQUIRED REPLACEMENT

NVTA’s objective is to aggressively pursue funding to replace all its vehicles with zero emission vehicles. This not only significantly reduces NVTA’s carbon footprint, but it also makes NVTA eligible for a number of grant programs that the agency would otherwise not be eligible for. Securing adequate grant funds would allow NVTA to reach its goal of having a 100% zero emission fleet by 2030.

SCHEDULED REPLACEMENT

PROPOSED TRANSITION & REDUCTION OF MOBILE EMISSIONS

2020

2033

2021

2034

REPLACE (4) 2010 35' NEW FLYER GASOLINE-ELECTRIC HYBRID BUSES WITH 30' OR 40' ELECTRIC BUSES

2022

2034

REPLACE (5) 2013 35' EL DORADO CNG VEHICLES WITH 30' OR 40' ELECTRIC BUSES

2025

2038

REPLACE (7) 2016 40' EL DORADO DIESEL BUSES WITH 40' ELECTRIC BUSES

2028

2041*

REPLACE (3) 2011 28' CHEVY ARBOC GASOLINE BUSES WITH 30' ELECTRIC BUSES REPLACE (3) 2012 28' CHEVY ARBOC GASOLINE BUSES WITH 30' ELECTRIC BUSES

REPLACE (2) 2013 GILLIG/ PHANTOM DIESEL BUSES WITH 40' ELECTRIC BUSES REPLACE (10) 2013 40' EL DORADO DIESEL BUSES WITH 40' ELECTRIC BUSES REPLACE (4) 2009 35' NEW FLYER GASOLINE-ELECTRIC HYBRID BUSES WITH 30' OR 40' ELECTRIC BUSES

than an all diesel fleet, that will reduce corresponding emissions by over 50 percent.34 The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) developed a comparative fuel efficiency and cost ratio looking at vehicles operating under exact conditions at Foothill Transit. NREL estimates the cost for fuel per mile for battery electric buses is $0.41 per mile and the cost of CNG at $0.50 per mile while the cost of diesel is $1.05 per mile.35 NVTA currently spends approximately $1.3 million annually on diesel and gasoline combined. This would reduce NVTA’s diesel and gasoline (which has an even higher cost per mile) fueling costs by $508,000 per year. Although it will take years Environmental and Energy Study Institute Fact Sheet: Battery Electric Buses: Benefits Outweigh Costs 34 Union of Concerned Scientists – Electric Vs. Diesel Vs. Natural Gas: Which Bus is Best for the Climate? 35 NREL – Foothill Transit Battery Electric Bus Demonstration Result June 2017 * Two BY 2016 40’ El Dorado Diesel Buses are required to be replaced in 2028, the other five require replacement in 2041. 33

REPLACE (2) 2016 35' EL DORADO DIESEL BUSES WITH 30' OR 40' ELECTRIC BUSES

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

117

to offset the capital investment associated with electric bus costs, the extra buses needed to address charging delays, and the charging infrastructure. This initiative shows significant promise in reducing harmful mobile emissions and improving the environment in Napa Valley. FUEL SUPPLY, BATTERY STORAGE, AND CAPITAL COSTS A major challenge for new fueling technologies is supply. We take for granted the current supply of gasoline and diesel fuel because stations are abundant in Napa Valley and along SR 29 and I-80 where most of NVTA’s bus service operates. To charge the new electric bus fleet, NVTA’s new maintenance facility will have 50 charging stations to accommodate NVTA’s express bus, regional service, and fixed route fleet. Paratransittype vehicles, known as cutaways, are not currently subject to Innovative Clean Transit Regulation. Nevertheless, the maintenance facility will include idle infrastructure that can accommodate the addition of future charging stations if the regulation is expanded to these types of vehicles or when NVTA increases its fleet. The cost to install each charging station is roughly $100,000. Replacement batteries is another expense for NVTA to consider. Some manufacturers are guaranteeing that the useful life of the battery is equivalent to the useful life of the bus (approximately 12 years). However, it is more likely that a battery will need to be replaced mid-life, which could cost as much as $150,000. When fully charged, a typical bus battery can go as far as 350 miles. Another challenge is that it takes six hours, on average, to fully charge an electric bus battery. At any given time, NVTA has four or five buses operating in express bus routes and there is no time in the schedule to allow for recharging. To make a successful transition to battery-operated electric buses, the agency will need almost twice as many buses to run express bus service, in order to allow for adequate time to recharge.

EXAMPLE OF AN INDUCTIVE BUS CHARGING STATION.

One solution to this recharging challenge is to develop a network of inductive (surface) charging stations located at common transportation hubs, such as Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) stations or at San Francisco ferry stations, that can be used by NVTA and its connecting transit partners. The cost of each inductive station will differ depending on the location, but on average, each station costs approximately $400,000.

118

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

RESPONDING TO EMERGENCIES AND OPERATING DURING POWER OUTAGES Another way that NVTA will work towards being more sustainable will be to retrofit their new maintenance facility with solar panels. The solar panel system has been engineered to meet the needs of the maintenance facility and office, but will not have the capacity to also charge NVTA’s vehicles due to insufficient space for battery storage. To address this issue, an additional battery storage site will be needed to help NVTA generate solar power and store it off the grid for when it is needed to charge its electric vehicles. Since the design of the facility was completed in 2019, NVTA was able to acquire an adjacent parcel to the maintenance facility site on Sheehy Court. This adjacent facility ,which is included for funding consideration in this plan, will be developed to accommodate additional parking and to build a facility that can accommodate battery storage.

Constructing a battery storage facility will not only reduce fueling costs further, but it will also provide battery backup power for NVTA vehicles during power outages. As a result of the 2019 fire season, Pacific Gas & Electric implemented a Public Safety Power Shutoff procedures, making potential power outages more likely. Power consistency is a necessary element for the success of the battery electric bus fuel transition. Even during power outages, NVTA riders depend on the bus service to access lifeline services, such as food, healthcare, employment, and education. The battery storage facility is also a necessary resource during emergencies since Vine Transit is a first responder and can be called to evacuate Napa County residents. Without a battery backup facility, NVTA will not be able to provide this vital emergency response.

NVTA WILL BUILD A NEW $32 MILLION MAINTENANCE AND ADMINISTRATION FACILITY AT SHEEHY COURT IN NAPA, CA TO ADDRESS THE GROWING NEEDS OF THE TRANSIT OPERATIONS. THE PROJECT WILL ALLOW NVTA TO MAINTAIN AND EXPAND TRANSIT SERVICE FOR THE NEXT 50 YEARS.

119

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES The transportation and mobility industries are currently undergoing profound and rapid change resulting from the emergence of new technologies. These rapid changes in available transportation technologies and services represent both a challenge and an opportunity to shape Napa’s transportation network to serve the goals of equity, safety, efficiency, economic sustainability, and environmental sustainability. This chapter provides an overview of the most promising technologies for Napa, summarizes current efforts, and describes the types of investments needed to realize the full potential.

THE FUTURE OF MOBILITY: AUTONOMOUS, CONNECTED, ELECTRIC, AND SHARED VEHICLES

AUTONOMOUS

CONNECTED

ELECTRIC

SHARED

While the timeline of implementation for autonomous vehicle (AV) technology is uncertain, there is also a huge investment being made in AVs by the private sector. Some level of vehicle autonomy will be featured in the transportation system of the future.

In the future, both privately-owned and fleet vehicles will increasingly become connected vehicles (CVs). CVs can communicate with the transportation infrastructure, such as traffic signals, as well as other vehicles and will enhance safety and improve traffic flow.

Electromobility refers to the development of electric-powered vehicle drivetrains intended to shift vehicle design away from fossil fuel use and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Electric vehicles of all types, from bicycles to buses, will be available and are expected to have lower operating costs than their internal combustion counterparts.

Shared mobility encompasses shared automobiles, ridesharing or ride-hailing services (also called Transportation Network Companies (TNCs)), short-term car rentals, docked and dockless bicycle rentals, electric scooters, and other micromobility devices that are now found in many cities.

120

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TECHNOLOGY TO IMPROVE ROADWAY OPERATIONS Public transportation agencies are looking to advanced communications and signaling technologies as a way to improve traffic flow and person throughput, and reduce congestion on existing roadways. Using technology to enhance traffic operations is often a more sustainable and more feasible alternative to adding more lanes to increase roadway capacity.

AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY POTENTIAL BENEFITS: • I NCREASE THE CARRYING CAPACITY OF ROADWAYS BY REDUCING THE DISTANCE NEEDED BETWEEN TRAVELING VEHICLE • I MPROVE SAFETY BY REMOVING HUMAN DRIVER ERROR FROM THE EQUATION • E XPAND MOBILITY TO THOSE WHO ARE UNABLE TO PHYSICALLY OPERATE A VEHICLE

CONSIDERATIONS: • W IDESPREAD ADOPTION OF AVS COULD ALSO WORSEN CONGESTION WITH EMPTY REPOSITIONING TRIPS AND BY UNDERMINING TRANSIT USE • TO GAIN THE FULL BENEFIT OF AV TECHNOLOGY, THE STATE, COUNTIES, AND CITIES WILL NEED TO INVEST IN A CONNECTED VEHICLE COMMUNICATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENHANCED PAVEMENT MARKINGS ALONG KEY CORRIDORS • AV TECHNOLOGY IS BEST IMPLEMENTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH POLICIES AND INVESTMENTS THAT PRIORITIZE TRANSIT USE FOR LONGER TRIPS

HIGHWAY SYSTEMS AND LANE MANAGEMENT

Key roadway corridors can be managed by providing additional lanes to the predominant flow of traffic, prioritizing transit vehicles, emergency vehicles or carpools, and responding to incidents and changing conditions in real time. Some of the key technologies for managing roadways are described in the following paragraphs. Advanced Signal Technologies: With adaptive traffic signal systems, signal timing can adjust in response to changing traffic conditions using real-time detection data and algorithms, to reduce delays. Traffic signal systems can also give priority to transit or emergency vehicles. Safety for bicyclists and pedestrians can be improved with specialized detection equipment at intersections and signal timing plans that reduce conflicts with vehicles. In the future, traffic signal systems will also be able to communicate with connected and autonomous vehicles. Transportation agencies can make available real-time Signal Phase and Timing (SPaT) data for connected vehicles. When combined with real-time vehicle and/or pedestrian status information, a number of safety- and mobility-enhancing applications can be provided, including red light violation warnings, dilemma zone protection, pedestrian-in-crosswalk warnings, and eco-approach and departure information. Changeable Message Signs: Today’s changeable message signs (CMS) are a well-established means of providing a variety of traveler information to drivers on freeways and major roadways. They provide information about incidents, travel times to key destinations, and alternate or diversion route recommendations. Electronic roadway signs are used to provide variable speed limits, lane usage guidance (e.g.,

121

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

lane closed due to incident ahead or buses allowed to run on shoulder), or to manage reversible lanes. In-Vehicle Signing (Virtual Changeable Message Signing): An emerging concept to augment or even replace traditional changeable message signs is to deliver geo-targeted en-route traveler information directly to a vehicle or in-vehicle device. Leveraging the ubiquity of Internetconnected smart phones and in anticipation of the wider adoption of CV technologies, there is an opportunity to provide better-targeted traveler information to road users at a much lower cost. In the near-term, the virtual CMS concept involves making relevant information available through a public data portal that is accessible to third-party information service providers (ISPs). These ISPs would subscribe to that data and make it available to the vehicle through a personal information device or an integrated display. Further in the future, when CV technologies are either mandated or widely adopted, the virtual CMS concept would also use roadside radios and an application to broadcast relevant messages to equipped CVs. Such infrastructureto-vehicle (I2V) communication could also occur without a connection to a central system, which may benefit remote locations where communications capabilities are limited. Dynamic Lane Assignment: Dynamic lane assignment reallocates road space in response to changes in demand to create a more efficient use of existing roadway infrastructure. This approach can function as an alternative to constructing more lanes by providing additional capacity to certain kinds of traffic at certain times. Examples include reversible

lanes on highways and arterials, merge (or junction) control on highway ramps, and, most applicable to Napa, part-time highway shoulder use. KEY INVESTMENTS

Advanced roadway technologies will require a supporting communications backbone and should be managed from a centralized Traffic Operations Center (TOC). These investments would not only improve typical traffic operations, but would allow for enhanced emergency operations (e.g., traffic could be efficiently directed out of Napa Valley during an emergency, such as a wildfire). Communications Backbone: High-speed communications networks that are linked to central systems, field elements, and mobile users are the foundational capability needed to support existing and future transportation technology applications. The goal of a next-generation communications infrastructure is to enable reliable, resilient communications with sufficient capacity to support future technologies and applications that may have greater speed and bandwidth needs for data exchange. Communications Technologies: Communications can be provided through a fiber-optic communications system and/or supplemented with wireless communications. A fiber-optic communications system provides high bandwidth and reliability, and is the gold standard for establishing next-generation communications networks. In some situations, such as rural locations or difficult terrain, wired networks are less feasible and wireless network links can be used instead. The emergence of 5G commercial cellular networks offer the potential to access high bandwidth communications without the need to install fiber optic infrastructure (e.g., underground conduit). However, to achieve the promised data throughput levels, a relatively high density of 5G small cell towers would be required, which may be impractical in more rural or remote areas.

122

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Coverage: Future transportation technology applications will employ some combination of processing at a central system (e.g., a management center or in the cloud), at the device in the field, with external central systems (e.g., a neighboring jurisdiction’s traffic management center), and potentially, with individual mobile users (e.g., connected vehicles). Traffic Operations Center: As NVTA continues to incorporate more advanced technologies and infrastructure, it will

SUPPORTING POLICIES

Develop a regional communications master plan to establish a communications architecture, required capabilities, identify technologies and standards, prioritize locations, and sequence improvements.

Require that as part of any roadway construction project, communications infrastructure improvements be included.

become necessary to establish systems and facilities that can coordinate operations across the region. In partnership with local jurisdictions and Caltrans, NVTA plans to establish a TOC that could serve as a data collection, monitoring, and response center for key roadways in the area, as well as collaborate with other TOCs in the region. The functions for this TOC would include monitoring and management of: y

Traveler information messaging (using changeable message signs)

Traffic signal controls

Real-time corridor traffic congestion

Incidents and road conditions (e.g., identifying stalls on the shoulder that could impede bus operations)

Vehicular speeds, volumes, and occupancies

Travel times

Road closures

Weather

Evacuation and emergency response

In addition, the TOC could receive event data through various data sources, such as local police, California Highway Patrol, Caltrans, and CCTV video feeds. The information received could be reviewed, verified, and disseminated to other agencies and the public.

INFORMATION MESSAGING CAN ALERT TRAVELERS TO COLLISIONS OR OTHER CONDITIONS AHEAD.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TECHNOLOGY TO SUPPORT TRANSIT USE The purpose of planning for and incorporating emerging technologies and public transportation service models is to advance the safe, equitable, and efficient accommodation of all travelers using the public transportation system and to expand transit’s role in a regional, multimodal transportation system. This section describes some leading transit industry trends, as well as technologies that NVTA is already implementing to be part of the next evolution of public transportation. Also addressed are technologies that NVTA and other transit agencies are using to optimize operations, increase safety and security, and improve transit-specific customer information. REAL-TIME SIGNAGE

Electronic signage at bus stops and other key locations that displays accurate bus arrival information is a well-established approach to improve the transit experience and make it a more viable option for travelers. ON-BUS TECHNOLOGY

A connected bus provides an onboard platform to interface with various vehicle systems (e.g., automatic vehicle location, automatic passenger counting, closed-circuit television (CCTV), fare payment, and vehicle sensors) and an efficient communications routing capability (e.g., 4G/5G cellular, Wi-Fi, and dedicated short-range communications) so that relevant safety, performance, and operational information can be transmitted to and from other connected vehicles, infrastructure, and remote systems. NVTA’s Vine transit has already begun extending mobile networking to its bus fleet, which can be leveraged to enhance the fleet’s connected capabilities. Vehicle Diagnostic Monitoring: Transit agencies are increasingly deploying on-board technologies to provide better monitoring and real-time reporting of key vehicle diagnostics. Better diagnostic information improves vehicle

123

uptime and surfaces maintenance issues earlier to minimize revenue service operation impacts. Transit agencies are beginning to deploy Internet-of-Things (IoT) mobile platforms on their vehicles to collect and aggregate vehicle sensor data and perform analytics to proactively predict and address maintenance issues. Video/CCTV Monitoring and Analytics: Real-time video monitoring and analytics for stations, vehicles, and infrastructure provide machine learning-based surveillance and anomalous event detection capabilities (e.g., disruptive passengers, altercations, or fires). This technology is accessed remotely and is supported by high-bandwidth networks. Transit Signal Priority: Transit Signal Priority (TSP) leverages vehicle and signal system communications to provide priority service to transit vehicles at traffic signals that improves travel times and schedule adherence. TSP works by adjusting the timing of a traffic signal’s red and green cycles to reduce the amount of time a transit vehicle spends waiting at a red light. Green times may be extended so an approaching transit vehicle can get through the intersection without stopping, or red times may be shortened so that a stopped vehicle can get moving again. Bus-only signal phases can help buses make left turns or “jump the queue” around traffic stopped at a red light. Because the decision to grant signal priority will always remain with the signal owner, any TSP initiative or deployment will have to be closely coordinated with the operating agency, taking into consideration their operations and infrastructure requirements. Connection Protection: Leveraging connected travelers, vehicles, and management systems, transit services can be coordinated across agencies to provide passengers with efficient connections between different lines and jurisdictions (e.g., between Vine transit and BART, Amtrak, and the San Francisco Bay Ferry). Particularly for high-volume transfer and low-frequency lines, incorporating real-time vehicle status

124

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

and connected passenger itinerary information can be used to recommend holding a transit vehicle if transfer passengers are approaching. NVTA is using similar technology now through its automatic vehicle location system. It informs riders when a bus will arrive at a stop, and for on-demand services, riders may request a ride through the Ride the Vine app and use the app to monitor when a bus will arrive.

KEY INVESTMENTS AND SUPPORTING POLICIES

Advanced Vehicle Safety Systems: Incorporating computer vision and other advanced driver-assistance system capabilities allow the connected bus to identify potential safety situations, provide applicable warnings to the vehicle operator, and even intervene proactively using automatic braking and steering assist. Recent pilot applications have demonstrated continual improvement in object recognition accuracy, false alert reductions, and capabilities in non-ideal environments (e.g., nighttime imaging). Autonomous Vehicles: Incorporating AV capabilities in the transit fleet using a phased approach provides increased functionality in complex environments. Pilot programs have been deployed, such as at the Veteran’s Administration facility in Palo Alto, California. In the future, NVTA envisions AV applications for general paratransit and on-demand services. Bus On Shoulder Running

Designed to improve transit travel times and increase the attractiveness of transit as a mode choice, bus on shoulder running allows authorized transit vehicles to use the shoulder to avoid congestion in the general purpose lanes. Bus on shoulder operations are typically used only during congested periods or when travel speeds in the adjacent lanes fall below a defined threshold. In Napa County, bus on shoulder running is of key interest between North Napa and American Canyon Road. Bus shoulder running may be facilitated by advanced technologies. For example, using automated short-range communications, buses running on the shoulder can provide alerts to downstream ramp meters or traffic signals to hold merging or conflicting traffic.

Work to implement transit supportive technology investments as proposed in the SR 29 Comprehensive Multimodal Corridor Plan including implementation of bus lanes, bus queue jumps and Transit Signal Priority

Continue to implement mobile networking in the Vine fleet

Support bus on shoulder and other operational improvements that bus travel times competitive with the automobile

TECHNOLOGY TO SUPPORT ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION Active transportation can also benefit from advancing transportation technologies. For example, enhanced video bicycle detection at traffic signals can be used to ensure that bicyclists get a green light and that it lasts long enough for them to cross the intersection. The same technology can be used to detect pedestrians in the crosswalk. In addition, some traffic signal systems can receive communications via an app on the personal devices of bicyclists, potentially creating a “green wave” timed to bicycle movements. Transportation technologies, including traffic signal timings, can also be used to improve safety for bicyclists and pedestrians. A Rectangular Rapid-Flashing Beacon (RRFB) alerts vehicles that pedestrians are nearby with two rectangular-shaped yellow lights that flash rapidly when a pedestrian is detected by the system or pushes a button. In the future, infrastructure-to-vehicle applications may communicate directly to approaching vehicles to warn of pedestrians in a crosswalk. KEY INVESTMENTS AND SUPPORTING POLICIES

Implement technology solutions that support active transportation users, as identified in the latest countywide Active Transportation Plan.

125

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

VEHICLE ELECTRIFICATION

NEW WAYS OF DELIVERING MOBILITY

The use of electric-powered vehicles, or electromobility, reduces greenhouse gas emissions. Electric versions of all types of vehicles, ranging from bicycles to buses, will be increasingly available and are expected to have lower operating costs than their internal combustion engine counterparts.

Recent years have seen a proliferation of ride-hailing, transit route planning, and shared mobility apps. Examples of these services include Uber and Lyft ride hailing, bicycle- and scooter-share services, and NVTA’s own Ride the Vine app. The trend is towards increasingly integrated services and payment methods, also known as Mobility as a Service (MaaS).

Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment

A robust, accessible, and equitable network of electric vehicle charging stations will be necessary to support the adoption of alternatives to internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles. Developing an electric vehicle supply equipment (EVSE) network will involve not only plans for publicly available charging locations, but also a review of local building and zoning codes to ensure that all residences and workplaces can be equipped with electric vehicle charging. EVSE can be provided at public buildings, mobility hubs, transit stations, and park-and-ride lots. Transit Vehicle Electrification

Electric vehicles can provide transit service with significantly less greenhouse gas emissions and lower maintenance costs. While developing a transit vehicle charging strategy and planning the necessary infrastructure will be a challenge, the transition to electric fleets is mandated by law and NVTA is already working towards this goal. For more information on this important strategy see page 94. Key Investments and Supporting Policies y

Prepare an EV charging master plan to ensure a robust public EV charging infrastructure.

Continue transit vehicle electrification planning

MaaS features integrated journey planning on a mobile device app or website, and can include integrated payment options or subscription pricing. The availability of a convenient menu of transportation options can reduce the need for private automobile ownership and support use of alternative transportation modes.

EXAMPLE OF MAAS IN HELSINKI, FINLAND, TRAVELERS CAN SUBSCRIBE TO VARIOUS COMBINATIONS OF TRANSIT PASSES, BICYCLE- AND SCOOTERSHARING, CAR RENTALS, AND DISCOUNT TAXI RIDES THROUGH ONE MOBILE APP THAT INCLUDES ALL TICKETING AND PAYMENT.

In Napa County, integrated payment methods will be a regional initiative, partly through the evolution of the current Clipper Card system. Plans are underway to upgrade the Clipper Card system and allow for payment through a card or app. MaaS capabilities will also be increasingly integrated into NVTA’s existing Transportation Demand Management program, V-Commute. Currently, the RideAmigos platform is offered to show options for carpooling, bicycling, driving, or using transit in one location. The RideAmigos app provides comparative information, such as travel time, tons of CO2 emitted, and driving cost, so that travelers can make an informed decision about their travel mode.

126

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

ON-DEMAND TECHNOLOGIES

PROJECTS THAT ADDRESS TECHNOLOGY

NVTA has taken the first steps towards MaaS with its Ride the Vine app. Ride the Vine is a platform to reserve ondemand door-to-door rides on any of the Vine Shuttles using a computer or a smartphone, instead of making phone calls for bookings. This real-time ride-hailing and dispatching service is for the general public and includes four separate systems operating within Napa County – Calistoga Shuttle, St. Helena Shuttle, American Canyon Transit, and Yountville Trolley. When there are no door-to-door requests, the shuttles provide service along a set of fixed stops, including connections to Vine Transit routes 10 and 29. NVTA also deployed on-demand services using the Ride the Vine app in the City of Napa when the community shut down because of the Coronavirus Pandemic. NVTA may maintain on-demand in all or part of the service area depending on rider demand.

Technology Projects to Improve Roadway Operations: SR 29 Phase 1 – operational and multimodal improvements on SR 29 from Napa Junction to American Canyon Boulevard such as signal technology upgrades and intersection reconfiguration

Technology Projects to Support Transit Use: Transit Signal Priority on SR 29 and major corridors

Technology Projects to Support Active Transportation: Lincoln Corridor Safety Enhancements (Calistoga) – bicycle and pedestrian enhancements to signal

Vehicle Electrification Projects: NVTA Electric Bus Infrastructure NVTA SR 29 Express Bus Enhancements

This service and associated technology will continue to evolve so that one day, almost all transit trips may be served on an on-demand basis with only the express or “trunk” routes operating as a fixed route service. Algorithms for routing and serving transit trips are expected to continue to improve, offering more efficient and responsive service to transit customers. NVTA may also explore the option to integrate services with private ride hailing providers to provide supplementary service at times of unexpectedly high demand or where demand is low. KEY INVESTMENTS AND SUPPORTING POLICIES

Continue to offer and improve transit on-demand services

Continue to support NVTA TDM and MaaS programs, such as V-Commute

Explore public-private partnerships that utilize technologies to better serve transit users

Continue to support seamless mobility efforts with nearby transit partners to better serve Bay Area riders

RIDE THE VINE IS USED FOR BOOKING ON-DEMAND, DOOR-TO-DOOR TRANSIT TRIPS.

Investing in the Future

128

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PROJECT NEEDS AND EVALUATION Over 100 projects have been identified through a collaborative process among the cities, the County, NVTA, and other stakeholders to meet the goals and objectives for the transportation system. The Plan’s projects are listed in Table 23 and have been characterized by their relevance to the goals related to Equity, Safety, Congestion Relief, Economic Sustainability, Sustainability, and Maintenance and Preservation. All of the projects address at least two goals and 70 percent address at least four or more goals. NVTA staff assessed projects through a qualitative approach that assessed how well projects met Plan goals, objectives, and vision. The project evaluation criteria were developed by taking the plan’s six goals and related objectives, and translating them into screening criteria to assess each project. Final scores were developed by averaging all the evaluators’ scores. The purpose of this exercise was to assess how the jurisdictions’ projects conform to the Plan’s goals. This exercise does not prioritize projects, but it allows NVTA staff to understand which goals are being met by jurisdictions' collective projects.

MAINTENANCE & PRESERVATION 20

SUSTAINABILITY 65

ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY 63

CONGESTION RELIEF 74

EQUITY 99

SAFETY 84

Note: Represents a count of projects scoring over 25/100 in each category.

47%

5% 1% AT LEAST 3

AT LEAST 4

AT LEAST 5

ALL

Figure 41. NUMBER OF GOALS ADDRESSED BY PERCENTAGE OF PROJECTS

Figure 42. NUMBER OF PROJECTS ADDRESSING EACH GOAL

129

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Projects included in the plan represents all transportation modes. Almost a third of the projects included are multimodal transportation improvements. The projects are located in jurisdictions across the County. Figures 41, 42, and 43 highlight some of the key auto and active transportation benefits achieved by the proposed projects. Table 22 lists the number of projects by jurisdiction.

Table 22. NUMBER OF PROJECTS BY JURISDICTION JURISDICTION

American Canyon

Calistoga

City of Napa

Napa County

NVTA

St. Helena

Yountville Grand Total

13% 37%

NUMBER OF PROJECTS

3 105

Advancing Mobility 2045 is part of a regional transportation planning and programming cycle. Many of these projects are proposed to be included in Plan Bay Area 2050, the Regional Transportation Plan currently under development. The Napa projects included in Plan Bay Area 2050 total $812 million (2020 dollars), which includes over $56 million in operating costs for expanded transit services.

14%

36%

Table 23 presents a financially unconstrained project list that includes both capital projects and estimated operating costs for enhanced transit service. Note that the Table 23 does not list all programs funded or operated by NVTA.

