Napa City Council
September 15, 2026

Yes, there are cumulative factors due to an increased
number of property acquisitions, including up to two
businesses. This alternative would acquire the Napa
Marble & Granite Works property and result in a major
impact on or full acquisition of the Napa Tires & Wheels property. This alternative would also acquire two
residences on the parcel at 1010 East Avenue.

These factors would cumulatively result in impacts to the existing community character and local economy by
demolishing several existing buildings surrounding the
Project intersection and displacing up to two residences and two businesses. In particular, displacement of the
Napa Marble & Granite Works business would cause a
unique problem for the Tulocay Cemetery, an assumed
Section 4(f) property, due to its existing business
relationship of purchasing grave markers and headstones from Napa Marble & Granite Works. Therefore, according
to this factor, Alternative 1 has been determined not to be feasible and prudent.
2 Five-legged
roundabout
Yes, no other
4(f) resources
impacted.

No, this alternative
might meet P&N
but may
compromise
operation and
safety element of
the P&N as
compared to the
Project. Alternative
2 would reduce
conflict points at
the Project
intersection.

No, this alternative
would not result in
unacceptable safety
or operational
problems because it
would improve
existing conditions;
however, it would
increase traffic
delays, pedestrian
crossing distances,
and vehicular
speeds as
compared to the
Project.

This alternative would result in a full acquisition of three commercial properties and full acquisition of a residential property, potentially resulting in social and economic impacts to the local community. − Napa Marble & Granite Works (9 Coombsville Road), located on the east corner of the intersection between East Avenue and Coombsville Road would be fully acquired and demolished. The parcel would be completely within the footprint of the new roundabout.
− Napa Tire & Wheels (713 Silverado Trail) is an automobile service business. The southbound SR 121 exit from the
roundabout would impact the existing overhang/carport
structure on the property. Both existing driveways would be impacted, and it may be challenging to identify an acceptable location to provide a new driveway that provides sufficient distance from the roundabout. Discussions with the business owners will determine if full acquisition is required. Due to the nature of the business, contaminated soils are likely present in the area.
− Posh Motors (800 Silverado Trail) is assumed to require acquisition due to elimination of both driveways to the parking lot used to store and display inventory.
− This alternative would also result in the acquisition of the multi- family residential parcel at 1010 East Avenue containing two residences.

There would be additional
costs associated with
right-of-way acquisition,
including up to three
businesses and one
residential property. There
would also likely be
additional cost associated
with soil remediation and
monitoring for the Napa
Tire & Wheels property.

These costs would be an
increase but are not
anticipated to be of an
extraordinary magnitude,
however, these cost
increases could bring into
question the
reasonableness for the
expenditure of public
funds.

While Napa Marble
& Granite Works (9
Coombsville Road)
is not a listed
historic resource,
the family-owned
business has been
in operation for
nearly 80 years
and there is a
strong relationship
between the
business, which
introduces a
unique problem
because this
business makes
grave markers and
headstones for
Tulocay Cemetery.

Yes, there are cumulative factors due to an increased
number of property acquisitions, including up to three
businesses and two residences. These factors would
cumulatively result in impacts to the existing community character and local economy by demolishing several
existing buildings surrounding the Project intersection and displacing up to two residences and three
businesses. In particular, displacement of the Napa
Marble & Granite Works business would cause a unique
problem for the Tulocay Cemetery, an assumed Section
4(f) property, due to its existing business relationship of purchasing grave markers and headstones from Napa
Marble & Granite Works.

Cumulative projects in the area are anticipated to result in network changes to SR 121 to address cut through
traffic at Hennessey Drive, including left-turn restrictions.

The implementation of left-turn restrictions at Hennessey Drive, a likely outcome of the roundabout construction, would result in operational deficiencies on Third Street (LOS E). Unacceptable LOS conditions along Third
Street would cause unique problems for the local
community because Third Street connects local
residential and commercial uses to SR 121 and Napa’s
downtown area, west of the Project intersection. These
factors would cumulatively result in unique problems for the existing community character and local economy,
resulting in severe disruption to an established
community. Therefore, according to this factor,
Alternative 2 has been determined not to be feasible and prudent.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-38 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026

3 Two
roundabout
intersections
with 3rd
Street
rerouted to
the southern
roundabout
Yes, no other
4(f) resources
impacted.

Yes, compromises
the P&N because
it does not improve
operations
The AM and PM
queue for
southbound
vehicles on SR
121 entering the
southern
roundabout will
likely extend more
than 150’, which is
the available
distance between
roundabouts in this
alternative. This
means the queue
would spill back
into the northern
roundabout,
creating significant
delay. Therefore,
according to this
factor, Alternative
3 has been
determined not to
be feasible and
prudent.

Operational
Problems
The AM and PM
queue for
southbound
vehicles on SR 121
entering the
southern
roundabout will
likely extend more
than 150’, which is
the available
distance between
roundabouts in this
alternative. This
means the queue
would spill back into
the northern
roundabout,
creating significant
delay. Therefore,
according to this
factor, Alternative 3
has been
determined not to
be feasible and
prudent.

This alternative would likely result in a full acquisition of three commercial properties and a major or full acquisition of a fourth property, potentially resulting in social and economic impacts to the local community.
− Posh Motors (800 Silverado Trail) is a used car dealership which uses the parking lot on their property to store and display inventory. This alternative would require acquisition of a significant portion of the parking area which eliminates the commercial viability of the property as a car dealership. Full acquisition would be anticipated.
− Napa Tire & Wheels (713 Silverado Trail) is an automobile service business. 3rd Street would be realigned through the center of their property, and a full acquisition is anticipated. Due to the nature of the business, contaminated soils are likely present in the area.
− Napa Marble & Granite Works (9 Coombsville Road) is a monument and grave marker business. Both existing driveways to the property would be eliminated with this alternative and there are no viable locations to provide a new driveway. Full acquisition would be anticipated.
− The commercial center on the southeast corner of Third Street and Juarez Street includes multiple businesses, such as an appliance store, plumbing showroom, and children’s event venue. Third Street would be realigned through the property, requiring demolition of a portion of the existing building. Some commercial utility of the remaining unused property may be possible, and an existing driveway onto Juarez Street would remain. Major acquisition is anticipated, though full acquisition may be required depending on discussion with property owner. − The residential property at 1010 East Avenue would require partial acquisition and may require driveway realignment.

There would be additional
costs associated with
right-of-way acquisition,
including up to three
businesses, potential full
acquisition of a
commercial center at
Third Street and Juarez
Street, and partial
acquisition of the
residential property at
1010 East Avenue. There
would also likely be
additional cost associated
with soil remediation and
monitoring for the Napa
Tire & Wheels property.

These costs would be an
increase but are not
anticipated to be of an
extraordinary magnitude,
however, these cost
increases could bring into
question the
reasonableness for the
expenditure of public
funds..

While Napa Marble
& Granite Works (9
Coombsville Road)
is not a listed
historic resource,
the family-owned
business has been
in operation for
nearly 80 years
and there is a
strong relationship
between the
business, which
makes grave
markers and
headstones, and
the nearby Tulocay
Cemetery.

Yes, there are cumulative factors due to an increased
number of property acquisitions, including three or more businesses. The alternative would fully acquire the Posh Motors, Napa Tire & Wheels, Napa Marble & Granite
Works properties and would result in a major impact on
or full acquisition of the commercial center on the
southeast corner of Third Street and Juarez Street.

This alternative would also result in partial acquisition of the 1010 East Avenue properties and may require
driveway relocations.

These factors would cumulatively result in impacts to the existing community character and local economy by
demolishing several existing buildings surrounding the
Project intersection and displacing up three businesses.

In particular, displacement of the Napa Marble & Granite Works business would cause a unique problem for the
Tulocay Cemetery, an assumed Section 4(f) property,
due to its existing business relationship of purchasing grave markers and headstones from Napa Marble &
Granite Works. Therefore, according this factor,
Alternative 3 has been determined not to be feasible and prudent.
4 Two
signalized
intersections
Yes, no other
4(f) resources
impacted.

Yes, compromises
the P&N because
it does not improve
operations or
bicycle/pedestrian
safety
Closely spaced
signals may create
queues for SR 121
through traffic that
conflict or spill
back into the other
intersection,
causing delay.

Long, skewed
crossings for bikes
and pedestrians
remain, which
contribute to safety
concerns.

Therefore,
according to this
factor, Alternative
4 has been
determined not to
be feasible and
prudent.

Safety and
Operational
Problems
Closely spaced
signals may create
queues for SR 121
through traffic that
conflict or spill back
into the other
intersection,
causing delay.

Long, skewed
crossings for bikes
and pedestrians
remain, which
contribute to safety
concerns.

Therefore,
according to this
factor, Alternative 4
has been
determined not to
be feasible and
prudent.

This alternative would likely require major acquisition of at least one residential property (36 Coombsville Road) to reroute Coombsville Road to a new three-legged signalized intersection.

If suitable driveway access cannot be maintained for Napa Marble & Granite Works (9 Coombsville Road), full acquisition of this property may be required, potentially resulting in social and economic impacts to the local community.

No, this alternative would
not result in additional
cost of an extraordinary
magnitude.

While Napa Marble
& Granite Works (9
Coombsville Road)
is not a listed
historic resource,
the family-owned
business has been
in operation for
nearly 80 years
and there is a
strong relationship
between the
business, which
makes grave
markers and
headstones, and
the nearby Tulocay
Cemetery.

No, the alternative does not involve cumulative factors that cause unique problems or impacts of extraordinary
magnitude.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-39 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026
Chapter 6 Measures to Minimize Harm to the
Section 4(f) Property
After determining there are no feasible and prudent alternatives to avoid the use of a Section 4(f) property, the project approval process for the Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation requires that the action includes all possible planning, as defined in 23 CFR 774.17, to minimize harm to a Section 4(f) property resulting from such use, as stated in project approval as defined in 23 CFR 774.3 (a)(2).

All possible planning, as defined in 23 CFR 774.17, means that all reasonable measures (identified in the Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation) to minimize harm or mitigate adverse impacts and effects must be included in the proposed project:

1. With regard to public parks, recreation areas, and wildlife and waterfowl refuges, the measures may include, but not be limited to, design modifications or design goals; replacement of land or facilities of comparable value and function; or monetary compensation to enhance the remaining property or to mitigate the adverse impacts of the project in other ways.

2. With regard to historic sites, the measures normally serve to preserve the historic activities, features, or attributes of the site as agreed to by Caltrans as the NEPA- federal lead agency and the official(s) with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resource in accordance with the Section 106 consultation process under 36 CFR part 800 Protection of Historic Properties.

3. In evaluating the reasonableness of measures to minimize harm under 23 CFR 774.3(a)(2), Caltrans will consider the preservation purpose of the statute and:
a. The views of the official(s) with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) property; b. Whether the cost of the measures is a reasonable public expenditure in light of the adverse impacts of the project on the Section 4(f) property and the benefits of the measure to the property, in accordance with 23 CFR 771.105(d); and
c. Any impacts or benefits of the measures to communities or environmental resources outside of the Section 4(f) property.

4. All possible planning does not require analysis of feasible and prudent avoidance alternatives, since such analysis will have already occurred in the context of searching for feasible and prudent alternatives that avoid Section 4(f) properties altogether under 23 CFR 774.3(a)(1) or is not necessary in the case of a de minimis impact determination under 23 CFR 774.3(b).

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-40 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026
When neither avoidance nor reduction is possible in establishing final design, construction, and operation details of the undertaking, mitigation measures must be agreed on by the appropriate parties through preparation of a project-specific agreement document.47 The Build Alternative was designed as two, single-lane roundabouts to minimize impacts on adjacent land uses, including minimizing property acquisitions on adjacent parcels within the East Napa Historic District. The following mitigation measure included in the Final EIR/EA is recommended for agreement among the funding, construction, operation, consulting, and review parties.

MM CULT-1.1: Historic Resource Preservation: Following construction, the Project Sponsor will prepare, in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO), an evaluation of the East Napa Historic District for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. In consultation with Section 106 stakeholders and the SHPO, Caltrans and the City of Napa will implement mitigation measures specific to the effects to the East Napa Historic District, including but not limited to, installation of identification signs and interpretive materials providing information on the history of the neighborhood, and recordation of 801 Silverado Trail consistent with Historic American Building Survey (HABS) standards maintained in local repositories. These mitigation measures are captured in a Memorandum of Agreement between Caltrans as the NEPA lead agency, the stakeholders, and the SHPO.

Recordation of the 801 Silverado Trail property and submittal to local repositories will ensure information about the property and East Napa Historic District are accessible to the public.

47 36 CFR 800.6.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-41 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026
Chapter 7 Least Harm Analysis and
Concluding Statement
As stated in Chapter 1, Section 4(f) requires that when there are no “prudent and feasible” avoidance alternatives to the “use” of Section 4(f) properties, and multiple build alternatives are being evaluated, the lead federal agency must choose from the remaining build alternatives that use the Section 4(f) property and select the alternative that causes the “least overall harm” in light of the statute’s preservation purpose. Since there were only two alternatives under consideration, the Build and No Build Alternatives, and the preceding section concluded there are no prudent and feasible alternatives, the analysis for least harm is not required. The following is only for informational purposes. As provided in 23 CFR 774.3(c)(1), the least overall harm is determined by balancing the following seven factors:

1. Ability to mitigate adverse impacts on each Section 4(f) property, including any measures that result in benefits to the property.

2. Relative severity of the remaining harm, after mitigation, to the protected activities, attributes, or features that qualify each Section 4(f) property for protection.

3. Relative significance of each Section 4(f) property.

4. Views of the official(s) with jurisdiction over each Section 4(f) property.

5. Degree to which each alternative meets the Purpose and Need for the project.

6. After reasonable mitigation, the magnitude of any adverse impacts on resources not protected by Section 4(f).

7. Substantial differences in cost among the project alternatives.

The first four factors relate to the net harm that each project alternative would cause to the Section 4(f) property, and the remaining three factors take into account concerns with the project alternatives that are not specific to Section 4(f).

As discussed in Chapter 5, there is no feasible and prudent alternative that meets the Purpose and Need and avoids the use of the Section 4(f) property. The No-Build Alternative is the only avoidance alternative under consideration, but it is not prudent because it compromises the proposed Project to a degree that it is unreasonable to proceed with the Project in light of the stated Purpose and Need. Multiple Build Alternatives are not being evaluated and there is only one Build Alternative under consideration; it is the only alternative that meets the Purpose and Need. Section

3.3.3.2 of the FHWA Section 4(f) Policy Paper states that the least harm alternative analysis is required when multiple alternatives that use a Section 4(f) property remain under consideration. For the proposed Project, only the Build Alternative is still being considered; therefore, a least harm analysis is not required.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-42 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026
Following circulation of the Draft EIR/EA, careful evaluation of all comments submitted by the public, and in consideration of the whole record, the Project Development Team (PDT) selected the Build Alternative as the Preferred Alternative on March 3, 2026. The Build Alternative meets the purpose, needs, and goals of the proposed Project while the No Build Alternative does not. For more information on alternatives that were previously considered but eliminated from consideration, see Chapter 5 of this evaluation.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-43 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026
Chapter 8 Coordination
Under 23 CFR 774.5, prior to making Section 4(f) approvals under 23 CFR 774.3(a), the Draft Section 4(f) Evaluation was provided for coordination and comment to the official with jurisdiction over the Section 4(f) resource and to the Department of the Interior. A minimum of 30 days was provided for receipt of comments from the Department of Interior. If comments were not received within 15 days after the comment deadline, a lack of objection is assumed, and the action may proceed. The Draft Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation was transmitted to the Department of Interior on August 28, 2025, concurrent with the public circulation period of the Draft EIR/EA. No response from the Department of Interior was received by October 27, 2025 nor at the time of writing this Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation. Therefore, a lack of objection is assumed.

In the case of historic properties, the official with jurisdiction is the SHPO for the state wherein the property is located or, if the property is located on tribal land, the official with jurisdiction is the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer. When the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) is involved with consultation concerning a property under Section 106 of the NHPA, the ACHP is also an official with jurisdiction over the resource for purposes of this part. When the property is a National Historic Landmark, the NPS is also an official with jurisdiction over the resource.

For purposes of this Project, the East Napa Historic District is considered eligible for listing in the NRHP, and SHPO is the official with jurisdiction over the district. SHPO concurred with this consideration of eligibility on August 27, 2024 and with individual findings stating that 801 Silverado Trail and other nearby properties were not individually eligible for listing in the NRHP on April 7, 2025. The SHPO stated on November 19, 2025, that they had no objection to Caltrans’s Finding of Adverse Effect for the Project. Additionally, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) has been negotiated between Caltrans, the SHPO, and other Section 106 stakeholders. As part of the Section 106 process, public participation efforts and outreach were conducted with local historical societies and Native American tribes.

8.1 Native American Consultation
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) completed a search of its Sacred Lands File for the Project area on April 22, 2024. The results were positive, and NAHC recommended contacting the tribes on the list provided for further information.

Consultation initiation letters under Section 106 and AB 52 were sent on August 7, 2024, by US Mail and email to 16 individuals representing 8 tribal organizations. Follow- up emails were sent on September 3, 2024.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-44 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026
Individual Tribal Organization
Jennie Mitchum, Cultural Preservation
Director
Cachil Dehe Band Wintun Indians Colusa
Indian Community
Wayne Mitchum Jr., Chairman Cachil Dehe Band Wintun Indians Colusa Indian Community
Charlie Wright, Chairperson Cortina Rancheria Kletsel Dehe Band Wintun Indians
Ronald Kirk, Chairperson Grindstone Rancheria of Wintun-Wailaki Bunny Tarin, Tribal Administrator Guidiville Rancheria of California Michael Derry, Historian Guidiville Rancheria of California Christi Gabaldon, Tribal Monitor Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley Scott Gabaldon, Chairperson Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley Richard Massiatt, Councilmember Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the SF Bay Area Charlene Nijmeh, Chairperson Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the SF Bay Area Erica Carson, THPO Pinoleville Pomo Nation
Leona Willams, Chairperson Pinoleville Pomo Nation
Anthony Roberts, Chairperson Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
Leland Kinter, Tribal Treasurer Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Yvonne Perkins, THPO, Cultural Resources
Chairman
Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
James Kinter, Tribal Secretary Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation

The following responses were received:

Muwekma Ohlone Tribe of the SF Bay Area
• Richard Massiatt of the Muwekma Ohlone Tribe replied on August 16. He stated that the Tribe declined consultation because the Project area was outside the Tribe’s jurisdiction.

Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley
• On August 9, 2024, Scott Gabaldon of the Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley requested to be notified of any work being done in the Project area, and also requested that a “tribal monitor be on site at all times.” • On September 18, 2024, a response from the Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley (Mishewal-Wappo) would like to consult on the Project. Phone

EXHIBIT A
Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-45 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026
calls were also received from the Mishewal-Wappo on September 23 and October 25, 2024, to request consultation and monitoring. • A consultation meeting with Tek-Tekh was held on December 9, 2024. Present were representatives from the City of Napa, Caltrans District 4, David J. Powers and Associates, and A/HC. In the meeting, Tek-Tekh stated that the tribe considered the whole Area of Potential Effects (APE) to be culturally sensitive as part of their territory from over 10,000 years ago, through the time they worked for Cayetano Juarez, who lived 0.5 miles south of the APE, to now. The tribe requested to monitor construction work. Consultation with the Mishewal-Wappo is ongoing.

Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation
• On October 30, 2024, a response was received from the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, stating their interest in a consultation meeting and requesting additional information.
• A consultation meeting was held on December 16, 2024, with representatives of Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation, Socorro Reyes-Gutierez and Eric Hernandez. Also present were representatives from the City of Napa, Caltrans District 4, David J.

Powers and Associates, and A/HC. At the meeting, tribal representatives stated they would like to provide cultural sensitivity training for the construction crew, be present to monitor the initial ground disturbing work, and monitor any construction on the water system. Additionally, they requested the City of Napa ensure the soil brought in for fill to raise the grade of the Project area be sterile and to be included in ongoing Project updates and scheduling. Consultation with the Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation is ongoing.

No responses were received from the following Tribes as of October 30, 2024:
• Cachil Dehe Band Wintun Indians Colusa Indian Community • Cortina Rancheria Kletsel Dehe Band Wintun Indians
• Grindstone Rancheria of Wintun-Wailaki
• Guidiville Rancheria of California
• Pinoleville Pomo Nation.

8.2 Section 106 Consultation
On August 12, 2024, Section 106 consultation was initiated with six organizations and local agencies with an interest in historical resources in Napa. The consultation letters provided an overview of the Project, a list of properties to be surveyed and evaluated, and the signed APE map. Organizations were invited to comment or ask questions regarding the Project.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-46 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026
Responses received were as follows:
• Anthony Halstead, Director of Library Services and Community Outreach at the Napa County Library, responded by email on August 13, 2024. He expressed thanks for the letter and said that he would make it available for public viewing. • Mark Perkins, President of the Napa Valley Genealogical Society, responded by email on August 14, 2024. He spoke with Society member Gail Martin and shared her memories of the neighborhood in the email. He also suggested contacting Ray Guadagni, a longtime resident, through NCHS. Mr. Guadagni was sent a consultation letter on September 3, 2024.
• Mayra Espinoza, Clerk of the City of Napa Cultural Heritage Commission, responded by email on August 19, 2024, that she would forward the letter to her manager and CHC.
• Laura Rafaty, Executive Director of the Napa Valley Museum, responded by email on August 26, 2024. She said that they had no information to share. • Sheli Smith, Executive Director of NCHS, responded by email on August 27, 2024, and said that they do not have any comments.
• Christine Madrid French, Executive Director of Napa County Landmarks, responded by email on September 9, 2024, and requested that 801 Silverado Trail be fully documented with photographs and a short site history prior to demolition. Salvage and reuse of any period or historically significant materials and resources were strongly encouraged prior to demolition. Ms. French also pointed out inscribed stones in front of 9 Coombsville Road (MR#4) and vernacular river rock constructions, remnants of the Edward Brown Public Rest Station at 427-441 Third Street (MR#8). Napa County Landmarks had no further information on the rock constructions. The inscribed stones were documented and added to the DPR 523 forms for 9 Coombsville Road. The Edward Brown Public Rest Station was recorded, evaluated, and added to this report.

No other responses were received as of the writing of this report.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-47 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026

Chapter 9 Resources Evaluated Relative to
the Requirements of the Section
4(f): No-Use Determination(s)
Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966, codified in federal law at 49 United States Code (USC) 303, declares that “it is the policy of the United States Government that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public park and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites.”
This section of the document discusses parks, recreational facilities, wildlife refuges, and historic properties found within or next to the Project area that do not trigger Section 4(f) protection because: 1) they are not publicly owned, 2) they are not open to the public, 3) they are not eligible historic properties, or 4) the project does not permanently use the property and does not hinder the preservation of the property.

9.1 Napa Valley Expo
The Napa Valley Expo is a State-owned property that is used to host the annual Napa Town and Country Fair, Bottlerock Napa Valley, and other events. The 34-acre property consists of open fields, parking lots, and several buildings. The property does not appear to be eligible for listing as a historic resource due to a lack of historic integrity because few of the buildings on the site are historic, and those that are appear to have been altered.48 Additionally, according to the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Section 4(f) Policy Paper (July 2012), Section 4(f) is not applicable to publicly owned fairgrounds that function primarily for commercial purposes, such as county fairs, rather than as park or recreation areas. The Napa Valley Expo functions primarily for commercial events rather than a publicly accessible park or recreation area. For these reasons, the Napa Valley Expo is not considered a Section 4(f) protected property and, therefore, the provisions of Section 4(f) do not apply.

9.2 Residential and Commercial Properties
Other residential and commercial properties were evaluated and determined not eligible for listing in the CRHR or NRHP including 820 Juarez Street, 802 Juarez Street, 9 Coombsville Road, 1010 East Avenue, 713 Silverado Trail, and 36 Coombsville Road.

The properties at 9 Coombsville Road, 1010 East Avenue, and 713 Silverado Trail have no historic significance and therefore, are not considered Section 4(f) protected properties.

48 Page & Turnbull, Inc. Soscol Gateway/East Napa Historic Context Statement & Survey Report. January 2010.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements A-48 Final Individual Section 4(f) Evaluation Napa, California July 2026
However, 820 Juarez Street and 802 Juarez Street are contributing properties to the East Napa Historic District. As previously discussed in Chapter 3, the East Napa Historic District is considered eligible for listing in the NRHP for the purposes of this analysis. As contributing properties to an eligible historic district, 820 Juarez Street and 802 Juarez Street are considered Section 4(f) protected properties. However, no “use” would occur to these properties under the proposed Build Alternative. Therefore, the provisions of Section 4(f) are not triggered because these properties will be completely avoided by the proposed Project.

9.3 Tulocay Cemetery
The Tulocay Cemetery, located at 411 Coombsville Road, is adjacent to the east of the Project. The cemetery is not currently included on any list of historic resources including the CRHR, NRHP, Napa County Landmarks, City of Napa’s HRI, and the State Built Environment Resources Directory. However, the cemetery was founded in 1858 and has associations with several important themes and individuals in local history. While the cemetery has not been formally evaluated, it would likely be found eligible for listing as a historic resource if evaluated.49 Therefore, for the development of the alternatives described in Chapter 5, the Tulocay Cemetery was considered eligible for listing as a historic resource and a Section 4(f) protected property. However, no “use” would occur to the Tulocay Cemetery under the proposed Build Alternative. Therefore, the provisions of Section 4(f) are not triggered because this property will be completely avoided by the proposed Project.

49 D. Shoup, Principal at Archaeological/Historical Consultants. Personal Communication. February 24, 2025.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements B-1 Appendix B
Napa, California July 2026
Appendix B Title VI/Non-Discrimination Policy
Statement
Caltrans’ Title VI/Non-Discrimination Policy Statement is included below.

EXHIBIT A

CALIFORNIA STATE TRANSPORTATION AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, GOVERNOR •·
litltmns·
California Department of Transportation

OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR
P.O. BOX 942873, MS-49 I SACRAMENTO, CA 94273-0001
(916) 654-6130 I FAX (916) 653-5776 TTY 711
www.dot.ca.gov
September 2025

TITLE VI/NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY STATEMENT
It is the policy of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the assurances set forth in the Caltrans' Title VI Program Plan, to ensure that no person in the United States shall on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance. Related non-discrimination authorities, remedies, and state law further those protections, including sex, disability, religion, sexual orientation, age, low income, and Limited English Proficiency (LEP).

Caltrans is committed to complying with 23 C.F.R. Part 200, 49 C.F.R. Part 21, 49 C.F.R. Part 303, and the Federal Transit Administration Circular 4702.1 B. Caltrans will make every effort to ensure nondiscrimination in all of its services, programs, and activities, whether they are federally funded or not, and that services and benefits are fairly distributed to all people, regardless of race, color, or national origin (including LEP). In addition, Caltrans will facilitate meaningful participation in the transportation planning process in a non-discriminatory manner.

The overall responsibility for this policy is assigned to the Caltrans Director. The Caltrans Title VI Coordinator is assigned to the Caltrans Office of Civil Rights Deputy Director, who then delegates sufficient responsibility and authority to the Office of Civil Rights' managers, including the Title VI Branch Manager, to effectively implement the Caltrans Title VI Program. Individuals with questions or requiring additional information relating to the policy or the implementation of the Caltrans Title VI Program should contact the Title VI Branch Manager at [email protected] or at (916) 639-6392, or visit the following web page: https://dot.ca.gov/programs/civil-rights/title-vi. ep 12, 2025 16:52:12 PDT)
DINA A. EL-TAWANSY
Director
“Improving lives and communities through transportation.”

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements C-1 Appendix C
Napa, California July 2026
Appendix C Summary of Relocation Benefits

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION RELOCATION

ASSISTANCE PROGRAM

DECLARATION OF POLICY
“The purpose of this title is to establish a uniform policy for fair and equitable treatment of persons displaced as a result of federal and federally assisted programs in order that such persons shall not suffer disproportionate injuries as a result of programs designed for the benefit of the public as a whole.” The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states, “No Person shall…be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.” The Uniform Act sets forth in statute the due process that must be followed in Real Property acquisitions involving federal funds.

Supplementing the Uniform Act is the government-wide single rule for all agencies to follow, set forth in 49 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 24. Displaced individuals, families, businesses, farms, and nonprofit organizations may be eligible for relocation advisory services and financial benefits, as discussed below.

FAIR HOUSING
The Fair Housing Law (Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968) sets forth the policy of the United States to provide, within constitutional limitations, for fair housing. This act, and as amended, makes discriminatory practices in the purchase and rental of most residential units illegal. Whenever possible, minority persons shall be given reasonable opportunities to relocate to any available housing regardless of neighborhood, as long as the replacement dwellings are decent, safe, and sanitary and are within their financial means. This policy, however, does not require Caltrans to provide a person a larger payment than is necessary to enable a person to relocate to a comparable replacement dwelling.

Any persons to be displaced will be assigned to a relocation advisor, who will work closely with each displacee in order to see that all payments and benefits are fully utilized and that all regulations are observed, thereby avoiding the possibility of displacees jeopardizing or forfeiting any of their benefits or payments. At the time of the initiation of negotiations (usually the first written offer to purchase), owner-occupants are given a detailed explanation of the state’s relocation services. Tenant occupants of properties to be acquired are contacted soon after the initiation of negotiations and also are given a detailed explanation of the Caltrans Relocation Assistance Program. To avoid loss of possible benefits, no individual, family, business, farm, or nonprofit organization should commit to purchase or rent a replacement property without first contacting a Department relocation advisor.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements C-2 Appendix C
Napa, California July 2026

RELOCATION ASSISTANCE ADVISORY SERVICES
In accordance with the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended, Caltrans will provide relocation advisory assistance to any person, business, farm, or nonprofit organization displaced as a result of the acquisition of real property for public use, so long as they are legally present in the United States. Caltrans will assist eligible displacees in obtaining comparable replacement housing by providing current and continuing information on the availability and prices of both houses for sale and rental units that are “decent, safe, and sanitary.” Nonresidential displacees will receive information on comparable properties for lease or purchase (for business, farm, and nonprofit organization relocation services, see below).

Residential replacement dwellings will be in a location generally not less desirable than the displacement neighborhood at prices or rents within the financial ability of the individuals and families displaced, and reasonably accessible to their places of employment. Before any displacement occurs, comparable replacement dwellings will be offered to displacees that are open to all persons regardless of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, and consistent with the requirements of Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. This assistance will also include the supplying of information concerning federal and state assisted housing programs and any other known services being offered by public and private agencies in the area.

Persons who are eligible for relocation payments and who are legally occupying the property required for the project will not be asked to move without first being given at least 90 days written notice. Residential occupants eligible for relocation payment(s) will not be required to move unless at least one comparable “decent, safe, and sanitary” replacement dwelling, available on the market, is offered to them by Caltrans.

RESIDENTIAL RELOCATION FINANCIAL BENEFITS
The Relocation Assistance Program will help eligible residential occupants by paying certain costs and expenses. These costs are limited to those necessary for or incidental to the purchase or rental of a replacement dwelling and actual reasonable moving expenses to a new location within 50 miles of the displacement property. Any actual moving costs in excess of the 50 miles are the responsibility of the displacee. The Residential Relocation Assistance Program can be summarized as follows:

Moving Costs
Any displaced person, who lawfully occupied the acquired property, regardless of the length of occupancy in the property acquired, will be eligible for reimbursement of moving costs. Displacees will receive either the actual reasonable costs involved in moving themselves and personal property up to a maximum of 50 miles, or a fixed payment based on a fixed moving cost schedule. Lawful occupants who move into the displacement property after the initiation of negotiations must wait until Caltrans obtains control of the property in order to be eligible for relocation payments.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements C-3 Appendix C
Napa, California July 2026
Purchase Differential
In addition to moving and related expense payments, fully eligible homeowners may be entitled to payments for increased costs of replacement housing.

Homeowners who have owned and occupied their property for 90 days or more prior to the date of the initiation of negotiations (usually the first written offer to purchase the property), may qualify to receive a price differential payment and may qualify to receive reimbursement for certain nonrecurring costs incidental to the purchase of the replacement property. An interest differential payment is also available if the interest rate for the loan on the replacement dwelling is higher than the loan rate on the displacement dwelling, subject to certain limitations on reimbursement based upon the replacement property interest rate.

Rent Differential
Tenants and certain owner-occupants (based on length of ownership) who have occupied the property to be acquired by Caltrans prior to the date of the initiation of negotiations may qualify to receive a rent differential payment. This payment is made when Caltrans determines that the cost to rent a comparable “decent, safe, and sanitary” replacement dwelling will be more than the present rent of the displacement dwelling. As an alternative, the tenant may qualify for a down payment benefit designed to assist in the purchase of a replacement property and the payment of certain costs incidental to the purchase, subject to certain limitations noted under the Down Payment section below.

To receive any relocation benefits, the displaced person must buy or rent and occupy a “decent, safe and sanitary” replacement dwelling within one year from the date Caltrans takes legal possession of the property, or from the date the displacee vacates the displacement property, whichever is later.

Down Payment
The down payment option has been designed to aid owner-occupants of less than 90 days and tenants in legal occupancy prior to Caltrans’s initiation of negotiations. The one-year eligibility period in which to purchase and occupy a “decent, safe and sanitary” replacement dwelling will apply.

Last Resort Housing
Federal regulations (49 CFR 24) contain the policy and procedure for implementing the Last Resort Housing Program on Federal-aid projects. Last Resort Housing benefits are, except for the amounts of payments and the methods in making them, the same as those benefits for standard residential relocation as explained above. Last Resort Housing has been designed primarily to cover situations where a displacee cannot be relocated because of lack of available comparable replacement housing, or when the anticipated replacement housing payments exceed the limits of the standard relocation

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements C-4 Appendix C
Napa, California July 2026
procedure, because either the displacee lacks the financial ability or other valid circumstances.

After the initiation of negotiations, Caltrans will within a reasonable length of time, personally contact the displacees to gather important information, including the following:
• Number of people to be displaced.
• Specific arrangements needed to accommodate any family member(s) with special needs.
• Financial ability to relocate into comparable replacement dwelling which will adequately house all members of the family.
• Preferences in area of relocation.
• Location of employment or school.

NONRESIDENTIAL RELOCATION ASSISTANCE
The Nonresidential Relocation Assistance Program provides assistance to businesses, farms and nonprofit organizations in locating suitable replacement property, and reimbursement for certain costs involved in relocation. The Relocation Advisory Assistance Program will provide current lists of properties offered for sale or rent, suitable for a particular business’s specific relocation needs. The types of payments available to eligible businesses, farms, and nonprofit organizations are: searching and moving expenses, and possibly reestablishment expenses; or a fixed in lieu payment instead of any moving, searching and reestablishment expenses. The payment types can be summarized as follows:

Moving Expenses
Moving expenses may include the following actual, reasonable costs:
• The moving of inventory, machinery, equipment and similar business-related property, including: dismantling, disconnecting, crating, packing, loading, insuring, transporting, unloading, unpacking, and reconnecting of personal property. Items identified as real property may not be moved under the Relocation Assistance Program. If the displacee buys an Item Pertaining to the Realty back at salvage value, the cost to move that item is borne by the displacee.
• Loss of tangible personal property provides payment for actual, direct loss of personal property that the owner is permitted not to move. • Expenses related to searching for a new business site, up to $2,500, for reasonable expenses actually incurred.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements C-5 Appendix C
Napa, California July 2026
Reestablishment Expenses
Reestablishment expenses related to the operation of the business at the new location, up to $25,000 for reasonable expenses actually incurred.

