california · thursday, april 4, 2019 2:00 pm napa valley transportation authority 625 burnell...

Thursday, April 4, 20192:00 PM

Napa Valley Transportation Authority625 Burnell Street

Napa, CA 94559

NVTA Conference Room

Technical Advisory Committee

All materials relating to an agenda item for an open session of a regular meeting of the Technical

Advisory Committee (TAC) are posted on our website at https://nctpa.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx at

least 72 hours prior to the meeting and will be available for public inspection, on and after at the time of

such distribution, in the office of the Secretary of the TAC, 625 Burnell Street, Napa, California 94559,

Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m., except for NVTA holidays.

Materials distributed to the present members of the TAC at the meeting will be available for public

inspection at the public meeting if prepared by the members of the TAC or staff and after the public

meeting if prepared by some other person. Availability of materials related to agenda items for public

inspection does not include materials which are exempt from public disclosure under Government Code

sections 6253.5, 6254, 6254.3, 6254.7, 6254.15, 6254.16, or 6254.22.

Members of the public may speak to the TAC on any item at the time the TAC is considering the item .

Please complete a Speaker’s Slip, which is located on the table near the entryway, and then present

the slip to the TAC Secretary. Also, members of the public are invited to address the TAC on any issue

not on today’s agenda under Public Comment. Speakers are limited to three minutes.

This Agenda shall be made available upon request in alternate formats to persons with a disability .

Persons requesting a disability-related modification or accommodation should contact Kathy Alexander,

TAC Secretary, at (707) 259-8631 during regular business hours, at least 48 hours prior to the time of

the meeting.

This Agenda may also be viewed online by visiting the NVTA website at

https://nctpa.legistar.com/Calendar.aspx

Agenda - Final

April 4, 2019Technical Advisory Committee Agenda - Final

1. Call To Order

2. Introductions

3. Public Comment

4. Committee Member and Staff Comments

5. STANDING AGENDA ITEMS

5.1 Congestion Management Agency (CMA) Report (Danielle Schmitz)

5.2 Project Monitoring Funding Programs* (Alberto Esqueda)

5.3 Caltrans’ Report* (Ahmad Rahimi)

5.4 Vine Trail Update (Erica Ahmann Smithies)

5.5 Transit Update (Matthew Wilcox)

5.6 Measure T Update (Alberto Esqueda)

Note: Where times are indicated for the agenda items they are approximate and intended

as estimates only, and may be shorter or longer, as needed.

6. CONSENT AGENDA

6.1 Meeting Minutes of February 7, 2019 Technical Advisory

Committee (TAC) Meeting (Kathy Alexander) (Pages 7-10)

TAC action will approve the February 7, 2019 meeting minutes.Body:

ApprovalRecommendation:

2:30 p.m.Estimated Time:

Draft Minutes.pdfAttachments:

7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS

Napa Valley Transportation Authority Printed on 3/28/2019

http://nctpa.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=a0d46ccb-daa9-41f5-abfc-970ccd987ed3.pdf


7.1 Community Based Transportation Plan (CBTP) Update (Danielle

Schmitz) (Pages 11-28)

Staff will provide an update on the CBTP.Body:

Information only.Recommendation:


Staff Report.pdfAttachments:

7.2 Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA-3) 2019-20

Countywide Claim Review (Diana Meehan) (Pages 29-39)

That the TAC review and recommend submitting the FY 2019-20

Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA-3) FY 2019-20 Countywide

Claim to MTC.

Body:

ActionRecommendation:



7.3 Plan Bay Area 2050: Request for Regionally-Significant Projects

(Alberto Esqueda) (Pages 40-64)

That the TAC review Regionally-Significant Project Guidance.Body:

Information onlyRecommendation:



7.4 Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC) Presentation

Schedule (Alberto Esqueda) (Pages 65-68)

Staff will review the ITOC presentation schedule.Body:

Information only.Recommendation:



7.5 Legislative Update* (Kate Miller)

Staff will review the state and federal legislative updates.Body:

Information only. Recommendation:


7.6 April 17, 2019 NVTA Board Meeting Draft Agenda* (Kate Miller)

Staff will review the April 17, 2019 NVTA Board meeting draft agenda.Body:

Information only. Recommendation:



http://nctpa.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=d79a630e-d68e-4f5d-b5ef-ea4ddbbe68d7.pdf

http://nctpa.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=df6d4b34-0e88-4ee6-ba18-2060f6e71dfb.pdf

http://nctpa.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=04900e8e-4bb3-4061-b8ed-ba45dfdfaca3.pdf

http://nctpa.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=ecac99b6-5945-4e3e-8f1a-ba59fdd4c73d.pdf


8. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

9. ADJOURNMENT

9.1 Approval of Next Regular Meeting Date of May 2, 2019 and Adjournment.

I, Kathy Alexander, hereby certify that the agenda for the above stated meeting was posted at a location

freely accessible to members of the public at the NVTA offices, 625 Burnell Street, Napa, CA by 5:00

p.m., on March 28, 2019

Kathy Alexander, March 28, 2019 (e-sign)

_____________________________________________________ Kathy Alexander, Deputy Board Secretary

*Information will be available at the meeting


Glossary of Acronyms

Latest Revision: 07/18

AB 32 Global Warming Solutions Act

ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments

ADA American with Disabilities Act

ATAC Active Transportation Advisory Committee

ATP Active Transportation Program

BAAQMD Bay Area Air Quality Management District

BART Bay Area Rapid Transit District

BATA Bay Area Toll Authority

BRT Bus Rapid Transit

CAC Citizen Advisory Committee

CAP Climate Action Plan

Caltrans California Department of Transportation

CEQA California Environmental Quality Act

CIP Capital Investment Program

CMA Congestion Management Agency

CMAQ Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program

CMP Congestion Management Program

CalSTA California Transportation Agency

CTP Countywide Transportation Plan

COC Communities of Concern

CTC California Transportation Commission

DAA Design Alternative Analyst

DBB Design-Bid-Build

DBF Design-Build-Finance

DBFOM Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain

DED Draft Environmental Document

EIR Environmental Impact Report

EJ Environmental Justice

FAS Federal Aid Secondary

FAST Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act

FHWA Federal Highway Administration

FTA Federal Transit Administration

FY Fiscal Year

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GGRF Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund

GTFS General Transit Feed Specification

HBP Highway Bridge Program

HBRR Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program

HIP Housing Incentive Program

HOT High Occupancy Toll

HOV High Occupancy Vehicle

HR3 High Risk Rural Roads

HSIP Highway Safety Improvement Program

HTF Highway Trust Fund

HUTA Highway Users Tax Account

IFB Invitation for Bid

ITIP State Interregional Transportation Improvement Program

ITOC Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee

IS/MND Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

JARC Job Access and Reverse Commute

LIFT Low-Income Flexible Transportation

LOS Level of Service

LS&R Local Streets & Roads

MaaS Mobility as a Service

MAP 21 Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act

MPO Metropolitan Planning Organization

MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission

MTS Metropolitan Transportation System

ND Negative Declaration

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NOAH Natural Occurring Affordable Housing

NOC Notice of Completion

NOD Notice of Determination

NOP Notice of Preparation

NVTA Napa Valley Transportation Authority

NVTA-TA Napa Valley Transportation Authority-Tax Agency

OBAG One Bay Area Grant

PA&ED Project Approval Environmental Document

P3 or PPP Public-Private Partnership

PCC Paratransit Coordination Council

PCI Pavement Condition Index

PCA Priority Conservation Area

5

Glossary of Acronyms

Latest Revision: 07/18

PDA Priority Development Areas

PID Project Initiation Document

PMS Pavement Management System

Prop. 42 Statewide Initiative that requires a portion of gasoline sales tax revenues be designated to transportation purposes

PSE Plans, Specifications and Estimates

PSR Project Study Report

PTA Public Transportation Account

RACC Regional Agency Coordinating Committee

RFP Request for Proposal

RFQ Request for Qualifications

RHNA Regional Housing Needs Allocation

RM2 Regional Measure 2 (Bridge Toll)

RM3 Regional Measure 3

RMRP Road Maintenance and Rehabilitation Program

ROW Right of Way

RTEP Regional Transit Expansion Program

RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program

RTP Regional Transportation Plan

SAFE Service Authority for Freeways and Expressways

SAFETEA-LU Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Efficient Transportation Equity Act-A Legacy for Users

SB 375 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act 2008

SB 1 The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017

SCS Sustainable Community Strategy

SHA State Highway Account

SHOPP State Highway Operation and Protection Program

SNCI Solano Napa Commuter Information

SNTDM Solano Napa Travel Demand Model

SR State Route

SRTS Safe Routes to School

SOV Single-Occupant Vehicle

STA State Transit Assistance

STIC Small Transit Intensive Cities

STIP State Transportation Improvement Program

STP Surface Transportation Program

TAC Technical Advisory Committee

TCM Transportation Control Measure

TCRP Traffic Congestion Relief Program

TDA Transportation Development Act

TDM Transportation Demand Management Transportation Demand Model

TE Transportation Enhancement

TEA Transportation Enhancement Activities

TEA 21 Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century

TFCA Transportation Fund for Clean Air

TIGER Transportation Investments Generation Economic Recovery

TIP Transportation Improvement Program

TLC Transportation for Livable Communities

TLU Transportation and Land Use

TMP Traffic Management Plan

TMS Transportation Management System

TNC Transportation Network Companies

TOAH Transit Oriented Affordable Housing

TOD Transit-Oriented Development

TOS Transportation Operations Systems

TPA Transit Priority Area

TPI Transit Performance Initiative

TPP Transit Priority Project Areas

VHD Vehicle Hours of Delay

VMT Vehicle Miles Traveled

6

625 Burnell Street

Napa, CA 94559

Napa Valley Transportation AuthorityMeeting Minutes - Draft

Technical Advisory Committee

2:00 PM NVTA Conference RoomThursday, February 7, 2019

1. Call To Order

Chair Ahmann Smithies called the meeting to order at 2:01 p.m.

Mike Kirn

Brent Cooper

Lorien Clark

Doug Weir

Ahmad Rahimi

Debra Hight

Chairperson Erica Ahmann Smithies

Mallika Ramachandran

Steve Hartwig

Present: 9 -

Nathan Steele

Eric Whan

Dana Ayers

Juan Arias

Aaron Hecock

Absent: 5 -

2. Introductions

Chair Ahmann Smithies invited all in attendance to introduce themselves.

Public present:

Patrick Band, Napa County Bicycle Coalition

Barry Eberling, Napa Valley Register

Philip Sales, Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition

Madeline Oliver, Napa County Bicycle Coalition

3. Public Comment

No public comment was received.

4. Committee Member and Staff Comments

Danielle Schmitz, NVTA - Thanked all who participated in the PEER Process Caltrans

Encroachment Permit workshop.

Alberto Esqueda, NVTA - The Imola Park & Ride Request for Proposal was released. Proposals

are due Monday, February 11, 2019. Would like Caltrans to participate on the Selection

Committee. [Ahmad Rahimi will check with Caltrans staff].

- The Metropolitan Transportation Commission will hold their North Bay Horizon workshop at the

Petaluma Community Center on Saturday, March 16th from 10 am to 12 pm.

Erica Ahmann Smithies, City of St. Helena - Held kick-off meeting for their downtown streetscape

improvement project.

Page 1Napa Valley Transportation Authority Printed on 3/28/2019

April 4, 2019TAC Agenda Item 6.1Continued From: New

Recommended Action: Approval

7

February 7, 2019Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes - Draft

- Design is almost complete on Hunt Avenue sidewalk gap closure, hopes to advertise project

next month.

- Year One Measure T paving design is almost complete.

5. STANDING AGENDA ITEMS

5.1 Congestion Management Agency (CMA) Report (Danielle Schmitz)

Report by Danielle Schmitz.

- Plan Bay Area 2050 Call for Projects Roadmap 2050 - flyer included in packet.

- Regional Transportation Program Call for Projects will be released sometime between March

and June.

- NVTA requested a Call for Projects presentation for a future meeting.

- There is a SuperRAWG meeting on March 11th.

5.2 Project Monitoring Funding Programs* (Alberto Esqueda)

Alberto Esqueda reviewed the updates to the Project Monitoring Spreadsheets.

5.3 Caltrans’ Report* (Ahmad Rahimi)

Ahmad Rahimi reviewed the Monthly Caltrans Report, pointing out that the Conn Creek Bridge

Project contract had been awarded.

5.4 Vine Trail Update (Erica Ahmann Smithies)

Chair Ahmann Smithies invited Philip Sales, Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition (NVVTC) to provide

an update.

Mr. Sales reported that the habitat assessment of the Calistoga to St. Helena segment has been

completed.

Mr. Sales suggested that the jurisdictions discuss nighttime use and lighting of the trail.

5.5 Transit Update (Matthew Wilcox)

Mr. Wilcox reported that his report will be covered in Agenda Item 7.1, Vine Vision

Implementation Plan.

5.6 Measure T Update (Alberto Esqueda)

Mr. Esqueda reported staff is working on resolving the 6.67% equivalent set aside issue.

6. CONSENT AGENDA

6.1 Meeting Minutes of January 10, 2019 TAC Meeting (Kathy Alexander) (Pages 7-11)

MOTION by KIRN, SECOND by COOPER to APPROVE the minutes of the January 10, 2019

Technical Advisory Committee meeting. Motion was approved with Member Hartwig abstaining.

7. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS

7.1 Vine Vision Implementation Plan (Matthew Wilcox) (Pages 12-31)


8


Report by Matthew Wilcox which included:

- A review of the Vine Vision Implementation Plan.

- Regional route changes will be implemented first.

- Local route changes will be launched after more user-friendly revisions are made to

VineTransit.com.

- Additional specific buses are needed to accommodate the service changes.

- Response to TAC members' questions regarding the service changes.

Mr. Wilcox also reviewed the Project Checklist for jurisdictions to provide to NVTA staff that will

help:

- NVTA to make comments on projects that may affect Vine service

- determine if project will impact Vine Transit service, i.e., road closures, delays or diversions

- determine if Vine related improvements are warranted

Member Hartwig requested a map or list of Vine stops for the City of American Canyon.

Mr. Wilcox will provide Vine stop maps to each jurisdiction.

7.2 Transportation Fund for Clean Air (TFCA) Expenditure Plan Update (Diana Meehan)

(Pages 32-36)

Report by Danielle Schmitz.

- Reviewed the existing three-year TFCA project list: 1) Imola Park and Ride Express Bus

Improvements - FYI 2019 and 2020 and 2) Napa Valley Vine Trail Calistoga to St. Helena - FYE

2021.

- The funding amount at the time of the Call for Projects was only an estimate and the amount is

trued up each year. There is an additional $56,720 available. NVTA can either issue a CFP for

the additional $56,720 or program to a project on the list.

- Staff is recommending the additional $56,720 be programmed to the Imola Park and Ride

Express Bus Improvements Phase II project.

