a. Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to
intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit?
b. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways?
c. Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
d. Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersection) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate emergency access?
f. Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise
decrease the performance or safety of such facilities?
Sources: Traffic Impact Report: Culinary Institute of America Greystone Master Plan, prepared by Crane Transportation Group, November 17, 2016; Traffic Impact Report: Culinary Institute of America Vineyard Lodge Master Plan, prepared by Crane Transportation Group, November 2, 2016; St. Helena Bicycle Plan, 2012.
Setting
The City of St. Helena lies on a north-west/south-east axis, with State Route (SR) 29/Main Street serving as the main route for intercity and regional travel. SR 29 is a two- to four-lane rural highway that stretches through Napa County from Vallejo at Napa County’s southern border to Lake County in the north; within the City of St. Helena, SR 29 is confined to two travel lanes. Since SR 29 is a major north-south thoroughfare for Napa County, heavy through traffic is typical along Main Street. The street network to the west of SR 29 is a grid pattern of residential blocks connected to SR 29 by a series of east-west streets connecting residential areas. To the east of SR 29, the grid network is discontinuous due to the lack of parallel facilities to SR 29 to connect the east-west roadways.
Within the City of St. Helena, SR 29 serves as a two-lane north-south highway. At the Pratt Avenue tee intersection the roadway is 48 feet wide curb to curb. A 75-foot-long left turn lane is provided on the southbound SR 29 approach to Pratt Avenue. Curb, gutter and sidewalk line both sides of the highway at Pratt Avenue. North of Pratt Avenue there is a tree-lined, unsurfaced pedestrian path along the west side of the highway and an unsurfaced bicycle pedestrian path along the east side of the highway.
Pratt Avenue serves as a two-lane collector that connects Main Street to Silverado Trail on the north side of the City and provides access to both residential and winery uses, but lacks any north-south connections outside of Main Street. Despite its function as a major connection to Silverado Trail and as a bypass to congested conditions on Main Street, traffic is limited due to the poor sight distance and turning radius on the narrow Pratt Avenue Bridge that crosses the Napa River. It is about
40 feet wide in the vicinity of SR 29. Pratt Avenue is stop sign controlled on its approach to SR 29 and the westbound approach lane is 20 feet wide, allowing left and right turning vehicles to separate. Fronting Vineyard Lodge, the Pratt Avenue travel lanes are about 25.5 feet wide, and along the north side (the Vineyard Lodge frontage), there is a 13-foot wide, 160+-foot long parking bay. Sidewalks are in place fronting the project site, but sidewalks are discontinuous along the north and south sides Pratt Avenue.
Public Transit
Public transit service is readily available throughout Napa County. The primary transit service in Napa County is provided by the VINE, a fixed-route bus service providing service to Calistoga, St. Helena, Napa, American Canyon, Yountville, and parts of unincorporated Napa County. Two routes pass through St. Helena along S.R. 29: routes 10 and 29. Route 10 provides service from Calistoga to Napa, including stops in St. Helena, Rutherford and Oakville, running seven days a week, all day and including weekends. Route 29, the Vine Express, is a commuter bus operating from early morning through late afternoon, Monday through Friday. The Vine Express extends from Calistoga to the Vallejo Ferry Terminal and El Cerrito BART. Service hours are Monday through Friday, 5:20 am to 9:10 pm, Saturday 6:00 am to 8:10 pm, and Sundays 8:30 am to 7:00 pm. The bus stops nearest the project site are two Route 10 northbound stops located at the Pratt Avenue/SR 29 (Main Street) intersection and opposite CIA Greystone, on the east side of the highway.
The St. Helena Shuttle is an on-demand shuttle service available for a fee of $1.00 per trip. Service is available Monday through Friday 7:00 am to 9:00 PM, Friday and Saturday 7:00 am to 11:00 pm, and Sunday (May through November) 11:00am to 9:00 pm. VINE Go is an origin to destination, shared ride service which provides demand response for persons with disabilities in the cities of Calistoga, St. Helena, Napa, American Canyon, the Town of Yountville and the unincorporated areas of Napa County. VINE Go is the ADA paratransit service complementary to the fixed route operators and runs at times corresponding to the fixed routes.