AUTO

MULTIMODAL

TRANSIT

Figure 43. PROPORTION OF PROJECTS BY PREDOMINANT MODE

BICYCLE/ PEDESTRIAN

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 44. KEY TRANSIT AND AUTO PROJECTS BY LOCATION

130

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Figure 45. KEY BICYCLE/PEDESTRIAN AND MULTIMODAL PROJECTS BY LOCATION

131

132

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 23. PROJECT DETAILS AND EVALUATION PROJECT EVALUATION (RELEVANCE TO PLAN GOALS)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

COST ESTIMATE

MODE

Rio Del Mar

New major collector from SR 29 to extension of Newell Drive with railroad undercrossing

$4,000,000

Auto

American Canyon

Eucalyptus Drive/Theresa Avenue intersection, Complete Streets

Extend Eucalyptus 450 feet to the east, connecting at SR 29; install roundabout

$3,700,000

Auto

American Canyon

Main Street

New minor collector from Eucalyptus to South Napa Junction

$2,000,000

Auto

American Canyon

Eucalyptus Drive

Widen to two-lane collector from Theresa to Wetlands Edge Road

$7,000,000

Auto

American Canyon

American Canyon Multimodal Transit Center

Construct transit center

$3,000,000

Multimodal

American Canyon

Highway 29 Pedestrian Safety Overcrossings

Construct three pedestrian crossings over Highway 29

$5,000,000

Multimodal

American Canyon

West Side Connector

New industrial collector from southern terminus of Commerce Drive to Eucalyptus Drive

$15,000,000

Auto

$50,000,000

Auto

JURISDICTION

PROJECT TITLE

American Canyon

PROJECT NUMBER

American Canyon

Newell Drive

New four-lane arterial from Donaldson Way to Rio Del Mar; new two-lane arterial from Rio Del Mar to SR 29; new two-lane arterial to South Kelly Road; railroad overcrossing structure

American Canyon

Paoli Loop Road Widening

Widen road from Green Island to Newell Extension to industrial collector standards

$9,000,000

Auto

American Canyon

Green Island Road Widening & Reconstruction

Widen road from SR 29 to Commerce Boulevard to industrial collector standards; widen railroad crossing to three lanes

$5,000,000

Auto

American Canyon

Highway 29/South Kelly Road Intersection

Improve intersection safety and operations at South Kelly Road

$2,000,000

Auto

American Canyon

Napa Junction Road Intersection

Add second excl. EBL and excl. EBR; traffic signal relocation

$2,000,000

Auto

Calistoga

LSR Rehab

Lake Street reconstruction and complete street enhancements

$1,000,000

Multimodal

Calistoga

Intersection Improvements at SR 29/128 & Lincoln Avenue

Signalization of intersection at SR 29/128 & Lincoln Avenue

$5,500,000

Auto

Calistoga

Pedestrian Safety Improvements at SR 29 & Cedar Street

Stop signs and crosswalks

$500,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

Calistoga

Pedestrian Safety Improvements at SR 29 & Brannan Street

Bulbout and flashing beacon

$500,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

Calistoga

Safe Routes to School

Construct foot bridge over the Napa River at Pioneer Park

$1,100,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

Calistoga

Washington Street Reconstruction

Complete Streets and utility enhancements along Washington Street

$500,000

Auto

Calistoga

Intersection Improvements at SR 128 & Berry Street

Widen SR 128 and install left turn lane onto Berry Street

$2,000,000

Auto

PROJECT EVALUATION:

EQUITY

Not Applicable or Project Minimally Addresses Goal

SAFETY

CONGESTION RELIEF

Project Somewhat Addresses Goal

ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

SUSTAINABILITY

Project Addresses Goal

MAINTENANCE & PRESERVATION

Project Strongly Addresses Goal

133

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PROJECT EVALUATION (RELEVANCE TO PLAN GOALS)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

COST ESTIMATE

MODE

Intersection Improvements at SR 29 & Washington Avenue

Convert signal to protected left-turn phasing at intersection of SR 29 & Washington Avenue

$500,000

Auto

Calistoga

Intersection Improvements at SR 29 & Fair Way

Signalization of intersection at SR 29 and Fair Way

$1,500,000

Auto

Calistoga

Intersection Improvements at SR 29 & Silverado Trail

Signalization of intersection at SR 29 and Silverado Trail

$1,500,000

Auto

Calistoga

SR 29 Bypass

Calistoga SR 29 Bypass Dunaweal Lane/Tubbs Lane

$7,000,000

Auto

Calistoga

Lincoln Corridor Safety Enhancements

Signal modification, bicycle, and pedestrian enhancements

$1,500,000

Multimodal

Calistoga

South Oak Bicycle/Pedestrian Bridge

Construct Fast bridge over Napa River at Logvy Park

$132,500

Bicycle/Pedestrian

Calistoga

Grant Street- City Limit to Centennial Court

Complete Street enhancements & multiuse pathway on Grant

$1,000,000

Multimodal

Calistoga

Garnett Creek Bridge

Replace vehicle bridge over Garnett Creek

$7,500,000

Multimodal

Calistoga

Silverado Trail

Pavement overlay project

$500,000

Auto

Calistoga

Cedar Street

Pavement and utilities

$500,000

Auto

City of Napa

Traffic Operations Center

Traffic Operations Center – City of Napa

$2,000,000

Auto

City of Napa

Trower Avenue Extension

Extend Trower Avenue east to connect with Big Ranch Road

$10,500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Linda Vista Avenue Bridge and Extension

New bridge at Redwood Creek and extension of Linda Vista Avenue to Robinson Lane over new Linda Vista Bridge

$3,500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Terrace Drive Bridge and Extension

New bridge at Cayetano Creek and extension of Terrace Drive from the southern terminus of Terrace Drive to the northerly terminus of South Terrace Drive

$3,500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Solano Avenue Bridge and Extension

New bridge at Napa Creek and extension of Solano Avenue south to connect with First Street

$3,500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Lincoln Avenue at California Boulevard & SR 29 Off-Ramp

Reconfigure northbound SR 29 off-ramp at Lincoln Avenue and modify Lincoln Avenue/California Boulevard intersection

$5,500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Salvador Avenue Complete Streets

Complete streets infrastructure improvements including roadway widening to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian facilities

$2,500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

SR 29 over Trower Avenue

Trower Avenue underpass at SR 29

$30,000,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Jefferson Street/Laurel Street Signal

New signal at Jefferson Street/Laurel Street intersection

$500,000

Multimodal

JURISDICTION

PROJECT TITLE

Calistoga

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT EVALUATION:

EQUITY

Not Applicable or Project Minimally Addresses Goal

SAFETY

CONGESTION RELIEF

Project Somewhat Addresses Goal

ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

SUSTAINABILITY

Project Addresses Goal

MAINTENANCE & PRESERVATION

Project Strongly Addresses Goal

134

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PROJECT EVALUATION (RELEVANCE TO PLAN GOALS)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

COST ESTIMATE

MODE

Jefferson Street/Old Sonoma Road Signal

New signal at Jefferson Street/Old Sonoma Road intersection

$500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Jefferson Street/Imola Avenue Intersection Modifications

Jefferson Street/Imola Avenue intersection modifications including additional right-turn lanes

$3,000,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Solano Avenue/Redwood Road Intersection Modifications

Solano Avenue/Redwood Road intersection modifications including widening and restriping

$750,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Soscol Avenue Widening

Widen Soscol Avenue/SR 221/SR 121 to six lanes from Magnolia Drive to Silverado Trail including median widening and intersection improvements

$22,500,000

Auto

City of Napa

Lincoln Avenue/Jefferson Street Intersection Modifications

Lincoln Avenue/Jefferson Street intersection modifications including additional right-turn lanes

$750,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Lincoln Avenue/Soscol Avenue Intersection Modifications

Lincoln Avenue/Soscol Avenue intersection modifications including additional right-turn lanes

$750,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

First Street and Browns Valley Road Corridor Complete Streets

Complete Streets infrastructure improvements including roundabouts at the intersections of First Street/Freeway Drive and First Street/SR 29 southbound ramps

$14,500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Jefferson Street/Sierra Avenue Signal

New signal at Jefferson Street/ Sierra Avenue intersection

$500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Browns Valley Road Complete Streets

Completes Streets infrastructure improvements including roadway widening between Westview Drive and McCormick Lane to accommodate bicycle and pedestrian facilities

$3,500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Salvador Creek Bicycle Trail

Construct a Class I multiuse path along Salvador Creek

$3,000,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Five-Way Intersection Modification

Construct intersection improvements at Silverado Trail/ Third Street/Coombsville Road/East Avenue

$15,600,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Oxbow Preserve Bicycle/ Pedestrian Bridge

Construct a bicycle/pedestrian bridge from the Oxbow Preserve over the Napa River to the River Trail

$1,250,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Oxbow District Bicycle/ Pedestrian Bridge

Construct a bicycle/pedestrian bridge from the River Trail over the Napa River to Third Street

$1,250,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

Laurel Street Sidewalks

Construct sidewalks along Laurel Street where gaps are present

$2,500,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

City of Napa

Sierra Avenue Sidewalks

Construct sidewalks along Sierra Avenue from Jefferson Street to SR 29

$800,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

City of Napa

Terrace Drive Sidewalks

Construct sidewalks along Terrace Drive where gaps are present

$1,500,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

City of Napa

Railroad Crossing Upgrades

Upgrade all railroad crossings citywide to Concreate® panels with flangeway fillers

$2,500,000

Multimodal

City of Napa

SR29 Corridor Improvements (Urban Highway)

Landscape enhancements to Urban Highway from Carneros Intersection to Trancas; SR 29 at Imola Avenue, 1st Street, Lincoln Avenue, and Trancas Street

$250,000

Auto

JURISDICTION

PROJECT TITLE

City of Napa

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT EVALUATION:

EQUITY

Not Applicable or Project Minimally Addresses Goal

SAFETY

CONGESTION RELIEF

Project Somewhat Addresses Goal

ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

SUSTAINABILITY

Project Addresses Goal

MAINTENANCE & PRESERVATION

Project Strongly Addresses Goal

135

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PROJECT EVALUATION (RELEVANCE TO PLAN GOALS)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

COST ESTIMATE

MODE

Vine Trail (Redwood Road Crossing)

Construct a grade-separated crossing across Redwood Road connecting the adjacent sections of the Vine Trail

$4,500,000

Multimodal

Napa County

Silverado Trail Intersections

Improve intersection safety and operations at Oak Knoll Avenue, Yountville Crossroad, Oakville Crossroad, Deer Park Road, and Dunaweal Lane

$5,000,000

Auto

Napa County

Silverado Trail Corridor Analysis

Silverado Trail Corridor Analysis, including but not limited to, safety and congestion improvements

$500,000

Auto

NVTA

29 North County Intersections

Improve intersection safety and operations at Oakville Grade Road, Oakville Crossroad, Rutherford Road (SR 128), Deer Park Road, and Dunaweal Lane

$2,500,000

Auto

NVTA

Vine Trail

Class I bicycle trails, including portions of American Canyon, St. Helena, and unincorporated Napa County

$20,000,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

NVTA

Airport Junction

Construct grade separated interchange

$60,000,000

Auto

NVTA

Park and Ride Lots (Construction and O&M)

Park and ride lots throughout Napa County

$11,000,000

Transit

NVTA

VINE Maintenance Facility (Construction and O&M)

Acquisition and construction of new maintenance facility

$40,000,000

Transit

NVTA

Charging Infrastructure (Construction and O&M)

Electric bus infrastructure

$4,000,000

Transit

NVTA

Express Bus Enhancements

13.5 miles of bus express corridor enhancements, including bus on shoulder

$25,000,000

Transit

NVTA

Express Buses

Acquisition of 24 commuter-style buses for Rapid Bus from Vallejo Ferry Terminal to Redwood Park and Ride

$20,000,000

Transit

NVTA

State of Good Repair/PM

Replacement of 24 commuter-style buses

$20,750,000

Transit

NVTA

Local Routes (A-H): Expanded Service Hours

Expand service hours from 4 AM – 12 PM; add Sunday service

$10,281,880

Transit

NVTA

Regional Routes (10 & 11): Expanded Service Hours

Expand service hours from 4 AM – 12 PM; add Sunday service

$10,346,000

Transit

NVTA

Regional Routes (10 & 11): Enhanced Frequency

Increase frequency from 30 peak and 60 midday/weekends to 30 peak and 30 midday/weekends

$33,122,216

Transit

NVTA

New Transit Vehicles (Expansion)

Acquisition of new paratransit vehicles, community shuttle buses, and Vine buses for service expansion

$27,510,000

Transit

NVTA

Transit System Growth (Operating Costs)

Operation costs for the expansion of the transit system

$2,800,000

Transit

NVTA

New Shelters and Stop Amenities (Expansion)

Improved bus stops throughout Napa County

$8,500,000

Transit

NVTA

Soscol Gateway Transit Center Improvements

Pedestrian connector, safety, and infrastructure upgrades

$5,000,000

Multimodal

JURISDICTION

PROJECT TITLE

City of Napa

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT EVALUATION:

EQUITY

Not Applicable or Project Minimally Addresses Goal

SAFETY

CONGESTION RELIEF

Project Somewhat Addresses Goal

ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

SUSTAINABILITY

Project Addresses Goal

MAINTENANCE & PRESERVATION

Project Strongly Addresses Goal

136

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PROJECT EVALUATION (RELEVANCE TO PLAN GOALS)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

COST ESTIMATE

MODE

Oxbow Bicycle and Pedestrian Crossing

Construct a bicycle/pedestrian bridge over the Napa River between 3rd Street and 1st Street adjacent to the existing railroad bridge

$5,000,000

Multimodal

NVTA

Traffic Operations Center

Construct a traffic operations center in Napa County

$12,000,000

Auto

NVTA

Multimodal Transit Station

Multimodal transit station to accommodate the rail and an east-west expansion

$5,000,000

Transit

NVTA

SR 29 Phase 1

Operational and multimodal improvements on SR 29 from Napa Junction to American Canyon Boulevard, including signal technology upgrades and intersection reconfiguration

$30,000,000

Auto

NVTA

SR 29 Gateway Improvements Phase 2

Phase 2-Highway 29 improvements, 6-lane modified boulevard, including pedestrian, transit and Vine Trail infrastructure.

$26,000,000

Auto

NVTA

Airport Junction

Operational improvements

$3,000,000

Auto

NVTA

Imola Complete Streets Corridor

Complete Streets enhancements and safety improvements along the Imola Avenue corridor

$15,000,000

Multimodal

NVTA

Transit Signal Priority

Transit signal priority on SR 29 and major corridors

$2,250,000

Transit

NVTA

Madison Street Interchange

Improvements to SR 29/Madison Street intersection

$10,000,000

Auto

NVTA

Napa Valley College Transfer Center

Construct a bus transfer center at Napa Valley College

$2,000,000

Transit

NVTA

Carneros Intersection

SR 29/SR 12/SR 121 (Carneros intersection) improvements

$3,000,000

Auto

NVTA

SR-37 Interim Project

Expand to a 3-lane contra-Flow (HOV lane) with movable median; Add HOV lanes, within existing right-of-way

$2,500,000

Auto

St. Helena

Main Street Corridor Improvements Phase I

Upgrade sidewalk, pedestrian lighting, pedestrian furniture, landscaping/trees, and bicycle infrastructure

$4,238,100

Multimodal

St. Helena

Main Street Corridor Improvements Phase II

Install traffic calming devices (e.g. bulb outs), pedestrian lighting, pedestrian furniture, landscaping, bicycle infrastructure, and traffic signal synchronization modifications

$3,120,000

Multimodal

St. Helena

Downtown Corridor Improvements

Install traffic calming devices (e.g. bulb outs), pedestrian lighting, pedestrian furniture, landscaping, bicycle infrastructure, and traffic signal synchronization

$8,400,000

Multimodal

St. Helena

Sulphur Creek Class I Bikeway

Construct Class I bikeway

$5,800,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

St. Helena

Spring Mountain Road Class I Bikeway

Construct Class I bikeway

$1,700,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

St. Helena

Oak Avenue Extension

Extend Oak Avenue

$4,000,000

Auto

JURISDICTION

PROJECT TITLE

NVTA

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT EVALUATION:

EQUITY

Not Applicable or Project Minimally Addresses Goal

SAFETY

CONGESTION RELIEF

Project Somewhat Addresses Goal

ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

SUSTAINABILITY

Project Addresses Goal

MAINTENANCE & PRESERVATION

Project Strongly Addresses Goal

137

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PROJECT EVALUATION (RELEVANCE TO PLAN GOALS)

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

COST ESTIMATE

MODE

Starr Avenue Extension

Extend Starr Avenue

$617,000

Auto

St. Helena

Adams Street Extension

Extend Adams Street

$851,000

Auto

St. Helena

New North-South Collector

Extend College Avenue, or Starr Avenue, or Allison Avenue

$1,900,000

Auto

St. Helena

Mills Lane Safety Improvements

Improve Mills Lane to two lanes with bicycle and pedestrian access

$3,500,000

Auto

St. Helena

Napa River Class I Bikeway

Construct Class I bikeway (River Trail)

$9,800,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

St. Helena

New East-West Collector

Extend Adams Street or Mills Lane

$2,900,000

Auto

100

St. Helena

Fulton Lane Safety Improvements

Improve Fulton Lane to two lanes with bicycle and pedestrian access

$2,200,000

Auto

101

St. Helena

Highway 29/Main Street and Pratt Avenue Intersection Improvements

Construct intersection improvements to safety and circulation on Highway 29

$1,000,000

Multimodal

102

St. Helena

Highway 29/Main Street and Deer Park Road Intersection Improvements

Construct intersection improvements to safety and circulation on Highway 29

$2,000,000

Multimodal

103

Yountville

South Veteran's Park Parking Improvements

Parking improvements to existing infrastructure

$200,000

Auto

104

Yountville

Washington Park – Parks and Path ADA Improvements

Adding sidewalks to the Washington Park Subdivision

$400,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

105

Yountville

Yountville Crossroads Bicycle Path & Sidewalk

Add a full-lane bicycle path along Yountville Crossroads

$1,500,000

Bicycle/Pedestrian

JURISDICTION

PROJECT TITLE

St. Helena

PROJECT NUMBER

PROJECT EVALUATION:

EQUITY

Not Applicable or Project Minimally Addresses Goal

SAFETY

CONGESTION RELIEF

Project Somewhat Addresses Goal

ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY

SUSTAINABILITY

Project Addresses Goal

MAINTENANCE & PRESERVATION

Project Strongly Addresses Goal

138

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TRAVEL FORECASTING The Project Needs and Evaluation section presented a list of projects that NVTA and its member jurisdictions will work to implement over the next 25 years. This section illustrates how the planned projects might influence the performance of the transportation system over the Plan horizon.

WHAT IS THE NVTA TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL?

• T HE NVTA TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL IS A MODEL OF TYPICAL WEEKDAY TRAVEL PATTERNS FOR THE ENTIRE BAY AREA, BUT FOCUSED ON, AND WITH GREATEST DETAIL WITHIN, NAPA COUNTY. • B ASED ON A TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL MAINTAINED BY THE MTC—TRAVEL MODEL 1.5—THE NVTA MODEL HAS BEEN CALIBRATED AND VALIDATED TO A YEAR 2015 BASELINE. THE MODEL REPRODUCES ALL TRIPS BY TRAVEL MODE BY MODELING THE INDIVIDUAL DAILY TRAVEL PATTERNS OF A SYNTHESIZED POPULATION. • F UTURE YEAR CONDITIONS CAN BE MODELED WITH ASSUMPTIONS ABOUT FUTURE GROWTH IN POPULATION AND JOBS ALONGSIDE FUTURE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK IMPROVEMENTS.

Many of the projects considered by the plan can be incorporated into NVTA’s travel demand model to predict how they might affect system performance in the future. The NVTA travel demand model is best suited to reflect extensive changes in the roadway and transit network. The model also reflects growth in travel demand due to expected increases in population and employment. The future impact of projects in the Plan that affect the roadway network (new roadways, new lanes, tolls, etc.) and bus or rail transit (changes to transit frequencies, fares, and stop locations) can be accurately forecasted with the NVTA travel demand model. In contrast, the regional scale of the travel demand model makes it less suited to reflect the impact of other types of Plan projects, such as bicycle and pedestrian improvements, Transportation Demand Management programs, and certain operational improvements, like traffic signal upgrades or roundabouts. In plain language, these projects affect characteristics of the transportation system that are not travel demand model inputs.1 However, investment in projects that support walking and bicycling is a key strategy that NVTA is using to create a more efficient, sustainable, and equitable transportation system. This section discusses the potential impacts of investments in active transportation that are analyzed outside the travel demand model. A summary of analysis compares different packages of transit and roadway investments and leads to key findings about the expected overall impact to mode shares.

The effects of these types of projects are typically studied with focused traffic operational models at the corridor or intersection scale.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

IMPACT OF PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE PROJECTS The projects presented in the previous section of Advancing Mobility 2045 include over 460 miles of new bicycle facilities. Some active transportation project highlights include: y

Vine Trail expansion in American Canyon, St. Helena, and unincorporated Napa County

Sulphur Creek Class I Bikeway

Spring Mountain Road Class I Bikeway

Napa River Class I Bikeway

139

Research used in developing the previous Regional Transportation Plan, Plan Bay Area 2040, demonstrates the impact of additional bicycle facilities on mode share. According to this research, every percent increase in the density of bicycle lanes and trails per square mile results in a one percent increase in bicycle mode share.2 The planned investment in new bicycle infrastructure contained in this plan, along with additional locally funded projects documented in the 2019 Napa Countywide Bicycle Plan should result in an increase in bicycle mode share from about 1.5 percent to 4 percent of all trips over the Plan horizon. NVTA used the active transportation mode share of the commute trip, from the American Community Survey (ACS), as a measure of the transportation system’s sustainability. The active transportation modes of walking and bicycling account for 4 percent of commute trips, as measured by the most recent ACS. The goal of this Plan and the Countywide Bicycle Plan is to increase the active transportation mode share for all trips to 10 percent. Meeting this goal will require the synergistic effort of increasing the density of bicycle facilities and implementing supportive policies and programs. These could include strategies like increased bicycle parking, investing in Safe Routes to Schools education and outreach, filling in gaps in the sidewalk network, and Complete Streets improvements on more roadway corridors. It is well documented that a lack of safe and convenient bicycle and pedestrian facilities constrains the use of these active transportation modes. Until there is a safe and convenient active transportation route to and from every potential destination in Napa County, active transportation will not realize its full potential in contributing to a sustainable, efficient, and safe transportation system.

A BICYCLIST AND PASSENGER IN NAPA.

Dill, J., & T. C. (2003). Bicycle Commuting and Facilities in Major U.S. Cities: If You Build Them, Commuters Will Use Them. Transportation Research Board, 1828.

140

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

IMPACT OF KEY TRANSIT AND ROADWAY PROJECTS This section examines the impact of key projects that affect the roadway network and level of transit service using the NVTA TDM.

FOUR ALTERNATIVE PROJECT PACKAGES WERE DEVELOPED TO TEST THE EFFECTS ON MODE SHARE, VMT, AND PERSON HOURS OF DELAY USING THE NVTA TRAVEL DEMAND MODEL:

Includes all the projects in the Investment Plan that can be modeled, except Project #67. INVESTMENT PLAN WITH IMPROVED EXPRESS BUS SERVICE (“PROPOSED PLAN”)

Includes all the projects in the Investment Plan that can be modeled, including Enhanced Frequency for Regional Bus Routes. Under this scenario, regional Route 10 and 1 1 buses would run every 30 minutes during the morning and afternoon commute peak periods (currently these routes run approximately every hour).

As shown in Figure 46, overall travel demand in terms of daily person trips is expected to increase by about 19 percent from the Existing Conditions scenario to 2045. Given the predominance of automobile travel, the differences among the future scenarios are subtle. To highlight the differences among the scenarios and to isolate the effects of the three key projects from increased travel due to expected population growth, three of the investment packages are compared to the Basic Plan investment package (this analysis only covers motorized transportation or auto and transit). 700,000

INVESTMENT PLAN WITH ENHANCED EXPRESS BUS SERVICE AND FREE LOCAL TRANSIT (“TRANSIT+”)

Includes all the projects in the Investment Plan that can be modeled. In addition, regional bus routes 10 and 1 1 would run every 15 minutes and local bus service would be provided free of charge. INVESTMENT PLAN WITH SR 29 CAPACITY EXPANSION (“SR 29 LANES+”)

The metrics discussed below were generated by the NVTA TDM for a 2015 baseline scenario and scenarios reflecting the four alternative packages. The metrics have been projected to represent a Year 2045 condition with the applicable transportation projects in place. A detailed table of model results can be found in Appendix D.

This scenario includes all the projects in the Investment Plan that can be modeled, except Project #67. This scenario also includes a project to widen SR 29 from two to three lanes in each direction between Napa Junction Road and American Canyon Road.

678,986

600,000 500,000 DAILY TRIPS

BASIC PLAN

COMPARISON OF INVESTMENT PACKAGES

+19%

567,546

400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 2015 (CONDITIONS BASELINE)

2045

Source: NVTA Travel Demand Model Note: Average weekday trips beginning or ending in Napa County. Figure 46. PROJECTED GROWTH IN DAILY TRIPS BEGINNING AND/OR ENDING IN NAPA COUNTY

141

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

MODE SHARE

0.6%

The mode shares for the Basic Plan scenario are presented in Figure 47. The change in mode share expected for Proposed Plan and Transit+ packages, as compared to the Basic Plan, are shown in Figure 48. The changes in trips by mode are shown in Figure 49. The biggest increase is the transit mode share in the Transit+ alternative package. The drive alone mode share is decreased somewhat under the Proposed Plan and Transit+ scenarios, which offer improved transit service.

0.4% 0.2% 0.0% -0.2% -0.4% -0.6%

DRIVE ALONE

SHARED RIDE

TRANSIT

PROPOSED PLAN

TNC (UBER, LYFT, ETC) TRANSIT+

Source: NVTA Travel Demand Model

64%

Note: The SR 29 Lanes + investment package is essentially equivalent to the Basic Plan investment package in terms of trips by mode.

DRIVE ALONE

Figure 48. CHANGE IN MODE SHARE COMPARED TO THE BASIC PLAN

SHARED RIDE

2% TAXI/TNC

Figure 47. SHARE OF MOTORIZED TRIPS BEGINNING OR ENDING IN NAPA COUNTY USING THE BASIC PLAN

4,500 CHANGE IN DAILY TRIPS BY MODE

1% TRANSIT

33%

3,000 1,500 0 -1,500 -3,000 -4,500

DRIVE ALONE TRIPS

SHARED RIDE TRIPS

PROPOSED PLAN

TRANSIT TRIPS

TAXI/TNC

TRANSIT+

Source: NVTA Travel Demand Model Note: The SR 29 Lanes + investment package is essentially equivalent to the Basic Plan investment package in terms of trips by mode. Figure 49. CHANGE IN TRIPS BY MODE COMPARED TO THE BASIC PLAN

142

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

VMT AND DELAY

23,000 22,811 22,800 WEEKDAY HOURS OF DELAY

The daily VMT that occurs in Napa by future scenario is compared in Figure 50. The lowest daily VMT could be achieved with the Transit+ alternative package. The SR 29 Lanes+ package results in a slight increase in VMT, relative to the Basic Plan, as some trips shift to private vehicles on SR 29 to take advantage of reduced congestion. The VMT effect reported here is only that associated with mode shift and induced demand has not been taken into account.

22,601

22,600 22,400 22,200

22,170 22,076

22,000 21,800

“INDUCED” IS A TERM IMPLYING THAT A 21,600

PARTICULAR CONDITION IS INDIRECTLY CAUSED BY ANOTHER CONDITION. IN THE CASE OF TRAFFIC VOLUMES, THE TERM AROSE FROM THE PHENOMENON THAT IMPROVEMENTS TO A HIGHWAY—ESPECIALLY CAPACITY IMPROVEMENTS—SEEMED TO RESULT IN

BASIC PLAN

PROPOSED PLAN

TRANSIT+

SR 29 LANES+

Figure 51. TOTAL HOURS OF DELAY FOR TRIPS BEGINNING OR ENDING IN NAPA COUNTY USING THE FUTURE SCENARIO

MORE TRAFFIC CHOOSING TO USE THE ROAD THAN WOULD BE THE CASE IF THE HIGHWAY WERE NOT IMPROVED. 3

3,980,000

3,977,277

3,976,098

AVERAGE WEEKDAY VMT

3,975,000 3,970,000 3,965,000

3,962,930

3,960,000

3,957,253

3,955,000 3,950,000 3,945,000

BASIC PLAN

PROPOSED PLAN

TRANSIT+

SR 29 LANES+

Figure 50. AVERAGE WEEKDAY VMT ON NAPA COUNTY ROADWAYS USING THE FUTURE SCENARIO https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/induced_traffic_and_induced_demand_lee.pdf

Figure 51 compares the daily person hours of delay incurred for trips beginning or ending in Napa County. The highest level of delay is associated the Basic Plan. While the SR 29 Lanes+ package results in somewhat reduced delay compared to the Basic Plan, the reduction in delay only occurs on a relatively short stretch of roadway and only affects a few trips. Countywide delay is reduced, but not by much because the SR 29 project only impacts a small length of the roadway. At the same time, the SR 29 Lanes+ alternative package does not result in a significant mode shift in relation to the Basic Plan. This is because the travel time savings on SR 29 are not large enough to shift travelers from transit and other modes. In contrast, the improved levels of transit service associated with the transit enhancing packages reduce waiting times for more trips and create greater overall reductions in delay.

143

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

The travel demand model does not capture the local operational benefits associated with the SR 29 six-lane project. To fully capture the impacts of an SR 29 lane expansion, the project must be studied in more detail. Because it adds general purpose lanes to a state highway, this project would likely have a significant VMT inducing impact under the California Environmental Quality Act, posing an additional challenge to implementation and requiring mitigation measures, such as enhanced transit, along the roadway corridor.

57%

Enhanced transit service will not only retain transit’s share of overall travel, but will also result in a significant number of new transit trips that shift from the auto modes. Concentrated in the long-distance commute market, these new transit trips (beyond those expected due to population growth) have the greatest potential to reduce VMT and person hours of delay. Figure 52 shows the mode shares projected under the Proposed Plan.

SHARED RIDE

DRIVE ALONE

KEY FINDINGS The Proposed Plan investments in active transportation, along with key transit enhancement projects, have the potential to significantly increase the share of trips made by bicycling and walking. These shifts will move transportation in Napa County towards a more sustainable and healthy future.

30%

11% ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

1% TRANSIT

6% 1% TAXI/TNC

Figure 52. PROJECTED MODE SHARE UNDER PROPOSED PLAN SCENARIO

144

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TRANSPORTATION FUNDING AND NEW REVENUE SOURCES NVTA anticipates that there will be over $754 million in unfunded transportation needs in Napa County over the 25-year period of Advancing Mobility 2045. Napa is not alone in this circumstance. Funding shortfalls are common throughout the country largely because new funding is not keeping pace with rising costs. The federal government has not increased the federal gas tax since 1993. Consequently, based on current spending, the Highway Trust Fund will be exhausted by fall of 2021. The waning participation of the federal government to fund infrastructure has required state, regional, and local governments to play a larger role in raising revenues to maintain and modernize transportation infrastructure. The State of California passed Senate Bill 1 (SB1), the Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017, raising fuel taxes and motor vehicle fees to fund $52.4 billion in transportation improvements over 10 years. The MTC went to the polls to ask voters to raise bridge tolls by $3 on the seven Bay Area state-owned bridges and the voters in the nine-county Bay Area approved Regional Measure 3 (RM 3) with 55 percent of the vote. Counties have also gone to the polls to request voter support rehabilitation and modernization of transportation infrastructure and to support transit operations. This section provides a background of the transportation funding that NVTA and its six jurisdictions currently receive and introduces policy considerations and preliminary steps to raise new revenues for transportation in Napa County. TRANSPORTATION FUNDING 101 Transportation infrastructure and operations in Napa County are funded by a complex mix of local, regional, state and federal funding. The funds are generated through various sources including fuel taxes, fees, and sales tax, and are administered by various agencies under various programs, each with their own set of regulations and limitations. Certain revenues can only be spent at the discretion of local jurisdictions and most are limited to very specific purposes and time frames. Some of the funds are allocated to Napa, based on complex formulas based upon Napa County’s population, transportation infrastructure (such as road miles or transit system revenue and performance factors), and other factors. Other funds are competitive and require detailed funding applications.

