Napa Countywide Transportation Plan Public workshops | April, 2014 | American Canyon, St. Helena, Napa

Why a Countywide Plan?

1. Identify investments to best serve Napa communities

2. Plan for a multi-modal system

3. Leverage potential revenue sources with existing funding

4. Put Measure T expenditure plan in context of other potential sources

5. Inform Napa’s contribution to the RTP

2 of 35

Countywide planning process

• Begin with previous plans

• Types of projects addressed

• Prioritization criteria

3 of 35

Countywide planning process

• Project kick-off and initiate outreach Winter 2014

• Background data/issue paper Spring 2014

• Call for projects/programs Summer/Fall 2014

• Review of Projects/Programs Fall/Winter 2014

• Draft Plan Spring 2015

• Final Plan May 2015

• Project Submittals due to MTC ~ June 2015

4 of 35

Planning process | Public input

• Community workshops

• Comment cards available today

• Web: www.nctpa.net/vision-2040-project-overview

• Survey: www.surveymonkey.com/s/vision-2040

• Mapping tool: www.collaborativemap.org/NapaCounty

• Quarterly Board meetings

5 of 35

Goals of the Countywide Plan

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

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

Use taxpayer dollars efficiently.

Support Napa County’s economic vitality.

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

Prioritize the maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing system.

6 of 35

Goal 1

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

7 of 35

Goal 1 | Projected age distribution

Source: California Department of Finance Note: Plan Bay Area projects total 2040 population of 163,000

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

180,000

200,000

2010 2020 2030 2040

Popu

latio

n

Total pop

25‒64

0‒24 65+

Seniors are the fastest-growing demographic

8 of 35

Goal 1 | Daily trips by mode

Originating in Napa County

Primary mode Daily trips

Drive Alone 72,363 (43%)

Shared Ride 38,682 (23%)

Walk 13,344 (8%)

Bike 2,354 (1%)

Transit 960 (<1%)

9 of 35

Goal 1 | Housing and transportation

• 25% of auto trips in Napa County are work trips from other counties.

• Many of these individuals work in Napa’s largest industries: hospitality and manufacturing.

• How many of those people are making a rational decision to commute based on Napa’s housing costs? Average home price: $460,000 Median monthly rent: $1,297

10 of 35

Goal 1 | Roadway network

11 of 35

Goal 1 | VINE Transit network

12 of 35

13 of 35

Goal 1 | VINE Paratransit network

Goal 1 | Bikeway network

14 of 35

15 of 35

Goal 2

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

Goal 2 | Complete streets

16 of 35

Goal 3

Use taxpayer dollars efficiently.

• Streamline project delivery

• Reduce overhead

17 of 35

Goal 4

Support Napa County’s economic vitality.

18 of 35

Goal 4 | Major Napa County industries

Source: California Employment Development Department (2013, Second Quarter)

Sector Employees (2013)

1 Manufacturing 11,341 (16%)

2 Leisure and Hospitality 11,252 (16%)

3 Public Administration 9,681 (14%)

4 Trade, Transportation, and Utilities 9,368 (13%)

5 Education and Health Services 9,102 (13%)

6 Professional and Business Services 6,536 (9%)

7 Natural Resources and Mining 5,632 (8%)

8 Construction 3,268 (5%)

19 of 35

Goal 4 | Projected jobs / housing gap

71,000

55,000

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

2010 2040

61,000

Jobs

and

Hou

sing

Uni

ts 90,000

2010‒2040 Employment: 27% increase Housing: 11% increase

Jobs

Housing units

20 of 35

21 of 35

Goal 4 | Travel patterns, 2010

22 of 35

Goal 4 | Travel patterns, 2040

Goal 4 | Freight movement

• Sharing the road

• Improving throughput

23 of 35

Goal 5

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

• SB 375 Implements AB32, which in the Bay Area strives to reduce per

capita CO2 emissions by 18% Mandates land use and transportation planning integration

• Plan Bay Area Accommodates housing 100% of regional population growth Envisions all non-ag development inside existing urban footprint

24 of 35

Goal 6

Prioritize the maintenance and rehabilitation of the existing system.

25 of 35 Note: Measure T primarily funds maintenance of local streets and roads.

Current contexts

Planned developments that may influence transportation investments • Napa Pipe/Costco

• St. Regis

• Ritz‒Carlton

• Copia redevelopment

• Calistoga resorts (Enchanted Resorts/Silver Rose)

26 of 35

Projected revenue and costs

In millions; 2014 dollars

$1.32 billion

$2.28 billion

$2.97 billion

$-

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$3,000

$3,500

Revenues Maintaining Existing System Maintaining & ImprovingSystem

$0.96 billion

shortfall

$1.65 billion

shortfall

27 of 35

Examples | Demand management

• Alternative modes

• Staggered start times

• Working from home

• New, cost effective technologies (e.g., highway messaging, signal coordination/timing)

• Land use policies

28 of 35

Examples | Revenue generation

• Sales tax / bond

• Vehicle license fee

• Tourism taxes and fees

• Congestion pricing

• Creative financing

29 of 35

Project examples | Roads and paths

SR 29 improvements • Widening in American Canyon • Soscol flyover • Channelization/St. Helena • Airport/SR 12 tight diamond interchange • Bike/ped/transit Improvements • Landscaping

30 of 35

Bike/Ped improvements • Vine Trail • Buildout of Active Network • Sidewalks/complete streets

Project examples | Transit

• Maintenance/Fueling Facility

• SR 29 Rapid Improvements

• Other Rapid Improvements

• Expansion/enhancements

• Rail

31 of 35

For discussion

• Challenge: Increasing demand for transportation during a period of declining revenue Growing economy Jobs/housing mismatch Aging population Significant transportation need Not enough revenue

• Specific projects, programs or prioritization criteria?

• Other issues?

32 of 35

Outreach and input opportunities

• NCTPA Board meetings

• NCTPA Advisory Committee meetings

• Citizens’ Advisory Committee meetings

• Public meetings

• Media coverage

• Online outreach: Website, surveys, mapping tool

• Visits to stakeholder groups

33 of 35

Discussion stations

• Station #1 Active transportation (biking and walking)

• Station #2 Public transit (fixed route and paratransit)

• Station #3 Driving

• Station #4 TDM, programs, survey, online mapping tool

34 of 35

Contact us

Kate Miller, Executive Director (707) 259‒8634 kmiller@nctpa.net

Eliot Hurwitz, Project Manager (707) 259‒8782 ehurwitz@nctpa.net

35 of 35