- Rolling funds over to the next year is no longer allowed in the TFCA program.

MOTION by HARTWIG, SECOND by KIRN to REVISE Agenda Item 7.2 from an Information Item to

an Action Item. Motion was unanimously approved.

MOTION by KIRN, SECOND by HARTWIG to recommend the NVTA Board approve the additional

allocation of available revenue to the Imola Park and Ride Express Bus Improvement Phase II

project. Motion was unanimously approved.

7.3 Draft Napa Countywide Bicycle Plan (Diana Meehan) (Pages 37-40)

Report by Danielle Schmitz that included:

- The Draft Napa Countywide Bicycle Plan has been released for public comment

- Comment period ends March 15, 2019

- The public will be invited to provide comments through the website and open house meetings

at NVTA on February 27th, American Canyon on March 12th, and Calistoga on March 14th.

Chair Ahmann Smithies inquired if the Draft Plan would be presented to the jurisdictions;

planning commissions.

Ms. Schmitz responded staff member Meehan intends to reach out to the jurisdictions' planning

commissions.


9


7.4 Legislative Update* (Kate Miller)

Kate Miller reviewed the Legislative Report.

7.5 February 20, 2019 NVTA Board Meeting Draft Agenda* (Kate Miller)

Kate Miller reviewed the February 20, 2019 NVTA Board meeting agenda.

8. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS

Transportation Development Act Section 3 (TDA 3) Call for Projects.

9. ADJOURNMENT

9.1 Approval of Next Regular Meeting Date of March 7, 2019 and Adjournment.

The meeting was adjourned at 3 p.m.


10

April 4, 2019 TAC Agenda Item 7.1 Continued From: New

Action Requested: INFORMATION

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TAC Agenda Letter ______________________________________________________________________

TO: Technical Advisory Committee

FROM: Kate Miller, Executive Director

REPORT BY: Danielle Schmitz, Director – Programs, Projects and Planning (707) 259-5968 / Email: [email protected]

SUBJECT: Community Based Transportation Plan Update ______________________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATION That the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) review and comment on the Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA) Community Based Transportation Plan (CBTP) progress update. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The intent of the outreach portion of the Community Based Transportation Plan (CBTP) is to identify projects that: 1) are developed through a collaborative and inclusive planning process; 2) improve transportation choices; 3) address and identify transportation gaps; and 4) focus on transportation needs specific to elderly, disabled, and low-income communities. This memo provides a project update and timeline for work completed as part of the CBTP for Napa County. FINANCIAL IMPACT Is there a fiscal impact? No BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The purpose of the CBTP is to improve mobility options and close transportation gaps for low-income and disadvantaged communities in Napa County. The plan will also review census data and other data sources to determine where resources are most needed and identify additional communities of concern (CoC), beyond those identified by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). • The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) requires that NVTA, as the

Congestion Management Agency (CMA), regularly analyze local conditions to

11

mailto:[email protected]

TAC Agenda Letter Thursday, April 4, 2019 Agenda Item 7.1

Page 2 of 4 ____________________________________________________________________________________

improve mobility options and close transportation gaps for low-income and disadvantaged communities. This plan will be an update to NVTA’s previously prepared CBTP in 2015. This update will incorporate MTC’s updated guidelines to include simple and clear program goals, incorporate a list of priority projects in coordination with other agency planning efforts, and involve a steering committee inclusive of social service and community based organization/non-profit representation that work with low-income and other underserved residents. NVTA has reached out to housing, low-income and senior representatives to serve on the steering committee.

NVTA staff met with the Steering Committee on July 23rd to discuss outreach efforts. Based on input from the Steering Committee, staff identified outreach events to ensure equitable and appropriate outreach in all communities (Attachment 1). Prior to all events staff issued press releases and coordinated with the local jurisdictions to inform and invite them to take part. The scheduled outreach events began in September of 2018 and concluded in early December of 2018. Outreach Feedback from residents was generally positive. Many residents expressed their appreciation for the mobility programs NVTA offers. The CBTP outreach has helped in educating the public about the transportation options in the Napa Valley. At some events, it was the first time members of the community had heard about NVTA’s transit connections to Amtrak and BART. In order to effectively engage residents NVTA staff will continue to coordinate with the CBTP Steering Committee to ensure the priorities of Napa Valley residents are appropriately considered. Based on the comments and feedback from the outreach events and the online survey, staff has prepared a draft of CBTP recommended transportation projects (Attachment 2). The next steps in the process include setting clear goals for the Plan and prioritizing projects and programs to improve mobility in Napa County. Evaluation of Transportation Proposals NVTA staff created criteria to evaluate proposals to see if they addressed community needs that were identified through the outreach process, and if they should be included in the final plan. The Steering Committee reviewed and concurred with the evaluation criteria at their February 27th meeting. The five criterions used to evaluate projects included: 1. Project Lead:

Existence of a “program champion,” an agency (or agencies) that takes a leadership role in securing funding, staffing and other resources devoted to the proposed service or project.

12


Page 3 of 4 ____________________________________________________________________________________

2. Community Identified:

Does the proposal address transportation needs identified through public outreach? Ultimately, all proposed projects addressed transportation needs identified by the community.

3. Implementation: Based on anticipated barriers to implementation (such as funding, resource allocation, and project development), the group placed proposals in implementation timeframes: • Near-Term (to be implemented within 2 years); • Mid-Term (to be implemented in 3 to 5 years); and • Long-Term (to be implemented in 6 years or more).

4. Cost/Funding

When funding might be available to plan, construct, and maintain the proposed projects and services. Availability of on-going funding/sources, especially for transit service operations, must also be considered when evaluating the sustainability of a proposal. Although the group did consider the possible costs to develop and implement each proposal, proposals were not ranked based on their costs.

5. Benefit:

Lastly, whether each proposal is easy for potential customers to use in addressing Lifeline Transportation barriers. • Safety • System Performance (in addition to helping the community, does the project

improve system performance?) • Emission reduction • Improved mobility • Improved Health Outcomes

Identified Projects Based on the feedback from residents in the CoCs identified by MTC and NVTA staff, the below list represents the projects identified by the community for improving their mobility and lives:

1. Bike facility on Trancas from Redwood Road to Villa Lane 2. Enhanced pedestrian crossing/Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB) on

Trancas at Valle Verde 3. Traffic calming and RRFB at Jefferson/Rubicon 4. Enhanced pedestrian crossing Jefferson and El Capitan 5. Bus shelter/benches at high usage stops 6. Sidewalks/Lighting on Hunt Street and Pope Avenue in St. Helena

13


Page 4 of 4 ____________________________________________________________________________________

7. Expanded evening hours on local transit 8. Expanded TaxiScrip and V-Commute Options 9. Transit service from St. Helena to Angwin and St. Helena Hospital 10. Transit service from Calistoga to Santa Rosa Kaiser

Projects Ranked Based on the above-mentioned criteria the 10 projects identified were ranked in the following order:

1. Sidewalks/Lighting on Hunt Street and Pope Avenue in St. Helena 2. Expanded TaxiScrip and V-Commute Options 3. Bus shelter/benches at high usage stops 4. Traffic calming/RRFB at Jefferson/ Rubicon 5. Traffic calming/RRFB at Jefferson and El Capitan 6. Enhanced Pedestrian Crossing/RRFB at Trancas/Valle Verde 7. Transit service from St. Helena to Angwin and St. Helena Hospital 8. Transit service from Calistoga to Santa Rosa Kaiser 9. Expanded evening hours on local transit 10. Bike facility on Trancas from Redwood to Villa Lane

CBTP Steering Committee The Steering Committee convened on February 27th to review the projects and criteria staff prepared. Projects were then ranked based on the outlined criteria. The Steering Committee reviewed the projects and ranking criteria and was in agreement with staff’s proposal on the five criteria and the ranking of projects. The next step is for staff to bring the draft list of projects to individual jurisdictions to coordinate on the feasibility and deliverability of the identified projects before releasing the draft plan. The April TAC meeting is the first review by the jurisdictions. The Steering Committee will next convene in May to review the draft plan and make a recommendation to the NVTA Board of Directors. SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Attachments: (1) CBTP Outreach Comments (2) Matrix of Identified Projects (3) Project Rankings (4) CoC map

14

Community Based Transportation Plan Outreach Comments

Resident Feedback NVTA staff scheduled 15 events throughout Napa County to solicit feedback for the plan, with a minimum of one meeting in each community. NVTA also created on online survey for residents to complete that received 200 responses. NVTA staff received comments on a variety of mobility topics. Key issues included a lack of information/knowledge on transit services and mobility programs, the need for physical and operational improvements to bus stops and lines, safer routes for pedestrians, particularly seniors, and additional, affordable resources for seniors and the disabled. Below is a summary of comments, sorted by event and community.

Location Date

American Canyon - Senior Center • Residents we spoke to did not use/need our fixed

route or Vine Go services • There was some complaints about wait times for

the community shuttle • Some projects listed in the 2014 Countywide

Transportation Plan are obsolete, such as the Eucalyptus extension, and the Roundabout

• The Napa Junction Rd. intersection has been completed

• S. Napa Junction Rd. should be replaced with Rio Del Mar connector to Newell-Modified to Rio Del Mar as E/W connector

• The City is considering locations for P&R lots along the corridor

10/10/2018; 2-4 PM

Napa - Senior Center • Found the younger riders on fixed route to be

rowdy; made using transit less desirable • People expressed appreciation for the TaxiScrip

program • Most attendees drive themselves, it’s possible that

those without easy access are not utilizing the Senior Center as much

9/27/2018; 12-2 PM

ATTACHMENT 1 TAC Agenda Item 7.1

April 4, 2019

15

Napa - Free Market at Health and Human Services • Most attendees drove themselves that may be a

reflection of limited access, as the location is only served by Route 11. Also may be difficult to transport groceries to/from the bus stop

9/14/2018; 2-4 PM

Napa - Storehouse/Food Bank • Many of these clients drove to the pickup, as

transit would not allow them to transport that many bags of groceries

• Attendees were glad to know that Vine offered connections to the BART, the Ferry, and Solano County.

9/20/2018; 11-2 PM

Napa - Queen of the Valley • Received feedback that local routes don’t run

frequently enough for clients • Local routes also do not run late enough • Our fares are too high for some clients

10/1/2018; 1:30-3:30 PM

Napa Valley College • Students who rode the bus to NVC were generally

appreciative and spoke well of the service, one rider who used the local routes stated later run times would be better, as to allow for greater flexibility

• Most students drove and would only consider transit for emergency purposes

• One group of students sometimes walk from the Imola/Shurtleff area neighborhood to campus and remarked on how “scary” it is to walk along that corridor

• Would like to see later hours of local routes, so that students can use transit for other errands on the way home

10/24/18; 11 AM-1 PM

Napa Valley Support Services • Issue with clipper card reader functionality • Difficult to board smaller buses with mobility

devices • Jefferson/Bel Aire stop and Lincoln/Jordan Lane

stops should be prioritized for shelter and seating • Shelters and benches are a necessity for disabled

customers • Would like see Routes 10 and 11 stop at Napa

Valley College on weekends • Bi-directional service availability on transit routes

is needed, resident informed that COA addresses this concern

11/2/2018; 12:30-1:45 PM

16

• Longer service hours into the evening • A stop at the Napa Bowl is needed, currently

inaccessible due to construction on Soscol, but not removed

• Most people can’t walk or move more than a couple of blocks, so they need stops closer together

• People want to be able to use TaxiScrip with Uber and Lyft, current taxi companies are unreliable

• Imperial Way and Jordan needs a stop and bus shelter/seating

• Drivers have not provided service to some riders in wheelchairs or driven past riders in wheelchairs

• The stop along Lincoln/Jordan Lane has a slope making wheelchair access difficult.

• The limit on three books per month are not enough for Taxi Scrip

• Real-time signage need to be more reliable and work consistently

• Fares are too costly • Transdev drivers place ramps down on streets

less than a foot away from curb, so there is no way for a wheelchair to safely board

• Would like more curb space painted red, so there is better access for ADA riders to board the bus

Napa-St. Thomas Church • Lack of sidewalks connecting to Pueblo Vista

elementary school • From a truck driver: Educate cyclists on riding on

the inside of the bike lane • Add a stop sign at the intersection of Hemlock and

Hoover • Put up signs requesting people not to walk down

middle of the street on Homewood Ave. • Drainage issues at Kilburn and Bryant from

rainwater from Westwood Hills. • Add a bus line that goes directly from Laurel

Street on the west side of SR-29 to Napa High School

11/18/18; 1-3 PM

Napa- Silverado Creek Apartments • Bus stop is too far from apartments • Crossing larger intersections is difficult, would like

more lighting, more crosswalks • Speeding around school, traffic

calming/enforcement needed

11/29/18; 5-7 PM

17

• Sidewalk improvements for Vintage and Bel Aire schools

• Bike Lane on Trancas from Redwood to Villa Lane (class 4)

• Traffic light or stop sign at Trancas and Valle Verde

• RRFB at Jefferson/ Rubicon • Traffic light at Jefferson/Rubicon/ El Capitan • Traffic light at Jefferson/ Rubicon • Bus (public transportation) to Villa Lane • Rehab sidewalk on Villa Lane • RRFB at Trancas/ Valle Verde

Napa- Redwood Park and Ride • Riders had very positive comments about the

service and drivers • Cyclists love the Vine Trail • Rider pointed out that real time signs were

incorrect and sometimes non functional • A senior rider would like to see bathroom facilities

at the park and ride, as there is nowhere nearby to use the restroom and sometimes there are long wait and transfer times for our buses

11/30/18; 2-4 PM

Yountville - Veteran’s Home • Residents of the Vet’s Home have their

transportation needs met almost exclusively by the transportation provided by the Home, including medical transport to San Francisco

• Some residents do use the Vine Trail and Routes 10 and 29 and appreciate that those services are available

• They love the Community Trolley and really appreciate having access to the town for dining and entertainment

9/26/2018; 1-3 PM

St. Helena - Rianda House • Most residents rely on Kaiser Napa and felt the

existing transit options were adequate for their medical and grocery trips

• Appreciative of the service on St. Helena shuttle, spoke highly of the drivers

• Discussion about St. Helena/Lyft pilot shuttle program. All rides are coordinated through Molly’s Angels. One issue is lack of wheelchair access on Lyft vehicles

• Issue with Molly’s Angels only taking ambulatory passengers

10/26/2018; 11-12 PM

18

• Driver reimbursement under MRP for Molly’s Angels drivers-Drivers are prohibited from receiving reimbursement-Consider updating MRP form for volunteer drivers to indicate they are with Molly’s Angels.

• Request from Angwin resident to have a “one-day-a-week” shuttle down to St. Helena

• Many were supportive of pedestrian infrastructure improvements

• When asked how they receive information-many still rely on the St. Helena Star newspaper.

