3-1STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN

3VISION

• CommunityworkshopsonNovember13and29,2012

• PhoneinterviewsconductedonJanuary16-19,2013

• TheCitizensAdvisoryCommitteeonDecember19,2012andFebruary6,2013

• StaffWorkingGrouponAugust30,2012andFebruary21,2013

• TheCorridorSteeringCommitteeonNovember16,2012;andMarch21,2013

All roadway types described in theVision canbe designed in ways that can handle prelimi-nary estimates of future traffic volumes in thecorridor.Thereisawiderangeofdesignoptionsassociatedwitheachoftheroadwaytypescon-sidered, which were then explored and devel-oped in more detail after a general directionforthecorridorwasestablished.Afterinputondesign options was received, traffic modelingwasconductedtoensurethatadequatecapacityisprovidedanddesignsrefinedtooptimizeper-formanceacrossallmodes.

ROLE OF THE VISIONTheSR29GatewayCorridorImprovementPlanconsisted of two major phases: visioning andimplementation, the results ofwhich are com-binedtocreatethefinalCorridorPlan.

Thischapterdescribestheresultsofthevision-ing phase, which produced a long-term high-levelvisionforthecorridorbasedoncommunitypreferencesandregionaltransportationneeds.Itconsistsofanoverallvisionstatement,guidingprinciples, and objectives that describe generalgoalsfortransportationacrossallmodes,aswellas organizing concepts for long-term characterofimprovementsalongthecorridor.

Guidingprinciples andobjectivesweredraftedto define overarching goals before focusing onspecificdesignoptionsandotherrecommenda-tions.Thedraftprinciplesandobjectivesbuildon adopted local policies and reflect commonthemesthatemergedatthefollowingmeetingsandworkshops:

STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN3-2

In-depthanalysisofdesignoptionsanddetailedtrafficmodelingoccurredfollowingadoptionofthe Vision by the Corridor Steering Commit-tee (CSC).Theproposedprogramof improve-mentsthatresultedfromthisstageisdescribedinChapter4.

INPUT TO THE VISION PLANThe Vision is a community-based product ofseveral months of public input and focusedreview by the various committees associatedwiththeSR29GatewayCorridorImprovementPlan. The following summary describes howcommunity engagement formed the basis fortheVision,aswellasthespecificinputprovidedby the Community Advisory Committee andtheStaffWorkingGroup.

Community and Committee Invovlement

Visioning WorkshopsTwocommunityvisioningworkshopswereheldin November 2012 to solicit input on the SR29 Gateway Corridor Improvement Plan.Theworkshopsweredesignedtoengageadiversesetofcommunitymembersrepresentingarangeofinterests. The workshops provided opportuni-ties for discussion and direct input relating tothedevelopmentofa“VisionPlan”forthecor-ridor.

Over fifty community members participatedbetween the two workshops. The first work-shopwasheldinAmericanCanyononNovem-ber13,2012;29communitymembersattended,andmostwereAmericanCanyonresidents.Thesecondworkshopwas held in the city ofNapaonNovember27,2012;22communitymembersattended with participants split between Napaand American Canyon as their place of resi-dence.

Participants identified many common themessurrounding the performance and characterof the corridor, including the conflict betweenlocal and regional through traffic; a desire forimproved pedestrian and bicycle access; theimportance of beautification and communityidentity;andthechallengesofreducingautomo-bilecongestion.Thesethemesdirectlyinformedthe guiding principles and objectives presentedintheVision.

Workshopparticipantsalsotookpartinamap-pingexercise, inwhichtheyweregivenstickersrepresenting different roadway types and othertransportation-related amenities (trails, pedes-trian crossings, etc.). In small groups, partici-pantsplaced the stickersona largemapof thecorridortoillustratetheirdesiredroadwaychar-acterandpotentialimprovements.Asynthesisofthe small groups’maps and sticker placementsformedthebasisoftheHighwayCharacterDia-gram(Figure3-1)presentedinthischapter.

STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN 3-3

Workshop IdeasCommunitymembers who participated in thetwo visioning workshops reached a significantlevel of agreement, as noted above and high-lightedbelow.TheCitizensAdvisoryCommit-tee and theStaffWorkingGroupbothofferedideas for components to be included within along-term Vision Plan for the addressing thehighway’s design and community character.Many, butnot all, are part of thefinal vision.AfullsummaryoftheworkshopsisprovidedinAppendixA.

ELEMENTS THROUGHOUT CORRIDOR

• Provideparallelroutesforpedestriansandbicyclists,whichmayormaynotbewithinthehighwayright-of-way,asisappropriate.

• Examinewhetherparallellocalroutescanprovidealternativeroutestoresidents,with-outattractingthough-trafficinresidentialneighborhoods.

• Servesurroundingusesofsufficientintensitywithwell-locatedbusstops.

SEGMENT 1: SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 37

• DefertoSonomaBoulevardSpecificPlanforhighwayimprovementsandcommunitycharacter.

• Examinemethodstospeedbustransitser-vicetoandfromtheVallejoFerryTerminal,includingalongroutesinadditiontoSR29.

• Strengthentheferryterminalasaregionaltransithub.

SEGMENT 2: HIGHWAY 37 TO JUST SOUTH OF AMERICAN CANYON ROAD

• Inthesouthbounddirection,whereresiden-tialusesareadjacenttotheroadway,developaParkwaywithlandscapingandbicycle/pedestrianpathsalongtheright-of-waybutbufferedfromtraffic.

• Inthenorthbounddirection,developoptionsforaBoulevardthatallowslocalaccesstocurrentandfuturebusinessesandcreatesapedestrian-orientedenvironmentalongthehighway.

• Designa“gateway”toAmericanCanyonandtheNapaValley.

• Examinedemandforpedestriancrossings(noneidentifiedduringworkshops),aswellastheirlocationandtype.

• AccommodateaparkandridetransitnodeneartheconvergenceofSR29andSR37.

SEGMENT 3: JUST SOUTH OF AMERICAN CANYON ROAD TO NAPA JUNCTION ROAD

• Considertheappropriatebalancebetweenusersmakingregionaltripsversususersmakinglocaltripsandlocalconnectivity.

• Recommendspecificlocationsforpedes-trian/bicyclecrossingsat-gradeandbridges,suchasatAmericanCanyonRoad,Donald-sonWay,NapaJunctionRoadandtheHighSchool.

• Furtherresearchtheissuesandcostsinvolvedincreatinggradeseparatedintersec-

STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN3-4

tionsatthemajorSR29crossingsinAmeri-canCanyon.

• CreatescenictrailswithviewsofSanPabloBay.

• DevelopoptionsforaBoulevardtoallowlocalaccessandcreatepedestrian-orientedenvironmentsalongthehighwaytobedevel-opedfurther.

SEGMENT 4: NAPA JUNCTION ROAD TO JUST SOUTH OF SR 12

• CreateaParkwaywithlandscapingandotherfeaturesthatgivesthisemploymentareaadistinctidentity.

• Strivetomaintaintheruralcharacterofthissegment,especiallytotheeast.

• Provideapedestrianat-gradecrossingorbridgeatSR12andatGreenIslandRoad.

• Locatebusstopstoserveemployers.Con-siderestablishingatransitparkandridefacilitynearNapaCountyAirport.

• Providebicycle/pedestriantrailsparalleltotheCorridor,withgoodconnectionstoemployers.

• CreatescenictrailswithviewsofSanPabloBay,ifpossible.

SEGMENT 5: JUST SOUTH OF SR 12 TO URBANIZED CITY OF NAPA

• Maintainasimilarlookandfeeltocurrentconditions.RecognizeruralcharacterasimportanttotheidentityoftheNapaValley,andtourisminthearea.

• ProvideaseparatedtrailsystemparalleltotheCorridor.AddresshowthetrailcrossestheNapaRiver.

• AddressfunctionalityofintersectionofSR29withSR12/121.