NVTA has limited control over how the majority of the funds are allocated, but does play a fundamental role in determining fund programming among its local jurisdictions and between Napa County and the rest of the Bay Area region. The MTC serves as the designated recipient of the region’s federal and state funds and has administrative oversight over other locally generated funds, such as Transportation Development Act funds. FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES AND STRUCTURE

NVTA receives several categories of federal transportation funding for capital infrastructure improvements, planning, and transit operations that, combined, total roughly $7 to $10 million annually. Most of the funding is for transit capital expenditures and operations. The federal gas tax is an 18.4 cent per gallon excise tax on gasoline and 24.4 cent per gallon tax on diesel fuel, and has not been raised since 1993. Its value has been cut by more than 50% by inflation and revenue generations are nominally declining due to more fuel-efficient and electric vehicles. Moreover, during the coronavirus pandemic, gas demand has dropped, leading to lower gas prices. Federal funding for transportation is authorized by Congress through Transportation Authorization Legislation. Starting with the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, Congress has authorized successive multi-year surface transportation legislation that guarantees states and regional governments funding to address transportation needs. The current legislation is the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act, or FAST Act, signed into law by President Obama in December 2015.

145

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

THE FAST ACT SURFACE TRANSPORTATION LEGISLATION THAT INCLUDES $305 BILLION OVER FISCAL YEARS 2016 THROUGH 2020 FOR HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION AND MAINTENANCE, HIGHWAY AND MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION, RAIL, HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY, AND RESEARCH, TECHNOLOGY, AND STATISTICS PROGRAMS.

The FAST Act increased funding for locally owned infrastructure, including protected funding for off-system bridges and rural and urban public transportation systems, and included necessary reforms to expedite project delivery through a streamlined approval process and direct funding to local decision-makers. The FAST Act expired on September 30, 2020, but will likely continue through successive continuing resolutions until Congress can pass a successor surface transportation bill. Roughly 80 percent of federal funds in the Highway Trust Account are committed to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) programs and 20 percent goes to the Mass Transit Account to fund Federal Transit Administration (FTA) programs. FHWA funds are committed to States and regions on obligation authority in the surface transportation legislation, which guarantees each state a certain level of funding that must be used within a certain time frame. FTA funds must be appropriated annually by Congress. FEDERAL AID HIGHWAY SYSTEM: FHWA block grant funds are distributed directly to both the states and to regions. MTC, as the Metropolitan Planning Organization to the ninecounty Bay Area, is the designed recipient of regional funds. Napa County receives FHWA regional and state block grant revenues from the MTC. The state block grant funds come through a program called State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP), a program discussed in greater detail in the

State funding section. The FHWA block grant funds that flow to the regions are Surface Transportation Program (STP) and Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds. The subset of STP/CMAQ funds that directly come to the county transportation agencies is referred to by the MTC as the One Bay Area Grant program. Once programmed4 in the Transportation Improvement Program5, FHWA funds are administered by Caltrans or the FTA, if the funds are being used for transit purposes. MTC programs these revenues every four years. In the last iteration of the plan, NVTA received approximately $9 million, of which $3.8 million was retained to comply with planning requirements for the four-year period. The balance was distributed to the jurisdictions that maintain the federal aid system in Napa County. NVTA also pursues FHWA discretionary program funds, such as Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Developments, for certain projects. FTA block grant funds or formula funds are based a number of operational factors, but for small urbanized and rural areas, such as Napa, the formula is based on population. The formula funds include: TRANSIT:

FTA §5307 Urbanized Area Formula Funds

FTA §5311 Non-Urbanized Area Formula Funds

FTA §5339 Bus and Bus Facilities

FTA §5337 State of Good Repair

NVTA also receives FTA §5303 funds to complete its 10-year Short Range Transit Plan every four years. While the FTA provides annual formula grants to transit agencies nationwide, it also makes discretionary funding available through competitive processes.

The term program or programming refers to assigning funds to projects and formal approval by government oversight body – usually MTC or the State. The Transportation Improvement Program or TIP is essentially a list of all federally-funded transportation projects or regionally significant funded within a Metropolitan Planning Organization, such as the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.

4 5

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

STATE FUNDING SOURCES AND STRUCTURE

State funds for transportation include a mix of Federal funds, fuel taxes, and motor vehicle fees. NVTA receives state operating revenues for transit and to support Caltrans and MTC planning efforts to identify projects eligible to receive state highway funds. Other fund sources, such as some SB1 programs, are primarily discretionary, and NVTA and local jurisdictions compete for these revenues. Cities and counties receive roughly 40 percent of the state gasoline tax. In fiscal year 2020-21, the state gasoline excise tax is set at 50.5 cents per gallon. The tax is expected to raise $6.6 billion from gasoline purchases from vehicles using public roads. The excise tax is comprised of three distinct components, each of which is adjusted for inflation in July and allocated based on formulas set forth in state law. The components of the state excise tax are:

146

SENATE BILL 1: The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 invests $54 billion over the next decade to fix roads, freeways and bridges, transit and bicycle/ pedestrian projects and programs. SB1 Local Streets and Road programs generate roughly $15 billion over a 10-year period, which is split equally between the County and Cities. SB1 doubled the amount of revenue that cities and counties receive from the state for local street maintenance and rehabilitation.

STATE GAS TAX:

Incremental Tax: 18.5 cents

Base Tax: 19.2 cents

SB1 Tax: 12.8 cents 3.50

UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK FEE

3.00

STATE/LOCAL SALES TAX STATE EXCISE TAX

DOLLARS ($)

2.50

FEDERAL EXCISE TAX

2.00 1.50 PRE-TAX PRICE

1.00 0.50 0

Source: https://lao.ca.gov/Transportation/FAQs#what-taxes-apply-togasoline-in-california Figure 53. TAXES ON GASOLINE

SB1 increased several taxes and fees to raise over $5 billion annually in new transportation revenues and stabilized the funding for a number of existing programs, including the STIP, the State Transit Assistance Program, and Local Streets and Road funding. SB1 provides inflationary adjustments so that the purchasing power of the revenues does not diminish as it has in the past. Approximately $1.5 billion per year is earmarked for local streets and roads maintenance and rehabilitation and other eligible uses, including complete streets projects, traffic signals, and drainage improvements. California’s counties will share about $750 million annually, and the same amount will be allocated to cities. In addition to formula funding, county roads will be eligible to compete for additional funding for active transportation and complete streets projects, congested corridor projects, goods movement improvements, and additional state matching funds for self-help counties that pass sales taxes or impose comprehensive development fees to fund transportation. SB1 programs and their funding amounts are detailed in Table 24.

147

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 24. SENATE BILL 1 PROGRAMS

LOCAL PROGRAMS

ANNUAL FUNDING

FUNDING AMOUNT (OVER 10 YEARS)

$1.5 billion

$15 billion

TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND CAPITAL

$750 million

$7.5 billion

LOCAL PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM

$200 million

$2 billion

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM

$100 million

$ 1 billion

STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – REGIONAL SHARE

$82.5 million

$825 million

$25 million

$250 million

ANNUAL FUNDING

FUNDING AMOUNT (OVER 10 YEARS)

$1.9 billion

$19 billion

TRADE CORRIDOR ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM

$300 million

$3 billion

SOLUTIONS FOR CONGESTED CORRIDORS PROGRAM

$250 million

$2.5 billion

$80 million

$800 million

$27.5 million

$275 million

$25 million

$250 million

$7 million

$70 million

LOCAL STREET AND ROAD MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION

LOCAL PLANNING GRANTS STATE PROGRAMS

STATE HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE AND REHABILITATION

PARKS, OFF-HIGHWAY VEHICLE, BOATING AND AGRICULTURAL PROGRAMS STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM – INTERREGIONAL SHARE FREEWAY SERVICE PATROL PROGRAMS CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PROGRAMS

Source: CSAC https://www.counties.org/post/sb-1-road-repair-and-accountability-act-2017#:~:text=SB%201%20prioritizes%20funding%20 towards,transit%2C%20and%20active%20transportation%20facilities

148

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE: State Transit Assistance (STA) is part of the Transportation Development Act (TDA), which is a statewide program distributed to public transportation providers. The revenues are generated from a sales tax on diesel fuel. These funds come to the Bay Area according to two formulas – 50 percent based on population, which goes directly to MTC and 50 percent based on revenue factors, which goes directly to the public transportation providers. MTC uses the population-based formula for various operating programs, including a modest redistribution to eligible small transit providers. Napa receives roughly $2 million per year in STA funds from the combined population and revenue formulas.

The STIP is comprised of two basic programs, the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP) and Regional Transportation Improvement Program (RTIP) which are funded with revenues from the Transportation Investment Fund and other funding sources. STIP is funded with State and Federal Highway funds (including Federal Aid highway system funds). Both the RTIP and ITIP are administered by the California Transportation Commission. The ITIP is intended to improve links between regions, both highway and rail, and is utilized primarily by Caltrans. The RTIP is distributed to regions by formula. The revenues are redistributed to Bay Area counties by MTC. NVTA administers RTIP funds for Napa County. NVTA receives approximately $1.5 million a year in RTIP funds and also receives RTIP revenues for program planning and monitoring.

The rules for allocation of these revenues stipulate that there must be a nexus between the fee on carbon and the use of the fee. The fee must be used for projects that reduce carbon emissions. Transportation generates more than 40 percent of California's GHGs and therefore transportation projects that reduce GHGs remain a high priority for these funds. In 2018, the California Air Resources Board implemented $3.3 billion in Cap and Trade investments. The two Cap and Trade funded programs that support mass transit are the Transit and Intercity Rail Program (TIRCP) and Low-Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP). The TIRCP is competitive, but NVTA receives roughly $200,00 to $300,000 a year in LCTOP formula funds.

STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM:

Revenue is generated from fees associated with Assembly Bill 32 which establishes a Cap and Trade Program where major emitters of greenhouse gases (over 25,000 metric tons annually) are given an initial allowance. Any emission beyond the initial allowance requires that the emitting company purchase additional allowances. CAP & TRADE REVENUES:

STATE

HIGHWAY

OPERATION

AND

PROTECTION

PROGRAM: The State Highway Operation and Protection Program (SHOPP) is another significant state funding source and is used to maintain the State Highway system, including restoring damaged roadways, bridge preservation, and roadside preservation. There are multiple state highways in Napa County, and while NVTA often prioritizes improvements to those highways in coordination with Caltrans often using local funds, the highways are managed by Caltrans and the SHOPP is the primary funding source Caltrans uses to maintain and rehab the state highway and interstate system in California. Recently Caltrans has adopted initiatives to make bicycle and pedestrian improvements along highways that also serve as main streets in many communities. In Napa, that includes SR 29 in three of Napa’s jurisdictions—American Canyon, Calistoga, and St. Helena—as well as Imola (SR 121) on the south side of the City of Napa. HIGHWAY BRIDGE PROGRAM: Highway Bridge Replacement

and Rehabilitation Program (HBRRP) was dissolved by MAP21 where federal bridge programs were delegated to the states. Caltrans receives roughly $289 million in federal funds for its HBRRP program. The purpose of the program

149

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

is to provide federal aid to local agencies to replace and rehabilitate deficient locally owned public highway bridges. Bridges are primarily funded based on safety deficiency criteria where the bridge is in need of seismic retrofit, scour critical or needs repainting. REGIONAL FUNDING SOURCES

In 2004, voters passed Regional Measure 2 (RM 2), raising the toll on the seven stateowned toll bridges in the Bay Area by $1. This extra dollar funds various transportation projects within the region that have been determined to reduce congestion or to make improvements to travel in the toll bridge corridors, as identified in SB 916 (Chapter 715, Statutes of 2004). Specifically, RM 2 establishes the Regional Traffic Relief Plan and identifies specific transit operating assistance and capital projects and programs eligible to receive RM 2 funding. NVTA has transit operations funding ($390,000 per year) for Vine Route 29 express bus service that connects to BART at the El Cerrito Del Norte station. NVTA also received RM 2 capital funds for construction of the Soscol Gateway Transit Center and Park and Ride lots along the SR 29 corridor.

REGIONAL MEASURE 2:

Senate Bill 595 was passed by the Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Brown in fall 2017. The final certified election results were released in July 2018, confirming the passage of Regional Measure 3 (RM 3) with 55 percent of Bay Area voters supporting the measure. RM 3 raises tolls on the region’s state-owned bridges by a total of $3 over six years—$1 in 2019, $1 in 2022, and $1 in 2025. Toll revenues generated under RM 3 will help finance a $4.5 billion slate of highway and transit improvements in the toll bridge corridors. This includes $150 million for San Francisco Bay Trail/Safe Routes to Transit, $100 million for North Bay Transit Access Improvements, $100 million for SR 37 Improvements, and $20 million for Napa County SR 29 projects. RM 3 toll collections began in January 2019, pending resolution of litigation. At the time of this writing, the California Supreme Court has decided to hear the RM 3 appeal.

TRANSPORTATION FUND FOR CLEAN AIR 60 PERCENT

The Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) is a grant program operated by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District funded by a $4 surcharge on motor vehicles registered in the Bay Area. This generates approximately $22 million per year in revenues. The TFCA program provides grants to projects that implement the most cost-effective projects in the Bay Area that will decrease motor vehicle emissions, and thereby improve air quality. Projects must be consistent with the 1988 California Clean Air Act and the Bay Area Ozone Strategy. The regional funds receive 60 percent of the revenues. The remaining 40 percent are distributed to each county based on DMV fees collected in those counties and are used for local projects that meet the TFCA guidelines.

REGIONAL PROGRAM:

LOCAL FUNDING SOURCES

In 2012, the voters in Napa County approved Measure T, the Napa Countywide Road Maintenance Act. Measure T is a half of a cent sales tax which generates roughly $20 million annually. These funds are limited to maintenance, reconstruction, or rehabilitation of local streets, roads, and infrastructure within the public right-of-way. MEASURE T:

REGIONAL MEASURE 3:

This program, funded by a quarter of a cent statewide sales tax, includes the Local Transportation Fund and the State Transit Assistance Fund. These funds are available for a wide variety of transportation programs, including planning and program activities, pedestrian and bicycle facilities (Article 3), community transit services, public transportation, and bus and rail projects. NVTA receives roughly $10 million annually. The majority of these funds (Article 4 and Article 4.5) are used by NVTA for transit operations, capital improvements, and planning.

TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT:

150

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

TRANSPORTATION FUND FOR CLEAN AIR 40 PERCENT COUNTY PROGRAM: TFCA provides grants to the most cost-

effective projects in the Bay Area that will decrease motor vehicle emissions and improve air quality. Projects must be consistent with the 1988 California Clean Air Act and the Bay Area Ozone Strategy. NVTA is the designated agency to administer the portion of the 40 percent program that comes to Napa. As described above, TFCA is funded by a $4 surcharge on motor vehicles registered in the Bay Area and generates approximately $22 million per year. NVTA programs approximately $150,000 in TFCA program manager funds per year. Most jurisdictions also make contributions from their general funds to augment gas tax revenues to maintain streets and roads. Jurisdictions also raise revenues for transportation through development impact fees and parking fees.

ADDITIONAL LOCAL FUNDING:

INVESTMENT BLUE PRINT POTENTIAL NEW FUNDING SOURCES

With the diminishing role of the federal government in transportation funding, state and local governments have sought other means to backfill funding shortfalls. These include taxation, user fees (including improvement district, vehicle license and mitigation/impact fees), congestion pricing (tolls, parking fees), and public-private partnerships. Taxation includes imposing a tax on sales (could be statewide, regional, or countywide) or other activities to pay for transportation projects. Voter-initiated taxes generally requires approval of the state legislature, and an affirming super majority (66.67 percent) of the voting population. State taxes require a twothirds vote of the legislature (no public vote required) or 50 percent public vote by initiative. The legislature may also impose fees by majority vote or delegate fee-setting to an administrative body providing that there is corresponding benefit for the fee payer. Local measures require a twothirds public vote for special taxes (with a defined spending objective) or a majority vote for general taxes (with spending allocated by the local jurisdiction).

Table 27 is a list of measures that NVTA and its member jurisdictions could initiate to raise additional transportation revenues. SELF HELP COUNTIES AND SALES TAXES

Of the 58 counties in California, 25 counties, including Napa, have passed local sales tax measures to fund local transportation needs. Of the nine Bay Area counties, all but one county, Solano, have passed a local transportation sales tax. This approach to meeting transportation infrastructure needs not only provide new funding for the county but allows local communities to have greater control of how the revenue is spent. Local sales tax funds for transportation are also frequently leveraged to attract additional federal and state dollars. Napa’s existing transportation sales tax measure, Measure T, is limited to funding maintenance and rehabilitation of local streets and roads. Consequently, major improvements to the state highway system in Napa necessary to manage growing congestion is an ineligible use of Measure T sales tax. With the support of the voters, Napa could increase, extend and/or modify the sales tax to address other critical needs. Napa’s total sales tax rate is currently 7.75 percent. Taxes elsewhere in the State range from 7.5 percent (no local tax) to 10.25 percent (some Los Angeles County municipalities). Some other Bay Area places with higher taxes include Alameda County (9.25 percent), Contra Costa County (8.25–9.575 percent), Marin County (8.525–9 percent), San Mateo County (9.25–9.5 percent), Santa Clara County (8.759 percent), and Sonoma County (8.25–9.25 percent). A local measure that would increase the sales tax over the 8 percent state ceiling requires state legislative action. Extending the sales tax and bonding against future revenue, would facilitate accessing future sales tax funds to both accelerate improving local road infrastructure but also help fund transportation improvements throughout Napa County.

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

PARCEL TAX

NVTA’s authorizing language also allows it to pursue a parcel tax for transportation improvements. Like a sales tax, it requires a two-thirds vote of the public to pass. Parcel taxes are incremental value per parcel and cannot be based on the value of the property (ad valorem tax). Parcel taxes are difficult to pass and the revenue generations for a nominal assessment, say $10, is more likely to pass but would generate under a $1 million annually in revenues. A per parcel assessment of say $50 or more would generate almost $3 million in new revenues but would difficult to convince voters to support it. NEW REVENUES FROM BLUE RIBBON TASK FORCE EFFORTS

MTC's Blue Ribbon Task Force was convened in the spring of 2020, in part, to identify a distribution formula for the $1.3 billion in Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act funds. The Task Force is also considering other ways to improve the transit experience for the rider. It may also result in new revenues to expand and improve transit services. USER FEES

Vehicle Registration Fee – SB 83 (Hancock) was signed into law in October 2009 and authorizes county transportation agencies to impose a $10 per vehicle fee for transportation purposes if approved by two-thirds of its voters. A number of local counties have approved these fees. In Napa County, there are approximately 132,000 vehicles that would be subject to paying the fee if the voters approved such a measure. This would generate an additional $1.32 million for transportation each year. Vehicle License Fee – A vehicle license fee is a percentage of the total value of the car paid annually upon renewal of the DMV registration. The legislature has not passed legislation that would allow state and local governments to impose such a fee. This fee could potentially generate significant revenues for transportation and would be adjustable as car values increase.

151

Development and Traffic Impact Fees – The County and cities/town of Napa all have programs to collect fees to address traffic challenges associated with new developments and other activities. Traffic impact fees must be reasonably related to the cost of the service provided. If a development impact fee does not relate to the impact created by development or exceeds the reasonable cost of providing the public service associated with the development, then the fee may be declared a special tax and subject to a twothirds voter approval. Parking Fees – Charging for parking represents a significant change from current practices in Napa County. Most vehicle parking is provided free or significantly subsidized within the County. However, in many cities’ central business districts, meters or other parking management strategies are used to generate revenues that flow into the general fund or parking districts of local jurisdictions. Expenditures funded with parking fee revenue, like other fees, must have a nexus but shifting from free parking to charging for providing parking has been shown to reduce automobile commuting by 10 to 30 percent, particularly if combined with other Transportation Demand Management strategies. Tolls – In the Bay Area, toll roads are limited to express lanes and bridges. RM3 is a flat fee and the bridge toll increase will erode will erode with inflation by 2045, this Plan’s horizon date. Consequently, it is probable the Bay Area bridges could face another toll adjustment before 2045. The express lanes also known as High Occupancy Toll (HOT) express lanes have been added to some sections of I-580 and I-680 in the east bay and the recently I-880 express lanes opened on October 2, 2020. A key benefit of express lanes in addition to raising revenues to improve and maintain transportation infrastructure is the fees charged are variable depending on the level of traffic congestion. The more congestion, and the greater the driver benefits, the higher the fee. This congestion pricing approach can significantly influence when people choose to use the roadway.

152

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

In the Bay Area, MTC envisions that there will be 270 miles of authorized express lands by 2035. Twenty-three miles of existing I-680 HOV lanes through San Ramon, Danville, Alamo and southern Walnut Creek are proposed to be converted to managed lanes. Federal and state law restricts the number of HOT lanes and requires close coordination with Caltrans on proposed routes. Since HOT lanes require at least a sixlane roadway structure, no current road segment in Napa County could support such. There have been discussions about converting a segment of SR 29 in south Napa County to six lanes, however the number of signals and interference of driveways as well as implications to local traffic on SR 29 along SR 29 also limit the practicality of HOT lanes in Napa.

The challenges is how to fund the ultimate project. A number of operational improvements are now being planned which will greatly benefit highway users. Tolling the facility is being considered to fund the ultimate project.

Another project that is in the works is the SR 37 corridor, which is impacted by heavy congestion and flooding during winter months. A proposed solution is to elevate a section of this road between Mare Island and Sears Point in anticipation of sea-level rise, which is predicted to submerge the road.

Table 25 summarizes the projects and programs requests submitted by Napa County jurisdictions. Table 26 summarizes the projected revenues that NVTA and its jurisdictions are expected to receive over the 25-year period relative to the projects and programs.

REVENUE BLUE PRINT

As state and federal revenues continue to trend down and costs increase, a resulting revenue shortfall is inevitable. This has put greater and greater pressure on counties to identify new revenues to address transportation infrastructure modernization and maintenance programs. Moreover, there is a growing trend around the state that prioritizes projects that are heavily funded by local revenue sources.

Table 25. PROJECT COSTS BY FUNDING CATEGORY

OTHER PROJECTS

CONSTRAINED (RTPa)

TOTAL (UNCONSTRAINED PROJECT LIST)

$33,950,000

$397,518,000

$431,468,000

$16,832,500

$83,658,100

$100,490,600

TRANSIT

$25,750,000

$206,810,096

$232,560,096

TOTAL

$76,532,500

$687,986,196

$764,518,696

FUNDING CATEGORY

AUTO

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION

Submitted to MTC for inclusion in Plan Bay Area 2050.

153

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 26. COUNTYWIDE PLAN REVENUE PROJECTIONS 2020–2045

SOURCE

ROADWAY & ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION REVENUE

AMOUNT (THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)

FEDERAL

Surface Transportation Program/Congestion Management/Air Quality (STP/CMAQ)/CMAQ (Jurisdictions)

100,231

STATE

TDA Article 3 Bike/Pedestrian (TDA 3)

5,604

Regional Improvement Program (RTIP)

59,443

SB1 Road Repair & Accountability Act SB1 Local Partnership Program SB1 Solutions for Congested Corridors

208,631 8,111 25,000

REGIONAL / LOCAL

Measure T

590,200

Transportation for Clean Air (TFCA)

6,800

Membership Contributions

6,250

TOTAL TRANSPORTATION REVENUES DISCRETIONARY TRANSPORTATION REVENUEa

$1,002,159 $211,439

PROJECTED TRANSPORTATION PROJECT NEEDS NON-TRANSIT PROJECTS AND PROGRAMSb NEEDS ASSESSMENT FOR STATE OF GOOD REPAIRc TRANSPORTATION FUNDING SHORTFALL – HIGHWAY AND ROADSd

$531,959 $317,142

–$637,662

Does not include SB1 Road Repair and Measure T funds. These revenues are passed through to local jurisdictions for maintainance and rehabilitation projects only. Some SB1 funds are channeled directly to local jurisdictions and not reflected in this table.

Includes all roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian (non-transit) projects in Table 23.

Estimated unmet needs for State of Good Repair from MTC for Draft Plan Bay Area 2050.

Calculated as total transportation project needs less discretionary revenues

154

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

SOURCE

TRANSIT REVENUE

AMOUNT (THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS)

FEDERAL

Federal Transit Administration (FTA Transit Funds)

62,035

State Transit Assistance (STA) Funds

69,407

STATE

STA State of Good Repair (SGR) Transportation Development Act – Transit

1,210 255,057

Low Carbon Transit Operating Program

3,900

Regional Measure 2

10,612

REGIONAL / LOCAL

Regional Measure 3 Operations

38,400

Regional Measure 3 Capital

49,000

SRTS, ATP

2,880

TRANSIT REVENUE TOTAL

$492,501

TOTAL COSTS – TRANSIT

$409,166

OPERATING COSTS

$200,000

TOTAL SHORTFALL – TRANSIT

– $116,665

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

$900

$849

$800 $700 MILLIONS OF DOLLARS

$609 $600

$117 M SHORTFALL

$638 M SHORTFALL

$493

$500 $400 $300

$211 $200 $100 $0

ROADWAY AND ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS REVENUE

TRANSIT OPERATIONS AND CAPITAL PROJECTS PROJECTED NEED

Figure 54. TRANSPORTATION PROJECT NEEDS COMPARED TO PROJECTED REVENUE OVER PLAN HORIZON

155

Reliance on Federal and State funding has waned in recent years. Transportation agencies are looking to alternative funding sources to help maintain transportation infrastructure and address growing congestion. Table 27 is a comprehensive summary of revenue concepts that were prioritized during the last CTP update by NVTA staff with input from member jurisdictions. Revenue concepts were prioritized based upon NVTA’s oversight authority and the amount of estimated revenues that the fund source could generate annually. Table 28 summarizes the potential funding sources discussed.

156

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 27. COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF POTENTIAL NEW REVENUE SOURCES

REVENUE TYPE

USER/UNIT FEE

ESTIMATED REVENUES SUMMARY OF PROS PER YEAR

TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX

Additional half cent

$20 million/year

SUMMARY OF CONS

2020-2045 (25 YEARS)

$500 million over 25 years

• Generates stable fund sources that can be used for capital and operating uses. • Requires ballot measure with 2/3 voter support

• Is subject to annual fluctuation but can be mitigated with bonding authority • Is limited to projects and programs in approved Expenditure Plan • • • • •

Requires ballot measure with majority voter support Limited to uses contained in the approved Expenditure Plan Limited project use Generates limited funds Requires 2/3 voter support

VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE

$10/vehicle

$1.41 million/year*

$35 million over 25 years*

• Generates annual funds that can be used for both capital and operating purposes contained in an Expenditure Plan • Funds expand or contract based on number of registered vehicles

BICYCLE FACILITIES VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE

$5/vehicle

$700 thousand/year

$17.5 million over 25 years*

• Generates annual funds that can be used for both capital and operating purposes

• Generates limited funds

• Requires 2/3 voter support

$50/parcel

$2.27 million/year**

$56.75 million over 25 years**

• Generates a stable funding source that can be used for capital and operating uses • Funds flow from the County's Assessor's office to the entity that places the tax on the ballot • Flexibility in use of funds (not explicitly tied to Expenditure Plan)

REGIONAL DEVELOPER IMPACT FEES/ TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE

TBD

Revenue difficult to estimate, likely anywhere from $20-40 million over 25 years

Revenue generation difficult to estimate, likely anywhere from $20-40 million over 25 years

• If fee relates to the impact of the development, cities or counties can assess the fee without voter approval • Creates a fund source that can be used for capital expenses such as signalization, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, or transit-related projects

• Relies on new development • Requires jurisdictions to develop policies for assessing and/or collecting impact fees • May be unpopular with jurisdictions who do not want to impact desirability of development environment

PUBLIC TRANSIT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT

TBD

Dependent on location of potential transit improvements

• Provides funding mechanism for major rail or transit station investment

• Funds cannot be used for operating expenses • Funds are limited to areas no more than a half mile from the center point of the transit station

PARCEL TAXES**

PROPERTY BASED BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS (PBID)

BUSINESS-BASED BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICTS

HOV/HOT LANES

TOLL ROAD

TBD

Project specific

• Provides stable funding for the term of the Agreement • Can be administered by a third party to carry out functions identified in the District Agreement • Can be used for capital and operating expenses

• Requires support by petition of property owners that will pay 50% or more of the fee • Life of PBID is maximum of 5 years, requiring new petition for renewal • Renewal can be for a term of up to 10 years • BID is limited to programs/projects that are identified during the formation of the BID

TBD

Project specific

• Can be used to augment services or fund projects or programs that improve the image of their city

• Requires support by petition of property owners that will pay 50% or more of the fee • Life of PBID has maximum of 5 years, requiring new petition for renewal • Renewal can be for a term of up to 10 years • BID is limited to programs/projects that are identified during the formation of the BID

TBD

Dependent on fee and number of trips

• Rewards drivers who carpool • Reduces congestion on the road

• • • •

Unsure of revenue generation potential May be hard to implement on Napa roads because of limited lane capacity Low return on investment Potential equity issues

TBD

Dependent on toll and number of trips

• Is a way to generate funds for maintenance of the roadway

• • • •

Lack of public support Equity issues Limited alternative routes Limited fund generation

*Assuming one percent annual growth in the number of registered vehicles (autos, trucks, trailers, and m/c)

**45,382 = Total number of parcels in Napa County

***Assuming 1% growth rate in both registered vehicles and AVMT—estimate is for Napa County only.

157

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

While various funding options might generate reasonable levels of new revenue, many pose both political and practical challenges. For example, aside from bridges, tolling is currently legislatively restricted to three roadways statewide. While discussions are underway to expand the Express Lane network, they have been largely restricted to freeways. Therefore, tolling is not likely to be a feasible revenue generator for Napa because it lacks the transportation infrastructure to support such a proposal. NVTA also explored other revenue generating opportunities including special districts such as Property Based Improvement Districts, Business Based Improvement Districts, and Public Transit Assessment Districts. Discretion for revenue sharing for the former two types of districts lies with the individual jurisdiction. The latter district is generally used in high density mixed-use destinations where business is thriving and parking is minimal. SB 1077, signed into law by Governor Brown in 2014, authorizes a pilot program to study a mileage based user fee. While the revenue generation potential is sound, the overhead and administration of implementing such a system may prove costly to implement and challenging to police. User fees are considered to be more equitable because they impose taxation on individuals based on their use of the roadway infrastructure, but there are also a number policy questions to be resolved. A critical issue for Napa will be how user fees are redistributed. If revenues are distributed based on where users live, that would not compensate Napa County for the wear and tear of the roads caused by the millions of visitors that travel to the County each year. In the previous CTP, NVTA narrowed the revenue sources from Table 28 to focus on five sources. Staff believes these are still relevant with the addition of a local sales tax renewal.