Fixed In Lieu Payment
A fixed payment in lieu of moving, searching, and reestablishment payments may be available to businesses that meet certain eligibility requirements. This payment is an amount equal to half the average annual net earnings for the last two taxable years prior to the relocation and may not be less than $1,000 nor more than $40,000.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Reimbursement for moving costs and replacement housing payments are not considered income for the purpose of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, or for the purpose of determining the extent of eligibility of a displacee for assistance under the Social Security Act, or any other law, except for any federal law providing local “Section 8” Housing Programs.

Any person, business, farm or nonprofit organization that has been refused a relocation payment by Caltrans’s relocation advisor or believes that the payment(s) offered by the agency are inadequate may appeal for a special hearing of the complaint. No legal assistance is required. Information about the appeal procedure is available from the relocation advisor.

California law allows for the payment for lost goodwill that arises from the displacement for a public project. A list of ineligible expenses can be obtained from Caltrans’s Division of Right of Way and Land Surveys. California’s law and the federal regulations covering relocation assistance provide that no payment shall be duplicated by other payments being made by the displacing agency.

To learn more about the Division of Right of Way’s Relocation Assistance Program visit:
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/right-of-way/relocation-assistance-program

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-1 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
Appendix D Avoidance, Minimization and/or Mitigation Summary In order to be sure that all of the environmental measures identified in this document are executed at the appropriate times, the following mitigation program (as articulated on the proposed Environmental Commitments Record [ECR] which follows) would be implemented. During project design, avoidance, minimization, and /or mitigation measures will be incorporated into the project’s final plans, specifications, and cost estimates, as appropriate. All permits will be obtained prior to implementation of the project. During construction, environmental and construction/engineering staff will ensure that the commitments contained in this ECR are fulfilled. Following construction and appropriate phases of project delivery, long-term mitigation maintenance and monitoring will take place, as applicable. As the following ECR is a draft, some fields have not been completed, and will be filled out as each of the measures is implemented. Note: Some measures may apply to more than one resource area. Duplicative or redundant measures have not been included in this ECR.

ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure

MM-RRP-

1.1 The Project would comply with all requirements of
the Uniform Relocation Act to ensure residents
displaced by the Project would be properly
compensated and relocated, as necessary.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.5 Design Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM VIS-

1.1 The Project shall survey exact locations of existing trees and include the tree locations in the plan set
during the design phase. Where the pruning of trees
is required to accommodate construction operations,
pruning shall be done under the supervision of a
certified arborist.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.8 Design
through
Construction
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM-VIS-

1.2 Where feasible, the roundabout island, medians, and parkway strips shall be landscaped with a
combination of trees and ornamental planting.

Decorative paving shall be incorporated for areas too
narrow to plant or where planting is not easily
maintained.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.8 Design
through
Construction
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM-VIS-

1.3 Retaining walls, barriers, paving, and roundabouts
shall incorporate aesthetic treatments that use
context-sensitive design, textures, and/or colors to
Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.8 Design
through
Construction
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-2 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure
help minimize glare and support visual unity at the
Project site.

AMM VIS-

1.4 During construction operations, unsightly material
and equipment in staging areas shall be placed
where they are less visible and/or covered where
possible. Construction activities shall limit all
construction lighting to within the area of work and
avoid light trespass in residential areas through
directional lighting, shielding, and other measures as
needed.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.8 Design
through
Construction
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM VIS-

1.5 Light added as permanent features shall be shielded to the extent feasible and light trespass shall be
minimized.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.8 Design
through
Construction
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

MM CULT-

1.1 Historic Resource Preservation: Following
construction, the Project Sponsor will prepare, in
consultation with the State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO), an evaluation of the East Napa
Historic District for eligibility to the National Register of Historic Places. In consultation with Section 106
stakeholders and the SHPO, Caltrans and the City of
Napa will implement mitigation measures specific to
the effects to the East Napa Historic District,
including, but not limited to, installation of
identification signs and interpretive materials
providing information on the history of the
neighborhood and recordation of 801 Silverado Trail
consistent with the Historic American Building
Survey (HABS) standards maintained in local
repositories. These mitigation measures are
captured in a Memorandum of Agreement between
Caltrans as the NEPA lead agency, the
stakeholders, and the SHPO.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.9 Permitting Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM WQ-

1.1 Prior to any soil disturbance work, file a Notice of Intent with State Water Resources Control Board
(SWRCB). To maintain proper permit coverage
under the Construction Stormwater General Permit
Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.11 Design
Through
Construction
Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-3 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure
(CGP), in addition to filing a Notice of Intent, all
dischargers must electronically file permit registration documents, Notice of Termination, changes of
information, sampling and monitoring information,
annual reporting, and other required compliance
documents through the SWRCB’s Stormwater
Multiple Application and Report Tracking System
(SMARTS).

AMM WQ-

1.2 Prepare and implement a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Prior to the start of
construction, the SWPPP would be submitted by the
Contractor to Caltrans for approval. The SWPPP
shall detail the measures to address the temporary
water quality impacts resulting from construction
activities associated with this Project. The SWPPP
shall also include the development of a Construction
Site Monitoring Program that presents procedures
and methods related to the visual monitoring,
sampling, and analysis plans during construction of
the Project.

Additionally, the treatment BMP certifications will be
prepared and provided at various milestones of the
Project.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.11 Permitting,
Construction
Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM GEO-

1.1 At minimum, one additional boring shall be drilled at the location of the proposed retaining wall along the
west side of East Avenue at the SR 121 level to
verify the subsoil/groundwater conditions and
bedrock depths. An additional boring shall be drilled
at the location of the proposed retaining wall along
the northeast side of Coombsville Road on the
western end of the proposed wall. Additional
laboratory tests shall also include moisture content,
unit weight, plasticity indexes and liquid limits,
particle size analyses, consolidation, strength tests,
and corrosivity testing.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.12 Design Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-4 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure

AMM HM-

1.1 Testing for the presence of lead-based paint and
asbestos-containing materials, on the existing
structure at 801 Silverado Trail and roadway paint to
be removed shall occur. If these substances are
found to be present, applicable regulations pertaining
to their removal and disposal shall be followed.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.14 Project
Design
Through
Construction
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM HM-

1.2 Testing of the soils within the project area for worker safety and soil management purposes shall occur.

Soils and groundwater, if encountered, shall be
tested for the following:
• Total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) as
gasoline, as diesel, and as motor oil;
• Pesticides and herbicides;
• CAM 17 metals
Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.14 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM AIR-

1.1 Caltrans or the general contractor for the project
shall submit a list of all off-road equipment greater
than 25 horsepower (hp) that would be operated for
more than 20 hours over the entire duration of
project construction, including equipment from
subcontractors to the relevant air district for review
and certification. The list shall include all information necessary to ensure the equipment meets the
following requirements:
• Equipment shall be zero emissions or have
engines that meet or exceed either EPA or
CARB Tier 4 off-road emission standards, or
it shall have engines that are retrofitted with
a CARB Level 3 Verified Diesel Emissions
Control Strategy (VDECS), if one is available
for the equipment being used. Equipment
with engines that meet Tier 4 Interim or Tier
4 Final emission standards automatically
meet this requirement; therefore, a VDECS
would not be required.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.15 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-5 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure
• Idling time of diesel-powered construction
equipment and trucks shall be limited to no
more than two minutes. Clear signage of this
idling restriction shall be provided for
construction workers at all access points.

AMM AIR-

1.2 Portable diesel generators shall be prohibited. Grid power electricity should be used to provide power at
construction sites; or propane and natural gas
generators may be used when grid power electricity
is not feasible.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.15 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM NOI-

1.1 All construction equipment shall conform to Section 14-8.02, Noise Control, of the latest Standard
Specifications.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.16 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM NOI-

1.2 When feasible, noise-generating construction
activities shall be restricted to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays, with no construction
occurring on weekends or holidays. If work is
necessary outside of these hours, Caltrans shall
require the contractor to implement a construction
noise monitoring program and provide additional
noise controls where practical and feasible.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.16 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM NOI-

1.3 Noise generating equipment shall be located as far
as practical from sensitive receptors when sensitive
receptors adjoin or are near the construction Project
area.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.16 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM NOI-

1.4 "Quiet" air compressors and other "quiet" equipment shall be utilized where such technology exists.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.16 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■
MM NOI-2.1 Avoid the use of vibratory rollers within 25 feet of structures. Static mode compaction shall be used
when construction activities are less than 25 feet
from structures.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.16 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-6 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure
MM NOI-2.2 Avoid dropping heavy objects or equipment within 25 feet of structures.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.16 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■
MM NOI-2.3 Avoid the use of hoe rams, large bulldozers, and caisson drilling equipment within 15 feet of
structures. If vibratory rollers must be used within 25 feet and all other equipment must be used within 15
feet of structures, the following measures will be
required:
• Contractor must perform vibration
monitoring, crack monitoring and photo/video
documentation of the effected facilities
during construction. The requirements to
perform vibration monitoring, crack
monitoring and photo/video documentation
will be included in the Project's construction
specifications as part of the construction
contract documents.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.16 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM BIO-

1.1 A spill prevention plan shall be prepared describing measures to be taken to minimize the risk of fluids or
other materials used during construction (e.g., oils,
transmission and hydraulic fluids, cement, fuel) from
entering the Napa River or contaminating adjacent
riparian areas. In addition to a spill prevention plan, a cleanup protocol shall be developed before
construction begins and will be implemented in case
of a spill. The spill prevention plan and cleanup
protocol shall be submitted to the Caltrans Engineer
prior to construction.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.18 Permitting,
Construction
Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM BIO-

1.2 Stockpiling of materials, including portable
equipment, vehicles and supplies (e.g., chemicals),
will be restricted to the designated construction
staging areas.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.18 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM BIO-

2.1 The removal of any trees or structures containing
suitable bat roosting habitat shall be scheduled to
avoid the maternity roost season. To the extent
Final
EIR/EA
Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-7 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure
feasible, activities should be restricted to the period between August 31 and April 15.

Section

2.19 AMM BIO-

2.2 If seasonal avoidance is not possible, within 10 days prior to the start of work, a roosting bat survey shall be performed by a qualified biologist to determine if
potential bat roosts or roosting habitat is present on
the Project site or within a zone of influence (i.e., 50 feet) and if any avoidance measures are necessary
to avoid impacts on bats. If roosting bats or signs of
roosting bats are observed, a qualified biologist shall develop a roost deterrent and/or roost exclusion
plan. The deterrent/exclusion plan shall include
measures to avoid bats potentially using bat tree
roost habitat within the Project limits.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.19 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM BIO-

3.1 Before any ground-disturbing activities begin, a
qualified biologist, defined as a person who
possesses, at minimum, a bachelor's degree in
biological sciences, zoology, botany, ecology, or
another closely-related field, and who is familiar with western pond turtle, shall conduct a training session
for all on-site project personnel. At a minimum, the
training will include a description of western pond
turtle terrestrial behavior, as well as nesting birds,
roosting bats—specifically, the pallid bat, the
importance of these species, legal protections, the
measures that are being implemented to avoid and
minimize impacts as they relate to the Project, and
the boundaries within which work may occur.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.20 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM BIO-

3.2 The boundaries of the work area where natural
vegetation occurs shall be clearly staked or
otherwise delineated on the plans to prevent workers
or equipment from inadvertently straying from the
work area. All construction personnel, equipment,
and vehicle movement shall be confined to
designated construction and staging areas.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.20 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-8 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure

AMM BIO-

3.3 Plastic monofilament netting (erosion control
matting) or similar material shall not be used
because wildlife may become entangled or trapped
in it. Acceptable substitutes include coconut coir
matting or tackifier hydroseeding compounds.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.20 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM BIO-

3.4 To prevent special-status species from entering the construction staging area, exclusion fencing (e.g., silt fence) shall be constructed in strategic locations in
and around all work areas within 100 feet of all
aquatic features. Exclusion fencing shall be installed
prior to the start of Project-related activities and
should be placed within 10 feet of the edge of work
areas. Permittee shall maintain the barrier
throughout all construction activities.

A Qualified Biologist shall inspect the area prior to
fence installation. The interior and exterior of the
exclusion fencing shall be inspected by WEAP-
trained crews at least once daily before 9:00 a.m.
each day to ensure that no special-status species
are trapped against the fencing, where they could
desiccate or be predated upon. The Project
proponent shall maintain and repair the barrier
immediately to ensure that it is functional and without defects. The barrier shall remain in place until project activities in that area have been completed and
construction equipment has been removed from the
site.

If wildlife is found along the fence, a Qualified
Biologist shall be consulted. The Project proponent
shall avoid damage to small mammal burrows to the
maximum extent possible during installation of the
exclusion fencing. The Project proponent shall also
ensure that silt fencing and/or other erosion control
methods used to prevent sediment or other debris
Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.20 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-9 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure
from passing into aquatic habitat that is within 100
feet of Project construction activities does not create a barrier to special-status species movement.

AMM BIO-

3.5 Crews shall check for wildlife under all vehicles,
equipment, materials, or otherwise suitable locations
for wildlife, such as western pond turtle, to hide.

Workers shall inspect under vehicles and equipment
for wildlife before vehicles and equipment are moved
or have been idle for five minutes. If wildlife is
present, they shall be allowed to move out of the
construction area under their own volition.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

2.20 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

AMM TCR-

1.1 Prior to the initiation of construction, an agency
approved archaeologist and Native American
representative will prepare and conduct an
educational program to instruct construction workers
of the obligation to protect and preserve valuable
resources. This program shall be provided to all
construction workers as a field training prior to the
beginning of ground-disturbing activities, and shall at minimum, the training will include a discussion of
archaeological and tribal resources that may be
encountered (including the traditional importance of
resources such as cultural landscapes, significant
waterways, and ethnobotanical plants); the
procedures when working in Tribal Monitoring Areas
or near Environmentally Sensitive Areas, if
applicable; a summary of state and federal laws and
penalties under the laws; samples or visual aids of
resources that could be encountered in the project
vicinity; instructions regarding the need to halt work
in the vicinity of any potential archaeological and
Native American resources encountered; and
measures to notify their supervisor, City of Napa
Public Works Director, and District 4 Office of
Cultural Resources Studies.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

3.2.18 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements D-10 Appendix D
Napa, California July 2026
ID # Task and Description Source Project
Timing
Responsible
Staff
CEQA
Mitigation
Measure
Avoidance/
Minimization
Measure

AMM TCR-

1.2 Construction related activities (including, but not limited to, demolition/ excavation, grading, and utility trenching) shall be monitored by a Native American
tribal monitor to be retained by Caltrans. The tribal
monitor shall have authority to halt construction
activities temporarily in the immediate vicinity of an
unanticipated find until its significance can be
assessed by the tribal monitor.

Monitoring within the Tribal Monitoring Area may
move to a part-time or intermittent schedule by
mutual agreement between the Tribes, the City of
Napa and Caltrans District 4 Office of Cultural
Resources Studies.

A summary report of the monitoring results, including
any protective measures implemented, shall be
submitted to Caltrans upon completion of the
construction monitoring.

Final
EIR/EA
Section

3.2.18 Construction Contractor,
Caltrans, City
of Napa
■

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements E-1 Appendix E
Napa, California July 2026
Appendix E Notice of Preparation
The Project Notice of Preparation, dated July 29, 2024, is included below.

EXHIBIT A

Notice of Preparation
Notice of Preparation
To: From:
(Address) s)
Subject: Notice of Preparation of a Draft Environmental Impact Report ________________________________________willbetheLeadAgencyandwillprepareanenvironmental impact report for the project identified below. We need to know the views of your agency as to the scope and content of the environmental information which is germane to your agency's statutory responsibilities in connection with the proposed project. Your agency will need to use the EIR prepared by our agency when considering your permit or other approval for the project.

The project description, location, and the potential environmental effects are contained in the attached materials. A copy of the Initial Study ( is is not ) attached.

Due to the time limits mandated by State law, your response must be sent at the earliest possible date but not later than 30 days after receipt of this notice.

Please send your response to _______________________________________________ at the address shown above. We will need the name for a contact person in your agency.

Project Title:

Project Applicant, if any:

Date Signature
Title
Telephone
Reference: California Code of Regulations, Title 14, (CEQA Guidelines) Sections 15082(a), 15103, 15375.

X
City of Napa
1600 First Street
Napa, CA 94559
(Addres
The City of Napa
Tam Duong, Associate Civil Engineer
Five-Way Intersection Improvements Project
City of Napa
July 29,2024
Associate Civil Engineer/Project Manager
(707) 257-9520 Ext. 7613

EXHIBIT A

July 26, 2024

NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF AN

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Five-Way Intersection Improvements Project

SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECT INFORMATION

Introduction

The City of Napa is the Lead Agency for preparation of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project and is issuing this Notice of Preparation pursuant to Section 15082 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. The Project is located at the intersection of four roads serving local and regional traffic: SR 121 and local roadways Third Street, Coombsville Road, and East Avenue. The SR 121 intersection at Third Street/Coombsville Road/East Avenue is located in southeast Napa at post mile 7.35. Napa is an incorporated city in Napa County, California.

Surrounding land uses in the vicinity of the Project intersection include commercial businesses, single-family residences, and a public event facility (Napa Valley Expo).

Purpose and Need

Purpose

The purpose of the Project is to improve the operations of the intersection that will result in reduced driver delay, reduced congestion, and, therefore, an overall improvement to intersection operations. Additionally, the purpose of the Project is to improve the safety and accessibility for all users of the intersection. The secondary objectives of this Project are to improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities at the intersection as well as meet ADA requirements.

CITY OF
NAPA

EXHIBIT A
Need

The Project intersection needs geometric improvements to improve the operations, efficiency, and capacity of the intersection. In addition, safety improvements are needed to reduce the higher- than-average collision rate at this intersection. Based on data from the Caltrans Traffic Accident Surveillance and Analysis System (TASAS) for the 3-year period from July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2023, there were six reported collisions in the project area. This results in a rate of 0.64 collisions per million vehicle miles in the project area, higher than the statewide average rate of 0.61 for similar facilities.