• MajorintersectiontreatmentsatSR29andSR221(SoscolFlyover)

• MajorintersectiontreatmentatSR29andSR12/AirportBlvd

SEGMENT 6: FREEWAY IN URBANIZED CITY OF NAPA

• Maintainthissegmentasalimited-accessfreeway.

• Enhancethissegmentwithadditionalland-scapingandspecialfeaturestobettercreatea“gateway”tothecityandvalleybeyond.

• AddressfunctionalityofFirstStreet/SR29interchange.

ILLUSTRATIONS

Figure 3-1, the Highway Character Diagram,shows conceptually the elements of the DraftVision Plan described in the previous section.Thediagramillustratesanddescribestheroad-way type,keycharacter elements, andgeneral-izedadjacentlandusesforeachsegment.Gate-ways/Community IdentityMarkersand transi-tionpointsbetweensegmentsarealsoshown.

This diagram is a general, “high level” visualrepresentation of the ideas expressed in theVision,whichhelpedtoguidethedevelopmentof specific roadway modification options thatcan implement the specific recommendations.Chapter 4, Proposed Program, describes thespecificprogramandimprovementoptionsthatweretestedandrecommendedfollowingdevel-opmentoftheVision.

Citizens Advisory CommitteeThefeedbackfromtheworkshopswaspresentedtotheCitizensAdvisoryCommittee(CAC)onDecember19,2012;theCACwasaskedtoaffirmthegeneralvisionforthecorridorthatresultedfromtheworkshops.Then,thefirstdraftoftheVisionPlanwaspresentedtotheCAConFeb-ruary6,2013.TheCACengagedinadiscussionin which members provided specific feedbackonthedraft,whichtheconsultantteamusedtorefinethedocumentbeforepresentingittotheStaffWorkingGroup.

STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN 3-5

Figure 3-1: Highway Character Diagram

50 1

MILES

2 3 4

Gateway (Community Identity Marker)

Bridge (Vista/Landmark)

Transition

Commercial

Light Industry

Residential

Open Space

Highway Character Diagram

C i t yo f

N a p a

C i t y o fA m e r i c a n

C a n y o n

C i t yo f

V a l l e j o

N a p aC o u n t yA i r p o r t

Napa

R i v e r

M a r eI s l a n d

VallejoFerry

Terminal

RegionalPark & Ride

U n i n c o r p o r a t e dN a p a C o u n t y

Na

pa

Co

un

ty

So

lan

o C

ou

nt

y

Sonoma BlvdSpeci�c Plan Area

FAIRGROUNDS DR

MAGAZINE

ST

CURTO

LAPK

WY

SOLANO AVE

TS EESSEN

NET

SONOMA BLVD

NEWELL DR

TRANCAS ST 1S

T ST

IMO

LAAV

E

LINCO

LN AVE

AI

GROE

G S

T

37

221

1280

29

121

12

AM

ERIC

AN

CAN

YON

RD

Freeway• Small Town Identity• Landscaped Buffers• Separate Parallel Trails

Rural Highway• Vineyard Identity• Minimal Pavement• Separate Parallel Trails

Parkway• Rustic Identity• Landscaped Buffers• Adjacent Parallel Trails

Boulevard orModi�ed Boulevard• “Downtown” Identity• Local Access Provided• Bike & Pedestrian Friendly

Parkway (Southbound)Boulevard (Northbound)(optional)• Mixed Use Identity• Local Access Provided Northbound• Landscaped Buffers Southbound• Adjacent Parallel Trails on West Side

AmericanCanyon/Vallejo

Gateway

Siverado Trail/Lake Berryessa

Gateway

Urban/RuralGateway

City CenterGateway

Design Elements Abutting Land Uses(generalized)

STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN3-6

Key contributions on the Draft Vision Planincluded:

• ClarifyingthatanyidentifiedparallelroutestoSR29throughAmericanCanyonshouldbedesignedforlocaluseandaccess,ratherthanasaregionalhighwaybypass

• Includingpassengerrailasapotentialfuturemodeforthecorridor

• EnsuringthattheconceptualroadwaytypesshownontheHighwayCharacterDiagramcanactuallysupporttheamountofautomo-biletrafficprojectedforthecorridor

Staff Working GroupTheStaffWorkingGroup(SWG)reviewedtheDraft Vision Plan on February 21, 2013. ThedraftplanatthispointincorporatedthechangessuggestedbytheCACearlierinthemonth.InasimilarformattotheCACmeeting,theSWGdiscussed the emerging Vision and its variousprinciples and objectives, and provided addi-tionalfeedbackthathasnowbeenincorporatedintothisdocumentforpresentationtotheCor-ridorSteeringCommittee.