A parcel tax generates a stable funding source that is flexible source of funds, not necessarily bound by an expenditure plan, but this option would generate a limited amount of funds and a two-thirds voter support is necessary to pass.

A bicycle facilities vehicle registration fee would consist of a $5 fee per registered vehicle and although generated funds can be used for capital or operating uses, this option generates a limited amount of funds dependent on the number of registered vehicles in the county, but also requires a super majority of two thirds voter support.

Similar to a bicycle facilities vehicle registration fee, a vehicle registration fee is voter-approved fee levied on each vehicle registration. In contrast to the bicycle facilities vehicle registration fee, the vehicle registration fee only needs a simple majority of votes, but this revenue option generates a limited amount of funds and is dependent on the number of vehicles registered.

A regional Development/Traffic Impact Fee is outside of NVTA’s statutory ability, but it is a streamlined option that each jurisdiction can implement. The challenge is to project future revenue generations accurately because these revenues are based upon projected development, which fluctuates depending on the market, the economy, and competition with other communities. Also, uses tend to be highly prescriptive and usually require a nexus to a particular project.

A local sales tax renewal generates a significant amount of money for Napa County transportation projects. A challenge is that any change or renewal to the existing local sales tax requires two thirds vote. NVTA and member jurisdictions have been discussing the potential for a sales tax renewal and/or extension that would clean-up ordinance language and allow for bonding to bring money forward. The sales tax renewal would also allow jurisdictions and NVTA to fund capital projects such as highway improvements and active transportation projects.

158

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Table 28. POTENTIAL FUNDING SOURCES MATRIX

ESTIMATED REVENUES REVENUE TYPE

USER/UNIT FEE PER YEAR

OVER 25 YEARS (2020-2045)

TRANSPORTATION SALES TAX

Additional half cent

$20 million

$500 million

VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE

$10/vehicle

$1.41 million

$40 million

BICYCLE FACILITIES VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE

$5/vehicle

$700 thousand

$20 million

PARCEL TAXES

$50/parcel

$2.27 million

$56.75 million

REGIONAL DEVELOPER IMPACT FEES/ TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE

TBD

Revenue generation difficult to estimate likely anywhere from $20–40 million over 25 years

SALES TAX RENEWAL

1/2 cent

$20 million

$500 million

159

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

GLOSSARY OF ACRONYMS ACS

AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY

MAAS

ADA

AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT

ATP

ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (CALIFORNIA GRANT FUNDING SOURCE)

MTC METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION

AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE

BART

BAY AREA RAPID TRANSIT

MOBILITY AS A SERVICE

NREL

NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY LABORATORY

NVTA

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

CARES CORONAVIRUS AID, RELIEF AND ECONOMIC SECURITY ACT

OBAG

ONE BAY AREA GRANT (MTC GRANT PROGRAM)

CBTP

COMMUNITY BASED TRANSPORTATION PLAN

PCI

PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX

CHA

COMMUNITY HEALTH ASSESSMENT

RM2

REGIONAL MEASURE 2

CHIP

COMMUNITY HEALTH IMPROVEMENT PLAN

RRFB

RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACON

CMAQ

CONGESTION MITIGATION AND AIR QUALITY (FUNDING PROGRAM)

RTIP

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

CMCP

COMPREHENSIVE MULTIMODAL CORRIDOR PLAN (STUDY OF SR 29 IN AMERICAN CANYON)

RTP

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN

SB1

SENATE BILL 1

CMS

CHANGEABLE MESSAGE SIGN

COA COMPREHENSIVE OPERATIONS ANALYSIS CTP

COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN

CONNECTED VEHICLE

EPA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY EV

ELECTRIC VEHICLE

FAST

FIXING AMERICA’S SURFACE TRANSPORTATION ACT

FHWA

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION

GHG

GREENHOUSE GAS

HOT

HIGH OCCUPANCY TOLL (LANES)

ITIP

INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

LHNC

LIVE HEALTHY NAPA COLLABORATIVE

SHOPP STATE HIGHWAY OPERATION AND PROTECTION PROGRAM SMART SONOMA-MARIN AREA RAIL TRANSIT SRTS

SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL

STA

STATE TRANSIT ASSISTANCE

STIP

STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM

TDA

TRANSPORTATION DEVELOPMENT ACT

TDM TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT TFCA

TRANSPORTATION FUND FOR CLEAN AIR

TNC

TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANY

TOC

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS CENTER

TSP

TRANSIT SIGNAL PRIORITY

TTTRI

TRUCK TRAVEL TIME RELIABILITY INDEX

VMT

VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED

NAPA VALLEY COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN MAY 2021

Appendix

APPENDIX CONTENTS PUBLIC OUTREACH PERFORMANCE METRICS TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY SAFETY DELAY INDEX ON-TIME BUS PERFORMANCE TRUCK TRAVEL TIME RELIABILITY JOB ACCESSIBILITY PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX

FREIGHT FLOWS GREENHOUSE GAS CALCULATIONS TRAVEL DEMAND FORECASTING – MODE SHARES FUNDING PROGRAMS COMMENTS RECEIVED AND RESPONSE COMMENTS MATRIX NAPA COUNTY BICYCLE COALITION NAPA VALLEY VINE TRAIL COALITION ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED

Public Outreach

NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan 2045

Community Engagement Summary Report Round 1: August 2019 - January 2020 Round 2: March 2021 - April 2021

Table of Contents Community Engagement Phase I Overview .............................................................................................. 4 Community Engagement Phase II Overview ............................................................................................. 5 Overall Community Engagement Process ................................................................................................. 6 In-Person ....................................................................................................................................................... 6 Online ............................................................................................................................................................. 6 Promotional Campaign .............................................................................................................................. 8 Results ................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Phase I - Overall Participation .................................................................................................................. 9 Phase I - Data from Survey ...................................................................................................................... 11 Phase I - Data from Interactive Map (online & in-person) ............................................................... 21 Phase I - Data from Transportation Mode Poll ................................................................................... 23 Phase I - Findings by Focus Area ........................................................................................................... 25 Phase II - Overall Participation ............................................................................................................... 27 Phase II - Data from Konveio Comments ............................................................................................. 27 Appendix.......................................................................................................................................................... 31 1. Pop-up Event Posters .......................................................................................................................... 31 2. Website Pages ....................................................................................................................................... 32 3. Video Presentation ............................................................................................................................... 37 4. Live Online Q&A Sessions ................................................................................................................... 37 5. Konveio PDF Commenting .................................................................................................................. 39

Community Engagement Phase I Overview From August 2019 to January 2020, we gathered input from residents across the County via an interactive website and a series of pop-up events. The same input mechanisms were available online and offline. Input was used to inform the draft Transportation Plan. Online engagement opportunities: ●

Survey to understand community transportation needs

●

Interactive Map to gather ideas for transportation improvements

●

Poll to gather data on current transportation usage

All online engagement opportunities were also available in analogue form at community events. Community engagement events: NVTA Transportation Summit

September 18th, 2019 4:00pm-6:00pm

Napa Farmers Market

October 16th, 2019 9:00am - 1:00pm

American Canyon Senior Center

December 11th, 2019 9:00am - 10:30am

Up Valley Family Center 500 Cedar St, Calistoga, CA 94515

December 19th, 2019 12:30pm - 1:30pm

City of Napa Senior Center 1500 Jefferson St, Napa, CA 94559

January 13th, 2020 10:00am-12:00pm

Carnegie Building, St Helena 1360 Oak Ave, St Helena, CA 94574

January 16th, 2020 4:30pm - 6:30pm

1 Copia, 500 First Street, Napa, CA, 94559 2 195 Gasser Dr, Napa, CA 94559 3 2185 Elliott Dr, American Canyon, CA 94503

Community Engagement Phase II Overview From March 2021 to April 2021, we invited the community to review a draft of the NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan. During this period, we shared a video overview of the plan, hosted a live online meeting to answer community questions, and sought input from community members to validate the draft plan via an interactive website. Due to the coronavirus pandemic, all engagement opportunities were online. Online engagement opportunities: ●

Video Presentation and Fact Sheets to share a overview of the draft plan in an engaging and digestible format

●

Konveio (collaborative PDF commenting) to share the full draft plan and gather input by enabling community members to comment directly on the plan

●

Live Online Q&A Sessions on April 7, 2021 (Spanish) and April 8, 2021 (English) to respond to questions from the community

Overall Community Engagement Process To gather input on the NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan 2045 (“Transportation Plan”) from Napa County’s community members, NVTA worked with contractors DKS and CivicMakers (NVTA team) to conduct a series of in-person and online engagement activities from August 2019 to January 2020 (Phase I) and from March 2021 to April 2021 (Phase II).

In-Person During phase I, the NVTA team hosted a series of pop-up events during popular community events in Napa, St. Helena, American Canyon and Calistoga. At each event, the public was presented with a set of engagement posters to share project information and solicit input on focus areas and measures for the Transportation Plan. The posters were translated to Spanish for targeted events.

Online Throughout the project, the NVTA team provided an online engagement platform designed to make it easier, more convenient and accessible to share input on the Transportation Plan. The website (https://www.nvtatransportationplan.org/), available in English, Spanish and Filipino, was set up as a hub for sharing project information, as well as for gathering input via interactive maps and survey components. Text messaging integration was included in order to better reach those people who may not have computers or smartphones at home. All online engagement opportunities were also available in analogue form at community pop-up events. In addition, for Phase II, we used an online engagement platform called Konveio to allow participants to review the full draft plan and leave comments directly on the document. The document was set up with a walk-through to guide participants through the most important aspects of the document. Furthermore, we produced a video presentation and factsheets that were shared on the website, which provided an overview of the draft plan in an engaging and digestible format. Finally, we hosted two live online Q&A meetings over Zoom on April 7 (Spanish) and April 8, 2021 (English) to give the community an opportunity to ask questions and receive clarifying responses from NVTA and local jurisdiction staff. The event was also live-streamed over Facebook. This

meeting was conducted online due to social distancing restrictions imposed by the coronavirus pandemic. Below is a screen capture of the webpage.

Promotional Campaign To promote the pop-up events and online engagement activities, the NVTA team developed a promotional campaign that included emails, social media, press releases, and printed poster ads on buses, in bus shelters, and in other public places. All materials were translated into Spanish.

Results Phase I - Overall Participation Combined Participation (In-Person + Online) In total we estimate that nearly 900 people shared input on the Transportation Plan. Activity

In-Person

Online

SMS

SUM

Transportation Needs Assessment Survey

374

385

Interactive Map

189

281

Transportation Mode Poll

Focus Area Prioritization

152

424

456

899

SUM Participation at Community Events (In-Person)

While we did not do a head count at events, we estimate 100+ in-person participants based on the number of comments received. Many more learned about the project without sharing input. Event

Map Comments

% of Total

Total Votes 1 Collected

% of Total

Transportation Summit (Napa; 9/18/19)

28.04%

40.63%

Napa Farmers Market (Napa; 10/19/19)

35.45%

18.75%

Boys and Girls Club (American Canyon; 12/11/19)

19.58%

12.05%

Up Valley Family Center (Calistoga; 12/19/19)

7.41%

0.00%

Total Votes includes the number of pompoms collected to indicate primary travel mode (for which, participants could cast only 1 vote) and the number of dot votes placed on important focus areas (for which, participants could cast 1-3 votes).

Napa Senior Center (Napa; 1/13/20)

3.17%

12.50%

Pop-up at Carnegie Building (St Helena; 1/16/20)

6.35%

16.07%

TOTAL_

189

224

Participation Online In total, we saw 500+ online participants and many more learned about the effort by visiting the project website. Types of Online Visitors

Online

Total Site Views

3,621

Unique Participants (contributors) Comments Received (survey + map + poll)

460 1,007

Survey: ● ●

883 comments 2 (a single survey contained 13 opportunities to provide a comment) 290 unique commenters ○ Range 1-10 comments ○ Average per respondent: 2.16 comments ○ Average per commentator : 2.88 comments

Map + Poll ● ●

124 comments 79 unique commenters

‘Comments’ for the survey include both open-answer responses and boxes where respondents

could clarify their quantitative responses.

Phase I - Data from Survey Purpose. Understand the transportation needs, concerns and ideas of Napa residents and workers.

Submission Source: ● Online (372) ● Community Events (11)

385 Surveys Received About the survey. ●

13 question

●

Available online and as a printed survey during community events

1. Survey Participants by Age Group: (247 question responses; 64.2% response rate 3)

The response rate is the number of people who responded to this question compared to the total number of surveys submitted.

2. School Age Children at Home: (250 question responses; 64.9% response rate)

3. Number of Household Vehicles: (250 question responses; 64.9% response rate)

4. Annual Household Income: (220 question responses; 57.1% response rate)

5. What is your main form of transportation? (331 question responses; 86% response rate)

6. If you're employed, how do you usually travel to work? (370 question responses; 96.1% response rate)

7. What zip code do you live in? (236 question responses; 61.3% response rate) 209

Within Napa County Napa

94558, 94559

135

57.20% *

American Canyon

94503

10.59%

Saint Helena

94574

8.47%

Calistoga

94515

5.08%

Pope Valley

94567

2.54%

Yountville

94599

2.54%

Angwin

94508

1.69%

Rutherford

94573

0.42%

Outside Napa County

27 14

4.66%

Sonoma County (Sonoma, Windsor, Santa 95476, 95492, 95401, 95403 Rosa)

2.11%

Marin County (Novato, Belvedere Tiburon) 94949, 94920

0.85%

Lake County (Middletown)

95461

0.42%

Yolo County (West Sacramento)

95691

0.42%

Sacramento County (Sacramento)

95818

0.42%

Contra Costa County (Walnut Creek)

94596

0.42%

San Mateo (Belmont)

94002

0.42%

Solano County (Suisun City, Benicia, Vallejo, Fairfield, Vacaville)

94585, 94510, 94590, 94534, 95687

*percentage of total zip codes (within Napa County and Outside the County, combined)

8. What zip code do you travel to most often? (199 question responses; 51.7% response rate) 145

Within Napa County Napa

94558, 94559

101

50.75% *

Saint Helena

94574

11.06%

American Canyon

94503

4.52%

Calistoga

94515

2.51%

Angwin

94508

2.01%

Yountville

94599

1.51%

Rutherford

94573

.50%

Outside Napa County

Solano County (Fairfield,Vallejo, Vacaville, 94534, 94533, 94589, 94590, Suisun City) 94592, 95688, 94585

6.03%

Alameda County (Hayward, Oakland, Berkeley, Livermore)

94541, 94612, 94611, 94601, 94610, 94707, 94703, 94550

5.03%

Sonoma County (Santa Rosa, Sonoma)

95407, 95401, 95409, 95476

4.02%

San Francisco County (San Francisco)

94103, 94116, 94104, 94114, 94111

4.02%

Contra Costa County (San Pablo, Moraga, San Ramon, Byron)

94806, 94575, 94583, 94514

2.01%

San Mateo (San Carlos, Pacifica, Brisbane)

94070, 94044, 94005

2.01%

Marin County (Novato, San Rafael)

94949, 94948, 94903

1.51%

Monterey County (Monterey)

93940

0.50%

Amador County (Pioneer)

95666

0.50%

*percentage of total zip codes (within Napa County and Outside the County, combined)

9. How does each of the following conditions compare to five years ago? (332 responses; 86.2% response rate)

Somewhat About the Much better now better now same

Somewhat Much No worse now worse now opinion

Traffic on local highways (Routes 12, 29, 121, 128)

155

281

Pavement conditions on the local highways (Routes 12, 29, 121, 128)

285

Traffic on local streets and roads

113

104

283

Pavement conditions on local streets and roads

285

Reliability of Vine Transit

168

272

Frequency of Vine Transit

166

266

Ability to walk places to meet everyday needs

149

273

Safety and ease of biking

270

235

479

421

501

533

2215

2.08%

10.61%

21.63%

19.01%

22.62%

24.06%

SUM %

10. What do you find most challenging/frustrating as you travel around Napa County? (302 responses; 78.4% response rate) [See chart below]

11. What is the best aspect of Napa County's transportation system? (187 responses; 48.6% response rate) Most challenging/frustrating part of traveling in the County

Best aspect of the County transportation system

Congestion (or lack thereof)

215

71.19%

9.09%

Transit Options

8.28%

27.81%

Pedestrian Facilities

0.99%

9.09%

Travel Information

0.00%

13.37%

Pavement Conditions

15.56%

16.58%

Bicycle Facilities

3.97%

20.86%

Carpool/ vanpool options

0.00%

3.21%

Other

0.00%

SUM

302

187

12. If you had unlimited resources and no limits, what is the one thing (or things) that you would do to make transportation in Napa County easier, safer or more pleasant? (248 question responses; 64.75% response rate)

Number of Open Comments

231

73.10%

Number of Map pins

26.90%

TOTAL COMMENTS

316

13. Below are some ways in which Napa County's transportation system could change in the future. In general, how much do you support each change? (252 question responses; 65.5% response rate)

Strongly

Somewhat

Not at all

Not sure or Indifferent

Congestion relief on local highways (Routes

182

216

146

216

218

216

214

112

215

business districts

121

217

Safe bikeways

138

216

options

213

Safer routes to school

118

212

921

426

109

272

1728

41.58%

19.23%

4.92%

12.28%

12, 29, 121, 128) Improving local streets and roads Increase the number of park-and-ride lots Faster or more frequent Vine Transit service Faster or more frequent Vine Paratransit service More walkable neighborhoods More walkable central

Carpool / vanpool

SUM

Phase I - Data from Interactive Map (online & in-person) Purpose. Identify where Napa residents and workers would like to see improvements to the County transportation system.

Comment Source: ● In-Person (189) ● Online (73) ● SMS (19)

281 Comments Collected About the Map Activity ●

Online, an interactive map allowed participants to pin comments throughout the County

●

At Community Events, larga maps were printed of the County and each jurisdiction. Attendees were invited to place a post-it comment where they would like to see improvements

Online Mapping Activity

In-Person Mapping Activity Where would you like to see improvement? (189 post-it comments placed) In-Person Mapping Data: Comments per jurisdiction

Napa

38.82%

American Canyon

31.58%

County-wide

30.26%

Calistoga

11.84%

St Helena

8.55%

Yountville

3.29%

SUM

189

Phase I - Data from Transportation Mode Poll Purpose. Understand how participants typically move through the transportation system, and begin the conversation around mode options and practicality.

Source: ● In-Person (72) ● Online (9)

81 Votes Cast About the poll ●

Online, participants voted in a poll

●

At Community Events, attendees were invited to place a pom pom in the jar of the mode they use most often

Phase 1 - Data from County-wide Plan Focus Areas Only conducted at in-person events. What is most important to improve transportation in Napa County? (152 dot votes placed 4)

Phase I - Findings by Focus Area Community sentiment from comments received via digital engagement and pop-up events is summarized below according to the goals of the Countywide Transportation Plan 2045.

Equity Goal: Serve the transportation needs of the entire community regardless of age, income or ability. Most comments related to equity emphasized the need to provide and maintain safe, reliable, and comfortable transportation options to schools for youth (e.g., increase bus service, expand bike routes, and maintained sidewalks). Some comments expressed a desire for better or

Participants were invited to place up to three dots across the focus areas. The number of votes cast is not an accurate depiction of the number of participants.

alternative transportation options for seniors and persons with disabilities, such as on-demand rideshare services because existing transportation options are not considered accessible or comfortable.

Safety Goal: Improve system safety in order to support all modes and serve all users. Most comments expressed a desire to see more safety improvements for bikers and pedestrians (e.g. designated bike lanes, pedestrian signal crossings, etc.). Many comments raised concerns over dangerous vehicular traffic, identifying specific unsafe intersections or crossings and calling for increased traffic calming measures and road enforcement. A few comments asked about planned evacuation routes in the case of an emergency or natural disaster.

Reduce Congestion Goal: Use taxpayer dollars efficiently and reduce traffic congestion. The majority of comments (over 200) were concerned with traffic congestion. Over half of the comments advocated for more frequent, reliable public transportation services that better connect Napa County cities to each other as well as to San Francisco, East Bay, and Sonoma County (at least to the Vallejo Ferry or Richmond Bart). The other comments want traffic congestion alleviation via roadway improvements, such as via synchronized traffic signals, roundabouts, road widening, designated turning and passing lanes, and over/underpasses.

Economic Vitality Goal: Support Napa County’s economic vitality. Most comments related to economic vitality want to see better coordination with the wine and tourist industry to manage transportation demand. A few comments (also related to equity) want to see better public transportation options for existing residents/workers and more reliable service to connect residents to economic opportunities inside and outside of Napa Valley.

Sustainability Goal: Minimize the energy and other resources required to move people and goods. Overall, there were few comments explicitly about sustainability. Of those related, some comments advocated for electric vehicles while others discouraged driving in favor of promoting alternative modes of transportation, such as public transit, e-scooters, biking, and walking,

through improving efficiency and safety or providing incentives (e.g. free transit passes, helmets, etc.) to protect the environment.

Maintenance & Preservation Goal: Prioritize the maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing system. Many commenters want to see roads maintained and repaved, biking and pedestrian networks continue to be expanded and maintained, and public transportation frequency improved to encourage ridership. Additionally, some commenters felt public transportation could be improved through easier, seamless payment methods and better real-time trip planning tools.

Phase II - Overall Participation Participation Online In total, we saw 57 online participants take part in our online engagement. Types of Online Visitors

Online

Video Presentation Views

Konveio Participants

Q&A Attendees

13 (30 RSVP’d)

SUM

Phase II - Data from Konveio Comments In total, we saw 102 comments from 10 participants who shared their input on the draft plan. Most comments were suggestions or questions that sought clarification on specific details, diagrams, and projects presented in the draft plan. A complete listing of comments can be found in the "Comments Received" section of the countywide plan appendix.

Page No.

Total Comments

Sentiment

Type

Neutral (2)

Question (2)

Neutral (1) Negative (1)

Question (1) Suggestion (1)

Neutral (4) Negative (1)

Question (4) Suggestion (1)

Neutral (8) Negative (4)

Question (6) Suggestion (6)

Negative (4)

Question (1)

Neutral (3)

Question (2) Other (1)

Neutral (3)

Question (1) Suggestion (1)

Negative (1)

Question (1)

Neutral (2)

Question (1) Suggestion (1)

Neutral (1) Negative (1)

Question (2)

Neutral (1)

Suggestion (1)

Neutral (1) Negative (1)

Suggestion (2)

Negative (1)

Suggestion (1)

Neutral (1)

Question (1)

Negative (1)

Suggestion (1)

Neutral (1)

Suggestion (1)

Negative (1)

Question (1)

Negative (1)

Question (1)

Page No.

Total Comments

Sentiment

Type

Negative (1)

Suggestion (1)

Neutral (2)

Question (2)

Negative (1)

Question (1)

Neutral (1)

Suggestion (1)

Neutral (1)

Suggestion (1)

Negative (1)

Question (1)

Positive (1) Neutral (7) Negative (4)

Question (6) Suggestion (6)

Neutral (3) Negative (2)

Question (5)

Neutral (1) Negative (1)

Suggestion (2)

Neutral (3)

Suggestion (2) Other (1)

Neutral (1) Negative (1)

Suggestion (2)

Neutral (1) Negative (1)

Suggestion (2)

Neutral (1) Negative (1)

Question (1) Suggestion (1)

Positive (1) Neutral (1)

Suggestion (2)

Neutral (1)

Suggestion (1)

Positive (1) Negative (1)

Question (1) Suggestion (1)

101

Negative (1)

Suggestion (1)

Page No.

Total Comments

Sentiment

Type

109

Neutral (1)

Question (1)

110

Neutral (1)

Suggestion (1)

116

Negative (1)

Suggestion (1)

130

Negative (1)

Question (1)

134

Negative (1)

Question (1)

135

Negative (1)

Question (4) Suggestion (1)

136

Neutral (3) Negative (2)

Question (1) Suggestion (4)

137

Neutral (3)

Question (1) Suggestion (2)

141

Negative (1)

Suggestion (1)

152

Neutral (1)

Suggestion (1)

Positive (3) Neutral (64) Negative (36)

Question (50) Suggestion (50) Other (2)

SUM

102

Appendix Appendix Table of Contents 1. Pop-up Event Posters

2. Website Pages

3. Video Presentation

4. Live Online Q&A Session

5. Konveio PDF Commenting

1. Pop-up Event Posters

2. Website Pages Banner

Introduction to the Site (1) English

(2) Spanish

(3) Tagalog

About the Project

‘Take the Survey!’ Page (Phase I)

‘Learn More & Share Input’ Page (Phase II)

Fact Sheets (Phase II)

3. Video Presentation Below is a screenshot of the video overview of the plan. You can view the video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NoLetin8qfo&t=1s

4. Live Online Q&A Sessions Below are the questions received during the Q&A sessions and a summary of responses. ●

●

Why does NVTA Complete a Countywide Transportation Plan? o NVTA completes a CTP every 4 years to outline the transportation priorities and projects for the next 25 years. It is a requirement of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to receive federal and state discretionary funding through the region. What is the purpose of setting performance metrics?

The purpose of the performance metrics is to measure how NVTA is doing in meeting goals and objectives identified in the Plan. That is why it is important that performance metrics can be quantifiable. How often is NVTA going to review the performance metrics? o The idea would be to review progress towards performance metrics every 4 years with the potential to do a mid-cycle review every 2 years. What is VMT? o Vehicle Miles Traveled. It is measured by multiplying the number of vehicles by number of miles traveled along a roadway. Travel models can also estimate VMT by development project, city, county and by region. How are transportation projects prioritized in the Plan? Why wouldn’t the Plan prioritize projects based on their ability to meet performance metrics? o NVTA ran all the projects in the Plan through a qualitative assessment on how the projects meet the goals of the Plan. This is one of the factors used to prioritize projects in the Plan, but many times there are multiple factors that go into prioritizing a project such as funding source (since not all funding sources can be used for every type of project), local priorities, and identified community needs, etc. How does the Plan measure equity? o The Plan measures equity by number of households below the county median income that are within a quarter mile of transit. NVTA wanted to focus performance metrics on metrics that were quantifiable and NVTA had influence over… access to transit is a natural fit since NVTA operates the Vine bus system. How does the Plan measure congestion? o The Plan measures congestion several different ways: ▪ Peak period delay index - which is the ratio of congested travel time to free flow travel time along that corridor and reflects the reliability of a roadway. ▪ Average weekday person hours of delay on Napa roads - delay experienced by people traveling on Napa’s roadway in excess of free flow travel times. ▪ On-time bus performance weighted by ridership ▪ Number of users in the transportation demand management programs What is a travel demand model and what is it used for? o The Travel Demand Model is a computer simulated model that looks at typical weekday travel patterns for the entire bay area. This one is specifically focused on Napa County. The travel model baseline year is 2015. Future year conditions can be modeled with assumptions about future growth in population and jobs alongside future transportation network improvements. What is TTTR index? o Truck Travel Time Reliability Index. It indicates the reliability of freight travel times as measured by historical truck speed along a corridor. o

●

Why is the SR 29 widening specifically called out in the modeling scenarios and why would Caltrans not likely support a project like this? o The modeling of SR 29 widening was used to compare investments in vehicle travel with transit investments for modeling purposes. The SR 29 lanes package results in an increase in VMT relative to the basic plan. The modeling effort found that transit enhancements (i.e. greater frequency, reliability and reduced cost) have the potential to increase the number of trips made by transit and reduce VMT. Caltrans is not likely to support any project that increases VMT and also adds more maintenance cost onto the state in the form of adding more pavement to Hwy 29.

5. Konveio PDF Commenting The screenshots below show the interactive PDF commenting platform that welcomed input on the draft plan.

Performance Metrics TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY SAFETY DELAY INDEX ON-TIME BUS PERFORMANCE TRUCK TRAVEL TIME RELIABILITY JOB ACCESSIBILITY PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX

TRANSIT ACCESSIBILITY

TRANSIT BUFFER ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM DATE:

August 19, 2020

TO:

Alberto Esqueda | Napa Valley Transportation Authority

FROM:

Aditi Meshram | DKS Associates Erin Vaca | DKS Associates

SUBJECT: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan

Project #19118-000

OBJECTIVE

This memorandum describes the methodology for estimating the number of households with lower than median income that are served by Napa’s Vine Transit stops. The accessibility of Vine Transit service is determined by the walkable distance to these transit stops, which is assumed to be one quarter of a mile.

DATA

The following data was utilized for this analysis: 1. Number of households in Napa County – obtained from the American Community Survey (ACS) 2014-2018 2. Census Block Groups shapefile – obtained from TIGER (Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing 3. Vine Transit Stops shapefile – obtained from the NVTA web site.

METHODOLOGY

A combination of Microsoft Excel and ESRI’s ArcGIS was used for this analysis. 1. Load the Napa County Basemap ArcMap file. 2. Add the Vine Transit Stops shapefile to the map. 3. Use the Geoprocessing  Buffer tool in ArcMap to create a 1/4th mile buffer around Vine stops. Select the dissolve option to merge overlapping buffers. Save this buffer polygon feature class in the desired geodatabase.

4. Load the Block Groups shapefile. Using the Geoprocessing  Clip tool, clip the Block Groups to the existing Napa County boundary. This will create a subset of the Block Groups that only lie within Napa County’s boundary. 5. Certain block groups have houses build only over a small portion of their entire area. This is especially evident in block groups outside the dense city center, where built-up area does not cover the entire block group. To obtain the number of households within such transit buffers that lie along the periphery of cities, we calculate the ratio of area covered by transit buffers to the area of residential build-up in the block group, and multiply by the total number of households in that block group. Polygons around built-up residential area are created in Google Maps and imported into ArcMap as shown below.

FI GURE 1. EX AMPLE OF BLOCK GROUPS WI TH S MALL BUILT-UP AREA

6. Load the residential built-up area polygons onto ArcMap. 7. Using the Geoprocessing  Clip tool, join the Block Groups and Residential Polygons. Save as shapefile. Let’s call this “BlockGroup_Poly” for purposes of referencing. The Clip tool will attach the Block Group’s GeoID field to the Polygons shapefile, for easy cross-referencing later.