Traffic studies conducted by the City of Napa have shown that the intersection has operated at a Level of Service (LOS) D since at least the year 2000. Although the intersection is already operating at an unacceptable LOS, operations will continue to deteriorate due to the continued growth of the area and continued increase in vehicular demand on this intersection, as documented in the Napa- Solano Travel Demand Model.

Project Description

The Project proposes to improve the intersection by constructing two, modern, single -lane roundabouts with curb, gutter, ramps, sidewalk, streetlights, and storm drain improvements. The proposed Project would ease traffic congestion by introducing a traffi c-calming circulation pattern, improving community connectivity in the Project area, and improving pedestrian and bicycle safety within and adjacent to the intersection. Local circulation and access would largely remain unchanged.

The Project intersection geometrics and pedestrian crossings are consistent with the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 672 entitled “Roundabouts: An Information Guide, 2nd Edition” (Guide).

A double roundabout with four legs on the northerly roundabout and three legs on the southerly roundabout would accommodate the Design Year traffic volumes. Retaining walls will be required to minimize adjacent property impacts along Coombsville Road and E ast Avenue. Along Coombsville Road, a retaining wall minimizes grading impacts that would otherwise require removal of multiple mature trees. Along East Avenue, the retaining wall minimizes encroachment onto the parcel at the northeast corner of the inters ection with SR 121 to maintain economic viability of the commercial parcel. Due to the steep entry grades coming into/out of East Avenue and Coombsville Road, the new roundabout intersections will largely be in fill in order to flatten the roadway grade on the entry/exits.

Minor regrading on approaches where the project conforms to existing roadways will be required, but would be a maximum excavation of three feet.

EXHIBIT A
Potential Environmental Impacts

The EIR will identify significant environmental impacts anticipated to result from the proposed project. Mitigation measures will be identified for significant impacts, as warranted. The EIR will discuss the following environmental resource areas as related to the proposed project:

Aesthetics

The EIR will describe the existing visual character of the project site and surrounding area, and the projected changes resulting from development of the proposed roundabouts.

Agricultural and Forestry Resources

The project site is currently a roadway intersection. The project site does not currently support any agricultural or forestry operations.

Air Quality

The EIR will describe the regional air quality conditions in the San Francisco Bay Area and evaluate the air quality impacts from the project, in conformance with the criteria identified by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.

Biological Resources

The project site and surrounding area is largely developed. The Napa River is isolated from the project limits by the Oxbow School on Third Street. One roadside drainage within the project runs along the southern end of Silverado Trail and feeds into a culvert. The EIR will evaluate potential impacts to special-status plant and wildlife species and habitats on the site.

Cultural Resources

The EIR will evaluate the project’s potential to impact cultural resources, including historic resources and archaeological resources.

Energy

The EIR will examine the potential for the project to result in excessive or inefficient use of energy and discuss the energy conservation measures included in the project.

EXHIBIT A
Geology and Soils

The EIR will describe the existing geologic and soil conditions at the project site. The EIR will evaluate impacts to persons and structures that may result from existing geologic conditions, including seismic and seismic-related hazards.

Greenhouse Gas Emissions

The EIR will discuss the project’s consistency and conformance with applicable plans, policies, and/or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and assess whether the project’s greenhouse gas emissions would have a significant impact on the environment.

Hazards and Hazardous Materials

The EIR will evaluate the potential for hazardous materials contamination on and/or near the project site which could be affected by site demolition, grading, or excavation. The EIR will discuss the potential for hazardous materials contamination to impact construction workers or off-site uses.

Hydrology and Water Quality

The EIR will describe the existing hydrologic and drainage conditions at the project site and any changes in site drainage and hydrologic conditions resulting from the proposed project. The EIR will also describe the project’s impact on stormwater runoff quantity and quality during and post- project construction.

Land Use

The EIR will describe the existing land uses on and adjacent to the project site and discuss the project’s conformance with relevant land use plans, policies, and regulations, including the City’s General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.

Mineral Resources

The EIR will describe whether the project would result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource or locally-important mineral resource recovery site.

EXHIBIT A
Noise and Vibration

The EIR will describe the existing noise conditions in the project area and will address noise and vibration impacts from the proposed project (including noise from project traffic and project demolition/construction).

Population and Housing

The project proposes to make intersection improvements. The EIR will discuss the potential for the project (if any) to induce substantial growth in the area or displace substantial numbers of houses or residents.

Public Services

The EIR will describe the available public services (e.g., fire and police protection, schools, and parks) in the project area and the potential for the project to impact public facilities.

Recreation

The EIR will describe the available recreational facilities in the project vicinity and the potential for the project to impact those facilities.

Transportation

The EIR will describe the existing transportation network serving the project area and will evaluate the project’s impact on vehicle miles traveled as well as the transportation network (e.g., impacts on transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities).

Tribal Cultural Resources

The EIR will evaluate the potential of the project to impact tribal cultural resources.

Utilities and Service Systems

The EIR will describe the existing sanitary sewer, storm drain, water, and solid waste services for the project area. The EIR will discuss the impacts of any utility improvements proposed by the project.

Wildfire

The EIR will describe whether the project site is subject to wildfire hazards and any impacts associated with the risk of wildfire.

EXHIBIT A
Alternatives

The EIR will examine alternatives to the proposed project, including a No Project alternative and one or more alternative projects depending on the impacts identified. Alternatives discussed will be chosen based on their ability to reduce or avoid identified significant impacts of the proposed project, while still achieving most of the identified project objectives.

Significant Unavoidable Impacts

The EIR will identify those significant impacts, if any, that cannot be avoided if the project is implemented as proposed.

Cumulative Impacts

The EIR will include a Cumulative Impacts analysis addressing the impacts of the project when considered with past, present, and probable future projects in the area.

Other Required Sections

In conformance with the CEQA Guidelines, the EIR will also include the following sections: 1) growth-inducing impacts, 2) significant irreversible environmental changes, 3) references and organizations/persons consulted, and 4) EIR authors.

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT A
Coombsville Road
Coombsville Road
Silverado Trail
Silverado Trail
Terrace Drive
Shurtleff Avenue
3rd Street
2nd Street
East Avenue
Soscol Avenue
1st Street
Laurel Street
Jefferson Street
Coombs Street
Montecito Boulevar d
Napa RiverNapa River
Napa River
Napa Creek
U.P .R.R.

U.P .R.R. Silverado Trail
Silverado Trail
Terrac
e Drive
Shurtleff Avenue
3rd Street
2nd Street
East Avenue
Soscol Avenue
1st Street
Laurel Street
Jeff
erson Street
Coombs Street
MontecitoB oulevar d
Napa RiverNapa River
Napa River
NapaCre
ek
U.P .R.R.

U.P .R.R.

Project Boundary
Staging Area
Base Map: ESRI, ArcGIS
0 200 800 1,200 1,600 Feet
VICINITY MAP FIGURE 2

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT A
Five-Way Intersection Improvements F-1 Appendix F
Napa, California July 2026
Appendix F List of Technical Studies
The following studies and/or technical analyses have been prepared and are incorporated by reference into this Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment and can be located at:

Caltrans District 4, 111 Grand Avenue, Oakland, CA 94612 or the City of Napa Community Services Building at 1600 First Street, Napa, CA 94559 on weekdays from 8:00am-5:00pm.

Please note, many state and federal laws limit the disclosure of sensitive cultural and tribal resource information to the public. Additional information regarding confidentiality of these resources can be found in the Standard Environmental Reference Volume 2 in Section 3.4.13 and Section 5.3.6.

Name of Study Study Author Study Date
Air Quality Report Illingworth & Rodkin May 2025
Archaeological Survey Report Archaeological/Historical
Consultants
December 2024
Community Impacts Technical
Memo
David J. Powers & Associates August 2024
Construction Vibration Report Illingworth & Rodkin April 2025 Drainage Technical
Memorandum
Watearth August 2024
Energy Analysis Illingworth & Rodkin September 2024
Historic Property Survey Report Archaeological/Historical Consultants
February 2025
Historical Resources Evaluation
Report
Archaeological/Historical
Consultants
January 2025
Hydrology and Water Quality
Technical Memo
David J. Powers & Associates September 2024
Initial Site Assessment Watearth May 2024
Location Hydraulic Study Watearth January 2025
Natural Environment Study
(Minimal Impacts)
Sequoia Ecological Consulting August 2024
Noise Abatement Decision
Report
GHD February 2025
Noise Study Report Illingworth & Rodkin December 2024
Preliminary Geotechnical
Design Report
Parikh Consultants August 2024
Stormwater Data Report GHD December 2024
Traffic Operations Analysis
Report
GHD July 2024
Visual Impact Assessment
Memorandum
GHD September 2024

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-1 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
Appendix G Glossary of Technical Terms
A
ACTION (1): Any highway construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, repair, or improvement undertaken with Federal-aid highway funds or FHWA approval.

ACTION (2): A highway or transit project proposed for FHWA or FTA funding. It also includes activities such as joint and multiple use permits, changes in access control, etc., which may or may not involve a commitment of federal funds (23 CFR 771.107(b)).

ACTIVE FAULT: A fault that has moved within late Quaternary time (the last 750,000 years). Note that this definition is broader than that used by the California Department of Conservation, California Geological Survey (CGS), which defines an active fault as one that has moved within Holocene time (the last 11,000 years).

ADAPTIVE MANAGEMENT: A long-term repeated process of gradually modifying management techniques based on the results of modeling and research.

ALLUVIAL FAN: A fan-shaped area of soil deposited where a mountain stream first enters a valley or plain.

ALLUVIAL SOILS: Soil developing from recent alluvium (see below); typical of floodplains.

ALLUVIUM: Material developed by running water.

AMBIENT: Refers to surrounding, external, or unconfined conditions.

AMBIENT NOISE: Exterior sound (the surrounding sound from all sources near and far).

ANADROMOUS: Refers to fish that typically inhabit seas or lakes but ascend streams to spawn; for example, salmon.

AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT (APE): A term used in Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act to describe the area in which historic resources may be affected by a federal undertaking.

ARID: Dry.

ARTERIAL: A highway or local road that primarily serves through traffic AS-BUILTS: The final plans of a project after the project is constructed. These plans show the original design, as well as changes that occurred during construction.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-2 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
ATTAINMENT AREA: A geographic area in which levels of a criteria air pollutant meet the health-based primary standard (national ambient air quality standard, or NAAQS) for the pollutant. An area may have an acceptable level for one criteria air pollutant, but may have unacceptable levels for others. Thus an area could be both attainment and nonattainment at the same time. Attainment areas are defined using federal pollutant limits set by the U.S. EPA.

AUXILARY LANE: The portion of the roadway adjoining the traveled way for speed change, turning, weaving, truck climbing, maneuvering of entering and leaving traffic, and other purposes supplementary to through-traffic movement. Auxiliary lanes are used to balance the traffic load and maintain a more uniform level of service on the highway. They facilitate the positioning of drivers at exits and the merging of drivers at entrances.

B
BACKWATER: The rise in water surface elevation due to encroachment.

BASE FLOOD: The flood having a one percent (1%) chance of being equaled or exceeded in any given year (100-year flood).

BASE FLOOD ELEVATION (BFE): The water surface elevation of the base flood.

BASE FLOOD PLAIN: The area subject to flooding by the base flood.

BENEFICIAL USE: A use of a natural water resource that enhances the social, economic, and environmental well-being of the user. Twenty-one beneficial uses are defined for the waters of California, ranging from municipal and domestic supply to fisheries and wildlife habitat.

BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE (BMP): Any program, technology, process, operating method, measure, or device that controls, prevents, removes or reduces pollution.

BOG: Wetland ecosystem characterized by an accumulation of peat, acid conditions, and dominance of sphagnum moss.

BORROW: Soil brought in from another area.

BRACKISH: Water that has salt concentration greater than fresh water (>.05 0/00) and less than seawater (<35 0/00).

BYPASS: An arterial highway or local road that permits traffic to avoid part or all of an urban area.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-3 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
C
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA): State legislation enacted in 1970 and subsequently amended. It requires public agencies to regulate activities which may affect the quality of the environment so that major consideration is given to preventing damage to the environment.

CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION (CTC): A State Commission, established by State Assembly Bill 402 (AB 402) with nine appointed member and two ex-officio members, responsible for the programming and allocating of funds for the construction of highway, passenger rail, and transit improvements throughout California. The CTC also provides guidance and recommendations on transportation policies.

CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION PLAN (CTP): The CTP is a long-range transportation policy plan that is submitted to the Governor. The CTP is developed in collaboration with partners, presents a vision for California’s future transportation system, and defines goals, policies, and strategies to reach the vision. It is developed in consultation with the State’s regional transportation planning agencies, is influenced by the regional planning process, and provides guidance for developing future RTPs. RTPs should be
consistent with and implement the vision and goals of the CTP. As defined by State statute, the CTP is not project specific.

CAPACITY: The maximum amount of traffic that can be accommodated by a uniform segment of freeway under prevailing conditions.

CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION (CE): “Categorical exclusion,” under NEPA, covers various categories of actions which do not individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human environment and are exempt from the requirement to prepare an Environmental Assessment or an Environmental Impact Statement.

CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION (CE): “Categorical Exemption,” under CEQA, means an exemption for a class of projects that have been determined by the Secretary of the Resources Agency not to have a significant effect on the quality of the environment. Article 19 of the CEQA Guidelines describes and gives examples for each class of categorical exemption. There are several exceptions which preclude a project from being considered a Categorical Exemption under CEQA: projects located on a site included on a list of designated hazardous waste sites (the Cortese List); projects that may result in damage to scenic resources on officially designated state scenic highways; or projects that may cause substantial adverse change to a historic resource.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-4 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
CHANNELIZATION: The use of traffic markings or islands to direct traffic into certain paths, for instance, a “channelized” intersection directs portions of traffic into a left- turn lane through the use of roadway islands or striping that separates the turn lane from traffic going straight.

CLEAR RECOVERY ZONE: Unobstructed, relatively flat or gently sloping area beyond the edge of the traffic lane, which affords the drivers of errant vehicles the opportunity to regain control.

COFFERDAM: Temporary watertight enclosure from which water is pumped-out to expose the bottom of a body of water and permit construction.

CONVENTIONAL HIGHWAY: A highway without control of access that may or may not be divided.

COOPERATING AGENCY: “Cooperating Agency,” under NEPA, means any agency other than the lead agency which has jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any environmental impact involved in a proposal for any action significantly affecting the human environment.

CORRIDOR: A strip of land between two termini within which traffic, topography, environment, and other characteristics are evaluated for transportation purposes.

COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS (COG): A voluntary consortium of local governments formed to cooperate on problem solving, e.g., regional transportation planning and programming. Some RTPAs and MPOs are COGs.

CUMULATIVE IMPACT (CEQA): The CEQA definition of cumulative impact comes from the Office of Planning and Research (OPR). Section 15355 of OPR’s CEQA Guidelines provides the following context:

Cumulative impacts refer to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts.
a) The individual effects may be changes resulting from a single project or a number of separate projects.
b) The cumulative impact from several projects is the change in the environment which results from the incremental impact of the project when added to other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant projects taking place over a period of time.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-5 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
CUMULATIVE IMPACT (NEPA): The NEPA definition of a cumulative impact comes from the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), which defines a cumulative impact as:
…the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time. (40 CFR §1508.7.) D
dba: A-weighted decibels are adjusted to approximate the way the average person hears sound.

DECIBEL: With respect to sound, decibels measure a scale from the threshold of human hearing, 0 decibels, upwards towards the threshold of pain, about 120-140 decibels. Because decibels are such a small measure, they are computed logarithmically and cannot be added arithmetically. An increase of 10 decibels is perceived by the human ear as a doubling of noise.

DECIDUOUS: (of leaves), shed during a certain season (winter in temperate regions, dry seasons in the tropics); (of trees), having deciduous parts.

DEMAND: The transportation need at a point in time, e.g., traffic volume on a segment of road at a point in time, projected traffic volume on a segment of road in a future year, current peak period ridership on a bus route, children crossing at a signed intersection on school days.

DEMOGRAPHY, DEMOGRAPHIC: The study of populations with reference to birth and death rates, size and density, distribution, migration, and other vital statistics.

DESIGN CAPACITY: The maximum number of vehicles that can pass over a lane or a roadway during one hour without operating conditions falling below a pre-selected design level.

DESIGN CONCEPT: The type of facility identified by the project, e.g., freeway, expressway, arterial highway, grade-separated highway, reserved right-of-way rail transit, mixed-traffic rail transit, exclusive busway, etc.

DESIGN FLOOD: The peak discharge, volume if appropriate, stage or wave crest elevation of the flood associated with the flood frequency selected for the design of a project. (In other words, the project will not be inundated at the design flood frequency.)
DESIGN LIFE: The length of time that a transportation facility or improvement is intended to remain serviceable, frequently expressed in years.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-6 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
DESIGN SCOPE: The design aspects which will affect the proposed facility's impact on regional emissions, usually as they relate to vehicle or person carrying capacity and control, e.g., number of lanes or tracks to be constructed or added, length of project, signalization, access control including approximate number and location of interchanges, preferential treatment for high-occupancy vehicles, etc.

DESIGN SPEED: A speed determined for design and correlation of the physical features of a highway that influence vehicle operation. It is the maximum safe speed that can be maintained over a specified section of highway when conditions are so favorable that the design features of the highway govern.

DESIGN VOLUME: A volume determined for use in design, representing traffic expected to use the highway. Unless otherwise stated, it is an hourly volume.

DESIGNATED FLOODWAY: A floodway designated by a state or local agency.

California State Reclamation Board (Board) definition: A designated floodway means either: (1) the channel of the stream and that portion of the adjoining floodplain reasonably required to provide passage of a base flood or (2) the floodway between existing levees as adopted by the Board or the Legislature.

DETERMINISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS: Seismic parameters are estimated based on the size of the maximum credible (magnitude) earthquake expected. The value obtained is essentially time-independent. This method is used by Caltrans to assess the seismic hazard at most structures. See also probabilistic seismic hazard analysis, below.