Bike and Pedestrian Facilities
State Route 29 (Main Street) northbound from Pratt Avenue, is proposed as a link in the planned countywide Vine Trail Alignment, with a Class I Multi-Use Bike Path northbound, extending past the CIA-Greystone facility, north as far as Calistoga. Just east of S.R. 29 (Main Street) on Pratt Avenue, the Vine Trail Alignment loops north to connect to a proposed York Creek Class I Multi-Use Bike Path, then rejoins S.R. 29 just north of Pratt Avenue. State Route 29 (Main Street) southbound is an
existing Primary Class II Bike Route and is proposed to have a Class II Bike Lane.
Eastbound Pratt Avenue between State Route 29 (Main Street) and the railroad tracks is proposed to have a Class II Bike Lane; through this segment, westbound Pratt Avenue is proposed to have a Class I Multi-Use Bike Path and is a link in the planned Countywide Vine Trail Alignment. Eastbound Pratt Avenue between the railroad tracks and Silverado Trail, which includes the portion of Pratt Avenue fronting the Vineyard Lodge site, is proposed to have a Class III Bike Route. These facilities would connect with matching improvements on State Route 29 (Main Street) north of Pratt Avenue, and on Silverado Trail north and south of Pratt Avenue. Sidewalks are in place fronting the project site, but sidewalks are discontinuous along the north and south sides Pratt Avenue.
The 1993 St. Helena General Plan prescribed the following City Roadway and Intersection Impact Criteria to identify potential impacts from proposed development projects:
(a) All signalized intersections in St. Helena should maintain LOS C except along Main Street, where LOS D is permitted. Exceptions to this policy are that lower service levels shall be permitted at any location where the existing LOS does not meet this standard and in which case the LOS cannot be worsened any further.
(b) All unsignalized intersections must maintain LOS C. If the LOS degrades below LOS C, an evaluation of the need for traffic signalization shall be undertaken according to standard Caltrans signal warrants as described below. If signals are not initially warranted, the location shall continue to be monitored for signal warrants on a regular basis. Impact Analysis
a. (Plan, Policy Ordinance: Circulation System) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: The Traffic Impact reports (TIR)
prepared by Crane Transportation for the Greystone site and Vineyard Lodge Site (dated November 17, 2016 and November 2,2016) reviewed onsite circulation and access, and evaluated the Project’s traffic impacts on the surrounding circulation network including two intersections in the project vicinity. Specifically, the analysis evaluated traffic impacts at the following unsignalized intersections:
1. CIA Driveway/ SR HWY 29 EB 2. Pratt Ave/ SR HWY 29 EB 3. Pratt Ave/ SR HWY 29 WB
The TIS evaluated existing conditions, existing plus project conditions, baseline/baseline plus project conditions (Yr 2018), and future/ future plus project conditions (Yr 2035). As described below, under existing conditions, all intersections are operating unacceptably at LOS D or worse, with the exception of CIA Driveway/ SR HWY 29 EB which is operating at LOS “C” under the AM peak hour scenario. The intersection LOS continues to deteriorate under all scenarios without the project. With the project, study intersections will improve slightly with the exception of Pratt Ave/ SR HWY 29 WB, which will operate unacceptably under LOS “F” during the AM and PM Peak hour with and without the project under both scenarios for baseline and Future conditions. Trip Generation
As proposed, the CIA Master Plan project is expected to result in a net reduction in traffic trips. There are two reasons for the net decrease:
1. With the acquisition of Copia 49 faculty and employees (and associated traffic trips) will be transferred to Napa and seven new faculty positions will be added at the Greystone Campus. As such, traffic trips associated with the CIA at Greystone would be reduced by 42 roundtrips.
2. The applicant proposes to increase the size of shuttles employed from 14 and 22 to 22 and 32 seats, on an as-needed basis, which would accommodate the increased number of students (approximately 100) and therefore, the increase in enrollment/ housing would have a negligible change to traffic trips.
Accordingly, the project is expected to generate - (15) AM Peak Hour trips and -(21) PM Peak hour trips between Greystone and the Vineyard Lodge site. All new students are expected to reside at the Vineyard Lodge Housing site and therefore, no increase in students living off campus is expected. As such, there is no expected increase of trips generated by students living off campus. Existing Conditions
With the exception of the CIA Driveway/ SR HWY 29 EB under the AM peak hour, all study intersections are operating unacceptably at LOS D or below during Am and PM peak hour traffic. With the addition of project-related trips to the existing conditions scenario, it is anticipated all study intersections will continue operating at the current level of service with very slight reductions in the seconds of delay. In accordance with 1993 GP significance criteria, if LOS of an unsignalized intersection degrades below LOS C, signal warrants shall be performed to determine need for signalization. According to the analysis, the intersections do not meet signal warrant thresholds under existing conditions.