8. Using the Geoprocessing  Intersect tool, create an intersect between the Block Groups and Transit Buffers. This will split the buffers and divide them across block groups as highlighted in teal below. Save as shapefile and call this “BlockGroup_Buffer_Intersect”

FIGURE 2. CREATE AN INTERSECT OF TRANSIT BUFFER AND BLOCK GROUP SHAPEFILES

9. Using the Geoprocessing  Clip tool, join the BlockGroup_Poly and BlockGroup_Buffer_Intersect obtained in Step 8. Save this as a shapefile and name it as “BlockGroup_Poly_Buffer”. This gives the residential area that is intersected by transit buffers. Area of these polygons can be found under the field “Shape_Area”. Refer Figure 5 to view how each of the layers from Step 7 to 9 look on the map. 10. Export the table data of shapefiles BlockGroup_Poly and BlockGroup_Poly_Buffer. 11. In an Excel Worksheet, import the data from BlockGroup_Poly, BlockGroup_Poly_Buffer and the Demographic data obtained from ACS. Note that GeoID in ACS data is in a slightly different format than that in Block Groups. Edit the ACS GeoID field to match the Block Groups.

FIGURE 3. GEOID FIELD IN ACS 2014-2018

F I G U R E 4 . G E O I D I N B L OC K G R O U P S

12. Using VLOOKUP function in Excel, for every block group obtain the built-up area i.e. Shape_Area of BlockGroup_Poly, and the built-up area intersecting the transit buffers, i.e. Shape_Area of BlockGroup_Poly_Buffer. 13. Calculate the ratio of “Built-up area intersecting transit buffer” to “Built-up area”. Let’s call this “Area Ratio”. 14. Again using the VLOOKUP function obtain the total number of households for every block group. Multiply these by the Area Ratio to obtain an estimate of the number of households served by Vine Transit in that block group. 15. Summarize the number of households within 1\4th mile of Vine transit stops by income category, as shown in Table 1. 16. Obtain the number of households that lie below the median income of Napa, as shown in Table 2. Note that Napa’s median income is $84,753, however ACS income bins are broad, therefore $75,000 has been considered as the threshold income.

T ABLE 1 . HOUSEHOLDS WITHI N ACS -DEFINED IN COME CAT EGORIES INCOME CATEGORY

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS WITHIN 1/4 MILE OF VINE TRANSIT STOP

< $10,000

1,131

$10,000 TO $14,999

1,141

$15,000 TO $19,999

1,098

$20,000 TO $24,999

1,385

$25,000 TO $29,999

1,286

$30,000 TO $34,999

1,187

$35,000 TO $39,999

1,310

$40,000 TO $44,999

1,332

$45,000 TO $49,999

1,282

$50,000 TO $59,999

2,447

$60,000 TO $74,999

3,271

$75,000 TO $99,999

4,756

$100,000 TO $124,999

3,876

$125,000 TO $149,999

2,732

$150,000 TO $199,999

3,380

$200,000 OR MORE

3,746

FI GURE 5. CLIPPI NG AN D IN TERSECTI NG BLOCK GROUPS , BUI LT-UP POLYGONS AN D TRAN SIT BUFF ER LAYERS

RESULTS

The number of households with income less than Napa’s median income and lying within onefourth mile of any Vine Transit stop are presented below. TABLE 2 . NUMBER OF HOUS EHOLDS SERV ED BY VI NE T RAN SIT IN NAP A COUN TY

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS IN NAPA COUNTY

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS IN NAPA COUNTY BELOW MEDIAN INCOME*

% OF HOUSEHOLDS IN NAPA COUNTY BELOW MEDIAN INCOME* ($75,000)

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS UNDER MEDIAN INCOME WITHIN ¼ MILE FROM TRANSIT STOP

% OF HOUSEHOLDS UNDER MEDIAN INCOME* THAT ARE WITHIN ¼ MILE FROM TRANSIT STOP

47%

16,869

85%

($75,000)

42,747

19,951

*Napa County median income is $84,753; however ACS provides data in income brackets like [$75,000 to $99,999]. Therefore households with an income less than $75,000 have been counted.

SAFETY

SAFETY ANALYSIS MEMORANDUM DATE:

August 19, 2020

TO:

Alberto Esqueda | Napa Valley Transportation Authority

FROM:

Erin Vaca | DKS Associates Aditi Meshram | DKS Associates

SUBJECT: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan

Project #19118-000

OBJECTIVE

This memorandum discusses the methodology used in obtaining the number of traffic collisions in Napa County and depicting them on a map.

DATA

Traffic collision data for the state of California is available through the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS). This data has been geocoded for ease of mapping, and has been made available on the Transportation Injury Mapping System (TIMS) maintained by the University of California, Berkeley Safe Transportation Research and Education Center. Note that the TIMS system includes only injury collision data and does not include property-damage-only (PDO) records. Collision data within the County of Napa was acquired for the years 2015 to 2018.

METHODOLOGY

The SWITRS collision data is mapped in ArcMap of ESRI’s ArcGIS Suite through the following steps: 1. Download the collision data from TIMS and save it as Comma Separated Value (csv) file. 2. Load the Napa County Basemap ArcMap file. 3. Using the Add Data feature, add the collision data csv file to ArcMap. 4. In the Table of Contents, right click on the collision csv layer and select ‘Display XY Data’. Using the dialogue box, set the X Field as LONGITUDE, and Y Field LATITUDE as shown

below. Click OK.

5. A Point feature layer will be added to the map. Right click on this layer, select Data then Export Data. Set the file path for where you wish to save the output feature class, rename the shapefile and hit save. Add the exported data to the map as a layer. 6. Go to Layer Properties of the layer added in Step 5. Under Symbology  Categories  Unique Values, select the value field COLLISIO_1. Use the Add Values button to add collision severity values of 1 and 2, which correspond to Fatal and Severe Injury collisions, respectively.

7. Change the Symbol properties as desired and edit legend to display the feature counts. 8. The raw collision data obtained from TIMS was summarized in Excel using a Pivot Table.

The traffic collisions map of Napa County between 2015 and 2018 is shown in Figure 1. Traffic collisions involving pedestrian and bicycle fatalities are shown in Figure 2. Table 1 summarizes the collisions by city and mode involved. T ABLE 1 . FAT AL AN D SEVERE I NJURY COLLISIONS BY CITY 20 15- 2018

CITY

TOTAL FATAL

SEVERE INJURY

TOTAL INJURY

ALCOHOL INVOLVED

PEDESTRIAN INVOLVED

AMERICAN CANYON

324

CALISTOGA

NAPA

1,467

155

105

SAINT HELENA

133

UNINCORPORATED

202

2,198

190

180

YOUNTVILLE

291

4195

380

140

261

TOTAL IN NAPA COUNTY

PEDESTRIAN FATALITIES

BICYCLE INVOLVED

176

BICYCLE FATALITIES

MOTORCYCLE INVOLVED

MOTORCYCLE FATALITIES

FI GURE 1. F AT AL AN D S EV ERE TRAFF I C COLLI SI ONS IN N AP A COUNT Y (2 015 -20 18 ) SO UR CE: STATEWIDE INTEGRATED TR AFFIC R ECO RDS SYSTEM (SW ITR S), 2015 -201 8

FI GURE 2. F ATAL P EDEST RI AN AN D BI CYCLE COLLISI ON S SO UR CE: STATEWIDE INTEGRATED TR AFFIC R ECO RDS SYSTEM (SW ITR S), 2015 -201 8

RESULTS

Between the years 2015 and 2018, a total of 48 fatal and 291 severe collisions have occurred within the boundary of Napa County. The proposed target for CTP is zero fatal and severe injury collisions.

DELAY INDEX

DELAY INDEX MEMORANDUM DATE:

August 24, 2020

TO:

Alberto Esqueda | Napa Valley Transportation Authority

FROM:

Aditi Meshram | DKS Associates Erin Vaca | DKS Associates

SUBJECT: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan

Project #19118-000

OBJECTIVE

This memorandum describes the methodology for calculating the delay index of study roadway segments in Napa county. Segments of the following roadways were studied: •

Trancas Street

•

Imola Avenue

•

SR 12 (Sonoma Hwy)

•

Silverado Trail

•

SR 221 (Napa-Vallejo Highway)

•

SR 29

•

SR 128/SR 29 (St Helena Highway)

•

Soscol Avenue

DATA

Travel demand model outputs: • •

Free-flow travel time Congested travel time

METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS

1. Obtain the free-flow and congested travel time outputs from the travel demand model for desired study corridors. 2. For every segment or extent of a corridor, sum the free-flow travel time. 3. Similarly, for each segment or extent of the corridor, sum the congested travel time. 4. Divide the congested travel time by free-flow travel time. 5. Repeat the process for every study route and time period (AM and PM). Delay index results are summarized for study routes and their extents below. Segments with delay index greater than 2.0 are bolded. The proposed target is a peak period delay index less than or equal to 2.0.

T ABLE 1 . DELAY I N DEX - EASTBOUN D AN D WESTBOUN D DI RECTI ONS

DIRECTION

Eastbound

Westbound

ROUTE

EXTENTS

PEAK PERIOD DELAY INDICES AM

Trancas St

SR 29 (St Helena Hwy)-Silverado Trail

1.00

Imola Ave

SR 29-SR 221 (Napa Vallejo Hwy)

1.00

Old Sonoma Rd - SR 12/29/121 Jnct.

1.04

Trancas St

Silverado Trail - SR 29 (St Helena Hwy)

1.00

Imola Ave

NapaValley-Jefferson

1.00

SR 12/29/121 Jnct-Old Sonoma Rd

1.04

SR 12 (Sonoma Hwy)

T ABLE 2 . DELAY I N DEX - S OUTHBOUN D DIRECTION

ROUTE

Silverado Trail SR-221 (NapaVallejo Hwy) SR-29

SR 128/29 (St Helena Hwy) Soscol Ave

EXTENTS

PEAK PERIOD DELAY INDICES AM

Deer Park Rd-Trancas St.

1.00

Trancas St - Lincoln Ave

1.01

Lincoln Ave -Imola Ave

1.01

Imola Ave - SR 12

1.01

1.05

Soscol Jnct-SR 12 (Lincoln Hwy)

1.88

3.14

SR 12-Donaldson Way

1.14

1.16

Donaldson Way - American Canyon Rd

1.01

1.04

Pope St -Trancas St

1.00

1.02

Trancas St -Lincoln Ave

1.20

1.22

Lincoln Ave -Imola Ave

1.09

1.13

Imola Ave-SR 12 (Sonoma Hwy)

1.01

Sonoma Hwy-Soscol Jnct.

1.02

1.03

Trancas St -Imola Ave

1.00

1.01

T ABLE 3 . DELAY I N DEX - N ORTHBOUN D DIRECT ION

ROUTE

EXTENTS American Canyon Rd -Donaldson Wy

SR-29 SR-221 (NapaVallejo Hwy) Silverado Trail

SR 128/29 (St Helena Hwy) Soscol Ave

PEAK PERIOD DELAY INDICES AM

1.03

1.02

Donaldson Way-SR 12

1.09

1.07

SR 12 (Lincoln Hwy) -Soscol Jnct.

3.71

2.40

Soscol Jnct.-Imola Ave

1.01

Imola Ave-Lincoln Ave

1.00

1.01

Lincoln Ave -Trancas St

1.01

Trancas St -Deer Park Rd

1.00

Soscol Jnct-SR 12 (Sonoma Hwy)

1.00

SR 12 (Sonoma Hwy) - Imola Ave

1.00

Imola Ave-Lincoln Ave

1.11

1.10

Lincoln Ave -Trancas St

1.08

Trancas St -Pope St

1.03

1.01

Imola Ave -Trancas St

1.03

1.02

ON-TIME BUS PERFORMANCE

TRANSIT PERFORMANCE MEMORANDUM DATE:

April 26, 2021

TO:

Alberto Esqueda | Napa Valley Transportation Authority

FROM:

Aditi Meshram | DKS Associates Erin Vaca | DKS Associates

SUBJECT: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan

Project #19118-000

OBJECTIVE

This memorandum describes the methodology for calculating on-time performance and ridership of Vine Transit in Napa county.

DATA

Transit Ridership: •

Vine Transit ridership data from NVTA (FY 2018-2019)

On-Time Performance: • • •

Vine Transit on-time performance data by route for year FY 2018 (routes changed December 2019) Vine Transit ridership data by route for year FY 2018 Routes categorized by o City (Routes 1 to 8) o Intercity (Routes 10 and 11) o Regional routes (Routes 21 and 29)

METHODOLOGY AND RESULTS TRANSIT RIDERSHIP

The Vine transit ridership data obtained from NVTA has ridership data for FY 2018-19 broken down by routes. This data was simply summarized for Commuter Service (routes 10X, 11X, 21 and 29), Regional Service (routes 10, 11, 10X, 11X, 21 and 29) and Local Routes (routes 1 to 8). These are

shown in Table 1. It is recommended that transit ridership be maintained or improved from current levels. T ABLE 1 . VIN E TRANSIT RI DERS HI P BY SERVI CE TYP E SERVICE TYPE

RIDERSHIP

COMMUTER SERVICE

87,737

REGIONAL SERVICES

570,066

LOCAL ROUTES

382,023

ON-TIME PERFORMANCE

On-time performance and ridership data for year 2018 is available individually for routes 1 to 8, routes 10, 10x, 11, 11x, 21 and 29. Out of these, routes 1 to 8 are considered City Routes, 10 and 11 are Intercity Routes, and 21 and 29 are Regional Routes. This data is depicted in Figure 1 and Figure 2. Since the level of ridership varies across routes, performance was measured to capture how many riders are impacted when a bus is late. Therefore, on-time performance is weighted by ridership for each route category - City, Regional and Intercity. For this, weights are first calculated for each route within a route category based on ridership. These ridership weights are then applied to on-time performance to obtain a weighted average. Calculations are shown in Table 2. On-time performance for City Routes is 79%, for Intercity 63% and for Regional Routes is 65%.

90.00%

100,000

85.00%

80,000 60,000

80.00%

40,000

75.00% 70.00%

20,000 Route 1 Route 2 Route 3 Route 4 Route 5 Route 6 Route 7 Route 8

Axis Title On-Time Performance

Ridership

FI GURE 1. ON -TI ME PERFORMANCE AN D RI DERS HIP OF CI TY ROUTES

Ridership

On-Time Performance

City Routes, FY 2018

300,000

70.00%

250,000

65.00%

200,000

60.00%

150,000 100,000

55.00% 50.00%

Ridership

On Time Performance

Intercity and Regional Routes, FY 2018

50,000 Route 10

Route 11

Route 21

Route 29

Axis Title On-Time Performance

Ridership

FI GURE 2. ON -TI ME PERFORMANCE AN D RI DERS HIP OF I NT ERCIT Y AN D REGI ON AL ROUTES

T ABLE 2 . CALCUL ATI ON OF RI DERS HIP WEIGHTS AN D WEIGHTED ON -T IME P ERF ORMAN CE ROUTE CATEGORY

CITY ROUTES

INTERCITY ROUTES REGIONAL ROUTES

ROUTE

RIDERSHIP

ON-TIME PERFORMANCE (2018)

WEIGHTAGE

Route 1

18,533

84.82%

Route 2

51,810

80.09%

14%

Route 3

60,592

79.16%

16%

Route 4

50,853

84.72%

13%

Route 5

51,219

81.08%

13%

Route 6

38,632

75.42%

10%

Route 7

16,689

76.59%

Route 8

93,695

75.70%

25%

Route 10

230,578

58.25%

48%

Route 11

251,751

67.57%

52%

Route 21

21,140

68.21%

25%

Route 29

62,922

64.10%

75%

WEIGHTED ON-TIME PERFORMANCE

79.22%

63.12%

65.13%

It is recommended that weighted on-time performance be increased to 90% for all route categories.

TRUCK TRAVEL TIME RELIABILITY

FREIGHT RELIABILITY MEMORANDUM DATE:

August 16, 2020

TO:

Alberto Esqueda | Napa Valley Transportation Authority

FROM:

Aditi Meshram | DKS Associates Erin Vaca | DKS Associates

SUBJECT: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan

Project #19118-000

OBJECTIVE

This memorandum describes the methodology for calculating the Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR) Index for a given set of corridors within Napa County. This index will serve as the freight performance measure for the Napa countywide transportation plan. Results from this analysis are also discussed in the final section of the memo.

TRAVEL TIME RELIABILITY

The TTTR is calculated using data from the National Performance Management Research Data Set (NPMRDS), which provides travel time data for trucks on a given system of roads, mainly Interstate and State highways. 1 The TTTR compares days with extremely high delay to days with average delay, which gives an estimate of unexpected or unplanned delays or reliability. Travel time reliability measures the extent of this unexpected delay. As per FHWA, a formal definition for travel time reliability is the consistency or dependability in travel times, as measured from day-today and/or across different times of the day. 2 Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR) is simply the travel time reliability calculated for truck traffic. TTTR is the ratio of the longer travel times (95th percentile) to a “normal” travel time (50th percentile). The TTTRs of a highway corridor’s segments are then used to create the TTTR Index for

https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/tt_reliability/brochure/ttr_brochure.pdf

https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/tt_reliability/TTR_Report.htm

the entire corridor using a weighted aggregate calculation for the worst performing times of each segment. 3 A higher TTTR Index denotes a less reliable highway. A TTTR Index of 1 represents freeflow conditions. For Interstate highways, a TTTR Index less than 1.69 is considered desirable. 4 For non-interstate highways studied within smaller regions (e.g. Counties or Cities), the TTTR Index can be of much higher value due to the constricted nature of traffic flow in these regions.

𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 (95𝑡𝑡ℎ) = 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅 𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁𝑁 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 (50𝑡𝑡ℎ) DATA

National Performance Management Research Data Set (NPMRDS) obtained from RITIS at https://npmrds.ritis.org/analytics/. Login with your RITIS account and using the Massive Data Downloader, download the truck-only data for Napa County with the following attributes as shown in Figure 1.

FI GURE 1. N PMRDS DATA DOWNLOAD S ETTIN GS

https://crcog.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/12/FINAL-2018_09-Freight-Reliability-TTTR.pdf

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tpm/reporting/state/reliability.cfm?state=California

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E T RA N S P O RT A T I O N P L A N • F R E I G H T RE L I A B I L I T Y M E M O • M A RC H 2 4, 2 02 0

The download will contain segment performance data for trucks as well as a segment identification file named “TMC_Identification.csv”. The segment performance data contains speed and travel time information for each segment and for each time stamp. In this case we have obtained data averaged over fifteen minutes. As shown in Figure 2, the data has a column named “tmc_code”. TMC stands for Traffic Message Channel, the purpose of which is to deliver information about traffic. As discussed earlier, each highway is divided into numerous segments and data is collected for each of these segments by TMCs which are identified by unique TMC codes.

FI GURE 2. TRUCK DATA DOWN LOADED F ROM N P MRDS

The TMC Identification file also contains a column for TMC codes as well as other information, used to relate any TMC in our data file to the road name (column: road) and the length of the segment (column: miles).

FI GURE 3. T MC I DENTIF I CATI ON FI LE ACCOMP AN YI N G THE TRUCK DAT A

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E T RA N S P O RT A T I O N P L A N • F R E I G H T RE L I A B I L I T Y M E M O • M A RC H 2 4, 2 02 0

METHODOLOGY

The methodology for calculating Travel Time Reliability Index is obtained from a FHWA presentation on “National Travel Time Data Processing and Utilization” by the Office of Highway Policy Information. 5 The freight reliability measure, TTTR, is the sum of maximum TTTR for each reporting segment, divided by the total study corridor miles. The higher the TTTR Index, less reliable is the highway. The method to calculate TTTR for each segment of a given study corridor is detailed in this section. 1. Join the obtained truck data with the TMC Identification information. Filter out the data based on road name of desired highway and create a sub-data set for each highway. For this analysis, four highway corridors have been studied: • • • •

CA-12 CA-29 CA-121 Napa-Vallejo Highway

2. Group the sub-data into 5 time periods for each TMC: • • • • •

Weekday 6:00 - 10:00 am Weekday 10:00 am - 4:00 pm Weekday 4:00 - 8:00 pm Everyday Overnight 8:00 pm - 6:00 am Weekend 6:00 am - 8:00 pm

3. Sort and rank the travel times in each group to obtain 95th and 50th percentile travel times for each TMC segment as shown below. Calculate their ratio to get Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR). TTTR = 95th percentile travel time / 50th percentile travel time for each TMC. Find the maximum TTTR out of these. A maximum TTTR will be obtained in this manner for every TMC segment.

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tpm/guidance/hif18040.pdf N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E T RA N S P O RT A T I O N P L A N • F R E I G H T RE L I A B I L I T Y M E M O • M A RC H 2 4, 2 02 0

FI GURE 4. CALCULATIN G TTT R F OR EACH TI ME WIN DOW AN D OBTAIN IN G MAXIMUM TTTR

4. To obtain the TTTR Index for the entire study corridor, we need length of the TMC segments, obtained from the ‘TMC Identification’ data. Multiply the length of each TMC segment by the Maximum TTTR of that segment. Add all the length-weighted TTTRs for this study corridor and divide by total length of the corridor. This gives the TTTR Index, as illustrated in Figure 5.

FI GURE 5. CALCULATIN G LENGT H-WEI GHTED TTT R AN D T TT R I N DEX

5. An overall TTTR Index can be calculated for all four study corridors combined in a similar way by summing the length-weighted TTTR obtained in Step 4 for all corridors and dividing by the sum of lengths of all corridors.

𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿𝐿ℎ 𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤𝑤ℎ𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡𝑡 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 = 𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂𝑂 𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇𝑇 𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼𝐼 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙𝑙ℎ𝑠𝑠 𝑜𝑜𝑜𝑜 𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎𝑎 𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐𝑐 N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E T RA N S P O RT A T I O N P L A N • F R E I G H T RE L I A B I L I T Y M E M O • M A RC H 2 4, 2 02 0

This process (Steps 1 to 4) needs to be repeated for all study corridors. The task of grouping data by time window and sorting to obtain 95th and 50th percentile travel time can become cumbersome when dealing with an entire year’s data containing more than 740,000 records. To make this process easily reproducible, a Python code has been written that calculates the TTTR Index for chosen study corridors. The same inputs are used by this code – NPMRDS Truck Data and TMC Identification file. The code is attached in the Appendix. In order to run the code it is essential to download and install Python 3 (Python 3.7.4 was used for this analysis) 6. An interactive python development environment (IDE) ‘Spyder’ was used to edit and run the code 7. Spyder can be installed using Anaconda Navigator. Python packages NumPy and Pandas have been utilized in the code. Since Spyder is a Python environment, there is usually no need to set up the mentioned Python packages separately. However, in case Pandas and NumPy need to be installed for Spyder, detailed instructions can be found here.

https://www.python.org/downloads/

https://www.spyder-ide.org/

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E T RA N S P O RT A T I O N P L A N • F R E I G H T RE L I A B I L I T Y M E M O • M A RC H 2 4, 2 02 0

RESULTS

The Truck Travel Time Reliability Index for specified highway corridors within Napa County are tabulated for the years 2016, 2017 and 2019. T ABLE 1 . TT TR IN DEX F OR S TUDY CORRI DORS IN N AP A COUNTY 2017 S. No.

HIGHWAY/ROAD

CA-12

CA-121

CA-29

Napa-Vallejo Hwy

2018

2019

DIRECTION

LENGTH (miles)

TTTR Index

LENGTH (miles)

TTTR Index

LENGTH (miles)

TTTR Index

Eastbound

13.02

2.79

13.02

2.83

9.48

2.74

Westbound

13.04

2.43

13.04

2.41

8.68

2.88

Northbound

26.89

2.13

26.89

1.98

26.87

1.74

Southbound

27.08

2.20

27.08

2.19

27.06

2.15

Northbound

53.74

1.99

53.74

2.12

50.36

1.96

Southbound

53.73

2.05

53.73

1.95

53.75

2.06

Northbound

2.75

2.82

2.72

2.62

2.73

2.46

Southbound

2.75

3.18

2.70

3.78

2.73

3.10

These numbers denote how much longer it takes to traverse a roadway in extremely congested situation (e.g. during an accident) compared to normal conditions. For Westbound CA-12, thirteen miles of corridor length has been analyzed for 2019 giving a TTTR Index of 2.88. With a posted speed limit of 60 mph, under normal conditions the truck travel time along this corridor is thirteen minutes. During an extreme incident this travel time might increase to about thirty seven minutes, obtained by multiplying the normal truck travel time (13 minutes) to the TTTR Index (2.88). Thus, lower TTTR Index implies higher reliability of highway and therefore better on-time performance of freight. The numbers here look slightly amplified because the lengths of study corridors considered are very small compared to statewide Interstate corridor lengths, which have long segments with near free-flow conditions for freight traffic. On the other hand, segments considered here pass through busy regions of Napa County for their most lengths, thereby showing a higher TTTR Index. However, these numbers are useful for defining a baseline at present conditions and setting targets for the Countywide Transportation Plan.

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E T RA N S P O RT A T I O N P L A N • F R E I G H T RE L I A B I L I T Y M E M O • M A RC H 2 4, 2 02 0

TTTR Index over three years 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 0.50 0.00

2017

2018

CA-12

CA-121

CA-29

2019

Napa-Vallejo Hwy

FI GURE 6. T REN D OF TTTR IN DEX OV ER F OUR YEARS

PROPOSED TARGETS

As seen in Figure 7, the Overall Truck Travel Time Reliability Index has seen a decrease from 2017 to 2019. With increasing traffic over time, this decline can be very slow in the future. For the Napa Countywide Transportation Plan (CTP), it is recommended to maintain, or reduce by planned highway improvements, the current overall TTTR Index of 2.09.

2.18

2.17

2.16

Overall TTTR

2.16 2.14 2.12

2.09

2.10 2.08

2.09

2.06 2.04

2017

2018

Year

Overall TTTR

2019 Target

FI GURE 7. OV ERALL TTT R IN DEX F OR ALL S TUDY CORRIDORS

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E T RA N S P O RT A T I O N P L A N • F R E I G H T RE L I A B I L I T Y M E M O • M A RC H 2 4, 2 02 0

APPENDIX

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65

# -*- coding: utf-8 -*""" Created on Fri Feb 21 12:12:04 2020 @author: Aditi.Meshram """ import pandas as pd import numpy as np import tkinter as tk from tkinter.filedialog import askopenfilename print("Select truck data file") csv_file_path = askopenfilename() truck_data = pd.read_csv(csv_file_path) #split measurement stamp into date and time and store in new columns in truck_data truck_data_new = truck_data["measurement_tstamp"].str.split(" ", n=1, expand = True) truck_data["date"] = truck_data_new[0] truck_data["time"] = truck_data_new[1] #Obtain day of week truck_data['date'] = pd.to_datetime(truck_data['date']) truck_data['day_of_week'] = truck_data['date'].dt.day_name() #Convert 24-hour time to integer truck_data["time_int"] = truck_data['time'].str.replace(':','') truck_data['time_int'] = truck_data['time_int'].astype(int) weekday_list = ["Monday", "Tuesday", "Wednesday", "Thursday", "Friday"] weekend_list = ["Saturday", "Sunday"] truck_data["time_window"] = "" window

#create an empty column in dataframe to assign time

print("Assigning time windows to truck data rows...") #Assign time window categories to rows for index, row in truck_data.iterrows(): dayWeek = row['day_of_week'] timeInt = row['time_int'] if dayWeek in weekday_list: if timeInt >= 60000 and timeInt < 100000: #between 6am and 10am row['time_window'] = 1 elif timeInt >= 100000 and timeInt < 160000: #between 10am and 4pm row['time_window'] = 2 elif timeInt >= 160000 and timeInt < 200000: #between 4pm and 8pm row['time_window'] = 3 else: row['time_window'] = 4 #between 8pm and 6am if dayWeek in weekend_list: if timeInt >= 60000 and timeInt < 200000: #between 6am and 8pm row['time_window'] = 5 else: row['time_window'] = 4 #between 8pm and 6am #print("...") print("Time windows assignment complete") #-------------------------------------------------------------#

66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112

113 114 115 116 117

#define function to calculate TTTR def calculate_TTTR(time_win_sub): # TTTR = 95th percentile/50th percentile travel time tttr_time = np.percentile(time_win_sub['travel_time_seconds'],95)/np.percentile(time_win_sub['tra vel_time_seconds'],50) return tttr_time #-------------------------------------------------------------# #Read TMC Identification file print("Reading TMC Identification file") print("Select TMC Identification file") tmc_file_path = askopenfilename() tmc_data = pd.read_csv(tmc_file_path) tmc_data = tmc_data.sort_values('active_start_date') tmc_data = tmc_data.drop_duplicates(subset ='tmc', keep = 'last', inplace = False) #List of roads from TMC file R = tmc_data['road'].unique() R.sort() #Merge Truck Data and TMC Identification data based on tmc codes in Truck Data dataMerge = pd.merge(truck_data, tmc_data, how='left', left_on='tmc_code', right_on='tmc') dataMerge = dataMerge.dropna(subset = ['travel_time_seconds']) #drop rows with missing travel time values #-------------------------------------------------------------# #Process to calculate TTTR Index print("Creating sub-dataframe for road") for i in R: tmc_sub = dataMerge[dataMerge['road'] == i] #create sub-dataframe with data of each roadway D = tmc_sub['direction'].unique() #get list of directions for the roadway D.sort() for direction in D: tmc_sub2 = tmc_sub[tmc_sub['direction'] == direction] #create sub-dataframe for each direction of the roadway Z = [] #empty list to store TTTR M = [] #empty list to store Max TTTR LWT = [] #empty list to store length-weighted TTTR road_len = [] #empty list to store lenghts of all TMCs for direction of roadway TMC_list = tmc_sub2['tmc'].unique() for tmc in TMC_list: tmc_sub3 = tmc_sub2[tmc_sub2['tmc'] == tmc] for each tmc tmc_avgLen = round(tmc_sub3['miles'].mean(), 6) tmc segment.

time_window = tmc_sub3['time_window'].unique() windows [1,2,3,4,5] time_window.sort()

#create sub-dataframe #Find length of each #Unique TMCs should have the same lengths but the numbers might differ by 0.000001, so find mean. #Get list of time

for n in time_window: tmc_sub4 = tmc_sub3[tmc_sub3['time_window'] == n] #create sub-dataframe for time window "n"

118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134

TTTR = calculate_TTTR(tmc_sub4) #calculate TTTR for time window Z.append(TTTR) #append TTTR to list Z. TTTRs of all time windows for a TMC will be appended to Z. max_TTTR = max(Z) #find maximum TTTR amongst all time windows of a TMC LW_TTTR = max_TTTR*tmc_avgLen #find length-weighted TTTR LWT.append(LW_TTTR) #append length-weighted TTTR to list LWT. Length-weighted TTTRs of all TMCs of a road direction will be appended to LWT. road_len.append(tmc_avgLen) #append length of TMC to list road_len. Lengths of all TMCs of a road direction will be appended to road_len. Z = [] max_TTTR = 0

#empty the list Z for next TMC #reset max_TTTR for next TMC

TTTR_index = sum(LWT)/sum(road_len) #calculate TTTR Index print(i,direction,":","Road segment length =",round(sum(road_len),2),"miles,","TTTR Index =",TTTR_index)

#-------------------------------------------------------------# end

#print results

JOB ACCESSIBILITY

JOB ACCESSIBILITY BY TRANSIT MEMO DATE:

May 12, 2021

TO:

Alberto Esqueda | Napa Valley Transportation Authority

FROM:

Aditi Meshram | DKS Associates Erin Vaca | DKS Associates

SUBJECT: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan

Project #19118-000

OBJECTIVE

This memorandum describes the methodology for estimating the number of jobs accessible by transit within sixty minutes of travel time.