• Several of the senior housing developments have their own monthly newsletters for residents and requested information on transportation be included. Also requested information be made available at the offices of senior housing complexes, Library, Safeway, coffee shop etc.

St. Helena-Stonebridge Apartments • Transit services for residents of Silverado Orchard • RRFBs for all School crossings (they mentioned a

school where they were already installed and said they worked well)

• Complete sidewalk on Hunt Avenue to Montevista • Transit services to Angwin. • Improved street lighting on Pope, Hunt (and the

street where the apartments are located)

11/27/18; 5-7 PM

Calistoga – Springs Mobile Home Park • Residents discussed issues they have with

accessing medical care, specifically St. Helena Hospital and Kaiser in Santa Rosa

• They asked that we evaluate the potential to revive the previous Route that connected to Santa Rosa

• Some residents have to travel long distances for medical care out of the county, staff let them know about the Mileage Reimbursement program and how to apply

• Residents expressed their view that the Calistoga shuttle seemed geared towards tourists and the long wait times made it less than ideal for residents

• Residents had complaints about lack of handicap parking at Cal-Mart, we connected them with city staff personnel to address the issue

• Residents would also appreciate if drivers could let them off closer to their destination, rather than only at designated stops, staff explained that for

9/13/2018; 5-7 PM

19

safety reasons, we don’t let drivers stop just anywhere

Survey Results The survey was an opportunity for Napa County residents to provide direct feedback on their transportation issues and needs. From the survey responses, some important findings were as follows:

• The most common modes travel are solo driving, bus/community shuttles, carpooling, and walking/biking.

• Most of the survey respondents are 65+, 69.3%. • One out of every three respondents (36.1%) make less than $25,000. • Two out of every three respondents (66.7%) do not use any of the existing Vine

routes, 34% of those said the bus did not go where they needed, and 23% said it didn’t fit their schedule.

• 50.5% of the respondents are either retired or not currently working.

20

Project # Mode Type ProposalCommunity Need Addressed Description Sponsor Estimated costs Benfit

Potential Implemetation Timeline Status Project Rank

1Active Tranportation/Biking

Bike facility from Redwood to Villa Lane

Access to and encouraging active transportation, public health

Bike lane for east went connection along Trancas Avenue from Redwood Avenue to Villa Lane City of Napa

Safety; Reduced Emmissions; Improved Mobility; Improved Health Outcomes Long-term Identified

2Active Transportation/Walking

Enhanced Ped Crossing/RRFB on Trancas at Valle Verde

Improved pedestrian experience

Traffic calming and pedestrian improvements along Trancas Acenue at Valle Verde City of Napa $60,000 Safety; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified

3Active Tranportation/Walking

Traffic calming and RRFB at Jefferson/ Rubicon

Traffic calming, improved pedestrian experience

Traffic calming and pedestrian improvements along Jefferson Street and Rubicon City of Napa $50,000 Safety; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified

4Active Transportation/Walking

Enhanced pedestrian crossing at Jefferson and El Capitan

Improved safety for vehicles and improved pedestrian experience

Traffic calming and pedestrian improvements at Jefferson Avenue, El Centro, and Rubicon City of Napa $650,000 Safety; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified

5 Transit Bus shelter/benches at high usage stops Transit Amenities

Improved transit experience and rider amenities at bus stops, in accordance with adopted Bus Stop policy NVTA $250,000 Safety; Reduced Emmissions; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified

6Active Tranportation/Walking

Sidewalks/Ligthing on Hunt Street and Pope Avenue in St. Helena

Improved safety and pedestrian experience

Pederstriand and safety improvements along Hunt Street and Pope Avenue

City of St. Helena Safety; Improved Mobility Medium-term Underway

7 TransitExpanded evening hours on local transit

Improved Transit Access NVTA

$200,000/ annually Reduced Emmissions; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified

8 All Mode typesExpanded TaxiScrip and VCommute Options

and need, implementation of TNC NVTA

$25,000/ annually Reduced Emmissions; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified

9 TransitTransit service from St. Helena to Angwin and St. Helena Hospital

Access to medical care Expanded trip coverage area for

NVTA; P3$80,000/ annually


10 TransitTransit service from Calistoga to Santa Rosa Kaiser Access to medical care

Two round trip bus trips from Calistoga to Santa Rose on Weekdays NVTA; P3

$195,000/ annually


Short-term: 1-2 yearsMedium-term: 3-5 yearsLong-term: 6 or more years

ATTACHMENT 2TAC Agenda Item 7.1

April 4, 2019ATTAC

HM

ENT 2

TAC Agenda Item

7.1 April 4, 2019

21

Project Number Proposal Sponsor Estimated costs BenfitPotential Implemetation Timeline Status Project Rank

1 Bike facility on Trancas from Redwood to Villa Lane City of Napa

Safety; Reduced Emmissions; Improved Mobility; Improved Health Outcomes Long-term Identified 10

2Enhanced pedesrian crossing/RRFB at Trancas/Valle Verde City of Napa $50,000 Safety; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified 6

3Traffic calming/RRFB at Jefferson/ Rubicon City of Napa $50,000 Safety; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified 4

4Enhanced pedestrian crossing Jefferson and El Capitan City of Napa $650,000 Safety; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified 5

5 Bus shelter/benches at high usage stops NVTA $250,000 Safety; Reduced Emmissions; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified 3

6Sidewalks/Ligthing on Hunt Street and Pope Avenue in St. Helena City of St. Helena Safety; Improved Mobility Medium-term Underway 1

7 Expanded evening hours on local transit NVTA$200,000/ annually Reduced Emmissions; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified 9

8Expanded TaxiScrip and VCommute Options NVTA

$25,000/ annually Reduced Emmissions; Improved Mobility Medium-term Identified 2

9Transit service from St. Helena to Angwin and St. Helena Hospital NVTA; P3

$80,000/ annually


10Transit service from Calistoga to Santa Rosa Kaiser NVTA; P3

$195,000/ annually


Short-term: 1-2 yearsMedium-term: 3-5 yearsLong-term: 6 or more years


April 4, 2019

ATTACH

MEN

T 3TAC

Agenda Item 7.1

April 4, 2019

22

Existing County Communities of Concern by Census Tract

Census Tract Neighborhood Name 2002.02 South Downtown Napa 2008.04 Westwood Neighborhood 2016.01 South St. Helena

2009 East Imola

City of Napa COCs

Source: MTC’s Communities of Concern Tracts Plan Bay Area 2017


April 4, 2019

23

St. Helena COC

Source: MTC’s Communities of Concern Tracts Plan Bay Area 2017

24

New County Communities of Concern by Census Tract

Census Tract

Neighborhood Name Criteria Met

2006.02 Northeast Napa Senior, Low-Income, Disabled 2007.07 Northwest Napa Senior, Low-Income, Disabled 2012 Unincorporated area near Yountville Senior, Low-Income, Disabled 2020 City of Calistoga Senior, Low-Income, Disabled

2006.02- Northeast Napa

25

2007.07-Northwest Napa

26

2012- Unincorporated area surrounding Town of Yountville

27

2020-City of Calistoga

28

April 4, 2019 TAC Agenda Item 7.2

Continued From: New Action Requested: ACTION

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TAC Agenda Letter TO: Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) FROM: Kate Miller, Executive Director REPORT BY: Diana Meehan, Senior Program Planner/Administrator

(707) 259-8327 | [email protected] SUBJECT: Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA-3) 2019-20 Countywide Claim Review

RECOMMENDATION That the TAC review and recommend submitting the FY 2019-20 Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA-3) FY 2019-20 Countywide Claim to MTC. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The NVTA Board adopted the TDA-3 three-year program of projects for FY 2018-19 through FY 2020-21 at its June 2018 meeting. The program recommended fully funding, five projects from three (3) jurisdictions. The FY 2018-19 through FY 2020-21 total revenue estimate in June 2018 was $641,758. The three-year projects list (Attachment 1) has been revised to reflect an additional carryover amount of $17,778, slightly higher than initially estimated. Additional available funds have been rolled over and will be part of the next call for projects in March 2020. FISCAL IMPACT Is there a fiscal impact? None, but Board approval of the annual countywide claim will make $185,659 available for programming in the FY 2019-20. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION The TDA-3 program is a grant program funded by approximately 2% of the ¼ cent Statewide Sales Tax. This generates approximately $160,000 per year in revenues for

29


TAC Agenda Letter April 4, 2019 TAC Agenda Item 7.2

Page 2

Napa County jurisdictions. The purpose of the TDA-3 program is to provide grants for local bicycle and pedestrian projects. The TDA-3 call for projects was opened by the NVTA Board at its April 18, 2018 meeting and closed on May 11, 2018. Five (5) project applications were received from three jurisdictions, two applications from the City of St. Helena, one application from the City of Calistoga and two applications from the City of American Canyon. Project prioritization considers the TDA-3 Project Selection Criteria for Napa County (listed in the TDA-3 Guidelines) to ensure funding priority projects. Priority is given to capital projects. An annual review of the program must take place each year to ensure selected projects are in compliance with program guidelines and to update actual funding amounts. The FY 2019-20 fund estimate is $17,778 higher than originally estimated (Attachment 2). Since the amount is not significantly higher than originally estimated, staff is recommending submission of the FY 2019-20 Countywide Claim as originally adopted and the additional $17,778 be carried over for the next three-year cycle call for projects in March 2020. Staff is also requesting TAC review the TDA-3 Program Guidance and make comments no later than May 31, 2019. Staff will bring the updated guidance back to TAC for approval prior to the next call for projects. The TDA-3 program timeline is shown in Table A below. Table B: TDA-3 Timeline FY 2019-20 through FY 2020-21

ITEM DATE TDA-3 Program Review-TAC April 4, 2019 TDA-3 Program Review-ATAC April 22, 2019 Countywide Claim Approval-NVTA Board May 15, 2019 Resolutions of Local Support Due on or before May 31, 2019 Submit Countywide Claim to MTC June 1, 2019 Review/Update Napa County TDA-3 Program Guidance July-Sept. 2019 TDA Fund Estimate Received February 2020 TDA-3 Call for Projects-FY 2021-22 through FY 2023-24 March 2020 Submit FY 2020-21 Countywide Claim to MTC June 2020

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Attachment(s): (1) Project List FY 2018-19 through FY 2020-21-Revised (2) FY 2019-20 TDA Fund Estimate (3) TDA-3 Napa County Program Guidance

30


April 4, 2019

FY 2018-19 FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 Staff Recommendation

Included $25,659 17,778

$659,536 $321,758 $177,778 $160,000 $321,758 $203,437 $177,778

City of American CanyonDonaldson Way Sidewalk Gap Closure Project

$221,099 221,099 Fully fund

Received TDA-3 funds in prior cycle $127,652; Environmental complete; Resolution of local support; Project construction complete Sept. 2018-Change of scope from original application-Class II to Class III

City of American Canyon Eucalyptus Dr. sidewalk Gap Closure 53,000 53,000 Fully fund Environmental complete; Resolution of

local support

City of CalistogaBike/Ped Bridge over Napa River at Pioneer Park

200,000 82,659 117,341 Fully fund Resolution of local support; Environmental expected April 2019;

City of St. Helena Hunt Avenue Sidewalk Gap Closure $75,000 75,000 Fully fund

Project in Pedestrian Plan; Serves senior and low income; Resolution of local support June 2018

City of St. Helena

Pratt and Elmhurst Crosswalk Improvements on Main St/SR29

$50,000 50,000 Fully fundResolution of local support June 2018 Pedestrian Plan program category-crossing improvements

$599,099 $296,099 $185,659 $117,341 $60,437 25,659 17,778 60,437

Total Project RequestBalance

Total Available for Programming

Notes

Amount rolled over from prior year

Fund Estimate

Project DescriptionProject Sponsor 3-Year Amount Requested

NVTA Programming by Year

31


April 4, 2019

32

3

DRAFT-Guide and Application for

Transportation Development Act – Article 3 (TDA-3) Funds for Napa County

Three-Year Program

FY 2021-22 to FY 2023-24 Applications Due to NVTA: May 8, 2019

NVTA 625 Burnell Street Napa, CA 94559

Phone: 707-259-8631 Fax: 707-259-8638 www.nvta.ca.gov

ATTACHMENT 3 TAC Agenda Item 7.2

April 4, 2019

33

http://www.nvta.ca.gov/

MTC Programming and Allocations Section April 2005 TDA Article 3 Model Resolution Page 2

The Napa Valley Transportation Authority (NVTA) is pleased to announce a Call for Projects for Transportation Development Act, Article 3 (TDA-3) funds available to Napa County jurisdictions. The TDA-3 program is a grant program, funded by approximately 2% of the ¼ cent Statewide Sales Tax. This generates approximately $160,000 per year in revenues for Napa jurisdictions. The purpose of the TDA-3 program is to provide grants for local bicycle and pedestrian projects. The TDA-3 program can fund a wide range of project types including:

• Construction and/or engineering of a bicycle or pedestrian capital project • Restriping on-street bicycle facilities • Bicycle safety education programs (no more than 5% of county total) • Development of a comprehensive bicycle and/or pedestrian facilities plan (once

every 5 years) NVTA is pleased that your agency or organization has chosen the TDA-3 program as a potential funding source to complete your eligible project. This packet has been created to help guide you in submitting a successful application for funding. The estimated available funding for Napa County TDA-3 projects for FY 2021-22 through FY 2023-24 will be approximately $XXX,XXX dollars. The TDA Applications are due to NVTA by 5:00 PM on Friday, May 8, 2019. If you have any questions, you may contact Diana Meehan, TDA-3 Program Manager at: [email protected] NVTA 625 Burnell Street Napa, CA 94559 Phone: 707-259-8631 Sincerely, Kate Miller Executive Director Napa Valley Transportation Authority

34

The TDA-3 Program The State Legislature passed the Transportation Development Act (TDA) in 1971. The TDA provides one of the major funding sources for public transportation in California. Transportation Development Act (TDA) funds are generated from a statewide ¼ cent sales tax. Article 3 of TDA is a set-aside of approximately 2% of those monies. Under Article 3 of the TDA, funds are also used by local jurisdictions for bicycle and pedestrian projects. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) administers TDA-3, which is distributed based on population. Each year, an annual fund estimate or “entitlement” is developed for each jurisdiction. Unused “entitlement” is accumulated as credit. A jurisdiction’s claim in any given year cannot exceed the sum of their accumulated credit plus their projected entitlement for the following two years. Funds are obtained by local jurisdictions via a three-step process: (1) apportionment, (2) allocation, and (3) payment (reimbursement). Apportionment in the San Francisco Bay Area follows a Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) formula based upon population. Allocation is the discretionary action by MTC that designates funds for a specific claimant for a specific purpose. NVTA submits TDA allocation requests to MTC on a regular basis, and unused TDA funds allocated to any project may be rolled over from one fiscal year to the next. No matching funds are required, but the project must meet the funding objectives and be developed in cooperation with the community. The basic objectives of the grant source are to fund projects that increase the safety, security, and efficiency of bicycle and pedestrian travel, and to provide for a coordinated system. The MTC requires supporting resolutions from the sponsoring Council. TDA 3 projects are required to meet Caltrans safety design criteria and CEQA requirements; be completed within three years; be maintained; be consistent with adopted bicycle or pedestrian plans; and be authorized by a governing council or board. This “Call for Projects” will be issued on April 15, 2019 upon approval by the NVTA Board of Directors. In addition to the application, project sponsors must deliver documentation of environmental clearance and maps/documents showing project locations and design parameters. Projects must be approved by MTC. As part of the grant process, MTC also requires the City Council to adopt a resolution making certain findings as follows:

(i) the City is eligible to request grant funding under State law, (ii) there is no pending or threatened litigation that adversely affects the project (iii) the grant application is accurate, (iv) The jurisdiction has committed adequate staffing resources to complete the

projects (v) The jurisdiction will comply with CEQA,

35

(vi) the completed projects will be maintained by the jurisdiction for the benefit of the public, and

(vii) the adopted resolution will be sent to NVTA no later than one month following project selection

Basic Eligibility for TDA-3 Funding TDA Article 3 funds may be used for the following activities relating to pedestrian and bicycle facilities (including sidewalk wheelchair ramps):

• Engineering expenses leading to construction. • Right-of-way acquisition. • Construction and reconstruction. • Retrofitting existing bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including installation of

signage, to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). • Route improvements such as signal controls for cyclists, bicycle loop detectors,

rubberized rail crossings and bicycle-friendly drainage grates. • Purchase and installation of bicycle facilities such as

o secure bicycle parking, o benches, drinking fountains, changing rooms, rest rooms and showers

which are adjacent to bicycle trails, employment centers, park-and-ride lots, and/or transit terminals and are accessible to the general public.