DIAMETER AT BREAST HEIGHT (DBH): Diameter of tree measured 4 feet, 6 inches (1.4 meters) from ground level.

DIFFERENTIAL SETTLEMENT: The uneven lowering of different parts of an engineered structure, often resulting in damage to the structure.

DIRECT EFFECTS: Effects that are caused by and action and occur at the same time and place as the action.

E
ECOSYSTEM: The biotic community and its abiotic environment functioning on a system.

ENCROACHMENT (FEMA DEFINITION): Construction, placement of fill, or similar alteration of topography in the floodplain that reduces the area available to convey floodwaters. FHWA definition: An action within the limits of the base floodplain.

ENCROACHMENT (FHWA): An action within the limits of the base floodplain.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-7 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
ENDANGERED: Plant or animal species that are in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.

ENDEMIC, ENDEMISM: Restricted to a given region (e.g., endemic to California).

ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: “Environmental Document” means draft or final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) or Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), Environmental Assessment (EA) or Negative Declaration (ND)/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND). A categorical exemption or exclusion is not considered an environmental document; it is rather the determination that the project is exempt/excluded from the requirement to prepare an environmental document.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY [UNITED STATES] (U.S. EPA): An agency of the executive branch of the federal government charged with establishing and enforcing environmental regulations.

EPHEMERAL: Lasting for only a short time; transitory; short-lived.

EROSION: The wearing away of the land surface by running water, wind, ice, or other geological agents.

ESTUARY: Partially enclosed embayment where fresh water and sea water meet and mix.

ETHNOGRAPHIC: Relating to the study of human cultures.

EXPANSIVE SOILS: Soil deposits that have the capacity or a tendency to expand during weather or seismic events.

EXPRESSWAY: An arterial highway with at least partial control of access, which may or may not be divided or have grade separations at intersections.

EXTANT: Still in existence.

F
FALSEWORK: A temporary frame to support a structure during construction.

FAULT CREEP: Slow ground displacement occurring without accompanying earthquakes.

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION (FHWA): The Federal agency within the U.S. Department of Transportation responsible for administering the Federal-aid Highway Program and the Motor Carrier Safety Program.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-8 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
FEDERAL REGISTER (FR): The Federal Register is the official daily publication for agency rules, proposed rules, and notices of federal agencies and organizations, as well as for Executive Orders and other presidential documents.

FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION (FTA): An agency within the U.S.

Department of Transportation responsible for administering federal funds for public transportation planning, programming, and projects.

FEDERAL STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (FSTIP): A multiyear statewide, financially constrained, intermodal program of projects that is consistent with the statewide transportation plan (CTP) and regional transportation plans (RTPs). The FSTIP is developed by the California Department of Transportation and incorporates all of the MPOs and RTPAs FTIPs by reference. Caltrans then submits the FSTIP to FHWA.

FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (FTIP): A constrained 4-year prioritized list of all transportation projects that are proposed for federal and local funding. The FTIP is developed and adopted by the MPO/RTPA and is updated every 2 years. It is consistent with the RTP and it is required as a prerequisite for federal funding.

FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT (FONSI): A document by a federal agency briefly presenting the reasons why an action, not otherwise categorically excluded, will not have a significant effect on the human environment and therefore does not require the preparation of an EIS.

FLOOD BOUNDARY AND FLOODWAY MAP (FBFM): The floodplain management map issued by FEMA that depicts, on the basis of detailed analyses, the boundaries of the 100- and 500-year floodplain and the regulatory floodway.

FLOOD FREQUENCY: The statistical number of years that takes place before the recurrence of a flood of the same magnitude. (10-year flood, 50-year flood, 100-year flood, etc.)
FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM): The insurance and floodplain management map issued by FEMA that identifies, on the basis of detailed or approximate analyses, the areas of 100-year flood hazard in a community.

FLOOD INSURANCE STUDY (FIS): It is a report that describes and delineates the Special Flood Hazard Areas and the elevations of the community.

FLOODPLAIN: Any land area subject to inundation by floodwaters from any source.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-9 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
FLOODPLAIN EVALUATION REPORT: A technical report which evaluates effects of the floodplain encroachment concerning the six key items identified in 23 CFR 650.111(b)(c)(d) verified by results of the Location Hydraulic Study (same as Figure 804.7A Technical Information for Location Hydraulic Study located in chapter 804 of the Highway Design Manual), but in greater detail. This report is required in situations where it is uncertain or clear that a project may involve a significant encroachment.

This report is to be used as a backup for the Environmental Assessment/Finding of No Significant Impact (EA/FONSI) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The risks, impacts, and mitigation measures must be summarized in the NEPA document.

FLOODPLAIN VALUES: Fish, wildlife, plants, open space, natural beauty, scientific study, outdoor recreation, agriculture, aqua culture, forestry, natural moderation of floods, water quality maintenance, groundwater discharge, etc.

FLOODPROOF: To design and construct a project to keep floodwaters out or to reduce the effects of floodwaters.

FLOODWAY: The channel of a river or other watercourse, plus any adjacent floodplain areas, which is designated a floodway by a public agency, that must be kept free of encroachment so that the 100-year flood discharge can be conveyed without cumulatively increasing the water-surface elevation more than one foot above the BFE. (Since the one foot is already accounted for, no increase of any amount in the BFE is allowed in the floodway.)
FLOODWAY FRINGE: The portion of the 100-year floodplain that is not within the floodway and in which development and other forms of encroachment may be permitted under certain circumstances.

FOSSIL: Any remains, trace, or imprint of a plant or animal that has been preserved in the earth’s crust since some past geologic time (Bates and Jackson 1980:243).

FRAGMENTATION: Reduction of a large habitat area into small, scattered remnants; reduction of leaves and other organic matter into smaller particles.

FRIABLE: Easily crumbled (as in friable soil).

FREEWAY: A divided arterial highway with full control of access and with grade separations at intersections.

G
GEOMETRIC DESIGN: The design of the physical features of a road, such as alignment, grades, sight distances, widths, slopes, etc., many of which are dictated by the design speed.

GOODS MOVEMENT: The transportation of commodities by any or all of the following commercial means; aircraft, railroad, ship, or truck.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-10 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
H
HABITAT: Place where a plant or animal lives.

HABITAT PROTECTION: Ensuring appropriate uses of land to maintain and optimize species habitat values.

HIGH OCCUPANCY TOLL (HOT) LANES: New HOV lanes that allow single occupant vehicles access for a fee.

HIGH OCCUPANCY VEHICLE (HOV) LANES: A lane of freeway reserved for the use of vehicles with set minimum number of occupants. Buses, taxis, carpools (which satisfy the occupancy minimum), and motorcycles generally may use HOV lanes.

HOLOCENE: The second epoch of the Quaternary Period characterized by man and modern animals.

HYDRIC SOIL: Soil subject to saturation or inundation.

I
IGNEOUS ROCKS: Formed when magma (liquid rock material) cools below the earth’s surface or when lava cools above ground.

INDIRECT EFFECTS: Effects that are caused by an action and occur later in time, or at another location, yet are reasonably foreseeable.

INTERCHANGE: A system of interconnecting roadways in conjunction with one or more grade separations providing for the routing of traffic between two or more roadways on different levels.

INTERMODAL SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EFFICIENCY ACT (ISTEA): Federal transportation legislation adopted in 1991. It provided increased funding and program flexibility for multimodal transportation programs. Upon its expiration, ISTEA was succeeded by TEA-21.

INTERREGIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (IIP): One of two component funding source programs that ultimately make up the State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP). The IIP receives 25% of the funds from the State Highway account.

The IIP is the source of funding for the ITIP.

INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (ITIP): A Statewide program of projects, developed by Caltrans for interregional projects that are primarily located outside of urbanized areas. The ITIP has a 4-year planning horizon and is updated every two years. It is submitted to the CTC along with the FTIP and taken together they are known as the STIP.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-11 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
INTERREGIONAL TRANSPORTATION STRATEGIC PLAN (ITSP): A plan that describes and communicates the framework in which the state will carry out its responsibilities for the Interregional Transportation Improvement Program (ITIP).

INITIAL STUDY (IS): Under CEQA, the Initial Study is prepared to determine whether there may be significant environmental effects resulting from a project. The Initial Study is attached to the Negative Declaration or Mitigated Negative Declaration. It can become the basis of an EIR if it concludes that the project may cause significant environmental effects that cannot be mitigated below the level of significance.

J
K
L
LANE NUMBERING: On a multilane roadway, the lanes available for through travel in the same direction are numbered from left to right when facing in the direction of travel.
ldn: Average noise over one day and night.

LEAD AGENCY (CEQA): “Lead Agency” means the public agency which has primary responsibility for carrying out or approving a project which may have a significant effect on the environment and preparing the environmental document.

LEAD AGENCY (NEPA): The agency or agencies preparing or having taken primary responsibility for preparing the environmental impact statement. leq: A measure of the average noise level during a specified period of time. leq(h): Equivalent or average noise level for the noisiest hour.

LEVEL OF SERVICE (LOS): A measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream. It measures such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety. The six defined levels of services use letter designations from A to F, with Level of Service A representing the best operating conditions and Level of Service F representing the worst. Each Level of Service represents a range of operating conditions.

LIQUEFACTION: The loss in the shearing resistance of a cohesionless soil, caused by an earthquake wave. The soil is turned into a fluid mass.

LITHIC: Consisting of or relating to stone or rock.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-12 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
LITTORAL: Shallow water of a lake in which light penetrates to the bottom, permitting submerged, floating, and emergent vegetative growth; also shore zone of tidal water between high-water and low-water marks.

LOAD LIMITS: Weight restrictions used to prohibit vehicles that exceed a specified weight from using a transportation facility.

LOCATION HYDRAULIC STUDY (SAME AS FIGURE 804.7A TECHNICAL

INFORMATION FOR LOCATION HYDRAULIC STUDY LOCATED IN CHAPTER 804 OF THE HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL): The preliminary investigative study to be made of base floodplain encroachments by a proposed highway action. (This study must be performed by a registered engineer with hydraulic expertise.) LONGITUDINAL ENCROACHMENT: An encroachment that is parallel to the direction of flow. Example: A highway that runs along the edge of a river is, usually considered a longitudinal encroachment.

M
MAGNITUDE: A measure of the strength of an earthquake or the strain energy released by it.

MAINTENANCE AREA: A federal term to describe any geographic region of the United States designated non-attainment pursuant to the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 (CAAA) and subsequently re-designated to attainment subject to the requirement to develop a maintenance plan under Section 175A of the CAAA.

MAJOR FEDERAL ACTION: Section 1508.18 of the CEQ Regulations states that "Major Federal action" includes actions with effects that may be major and which are potentially subject to Federal control and responsibility. Major reinforces but does not have a meaning independent of significantly (Sec. 1508.27).” An EIS must be prepared for any major federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.

MAJOR INVESTMENT: Federal regulations define a “major metropolitan transportation investment” as “a high-type highway or transit improvement of substantial cost that is expected to have a significant effect on capacity, traffic flow, level of service, or mode share at the transportation corridor or subarea scale” (23 CFR 450.104).

MAJOR INVESTMENT STUDY (MIS): Prepared during the early planning phase to analyze the range of modal alternatives and cost/benefits of “major metropolitan transportation investments,” which are defined as being highway or transit improvements of substantial cost that are expected to have a significant effect on capacity, traffic flow, level of service, or mode share at the transportation corridor or subarea scale. TEA-21 ELIMINATED THE REQUIREMENT FOR A SEPARATE MIS DOCUMENT, BUT THE ANALYSIS STILL MUST BE CONDUCTED.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-13 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
MARSH: Wetland dominated by grassy vegetation, such as cattails and sedges.

MAXIMUM CREDIBLE EARTHQUAKE (MCE): The maximum intensity earthquake that is assumed to occur closest to the site. This earthquake is also described as the maximum magnitude earthquake, or maximum earthquake.

MEDIAN: The portion of a divided highway separating the traveled ways in opposite directions.

METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION (MPO): A federal designation for the forum for cooperative transportation decision-making for an urbanized area with population of more than 50,000.

METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (MTIP): MTIP is a synonym for the FTIP and it refers to the programming done by the MPO/RTPA as part of the development of the MTP. Also called REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (RTIP).

METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP): A federal and state mandated planning document prepared by MPOs and RTPAs. The plan describes existing and projected transportation needs, conditions, and financing affecting all modes within a 20-year horizon. Also called a REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN (RTP).

MIDDEN: A prehistoric refuse heap, usually containing shells and/or bones.

MIGRATION: Intentional, directional, and usually seasonal movement of animals between two regions or habitats; involves departure and return of the same individual.

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND): The CEQA document that is used when the Initial Study concludes that a project's potential significant effect on the environment can be reduced below the level of significance with the incorporation of mitigation measures.

MITIGATION BANK: Large blocks of land preserved, restored, and enhanced for the purpose of consolidating mitigation and/or mitigating in advance for projects that take listed species.

MIXED-FLOW LANE: A standard traffic lane for all types of vehicles, including single- occupant cars, carpools, vans, buses, and trucks.

MONITORING WELL: A well drilled at a hazardous waste management site or Superfund site to collect groundwater samples for the purpose of physical, chemical, or biological analysis to determine the amounts, types, and distribution of contaminants in the groundwater beneath the site.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-14 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
MOVING AHEAD FOR PROGRESS IN THE 21st CENTURY ACT (MAP-21): MAP-21 was signed into law by President Barack Obama on July 6, 2012. Funding surface transportation programs at over $105 billion for fiscal years (FY) 2013 and 2014, MAP-21 is the first long-term highway authorization enacted since 2005.

MULTIMODAL: Pertaining to more than one method of traveling.

N
NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (NEPA): Enacted in 1969, NEPA requires all federal agencies to consider environmental factors through a systematic interdisciplinary approach before committing to a course of action. The NEPA process is an overall framework for the environmental evaluation of federal actions.

NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM (NHS): Consists of 155,000 miles (plus or minus 15 percent) of the major roads in the U.S. Included will be all interstate routes, a large percentage of urban and rural principal arterials, the defense strategic highway network, and strategic highway connectors.

NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT (NPDES):
“…is required for facilities and activities that discharge waste into surface waters from a confined pipe or channel.”
NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ND): The CEQA document that is used when the Initial Study concludes that a project will have no significant impact on the environment.

NONATTAINMENT AREA: “Nonattainment Area” means any geographic region of the United States that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) has designated as a nonattainment area for a transportation related pollutant(s) for which a National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) exists.

NONPOINT SOURCE: A “nonpoint source” is a dispersed source of pollution that is not identifiable as to specific location, but may be identified as contributing to water quality degradation from a tributary drainage area, e.g., pesticide residues distributed over an agricultural area.

NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY (NOA): “Notice of Availability” means a formal public notice under NEPA announcing the availability of a completed EA, DEIS, or FEIS. For EISs, publication of such notice in the Federal Register is required.

NOTICE OF COMPLETION (NOC): The CEQA notice submitted to the State Clearinghouse when an EIR, MND, or ND is completed.

NOTICE OF DETERMINATION (NOD): A “Notice of Determination” is a formal written notice under CEQA filed by a lead state agency when approving any project subject to the preparation of an EIR, MND, or ND.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-15 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION (NOE): “Notice of Exemption” means a brief notice which may be filed by a public agency after it has decided to carry out or approve a project and has determined that the project is exempt from CEQA.

NOTICE OF INTENT (NOI): Under NEPA, the “Notice of Intent” is a notice that an Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared and considered. The Notice of Intent is published in the Federal Register by the lead federal agency. Under CEQA, a lead agency must also provide a “Notice of Intent to Adopt” an ND or MND to the public, responsible agencies, trustee agencies, and the county clerk of each county in which the proposed project is located.

NOTICE OF PREPARATION (NOP): "Notice of Preparation" is the CEQA notice that an EIR will be prepared for a project.

O
OVERCROSSING (O.C.): A local road structure that bridges over a state highway.

OXYGEN DEMAND: Materials such as food waste and dead plant or animal tissue that use up dissolved oxygen in the water when they are degraded through chemical or biological processes. Chemical and biochemical oxygen demand (COD and BOD) are measures of the amount of oxygen consumed when a substance degrades.

P
PALEONTOLOGIC SPECIES: A morphologic species based on fossil specimens. It may include specimens that would be considered specifically distinct if living individuals could be observed (Bates and Jackson 1980:451).

PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCE: A locality containing vertebrate, invertebrate, or plant fossils (i.e., fossil location, fossil bearing formation, or a formation with the potential to bear fossils).

PALEONTOLOGY: The study of life in past geologic time based on fossil plants and animals and including phylogeny, their relationships to existing plants, animals, and environments, and the chronology of the earth's history (Bates and Jackson 1980:451).

PARTICIPATING AGENCY: Under 23 USC 139, a participating agency is any federal or non-federal agency (state, tribal, regional, or local government agency) that may have an interest in the project. Nongovernmental organizations and private entities cannot serve as participating agencies
PLAYA: A shallow temporary lake that may form in alkali sinks.

PLEISTOCENE: The first epoch of the Quaternary Period characterized by the first indications of social life in man.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-16 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
PLIOCENE: The first epoch of the Tertiary Period characterized by the transition from hominids to early humans
POINT SOURCE: Distinct location from which wastes are discharged (e.g., pipes and sewers).

PRACTICABLE: The term practicable means available and capable of being done after taking into consideration cost, existing technology, and logistics in light of overall project purposes.

PROBABILISTIC SEISMIC HAZARD ANALYSIS: Seismic parameters are estimated using several significant seismic sources, the likelihood of occurrence within a given time frame, and the uncertainty of the estimate. Caltrans uses probabilistic methods for important bridges and certain seismic retrofit projects.

PROJECT (CEQA): California Public Resources Code §21065 defines a “project” as an activity which may cause either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and which is any of the following:

A. An activity directly undertaken by any public agency.

B. An activity undertaken by a person which is supported, in whole or in part, throughout contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies.