DATA AND TOOLS

Isochrones of transit coverage were obtained from www.remix.com, centered at five jurisdictions with Napa County and at three different start times per bus schedules: 6:40 AM, 7:00 AM and 7:40 AM. Jobs data was obtained from Census Transportation Planning Product (CTPP) at TAZ level. Data was exported as shapefiles to obtain the area of TAZs. The shapefile also contains job information. Open the shapefile in ArcMap, export the attribute table and save as a CSV file. ArcMap by Esri was used to map the transit coverage and relate the jobs data to the area of coverage.

METHODOLOGY OBTAINING ISOCHRONES FROM REMIX

Go to www.remix.com. Add the Vine Transit lines using Add Transit Line option. Place the isochrone marker “Jane” at the desired location (city center or City Hall). Select the desired start time, wait times based on ‘Timetables’, travel time of 60 minutes and coverage option for jobs.

FI GURE 1. T RANSIT COV ERAGE IS OCHRON ES ON REMIX PLATF ORM

Using the export option, download the shapefile. Repeat this for all desired start times and then for each jurisdiction. MERGING SHAPEFILES

Import isochrones for all desired start times into ArcMap, one jurisdiction at a time. Merge isochrones pertaining to all start times of a given jurisdiction using the Geoprocessing  Merge tool.

FI GURE 2. MERGI NG IS OCHRON ES FROM DIFF ERENT S TART TI MES I N ARCMAP

N V T A C T P • J O B S A C C E S S I B I L I T Y M E M O RA N D U M • M A Y 2 0 21

Select the polygons for “60 minutes” travel time and merge them using the Edit layer option. Save this merged transit coverage shapefile. JOINING JOBS DATA TO SHAPEFILE

Import jobs data into ArcMap. Using the Geoprocessing tool in ArcMap, Clip the jobs data to the transit coverage shapefile. The clipped polygons are shown below. In the attribute table, add a field and calculate the shape area of the clipped polygons. Export the attribute table of the obtained Clip file. This should contain the area of clipped polygons which will be used to calculate the ratio of area of polygons to the total area of TAZs to estimate the number of jobs accessed.

FI GURE 3. JOBS BY TAZ CLIPP ED TO T RAN SIT COV ERAGE I SOCHRON E

N V T A C T P • J O B S A C C E S S I B I L I T Y M E M O RA N D U M • M A Y 2 0 21

OBTAINING NUMBER OF JOBS ACCESSIBLE

In an excel workbook, import the attribute tables exported in the previous steps as well as the jobs by TAZ data obtained from CTPP. For each field, calculate the ratio of the area of polygon to the area of TAZ. Multiply this ratio by the number of jobs corresponding to that field. This gives an estimate of the number of jobs within the coverage area reachable by transit under sixty minutes from the given start point and within the given time period. In this case, start times of 6:40 AM, 7:00 AM and 7:40 AM were considered to observe maximum transit coverage and number of jobs accessible during the morning commute hours. Figures 4 through 8 show the range of job density in TAZs overlayed with the sixty minute isochrones for each jurisdiction.

N V T A C T P • J O B S A C C E S S I B I L I T Y M E M O RA N D U M • M A Y 2 0 21

RESULTS TRANSIT COVERAGE FROM EACH JURISDICTION

FI GURE 4. JOB ACCESSI BILI TY F ROM CALISTOGA WITHIN 60 MI NUT ES

N V T A C T P • J O B S A C C E S S I B I L I T Y M E M O RA N D U M • M A Y 2 0 21

FI GURE 5. JOB ACCESSI BILI TY F ROM ST. HELEN A WI T HIN 60 MI NUT ES

N V T A C T P • J O B S A C C E S S I B I L I T Y M E M O RA N D U M • M A Y 2 0 21

FI GURE 6. JOB ACCESSI BILI TY F ROM YOUNTVI LLE WIT HIN 60 MI NUTES

N V T A C T P • J O B S A C C E S S I B I L I T Y M E M O RA N D U M • M A Y 2 0 21

FI GURE 7. JOB ACCESSI BILI TY F ROM N AP A WI T HIN 60 MI NUTES

N V T A C T P • J O B S A C C E S S I B I L I T Y M E M O RA N D U M • M A Y 2 0 21

FI GURE 8. JOB ACCESSI BILI TY F ROM AMERI CAN CAN YON WI THI N 60 MI NUTES

N V T A C T P • J O B S A C C E S S I B I L I T Y M E M O RA N D U M • M A Y 2 0 21

NUMBER OF JOBS ACCESSIBLE BY VINE TRANSIT UNDER 60 MINUTES

NUMBER OF JOBS ACCESSIBLE BY TRANSIT FROM CITY CENTERS BETWEEN 6:30 AM AND 8:00 AM AMERICAN CANYON

CALISTOGA

NAPA

ST. HELENA

YOUNTVILLE

NUMBER OF JOBS

37,725

8,831

40,241

8,475

29,521

NUMBER OF JOBS WITHIN NAPA COUNTY

24,019

8,830

36,996

8,475

29,521

38%

14%

58%

13%

47%

JURISDICTION

% OF TOTAL NAPA COUNTY JOBS*

*Does not include jobs outside Napa County that might be accessible by transit

PAVEMENT CONDITION INDEX

PAVEMENT CONDITION MAPPING MEMORANDUM DATE:

April 24, 2021 18, 2020

TO:

Alberto Esqueda | Napa Valley Transportation Authority

FROM:

Aditi Meshram | DKS Associates Erin Vaca | DKS Associates

SUBJECT: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan

Project #19118-000

OBJECTIVE

This memorandum describes the methodology for mapping the pavement condition index for Napa county.

DATA

Pavement Condition Index (PCI) at street level and at county level from MTC Vital Signs (2018)

METHODOLOGY

The overall score for pavement condition of Napa County and all jurisdictions within the county are reported at https://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/street-pavement-condition under Regional Distribution. The following steps were applied to obtain street level PCI data from MTC: 1. Go to https://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/street-pavement-condition

2. Scroll down to the Local Focus section that displays PCI by street segment.

3. Click on “Download Indicator Data From This Page.

4. Select the Street and Roads [Shapefile] data

5. Select Export  Shapefile.

6. Map the PCI for street segments using ArcGIS or other mapping software.

RESULTS

The overall pavement condition index for Napa county is 58, as reported by MTC for 2018. PCI score by jurisdiction is presented in Table 1. The pavement condition of street segments is mapped in Figure 1 and summarized in Table 2. Currently 64% of the streets have Good/Fair or Excellent/Very Good pavement condition. The proposed target is to achieve a countywide PCI score of 80.

T ABLE 1 . COUNTY AN D JURI S DI CTI ON P CI S CORE Pavement Condition Index by MTC (2018) Jurisdiction

PCI score

American Canyon

Calistoga

Napa

St. Helena

Yountville

Unincorporated

Napa County

T ABLE 2 . PERCEN T OF S TREETS BY P AV EMENT CON DIT ION

Pavement Condition

% of streets

Excellent/Very Good

42%

Good/Fair

22%

At Risk

Poor/Failed

29%

FI GURE 1. P AVEMENT CON DITI ON OF S TREETS IN N AP A COUNT Y

Freight Flows

MEMORANDUM - GOODS MOVEMENT ANALYSIS DATE:

November 6, 2020

TO:

Alberto Esqueda | Napa Valley Transportation Authority

FROM:

Aditi Meshram | DKS Associates Erin Vaca | DKS Associates

SUBJECT: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan

Project #19118-000

MEMO OBJECTIVE

This memorandum describes the methodology for estimating freight flows of Napa County. Freight flow data is described by its associated travel patterns, which include inbound to the County, outbound from the County, and internal trips that start and end within the County. In addition, freight flows were assessed for two basic categories: •

Flow by weight of shipment

•

Flow by value of shipment

DATA

•

Freight Analysis Framework version 4.5.1 (FAF4) estimated 2018 flows Note that the FAF data is aggregated at the San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA area (FAF zone 64). This includes the nine counties of Bay Area: Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma county.

•

Employment by industry data for the nine-county Bay Area (FAF zone 64) and for Napa County, from Employment Development Department (EDD) 1

•

Household income and number of households by county from American Community Survey (ACS) 2018 5-year estimates 2

https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/data/employment-by-industry.html

Table S1901 for the Bay Area counties.

METHODOLOGY

For disaggregating the regional FAF goods flow data to obtain county-level flow, proportional weighting allocation method has been used. This method allocates values from a source unit to target units proportional to a proxy variable. A proxy variable is a variable that can be easily measured in lieu of another variable that is difficult to measure. We applied employment data as a proxy variable to represent “goods production”, since this data is readily available for Napa County based on industry type. Outbound and inbound goods flow has been assumed to be proportional to the level of relevant industry-specific employment of the County relative to other Bay Area counties. Similarly, median income is the proxy variable for “goods consumption”. For goods flow within Bay Area counties, consumption factor has been calculated using household median income weighted by number of households. The desired FAF flow data was disaggregated to the county level based on these production and consumption factors. The steps to obtain the goods flow estimate for Napa County are detailed below. A screenshot of the resulting calculating is shown in Figure 1. 1. Identify the appropriate proxy variable. Employment by industry and median income weighted by number of households have been chosen as proxy variables for this disaggregation process. 2. Obtain the employment data of the relevant industries mentioned in Step 4 for the entire San Francisco-San Jose-Oakland area (FAF zone number 64), as well as for Napa County alone. 3. Calculate the percent proportion of median income weighted by number of households for each county relative to the parent FAF zone 64. Call this the consumption factor. 4. Calculate the percent proportion of industry employment of each county to the parent FAF region using EDD employment data. This will be referred to as production factor. This should be calculated for the following industry sector groups: a. Total Farm b. Mining, Logging, and Construction c. Manufacturing d. Wholesale Trade e. Retail Trade f. Transportation, Warehousing & Utilities 5. For each of the above industries, identify relevant commodities from FAF data. The complete list of FAF commodity codes is included as an attachment.

Industry

FAF Commodity Code

Farming

1 to 9

Mining, Logging, and Construction

10 to 19, 25

Manufacturing

20 to 40

Wholesale Trade

20 to 40

Retail Trade

20 to 40

Transportation, Warehousing & Utilities

37, 41,43,99

6. From FAF data of each mentioned industry (or corresponding commodity codes), find the total shipment weight and shipment value for: a. Outbound flow (origin as zone 64 and destination as other zones) b. Inbound flow (other zones to zone 64) c. Internal flow (zone 64 to zone 64) These totals were also checked against the FAF4 data tabulation tool. 3 INDUSTRY

FARMING MINING, LOGGING, AND CONSTRUCTION MANUFACTURING WHOLESALE TRADE RETAIL TRADE TRANSPORTATION, WAREHOUSING & UTILITIES

SHIPMENT WEIGHT (THOUSAND TONS) Outbound Inbound Internal

SHIPMENT VALUE (MILLION DOLLARS) Outbound Inbound Internal

31,576

21,493

14,160

41,325

40,736

21,834

29,134

46,503

104,308

18,703

21,475

42,436

32,441

35,563

37,587

190,459

194,879

81,555

32,441

35,563

37,587

190,459

194,879

81,555

32,441

35,563

37,587

190,459

194,879

81,555

6,197

4,484

24,450

26,404

14,472

22,400

7. For internal goods flow within zone 64 (i.e. the intra-Bay Area flow), multiply the internal flow totals by production factor of the origin county and by consumption factor of the destination county. 8. For outbound goods flow, multiply the total outbound flow from zone 64 with production factor of the origin county.

https://faf.ornl.gov/fafweb/Extraction1.aspx

FI GURE 1. EX AMPLE CALCULATI ON S OF GOODS FLOW FOR F ARMING IN DUST RY

9. For inbound goods flow, multiply the total inbound flow to zone 64 with production factor of the destination county. 10. Repeat the steps for each industry. Note: As the FAF commodity codes for Manufacturing, Wholesale Trade, and Retail Trade coincide, the estimated goods flow for these industries have been combined as an average of the three.

RESULTS

Out of total 26,798 thousand tons of shipment to, from, and within Napa County, 62% is outbound and about 37% is inbound. As expected, farm products are the largest exports from the county, in terms of both shipment weight and value.

Goods flow share by shipment weight 0.4%

37.4% 62.2%

Intra

Inbound

Outbound

Goods flow share by shipment value 0.6%

36.4%

63.0%

Intra

Inbound

Outbound

Total weight of goods in thousands of tons 30000 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Total Farm

Mining, Logging, and Construction

Manufacturing, Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade

Outbound

11493

3016

1604

544

16657

Inbound

5588

2616

1381

446

10030

111

Intra

Inbound

Outbound

Transportation, Warehousing & Utilities

Total

Total value of goods in million dollars 25000 20000 15000 10000 5000 0 Total Farm

Mining, Logging, and Construction

Manufacturing, Wholesale Trade, Retail Trade

Outbound

6374

1384

6255

871

14883

Inbound

1180

1123

5715

595

8613

134

Intra

Inbound

Outbound

Transportation, Warehousing & Utilities

Total

ATTACHMENT – FAF COMMODITY CODES

Greenhouse Gas Calculations

GHG EMISSION SAVINGS MEMORANDUM DATE:

October 13, 2020

TO:

Alberto Esqueda | Napa Valley Transportation Authority

FROM:

Erin Vaca | DKS Associates Aditi Meshram | DKS Associates Jim Damkowitch | DKS Associates

SUBJECT: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan

Project #19118-000

OBJECTIVE

This memorandum describes the methodology for estimating the reduction (or savings) in on-road mobile source greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions for the following scenarios: 1. Potential GHG savings if passenger loading on existing express commuter route services provided by NVTA increase by 80%. 2. Potential GHG savings if a 10% mode shift to transit were to occur for the top five divertible commuter markets as identified in NVTA’s Travel Behavior Study (TBS). 3. Potential GHG savings if a 10% mode shift 1 to active transportation were to occur for all trips under 3 miles in length (one-way trip end) based on the TBS. The 10% mode shift is consistent with a goal from the Bike and Ped Plan goal).

DATA AND TOOLS

The following data sources were utilized to inform the mode shift analyses and resulting GHG emission benefits: 1. Streetlight OD trip data and zones for Fall 2018 (August-November) 2. Vine Transit commuter route load factors 3. Vine transit stops and routes

A ten percent mode shift is part of the vision statement for the Napa Countywide Bicycle Plan (NVTA, 2019).

4. Google distance API - a service that provides travel distance and time for a matrix of origins and destinations. The API returns information based on the recommended route between start and end points, as calculated by the Google Maps API. 5. QGIS mapping tool - QGIS is an Open Source Geographic Information System (GIS) 6. SB1 emissions calculator – developed by the California Transportation Commission (CTC) to estimate on-road mobile source emissions changes for transportation projects. The tool applies vehicle speed, vehicle type and vehicle technology group corrected on-road mobile source base emission rates consistent from EMFAC emissions model developed by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) for application in California. The methodology is similar to CARB’s California Freight Investment Program.

METHODOLOGY

The following steps were undertaken to estimate GHG savings for each scenario. SCENARIO 1

1. Using QGIS, map the Streetlight OD zones. 2. Create ½ mile buffers around commuter stops and extract zones that intersect with these buffers.

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E P L A N • G H G C A L C U L A T I O N S • O C T O B E R 20 2 0

3. To these zones, add zones in San Francisco and Alameda that can be accessed via transfers from El Cerrito BART and Vallejo ferry. This would be the set of zones that can be accessible by transit. Let’s call these “divertible zones”.

4. Using QGIS, find the centroids of each of these zones. 5. Using Google Distance API, find the travel distance array for divertible zones. 6. For these zones, find the trips from Streetlight OD data for the following combinations: a. Trips from zones in Napa county to zones outside Napa b. Trips from zones outside Napa county to zones within Napa

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E P L A N • G H G C A L C U L A T I O N S • O C T O B E R 20 2 0

7. Multiply obtained trip matrices to corresponding distance arrays to yield the following VMT estimates:

Napa to Outside Outside to Napa Total

VMT of total divertible trips 118,654 126,145 244,799

8. From transit load factor data provided by NVTA, determine the increase in daily ridership assuming load factors increase by 80%. Correspondingly, determine the number of daily vehicle trips that would be reduced by applying an Average Vehicle Occupancy (AVO) of 1.1 2

Route 29 21 11 11X 10 10X

Number of runs in peak AM and PM periods 13+11 6+8 8+8 7+9

Number of runs in AM

Number of runs in PM

13 6 8

11 8 8

What is the maximum load capacity 33 33 33 33 33 33

Average % of load for a given run

Load Passengers Vehicles factor increased reduced increased by by by (AM+PM) (AM+PM)

21% 14% 39%

59% 66% 41%

31%

49% Total

468 304 214 0 260 0 1246

425 277 194 0 236 0 1133

9. Based on Steps 1-8, an estimated 1,133 vehicle trips will be reduced in the AM and PM combined if load factors of commuter routes are increased to 80% 10. Determine the weighted average trip length of all divertible trips to and from Napa County and multiply by 1,133 vehicle trips to yield the VMT reduction/savings. This results in a daily VMT reduction of 227,302.

Napa to Outside Outside to Napa Total

VMT of total divertible trips (No Build) 118,654 126,145 244,799

VMT if 1,133 vehicle trips shift to bus (Build)

227,302

Average trip length for vehicles 15.35 15.54 15.44

11. Based on the estimated VMT reduction, apply the SB1 Emissions Calculator to estimate the GHG reduction. No operational benefits are assumed as part of this analysis (i.e., average vehicle speeds are considered constant between the No Build (no mode shift) and Build

This AVO is a conservatively rounded estimate consistent with that reported in the American Community

Survey 2018 5-year estimates for Napa County (Table S0801).

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E P L A N • G H G C A L C U L A T I O N S • O C T O B E R 20 2 0

(with mode shift) condition (i.e., set constant at 35 mph). An immediate mode shift was assumed, so a project construction phase of 0 years was assumed.

12. The emissions calculator calculates the on-road mobile source emissions saved in tons per year for both criteria (health-based) pollutants and climate change pollutants. For purposes of this analysis, only CO2 emissions are counted as GHG emissions.

TONS EMISSIONS SAVED (tons/yr) CO 6.57

CO2 1448.55

NOX 0.52

PM10 0.01

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E P L A N • G H G C A L C U L A T I O N S • O C T O B E R 20 2 0

SOX 0.01

VOC 0 0.27

PM2.5 0.01

SCENARIO 2

1. Identify the top five divertible markets from TBS that have access to Vine transit routes. These were identified as Napa County, Solano County, Contra Costa County, San Francisco County and Alameda County. Though Sonoma County is a significant market, it was not accounted for given that it does not have access to Vine routes. 2. Similar to Scenario 1, find the VMT between zones of the identified divertible markets. The following trips were analyzed: a. Napa County to external counties b. External counties to Napa County c. Trips within Napa county that are accessible by transit 3. Calculate the VMT if 10% of above trips shift to transit. All new transit service needed to accommodate this influx of new riders is assumed to be by electric vehicle technology buses and therefore have zero emissions (point source electric generation is not accounted for). 4. Find the average trip length of trips reduced.

Napa to External Counties External Counties to Napa Subtotal Within Napa

VMT of total divertible trips

VMT if 10% vehicle trips shift to bus

Average trip length for vehicles

236,092

23,609

15.61

243,051 479,143 802,895

24,305 431,228 722,606

15.91 15.76 4.75

5. Using the SB1 Emissions Calculator, estimate the on-road mobile source emissions saved in tons per year for both criteria (health-based) pollutants and climate change pollutants for the two sub-scenarios: a) Napa to external, external to Napa, and b) Within Napa. For purposes of this analysis, only CO2 emissions are counted as GHG emissions.

Scenario 2.1 Scenario 2.2 Scenario 2 (total)

Emissions Saved (tons/yr)

TONS EMISSIONS SAVED (tons/yr) CO2 NOX PM10 SOX VOC

PM2.5

3,986

17.94

3965.52

1.43

0.02

0.04

0.74

0.02

6,907

39.12

6862.30

3.34

0.05

0.07

2.49

0.04

10,893

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E P L A N • G H G C A L C U L A T I O N S • O C T O B E R 20 2 0

SCENARIO 3

1. For all zones within Napa county, calculate the VMT for trips that are less than 3 miles. 2. Calculate the VMT if 10% of trips move to active transportation.

Napa trips within 3 mi

VMT of total divertible trips 96,127

VMT if 10% vehicle trips shift to bus 80,971

Average trip length for vehicles 1.58

3. Using the Emissions Calculator, estimate the on-road mobile source emissions saved in tons per year for both criteria (health-based) pollutants and climate change pollutants. For purposes of this analysis, only CO2 emissions are counted as GHG emissions.

TONS EMISSIONS SAVED (tons/yr) Scenario 3

NOX

PM10

SOX

VOC

PM2.5

1.15

0.01

1.15

0.01

TONS EMISSIONS SAVED (tons/yr) CO2 NOX PM10 SOX VOC

PM2.5

1,456

6.57

1448.55

0.52

0.01

0.27

0.01

3,986

17.94

3965.52

1.43

0.02

0.04

0.74

0.02

6,907

39.12

6862.30

3.34

0.05

0.07

2.49

0.04

12.30

1413.36

1.15

0.01

1.15

0.01

Emissions Saved (tons/yr) 1,428

CO 12.30

CO2 1413.36

RESULTS SUMMARY

Scenario 1 Scenario 2.1 Scenario 2.2 Scenario 2 (total) Scenario 3

Emissions Saved (tons/yr)

10,893 1,428

Scenario 1: 1,456 tons of GHG (CO2) emissions will be saved per year if load factors on express commuter routes are increased to 80%. Scenario 2: A total of 10,893 tons of GHG emissions will be saved in a year if 10% vehicle trips from top five divertible markets shift to transit. Scenario 3: 1,428 tons of GHG emissions will be saved in a year if 10% of all trips within 3 miles in Napa County shift to active transportation.

N V T A C O U N T Y W I D E P L A N • G H G C A L C U L A T I O N S • O C T O B E R 20 2 0

Travel Demand Forecasting – Mode Shares

NVTA Advancing Mobility 2045

Metric

Drive Alone Mode Share Shared Ride Mode Share Transit Mode Share Bike Mode Share Ped Mode Share TNC (Uber, Lyft, etc) Total VMT Delay

2015 Conditions Baseline

Scenario 1 Basic Plan

Scenario 2 - Proposed Plan Difference from (1)

Scenario 3 - Transit+ (3)

Difference from (1)

Scenario 4 - SR-29 Lanes Scenario 4 Lanes+

Difference from (1)

(1)

(2)

57.03%

56.76%

56.63%

-0.13%

56.29%

-0.47%

56.76%

0.00%

31.68%

29.82%

29.89%

0.07%

29.78%

-0.03%

29.82%

0.00%

1.00% 1.49% 7.21% 1.58% 2,914,618 5,468

0.90% 3.99% 6.95% 1.59% 3,976,098 22,811

1.01% 3.99% 6.90% 1.58% 3,962,930 22,170

0.12% 0.00% -0.05% -0.01% -0.3% -2.8%

1.46% 3.99% 6.95% 1.53% 3,957,253 22,076

0.56% 0.00% 0.00% -0.06% -0.5% -3.2%

0.90% 3.99% 6.95% 1.59% 3,977,227 22,601

0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.0% -0.9%

Notes: Mode shares based on average daily person trips with origin and/or destination in Napa County. Total VMT is daily and occurring on Napa County roadways. Delay is total daily person hours of delay for trips beginning or ending in Napa County. Bike mode share adjusted outside travel demand model.

4/22/2021

Funding Programs

Current FTA Grant Programs Program Accelerating Innovative Mobility Access and Mobility Partnership Grants

Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) Transportation Grants Program (formerly TIGER) Capital Investment Grants - 5309

Description Accelerating Innovative Mobility (AIM) will highlight FTA’s commitment to support and advance innovation in the transit industry. This program provides competitive funding to support innovative capital projects for the transportation disadvantaged that will improve the coordination of transportation services and non-emergency medical transportation services. US DOT’s Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) Transportation Discretionary Grants program funds investments in transportation infrastructure, including transit.

Type Competitive Competitive

Competitive

Provides funding through a multi-year competitive process for transit capital Competitive investments, including heavy rail, commuter rail, light rail, streetcars, and bus rapid transit. Federal transit law requires transit agencies seeking CIG funding to complete a series of steps over several years to be eligible for funding. Enhanced Mobility of Seniors & Formula funding to states for the purpose of assisting private nonprofit Formula Individuals with Disabilities groups in meeting transportation needs of the elderly and persons with Section 5310 disabilities. Expedited Project Delivery Pilot The EPD Pilot Program, authorized by Section 3005(b) of the Fixing Competitive Program - Section 3005(b) America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act), is aimed at expediting delivery of new fixed guideway capital projects, small starts projects, or core capacity improvement projects. These projects must utilize public-private partnerships, be operated and maintained by employees of an existing public transportation provider, and have a Federal share not exceeding 25 percent of the project cost. FTA will notify applicants in writing within 120 days after the receipt of a complete application whether the application has been... Flexible Funding Programs CMAQ provides funding to areas in nonattainment or maintenance for Formula Congestion Mitigation and Air ozone, carbon monoxide, and/or particulate matter. States that have no Quality Program - 23 USC 149 nonattainment or maintenance areas still receive a minimum apportionment of CMAQ funding for either air quality projects or other elements of flexible spending. Funds may be used for any transit capital expenditures otherwise eligible for FTA funding as long as they have an air quality benefit. Flexible Funding Programs - Surface Provides funding that may be used by states and localities for a wide range Formula Transportation Block Grant of projects to preserve and improve the conditions and performance of Program - 23 USC 133 surface transportation, including highway, transit, intercity bus, bicycle and pedestrian projects. Formula Grants for Rural Areas Provides capital, planning, and operating assistance to states to support Formula 5311 public transportation in rural areas with populations less than 50,000, where many residents often rely on public transit to reach their destinations. Grants for Buses and Bus Facilities Provides funding to states and transit agencies through a statutory formula Formula Formula Program - 5339(a) to replace, rehabilitate and purchase buses and related equipment and to construct bus-related facilities. In addition to the formula allocation, this program includes two discretionary components: The Bus and Bus Facilities Discretionary Program and the Low or No Emissions Bus Discretionary Program. Grants for Buses and Bus Facilities Provides funding through a competitive allocation process to states and Competitive Program transit agencies to replace, rehabilitate and purchase buses and related equipment and to construct bus-related facilities. The competitive allocation

Program

Description

Type

provides funding for major improvements to bus transit systems that would not be achievable through formula allocations. Helping Obtain Prosperity for In keeping with the U.S. Department of Transportation’s focus on addressing Competitive Everyone Program the deteriorating conditions and disproportionately high fatality rates on our rural transportation infrastructure, FTA’s Helping Obtain Prosperity for Everyone (HOPE) Program supports projects that will address the transportation challenges faced by areas of persistent poverty. Integrated Mobility Innovation FTA's Integrated Mobility Innovation (IMI) Program funds projects that Competitive demonstrate innovative and effective practices, partnerships and technologies to enhance public transportation effectiveness, increase efficiency, expand quality, promote safety and improve the traveler experience. Low and No-Emission Component On September 29, 2016, FTA announced the opportunity for eligible Competitive Assessment Program (LoNo-CAP) institutions of higher education to apply for funding to conduct testing, evaluation, and analysis of low or no emission (LoNo) components intended for use in LoNo transit buses used to provide public transportation. The deadline for applications is November 28, 2016. Low or No Emission Vehicle Provides funding through a competitive process to states and transit Competitive Program - 5339(c) agencies to purchase or lease low or no emission transit buses and related equipment, or to lease, construct, or rehabilitate facilities to support low or no emission transit buses. The program provides funding to support the wider deployment of advanced propulsion technologies within the nation’s transit fleet. Metropolitan & Statewide Planning Provides funding and procedural requirements for multimodal Formula and Non-Metropolitan transportation planning in metropolitan areas and states. Planning needs to Transportation Planning - 5303, be cooperative, continuous, and comprehensive, resulting in long-range 5304, 5305 plans and short-range programs reflecting transportation investment priorities. Mobility for All Pilot Program This funding opportunity seeks to improve mobility options through Competitive Grants employing innovative coordination of transportation strategies and building partnerships to enhance mobility and access to vital community services for older adults, individuals with disabilities, and people of low income. Mobility on Demand (MOD) Funds projects that promote innovative business models to deliver high Competitive Sandbox Demonstration Program - quality, seamless and equitable mobility options for all travelers. 5312 Passenger Ferry Grant Program Provides competitive funding to public ferry systems in urbanized areas. Competitive Section 5307 Pilot Program for Transit-Oriented Provides funding to local communities to integrate land use and Competitive Development Planning – Section transportation planning with a transit capital investment that will seek 20005(b) funding through the Capital Investment Grant (CIG) Program. Public Transportation COVID-19 This program will fund grants through public transit agencies to develop, Competitive Research Demonstration Grant deploy, and demonstrate innovative solutions that address COVID-19 Program related concerns to increase operating efficiencies and improve mobility. Public Transportation Emergency Helps states and public transportation systems pay for protecting, repairing, Formula Relief Program - 5324 and/or replacing equipment and facilities that may suffer or have suffered serious damage as a result of an emergency, including natural disasters such as floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes. It provides authorization for Section 5307 and 5311 funds to be used for disaster relief in response to a declared disaster. Public Transportation Innovation - Provides funding to develop innovative products and services assisting Competitive 5312 transit agencies in better meeting the needs of their customers.