• Maintenance of Class I bikeways (unlimited) • Maintenance of on-street bikeways. Countywide, the total funds allocated to on-

street bikeway maintenance cannot exceed 20% of the total countywide TDA estimate

• Bicycle Safety Education Programs (not more 5% of the countywide TDA Article 3 funds)

• Comprehensive Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities Plans (not more than once per jurisdiction every 5 years)

• Projects identified in a recent (within 5 years) comprehensive local bicycle/pedestrian or active transportation plan

• Annual TDA Article 3 Audits (Only in fiscal years funds are disbursed. Can be part of annual audit program, but must comply with additional TDA-3 requirements. Follow audit instructions here:

All claimants that have received an allocation of TDA funds are required to submit an annual certified fiscal and compliance audit to MTC and to the Secretary of Business and Transportation Agency within 180 days after the close of the fiscal year, in accordance with PUC Section 99245. Article 3 applicants need not file a fiscal audit if TDA funds were not expended (that is, costs incurred) during a given fiscal year. However, the applicant should submit a statement for MTC’s records certifying that no TDA funds were expended during the fiscal year. Failure to submit the required audit for any TDA article will preclude MTC from making a new Article 3 allocation. For example, a delinquent Article 4.5 fiscal audit will delay any other TDA allocation to the city/county with an outstanding audit. Until the audit requirement is met, no new Article 3 allocations

36

will be made. TDA Article 3 funds may be used to pay for the fiscal audit required for this funding.

Submit completed audits to:

TDA Audits 375 Beale Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94105 or via email to: [email protected] Electronic submissions preferred. TDA Article 3 funds may not be used to fully fund the salary of any one person working on these programs. Bicycle Advisory Committee Requirement Cities and counties may not receive TDA Article 3 funds for bicycle projects unless the jurisdiction has established a Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC) and the project is included in an adopted plan as stipulated in the MTC TDA Article 3 Rules and Procedures. This requirement does not apply to pedestrian projects. For Napa County, the NVTA Active Transportation Advisory Committee fulfills this requirement. However, for those jurisdictions with additional local Bicycle Advisory Committees, the approval of that committee is also required. Recent Project Examples in Napa County

Project Name Sponsor TDA-3 Funds

Total Project $

Donaldson Sidewalk Gap Closure Project

City of American Canyon

$348,751 $500,000

Hunt Ave. Sidewalk Gap Closure Project

City of St. Helena

$75,000 $225,000

Project Selection Process The project selection process is as follows. NVTA staff will run the prospective projects through an initial qualification process based on project eligibility, and present their findings to the NVTA Active Transportation Advisory Committee (ATAC) which will serve as the initial selection and prioritization committee. The ATAC recommendations will be forwarded to the NVTA Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for their review and recommendation. The recommendation from both Committees will be forwarded to the NVTA Board for their decision.

37


Projects will be evaluated on a cost effective and project readiness basis.

TDA-3 Project Selection Criteria for Napa County Project selection will be prioritized for capital projects identified in the adopted Countywide Bicycle Plan/Pedestrian Plan(s) or Active Transportation Plan. For Bicycle Projects

• The project is listed in the jurisdiction’s adopted Bicycle Plan • The project provides connectivity (gap closure) or improves safety • Environmental Clearance is secured

For Pedestrian Projects

• The project is listed in the jurisdiction’s Capital Improvement Plan or Pedestrian Plan

• The project provides connectivity (gap closure) • Environmental Clearance is secured

Additional credit will be given to projects that

• Provide gap closures on routes to schools and/or transit • provide additional local matching funds (not required)

Application Instructions: TDA-3 project applications for FY 2021-22 through FY 2023-24 must be submitted to NVTA no later than 5:00 pm on Friday May 8, 2019. Applications may be emailed to Diana Meehan at [email protected] Applications must include:

• MTC project application (attached) • Resolution of local support following MTC requirements (attached)

What Happens After Submission of the TDA-3 application? After applications are submitted to NVTA the evaluation process will begin. NVTA plans on the following action timeline:

38


ITEM DATE

Board Approval – Call For Projects April 15, 2019

Issue Call For Projects April 15, 2019

TDA-3 Applications - due to NVTA by 5:00 PM May 8, 2019

Draft Program Review by ATAC May 18, 2019

Draft Program Review by TAC June 4, 2019

Board Approval – Program of Projects June 17, 2019 Local Resolutions of Support for current program year Due to NVTA July 1

Contact Information Napa County TDA-3 Program Manager: Diana Meehan 625 Burnell Street Napa, CA 94559 Phone: (707) 259-8327 [email protected] NVTA Main Office 625 Burnell Street Napa, CA 94559 Phone: (707) 259-8631 Fax: (707) 259-8638 www.nvta.ca.gov Metropolitan Transportation Commission TDA & RM2 Operating Program Manager Cheryl Chi 510-817-5939 [email protected]

39


http://www.nvta.ca.gov/



Continued From: New Action Requested: INFORMATION

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TAC Agenda Letter TO: Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) FROM: Kate Miller, Executive Director REPORT BY: Alberto Esqueda, Senior Program Planner/ Administrator

(707) 259-5976 | [email protected] SUBJECT: Plan Bay Area 2050: Request for Regionally-Significant Projects

RECOMMENDATION That the TAC review Regionally-Significant Project Guidance and provide project submittals to NVTA no later than Friday, April 26th. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) has issued an open “Call for Projects” for Regionally-Significant Projects for Plan Bay Area 2050, the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). This is the 25-year Regional Strategic Transportation Plan that is revised every four (4) years. This RTP will continue to promote policies created by SB 375 that mandate a companion “Sustainable Communities Strategy”, which must demonstrate how the RTP will achieve reductions in Greenhouse Gas emissions due to cars and light trucks.

MTC is requesting projects from two investment categories, 1) group listings of exempt projects (i.e., programmatic categories) and 2) non-exempt, capacity-increasing projects (i.e., regionally-significant projects). At this time only regionally significant projects are being requested. Submissions are due to NVTA by April 26, 2019.

Generally, regionally-significant projects are those that add capacity to the region’s network of freeways, expressways, and highways or to the region’s network of fixed guideway transit facilities (e.g., rail, ferry, BRT).

40



Page 2

Final project submittals must be approved by the NVTA Board at the June 19 meeting and submitted to MTC no later than June 30, 2019. TAC will evaluate RTP guidelines in context of Plan Bay Area 2050 and consider projects previously submitted under NVTA’s Countywide Transportation Plan Vision 2040: Moving Napa Forward and refine projects as necessary.

Initial project submittals must be received by NVTA by Friday, April 26th using the RTP project application (Attachment 2). NVTA staff will complete a first review of initial project submittals and a comprehensive list will be brought back to TAC at the May meeting.

Project costs in the application should be captured in year-of-expenditure (YOE). If project cost estimates are in current dollars, a 3% annual inflation rate should be applied to escalate project costs to YOE.

The discussion on RTP project selection will be continued at the May and June TAC meetings and a final project submittal list will be approved by the NVTA Board at the June 19, 2019 Board meeting to meet MTC’s deadline.

FISCAL IMPACT Is there a fiscal impact? None. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION As the Bay Area’s Metropolitan Planning Organization, MTC is required by federal and state regulations to prepare a fiscally-constrained, Regional Transportation Plan (“Plan Bay Area 2050” or “RTP”). The RTP is prepared in accordance with the California Transportation Commission’s RTP guidelines. Among many things, the RTP identifies needs, sets priorities, and includes a fiscally constrained list of short-, medium-, and long-range projects and programs. As the County Transportation Agency (CTA) for Napa County, NVTA is required to coordinate the submittal of regionally-significant transportation projects to MTC. The RTP 25-year vision is supported by a similar 25-year investment plan comprised of project and programs submitted by jurisdictions based on need and contributed improvements to the community. As required by federal and state planning regulations, Plan Bay Area 2050 will be a fiscally constrained plan. This means the proposed transportation project costs cannot exceed the reasonably expected transportation revenues forecasted over the planning horizon. Plan Bay Area’s forecast of reasonably expected transportation revenues will not be finalized until Fall 2019; however, county targets have been developed for the purpose of this Request for Regionally-Significant Projects. The Napa County target for regionally significant projects is $615 million. Jurisdiction projects and programs will be collected via a Call for Projects (CFP) through NVTA.

41


Page 3

While there are no single projects in Napa County over $250 million, NVTA will submit projects that are regionally significant in the following criteria:

• Expands or extends the principal arterial system (length must be greater than ¼ mile)

• Expands or extends a roadway to become part of the principal arterial system (length must be greater than ¼ mile)

• Reduces the number of lanes (e.g., road diet) of the principal arterial system (length must be greater than ¼ mile)

• Adds new or expands access to the principal arterial system (e.g., new interchanges or interchange modifications that add capacity)

• Extends or expands the fixed guideway transit infrastructure • Adds new or expands transit stations or terminals, including parking facilities • Expands transit fleets or service levels (e.g., increased frequency, hours of

operation) • Alters the cost for users of the transportation system (e.g., cordon pricing, tolling,

transit fares).

Programmatic categories or group projects will be requested in fall of 2019, at which time NVTA will conduct another Call for Projects.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS Attachment(s): (1) Request for Regionally-Significant Projects Guidance (2) NVTA’s RTP 2050 Application Form (includes 2015 Countywide Transportation Plan Project List)

42

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 1

B A Y A R E A M E T R O C E N T E R 3 7 5 B E A L E S T R E E T , S A N F R A N C I S C O , C A 9 4 1 0 54 1 5 7 7 8 6 7 0 0 W W W . P L A N B A Y A R E A . O R G

G U I D A N C E

Request for Regionally-Significant Projects The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) requests the assistance of each of the nine Bay Area county transportation agencies (CTAs) and multi-county project sponsors (e.g., Caltrans, BART, Caltrain) to submit locally-identified, regionally-significant project proposals for consideration into Plan Bay Area 2050, the Bay Area’s Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS).

Overview CTAs and multi-county project sponsors were fundamental to the development of previous iterations of Plan Bay Area by reflecting local visions and priorities for consideration into the RTP/SCS, and they will be fundamental to the development of Plan Bay Area 2050. MTC expects CTAs and multi-county project spon-sors to coordinate and lead the Request for Regionally-Significant Projects for their respective county or system. This includes the review and update of project assumptions and the identification of new project proposals.

Context As the Bay Area’s MPO, MTC is required by federal and state regulations to prepare a fiscally-constrained, long-range transportation plan (”Plan” or “Plan Bay Area 2050”). The Plan is prepared in accordance with the California Transportation Commission’s RTP guidelines. Among many things, the Plan identifies needs, sets priorities, and includes a fiscally constrained list of short-, medium-, and long-range projects and pro-grams.

MTC characterizes Plan projects into two investment categories, 1) group listings of exempt projects (i.e., programmatic categories) and 2) non-exempt, capacity-increasing projects (i.e., regionally-significant pro-jects). Generally, regionally-significant projects are those that add capacity to the region’s network of free-ways, expressways, and highways or to the region’s network of fixed guideway transit facilities (e.g., rail, ferry, BRT).

In order to meet federal and state air-quality planning requirements, MTC gathers locally-identified, region-ally-significant project proposals for consideration into the adopted Plan. Regionally-significant projects represent a small share of the Bay Area’s regional investment strategy; however, their submittal is vital for the development of the Plan and its technical analyses.

The submitted projects are subject to several technical analyses. MTC will assess the costliest projects to estimate their societal benefits to inform project prioritization and the development of Plan Bay Area 2050’s investment strategy. Prior to the Plan’s adoption, MTC will collectively assess the prioritized projects to esti-mate their potential environmental impacts.

Plan Bay Area 2050 Development Process This Request for Regionally-Significant Projects is the third step of a multi-step effort to identify region-ally-significant project proposals for consideration into Plan Bay Area 2050, see Figure 1.


April 4, 2019

43

G U I D A N C E

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9

2 2

Figure 1. Plan Bay Area 2050 Development Process

Steps 1 and 2 occurred in Summer 2018. During Step 1, CTAs and multi-county project sponsors were asked to update project assumptions (e.g., scope, cost, schedule) of the costliest regionally-significant projects in-cluded in Plan Bay Area 2040 (2017). In Step 2, the region was challenged to submit project proposals that could ‘transform’ the region through an open Request for Transformative Projects. The open request focused on re-gionally-significant projects that were estimated to cost more than $1 bil-lion and were not submitted for consideration in Plan Bay Area 2040.

This Request for Regionally-Significant Projects is Step 3 in the process.

Step 4 is anticipated to begin in Fall of 2019 to inform the development of Plan Bay Area 2050’s fiscally constrained investment strategy. Steps 1-3 will inform Step 4, as will the results from Plan Bay Area 2050’s project perfor-mance assessment, needs assessments, and forecast of reasonably ex-pected transportation revenues. This final step will ask each CTA and multi-county project sponsor to identify a fiscally constrained list of both region-ally-significant projects and programmatic category investments.