C. An activity that involves the issuance to a person of a lease, permit, license, certificate, or other entitlement for use by one or more public agencies.

PROJECT (FHWA): 23 Code of Federal Regulations §1.2 defines a project as an undertaking by a State highway department for highway construction, including preliminary engineering, acquisition of rights-of-way and actual construction, or for highway planning and research, or for any other work or activity to carry out the provisions of the Federal laws for the administration of Federal-aid for highways.

Q
QUATERNARY PERIOD: A geologic period, which includes both the Pleistocene and Holocene Periods, comprising the second portion of the Cenozoic era; characterized by the rise of man and modern animals.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-17 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
R
RECEPTORS: Term used in air quality and noise studies that refers to houses or businesses that could be affected by a project.

RECORD OF DECISION (ROD): The “Record of Decision” is a formal written statement, required under NEPA, wherein a federal lead agency must present the basis for its decision to approve a selected project alternative, summarize mitigation measures incorporated into the project, and document any required Section 4(f) approval.

RECURRENCE INTERVAL: The average time interval between earthquake occurrences of equal magnitude on the same fault.

REGULATORY AGENCY: An agency that has jurisdiction by law.

REGIONAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (RIP): One of two component funding source programs that ultimately make up the STIP. The RIP receives 75% of the funds from the State Highway account. This 75% is then distributed to the MPOs and RTPAs by a formula. The RIP is the source of funding for the FTIP.

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (RTIP): RTIP is a synonym for the FTIP and it refers to the programming done by the MPO/RTPA as part of the development of the RTP. Also called a METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (MTIP).

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLAN (RTP): A federal and state mandated planning document prepared by MPOs and RTPAs. The plan describes existing and projected transportation needs, conditions, and financing affecting all modes within a 20-year horizon. Also called a METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION PLAN (MTP).

REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING AGENCY (RTPA): A state designated single or multi-county agency responsible for regional transportation planning. RTPAs are also known as Local Transportation Commissions or Councils of Governments and are usually located in rural or exurban areas.

REGULATORY EARTHQUAKE FAULT ZONES: Areas along faults defined as active by the California Geological Survey, typically one-quarter mile or less in width, where special studies are required to determine if there is a surface rupture hazard.

Caltrans’ broader definition of active faults results in other areas that also need to be addressed for surface rupture. A site near a fault defined as active by Caltrans criterion also requires a review of surface rupture potential.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-18 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
REGULATORY FLOODWAY: A floodplain area that is reserved in an open manner by federal, state, or local requirements, i.e., unconfined or unobstructed either horizontally or vertically, to provide for the discharge of the base flood so that the cumulative increase in water surface elevation is no more than a one-foot increase. (Since the one foot is already accounted for, no increase more than 0.00 feet is allowed)
RESPONSIBLE AGENCY: A “public agency, other than the lead agency which has responsibility for carrying out or approving a project” (PRC 21069). The CEQA Guidelines further explains the statutory definition by stating that a “responsible agency” includes “all public agencies other than the Lead Agency which have discretionary approval power over the project” (14 CCR 15381). State and local public agencies that have discretionary authority to issue permits, for example, fall into this category.

REVEGETATION: Planting of indigenous plants to replace natural vegetation that is damaged or removed as a result of highway construction projects or permit requirements.

RIGHT-OF-WAY: A general term denoting land, property, or interest therein, usually in a strip acquired for or devoted to transportation purposes.

RIPARIAN: Along banks of rivers and streams; riverbank forests are often called gallery forests.

RIPRAP: Randomly placed rock or concrete used to strengthen an embankment or protect it from erosion.

RISK ASSESSMENT: An economic and/or non-economic assessment of the impacts associated with the floodplain encroachment(s). It is meant to be more general in detail than a risk analysis. The format and content of the Summary Floodplain Encroachment Report form is the minimum required for a risk assessment.

ROTATIONAL SLIDE OR SLUMP: Landslide movement due to forces that cause a concave upwards surface in the mass.

RUDERAL: Disturbed area with a prevalence of introduced weedy species. Ruderal habitats are associated with unpaved highway shoulders and weedy areas around and between dwellings and other structures.

S

THE SAFE, ACCOUNTABLE, FLEXIBLE, EFFICIENT TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT: A LEGACY FOR USERS (SAFETEA-LU): SAFETEA-LU authorized the Federal surface transportation programs for highways, highway safety, and transit for the 5-year period 2005 to 2009.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-19 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
SCENIC HIGHWAY SYSTEM: A list of the highways that are eligible to become, or are designated as, official scenic highways. Many state highways are located in areas of outstanding natural beauty. California’s Scenic Highway Program was created by the Legislature in 1963. Its purpose is to preserve and protect scenic highway corridors from change that would diminish the aesthetic value of lands adjacent to highways. The state laws governing the Scenic Highway Program are found in the Streets and Highways Code, §260 et seq.

SCOPING: NEPA defines scoping as an early and open process for determining the scope of issues to be addressed and for identifying the significant issues related to a proposed action (40 CFR §1501.7). Under CEQA, scoping is designed to examine a proposed project early in the EIR environmental analysis/review process, and is intended to identify the range of issues pertinent to the proposed project and feasible alternatives or mitigation measures to avoid potentially significant environmental effects.

SCOUR: Erosion caused by moving water.

SEICHE: A wave oscillation of the surface of water in an enclosed basin initiated by an earthquake.

SENATE BILL (SB) 45: California State Senate Bill 45, passed in 1997, revised transportation funding priorities at the State level, allocating 75% of capital outlay dollars to regional agencies, and 25% to the State.

SETBACKS: The minimum horizontal distance slopes shall be set back from site boundaries according to Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code. Also applies to the minimum horizontal distance required from faults to structures (see California Geological Survey Special Publication 42, pp. 27 and 29).

SETTLEMENT: The gradual downward movement of an engineered structure due to compression of the soil below the structure foundation.

SIGNIFICANCE (CEQA): CEQA defines a "significant effect on the environment" as “a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project, including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment. A social or economic change related to a physical change may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant” (15382).

CEQA requires that the lead agency identify each “significant effect on the environment” resulting from the project and avoid or mitigate it.

The CEQA Guidelines include mandatory findings of significance for certain effects, thus requiring the preparation of an EIR.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-20 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
SIGNIFICANCE (NEPA): Under NEPA, an EIS is required when the proposed federal action has the potential to “significantly affect the quality of the human environment.” To determine that potential, one must consider both the context in which the action takes place and the intensity of its effect. Section 1508.27 of the CEQ regulations defines the term “significantly” as:

Significantly as used in NEPA requires considerations of both context and intensity:

A. Context. This means that the significance of an action must be analyzed in several contexts such as society as a whole (human, national), the affected region, the affected interests, and the locality. Significance varies with the setting of the proposed action. For instance, in the case of a site-specific action, significance would usually depend upon the effects in the locale rather than in the world as a whole. Both short- and long-term effects are relevant.

B. Intensity. This refers to the severity of impact. Responsible officials must bear in mind that more than one agency may make decisions about partial aspects of a major action. The following should be considered in evaluating intensity:

1. Impacts that may be both beneficial and adverse. A significant effect may exist even if the Federal agency believes that on balance the effect will be beneficial.

2. The degree to which the proposed action affects public health or safety.

3. Unique characteristics of the geographic area such as proximity to historic or cultural resources, park lands, prime farmlands, wetlands, wild and scenic rivers, or ecologically critical areas.

4. The degree to which the effects on the quality of the human environment are likely to be highly controversial

5. The degree to which the possible effects on the human environment are highly uncertain or involve unique or unknown risks

6. The degree to which the action may establish a precedent for future actions with significant effects or represents a decision in principle about a future consideration

7. Whether the action is related to other actions with individually insignificant but cumulatively significant impacts. Significance exists if it is reasonable to anticipate a cumulatively significant impact on the environment. Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts.

8. The degree to which the action may adversely affect districts, sites, highways, structures, or objects listed in or eligible for listing in the National Register of

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-21 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
Historic Places or may cause loss or destruction of significant scientific, cultural, or historical resources.

9. The degree to which the action may adversely affect an endangered or threatened species or its habitat that has been determined to be critical under the Endangered Species Act of 1973.

10. Whether the action threatens a violation of Federal, State, or local law or requirements imposed for the protection of the environment. [43 FR 56003, Nov. 29, 1978; 44 FR 874, Jan. 3, 1979].

SIGNIFICANT ENCROACHMENT: A highway encroachment and any direct support of likely base floodplain development that would involve one or more of the following construction or flood related impacts:

1. A significant potential for interruption or termination of a transportation facility, which is needed for emergency vehicles or provides a community's only evacuation route.

2. A significant risk (to life or property), or

3. A significant adverse impact on natural and beneficial floodplain values.

SOIL CREEP: The gradual, steady downhill movement of soil and loose rock material.

SOLE SOURCE AQUIFER: An aquifer upon which a community depends exclusively for its fresh water supply.

SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS (SFHAS): The areas delineated on an NFIP map as being subject to inundation by the base (100-year) flood.

SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES: Plant or animal species that are either (1) federally listed, proposed for or a candidate for listing as threatened or endangered; (2) bird species protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act; (3) protected under state endangered species laws and regulations, plant protection laws and regulations, Fish and Game codes, or species of special concern listings and policies; or (4) recognized by national, state, or local environmental organizations (e.g., California Native Plant Society).

STATE HIGHWAY OPERATIONS AND PROTECTION PROGRAM (SHOPP): A legislatively created program to maintain the integrity of the State Highway System. It is tapped for safety and rehabilitation projects. SHOPP is a multi-year program of projects approved by the Legislature and Governor. It is separate from the STIP.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-22 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP): The state’s plan for attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Per federal law, transportation plans and programs in air quality non-attainment areas must conform to the SIP.

STATE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (STIP): A statewide or bundled prioritized list of transportation projects covering a period of four years that is consistent with the long-range statewide transportation plan, MTPs, and FTIPs, and required for projects to be eligible for funding under Title 23 USC and title 49 USC.

Chapter 53.

STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD: The principal authority of California for regulation of the quantity and quality of waters of the State, established by act of the legislature in 1967. It assumed responsibility for administration of the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act of 1969.

STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION: Pursuant to CEQA, a written explanation prepared by a public agency that explains why it approved a project, despite the presence of significant, unavoidable environmental impacts.

STATEWIDE TRANSPORTATION PLAN: The official statewide, intermodal transportation plan that is developed through the statewide transportation planning process.

STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP): A SWPPP is prepared to evaluate sources of discharges and activities that may affect storm water runoff, and implement measures or practices to reduce or prevent such discharges.

STRATUM: A layer of sedimentary rock; plural is strata.

STRATIGRAPHY: The study of rock layers, especially their formation, distribution, composition, and age.

SUBSIDENCE: A localized mass movement that involves the gradual downward settling or sinking of the earth’s surface.

SUMMARY FLOODPLAIN ENCROACHMENT REPORT (SAME AS FIGURE 804.7B FLOODPLAIN EVALUATION REPORT SUMMARY LOCATED IN CHAPTER 804 OF THE HIGHWAY DESIGN MANUAL): A floodplain assessment report which addresses the six key items identified in 23 CFR 650.111(b)(c)(d) verified by results of the Location Hydraulic Study. If it is determined that a project does not have a significant encroachment, this form can be used as a minimum backup for a categorical exclusion (CE) determination. For federally-funded projects on the State Highway System (SHS), the Caltrans project engineer will sign the Summary Floodplain Encroachment Report. For local assistance projects, this report must be filled out and signed by the local agency project engineer, with concurrence signature by the District Local Assistance Engineer (DLAE).

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-23 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
SWALE: A wide shallow depression in the ground to form a channel for storm water drainage. Bio-swales or biofiltration swales are densely vegetated to filter runoff.

T
THREATENED: A species that is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future in the absence of special protection.

TIERING: The process of preparing multiple levels of an environmental review, typically including general matter in broad environmental documents with subsequent narrower environmental documents.

TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS: Concentration of all substances dissolved in water (solids remaining after evaporation of a water sample).

TRACT: A standard geographical unit of measurement defined by the U.S. Census Bureau.

TRAFFIC ACCIDENT SURVEILLANCE AND ANALYSIS SYSTEM (TASAS): A system that provides a detailed list and/or summary of accidents that have occurred on highways, ramps, or intersections that are part of the State Highway System.

Accidents can be selected by location, highway characteristics, accident data codes, and combinations of the above.

TRAFFIC FORECAST: A best estimate of future roadway travel conditions, demand, and resulting volumes.

TRAFFIC OPERATIONS: The safe and efficient movements of vehicles, people, and goods. The typical measures of effectiveness are travel times, delay, accidents per vehicles miles, and level of service.

TRANSLATIONAL SLIDE: Landslide movement that occurs predominantly along planar or gently undulating surfaces.

TRANSPORTATION CONTROL MEASURE (TCM): “... is any measure that is specifically identified and committed to in the applicable implementation plan that is either one of the types listed in §108 of the Clean Air Act or any other measure for the purpose of reducing emissions or concentrations of air pollutants from transportation sources by reducing vehicle use or changing traffic flow or congestion conditions.

Notwithstanding the above, vehicle technology-based, fuel-base, and maintenance- based measures which control the emissions from vehicles under fixed traffic conditions are not TCMs for the purposes of project-level conformity.

TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM): “Demand-based” techniques for reducing traffic congestion, such as ridesharing programs and flexible work schedules enabling employees to commute to and from work outside of the peak hours.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-24 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
TRANSPORTATION EQUITY ACT FOR THE 21ST CENTURY (TEA-21): Federal legislation signed into law in 1998, authorizing highway, highway safety, transit and other surface transportation programs for the following six years. TEA 21 built on the initiatives established in the 1991 ISTEA.

TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PLAN (TIP): A staged, multiyear, intermodal program of transportation projects which is consistent with the metropolitan transportation plan. It is a federal term.

TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM MANAGEMENT (TSM): TSM is 1) a process oriented approach to solving transportation problems considering both long and short range implications; and 2) a services and operations process oriented in which low capital, environmentally-responsive, efficiency-maximizing improvements are implemented on existing facilities.

TRUSTEE AGENCY: “…a state agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by project which are held in trust for the people of the State of California. Trustee agencies include: a) the California Department of Fish and Game [Wildlife] with regard to the fish and wildlife of the state, to designated rare or endangered native plants, and to game refuges, ecological preserves, and other areas administered by the department; b) the State Lands Commission with regard to state owned “sovereign” lands such as the beds of navigable waters and state school lands; c) the State Department of Parks and Recreation with regard to units of the State Park System; and d) the University of California with regard to sites within the Natural Land and Water Reserves System” (14 CCR 15386).

TSUNAMI: A water wave of local or distant origin that results from large-scale displacements associated with large earthquakes, major submarine slides, or volcanic eruption.

TURBIDITY: Cloudiness (or a measure of the cloudiness in water due to the presence of suspended particulates).

TYPE I PROJECTS: A proposed federal or federal-aid highway project for the construction of a highway on new location or the physical alteration of an existing highway which significantly changes either the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the number of through-traffic lanes. Other specific activities that qualify as a Type I project are defined in 23 CFR 772.

TYPE II PROJECTS: Usually called a retrofit project, a proposed federal or federal- aid highway project for noise abatement on an existing highway.

TYPE III PROJECTS: A federal or Federal-aid highway project that does not meet the classifications of a Type I or Type II project. Type III projects do not require a noise analysis.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-25 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
U
UNDERCROSSING (U.C.): A state highway structure that bridges over a local road.

UNUSAL CIRCUMSTANCES (NEPA): For any action which would normally be classified as a CE but could involve unusual circumstances, Caltrans is required to conduct appropriate environmental studies to determine whether a categorical exclusion is proper (23 CFR 771.117(b)). Unusual circumstances include actions that involve:

1. Significant environmental impacts;

2. Substantial controversy on environmental grounds;

3. Significant impact to properties protected under 4(f) of the USDOT Act or Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act ;

4. Inconsistencies with any federal, state or local law relating to environmental impacts.

V
VERTICAL CLEARANCE: The unobstructed distance above the roadway surface; the height at which a vehicle may pass beneath a structure, such as a bridge, without any physical contact.

VIEWSHED: View; total visible area from the position of a single observer or the total visible area from observers in multiple positions.

VISUAL RESOURCES: The natural and artificial features of a landscape that characterize its form, line, texture, and color.

VISUAL UNITY: The visual coherence and compositional harmony of a landscape when considered as a whole.

VOLUME TO CAPACITY RATIO (V/C): The relationship between the demand for trips and the number of trips that can be accommodated.

W
WATERSHED: The area of land that drains into a specific waterbody.

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements G-26 Appendix G
Napa, California July 2026
WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES: As defined by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in 33 CFR 328.3(a):

1. All waters that are currently used, or were used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters that are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;

2. All interstate waters including interstate wetlands;

3. All other waters such as intrastate lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), mudflats, sandflats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, or natural ponds, the use, degradation or destruction of which could affect interstate or foreign commerce, including any such waters:
(i) Which are or could be used by interstate or foreign travelers for recreational or other purposes; or
(ii) From which fish or shellfish are or could be taken and sold in interstate or foreign commerce; or
(iii) Which are used or could be used for industrial purposes by industries in interstate commerce;

4. All impoundment of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under this definition;

5. Tributaries of waters identified in paragraphs 1-4;

6. The territorial seas;

7. Wetlands adjacent to waters (waters that are not wetlands themselves) identified in paragraphs 1-6.

WEIR: A dam in a stream to raise the water level or divert its flow.

WETLAND: Those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.