Program Public Transportation on Indian Reservations Program; Tribal Transit Program

Real-Time Transit Infrastructure and Rolling Stock Condition Assessment Research and Demonstration Program

Redesign of Transit Bus Operator Compartment to Improve Safety, Operational Efficiency, and Passenger Accessibility (Bus Operator Compartment) Program Rural Transportation Assistance Program - 5311(b)(3)

Description

Type

The Tribal Transit Program is a set-aside from the Formula Grants for Rural Competitive Areas program consisting of a $30 million formula program and a $5 million discretionary grant program subject to the availability of appropriations. A 10-percent local match is required under the discretionary program, however, there is no local match required under the formula program. FTA’s Public Transportation Innovation Program (49 U.S.C. § 5312), Competitive authorizes FTA to fund research, development, demonstrations, and deployment projects to improve public transportation. The Real-Time Transit Infrastructure and Rolling Stock Condition Assessment Demonstration Program is a competitive demonstration opportunity under FTA's research emphasis area of infrastructure. This priority area supports the U.S. Department of Transportation's Infrastructure strategic goal, as well as the strategic objective of life cycle and preventive maintenance for asset management planning and... This program supports research projects to develop transit bus operator Competitive compartment designs that improve bus operator and public safety as well as bus operator access to vehicle instruments and controls without hindering the accessibility of passengers.

Provides funding to states for developing training, technical assistance, Formula research, and related support services in rural areas. The program also includes a national program that provides information and materials for use by local operators and state administering agencies and supports research and technical assistance projects of national interest. Safety Research and Demonstration The Safety Research and Demonstration (SRD) Program is part of a larger Competitive Program safety research effort at the U.S. Department of Transportation that provides technical and financial support for transit agencies to pursue innovative approaches to eliminate or mitigate safety hazards. The SRD program focuses on demonstration of technologies and safer designs. State of Good Repair Grants - 5337 Provides capital assistance for maintenance, replacement, and rehabilitation Formula projects of existing high-intensity fixed guideway and high-intensity motorbus systems to maintain a state of good repair. Additionally, SGR grants are eligible for developing and implementing Transit Asset Management plans. Technical Assistance & Standards Provides funding for technical assistance programs and activities that Formula Development - 5314(a) improve the management and delivery of public transportation and development of the transit industry workforce. Transit Cooperative Research Research program that develops near-term, practical solutions such as best Competitive Program - 5312(i) practices, transit security guidelines, testing prototypes, and new planning and management tools. Urbanized Area Formula Grants - Provides funding to public transit systems in Urbanized Areas (UZA) for Formula 5307 public transportation capital, planning, job access and reverse commute projects, as well as operating expenses in certain circumstances. Zero Emission Research On November 22, 2016, FTA announced the opportunity for nonprofit Competitive Opportunity (ZERO) organizations to apply for funding to conduct research, demonstrations, testing, and evaluation of zero emission and related technology for public transportation applications.

SB 1 Funding SB 1 discretionary funding programs that are available to NVTA and local jurisdictions are as follows:

Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program Guidelines (TIRCP) The TIRCP was created to fund transformative capital improvements that modernize California’s intercity rail, bus (including feeder buses to intercity rail services, as well as vanpool services that are eligible to report as public transit to the Federal Transit Administration), ferry, and rail transit systems (collectively referred to as transit services or systems) to achieve all of the following policy objectives, as codified in Section 75220(a) of the PRC: 1. Reduce emissions of greenhouse gases 2. Expand and improve transit service to increase ridership 3. Integrate the rail service of the state’s various rail operations, including integration with the high‐ speed rail system 4. Improve transit safety Eligible applicants must be public agencies, including joint powers agencies, that operate or have planning responsibility for existing or planned regularly scheduled intercity or commuter passenger rail service (and associated feeder bus service to intercity rail services), urban rail transit service, or bus or ferry transit service (including commuter bus services and vanpool services). Public agencies include construction authorities, transportation authorities, and other similar public entities created by statute.

Active Transportation Program (ATP) – ATP is a competitive statewide program created to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation, such as biking and walking. The goals of the ATP are to: •

Increase the proportion of trips accomplished by biking and walking.

•

Increase the safety and mobility for non-motorized users.

• Advance the active transportation efforts of regional agencies to achieve greenhouse gas reduction goals as established pursuant to Senate Bill 375 (Chapter 728, Statutes of 2008) and Senate Bill 391 (Chapter 585, Statutes of 2009). • Enhance public health, including reduction of childhood obesity through the use of programs including, but not limited to, projects eligible for Safe Routes to School Program funding. •

Ensure that disadvantaged communities fully share in the benefits of the program.

•

Provide a broad spectrum of projects to benefit many types of active transportation users.

Eligible applicants include Local, Regional or State Agencies which include city, county, and Regional Transportation Planning Agencies, transit agencies, public schools and school districts, tribal governments, Natural Resource and Public Land Agencies, and private non-profit tax-exempt organizations (eligible only for recreational trail programs).

Trade Corridor Enhancement Program (TCEP) – The purpose of the Trade Corridor Enhancement Program is to provide funding for infrastructure improvements on federally designated Trade Corridors of National and Regional Significance, on California's portion of the National Highway Freight Network, as identified in California Freight Mobility Plan, and along other corridors that have a high volume of freight movement. The Trade Corridor Enhancement Program also supports the goals of the National Highway Freight Program, the California Freight Mobility Plan, and the guiding principles in the California Sustainable Freight Action Plan. A freight project is a project that significantly contributes to the freight system’s economic activity or vitality; relieves congestion on the freight system; improves the safety, security, or resilience of the freight system; improves or preserves the freight system infrastructure; implements technology or innovation to improve the freight system; or reduces or avoids adverse community and/or environmental impacts of the freight system; or improves system connectivity. Eligible applicants include local, regional, and public agencies such as cities, counties, Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Regional Transportation Planning Agencies, port authorities, public construction authorities, and Caltrans. Project proposals from private entities must be submitted by a public agency sponsor. This statewide, competitive program will provide approximately $300 million per year in state funding and approximately $515 million in National Highway Freight Program funds, if the federal program continues under the next federal transportation act.

Local Partnership Program (LPP) – SB 1 created the Local Partnership Program and continuously appropriates $200 million annually from the Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Account to local and regional transportation agencies that have sought and received voter approval of taxes or that have imposed fees, which taxes or fees are dedicated solely for transportation improvements. The primary objective of this program is to provide funding for entities who have previously approved fees/taxes dedicated solely to transportation improvements (as defined by Government Code Section 8879.67(b)). The program funds are distributed through a 40% statewide competitive component and a 60% formulaic component. The program provides funding to local and regional agencies to improve: •

Aging infrastructure

•

Road conditions

•

Active Transportation

•

Transit and rail

•

Health and safety benefits

Solutions for Congested Corridor Program (SCCP) The purpose of the Solutions for Congested Corridors Program is to provide funding to achieve a balanced set of transportation, environmental, and community access improvements to reduce congestion throughout the state. This statewide, competitive program makes $250 million available annually for projects that implement specific transportation performance improvements and are part of a comprehensive multimodal corridor plan by providing more transportation choices while preserving the character of local communities and creating opportunities for neighborhood enhancement. Regional transportation planning agencies, county transportation commissions and Caltrans are eligible to apply for program funds through the nomination of projects. All projects nominated must be identified in a currently adopted regional transportation plan and an existing comprehensive multimodal corridor plan. NVTA was successful in securing $25 million in SCCP funds for the Soscol Junction project in Cycle 2. The funding is for FY 2021-22 for the construction phase of the project. The project is currently at 65% design with construction on schedule for summer 2022.

Comments Received and Response COMMENTS MATRIX NAPA COUNTY BICYCLE COALITION NAPA VALLEY VINE TRAIL COALITION ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED

COMMENTS MATRIX

Countywide Transportation Plan Comment Response Matrix Comment No.

User name

Type

Julie Spencer

Maureen Trippe

Question

Maureen Trippe

Question

Rob Bregoff

Question

Maureen Trippe

Alex Crown

8 9

Rob Bregoff Alex Crown

Rob Bregoff

Alex Crown

Philip Sales

Alex Crown

Comment

NVTA Response

Date posted

Testing the comment system No response needed 04/15/2021 ‐ 8:58am Has anyone researched the 15 Minute City? If 60% of trips are 5 miles We have not, but appreciate the comment. Many Napa County or less, this looks like an idea worth researching. Fewer cars in the city, jurisdictions are smaller, very walkable communities. Overall, Napa County has a higher walking mode share than many cities and counties in the Bay more green spaces, more walking, biking. Area "https://www.15minutecity.com/ 04/23/2021 ‐ 9:13pm If 60% of trips in Napa County are 5 miles or less, there are indeed opportunities to increase bicycling and walking. Where is the bicycle This figure is correct. The NVTA Countywide Bicycle Plan can be found here: https://www.nvta.ca.gov/napa-countywide-bicycle-plan plan? 04/23/2021 ‐ 9:11pm NVTA is not specifically subject to meeting AB 32, SB 375, or SB 391 requirements, however, the agency recognizes the importance of reducing transportation sector emissions and has set a target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 19% per capita in Napa County from the 2015 levels. SB 743 is project specific and is therefore not relevant to the long range transportation planning process. Also, page 34, the objectives of Goal #5 "Minimize Why is there not an included goal that talks about state‐mandated the energy and other resources required to move people and good" explicitly address SB 375, reducing Green House Gases and Vehicle VMT and GHG ‐reduction targets in AB‐32, SB‐375, SB‐391, SB‐743, Miles Traveled. and Plan Bay Area? 04/22/2021 ‐ 10:55am

There is no mention of traffic calming in any element of the plan. System Safety (Goal #2) is important not only for transportation vehicles, but for all of the vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists with whom they interact. Traffic calming is a critical issue that must be addressed by Public Works, the Police Department and NVTA. It needs a holistic Page 32 under the objective of Page 93, under the Active Transportation Suggestion approach instead of fragmented goals from various agencies. The Truck Travel Time Reliability Index is a measure of the variability or reliability of truck travel times along National Highway Network segments. The data set used does not include any data for truck travel on local streets. See page 56 of the appendix http://bit.ly/NVTACTPAppendix Suggestion Please describe the index and how it works. There are few general concepts to increase pedestrian safety at intersections, such as increasing pedestrian visibility and shorten crossings by extending curbs (bulb-outs), using leading pedestrian intervals (LPI) at signalized intersections which allow pedestrians to begin crossing before the vehicle phase begins. Some local examples include the City of Napa adding Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFB) and implementing high visibility crosswalks. *optional comment: Additional information on pedestrian safety and controls best practices can be found in Appendix D of the NVTA Countywide Pedestrian Plan here: Question What can be done to increase pedestrian safety at intersections? https://www.nvta.ca.gov/sites/default/files/NCPMP_Final_web.pdf There are a number of projects listed in the plan that seek to improve Explain how the county transportation plan could uses other modes to transit frequency and extend service hours, increase bicycle and reduce delay. How will the county facilitate transit, active transport pedestrian facilities to facilitate and encourage the use of alternative transportation modes. Question movement rather than increasing capacity on roadways? Yes, in this instance transit refers to any bus stop or transit station. Question Please define transit. Do you mean a transit station? How does this graphic represent equity? Equity does not equal Comment noted. Question disability, as graphic suggests. A job is considered accessible by transit if it can be reached from a bus stop within 60 minute of travel time on transit. See page 69 of the appendix http://bit.ly/NVTACTPAppendix Question What makes a job "accessible" by transit?

04/23/2021 ‐ 9:04pm

03/26/2021 ‐ 5:22pm

03/26/2021 ‐ 5:23pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 11:04am 03/26/2021 ‐ 5:10pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 10:57am

03/26/2021 ‐ 5:26pm

Yes, this is solely transportation related and is derived from fuel sales (the methodology will likely need to be adjusted going forward to account for electric vehicles). See also page 48 for more information on this performance metric. Note that this statistic is taken from MTC's Vital Signs and more information can be found at https://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/greenhouse-gas-emissions. 03/26/2021 ‐ 5:27pm Question Is this 4.1 metric tons attributed solely to transit and travel? The reason we used VINE ridership as a VMT reduction alternative is In 2020, the Napa Valley Vine Trail in 2020 had over 522,000 uses, because we can quantify VMT from Vine Data. However, we cannot equivalent to 5% of single occupancy vehicle traffic on the Soscol quantify VMT from Vine Trail counter data. The Vine Trail's EcoAvenue and SR29 corridor. Counters only counts pedestrians and bicycles, but it does not The Draft Plan projects VINE ridership as a potential for reductions in provide any other information about a trip such as how long the trip VMT, but nothing is discussed re the benefit of the Vine Trail. I am was, where did they start and end the trip. We cannot estimate how disappointed as NVTA staff have access to four years’ worth of the many Vehicle Miles Traveled will be reduced if we do not know the Vine Trail's Eco‐Counter data collected daily from automatic bicycle length of the trip. Vine transit passenger data provides passengers' boarding and alighting data, which in turn provides a trip's length. Suggestion and pedestrian counters. 04/21/2021 ‐ 6:45pm The Truck Travel Time Reliability Index is a measure of the variability or reliability of truck travel times along National Highway Network segments. Truck Travel Time Reliability (TTTR) is simply the travel time reliability calculated for truck traffic. TTTR is the ratio of the longer travel times (95th percentile) to a “normal” travel time (50thpercentile). The TTTRs of a highway corridor’s segments are then used to create the TTTR Index for the entire corridor using a weighted aggregate calculation for the worst performing times of each segment. A higher TTTR Index denotes a less reliable highway. A TTTR Index of 1 represents free flow conditions. See page 56 of the appendix http://bit.ly/NVTACTPAppendix 03/26/2021 ‐ 5:29pm Suggestion Please describe this index

Countywide Transportation Plan Comment Response Matrix Comment No.

User name

Alex Crown

Philip Sales

Rob Bregoff

19 20

jeff farmer jeff farmer

Rob Bregoff

Mark Joseph

23 24 25

Rob Bregoff Alex Crown Alex Crown

Rob Bregoff

Philip Sales

Rob Bregoff

Type

Comment

NVTA Response

Date posted

PCI is a numerical rating of the pavement condition based on the type and severity of distresses observed on the pavement surface. The PCI value of the pavement condition is represented by a numerical index between 0 and 100, where 0 is the worst possible condition and 100 is the best possible condition. See page 80 of the appendix http://bit.ly/NVTACTPAppendix 03/26/2021 ‐ 5:25pm

Suggestion Please describe this index and how it works The 2015 Active Transportation Program grant application required the Vine Trail to use a Caltrans Cost/Benefit calculator which provided Comment noted. While we appreciate the estimated cost savings benefits expected savings from the project. Although this "calculator" was for a of Class I facilities generated by using this tool for funding application specific section of the Vine Trail, using it for the entire project shows purposes. This estimated figure is difficult to quantify and almost impossible to verify for actual benefit since the origin and destination of that the Vine Trail will reduce the need for gasoline by 74,127 gallons/year and reduce greenhouse gases by 738 tons/year. This in Vine Trail trips are unknown. If a trip distance cannot be determined, these figures cannot be verified. Suggestion 2016 dollars was $263,000/annually. 04/21/2021 ‐ 6:56pm Travel behavior of workers and tourist was studied in 2018 as part of the Travel Behavior study https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behaviorstudy. It shows how jobs in the unincorporated County are very spread out. Its hard to serve these areas with transit due to the low Is there no plan to increase transit coverage or routing to increase job density. NVTA offers carpool and vanpool options for areas outside of the incorporated jurisdictions that are served by transit through its access? I would expect that the county would program a study to V Commute Programs https://vcommute.org . 04/22/2021 ‐ 11:01am Question discover how transit would better serve workers (and tourists). To NVTA's knowledge, the County does not have a freight priority network. However, there are facilities within Napa County that are on the STAA terminal access network (SR-29 and SR-121) and CA 65' legal facilities. See the CA Truck Map published by Caltrans for more information (https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/legal-truckaccess/truck-network-map). Also, the City of Napa (and possibly other jurisdictions) designates truck routes for vehicles over 3 tons (these are listed in their municipal code). only one element of Napa's highway (Soscol Junction) is on the freight network. Given the minimal arterials in Napa, no specific freight priority network has been established. Question Does the county have a freight priority network? Suggestion noted. NVTA does have a bus stop plan that prioritizes bus stops for new shelters and benches based upon route ridership Many of the bus stops are not sheltered from the sun and weather. and location. NVTA will be installing 15 new shelters in the summer of 2021. Suggestion Some don't even have seats. Not very inviting. Suggestion I speaking of the ones in St. Helena only. This comment is related to the comment above. See response above The projects listed will contribute toward reductions, 63% of projects listed are meet the sustainability goal. The majority of the projects listed, 65, are categorized as transit, bicycle/pedestrian and multimodal projects. Question How will these reductions be achieved? Don't understand the American Canyon figure of 37k. There's only 21k This figure refers to the number of jobs accessible within one hour of the City of American Canyon using Vine Transit. Question residents in town! Data on Bay Area Counties' Congestion can be found at https://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/ No response needed, participant found information in the plan. Comment related to comment above. See above. with over 25 million data samples and 736,000 mobile devices. Detailed information can be found in NVTA's Travel Behavior Study https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travelbehavior-study Question Are these in‐county trips broken down by time and destination? There are currently no bike share programs in Napa County. It has been investigated but requires additional feasibility study. Some private Does Napa have a bike share program? does it include electric assist companies and bike shops provide bike rentals and many hotels loan out bicycles to guests. Question bicycles? Electric‐assist bicycles and scooters can increase the commute range. These newer technology modes should be included in active transport Noted‐Shared Mobility devices have been discussed with jurisdiction staff and will remain a part of the conversation. Suggestion discussions. It's surprising that NVTA has not studied the potential to facilitate the NVTA has studied travel patterns and 67 % of all traffic is generated movement of tourists both within the county, and from San Francisco by residents traveling within Napa County, 40% of trips generated in and Oakland. Considering the congestion and financial impacts of Napa County start and end in the City of Napa, 54% of trips from tourism in the county, they should be considered as part of the vine other counties start and end in Solano County and 20% of inter system. Why is there an O/D survey for tourists, a winery/hospitality county trips start and end in Sonoma county. Detailed information map with transit accessibility. I'd like to see a list of wineries sorted by including winery visitor data can be found in NVTA's Travel Behavior Study at https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study Question number of visits daily/annually. The completion of the Vine Trail will create increased opportunities for walking and cycling. It is projected in the Greenway Study that usership will exceed 3 million annually. Since the Vine Trail has exceeded over 522,000 in 2020, it is clearly on Comment noted. Prioritizing projects is not part of this plan, projects are evaluated and vetted by the public so that all projects have an its way. Completion of the Vine Trail should be a specific priority. equal opportunity to compete for funding as it become available. Suggestion Speed is the #1 factor in traffic fatalities and injuries, followed by Page 107‐110 explains Vision Zero and actions needed to implement. alcohol and distracted driving. NVTA will work with jurisdictions to develop a countywide Vision Zero How does this plan address these factors with regard to road safety plan. The goal is to reduce severe injuries and fatalities on all roadways to zero using safe systems approach strategies. Question for all users? Question Question

Do you have data that support this statement? Don't all Bay Area counties experience similar congestion delays? Do you know the average distance per trip for inta‐Napa county trips? nm, found it on the left.

04/22/2021 ‐ 11:08am

04/08/2021 ‐ 3:22pm 04/08/2021 ‐ 3:23pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 11:06am 04/08/2021 ‐ 5:24pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 11:13am 03/26/2021 ‐ 5:35pm 03/26/2021 ‐ 5:35pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 11:19am

04/22/2021 ‐ 11:22am

04/22/2021 ‐ 11:32am

04/21/2021 ‐ 9:52pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 12:01pm

Countywide Transportation Plan Comment Response Matrix Comment No.

User name

Alex Crown

Rob Bregoff

Philip Sales

Type

Question

Suggestion

Philip Sales

Suggestion

36 37

jeff farmer Philip Sales

Suggestion Suggestion

Rob Bregoff

Question

Philip Sales

Suggestion

Philip Sales

Suggestion

Rob Bregoff

Question

Rob Bregoff

Maureen Trippe

Comment

As BESS has limited capacity, will liquid fuel based generators be considered for resiliency as well?

many riders perceive alcohol as a factor in Napa County and are reluctant to ride because of fear of impaired drivers. Can alcohol impaired injury/fatality stats be included, comparing Napa to other state counties by collision/100K population? The completion of the Vine Trail will create increased opportunities for walking and cycling. It is projected in the Greenway Study that usership will exceed 3 million annually. Since the Vine Trail has exceeded over 522,000 in 2020, it is clearly on its way. Completion of the Vine Trail should be a specific priority.

NVTA Response

Date posted

For the New Maintenance Facility there will be a diesel generator that will provide 72 hours of emergency power to the facility. As for the a liquid fuel generator for electric bus charging, that has not been planned to date. With only five electric buses in the fleet for FY 21/22, NVTA is still planning to rely on its fleet of diesel, gasoline and CNG buses for emergency evacuations in the immediate future. At the point where the fleet becomes majority battery electric, NVTA will relook at all of the fuel and technology options available. 03/26/2021 ‐ 5:41pm

NVTA will analyze this data in detail in the Vision Zero plan. However, the Office of Traffic Safety provides this data which is easily accessible to the public. 04/22/2021 ‐ 11:58am

Comment noted. Prioritizing projects is not part of this plan, projects are evaluated and vetted by the public so that all projects have an equal opportunity to compete for funding as it become available.

There is a difference between leisure and health. With gyms and parks closed during COVID, the Vine Trail became the de facto workout for many people with an increased use of 46% in one year. Comment noted Several traffic lights ‐ all in St. Helena ‐ do not recognize bicycles. One must wait for a car/truck to trigger them. These are all along Main st/hwy 29. I don't know how widespread this is in the county. There should be a way for bikes to make themselves known without side‐ stepping to the pedestrian button (that is dangerous). Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with the City of St. Helena We have photos of better trail markers on the Vine Trail. Comment noted. Equity is mentioned throughout the document, but primarily on page 36 and in the Communities of Concern section on page 56. NVTA develops a Community Based Transportation Plan (CBTP) focused on equity and community needs, the CTP only draws from a few elements from the CBTP. Detailed information on equity and the CBTP can be found at https://www.nvta.ca.gov/CBTP Where is equity discussed? Comment noted. NVTA has been working on the CTP for two years I would like to point out that it is very difficult to find this plan on line and there have been ample opportunities over the course of those to make comments. As I am going through this document, I do not see two years to provide comments on the elements of the Plan. Staff many other contributors. I know that with COVID it has been difficult has presented at over 30 public events, in person and virtually, to but I do not think this has been readily available to the general public. solicit feedback from the public. In August 2020 the Vine Trail Coalition conducted counts of pedestrians and cyclists on SR 29 in Oakville (Parisi Traffic Engineering). We compared this data with data from our bike and pedestrian counter on the existing Vine Trail, three miles to the south. The results show that over eight times the number of cyclists and pedestrians were using the Vine Trail compared with the road shoulder of SR29. People feel safer on separated shared use paths. Comment noted. Can this inset be moved up so not to block the eastern part of the county? Yes, will address and move the inset.

04/21/2021 ‐ 10:03pm

04/21/2021 ‐ 10:05pm

04/08/2021 ‐ 3:27pm 04/21/2021 ‐ 10:07pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 12:06pm

04/21/2021 ‐ 10:10pm

04/21/2021 ‐ 10:58pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 12:13pm

This would be useful to map but we felt it would not be as legible. The maps show the worst delay index between the northbound and southbound directions for each segment. Detailed segment measurements by direction and time period can be found in the delay Wouldn't this and the following map be more informative if they were index tech memo in the Appendix. See page 48 in the Appendix http://bit.ly/NVTACTPAppendix 04/22/2021 ‐ 12:16pm Question directional? Under the Economic Stability Goal: Truck travel time measured by historical truck speed ‐‐ this is wrong. Is this the same type of 85% percentile rule used for cars or is there a commercial percentile rule? The problem is that trucks need to go slower, not faster. There is The Truck Travel Time Reliability Index is a measure of the variability or plenty of construction downtown. Landscape trucks hauling open trailers speed through residential neighborhoods well beyond the 25 reliability of truck travel times along National Highway Network segments. mph limit. It is wrong to allow these vehicles to travel at high speeds. The data set used does not include any data for truck travel on local streets. Suggestion Moving them faster is not the solution. 04/23/2021 ‐ 9:07pm

Countywide Transportation Plan Comment Response Matrix Comment No.

User name

Type

Rob Bregoffent. Select aQuestion

Philip Sales

Rob Bregoffent. Select aQuestion

Alex Crown

Rob Bregoffent. Select aQuestion

Rob Bregoffent

Suggestion

Rob Bregoffent

Suggestion

Julia Orr

Question

Rob Bregoffent

ENT

Suggestion

59 60

Julia Orr Julia Orr

Question Question

ENT

Suggestion

Rob Bregoffent

Question

Rob Bregoffent

Question

Julia Orr

Question

Suggestion

Comment

Can you show transit service within 1/2 mile of households? What percentage of total jobs do these numbers represent?

NVTA Response

Date posted

Figure 11 shows isochrones (i.e. temporal reach) from the city centers. Transit service within 1/2 mile of households is more akin to the performance metric of percent households within 1/4 mile of a transit stop. A quarter mile is typically considered the distance most people will walk to a stop and the industry standard. 04/22/2021 ‐ 12:25pm

This is essentially how the calculation was performed, the team overlaid a job density map over transit coverage. Such a map is shown in the jobs accessibility tech memo in the Appendix for Yountville. See page 69 in the Appendix http://bit.ly/NVTACTPAppendix Can you add a job location density vs. transit coverage map? 04/22/2021 ‐ 12:29pm The information is detailed in on page 46 and 47. The color-coded legend on the map on page 47 describes what the map represents, This map is confusing. What do bubbles represent? 60 minutes from which is the area you can reach within 60 minutes on transit from each of the city centers in Napa County. where? 04/22/2021 ‐ 12:27pm There is already local data to support the construction of shared use paths and their impact on cycling and walking. In 2020 the Vine Trail increased use by 46%. Our bike and pedestrian Comment noted. counters counted over 522,000 uses in 2020. 04/21/2021 ‐ 11:03pm The public agencies need to include Class I bike paths in their Pavement Condition Index calculations each year. Asphalt overlay and NVTA is actively working with jurisdictions on this item. seal coats for bike paths need to be planned for in a proactive way. 04/21/2021 ‐ 11:08pm Refer to page 56, the City of American Canyon does not have any areas that meet the Communities of Concern threshold. Why are communities of concern not listed in American Canyon? 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:21pm Yes, NVTA current does have on‐demand service (VineGo), which serves the disabled and it has on‐demand service for everyone in American Canyon, Yountville, St Helena and Calistoga. I think these Project Examples Doesn't Napa currently have on‐demand transit for disabled and are meant to extend the hours, and maybe make parts of the on‐demand serve instituted in the City of Napa due to COVID permanent. seniors? 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:34pm Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with the City of Napa. What about crossing guards, akin to the wine train? 03/26/2021 ‐ 5:52pm Yes, NVTA did an express bus study https://www.nvta.ca.gov/vine‐transit‐ Has making transit faster been studied, especially for congested express‐bus‐corridor‐study. It recommends things like bus queue jumps areas? Allowing transit to skirt congestion would make it more (allow a bus lane for buses to go ahead of cars at key intersections), transit signal priority and more direct routes. attractive. 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:41pm We are buying low floor vehicles depending on application ‐ for instance, all of our new cut‐always are low floor. They do work better on most routes but especially where sidewalks are located for even boarding and alighting. This is something to consider for express routes with minimal stops where curbs can be uniform, but does not work well on routes with Consider purchasing low‐floor transit vehicles in the future. many stops with varying curb heights or no curb at all. 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:36pm NVTA has a stop plan which prioritizes the types of amenities at stops. Improve the design on transit stops to provide shade, shelter, and seating. Additionally, transit riders appreciate having "next bus"‐type Shelters are provided at areas with a concentration of vulnerable arrival screens at major transit stops, as well as wayfinding maps. populations and overall use. 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:33pm No current plans for expansion of VineGo beyond the current 3/4 of a Are there any plans to expand the availability of Vine Go and the miles around the fixed route system. Riders in more rural areas can get rides if they can get to the service area. routes to more rural areas of Napa County? 04/09/2021 ‐ 11:58am Make sure all intersections have crosswalks on all legs, and that there Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with the jurisdictions. are median pedestrian refuge islands on wide streets. 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:30pm Are the longer Vine routes based on origin‐destination studies? There There was a Route 25 to Sonoma Plaza until Dec. 2018, but the ridership are no routes outside the county besides Fairfield, Vallejo, and El was very low. In the express bus study https://www.nvta.ca.gov/vine‐ Cerrito Del Norte BART. What about routes to Sonoma and Novato transit‐express‐bus‐corridor‐study (page 65) NVTA looked at going to SMART train? Petaluma SMART station instead as a potential alternative. 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:39pm Visibility in the City of Napa is simply horrid! I lived in LA for most of my life and in that city cars are not allowed to park within 1.5 car spaces from an intersection. Here it seems that on every corner a big truck is parked right up the corners (even in cross walks). Cars ‐ Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with the City of Napa. especially large ones ‐ block visibility. 03/30/2021 ‐ 7:09pm Can you expand on your plans to expand transportation to hospitals? No plans to expand ADA service to St Helena Hospital at this time. Are there any plans to expand your service to St Helena Hospital? 04/09/2021 ‐ 11:56am No response needed, see above. oh i just read you are so never mind! 04/09/2021 ‐ 12:02pm People park in front of ADA corners ALL OF THE TIME. Enforcement is Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with the jurisdictions. ZERO in my neighborhood (and probably others as well). 03/30/2021 ‐ 7:10pm The bus would used would probably be similar in size to the St. Helena shuttle (28ft). However, the size of the bus has a very minor Will Vine be running smaller vehicles on hospital routes until a need impact on operating costs, the main operating cost is the driver, and that is the same no matter the bus size. for full‐sized buses is established? 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:54pm Will this route originate at an existing Vine stop in SH? Will It could either leave from the St. Helena Post Office or be part of the arrivals/departures be coordinated to reduce rider wait times? service area of the current St. Helena shuttle 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:48pm Fixed Route service frequency is a product a current ridership, changes in land use and demographics, and funding availability. ADA How will you plan this service in terms of frequency? did you work service is based on ride requests from eligible riders. with the medical facilities to determine need? 04/19/2021 ‐ 10:01am

Countywide Transportation Plan Comment Response Matrix Comment No.