Relation to Countywide Transportation Plans The region’s countywide transportation plans represent robust local transportation planning efforts in the Bay Area. The plans, while voluntary, establish a county’s long-range transportation vision, goals and priori-ties. Countywide transportation plans have an inter-dependent relationship with the RTP/SCS and provide a primary basis for projects considered into the adopted Plan. To facilitate this inter-dependent relationship, MTC prepares guidelines for counties who choose to prepare a countywide transportation plan, see Figure 2, below. Among many things, MTC’s guidelines encourage proactive coordination and outreach while de-veloping the countywide transportation plans.

Step 1 (Summer 2018)• Review and update Plan Bay

Area 2040's regionally-significant project assumptions

Step 2 (Summer 2018)• Request for Transformative

Project proposals

Step 3 (Spring 2019)• Request for Regionally-

Significant Project proposals

Step 4 (Fall 2019)• Develop fiscally constrained

project list

CTPs

Guidelines RTP/ SCS

Regional Planning County “Local” Planning

1. PDA Investment & Growth Strategies 2. Expenditure Plans 3. Congestion Management Programs 4. Active Transportation Plans 5. Modal Studies (Freight, Transit, Freeway / Corridor) 6. Community Based Plans *not an exhaustive list of local planning efforts

Figure 2. Regional and County Planning Inter-dependency

Simultaneously, MTC will prepare Needs Assess-ments for Plan Bay Area 2050 to estimate the reve-nues and needs to operate and maintain the region’s existing network of streets, bridges, and highways, and the region’s transit sys-tems. The needs estimates will be complete in Fall 2019. For assessments related to transportation, staff will co-ordinate with county trans-portation agencies (CTAs), transit agencies, and local jurisdictions as needed.

1

2

3

4

5

6

G U I D A N C E

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 33

Guidance

Definitions • Exempt project means a transportation project exempt from regional transportation-air quality con-

formity requirements (CFR 40 §93.126-128) and/or projects with categorical exclusions or documentedcategorical exclusions from NEPA approvals by the FHWA or FTA (CFR 23 §771.117-8).

• Principal Arterial System includes Interstates, Other Freeway or Expressways, and Other Principal Arte-rials. See Caltrans’ web map1 for a map of the regional network.

• Fixed Guideway includes any public transportation facility which utilizes and occupies a designatedright-of-way or rails including rapid rail, light rail, commuter rail, bus rapid transit, busways, automatedguideway transit, people movers, and ferries.

Regionally-significant project means a transportation project (other than an exempt project) that isadding capacity to a facility which serves regional transportation needs including at a minimum theprincipal arterial system and all fixed guideway transit facilities.

In the context of Plan Bay Area 2050, a project proposal will be deemed regionally-significant if it meetsany of the following:

o Expands or extends the principal arterial system (length must be greater than ¼ mile)o Expands or extends a roadway to become part of the principal arterial system (length must

be greater than ¼ mile)o Reduces the number of lanes (e.g., road diet) of the principal arterial system (length must be

greater than ¼ mile)o Adds new or expands access to the principal arterial system (e.g., new interchanges or inter-

change modifications that add capacity)o Extends or expands the fixed guideway transit infrastructureo Adds new or expands transit stations or terminals, including parking facilitieso Expands transit fleets or service levels (e.g., increased frequency, hours of operation)o Alters the cost for users of the transportation system (e.g., cordon pricing, tolling, transit

fares).o Total estimated cost (capital + operating and maintenance) is greater than $250 million

• Programmatic investment means a collection of like transportation projects (other than regionally-significant projects) identified by a single listing in the Plan, often grouped by purpose and geography(e.g. pavement preservation, bicycle/pedestrian facilities, intersection improvements). Projects that in-crease capacity of the transportation system but fail to meet the regionally-significant criteria listedabove will be considered programmatic investments (e.g., minor highway improvements, widening oflocal streets). See Attachment B for an inventory of programmatic category project types.

1 https://caltrans.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=026e830c914c495797c969a3e5668538

45

G U I D A N C E

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 44

1. Project Lists

This Request for Regionally-Significant Projects builds upon the Bay Area’s adopted Plan and Transpor-tation Improvement Program, and Horizon’s Request for Transformative Projects (Steps 1 and 2, of the Plan Bay Area 2050 Development Process). As such, MTC staff will provide each CTA and multi-county project sponsor a list of known regionally-significant projects in their respective county or on their respective sys-tem.

• CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should review and update the assumptions of known re-gionally-significant projects and identify new regionally-significant project proposals.

• CTAs and multi-county project sponsors are encouraged to submit regionally-significant projectsderived from an adopted plan, corridor study, or project study report (e.g., RTP/SCS, countywidetransportation plan, community-based transportation plans, regional bicycle plan, climate actionplans) and which meet one or more of the general criteria listed below:

o Will open for operation after 2021 and by year 2050;o Will seek federal, state, or regional funding;o Will require federal or state action (e.g., project-level conformity, NEPA, CEQA);o Supports Horizon’s Guiding Principles (see Attachment C); or,o Supports the region’s sustainable communities strategy (SCS).

• CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should develop and submit project cost estimates using areasonable basis. Cost estimates should include both capital and operating and maintenance(O&M) costs through 2050. Cost estimates should be submitted in year-of-expenditure (YOE) dol-lars. If project cost estimates are in current dollars, a 3% annual inflation rate should be used to es-calate project costs to YOE.

2. County TargetsAs required by federal and state planning regulations, Plan Bay Area 2050 will be a fiscally constrained plan. This means the proposed transportation project costs cannot exceed the reasonably expected transporta-tion revenues forecasted over the planning horizon. Plan Bay Area’s forecast of reasonably expected trans-portation revenues will not be finalized until Fall 2019; however, county targets have been developed for the purpose of this Request for Regionally-Significant Projects. This means that CTAs and multi-county sponsors will need to work with MTC following the release of the revenue forecast to fiscally constrain and remove projects from their list of regionally-significant project proposals.

• CTAs should submit regionally-significant projects with a collective total cost (capital + O&M) equalto or less than the county target of transportation revenues in Table 1.

o CTAs should take the lead on submitting all localized regionally-significant projects (e.g.,freeway interchanges, corridor improvements, transit stations, bus rapid transit corridors)regardless of whether the project has a multi-county sponsor (e.g., Caltrans, BART, Caltrain).

o CTAs should account for the costs of the costliest regionally-significant projects included inPBA 2040 that are subject to Horizon/PBA 2050’s project performance assessment. The listof projects is included in Attachment D, Part A.

46

G U I D A N C E

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 55

o CTAs do not need to account for the costs of regionally-significant projects identified duringHorizon’s Request for Transformative Projects within their county target. The list of projectsin included in Attachment D, Part B.

• Multi-county project sponsors (e.g., Caltrans, ACE (SJRRC), AC Transit, BART, Caltrain (PCJPB), Capi-tol Corridor (CCJPA), GGBHTD, SMART, WETA), should take the lead on coordinating the submittalof localized projects (e.g., freeway interchanges, corridor improvements, transit stations, bus rapidtransit corridors) with the respective CTA and should coordinate the submittal of multi-county orsystems projects with MTC.

Table 1. County Targets (in millions of Year-of-Expenditure $) Column A Column B Column C Column D Column E Column F

County PBA 2040 Regionally-Signifi-cant Project Costs

PBA 2040 Regionally-Signifi-

cant Cost Share

D.O.F. 2018 Population

Share

PBA 2050 Regionally-Signifi-

cant Cost Share

PBA 2050 Regionally-Signifi-cant Project Cost

Targets Alameda $5,928 16% 21% 18% $10,524 Contra Costa $2,179 6% 15% 10% $5,844 Marin $277 1% 3% 2% $1,174 Napa $128 < 1% 2% 1% $615 San Francisco $10,382 27% 11% 19% $11,015 San Mateo $2,323 6% 10% 8% $4,578 Santa Clara $14,712 39% 25% 32% $18,191 Solano $1,076 3% 6% 4% $2,419 Sonoma $1,053 3% 7% 5% $2,641 Total $38,058 100% 100% 100% $57,000 notes:

1. The PBA 2050 county target for regionally-significant projects (non-exempt/capacity-increasing) of $57 billion represents a 50%

increase over the PBA 2040 county project costs of $38 billion. The 50% increase represents an estimated “top of range” and al-

lows for a longer-plan period (30 vs 24 years), a higher inflation rate (3% vs. 2.2%), and additional fund sources that were not in-

cluded in PBA 2040. It is not expected that PBA 2050 will have 50% more revenue than PBA 2040.

2. To develop the county targets, staff calculated a hybrid from the cost shares of county-sponsored regionally-significant projects in

PBA 2040 (Column C), and county population shares (column D) relative to the rest of the region. The hybrid shares weighted the

cost share and population share equally. The resulting target shares are shown in Column E.

3. Coordination, Outreach, & Public CommentFederal and state planning regulations require that the Plan be developed through an inclusive process. Project development and the progression from an idea to implementation or construction includes numer-ous robust coordination, outreach, and public comment opportunities. One such opportunity is the devel-opment of countywide transportation plans. MTC’s countywide transportation plan guidelines encourage proactive coordination and public engagement efforts to provide opportunities for stakeholders and the public to weigh in on local projects and priorities.

• CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should work closely with local jurisdictions and transitagencies within their respective county, as well as with MTC, Caltrans, other stakeholders, and other

47

G U I D A N C E

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 66

CTAs where appropriate, to review and update regionally-significant project assumptions and iden-tify new project proposals. CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should communicate the signif-icance of a project’s inclusion into the Plan.

• CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should hold at least one public meeting to provide an op-portunity for public comment on the list of regionally-significant projects that will be submitted forconsideration into Plan Bay Area 2050. CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should be pro-ac-tive in notifying stakeholders and the public – including traditionally underrepresented and/or dis-advantaged communities – on the opportunity(s) for comment. The meeting(s) should:

o Inform stakeholders and the public about the opportunity(s) for public comment on pro-jects and when decisions are to be made;

o Be held at times that are conducive to public participation to solicit public comment on theprojects;

o Be promoted to the public and noticed on the CTA’s agency’s website. CTA staff are encour-aged to provide MTC with a link so the information can also be available on the websitePlanBayArea.org;

o Include information on how to request language translation for individuals with limitedEnglish proficiency. If CTA agency protocol has not been established, please refer to MTC’sPlan for Assisting Limited English Proficient Populations;

o Provide accommodations for people with disabilities; and,o Be held in central locations that are accessible for people with disabilities and by public

transit.

• CTAs and multi-county project sponsors may leverage current or past coordination and public en-gagement efforts that involved the identification and/or prioritization of regionally-significant pro-jects. However, CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should still hold at least one public meet-ing to provide an opportunity for public comment on the list of regionally-significant projects thatwill be submitted to MTC for consideration into Plan Bay Area 2050.

• CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should conduct an outreach effort(s) in a manner con-sistent with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 as described in MTC’s Public Participation Plan2

(MTC Resolution No. 4174, revised).

• CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should document their outreach effort(s). Documentationshould describe how stakeholders and the public – including traditionally underrepresented and/ordisadvantaged communities – were involved in the process for identifying regionally-significantprojects for consideration into Plan Bay Area 2050. Documentation should include how the publicmeeting(s) was held in a manner consistent with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

4. Submittal Process• CTAs and multi-county project sponsors should submit to MTC:

2 https://www.planbayarea.org/sites/default/files/pdfs_referenced/2018_ppp_appendix_a_final_june2018.pdf

48

G U I D A N C E

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 77

o Completed list of regionally-significant project and their assumptions for consideration intoPlan Bay Area 2050 prior to MTC’s June 30, 2019, deadline.

o Board resolution authorizing the submittal of the list of regionally-significant projects forconsideration into Plan Bay Area 2050 by July 31, 2019.

o Documentation that a public meeting was held allowing the public to comment on the list ofregionally-significant projects and how the public meeting was conducted in compliancewith Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 by July 31, 2019.

o Documentation of how stakeholders and the public – including traditionally underrepre-sented and/or disadvantaged communities – were involved in the process by July 31, 2019.

Attachments

• Attachment A- Follow a Transportation Project From Idea to Implementation• Attachment B- Draft Programmatic Categories• Attachment C- Horizon’s Guiding Principles• Attachment D- Draft Project Performance Projects

49

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 8

Attachment A – Follow a Transportation Project From Idea to Implementation3

Idea An idea for a project starts when a transportation need is identified, and a new idea is put forward. The idea can sur-face in any number of ways — from you, a private busi-ness, a community group or a government agency.

Local Review The project idea must be adopted by a formal sponsor — usually a public agency — that may refine the initial idea and develop details for the project. To move forward, the project must be approved by local authorities such as a city council, county board of supervi-sors or transit agency.

To be eligible for certain regional, state and federal funds, projects must be cleared through the county congestion management agency (CMA) and become part of the Regional Transportation Plan.

The Regional Transportation Plan (RTP)/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) Every four years MTC updates the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), looking forward two to three decades. The plan identifies pol-icies, programs and transportation investments to support the long-term vision for the Bay Area.

The RTP also must identify anticipated funding sources. The RTP can include only those projects and programs that can be funded with revenues reasonably expected to be available during the plan’s timeframe. Projects identified in the RTP are generally drawn from the planning efforts of MTC, Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), county congestion management agencies, transit agencies and local governments.

State legislation now requires that regional transportation plans in-corporate a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) — provisions for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks by integrating transportation, housing and land use planning.

Once long-term goals, policies and funding initiatives have been set in the RTP, MTC develops program criteria and funds specific projects.

Environmental Review and Project Development Activities The project sponsor conducts an environmental review, as required by either the California Environ-mental Quality Act (CEQA) or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Final approval of the pro-ject design and right-of-way is re-quired by the sponsoring agency and appropriate federal agency (Federal Highway Administration or Federal Transit Administration) if federal funds and/or actions are involved. Funding is fully committed by grant approval once the project meets all requirements and moves forward to phases such as prelimi-nary engineering, final design, right-of-way acquisition, or con-struction.

Project Selection Process Funding Levels Established for RTP Pro-grams/Initiatives: Guided by the RTP and short-term revenue estimates, MTC decides how much funding to apply to programs over a two-to-four-year period at a time.

Project Selection Criteria Developed: For competitive programs under its control, MTC is guided by the RTP and develops and adopts minimum project requirements and criteria to evaluate and prioritize projects.

Project Selection: Depending on the pro-gram, projects may be selected using MTC’s criteria or by the county congestion man-agement agency, the California Transporta-tion Commission or a transit agency board. Some funding programs are non-competi-tive, meaning projects are funded accord-ing to a pre-determined formula or voter-enacted initiative.

The Transportation Improve-ment Program (TIP) The production of the Transportation Improvement Program or TIP is the culmination of MTC’s transportation planning and project selection process. The TIP identifies specific near-term projects over a four-year period to move the region toward its transporta-tion vision.

The TIP lists all surface transportation projects for which federal funds or ac-tions by federal agencies are antici-pated, along with some of the larger locally and state-funded projects. A project cannot receive federal funds or receive other critical federal project ap-provals unless it is in the TIP. MTC must update the TIP at least once every four years. It is revised several times a year to add, delete or modify projects.