X
Y
Z

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements H-1 Appendix H
Napa, California July 2026
Appendix H List of Acronyms and
Abbreviations
AB Assembly Bill
ABAG Association of Bay Area Governments
ACM asbestos-containing material
ADA Americans with Disabilities Act
ADL Aerially deposited lead
ALUC Airport Land Use Commission
APN Assessor’s Parcel Number
Bay Area San Francisco Bay Area
BFE Base flood elevation
BGS below ground surface
Btu British thermal unit
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standard
CAL FIRE California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection Cal/OSHA California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Occupational Safety and Health
CalARP California Accidental Release Prevention
CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency
CALGreen California Green Building Standards
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CARB California Air Resources Board
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements H-2 Appendix H
Napa, California July 2026
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CFC chlorofluorocarbon
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
CGS California Geological Survey
CH4 methane
CLUP Comprehensive Land Use Plan
CNEL Community Noise Equivalent Level
CO carbon monoxide
CO2 carbon dioxide
CO2e carbon dioxide equivalents
CRHR California Register of Historical Resources
CUPA Certified Unified Program Agency
dBA A-weighted decibel
DNL Day/Night Average Sound Level
DPM diesel particulate matter
DTSC Department of Toxic Substances Control
EA Environmental Assessment
EIR Environmental Impact Report
EO Executive Order
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
ESA Environmental Site Assessment
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAR Federal Aviation Regulations
FHSZ Fire Hazard Severity Zone

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements H-3 Appendix H
Napa, California July 2026
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FMMP Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program
FONSI Finding of No Significant Impact
FSTIP Federal Statewide Transportation Improvement Program GHG greenhouse gas
GIS Geographic Information Systems
GWh gigawatt hour
GWP Global Warming Potential
HSWA Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments
ibid Same source as previous footnote
Leq Energy-Equivalent Sound/Noise Descriptor
Lmax Maximum A-weighted noise level during a measurement period LBP lead-based paint
LOS Level of Service
LRA Local Responsibility Area
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MMTCO2e million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent MND Mitigated Negative Declaration
mpg miles per gallon
MSAT Mobile Source Air Toxics
MSL mean sea level
MTC Metropolitan Transportation Commission
N2O nitrous oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NAHC Native American Heritage Commission

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements H-4 Appendix H
Napa, California July 2026
NCP National Contingency Plan
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants NES(MI) Natural Environment Study (Minimal Impacts)
NFD City of Napa Fire Department
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOA naturally occurring asbestos
NOD Notice of Determination
NOx nitrogen oxides
NPD City of Napa Police Department
NRHP National Register of Historic Places
NVTA Napa Valley Transportation Authority
O3 ozone
PA&ED Project Approval and Environmental Document
PCB polychlorinated biphenyls
PFC perfluorocarbon
PDA Priority Development Areas
PDT Project Development Team
PG&E Pacific Gas and Electric Company
PM particulate matter
PM10 particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less PM2.5 particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less PPV Peak Particle Velocity
PS&E Plans, Specifications, and Estimates
R&D Research and Development

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements H-5 Appendix H
Napa, California July 2026
RAP Removal Action Plan
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
ROG reactive organic gases
ROW Right-of-Way
RTIP Regional Transportation Improvement Program
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SB State Bill
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SF6 sulfur hexafluoride
SHMA Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
SMARA Surface Mining and Reclamation Act
SMGB State Mining and Geology Board
SMP Site Management Plan
SOx sulfur oxides
SR State Route
SRA State Responsibility Area
SWPPP Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan
SWRCB State Water Resources Control Board
TACs Toxic Air Contaminants
Title 24 Title 24, Part 6 of the California Code of Regulations TMP Traffic Management Plan
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements H-6 Appendix H
Napa, California July 2026
VMT vehicle miles traveled
Williamson Act California Land Conservation Act
WPT western pond turtle
WUI wildland-urban interface
ZNE zero net carbon emission

EXHIBIT A
Five-Way Intersection Improvements I-1 Appendix I
Napa, California July 2026
Appendix I Required Consultation/
Concurrence Determination
• Memorandum of Agreement for any Finding of Adverse Effect • FHWA Project Level Conformity Determination

EXHIBIT A
State of California • Natural Resources Agency Gavin Newsom, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION

OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION
Julianne Polanco, State Historic Preservation Officer
1725 23rd Street, Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95816-7100 Telephone: (916) 445-7000 FAX: (916) 445-7053 [email protected] www.ohp.parks.ca.gov

Armando Quintero, Director
June 26, 2026 Refer To: FHWA-CATRA_2025_0311_001

Submitted Via Electronic Mail

Julia Prince-Buitenhuys
Section 106 Coordinator
Cultural Studies Office
Caltrans Division of Environmental Analysis
P.O. Box 942873, MS-27
Sacramento, CA 94273-0001

Re: Final Memorandum of Agreement for the Silverado Trail/Coombsville Road 5-Way Intersection Project, Napa, Napa County, California

Dear Ms. Prince-Buitenhuys:

Accompanying this letter is a signed copy of the Memorandum Of Agreement Between The California Department of Transportation and the California State Historic Preservation Officer Regarding the Silverado Trail/Coombsville 5-Way Intersection Project In Napa County, California.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact State Historian II Tristan Tozer at [email protected].

Sincerely,

Julianne Polanco
State Historic Preservation Officer

EXHIBIT A

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

AND THE CALIFORNIA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
REGARDING THE SILVERADO TRAIL/COOMBSVILLE ROAD 5-WAY

INTERSECTION PROJECT IN NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

WHEREAS, pursuant to the 2024
(Section 106 PA),
Caltrans is deemed to be a federal agency for all highway-aid projects it has to the Caltrans Division of Environmental Analysis (DEA) Chief for the purpose of compliance with Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations Part 800 (36 CFR § 800), the regulation that implements Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 (54 U.S.C. 470f), as amended and is responsible for oversight of District environmental responsibilities. To provide for effective compliance, day- to-day responsibilities, and coordination of the Section 106 process are further delegated to the DEA Cultural Studies Office (CSO) Chief; and

WHEREAS, Caltrans and the City of Napa propose to implement the Silverado Trail/Coombsville Road 5-Way Intersection Project (Undertaking) on State Route 121 in the City of Napa in Napa County, California, to modify the intersection of State Route 121 (Silverado Trail), East Third Avenue, and Coombsville Road, as described in Attachment A; and

WHEREAS, Caltrans has consulted with the State Historic Preservation Officer preparing this memorandum of agreement (MOA) pursuant to Stipulation XI of the Section 106 PA and 36 CFR Section 800.5(b) and 800.6, and will file a copy of this MOA with the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) pursuant to Stipulation X.C.3 of the Section 106 PA; and

1 WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has assigned and California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has assumed FHWA responsibility for environmental review, consultation, and coordination under the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the Federal Highway Administration and the California Department of Transportation Concerning the State of Participation in the Surface Transportation Project Delivery Program Pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 327 , which became effective on May 27, 2022, and applies to this undertaking; and

EXHIBIT A

2 WHEREAS, the Undertaking's Area of Potential Effects (APE) includes public right of way, staging areas, temporary construction easements, and areas where visual or audible changes could occur as a result of the Undertaking. The APE also includes the entirety of the East Napa Historic District, the entire property at 801 Silverado Trail, and a part of which will be acquired permanently and demolished, and 36 Coombsville Road, a portion of which will be acquired permanently for the construction of a retaining wall; and
WHEREAS, Caltrans has determined that the Undertaking will have an adverse effect on the East Napa Historic District, a property considered eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) for this project only under Criterion A as a surviving area of Italian settlement and working-class residential development in Napa, California, and under Criterion C as a good example of a working-class neighborhood characterized by modest vernacular bungalows and cottages with high integrity, and therefore the district is a historic property as defined at 36 CFR § 800.16(1)(1); and
WHEREAS, Caltrans has thoroughly considered alternatives to the Undertaking and has determined, in consultation with the SHPO, that the Undertaking adverse effects cannot be avoided, and that implementation of the treatments adverse effects on the historic property; and

WHEREAS, Caltrans has consulted with the City of Napa Cultural Heritage Commission, Napa County Historical Society, Napa County Landmarks, Napa Service, and the Napa County
Genealogical Society (consulting parties) regarding the Undertaking and its effects on historic properties, and will continue to consult with them and afford them, should they so desire, the opportunity to actively participate in the implementation of the Undertaking itself and this MOA; and

WHEREAS, Caltrans has consulted with representatives from Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley, Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Community, Guidiville Indian Rancheria, Pinoleville Pomo Nation, Cortina Rancheria Kletsel Dehe Band of Wintun Indians, and Grindstone Rancheria of Wintun-Wailaki regarding the effects of the Undertaking. The Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation and the Mishewal- Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley (tribes) requested continued consultation on the Undertaking; and

WHEREAS, Caltrans District 4 has participated in the consultation, has a responsibility to fulfill the terms of this MOA, and is participating as an Invited Signatory; and

EXHIBIT A

3 WHEREAS, The City of Napa has participated in the consultation, has a responsibility to fulfill the terms of this MOA, and is participating as an Invited Signatory; and

WHEREAS, Napa County Landmarks has participated in the consultation and is partaking as a Concurring Party to this MOA; and

NOW, THEREFORE, Caltrans and the SHPO agree that if the Undertaking proceeds, the Undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account the effects of the Undertaking on historic properties, and further agrees that these stipulations shall govern the Undertaking and all of its parts until this MOA expires or is terminated.

EXHIBIT A

STIPULATIONS

Caltrans and the City of Napa shall ensure that the following stipulations are carried out:

I. AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS

A. If modifications to the Undertaking subsequent to the execution of this MOA necessitate revision of the APE, the City of Napa will notify Caltrans District 4.

Caltrans District 4 will notify the MOA parties of the subject revisions as soon as it is feasible and request comment within thirty (30) days. The City of Napa, in collaboration with Caltrans District 4, will take all comments into account and submit a final map of the revisions, consistent with the requirements of Stipulation VIII.A and Appendix 3 of the Section 106 PA, no later than 30 days following the end of the comment period. The City of Napa will not conduct any additional studies necessitated by the revisions prior to distribution of the revised APE Map. Amendment of the APE will not require an amendment to the MOA unless the change alters the terms of this agreement. Any amendments to the APE that necessitate amendments to the MOA shall follow Stipulation V.D of this MOA.

B. Any additional required supplemental identification, evaluation, and effects analysis efforts necessitated due to changes to the APE will be undertaken consistent with the requirements of the Section 106 PA.

II. TREATMENT OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES

Caltrans and the City of Napa shall ensure that the following avoidance and minimization conditions are completed and adverse effects of the Undertaking on the East Napa Historic District are resolved through the implementation of the following measures:

A. EVALUATION OF THE EAST NAPA HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR ELIGIBILITY TO THE

NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES

Prior to completion construction, Caltrans District 4 and the City of Napa will conduct an evaluation, pursuant to NRHP criteria, of the East Napa Historic District to determine if the property retains sufficient integrity to convey historic significance and if it remains eligible for listing in the NRHP.

1. The City of Napa will submit drafts of the evaluation to Caltrans District 4 for review and approval, which approval shall not be unreasonably

4 EXHIBIT A
withheld, conditioned, or delayed.

2. Upon approval, Caltrans District 4 shall submit the evaluation to the SHPO for concurrence pursuant to the Section 106 PA Stipulation VIII.C.6.

B. 801 SILVERADO TRAIL ARCHITECTURAL SALVAGE

1. After the City of Napa takes ownership of the property at 801 Silverado Trail, and prior to construction, the City of Napa and Caltrans District 4 will coordinate with Napa County Landmarks to alert the local preservation community about salvaging components of the building at 801 Silverado Trail. Interested parties may remove and take ownership of salvage components at their sole cost and risk, subject to City Approval. Caltrans District 4 and the City of Napa will document good faith efforts to identify parties for salvaging components and record their consultation efforts.

2. If no parties salvage components prior to going to construction, the City of Napa will notify Caltrans District 4 and provide evidence of consultation efforts. Caltrans District 4 shall notify CSO and the SHPO within 30 days of determining that the efforts were sufficient and provide the evidence of consultation efforts, and this stipulation shall be deemed to have been met.

3. Caltrans District 4 will notify the SHPO within 30 days of the completion of all salvage activities and the outcomes of the architectural salvage efforts.

4. Nothing in this stipulation obligates the City to acquire 801 Silverado Trail by any date certain, to permit entry onto City-owned property absent a separate written agreement, or to accept liability for the acts or omissions of salvage participants, contractors, consultants, or volunteers.

C. WAYFINDER SIGNAGE

Caltrans District 4 shall ensure that the City of Napa will develop informational sign(s) that will identify the East Napa Historic District.

1. Sign number, locations, material, design and content will be determined by Caltrans District 4 and the City of Napa, in collaboration with the tribes, consulting parties, and Concurring Parties. The City of Napa will fund the design, fabrication, installation, and maintenance of the signs.

2. The City of Napa will submit a draft copy of the signage design and content to Caltrans District 4 for review and approval. The City of Napa will take all comments into account in revising the documents. After approval, Caltrans District 4 will submit a draft to the Signatories.

5 EXHIBIT A

3. The Signatories will have thirty (30) days to review and comment on the design. Caltrans District 4 and the City of Napa will take any comments into account in revising the draft signage design and content and will provide the Signatories with written documentation indicating whether and how the signs will be modified in accordance with any comments received. Objections will be resolved using the process outlined in Stipulation V.C of this MOA.

4. The City of Napa shall ensure their installation prior to the termination of this MOA. The City of Napa will notify the Signatories upon completion of the installation, pursuant to Stipulation V.F of this MOA.

5. If, after initial installation and within the duration of this MOA, the City determines the need to relocate any sign located on City property or City right of way if reasonably necessary for public safety, utility work, roadway operations, capital improvements, or compliance with law, the City of Napa will consult with Caltrans District 4 on the relocation.

D. ORAL HISTORY OF EAST NAPA HISTORIC DISTRICT

Caltrans District 4 shall ensure that the City of Napa, in collaboration with Napa County Landmarks, shall fund and develop an oral history of the East Napa Historic District. The oral history will expand on the history and early development of the neighborhood through interviews with current and former residents, if available, and local historians.

1. The oral history will be conducted by a professionally qualified oral historian/s using best practices, guidance, and tools available from the Oral History Association. The City may satisfy this requirement through qualified City Staff or qualified consultants.

2. The City of Napa will submit a draft to Caltrans District 4 for review and approval.

3. After completion, the City of Napa will develop digital formats within current oral history standards, and a written transcription. The final oral history will be distributed by the City of Napa to the following parties in the format requested: Napa County Landmarks, Napa County Library, Napa Historical Society, Order of Sons and Daughters of Italy in America (NapaLodge 2043), and Caltrans District 4.

4. After completion and receipt of the oral History, Caltrans District 4 shall distribute the digital formats and written transcription to CSO and the SHPO.

6 EXHIBIT A

E. INTERPRETIVE DISPLAY

Caltrans District 4 shall ensure that the City of Napa will develop public interpretive material documenting the history of the East Napa Historic District by highlighting dates, events, and people important to the development of the district.

1. Interpretive products may include up to (2) signs or panels.

2. The City of Napa and Caltrans will coordinate with the tribes, consulting parties, and Concurring Parties to develop interpretive objectives to determine the design, fabrication, installation, and maintenance of signs and/or panels. Any sign or panel located on City property or in City right ADA compliance, engineering, maintenance access, and consistency with applicable City standards.

3. The City of Napa will submit drafts to Caltrans District 4 for review and approval. After Caltrans District 4 approval, Caltrans will submit the documents to the signatories. The signatories will have thirty (30) days to review and comment on the design. The City of Napa and Caltrans District 4 will take any comments into account in revising the draft display design and content and will provide the Signatories with written documentation indicating whether and how the displays will be modified in accordance with any comments received. Objections will be resolved using the process outlined in V.C.

4. The City of Napa will fund and ensure the signs or display installation in locations with suitable public access. Installation shall only be in locations that the City determines are suitable for public access and compliant with applicable City standards. Nothing herein obligates the City to approve installation in any particular location within City right of way.

5. Caltrans District 4 and the City of Napa will also outline the locations where such interpretation may be installed or take place and identify any interpretation that might be needed prior to and during construction to educate the community about measures undertaken or proposed to protect cultural resources.

6. The City of Napa shall ensure that all interpretive displays and materials are completed and installed prior to the termination of this MOA. The City of Napa will notify the Signatories upon completion, per Stipulation V.F of this MOA.

7 EXHIBIT A

7. If, after initial installation and within the duration of this MOA, the City determines the need to relocate any sign located on City property or City right of way if reasonably necessary for public safety, utility work, roadway operations, capital improvements, or compliance with law, the City of Napa will consult with Caltrans District 4 on the relocation.

III. NATIVE AMERICAN CONSULTATION

Caltrans has consulted with representatives from Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Muwekma Ohlone Tribe, Mishewal-Wappo Tribe of Alexander Valley, Cachil Dehe Band of Wintun Indians of the Colusa Indian Community, Guidiville Indian Rancheria, Pinoleville Pomo Nation, Cortina Rancheria Kletsel Dehe Band of Wintun Indians, and Grindstone Rancheria of Wintun-Wailaki regarding the proposed Undertaking and its effects on historic properties, will continue to consult with them, and will afford them, should they desire, the opportunity to participate in the implementation of this MOA and the Undertaking. If other tribes or Native American groups who attach religious or cultural significance to historic properties that may be affected by this Undertaking are identified, Caltrans will invite them to participate as consulting parties as the Section 106 process moves forward.

Caltrans shall remain responsible for all Section 106 consultation, as per dination
under Stipulation II.C and II.E of this MOA shall not be construed as

IV. DISCOVERIES AND UNANTICIPATED EFFECTS

A. As legally mandated, human remains and related items discovered during the implementation of the terms of this Agreement and the Undertaking will be treated in accordance with the requirements of Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b). If pursuant to of Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(c) the coroner determines that the human remains are or may be those of a Native American, then the discovery shall be treated in accordance with the provisions of Public Resources Code Sections 5097.98 (a)- (d). Caltrans shall ensure, to the extent possible, that the views of the Most Likely Descendent(s), as determined by the California Native American Heritage Commission, are taken into consideration when decisions are made about the disposition of Native American human remains and associated objects.