Table 4
Summary of Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour Intersection LOS Calculations
Study Intersection Approach
Existing Conditions AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS
Existing plus Project AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS 1 CIA Driveway/ SR HWY 29 EB 20.6 C 29.3 D 19.8 C 25.2 D 2 Pratt Ave/ SR HWY 29 EB Driveway Intersection not yet operational
3. Pratt Ave/ SR HWY 29 WB 30.3 D 39.3 E 30.5 D 39.6 E
Baseline Conditions
The project’s TIS reviewed baseline conditions (Yr 2018) in order to assess existing conditions in conjunction with projects that are expected to begin generating traffic in the foreseeable future (within two to three years). As shown in Table 5, under the “Baseline” scenario, all intersections will continue to operate unacceptably with the exception of the CIA Driveway/ SR HWY 29 intersection, which is expected to operate acceptably at LOS C under the AM peak hour scenario. Under “Baseline plus Project (YR 2018)” conditions, Table 5 shows that study intersections are expected to operate unacceptably with the exception of CIA Driveway/ SR HWY 29, during the AM peak hour which is projected continue operating acceptably at LOS C.
The project’s contribution to the study intersections would result in a minor improvement to the existing LOS, with the exception of Pratt Avenue/ SR HWY 29 WB where the addition of four (4) trips would further degrade the LOS under the AM and PM peak hours. Given the degraded LOS under Baseline conditions, a warrant analysis was undertaken. Under baseline conditions with and without the project, the intersections would not meet warrant thresholds. Given that the project would not degrade the LOS to the next lowest level at any of the study intersections impacts would be less than significant.
Table 5
Summary of Baseline and Baseline plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Calculations ( YR 2018)
Study Intersection Approach
Baseline Conditions AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS
Baseline plus Project AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS 1 CIA Driveway/ SR HWY 29 21.8 C 32.0 D 20.9 C 27.2 D 2 Pratt Ave/ SR HWY 29 EB 35.9 E 36.4 E 35.1 E 35.4 E 3. Pratt Avenue/ SR HWY 29 WB 64.0 F 93.4 F 64.0+ F 93.4+ F
Future Conditions
The TIS reviewed future conditions for study intersections through applying a growth factor of 2.2 to the existing traffic volumes at all study intersections to project future volumes. As shown in Table 6 below, under future conditions without the project, it is expected that all study intersections will operate unacceptably at LOS E or worse. Under the Future plus Project scenario, Table 6 shows that, although the project would slightly improve the LOS at some intersections, all study intersections would continue to operate unacceptably at LOS “D” or worse.
Table 6
Summary of Future and Future Plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Calculations (YR 2035)
Study Intersection Approach
Future Conditions AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS
Future plus Project AM Peak PM Peak Delay LOS Delay LOS 1 CIA Driveway/ SR HWY 29 37.4 E 82.7 F 34.9 D 57.8 F 2 Pratt Ave/ SR HWY 29 EB 87.1 F 92.1 F 83.6 F 88.3 F 3. Pratt Ave/SR HWY 29 WB 518 F 867 F 518+ F 867+ F Signal Warrants
Pursuant to 1993 General Plan significance criteria and at the direction of the City, the traffic consultant performed a traffic warrant analysis for the project study intersections. The warrants were based on the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD). The consultant applied the peak hour warrant (warrant 3) to the Pratt Avenue/SR HWY 29 intersection; which is often used as an initial check for signalization given the peak hour volume data is readily available and that warrant 3 is often the first one to be met. In addition, Warrant 1 (highest eight hour volumes) and Warrant 7 (Accidents) were performed. The TIS concludes that under scenarios without the project, the study intersections would not meet the signal warrant criteria for warrants 1, 3, or 7. Under the future plus project scenario, the projected volumes approach meeting signal warrant criteria 1 and 3, they do not, however, meet or exceed the thresholds. As such, signalization is not required under any of the traffic scenarios analyzed.