KeycontributionsoftheSWGincluded:

• ChangingtheproposedroadwaytypeforthesegmentbetweenHighway37andtheAmericanCanyoncitylimitstobedesig-natedasaparkwayinthesouthbounddirec-tion(adjacenttoexistingresidentialareas)andaboulevardinthenorthbounddirection(toprovidebetterlocalaccesstocurrentandfuturecommercialdevelopments)

• AmendingtheadjacentlandusesshownontheHighwayCharacterDiagramfortheseg-mentintheCityofNapatobetterreflecttheexistingmixoflanduses

• Recognizingthatwhilethereisastrongdesiretohaveaseparatebikewayalongthecorridor(e.g.theVineTrail),Caltranshasacommitmenttoaccommodatingbicycleswithintherightofwayaswell(exceptwhereitisafreeway)

• Ensuringthatroundaboutsarediscussedasapossibleroadwayimprovement

• Changingwordingfrom“accommodating”alternativemodesto“promoting”alternativemodes

• Separatingoutthediscussionofvariousnon-automobilemodesoftravel,ratherthantreatingthemallasonecategory

In summary, input from communitymembersdirectly informed the development of the ini-tialDraftVisionPlan,whichwasthenreviewedandrefinedbytheCACandtheSWG.ThekeychangesdescribedabovefromtheSWGandtheCAC,aswell as additionalminor revisions forclarity,were incorporated into theVisionPlanforpresentationtotheCorridorSteeringCom-mittee(CSC).

STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN 3-7

VISION STATEMENT, GUIDING PRINCIPLES, AND OBJECTIVES TheVisionStatement,GuidingPrinciples,andObjectivesbelowresultedfromthecommunityprocess and guided the formulation of specificrecommendations and improvements for thecorridor.

Guiding Principles and Objectives Guiding principles (numbered) outline actionsto achieve desired outcomes. Objectives (let-tered)describegeneralstrategies.Recommenda-tionsfordesignandperformanceimprovementsand transportation programsmade during thenextphaseoftheprojectareintendedtoimple-menttheseguidingprinciplesandobjectives.

1. Undertake improvements to reduce conges-tion and delays along the SR 29 Corridor, while balancing the corridor’s role as both a regional and a local route through American Canyon and Vallejo.

a. Undertakeimprovementstothecor-ridortoreducevehiculardelaysandcongestion,especiallyduringthepeakhours.Addnewlanes,improveinter-sectionsandconsiderothermeasurestooptimizethemobilityofpeopleandvehiclesalongthecorridor.

b. Considerbestpracticesandtechnolo-gies,includingbutnotlimitedtoexpresslanes,roundaboutswhereappropriate,andsynchronizedtrafficlights,tomaxi-mizeoperationalefficiencies.

c. Prioritizecapacityincrease(vehiclesperhour)overhighvehiclespeeds,espe-ciallyalongstretchessuchasthroughtheAmericanCanyonPriorityDevel-opmentArea(PDA),wherelocalaccessisdesired.

d. Avoidoverbuilding.Considercostofwideningthehighway.Recognizethatthecongestionproblemsusuallyoccuronlyduringcommutehours.

Vision StatementEnhance mobility along the SR 29 Cor-ridor, while ensuring that improvements are sensitive to adjacent land use and development context. Undertake strate-gic improvements to reduce automobile congestion and minimize delays. Identify opportunities for transit and passenger rail, and provide for bicycle and pedes-trian access and safety along and across the corridor. Maintain local access and enhance the identity and distinctiveness of the corridor.

STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN3-8

2. Develop solutions that are context sensitive.

a. Ensurethatplannedimprovementsaresensitivetoandrespectfuloftheplansanddesiresoflocalcommunities.

b. Developvariedsolutions—suchasboulevard,parkway,andlandscapedruralhighway—appropriatetoadjacentlandusesandconditions.

c. Enhancecorridoridentityasaprinci-pal“Gateway”totheNapaValley.

d. SeektoprovidefrontageroadsintheAmericanCanyonPDA,potentiallywithparkingalongsomestretches,toenhanceaccesstobusinessesandotherdevelopmentsandeaseofmovementforlocaltraffic.

3. Reduce motorists’ need to use SR 29 by man-aging demand and encouraging use of alter-native/parallel routes for local trips.

a. Promotealternativestotravelinginsingle-occupantvehiclesbypromotingpublictransit,parkandridefacilities,carpooling/vanpooling,bicycleuseandwalking.

b. Promotetransportationdemandman-agementprogramssuchasalternativeworkschedulesandtelecommuting,especiallyamongmajoremployers.

c. Supportlocalandregionalgrowthmanagementeffortstoreducefuturetraveldemandalongthecorridor,suchasbybalancingjobsandhousing.

d. Encouragemotoriststomaketripsalongthecorridorduringoff-peakratherthanpeaktraveltimes.

e. Encouragedevelopmentoflocal-serv-ingroutesthatwillgiveresidentsalter-nativestoSR29forlocaltrips.

4. Expand the network of pedestrian paths and supporting infrastructure to provide conve-nient routes to work, schools, open space, and commercial destinations.

a. CreatecontinuouspedestrianfacilitiesalongbothsidesofSR29.WheretheroadwayisdesignatedasaBoulevard,theseshouldbesidewalks;wheretheroadwayisdesignatedasaparkwayoraruralhighway,thesemaybeonmulti-usepathsadjacenttothehighway.Pedestrianfacilitiesonparallelfacilitiesmayalsobeoffered.

b. Providesafepedestriancrossingsinconvenientlocations.Studywhetherat-gradecrossingsorpedestrianbridgesaremoreappropriatebasedonwhetherpedestrianswillusethefacilityasintendedandimplicationsfortrafficcongestion.

c. Createapedestrian-orientedenviron-mentandimprovestreetscapes,ensur-ingfullaccesstoandbetweenpublicareasandprivatedevelopments.

STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN 3-9

5. Expand the network of bicycle paths and sup-porting infrastructure to provide convenient access to destinations, and promote travel by bicycle as a viable alternative to the automo-bile.

a. ProvidecontinuousbicycleaccesswithintheSR29rightofway,perCaltrans’standards,exceptwheretheroadwayisalimited-accessfreeway.

b. WherepracticalandconsistentwithplansfortheVineTrail,createaddi-tionalbicycleroutesparallelto,butseparatefrom,theSR29rightofway.PrioritizecreationofClassImulti-usepathsthatcatertorecreationalbicy-clists.

c. Ensurethatbicycletravelisfacilitatedbyclearsignageandwayfindingele-ments,focusingonprovidingguid-ancewherethebicyclepathsintersectwithhighwayinterchangesandothersimilarlycomplexnaturalormanmadefeatures.

6. Maintain the safety, health and livability of local communities, especially adjacent resi-dential areas.

a. Calmtrafficonlocalroutesthatparal-lelSR29.

b. Preserveandaccentuateuniqueanddesirablecommunitycharacterandtheexistingqualityoflifeinadjacentneighborhoods.

7. Promote convenient and reliable public tran-sit to encourage its use by commuters and to provide reasonable options for getting to local destinations.

a. Minimizetransittraveltimeswithimprovementsandoperationaltech-nologies,suchasdeployingmethodsthatprioritizebusmovementalongthecorridorandpotentialBusRapidTran-sitservice.

b. Supportconvenientaccesstotransitwherehomesandjobsareconcen-trated.