How You Can Make a Difference Get involved in your community!

§ Follow the work of your city council, county board of supervisors or local transit agency.

§ Take notice of plans or improvement programs developed by your city, county or transit agency.

§ Comment on projects proposed by your county CMA or on trans-portation improvements submitted to MTC for regional, state or federal funding.

The Regional Transportation Plan is the earliest and best opportunity within the MTC process to comment on and influence projects. A project cannot move forward or receive any federal funds unless it is in-cluded in the RTP. MTC support of large projects occurs in the long-range plan and not as part of the TIP.

§ Attend public meetings or open houses to learn about plans and offer your comments

§ Participate in online surveys or forums

Get involved in planning for the whole Bay Area at MTC! Comment on a project’s impacts § Comment on the environ-

mental impacts of the project before the environmental document and project receive final approval by the board of the sponsoring agency, or in advance of federal approval, if required.

§ Comment at MTC committee level and Commission-level meetings, special public hearings and workshops.

§ Follow the work of MTC’s Policy Advi-sory Council which advises the Com-mission (www.mtc.ca.gov/whats-happening).

§ Check MTC’s website for commit-tee agendas and to keep current on activities (www.mtc.ca.gov).

§ Get your name added to MTC’s database to receive e-mail up-dates ([email protected]).

3 Source: A Guide to the San Francisco Bay Area’s Transportation Improvement Program, or TIP — 2019 TIP Update — September 2018

Construction/ Implementation

MTC’s Project Selection Process MTC’s Long-Term Regional

Transportation Plan New Project Ideas and

Local Review

50

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 9

Attachment B – Draft Programmatic Categories

The proposed programmatic categories and example project types are listed below:

Category Systems Project Types Minor Highway Improvements

• State Highway • minor highway extension or new lane (less than ¼ mile); • interchange modification (no additional capacity)

Minor Roadway Improvements

• Local Road • minor local road extension or new lane (less than ¼ mile)

Minor Transit Improvements

• Public Transit • minor/routine expansions to fleet and service; • purchase of ferry vessels (that can be accommodated by existing facilities or new CE facilities);• construction of small passenger shelters and information kiosks; • small-scale/CE bus terminals and transfer points; • public transit-human services projects and programs (including many Lifeline Transportation Program projects);• ADA compliance;• noise mitigation;• landscaping; • associated transit improvements (including bike/pedestrian access improvements);• alternative fuel vehicles and facilities

Minor Freight Improvements

• Freight • construction of new, or improvements to existing, rest areas and truck weigh stations;• improvements to existing freight terminals (not expansion)

New Bicycle & Pedestrian Facilities

• Local Road• State Highway

• new and extended bike and pedestrian facilities

Preservation/ Rehabilitation

• Local Road• State Highway• Public Transit• Tollway• Freight

• pavement resurfacing and/or rehabilitation;• bike/pedestrian facilities rehabilitation;• non-pavement rehabilitation;• preventive maintenance;• emergency repair;• bridge rehabilitation, replacement or retrofit with no new capacity;• transit vehicle rehabilitation or replacement; • reconstruction or renovation of transit buildings and structures; • rehabilitation or reconstruction of track structures, track, and trackbed in existing rights-of-way;• construction of new bus or rail storage/maintenance facilities (in industrial locations with adequate transportation capacity); • modernization or minor expansions of transit structures and facilities outside existing right-of-way, such as bridges, stations, or rail

yards;• purchase of office and shop and operating equipment for existing facilities;• purchase of operating equipment for vehicles, such as farebox, lifts, radios;• purchase of support vehicles;• toll bridge rehabilitation, replacement, or retrofit with no new capacity; • freight track and terminal rehabilitation

Routine Operations & Maintenance

• Local Road• State Highway• Public Transit• Tollway

• routine patching and pothole repair;• litter control, sweeping and cleaning; • signal operations; • communications; • lighting; • transit operations and fare collection; • transit preventive maintenance; • toll operations & fare collection

Management Systems

• Local Road• State Highway• Public Transit• Tollway

• incident management;• signal coordination; • ITS; • TOS/CMS;

51

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 1 01 0

• ramp metering; • transit management systems; • automatic passenger counters;• CAD-AVL;• fare media; • Transit Sustainability Project;• construction or renovation of power, signal, and communications systems; • toll management systems; • toll media

Safety & Security • Local Road • State Highway• Public Transit• Freight

• railroad/highway crossings and warning devices;• hazardous location or feature;• shoulder improvements; sight distance; • Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation;• Safe Routes to Schools projects and programs;• traffic control devices other than signalization;• guardrails, median barriers, crash cushions; pavement marking;• fencing; • skid treatments; • lighting improvements; • widening narrow pavements with no added capacity;• changes in vertical and horizontal alignment; • transit safety and communications and surveillance systems; • rail sight distance and realignments for safety; • safety roadside rest areas; • truck climbing lanes outside urban area; • emergency truck pullovers

Travel Demand Management

• Local Road• State Highway• Other

• car and bike share;• alternative fuel vehicles and facilities;• parking programs;• carpool/vanpool, ridesharing activities; • information, marketing and outreach; • traveler information

Intersection Improvements

• Local Road • intersection channelization;• intersection signalization at individual intersections

Multimodal Streetscape Improvements

• Local Road • minor bicycle and/or pedestrian facility gap closure;• ADA compliance;• landscaping; • lighting; • streetscape improvements; • minor road diet (less than ¼ mile)

Land Use • Other • land conservation projects;• TOD housing projects

Planning • Other • planning and research that does not lead directly to constructionEmission Reduction Technologies

• Other

52

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 1 1

Attachment C - Horizon’s Guiding Principles

MTC received over 10,000 unique comments from residents across the Bay Area in 2018 when we asked,

“What are the most pressing issues we should consider as we plan for life in 2050?” This feedback helped

MTC refine the five Guiding Principles, below, that underlie the Horizon initiative:

• Affordable: All Bay Area residents and workers have sufficient housing options they can afford—

households are economically secure.

• Connected: An expanded, well-functioning transportation system connects the Bay Area—fast, fre-

quent and efficient intercity trips are complemented by a suite of local transportation options, connect-

ing communities and creating a cohesive region.

• Diverse: Bay Area residents support an inclusive region where people from all backgrounds, abilities

and ages can remain in place—with access to the region’s assets and resources.

• Healthy: The region’s natural resources, open space, clean water and clean air are conserved—the re-

gion actively reduces its environmental footprint and protects residents from environmental impacts.

• Vibrant: The Bay Area is an innovation leader, creating quality job opportunities for all and ample fiscal

resources for communities.

53

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 1 2

Attachment D – Project Performance Projects

Part A. Uncommitted Major Projects from Plan Bay Area 2040 (>$250 million)

Type # Project Name

Local & Express Bus 1 AC Transit Local Service Frequency Increase

2 Sonoma Countywide Service Frequency Increase

3 Muni Forward + Service Frequency Increase

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) 4 San Pablo BRT

5 Geary BRT (Phase 2)

6 El Camino Real BRT

BART 7 BART Core Capacity

8 BART DMU to Brentwood

9 BART to Silicon Valley (Phase 2)

Commuter Rail 10 Caltrain Downtown Extension

11 Caltrain Full Electrification and Blended System1

12 SMART to Cloverdale

Light Rail (LRT) 13 Downtown San Jose LRT Subway

14 San Jose Airport People Mover

15 Vasona LRT (Phase 2)

16 Eastridge LRT

Ferry 17 WETA Service Frequency Increase

18 WETA Ferry Network Expansion (Berkeley, Alameda Point, Redwood City, Mission Bay)

Pricing 19 Regional Express Lanes (MTC + VTA + ACTC + US-101)

20 SR-152 Realignment and Tolling

21 Downtown San Francisco Congestion Pricing

22 Treasure Island Congestion Pricing

Freeways & Interchanges 23 I-680/SR-4 Interchange + Widening (Phases 3-5)

24 SR-4 Operational Improvements

25 SR-4 Widening (Brentwood to Discovery Bay)

26 SR-239 Widening

27 I-80/I-680/SR-12 Interchange + Widening (Phases 2B-7)

Other 28 Bay Bridge West Span Bike Path

29 Bay Area Forward (Phase 1)

30 Better Market Street 1 High-Speed Rail service will be evaluated as part of the blended system only in one of the three Futures, and substituted with increased Caltrain service in the other two Futures

54

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 1 31 3

Part B-1. Transformative Projects from Public Agencies (>$1 billion)

Type # Project Name Local, Express Bus & BRT 31 AC Transit Transbay Service Frequency Increase

32 AC Transit Rapid Network

33 Alameda County BRT Network + Connected Vehicle Corridors 2 *

BART 34 BART on I-680 *

35 BART to Cupertino *

36 BART to Gilroy

37 BART Gap Closure (Millbrae to Silicon Valley) *

Commuter Rail 38 Caltrain Full Electrification and Enhanced Blended System1

39 Caltrain Grade Separation Program

40 SMART to Solano

41 Dumbarton Rail (Redwood City to Union City) *

42 ACE Rail Network and Service Expansion (including Dumbarton Rail)

43 Valley Link (Dublin to San Joaquin Valley)

44 Megaregional Rail Network + Resilience Project 2 *

Light Rail (LRT) 45 Muni Metro Southwest Subway *

46 Muni Metro to South San Francisco *

47 Fremont-Newark LRT

48 SR-85 LRT

49 VTA North San Jose LRT Subway

50 VTA LRT Systemwide Grade Separation

51 VTA LRT Systemwide Grade Separation and Full Automation

52 VTA LRT Systemwide Grade Separation and Network Expansion 2 *

Freeway Capacity Expansion / Optimization

53 SR-37 Widening + Resilience + Express Bus Project 2 *

54 SR-12 Widening

55 I-80 Busway + BART to Hercules 2

56 I-680 Corridor Improvements (BRT, Express Bus Shared AVs, Gondolas) 2 *

57 I-580/I-680 Corridor Enhancements + Express Bus on I-680 2 *

58 San Francisco Freeway GP-to-HOT Lane Conversions *

Bridges & Tunnels 59 Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Replacement

60 Webster/Posey Tube Replacements

61 SR-87 Tunnel

Other 62 Oakland/Alameda Gondola Network

63 Contra Costa Autonomous Shuttle Program *

64 Mountain View Autonomous Vehicle Network *

65 Cupertino-Mountain View-San Jose Elevated Maglev Rail Loop * * Submitted by member of public/NGO as well (either partially or fully) 2 Individual components of network proposals may be required to undergo further project-level analysis for inclusion in the Plan

55

F i n a l | 2 . 2 8 . 2 0 1 9 1 41 4

Part B-2. Transformative Projects from Individual/NGOs (>$1 billion)

Type # Project Name Jury Selected

Individual components of network proposals may be required to undergo further project-level anal-ysis for consideration in Plan Bay Area 2050.

66 Optimized Express Lane Network + Regional Express Bus Network

67 Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) on All Bridges

68 SMART to Richmond via New Richmond-San Rafael Bridge

69 I-80 Corridor Overhaul

70 Regional Bicycle Superhighway Network **

71 Bay Trail Completion ** ** While recognized by the jury as transformative transportation investments, this project may not go through benefit-cost analysis/project performance as it is considered non-capacity-increasing under federal guidelines.

Part B-3. Transformative Operational Strategies

Type # Project Name Jury Selected 72 Integrated Transit Fare System

73 Free Transit

74 Higher-Occupancy HOV Lanes

75 Demand-Based Tolls on All Highways

76 Reversible Lanes on Congested Bridges and Freeways

77 Freight Delivery Timing Regulation

Part B-4. Transformative Transbay Crossing Projects

Type # Project Name Crossings 78 Bay Crossing Concept #1

79 Bay Crossing Concept #2





Part B-5. Transformative Resilience Projects

Type # Project Name Earthquakes 84 BART Caldecott Tunnel Resilience Project

Sea Level Rise 85 I-580/US-101 Marin Resilience Project

86 US-101 Peninsula Resilience Project

87 SR-237 Resilience Project

88 Dumbarton Bridge Resilience Project

89 I-880 Resilience Project

90 VTA LRT Resilience Project

56

Location Start Point End Point

No. Jurisdiction Project Title Project Description

Project LocationMode

General Criteria(Does the project meet any of the drop down

criteria)End Year

Included in Plan Bay Area or Countywide Tranportation

Plan

Regional Significance Criteria (Does the project meet any of the drop down criteria)

Project Phase

Total Cost Total Committed Types of funds Committed Total

Need Start Year


April 4, 2019

57

Indicates Project in Constrained List

Location Start Point End Point

1 AC South Napa Junction Road

New Major Collector from SR 29 to extension of Newell Drive Newell Drive SR 29 Newell Drive Vehicle $8,909,227 $0 $8,909,227 2016

2 AC Highway 29 Signal ATS Install Advance Traffic Signal SR 29 Vehicle $500,000 $220,000 TFCA $280,000 2015

3 AC

Eucalyptus Drive/ Theresa Avenue

intersection, Complete Streets

Extend Eucalyptus 450' to the east, connecting at SR 29, Install roundabout. Eucalyptus Drive Theresa

Avenue SR 29 Vehicle $3,700,000 $1,154,000 STIP $2,546,000 2017

4 AC Main Street New Minor Collector from Eucalyptus to South Napa Junction Main Street Eucalyptus

DriveSo Napa Junction Vehicle $2,021,629 $0 $2,021,629 2025

5 AC Devlin Road Segment H

New Industrial Collector from railroad overcrossing to Green Island Rd. Devlin Road Railroad

overcrossing Green Island Rd Vehicle $7,795,573 $1,962,000 STIP $5,833,573 2017

6 AC Eucalyptus DriveWiden to 2-lane collector from Theresa to Wetlands Edge Rd., Eucalyptus Drive Theresa

AvenueWetlands Edge

Rd Vehicle $6,393,240 $0 $6,393,240 2020

7 ACAmerican Canyon Multimodal Transit

Center Construct transit centerTBD Bike/Bus/passenger

vehicle/pedestrian/rail $12,000,000 $0 - $12,000,000 2025 No

8 ACHighway 29

Pedestrian Safety Overcrossings

Construct three pedestrian crossings over Highway 29

TBD Bike/Ped $9,000,000 $0 - $9,000,000 2020 Yes

9 AC Commerce Boulevard Extension

New Industrial Collector from southern terminus to Eucalyptus Drive

Commerce Boulevard Eucalyptus Drive

Commerce Boulevard Vehicle $8,073,987 $0 $8,073,987 2025

10 ACEucalyptus

Dr/Commerce Blvd. Intersection

Add excl. NBL & SBL, Add exclusive EBL and WBL, Add new sign

Eucalyptus Dr/Commerce Blvd.