Tourist Generated Traffic Impacts
As a tourist destination, the Greystone Campus does exhibit regular visitation by buses. While, this visitation may decrease with the relocation of many CIA activities to the former COPIA site in Napa, it is expected that buses will continue to arrive at the Greystone site at least on an occasional basis. Given the buses ability to impede traffic flow along SR 29 the applicant will be required to comply with Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 which will require buses to make reservations and obtain prior approval from the Culinary Institute to visit the Greystone Campus. The requirement for prior approval shall be clearly indicated on the school’s website, promotional materials, and on signage at the entrance to Greystone prohibiting entry by buses without prior approval from the CIA. These measures will ensure that buses visiting the Greystone site will not inadvertently impede traffic flow along SR 29 and congestion will be further minimized. With Mitigation Measure TRANS-1, the projects impacts to the level of service at affected intersections will be less than significant.
Conclusion
As described above, the project will not degrade any of the intersections to the next lowest level of service, particularly those exhibiting an LOS C or better, nor will the project generate volumes such that signal warrant criteria would be satisfied. Further, with Mitigation Measure TRANS-1, all buses visiting the Greystone site will require advance reservations to visit the Greystone Campus and this stipulation shall be clearly indicated on the CIA’s website and indicated on signage at the Greystone site entrance so as to prevent buses from causing traffic impediments. As such, with Mitigation Measure TRANS-1, traffic impacts are expected to be less than significant.
(b) (Congestion Management Plan) No Impact: Napa County has not adopted a Congestion Management Plan. As such, the
Congestion Management Agency for designated roads or highways. No further analysis of this issue is required.
(c) (Air Traffic Patterns) No Impact: There are no airports in St. Helena. The closest airports are Angwin-Parrett Field (8.5 miles
away), a public use general aviation airport located in Angwin; Napa County Airport, a public airport located in Napa (25 miles away); and Charles M. Schulz Airport (27 miles away), a public airport located in Santa Rosa. The project will have no impact on air traffic patterns, given the nature and location of the project, which is well outside of the established airport flight pattern.
(d) (Design Feature Hazard) Less Than Significant Impact: The project’s TIS reviewed the adequacy of sight distance for vehicles
exiting the project access driveways on Pratt Avenue; no changes are proposed for the Greystone driveway and therefore, it was not analyzed. Per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual the recommended site distance prescribed for minor-street approaches to driveways is based on stopping site distance using the approach travel speeds as the basis for determining appropriate site distance.
Pratt Avenue exhibits a posted speed limit of 30 feet and therefore warrants a minimum stopping site distance of 200 feet. At higher speeds, up to 50 mph, the required stopping site distance would increase to 430 feet. At Pratt Avenue sight lines to the east and west extend beyond 500 feet and as such, site distance is expected to be adequate. The project’s design provides sufficient set back from roadways and maintains visibility around corners. The preliminary landscaping plan considers visibility in the location of proposed trees and shrubbery. As proposed, there are no hazards that impede or block visibility or represent an incompatible design feature. Therefore, the project will have less than significant impact resulting from site design hazards or inadequate site distance.
(e) (Emergency Access) Less Than Significant Impact: The project’s internal circulation plan has been reviewed and meets all
requirements of the St. Helena Public Works & Utilities and Fire Departments. Site circulation was determined to be adequate, including sufficient street widths to allow for fire truck turn around and sufficient access to residential buildings. Therefore emergency vehicle access is adequate and potential impacts will be less than significant.
(f) (Transit, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Facilities) Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation: There is no proposed aspect of the
project that would directly decrease performance or safety of existing alternative transportation facilities. However, the absence of bike lanes along Pratt Avenue inhibit the use of alternative transportation and opportunities exist to improve consistency with the City’s Bike and Pedestrian Plan and are addressed in more detail below under “Bicycle Facilities”.
Public Transit
The primary transit service in Napa County is provided by the VINE, a fixed-route bus service providing service to Calistoga, St. Helena, Napa, American Canyon, Yountville, and parts of unincorporated Napa County. Two routes pass through St. Helena along S.R. 29: routes 10 and 29. Route 10 provides service from Calistoga to Napa, including stops in St. Helena, Rutherford and Oakville, running seven days a week, all day and including weekends. Route 29, the Vine Express, is a commuter bus operating from early morning through late afternoon, Monday through Friday. The Vine Express extends from Calistoga to the Vallejo