User name

Julia Orr

Rob Bregoffent

68 69 70 71 72 73

Rob Bregoffent Rob Bregoffent Rob Bregoffent Rob Bregoffent Kate Miller Kate Miller

ENT

Rob Bregoffent

Type

Comment

NVTA Response

Date posted

The prior service to the St Helena Hospital was on-demand. So Was the route to St Helena Hospital planned with statistics provided riders could request rides Monday through Saturday during St Helena Question by the hospital? How are you planning the frequency of this service. Shuttle hours which were approximately 7am to 7pm. 04/19/2021 ‐ 10:00am That's an option, further study would be necessary former Vine routes that went to Santa Rosa (Route 11 in 2009) had very low ridership and more Couldn't this route terminate at the SR SMART depot after stopping at recent attempts by the private sector to offer bus service between theses hospitals? Wouldn't this work as a general transit route from SR to two cities was unsuccessful. There does not seem to be one area in Santa Calistoga? Can Vine routes be coordinated for departures and arrivals Rose that is major ride generator. Yes, the route schedules can be to make these more viable? coordinated. 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:51pm Hospitality is included in the Accommodation and Food Services sector. 04/22/2021 ‐ 5:55pm Suggestion Hospitality should be included in this list

Previous paragraph: "Nearly half" and here "40%" of labor force. Suggestion Please be consistent and specific. Suggestion Please cite year and data source, trends. Nevermind. Saw the footnote Suggestion move the footnote # to the end of the paragraph. Suggestion Page 68 ‐ "education" and health services Suggestion Page 68 "Farming" instead of Total Farm I would love for there to be some way to get to Bel Aire Plaza on bike or foot but the intersections up there are so dangerous ‐ even if you are in a cross walk and you have the right of way, you that drivers Suggestion would drive right through you if they could. Agree. Why do planned bike lanes stop at Jefferson? Bike network would be more effective if the lanes reached Trancas Park and Ride, Suggestion and the Vine Trail.

Rob Bregoffent

Suggestion

Maureen Trippe

Question

Alex Crown

Suggestion

Rob Bregoffent

Suggestion

Philip Sales

Suggestion

Rob Bregoffent

Suggestion

Rob Bregoffent

Question

Rob Bregoffent

Suggestion

Maureen Trippe

Question

Alex Crown

Suggestion

Rob Bregoffent

Suggestion

Previous paragraph states that agriculture, wine, and tourism (3 sectors) account for almost 50%. This paragraph states that wine and tourism (2 sectors) account for nearly 40% so the two statements are not inconsistent. Propose revising second statement to, "The wine and tourism industries alone account for...". Data source is cited in the footnote. No response needed, see above. Suggestion noted. Will modify. Suggestion noted. Will modify. Suggestion noted. Will modify.

04/22/2021 ‐ 5:58pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 6:01pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 6:02pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 6:03pm 04/08/2021 ‐ 8:17am 04/08/2021 ‐ 8:19am

Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with the City of Napa.

03/30/2021 ‐ 7:16pm

Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with the City of Napa. The purpose of this map is to show the reach of the Napa Valley tourism across the country. Detailed tourism information and maps can be found in NVTA's Travel Behavior Study: https://www.nvta.ca.gov/travel-behavior-study avoid multi-year data collection, most data sources in the plan are from 2018.

Map isn't useful. A map of northern California would be more informative. Tourism trips from other cities, especially SF and Oak/Berk, would be helpful. When was the 6% work from home estimate created (pre‐or‐post pandemic)? I'd say trips of up to 4 miles (each way) are candidates for conversion to bicycle. Hills impact one's willingness to ride as does prevailing wind speeds and direction, yet our entire city is easily accessed via bike. Unless one is using highway 29, the increased amount of time taken to bike to a destination can be marginal and often negated due to better roadway accessibility. Comment noted. Electric‐assist bicycles are a rapidly growing bicycle market share and Noted‐Once a lower‐stress network of facilities can be built, and funding can increase the bike‐commute shed size. This is worth consideration programs or incentives to assist with purchases of e‐bikes, e‐biking as a in bike planning. commute option may become more feasible. People prefer Class I shared use paths. In August 2020, the Vine Trail Coalition contracted with Parisi Traffic Engineering to conduct counts of pedestrians and cyclists on SR 29 in Oakville just south of the Oakville Grade. This section of SR29 has wide shoulders. We compared this data with data from the bike and pedestrian counter on the existing Vine Trail, three miles to the south. The results show that over eight times the number of cyclists and pedestrians were using the Vine Trail compared with the road shoulder of SR29. Comment noted. A robust on‐line ridesharing/carpooling program could allow commuters to used the unused capacity inside cars. It's much more NVTA's Vcommute program is exactly that. Visit Vcommute.org to learn efficient and greener than expanding roadway capacity for SOVs more Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with the jurisdictions. Why isn't parking availability and pricing included in this TDM? Comment noted. A Park and Ride lot at the interchange of SR-29 and Imola Avenue in the City of Napa is under development to have Any expansion of SR 29 that isn't dedicated bus/HOV lanes will express buses bypass the Soscol Gateway Transit Center. Also, increase corridor VMT. tolling on constrained highways is not likely and NVTA is working with other transit operators and MTC on bus shoulder running and It would greatly reduce travel time if express buses from upvalley increasing transit funding to make transit more convenient for longer aren't forced to stop at the Napa Transit Center. Page 107‐110 explains Vision Zero and actions needed to implement. NVTA will work with jurisdictions to develop a countywide Vision Zero Is NVTA working actively with Vision Zero? To what extent? What are plan. The goal is to reduce severe injuries and fatalities on all roadways to the goals and expected outcomes? zero using safe systems approach strategies. NVTA will work with jurisdictions to develop a Countywide Vision Zero Plan. The goal is to reduce severe injuries and fatalities on all Survival is a low bar. What about lifelong consequences incurred by roadways to zero using safe systems approach strategies. These concerns will be studied in the Vision Zero Plan. the pedestrian/cyclist surviving the collision? Don't skip mentioning PM, which have known health detriments. Exposure to PM is an equity issue since people of color are more likely to live nearer to highways and freeways which are major PM Comment noted. Particulate Matter (PM) is noted on page 112. contributors. Diesel Trucks are the other major PM source.

04/22/2021 ‐ 6:53pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 6:57pm 04/23/2021 ‐ 9:21pm

03/26/2021 ‐ 6:19pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 7:02pm

04/23/2021 ‐ 4:38pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 7:11pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 7:09pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 7:18pm

04/23/2021 ‐ 9:12pm

03/26/2021 ‐ 7:03pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 7:32pm

Countywide Transportation Plan Comment Response Matrix Comment No.

User name

Type

87 88

Rob Bregoffent Rob Bregoffent

Question Question

Ken DeJarnette/Jeni Ka Suggestion

Rob Bregoffent

Question

Rob Bregoffent

Question

Rob Bregoffent

Question

Rob Bregoffent

Question

Maureen Trippe

Suggestion

ENT

Suggestion

ENT

Suggestion

Maureen Trippe

Suggestion

Rob Bregoffent. Select aQuestion

Philip Sales

Suggestion

100

Philip Sales

Suggestion

101

Rob Bregoffent

102

Philip Sales

Suggestion

Comment

NVTA Response

Equity issues are not interchangeable with disability issues. These should be addressed as 2 distinct issues. How does the author of this Comment noted. This figure came from the analysis conducted on project document not know this? submitted by the jurisdictions. Bicycle and pedestrian projects are listed starting on page 132. Won't bike/ped facilities be included in this project? No. 34: This proposed extension has been on the plan since 1998 and should be removed. If the issue is to improve traffic flow on California as was suggested in 2007, the benefit provided by the extension seems tenuous (as is indicated by the project ratings in the document). Improvements on California like the new traffic circles and the access to Hwy 29 for through traffic from Trancas (where California ends) to First Street and beyond seem more than adequate. Plus, the Solano extension would need to be substantially rethought. Pushing more through traffic onto Solano would cause its own set of traffic flow issues, including impeding the heavily used Lincoln/Solano on‐ramp to South Hwy 29. Lastly, the Solano extension is also not the most efficient way to address bike routes given it would be far more cost effective to improve the existing route from Coffield Avenue across the Napa Creek to First Street. Also, the cost estimate is woefully inadequate. In the draft Napa plan it is estimated to cost $7+ million (versus $3.5 million in this plan), both of which are underestimating the cost (just the eminent domain cost are between $4‐$5 million based on today’s market). Absent a compelling reason that can be articulated to us, which hasn’t been done, we think it’s time to remove Suggestion noted. Jurisdictions select projects submitted to the plan. NVTA will inform the City of Napa. the proposed extension. Suggestion noted. Jurisdictions select projects submitted to the plan. Ditto Roundabout. Roundabout would be safer style of intersection. NVTA will inform the City of Calistoga. Suggestion noted. Jurisdictions select projects submitted to the plan. NVTA will inform the City of Calistoga. Roundabout considered? Suggestion noted. Jurisdictions select projects submitted to the plan. NVTA will inform the City of Calistoga. was a roundabout study conducted for this intersection? This is project-specific question that will be addressed when the project scope is developed, however while it is always the objective to preserve historical structures, it is frequently not possible or feasible to do so. Will historic Stone bridge walls be preserved? Suggestion noted. Jurisdictions select projects submitted to the plan. NVTA will inform the City of Napa. The plan includes a Vision Zero There is data that proves speeding is increased when roads are wide. goal and traffic calming is part of that effort. Specific traffic calming Narrow streets slow things down. I'm disappointed to see suggestions will be part of a Vision Zero plan to be completed over the next few years. to widen Soscol to 6 lanes between Magnolia and Silverado trails. Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with I'm disappointed that there are no suggestions for calming traffic on the City of Napa. The plan includes a Vision Zero goal and traffic Old Sonoma Road (right now it's like freeway lanes but on a residential calming is part of that effort. Specific traffic calming will be part of a Vision Zero plan to be completed over the next few years. street with very poor visability). Suggestion noted. The plan is to address overall transportation vision in Napa and sound walls are more related to neighborhood improvements. However, NVTA will inform and actively work with the City of Napa and Caltrans to pursue this improvement. How about sound walls? Especially from First Street to Imola. I would insist that the neighbors in the Fuller Park area be invited to a discussion about any proposals to new signals along Jefferson at Laurel and Jefferson and Old Sonoma Road. Both Jefferson and Old Sonoma Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, jurisdictions select projects submitted to the plan. NVTA will inform and work with the City of Road are speedways and they have been commonly cited as safety Napa concerns by residents. One of the objectives under the Equity goal is to provide affordable How will this improve equity and sustainability? What sort of bike transportation solutions to ensure access to jobs, education, goods and lanes will fit? This is capacity expansion, which will increase VMT services for all members of the community. The Vine Trail project needs to be split into three distinct projects. The purpose of listing projects in the Plan is to ensure project can be 1. American Canyon to Napa eligible to receive federal funding once a project is ready for 2. Yountville to St Helena construction. Project details and scope will be developed as each project is ready for construction. 3. St Helena The underpass project was not recommended by the City of Napa BPAC to be included in the Bicycle Plan update, for cost and practicality. An alternative solution is an at grade crossing with refuge Suggestion noted. Jurisdictional concern, will inform and work with the City of Napa islands crosswalk and improved signalization. Intersections on State Highways require ICE analysis, which does evaluates design safety for all modes, including bicycles and pedestrians. However, ICE requires a roundabout analysis for intersection construction. What these questions are more appropriately addressed as part of project plans to protect bikes/peds from ramp‐style interchange features? specific planning efforts. The purpose of listing projects in the Plan is to ensure project can be eligible to receive federal funding once a project is ready for This description is too vague. There are three distinct sections of the construction. Project details and scope will be developed as each project is ready for construction. Vine Trail that need to be enumerated and not lumped together.

Date posted

04/22/2021 ‐ 7:44pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 7:47pm

04/06/2021 ‐ 3:32pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 7:53pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 7:53pm 04/22/2021 ‐ 7:52pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 8:01pm

04/23/2021 ‐ 9:05pm

03/30/2021 ‐ 7:26pm

03/30/2021 ‐ 7:24pm

04/23/2021 ‐ 9:06pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 8:06pm

04/23/2021 ‐ 5:13pm

04/23/2021 ‐ 5:09pm

04/22/2021 ‐ 8:10pm

04/21/2021 ‐ 11:12pm

Countywide Transportation Plan Comment Response Matrix Comment No.

User name

103

Philip Sales

104

Joseph P Thompson

Type

Comment

NVTA Response

Date posted

The purpose of the Countywide Transportation Plan is to focus on the There needs to be a paragraph recognizing the role of philanthropy transportation future of all transportation modes in Napa County. The CTP and the support of the Vintners and Visit Napa Valley. Napa Valley does not focus on the specific efforts or details of any particular project, Vine Trail Coalition has raised over $12 million through philanthropy in but rather looks toward the future. The funding section focuses on funding pledges and funding to plan and construct the Vine Trail. This is not a sources based on known fund distribution formulas which allows NVTA to forecast revenues. Since philanthropic funding is variable and unknown, it small amount of money and should be recognized as part of Napa is not included in the forecasting of this plan. Suggestion County's local effort. 04/23/2021 ‐ 5:18pm Comments seemed to pertain to San Benito County planning documents and no specific comment was made pertaining to the CTP. Suggestion Errors in transportation policy‐ letter attached in Appendix 4/27/2021 ‐ 10:55am

NAPA COUNTY BICYCLE COALITION

April 24, 2021 Alberto Esqueda 625 Burnell Street Napa, CA 94559 Re: NVTA Countywide Transportation Plan: Advancing Mobility 2045 Dear Mr. Esqueda, The Napa County Bicycle Coalition represents over 2,000 members and supporters throughout Napa County in advocating to make riding a bicycle in our communities safe, convenient, and accessible for riders of all ages and abilities. For over 12 years, the Napa County Bicycle Coalition has worked with local organizations, businesses, elected officials, and the public to align our transportation infrastructure with the needs of cyclists and other active transportation users. In recent years, our focus has expanded to include active transportation issues more broadly, and in particular a focus on ensuring that every child in Napa County can walk or bike to school safely. We first want to express our appreciation to you and NVTA staff for all of your efforts on this project. We fully recognize that NVTA has little control over the projects that local agencies submit for inclusion in the Plan, and that many of the shortcomings in the Plan are a direct result of our local cities pushing forward auto-dominated projects that may have been considered prudent 20 or 30 years ago, but which would only serve to promote further dependence on single occupancy vehicle trips, exacerbate impacts on climate and the environment, and pay lip service to the safety needs of those who walk and bike. For the purposes of this letter, we have limited our comments on the overall Goals and Metrics of the Plan. We will provide comments to jurisdictions directly, and copy NVTA staff, regarding specific projects. •

Goals Graphic (page 3) – We request the following changes to the graphic: o Goal #1 – Amend to read, “Serve the transportation needs of the entire community regardless of age, income, ability, or mode of travel,” to support o Goal #2 – Amend to read, “Eliminate serious injuries and fatalities for all users,” to more accurately reflect Vision Zero objectives and framing. o Goal #3 – We are confused by the name of this goal, “Use taxpayer dollars efficiently,” particularly when roadway widening or capacity projects are some of the least efficient uses of taxpayer dollars in the transportation industry. In

1100 Lincoln Ave, Suite 202-B | Napa, CA 94558 | (707) 258-6318 | www.napabike.org

numerous locations in the Plan, this goal is identified as “Congestion Relief” which is more accurate. •

Equity – We wholeheartedly support inclusion of Equity as a key lens for project evaluation and analysis, but are concerned that the only measure relates to low-income household proximity to transit stops. The equity issues inherent in our transportation system are far more complex and systemic. We would like to see additional metrics that consider other "transportation equity" metrics, potentially including build-out of bicycle and pedestrian facilities included in existing Plans, or % of project dollars spent within CoC or DACs. We are also concerned that using the current target, Napa County could by viewed as achieving transportation equity simply by relocating or installing new bus stops. Unfortunately, too many existing bus stops are unsafe and inaccessible for prospective riders. Dozens of bus stops throughout our cities lack even basic infrastructure such as sidewalks, shade trees, seating, and trash receptacles. In a plan that calls for over $200,000,000 in new transit improvements, access to and minimum standards for transit stops must be considered as a key metric of success.

•

Safety – Adoption of a comprehensive countywide Vision Zero program will be a critical component to achieving the goal of eliminating serious injuries and fatalities by 2045. We are concerned that this metric, under the timeline of the plan, will mean that precious few dollars will be invested in addressing the high injury network in each jurisdiction in the coming decade.

•

Sustainability – We oppose in the strongest possible terms any change to the Countywide goal for walking and biking mode share. The adopted 2019 Countywide Bicycle Plan has a bicycle mode share goal of 10% of all trips by 2035. The Napa County Pedestrian Plan identifies an existing 9% pedestrian mode share based on 2015 analysis (see p8). Backsliding on targets in existing plans is simply unacceptable. The Advancing Mobility 2045 Plan must establish an aggressive yet achievable active transportation mode share target, and we believe that 25% by 2045 is an appropriate goal. We also believe that a separate Transit mode share of 10% by 2045 would be appropriate, resulting in an overall alternative transportation share of more than 1/3 of all trips by that date.

•

Maintenance & Preservation – We support the goal of improving the countywide Pavement Condition Index, but also recognize that the current platform, StreetSaver, does not provide a comprehensive picture of the quality of our transportation network. To that end, we request that the following changes be made to the metrics for this goal: o Include PCI-equivalent analysis for all Class I multi-use pathways throughout the County in overall PCI ratings, and prioritize improvements accordingly. There are

1100 Lincoln Ave, Suite 202-B | Napa, CA 94558 | (707) 258-6318 | www.napabike.org

several popular Class I facilities that have been in significant disrepair or closed to the public for many years (Napa River Trail north of Lincoln, and Oxbow Trail behind Copia), conditions which would not be permitted to continue for an automobile roadway. Maintenance and Preservation analysis should also include our existing and planned network of sidewalks, which all jurisdictions acknowledge are significantly under-funded, but which are largely absent from the projects included in this Plan. The City of Napa has previously stated that sidewalk maintenance has a roughly 20 year backlog of work. Metrics such as number of trip/fall hazards per mile of sidewalk, linear feet of sidewalk gap, and number of non-compliant ADA ramps and curb cuts could be used to quantify maintenance and preservation of these facilities.

While we will be providing specific project-level comments to local jurisdictions, we do wish to share our high-level concerns regarding project categorization and evaluation criteria. In reviewing the Project List, we are concerned that many of the projects listed as "multimodal" are almost exclusively auto-oriented projects, and should be re-categorized as such, or a specific threshold (eg: 25% of project cost) should be required for a project to be considered in this category. We have similar concerns regarding how the Equity, Sustainability, and Safety criteria were evaluated. Based on a preliminary review, we identified more than 20 projects which are listed as “multimodal,” but which absent confirmation from local agencies regarding bike/ped/transit components, would accurately be described as auto-centric. The projects identified total more than $65 million in estimated project costs. As noted above, we will provide jurisdictions with specific comments on projects in a separate letter. Should you have any questions about any of the listed recommendations, please contact me directly at (707) 258-6318 or email pband@napabike.org. Thank you for your time and consideration. Sincerely,

Patrick Band Executive Director, Napa County Bicycle Coalition

1100 Lincoln Ave, Suite 202-B | Napa, CA 94558 | (707) 258-6318 | www.napabike.org

Esqueda, Alberto From: Sent: To: Subject:

Esqueda, Alberto Tuesday, May 11, 2021 3:50 PM Patrick Band RE: CTP Comments

Hi Patrick, Thank you for your interest in the CTP and taking the time to review and comment. Below are responses to your comments, I look forward to working with the NCBC to integrate your comments in the upcoming CTP. The comments regarding the equity and goals are well received; however, the Board adopted the goals well over a year ago after seeking significant input from NVTA committees and members of the public. Altering the goals at this juncture would require significant work as the goals are the foundation for establishing the plan metrics and targets. Changing language to the goals, metrics, and targets would trigger larger domino effect both for how projects were evaluated, but also influence many other aspects of the plan itself. Time and resource constraints limit staff from accomplishing the amount of work that this would require at this point in the CTP development. That said, staff will keep these concepts in mind when presenting proposed goals to the board in future CTPs. Safety: NVTA understands the critical nature of safety and plans to establish a separate coordinated effort with the jurisdictions, Caltrans, and law enforcement, to develop a Vision Zero plan to increase awareness and eliminate transportation related fatalities in Napa County. Sustainability: NVTA acknowledges that the Countywide Bike Plan has a goal to reach 10% of all trips made by bicycle by 2035. The CTP has a goal to reach 10% commute trips made by bike or walking by 2045. Commute trips tend to be longer and therefore more difficult to achieve. NVTA continues to support a 10% bike mode share shift of all trips by 2035 and the CTP goal and therefore, does not contradict the Countywide Bike Plan. Maintenance and Preservation: NVTA agrees with the comment that having a PCI for Class I paths is a good idea; however, a survey would need to be administered to assess the facilities condition. This task would require a concerted effort in coordination with the jurisdictions and financial resources. Project mode categorization: Many multi-modal projects include on-system bike/pedestrian improvements which is why they are classified as multimodal. However, NVTA is open to discuss with jurisdictions setting a threshold percentage of bicycle, pedestrian and transit elements in a project that would then deem a project “multi-modal.” Time and resource constraints limit staff from accomplishing the amount of work that this would require at this point in the CTP development. However, staff will keep these comments in mind when developing project evaluation criteria for the next CTP. Feel free to contact me to discuss further. Best regards, Alberto Esqueda Senior Planner

ATTACHMENT 5 AGENDA ITEM 11.2 MAY 19, 2021

625 Burnell Street, Napa, CA 94559 T: 707.259.5976 F: 707.259.8638 E: aesqueda@nvta.ca.gov nvta.ca.gov | vinetransit.com

From: Patrick Band <pband@napabike.org> Sent: Friday, April 30, 2021 8:43 AM To: Esqueda, Alberto <aesqueda@nvta.ca.gov> Subject: Re: CTP Comments

[External Email - Use Caution] Alberto See attached. -Patrick Band Executive Director, Napa County Bicycle Coalition C: (707) 319-1538 www.NapaBike.org Pledge to ride your bike during Bike Month!

NAPA VALLEY VINE TRAIL COALITION

April 23, 2021 Alberto Esqueda Senior Planner Napa Valley Transportation Authority 625 Burnell Way Napa CA 94559 Ref: Comments on Countywide Transportation Plan Dear Alberto: Thank you for the work in the updating of the Countywide Plan and I do not envy you your task. However, I feel a great opportunity has been missed here. Napa is unique in that there is a non-profit organization willing to share the burden of building the main spine of the Active Transportation Network. It is a success story with measurable results. As I read the Draft Plan, I was struck by the fact that this is not mentioned or even acknowledged. Over the past seven years we have assisted you and your staff as well as Solano Transportation Authority in writing and securing matching funds to leverage almost $18 million in state and federal funding, The Vine Trail is already paying significant dividends with real data collected over the past four years and yet none of this data, shared with NVTA staff who have access to the Ecocounter data, is included or analyzed. The use of the Vine Trail at over 522,000 trips last year is testimony to the value of a Class I trail connecting communities. The Vine Trail (project 61) is referred to as a single project but ignores the fact that at its completion, every other bike path, sidewalk and protected bike lane will be connected to an Active Transportation infrastructure which will serve all valley residents and visitors of the entire Napa Valley. Based on data from our automatic bike and pedestrian counters which have been counting users since January 2017, the Vine Trail is the most cost-effective means to create a mode shift that would take years with alternatives. I appreciated you and staff reviewing the ranking of the Vine Trail against the Plan Goals, but in the final Draft, the recommendations fall short. Below is a list of my comments: Greenhouse gas emissions (page 5) Data already exists to quantify the benefits of a mode shift to cycling and walking. The 2015 Active Transportation Program grant application required the Vine Trail to use a Caltrans Cost/Benefit calculator which provided expected savings from the project. Although this "calculator" was for a specific section of the Vine Trail, using it for the entire project shows that the Vine Trail will reduce gasoline consumption by 74,127 gallons/year and reduce greenhouse gases by 738 tons/year. This in 2016 dollars was $263,000/annually.

Vehicle Miles Travelled (page 5) In 2020, the Napa Valley Vine Trail in 2020 recorded over 522,000 annual trips, equivalent to an average of 5% of the annual single occupancy vehicle traffic in the Soscol Avenue and SR29 corridor. The Draft Plan projects VINE ridership as a potential for reductions in VMT, but nothing is discussed regarding the benefit of the Vine Trail. Health and Safety (page 11) The completion of the Vine Trail will create safe opportunities for walking and cycling. Travel Forecasting (page 15) The completion of the Vine Trail will create increased opportunities for walking and cycling. It is projected in the Greenway Study that usership will exceed 3 million annually. Since the Vine Trail has exceeded over 522,000 in 2020, it is clearly on its way. Completion of the Vine Trail should be a specific priority. Challenges and Opportunities (page 20) There is a difference between leisure and health. With gyms and parks closed during COVID, the Vine Trail became the de facto workout place for many people with an increased use of 46% in one year. Trail sign photo (page 21) The Vine Trail has better directional sign examples. Safety (page 37) Cyclists and walkers prefer the Class 1 shared use path. An example is cited on my note on page 97. Share of Active Transportation for Commute Trips (page 50) There is already local data to support the construction of shared use paths and their impact on cycling and walking. In 2020 the Vine Trail increased use by 46%. Our bike and pedestrian counters counted over 522,000 uses in 2020. Maintenance Pavement Condition Index. (page 54) The public works departments of all agencies need to include Class I bike paths in their Pavement Condition Index calculations each year. Asphalt overlay and seal coats for bike paths need to be planned for in a proactive way. Proposed Facilities (page 97) Cyclists and pedestrians prefer Class I shared use paths. In August 2020, the Vine Trail Coalition contracted with Parisi Traffic Engineering to conduct counts of pedestrians and cyclists on SR 29 in Oakville just south of the Oakville Grade. This section of SR29 has wide shoulders. We compared this data with data from the bike and pedestrian counter on the existing Vine Trail, three miles to the south. The results show that over eight times the number of cyclists and pedestrians were using the Vine Trail compared with the road shoulder of SR29.

Proposed Facilities (page 98) The Vine Trail is the main spine of the alternative transportation network connecting all the cities and town in Napa County as well as Vallejo. It is important that completing the Vine Trail be a priority sop that feeder shared use paths and other bike and ped infrastructure can connect to it. Projects (page 135) •

•

Project 57. The underpass project was not recommended by the City of Napa BPAC to be included in the Bicycle Plan update, for cost and practicality. An alternative solution is an “at grade” crossing with refuge island crosswalks and improved signalization. I pointed this out in an earlier email and to my knowledge the BPAC has not reversed its decision. Project 61. Future phases of the Vine Trail project need to be split into three distinct projects. 1. American Canyon to Napa 2. Yountville to St Helena 3. St Helena

Impact of Bicycle and Pedestrian Projects (page 139) This description of the Vine Trail is too vague. There are three distinct separate sections of the Vine Trail that need to be enumerated and not lumped together. Funding (page 150) There needs to be a paragraph recognizing the role of local philanthropy and the support of the Vintners and Visit Napa Valley. Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition has raised over $12 million through philanthropy in pledges and funding to plan and construct the Vine Trail. This is not an insignificant sum and needs to be recognized as part of Napa County's local effort. In closing, I would like to point out that it was difficult to find the Draft Plan online to make comments. When you type in “Countywide Transportation Plan” in the NVTA website you are only directed to the existing plan. As I was going through this document, I do not see many other contributors which I think reflects that. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.

Philip Sales Executive Director

cc Kate Miller. Executive Director, NVTA Chuck McMinn, President NVVTC,

Esqueda, Alberto From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments:

Esqueda, Alberto Tuesday, May 11, 2021 4:09 PM Philip Sales chuck_vineyard29; Miller, Kate RE: Comments on the Countywide Transportation Plan Update CTP Public Comment Response Matrix.pdf

Hi Philip, Thank you for taking the time to review the CTP and for summarizing your online comments in a letter. NVTA has replied to your comments in the attached response matrix along with all other comments received online.

Best regards, Alberto Esqueda Senior Planner

625 Burnell Street, Napa, CA 94559 T: 707.259.5976 F: 707.259.8638 E: aesqueda@nvta.ca.gov nvta.ca.gov | vinetransit.com

From: Philip Sales <psales@vinetrail.org> Sent: Friday, April 23, 2021 9:28 PM To: Esqueda, Alberto <aesqueda@nvta.ca.gov> Cc: chuck_vineyard29 <chuck@vineyard29.com>; Miller, Kate <kmiller@nvta.ca.gov> Subject: Comments on the Countywide Transportation Plan Update

[External Email - Use Caution] Alberto I have made comments on the on line document and I attach a letter summarizing my comments. PHILIP SALES Executive Director NAPA VALLEY VINE TRAIL COALITION 707.252.3547 x200 OFFICE HOURS: Monday-Thursday, 9am-5pm 1

ADDITIONAL COMMUNICATIONS RECEIVED