8. Use highway improvements to enhance com-munity character and promote economic development.

a. Designhighwayimprovementstocomplementandsupporttheenvi-sionedcharacterofcorridorsegments,asindicatedbytheHighwayCharacterDiagram(Figure3-1).

b. Wherethecorridorisdesignatedasa“freeway,”improvementsshould:

• IncorporatelandscapefeaturesandmotifsthataresimilartowhatthoseassociatedwithNapaValleyvineyardsandheritageroadways;

• Ensurethatadequatevisualandtrafficnoisebarriersfromadjacentdevelopmentareprovided,andthatthesebarriersaredesignedwithahighlevelofaestheticconsider-ation;and

Photo credits: NCTPA (above) and Napa Valley Vine Trail (below)

STATE ROUTE 29 GATEWAY CORRIDOR IMPROVEMENT PLAN3-10

• Provideadditionalandcontinuousbicycleandpedestrianaccessout-sideof,butparalleltoandincloseproximityto,thehighwayrightofway.Bicyclesandpedestriansarenotallowedonthefreeway.

c. Wherethecorridorisdesignatedasa“ruralhighway,”improvementsshould:

• IncorporatelandscapefeaturesandmotifsthataresimilartowhatthoseassociatedwithNapaValleyvineyardsandheritageroadways;

• Minimizeuseofmorepavementthanisfunctionallynecessary;

• Allowbicycleaccesswithinthehighwayrightofway,atasafedis-tancefromautomobiletraffic;and

• Provideadditionalcontinuousandparallelmulti-usetrails,althoughthesemaybeatadistancefromthehighway.

d. Wherethecorridorisdesignatedasa“parkway,”improvementsshould:

• Createandmaintainbicycle-pedes-triantrailsparalleltoandwithinand/oradjacenttothehighwayright-of-way;

• Providealandscapedbufferbetweentrailsandtraffic;

• Providealandscapedbufferbetweentrailsandabuttinguses;and

• Usedesignfeaturesandmotifsalongthatcomplementandhigh-lighttheuniquecharacterofthedifferentparkwaysegmentsthatwilloccur,asaregenerallydescribedintheHighwayCharacterDiagram.

e. Wherethecorridorisdesignatedasa“boulevard:”

• Provideanattractivepedestrianroutealongtheoutsideedgeofthehighwaythatencouragesdevelop-menttohaveentrancesthatfrontontotheboulevard;

• Ensurethatsafeandconvenientbicycleroutesareprovidedwithinthehighwayright-of-way;and

• Ensurethatstreettrees,lightstandardsandfurnishingscreateanurbanenvironmentsupportiveofadjacentmixofusesandhigherdevelopmentintensities.

f. Createunique“gateways”atkeyentrancestocommunities,districts,andalongtheNapaValleyVineTrail.Uselandscaping,publicartandsignagetoaccentuategatewaysincontext-sen-sitiveways.

g. Throughdesigntreatment—suchasgatewaylandscaping,lighting,signsandbanners—highlightthebridgesalongSR29(i.e.theNapaRivercross-ing)tobelandmarksthatheightenawarenessoftheirvistasandgeography.

h. Designimprovementsandoperationstosupportlandusepatternsonadja-centproperties,consistentwithlocalpoliciesandregionalplanninggoals.

i. Implementprocedurestoensureongo-ingdialogueandconsultationashigh-waydesignsaredevelopedamonglocaljurisdictions,Caltrans,andNCTPA.

j. Minimizenegativeeconomicimpactsduringtheconstructionofimprove-ments.

9. Support planned development activities.

a. Usehighwayimprovementstoencour-agecompactdevelopmentalongthecorridorinlocationsconsistentwithlocalgeneralplansandwheretransitservicemaybeprovided.

b. Inurbanlocations,encouragebuildingandsitedesignthathelpscreatepedes-trianenvironmentsthatareattractiveandsafe.

c. Filterpollutantsfromurbanandhigh-wayrunoffwithgreeninfrastructure,especiallybyusingfeaturesthatincor-porateattractivepavingandlandscap-ing.