IntersectionVehicle $840,240 $0 $840,240 2025

11 ACNewell Drive/So. Napa Junction

Intersection

Add excl. NBL & SBR, Add exclusive EBL and EBR, New traffic signal Newell Drive/So. Napa

Junction Intersection Vehicle $1,202,288 $0 $1,202,288 2016

12 AC Newell Drive

New 4-lane arterial from Donaldson Way to South Napa Junction Rd, Newell Drive Overcross Structure, New 2-lane arterial from South Napa Junction Rd to SR 29

Newell Drive Donaldson Way

Napa Junction Road Vehicle $37,398,160 $0 $37,398,160 2016 2020

13 AC Paoli Loop Road Widening

Widen road from Green Island to Newell Extension Industrial Collector standards Paoli Loop Road Green Island

Road Newell Extension Vehicle $8,770,020 $0 $8,770,020 2025

14 AC Green Island Road Widening*

Widen road from SR 29 to Commerce Blvd. to Industrial Collector standards Widen railroad crossing to three lanes Green Island Road SR 29 Commerce

Boulevard Vehicle $3,516,599 $2,550,000 EDA/Local funds $966,599 2016

15 AC 29 South Kelly Road intersection*

Improve intersection safety and operationsat South Kelly Road SR 29 South Kelly

Road South Kelly Road Vehicle CON $4,900,000 $0 - $4,900,000 2020 2035 Yes

16 AC SR 29 6-Lane* Parkway

6-lane Parkway from Napa Junction Road to South Kelly Road, including overpass structure

SR 29 Napa Junction Road South Kelly Road Vehicle $29,000,000 $0 PE-CON $29,000,000 2021 2025

17 AC SR 29 Gateway*Highway 29 improvements, 6-lane modified boulevard, including pedestrian, transit and Vine Trail infrastructure.

SR 29 American Canyon Road

Napa Junction Road Vehicle CON $26,000,000 $0 - $26,000,000 2021 2030 Yes

18 AC Napa Junction Road Intersection

Phase 1 Improvements, Add 2nd excl. WBL and excl. WBR, Add 2nd excl. EBL and excl. EBR, Traffic signal relocation Napa Junction Road SR 29 SR 29 Vehicle $2,938,400 $0 - $2,938,400 2018

19 Calistoga LSR RehabLake Street Reconstruction and Complete Street Enhancements Lake Street Washington

Ave Grant St. Vehicle PSE/CON $1,950,000 $0 - $1,950,000 2015 2016 No

20 CalistogaIntersection

Improvements at SR 29/128 & Lincoln Ave

Signalization of Intersection at SR 29/128 & Lincoln Ave

SR 29/128 & Lincoln Ave. SR 29 SR 128 Vehicle PID/PSE/CON $1,900,000 $0 - $1,900,000 2017 2019 No

21 CalistogaPedestrian Safety

Improvements SR 29 & Cedar Street In Pavement Lighting

SR 29 and Cedar Street SR 29 Cedar St Pedestrian PSR/PSE $100,000 $0 - $100,000 2017 2018 No

22 CalistogaPedestrian Safety

Improvements SR 29 & Brannan Street In Pavement Lighting

SR 29 and Brannan Street SR 29 Brannan St Pedestrian PSR/PSE $100,000 $0 - $100,000 2017 2018 No

No. Jurisdiction Project Title Project DescriptionProject Location

Mode End Year Included in Plan Bay AreaProject Phase Total Cost Total Committed Types of funds Committed Total Need Start Year

58


Location Start Point End Point No. Jurisdiction Project Title Project Description

Project LocationMode End Year Included in Plan Bay AreaProject Phase Total Cost Total Committed Types of funds

Committed Total Need Start Year

23 Calistoga Safe Routes to School

Construct foot bridge over the Napa River at Pioneer Park

Pioneer Park and Napa River

Calistoga Community

CenterPioneer Park Pedestrian PSR/PSE $850,000 $0 - $850,000 2017 2018 No

24 Calistoga Washington Street Reconstruction

Complete Streets Enhancements along Washington Street Washington Street Lincoln Oak Vehicle PSE/CON $1,200,000 $0 - $1,200,000 2017 2018 No


Improvements at SR 128 & Berry Street

Widen SR 128 and install left turn lane onto Berry Street

SR 128 & Pet Forest Road

On SR 128 300' south of

Berry St.

On SR 128 300' north of Berry St. Vehicle PID/PSE/CON $650,000 $0 - $650,000 2018 2019 No

26 Calistoga

Intersection Improvements at SR

29 & Washington Ave

Convert Signal to protected left turn phasing at Intersection of SR 29 & Washington Ave

SR 29 & Washington Ave. SR 29 Washington Vehicle CON $500,000 $0 - $500,000 2020 2022 No


Improvements at SR 29 & Fair Way Signalization of intersection at SR 29 & Fair Way

SR 29 and Fair Way SR 29 Fair Way Vehicle CON $950,000 $0 - $950,000 2021 2022 No


Improvements at SR 29 & Silverado Trail

Signalization of intersection at SR 29 & Silverado Trail

SR 29 and Silverado Trail SR 29 Silverado Trail Vehicle CON $853,000 $0 - $853,000 2027 2028 No

29 Calistoga

Intersection Improvements at SR 128 & Petrified Forest

Signalization of Intersection at SR 128 & Petrified Forest

SR 128 & Pet Forest Road SR 128 SR 128 Vehicle

CON

$650,000 $550,000

STIP/LM

$100,000 2015 2017 Yes

30 Calistoga SR-29 Bypass Calistoga SR-29 Bypass Dunaweal Ln/Tubbs Ln Dunaweal SR 29 Silverado Trail Vehicle $7,000,000 $0 - $7,000,000 2030 No

31 CalistogaLincoln Corridor

Safety Enhancements

Signal modification, bicycle and pedestrian enhancements

Lincoln Avenue SR 128 Silverado Trail Vehicle $3,500,000 $0 - $3,500,000 2020 No

32 City of Napa Trower Avenue Extension

Extend Trower Avenue east to connect with Big Ranch Road Trower Avenue

Eastern terminus of Trower Ave

Big Ranch Road Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $10,500,000 $0 - $10,500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

33 City of Napa Linda Vista Bridge and Extension

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

Linda Vista AvenueSouthern

terminus of Linda Vista

Robinson lane Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $3,500,000 $0 - $3,500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

34 City of Napa South Terrace 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

Terrace DriveSouthern

terminus of Terrace Dr

Northern terminus of S

Terrace DrBike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $3,500,000 $0 - $3,500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

35 City of Napa Solano Bridge and Extension

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

Southern terminus of Solano Ave

First Street Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $7,000,000 $0 - $7,000,000 2020 2020-2040 No

36 City of NapaLincoln Avenue at California Blvd & SR29 Off-Ramp

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

Lincoln Avenue SR29 Off-Ramp

California Avenue Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $5,500,000 $0 - $5,500,000 2020 2020-2040 Yes

37 City of Napa Salvador Avenue Complete Streets

Widen Salvador Avenue from SR29 to Jefferson Street Salvador Avenue SR29 Jefferson Street Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $2,500,000 $0 - $2,500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

38 City of Napa

Imola Corridor Bicycle and Pedestrian

Improvements*

Construct sidewalks and bicycle facilities along Imola Avenue where none exist or gaps are present from Foster Road to Skyline Park

Imola Avenue Foster Road Skyline Park Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $6,500,000 $20,000 NCTPA $6,480,000 2014 2020-2040 No

39 City of Napa SR29 under Pueblo Avenue

Pueblo Avenue Overpass connecting Pueblo Avenue to West Pueblo Avenue Pueblo Avenue Pueblo

AvenueWest Pueblo

Avenue Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $30,000,000 $0 - $30,000,000 2020 2020-2040 No

40 City of Napa SR29 over Trower Trower Avenue Underpass Trower Avenue/ SR29 Intersection - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $30,000,000 $0 - $30,000,000 2020 2020-2040 No

41 City of Napa Jefferson/Laurel Signal

New signal at Jefferson Street/Laurel Street Intersection

Jefferson/ Laurel Intersection - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $500,000 $0 - $500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

42 City of Napa Jefferson/Old Sonoma Signal

New signal at Jefferson Street/Old Sonoma Road Intersection

Jefferson/ Old Sonoma Intersection - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $500,000 $0 - $500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

43 City of NapaJefferson/Imola

Intersection Widening

Jefferson/Imola intersection modification Jefferson/ Imola Intersection - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $3,000,000 $0 - $3,000,000 2020 2020-2040 No

44 City of NapaSolano/Redwood

Intersection Widening

Widening and restriping modifications to the Solano Avenue/ Redwood Road Intersection

Solano/ Redwood Intersection - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $750,000 $0 - $750,000 2020 2020-2040 No

59





45 City of NapaSR29 Bike & Pedestrian

Undercrossing

Construct a bicycle and pedestrian undercrossing along the north bank of Napa Creek under SR29 at approximately post mile 11.67

North bank Napa Creek - - Bike/Ped Design $850,000 $97,000 BTA; TDA-3 $753,000 2013 2017 Yes

46 City of Napa Soscol Avenue Widening *

Widen Soscol Avenue-SR221-SR121 to six lanes from Magnolia Drive to Silverado Trail including median widening and intersection improvements

Soscol Avenue Magnolia Drive Silverado Trail Vehicle Planning $22,750,000 $0 - $22,750,000 2020 2020-2040 No

47 City of Napa Lincoln/Jefferson Right Turn Lane(s)

Modify Lincoln/Jefferson intersection with right turn lanes

Jefferson/ Lincoln Intersection - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $750,000 $0 - $750,000 2020 2020-2040 No

48 City of Napa Lincoln/Soscol Right turn Lane(s)

Modify Lincoln/Soscol intersection with right turn lanes

Lincoln/Soscol intersection - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $750,000 $0 - $750,000 2020 2020-2040 No

49 City of NapaFirst Street

Roundabouts (west side)

Construct roundabouts on First Street at Freeway Drive and SR29 Southbound ramps 1st/Freeway SR29 Ramp - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Design $8,500,000 $0 - $8,500,000 2020 2020-2040 Yes

50 City of Napa Jefferson/Sierra Signal

New signal at Jefferson Street/ Sierra Avenue Intersection

Jefferson/ Sierra Intersection - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $500,000 $0 - $500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

51 City of Napa Browns Valley Road Complete Streets

Widen Browns Valley Road from Westview Drive to McCormick Lane Browns Valley Road Westview

Drive McCormick Lane Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $3,500,000 $0 - $3,500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

52 City of Napa Salvador Creek Bike Trail

Construct a Class I multiuse path along Salvador Creek

adjacent to Salvador Creek Maher Street Big Ranch Road Bike/Ped Planning $800,000 $0 - $800,000 2020 2020-2040 Yes

53 City of Napa 5-way Intersection Modification

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

Silverado/ Coombsville/ 3rd/ East Ave Intersection

- - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Design $8,500,000 $3,500,000 Caltrans $5,000,000 2014 2019 Yes

54 City of Napa Oxbow Preserve Pedestrian Bridge

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

Preserve River Trail Bike/Ped Planning $1,250,000 $0 - $1,250,000 2020 2020-2040 Yes

55 City of Napa Oxbow District Pedestrian Bridge

Construct a pedestrian bridge from the River Trail over the Napa River to Third Street Napa River River Trail Third Street Bike/Ped Planning $1,250,000 $0 - $1,250,000 2020 2020-2040 Yes

56 City of Napa Laurel Street Sidewalk

Construct sidewalks along Laurel Street from Laurel Park to Laurel Manor Laurel Street Laurel park Laurel Manor Pedestrian Planning $2,500,000 $0 - $2,500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

57 City of Napa Traffic Operations Center Citywide signal coordination - - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $2,000,000 $0 - $2,000,000 2020 2020-2040 Yes

58 City of Napa Sierra Avenue Sidewalks

Construct sidewalks along Sierra Avenue from Jefferson Street to SR29 Sierra Avenue Jefferson

Street SR29 Pedestrian Planning $800,000 $0 - $800,000 2020 2020-2040 No

59 City of Napa Foster Road Sidewalk

Construct sidewalks along Foster Road adjacent to Irene M. Snow Elementary School

Foster Road adjacent to Snow School - - Pedestrian Planning $750,000 $0 - $750,000 2020 2020-2040 No

60 City of Napa Terrace Drive Sidewalks

Construct Sidewalks along Terrace Drive where gaps are present Terrace Drive Coombsville

Road

Southern terminus of

Terrace DrivePedestrian Planning $1,500,000 $0 - $1,500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

61 City of Napa Main Street Sidewalk Widening

Widening the sidewalk on Main Street from First Street to Third Street Main Street First Street Third Street Pedestrian Planning $2,000,000 $30,000 Local $1,970,000 2016 2020 No

62 City of Napa Railroad Crossing Upgrades

Upgrade all railroad crossings Citywide to concreate panels with flangeway fillers - - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle/Rail Planning $2,500,000 $0 - $2,500,000 2020 2020-2040 No

63 City of NapaSR29 Corridor Improvements

(Urban Highway)*

Landscape enhancements to Urban Highway from Carneros Intersection to Trancas. SR29 at Imola Avenue, 1st Street, Lincoln Avenue, Trancas Street

SR29 Carneros Intersection Trancas Street Vehicle Planning $250,000 $0 - $250,000 2020 2020-2040 Yes

64 Napa County Devlin Rd Extension* Complete construction of collector road as parallel facility for SR 29 corridor Airport Industrial Area Soscol Ferry

Rd Green Island Rd Vehicle CON $5,500,000 $1,300,000 TMF $4,200,000 2015 2020 Yes

65 Napa County Silverado Trail intersections

Improve intersection safety and operationsOak Knoll Avenue, Yountville Crossroad, Oakville Crossroad, Deer Park Rd, Dunaweal Ln Silverado Trail, various Napa Calistoga Vehicle CON $2,500,000 $0 - $2,500,000 2020 2040 No

66 Napa County Solano Ave Corridor Improvements

Construct improvements to reduce flooding and reduce noise impacts in corridor Solano Ave Yountville Dry Creek Vehicle CON $300,000 $0 - $300,000 2020 2025 Yes

67 Napa County 29 North County intersections*

Improve intersection safety and operationsOakville Grade Rd, Oakville Crossroad, Rutherford Rd (SR 128), Deer Park Rd, Dunaweal Ln

SR 29 Napa Calistoga Vehicle CON $2,500,000 $0 - $2,500,000 2025 2040 No

60





68 Napa County Route 221*

Improve corridor operationsSR 221

Napa Vallejo Highway SR 29 SR 121 Vehicle CON $5,200,000 $0 - $5,200,000 2030 2040 No

69 Napa County Carneros Intersection*

SR 29/SR12/SR 121 (Carneros intersection) Improvements SR29/SR12/SR121 Vehicle $500,000 $0 - $500,000 2020 2030 Yes

70 Napa CountySR 29-Unicorporated

Napa County/Carneros* 4-Lane Rural Highway, from unincorporated Napa

County to Carneros intersections.

SR 29 Jameson Napa City Limits Vehicle $8,000,000 $0 PE-CON $8,000,000 2021 2023 Yes

71 Napa CountySR-29

Unincorporated Napa/ AC*

6-Lane Rural Highway in unincorporated Napa County from South Kelly Road to Jameson Canyon

SR 29 South Kelly Road

Jameson Canyon Road Vehicle $13,068,000 $0 PE-CON $13,068,000 2021 2024 Yes

72 NCTPA Vine Trail (Redwood Rd Crossing)*

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

Redwood Road - - Bike/Ped/Vehicle Planning $4,500,000 $0 - $4,500,000 2020 2020-2040 Yes

73 NCTPA Napa Valley Vine Trail - Calistoga*

Construct Class I mixed use path, including Fairway Extension.

SR 29 Calistoga St. Helena Bike/Ped CON $9,200,000 $2,350,000 Local Donation $6,850,000 2016 2018 Yes

74 NCTPA Vine Trail (3rd-Vallejo)*

Construct Class I multiuse path between 3rd Street and Vallejo Street adjacent to Soscol Vallejo Third Street Bike/Ped Planning $3,500,000 100,000 TDA-3; NVVT Coalition $3,400,000 2016 2020 Yes

75 NCTPA Vine Trail*Class I bike trails, including portions of American Canyon, St. Helena, and unincorporated Napa

County. Napa County Bothe Park

South end of American Canyon

Bike PE-CON $19,799,360 $0 - $19,799,360 2015 2023 Yes

76 NCTPA Soscol Junction* Construct SB 221 to SB 29/12 flyover structure SR 29/12/221 - - Vehicle PE-CON $50,000,000 $0 - $50,000,000 2015 2035 Yes

77 NCTPA Airport Junction* Construct grade separated interchange SR 29/12/Airport - Vehicle CON $73,000,000 $0 - $73,000,000 2020 2040 Yes

78 NCTPAPark and Ride Lots, (Construction and

O&M)Park and Ride lots throughout Napa County Napa County - - Bus PE-CON $2,025,000 $0 - $ 2,025,000 2015 2040 No

79 NCTPA SR-37 Project Initiation Documentation SR 37 - - Vehicle PE $250,000 $0 $ 250,000 2030 2032 No

80 NCTPA Bus/Agency Signage New NCTPA Image, Including Bus Stop Signage Napa County - - Bus None $550,000 $0 - $550,000 2015 2018 No

81 NCTPAVINE Maintenance Facility (Construction O&M)

Acquisition and construction of new maintenance facility

TBD - - BusCON

$38,300,000 $0 - $38,300,000 2017 2018No

82 NCTPAFueling Station (Construction and O&M)

Construction of new fueling station TBD - - BusCON

$3,792,000 $0 - $3,792,000 2017 2018No

83 NCTPA Rapid Bus Project 13.5 miles of bus rapid corridor enhancements SR 29 Vallejo Ferry Terminal

Napa Valley College Bus PE-CON $25,000,000 $0 - $25,000,000 2020 2025 No

84 NCTPA Rapid Bus Buses Acquisition of 14 articulated buses for Rapid Bus from Vallejo Ferry Terminal to NVC N/A - - Bus None $14,000,000 $0 $14,000,000 2025 2027

85 NCTPA Rapid Bus Project 4.7 miles of bus Rapid Corridor Enhancement SR 29 Napa Valley College Redwood P&R Bus PE-CON $25,000,000 $0 - $25,000,000 2022 2025 No

86 NCTPA Rapid Bus Buses Acquisition of 6 articulated buses for Rapid Bus from NVC to Redwood Avenue Park and Ride N/A - - Bus

None$6,000,000 $0 - $6,000,000 2022 2024

87 NCTPA State of Good Repair/ PM

(Replacement of Rapid Bus buses) 6 low-floor articulated buses, 14 articulated buses N/A - - Bus None $20,750,000 $0 - $ 20,750,000 2037 2040

88 NCTPA ZE Bus Project Acquisition of 2 zero emission buses for a zero emission pilot bus project N/A Bus CON $3,720,000 $0 $ 3,720,000 2018 2040 No

89 NCTPALocal routes (1-8) - expanded service

hours

Expand service hours from 4am-12am, add Sunday service N/A - - Bus None $10,281,880 $0 - $ 10,281,880 2018 2040 No

90 NCTPARegional routes

(10/11)- expanded service hours

Expand service hours from 4am-12am, add Sunday service N/A - - Bus None $10,346,000 $0 - $ 10,346,000 2018 2040 No

91 NCTPARegional routes

(10/11)- Enhanced frequency

Increase frequency from 30 peak, 60 midday and weekends to 15 peak and 30 midday and

weekends. N/A - - Bus None $33,122,216 $0 - $ 33,122,216 2018 2040 No

92 NCTPA New Transit Vehicles (EXPANSION)

Acquisition of new paratransit vehicles, community shuttle buses and VINE buses for

service expansionN/A - - Bus None $27,510,000 $0 - $ 27,510,000 2017 2040 No

61





93 NCTPATransit System

Growth (Operating Costs)

Operation costs for the expansion of the transit system N/A - - Bus None $2,800,000 $0 - $ 2,800,000 2018 2040 No

94 NCTPANew Shelters and Stop Amenities (EXPANSION)

Improved bus stops throughout Napa County N/A - - Bus None $4,850,000 $0 - $ 4,850,000 2020 2040 No

95 NCTPA

IT Equipment Upgrades &

Replacement Program

Wi-Fi for all buses, Camera System & Real Time signage, Asset Management Database, sales office equipment, taxi scrip automated readers

N/A - - Bus None $480,000 $0 - $ 480,000 2015 2019 No

96 St Helena Main Street Corridor Improvements

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

Main Street (SR29) Spring Street Adams Street Bike/Ped/Vehicle PE-CON $700,000 $21,278 Local $678,722 2011 2018 No

97 St Helena Sulphur Creek Class I Bikeway Construct Class I Bikeway

Sulphur CreekSulphur Springs Avenue

Napa River Bike $5,800,000 $0 - $5,800,000 2020 2030 No

98 St HelenaSpring Mountain

Road Class I Bikeway Construct Class I Bikeway

Spring Mountain Road Lower Reservoir

Spring Mountain Court Bike $1,700,000 $0 - $1,700,000 2020 2030 No

99 St Helena Oak Avenue Extension Extend Oak Avenue Oak Avenue Charter Oak

Avenue Grayson Avenue Vehicle $1,800,000 $0 - $1,800,000 2020 2025 No

100 St Helena Starr Avenue Extension Extend Starr Avenue Starr Avenue Hunt Avenue Adams Street Vehicle $617,000 $0 - $617,000 2025 2030 No

101 St Helena Adams Street Extension Extend Adams Street Adams Street end Starr Avenue Vehicle $851,000 $0 - $851,000 2025 2030 No

102 St Helena New North-South Collector Extend College Avenue, or Starr Avenue, or

Allison AvenueNew Mills Lane Pope Street Vehicle $1,900,000 $0 - $1,900,000 2025 2030 No

103 St Helena Mills Lane Safety Improvements Improve Mills Lane to two lanes with bike and

pedestrian access

Mills Lane Main Street (SR29) End Vehicle $3,500,000 $0 - $3,500,000 2025 2030 No

104 St Helena Napa River Class I Bikeway

Construct Class I Bikeway (River Trail)

Napa River South City Limit North City Limit Bike $9,800,000 $0 - $9,800,000 2030 2040 No

105 St Helena New East-West Collector Extend Adams Street or Mills Lane New End Silverado Trail Vehicle $2,900,000 $0 - $2,900,000 2035 2040 No

106 St Helena Fulton Lane Safety Improvements

Improve Fulton Lane to two lanes with bike and pedestrian access

Fulton Lane Railroad Ave End Vehicle $2,200,000 $0 - $2,200,000 2035 2040 No

107 Yountville Oak Circle Parking Improvement Parking improvements to existing infrastructure

Future Oak Circle Park, near Oak Circle and

Vintner CtN/A N/A Vehicle Planning,

Design, Construction

$75,000 $0 - $75,000 2015 2018 No

108 Yountville South Veteran's Park Parking

Improvements Parking improvements to existing infrastructure

At Veteran's Park, Washington St. South of

California DrN/A N/A Vehicle Planning,


$175,000 $0 - $175,000 2020 2021 No

109 YountvilleWashington Park Sidewalk Project

Adding sidewalk to the Washington Park Subdivision

Washington Park

East of Washington,

North of Forrester Ln

East of Washington,

South of Yountville Cross

Rd

Pedestrian Planning, Design, Construction

$850,000 $0 - $850,000 2022 2023 No

110 Yountville Yountville Crossroads Bicycle

Path & SidewalkA full lane bicycle path along Yountville Crossroads

Length of Yountville Crossroads

Yountville Cross Roads and Yount St

Yountville Cross Roads and Stags

View LnBike Planning,


$1,500,000 $0 - $1,500,000 2030 2031 No

111 Yountville Future Parking Garage Facility New parking facility

To be determined N/A N/A Vehicle Planning, Design, Construction

$5,500,000 $0 - $5,500,000 2030 2031 No

62





112 Yountville Transportation Infrastructure

Extend Yount Mill Road and Yountville Cross Rd, connecting the new development to the Town.

Northeast of Washington and Yountville Cross Rd Entire Site Entire Site Bike/Ped/Vehicle

Planning, Design, Construction

$2,500,000 $0 - $2,500,000 2030 2035 No

113 Yountville SR-29 Interchange Project Construct Interchange at Madison and SR-29

Madison & SR-29 N/A N/A VehiclePlanning, Design,

Construction$20,000,000 $0 - $20,000,000 2030 2031 No

$240,527,096$592,943,445

TransitTransportation

63

REGIONAL SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIAExpands or extends the principal arterial system (length must be greater than ¼ mile)Expands or extends a roadway to become part of the principal arterial system (length must be greater than ¼ mile)Reduces the number of lanes (e.g., road diet) of the principal arterial system (length must be greater than ¼ mile)Adds new or expands access to the principal arterial system (e.g., new interchanges or interchange modifications that add capacity)Extends or expands the fixed guideway transit infrastructureAdds new or expands transit stations or terminals, including parking facilitiesExpands transit fleets or service levels (e.g., increased frequency, hours of operation)Alters the cost for users of the transportation system (e.g., cordon pricing, tolling, transit fares).Total estimated cost (capital + operating and maintenance) is greater than $250 million

GENERAL CRITERIAWill open after 2021 and by year 2050Will seek federal, state or regional fundingWill require federal or state action (e.g. project-level conformity, NEPA, CEQA)Supports Horizon’s Guiding Principles (See Attachment C in Plan Bay Area Regionally-Significan Project Guidance)Supports the region’s sustainable communities strategy (SCS)

64


Continued From: New Action Requested: INFORMATION

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY TAC Agenda Letter

TO: Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)

FROM: Kate Miller, Executive Director

REPORT BY: Alberto Esqueda, Senior Program Planner/ Administrator (707) 259-5976 | [email protected]

SUBJECT: ITOC Meeting Presentation Schedule

RECOMMENDATION

That the TAC review the ITOC meeting schedule.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Voter adoption of the Napa Countywide Road Maintenance Act and Expenditure Plan (Measure T) resulted in the creation of the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee (ITOC) to review fiscal and performance audits. To review project and program eligibility adheres to the Ordinance’s provisions.

As a way to keep the ITOC apprised of ongoing Measure T activities in each of the jurisdictions, staff is requesting that jurisdictions present updates to the ITOC on a regular basis. The ITOC has quarterly meetings and NVTA is requesting that each of the jurisdictions provide a presentation on their Measure T projects on a rotating schedule. The staggered presentation schedule will consist of the three large jurisdictions assigned to a meeting each and the three smaller jurisdictions presenting together at the fourth meeting. If a meeting is canceled due to lack of substantive agenda item, the jurisdiction(s) scheduled to present at that meeting will be pushed to the next meeting and the schedule will be adjusted accordingly.

Table 1 provides the schedule for the next 2 years of ITOC meetings:

65



Page 2

Table 1 Meeting Date Jurisdiction

June 5, 2019 City of Napa September 4, 2019 City American Canyon December 4, 2019 County of Napa

March 4, 2020 City of Calistoga, Town of

Yountville, City of St. Helena June 3, 2020 City of Napa September 2, 2020 City of American Canyon December 2, 2020 County of Napa

March 2, 2021 City of Calistoga, Town of

Yountville, City of St. Helena

FISCAL IMPACT

Is there a fiscal impact? None.

BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION

The Napa Countywide Road Maintenance Act and Expenditure Plan and Ordinance requires the creation of the ITOC which is made up of seven committee members and residents of the County of Napa. Committee members possess knowledge of a certain field such as municipal audit, finance, and/or budgeting, civil engineering with focus on transportation or public accounting. There is also a representative of a Napa region Chamber of Commerce, member of a bona fide taxpayers’ association and two members at-large.

Voter adoption of the Napa Countywide Road Maintenance Act (Measure T) resulted in creation of the Independent Taxpayer Oversight Committee ("ITOC"). The ITOC will remain in existence for so long as the tax exists. The ITOC reviews the fiscal and program performance of the retail transactions and use tax transportation program through a biennial performance audit to ensure that all transportation retail transactions and use tax revenues are spent by the NVTA-TA in accordance with the voter-approved Expenditure Plan and Ordinance. The ITOC's secondary mission is to provide positive, constructive advice to the Authority on how to improve implementation over the twenty-five year course of the program; this role includes consideration by the ITOC of the biennial project lists submitted by jurisdictions.

66


Page 3

Since ITOC meetings are held quarterly and Measure T activities are ongoing, presentation will be streamlined by having each of the larger jurisdictions i.e. City of Napa, American Canyon, Napa County each solely present their project update in a meeting while the smaller jurisdictions i.e. Calistoga, St. Helena, and Yountville with all present jointly.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

Attachment(s): (1) ITOC Meeting Schedule

67

Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat1 2 3 4 5 1 2 1 2

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 17 18 19 20 21 22 23

27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

31

Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 1

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

28 29 30 26 27 28 29 30 31 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30

Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

7 8 9 10 11 12 13 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

21 22 23 24 25 26 27 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

28 29 31 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 29 30

Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat Sun Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Sat1 2 3 4 5 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

20 21 22 23 24 25 26 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

27 28 29 30 31 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 29 30 31

2019NVTA/NVTA-TA Board of Directors and Committee Meeting Calendar

January February March

April May June

2:00 PM

July August September

October November December

10:00 AM 5:00 PMNVTA

1:30 PMHOLIDAYITOC

5:00 PMCACPCC ATACNVTA-TA

1:30 PMTAC

2:00 PM


April 4, 2019

68

california · thursday, april 4, 2019 2:00 pm napa valley transportation authority 625 burnell...

Documents