B. If Caltrans determines, during implementation of the terms of this MOA or after construction of the Undertaking has commenced, that the Undertaking

8 EXHIBIT A
will affect a previously unidentified property that may be eligible for listing in the NRHP or affect a known historic property in an unanticipated manner, Caltrans will address the discovery or unanticipated effect in accordance with 36 CFR §800.13(b)(3). Caltrans at its discretion may hereunder assume any discovered property to be eligible for the NRHP in accordance with 36 CFR §800.13.

V. ADMINSTRATIVE PROVISIONS
A. STANDARDS

1. Definitions. The definitions provided at 36 CFR § 800.16 are applicable throughout this MOA.

2. Parties to this agreement are defined as follows:

a. Signatory parties have the sole authority to execute, amend, or terminate the MOA.

b. Invited Signatories have the authority to amend or terminate the MOA.

c. Concurring Parties , signing the MOA do so to acknowledge their agreement or concurrence with the MOA, but have no legal authority under the MOA to terminate or amend this MOA.

Concurring with the terms of this MOA does not constitute their agreement with the Undertaking.

3. Professional Qualifications. Caltrans will ensure that only individuals meeting the
Standards (48 FR 44738-39) (PQS) as defined in Attachment 1 of the Section 106 PA, in the relevant field of study carry out or review appropriateness and quality of the actions and products required by Stipulations I, II, III, IV, and V in this MOA. However, nothing in this stipulation may be interpreted to preclude Caltrans or any agent or contractor thereof from using persons who do not meet the PQS as long as they are directly supervised by professionals who meet the standards.

4. Documentation Standards. Written documentation of activities prescribed by Stipulations I, II, III, and IV of this MOA shall conform to Secretary of the
Historic Preservation (48 FR 44716- 44740) as well as to applicable standards and guidelines established by the SHPO.

B. LIMITATIONS

9 EXHIBIT A

1. Limitations on City Obligations. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this MOA, the City shall be responsible only for those obligations expressly assigned to the City in this MOA, and no general duty to ensure overall MOA compliance is imposed on the City.

2. No Conveyance of Property Rights; Separate Agreements Required .

Nothing in this MOA conveys any easement, license, right of entry, possessory interest, permit, or approval to use City property or City right of way. Any such rights must be granted, if at all, only by separate written agreement or permit acceptable to the City.

C. CONFIDENTIALITY
The MOA parties acknowledge that the historic properties covered by this MOA are subject to the provisions of § 304 of the NHPA and § 6254.10 of the California Government Code (Public Records Act), relating to the disclosure of archaeological site information and, having so acknowledged, will ensure that all actions and documentation prescribed by this MOA are consistent with said sections.

D. RESOLVING OBJECTIONS

1. Should any party to this MOA object at any time in writing to the manner in which the terms of this MOA are implemented, to any action carried out or proposed with respect to implementation of the MOA (other than the Undertaking itself), or to any documentation prepared in accordance with and subject to the terms of this MOA, Caltrans sha ll immediately notify the other MOA parties of the objection, request their comments on the objection within fifteen (15) days following receipt of and proceed to consult with the objecting party
for no more than thirty (30) days to resolve the objection. Caltrans will honor the request of the other parties to participate in the consultation and will take any comments provided by those parties into account.

2. If the objection is resolved during the 30-day consultation period, Caltrans may proceed with the disputed action in accordance with the terms of such resolution.

3. If, at the end of the 30-day consultation period, Caltrans determines that the objection cannot be resolved through such consultation, then Caltrans shall forward all documentation relevant to the objection to the e to the objection. The ACHP
shall provide Caltrans with its advice on the resolution of the objection 10 EXHIBIT A
within thirty (30) days of receiving adequate documentation. Prior to reaching a final decision on the dispute, Caltrans shall prepare a written response that takes into account any timely advice or comments regarding the dispute from the ACHP, signatories, and Concurring Parties, and provide them with a copy of this written response. Caltrans will then proceed according to its final decision.

4. If the ACHP does not provide its advice regarding the dispute within the 30-day time period, Caltrans may make a final decision on the dispute and proceed accordingly. Prior to reaching such a final decision, Caltrans shall prepare a written response that takes into account any timely comments regarding the dispute from the signatories and Concurring Parties to the MOA and provide them to the ACHP with a copy of such written response.

5. Caltrans responsibility to carry out all other actions subject to the terms of this MOA that are not the subject of the dispute remain unchanged.

6. Caltrans may authorize any action subject to objection under this stipulation to proceed after the objection has been resolved in accordance with the terms of this stipulation.

E. AMENDMENTS

1. Any Signatory Party to this MOA may propose that this MOA be amended, whereupon all Signatory Parties shall consult for no more than thirty (30) days to consider such amendment. Caltrans may extend this consultation period, if necessary. This MOA may be amended only upon written agreement of the Signatories and Invited Signatories. The amendment will be effective on the date a copy signed by all of the original signatories is filed by Caltrans with the ACHP. If the signatories cannot agree to appropriate terms to amend the MOA, any signatory may terminate the agreement in accordance with Stipulation V.E, below.

2. No party shall alter any attachment to this MOA, or other document that has been reviewed and commented on pursuant to this MOA, without first affording the parties to this MOA the opportunity to review the proposed change and determine whether it shall require that this MOA be amended. If one or more party determines that an amendment is needed, the parties to this MOA shall consult in accordance with Stipulation V.D.1 to consider such an amendment. Within thirty (30) days of revising any Attachment, Caltrans shall append any revised document to this MOA and share the final revised document with parties to this MOA. 11 EXHIBIT A
F. TERMINATION

1. If this MOA is not amended as provided for Section V.E, or if a Signatory or Invited Signatory proposes termination of this MOA for other reasons, the party proposing termination shall, in writing, notify the other MOA parties, explain the reasons for proposing termination, and consult with the other consulting parties for at least thirty (30) calendar days to seek alternatives to termination. Such consultation shall not be required if Caltrans proposes termination because the Undertaking no longer meets the definition in 36 CFR 800.16(y).

2. Should such consultation result in an agreement on an alternative to termination, the Signatory Parties shall proceed in accordance with the terms of that agreement.

3. Should such consultation fail, the Signatory Party proposing termination may terminate this MOA by promptly notifying the other MOA parties in writing. Termination hereunder shall render this MOA without further force or effect.

4. If this MOA is terminated hereunder, and if Caltrans determines that the Undertaking will nonetheless proceed, Caltrans shall comply with the requirements of Stipulations III through XI of the Section 106 PA, or request the comments of the ACHP, pursuant to 36 CFR 800.

G. REPORTING REQUIRMENTS AND RELATED REVIEWS

1. Caltrans shall prepare an Annual Report documenting actions carried out pursuant to this MOA. The reporting period shall commence one year from the date of execution and is due annually on the anniversary of the date of execution. The Annual Report shall be distributed to all parties to this MOA.

2. The Annual Report shall address the following: any scheduling changes proposed, amendments to the MOA, status of treatment and mitigation activities, ongoing and completed activities, any uses that are affecting or may affect the ability of Caltrans to continue to meet the terms of the MOA, any disputes and objections received, and how they were resolved, and any additional parties who have become Signatories or Concurring Parties to this MOA in the past year.

3. Caltrans shall coordinate a meeting of the Signatories and Consulting Parties to be scheduled within ninety (90) calendar days of distribution of the Annual Report or another mutually agree upon date, to discuss

12 EXHIBIT A
activities carried out pursuant to this MOA during the preceding year and activities scheduled for the upcoming year. This meeting, should it be deemed unnecessary, may be cancelled by mutual consent of the Signatory Parties.

4. Where deliverables are subject to review and approval, such review shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed
H. DURATION OF THE MOA
The duration of this MOA shall be no more than 5 (five) years following the date of the execution by the SHPO and Caltrans, or upon completion of the Undertaking (whichever comes first). If the terms are not satisfactorily fulfilled at that time, Caltrans shall consult with the signatories and Concurring Parties to extend it or reconsider its terms. Reconsideration may include continuation of the MOA as originally executed, amendment of the MOA, or termination. In the event of termination, Caltrans will comply with Stipulations III through XI of Section 106 PA if it determines that the Undertaking will proceed notwithstanding termination of this MOA.

I. EFFECTIVE DATE
This MOA will take effect on the date that it has been executed by Caltrans and the SHPO.

EXECUTION of this MOA by Caltrans and the SHPO, its filing with the ACHP in accordance with 36 CFR §800.6(b)(1)(iv), and subsequent implementation of its terms, shall evidence, pursuant to 36CFR§800.6(c), that this MOA is an agreement with the ACHP for purposes of Section 110(l) of the NHPA, and shall further evidence that Caltrans has afforded the ACHP an opportunity to comment on the Undertaking and its effects on historic properties, and that Caltrans has taken into account the effects of the Undertaking on historic properties. 13 EXHIBIT A

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

AND THE CALIFORNIA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
REGARDING THE SILVERADO TRAIL/COOMBSVILLE ROAD 5-WAY

INTERSECTION PROJECT IN NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SIGNATORY:

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By ________________
Jeremy Ketchum, Chief Date
Division of Environmental Analysis

EXHIBIT A

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

AND THE CALIFORNIA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
REGARDING THE SILVERADO TRAIL/COOMBSVILLE ROAD 5-WAY

INTERSECTION PROJECT IN NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
SIGNATORY:

CALIFORNIA OFFICE OF HISTORIC PRESERVATION
By
Julianne Polanco, SHPO
California Office of Historic Preservation
________________
06/25/2026
Date

EXHIBIT A

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

AND THE CALIFORNIA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
REGARDING THE SILVERADO TRAIL/COOMBSVILLE ROAD 5-WAY

INTERSECTION PROJECT IN NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
INVITED SIGNATORY:

CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT 4
________________
Date Doanh Nguyen, Acting District
Director Caltrans, District 4

EXHIBIT A

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

AND THE CALIFORNIA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
REGARDING THE SILVERADO TRAIL/COOMBSVILLE ROAD 5-WAY

INTERSECTION PROJECT IN NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

INVITED SIGNATORY:

CITY OF NAPA

___________________________________________________________________ Date ____________ Jessica Lowe, Public Works Director
City of Napa

EXHIBIT A

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

AND THE CALIFORNIA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
REGARDING THE SILVERADO TRAIL/COOMBSVILLE ROAD 5-WAY

INTERSECTION PROJECT IN NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

CONCURRING PARTY:

NAPA COUNTY LANDMARKS

________________
Christine Madrid French, Executive Director Date
Napa County Landmarks

MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT

BETWEEN THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

EXHIBIT A

AND THE CALIFORNIA STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER
REGARDING THE SILVERADO TRAIL/COOMBSVILLE ROAD 5-WAY

INTERSECTION PROJECT IN NAPA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA

Attachment A

Project Description

EXHIBIT A

DESCRIPTION OF UNDERTAKING
The City of Napa, in collaboration with Caltrans District 4, proposes to convert the existing intersection of Silverado Trail (State Route 121), Third Street, Coombsville Road, and East Avenue to two, single-lane roundabouts. The northern roundabout has four legs and includes SR 121, Third Street, and East Avenue. The southern roundabout has three legs and includes SR 121 and Coombsville Road.

The Project would also include curb, gutter, ramps, sidewalk, streetlights, and storm drain improvements. Ground disturbing impacts will be up to 6 feet for utility relocations, lighting, landscaping and drainage facilities, placement of pipe, drainage structures, landscaping, irrigation, and backfill. A maximum excavation depth of 10 feet may be required to install foundations for retaining walls along the Coombsville Road and East Avenue legs. One residential property, 36 Coombsville Road will require major acquisition of an undeveloped area of the parcel in order to construct the new roundabouts; another, 801 Silverado Trail, will require full acquisition and will be demolished as part of the project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed scope of work for this project includes one build alternative.

The Undertaking includes permanent right-of-way (ROW) acquisitions, including full acquisition of 801 Silverado Trail (APN-006-147-004) (Figure 1). The single-family house at 801 Silverado Trail, which is a contributing element to the identified East Napa Historic District, will be demolished as part of the Undertaking. Other acquisitions are required to accommodate the southerly roundabout, and minor frontage impacts to conform the roundabout(s) and/or shared use path, including driveway conforms or realignments. Temporary construction easements (TCEs) are required on eight parcels, which will be returned to their previous condition after completion of construction.

The project elements are as follows:

•
A double roundabout with four legs on the northern roundabout and three legs on the southern roundabout. Fill will be used to flatten the roadway grade on the eastern entry/exits.
•
A 10-foot shared-use path throughout the new roundabout(s), buffered from the roadway by at least two feet of landscaping.
•
Replacement of existing sidewalks as needed to follow the new roadway edge.
•
Two retaining walls, including a short cut style retaining wall (4-6 feet tall and 100 feet long) along the northern side of Coombsville Road and a fill style retaining wall (12-14 feet high and 80 feet long) along the northern side of East Avenue. The retaining walls will support the new shared-use path and roundabout approach deflection, while minimizing impacts to adjacent parcels.
•
Relocation of the water transmission line on Third Street. •
Adjustment of utility vaults to match the final pavement surface elevations.

EXHIBIT A

•
Relocation or undergrounding of up to six joint utility poles. •
A staging area on a City of Napa -owned surface parking lot at the north side of Third Street and Lawrence Street (APNs 006-132-001, -002, and 006). No structures are located on these parcels.

Excavation for utility relocation, lighting, landscaping and drainage which require trenching, placement of pipe, drainage structures, landscaping, irrigation, and backfill will reach a maximum depth of six feet. An excavation depth of 10 feet may be required to install retaining walls foundations.

No Build Alternative
Under the No Build Alternative, there would be no action, and the improvements associated with the Build Alternative would not be constructed. This alternative does not satisfy the purpose and need of the project.

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT A
California Division 650 Capitol Mall, Suite 4-100
Sacramento, CA 95814
June 4, 2026 (916) 498-5001
(916) 498-5008 (FAX)
In Reply, Refer To:

HDA-CA

ELECTRONIC CORRESPONDENCE ONLY
David Ambuehl, Acting District Director
California Department of Transportation – D4
111 Grand Avenue PO Box 23660, MS-1A
Oakland, CA 94623
Attention: Rodney Tavitas, Chief
Air Quality Branch
SUBJECT: Project Level Conformity Determination for the Silverado Trail (SR121)/Third Street/Coombsville Road/East Avenue (“Five-Way Intersection”) Project (CTIPS ID# 206-0000- 6500, FTIP ID# NAP170009, RTP ID# 21-T07-056, Federal Aid# 0414000097, EA# 04-0J890) Dear Mr. Ambuehl:

On May 18, 2026, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) submitted to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) a complete request for a project level conformity determination for the Silverado Trail (SR121)/Third Street/Coombsville Road/East Avenue (“Five-Way Intersection”) Project. The project is in an area that is designated as designated as federal Nonattainment or Maintenance for ozone and PM2.5.

The project level conformity analysis submitted by Caltrans indicates that the project-level transportation conformity requirements of 40 CFR Part 93 have been met. The project is included in the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC), Plan Bay Area 2050, TIP (TIP).

As required by 40 CFR 93.116 and 93.123, the project area is subject to project-level hot-spot analysis requirements for PM2.5. However, the project is not considered a project of air quality concern (POAQC) for PM2.5 because it does not meet the definition of a POAQC as defined in U.S.

EPA’s Transportation Conformity Guidance. On July 7, 2023, the Interagency Consultation partners concurred that the project is not exempt from conformity analysis requirements, but that it is not a Project of Concern for PM2.5 as defined at 40 CFR 93.123(b)(1). As such, an explicit, detailed PM2.5 hot-spot analysis is not required. Public comment was open from October 30, 2025, to December 1, 2025. No public comments related to conformity were received during public review of this Project’s Air Quality Study Report.

EXHIBIT A

2 Based on the information provided, FHWA finds that the Silverado Trail (SR121)/Third Street/Coombsville Road/East Avenue Project conforms with the State Implementation Plan (SIP) in accordance with 40 CFR Part 93.

If you have any questions pertaining to this conformity finding, please contact Antonio Johnson at (916) 498-5889 or [email protected].

Sincerely,

Antonio Johnson
Director of Planning, Environment, & Right of
Way
Federal Highway Administration

EXHIBIT A

Five-Way Intersection Improvements J-1 Appendix J
Napa, California July 2026
Appendix J Draft EIR Comments

EXHIBIT A
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing messageSent from Report Suspicious
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Meligy, Amani@DOT; Susan Chang; Ahmad Rahimi; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT Subject: Fw: Roundabout
Date: Wednesday, September 24, 2025 8:54:09 AM
#7 - Aracne, K.
(9/23)
Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Kathy Aracne <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2025 4:42 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: Roundabout

my iPhone We live at 25 Highland Dr We have a home in
another Bay Area city Several years ago they were on the same movement regarding roundabouts The accident rate went up significantly and the roundabouts were removed We see the chaos at the one installed at the highway 29 interchange Napa engineering needs to stop reinventing the wheel Thank you Steve& Kathy Aracne

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT A

EXHIBIT A
e
Report Suspicious
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Meligy, Amani@DOT; Susan Chang; [email protected]; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT; Nguyen, Skylar@DOT
Subject: Fw: Alta Heights 5-way Intersection
Date: Monday, September 22, 2025 8:33:52 AM
#4 - Cuny, S.
(9/19)
Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Steve Cuny <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2025 8:26 AM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: Alta Heights 5-way Intersection

This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing messag It would not be smart to do anything with this intersection based on school traffic for ~30 minutes each school day. Sure it backs up but there are alternative ways to leave this area. To make this expensive change would require removing all the lights and making it almost impossible to cross Silverado from the Coombsville or Alta Heights area to walk to town or the Fair Grounds. On a normal day, people do not have long waits at these lights and the pacing is just fine in all directions. Yes, it gets backed up on the Silverado Trail at certain times, but this will not make that any smoother.

I would vote no to trying to fix something that does not need to be fixed! Steve Cuny
925-639-3798

EXHIBIT A
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Meligy, Amani@DOT; Susan Chang; [email protected]; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT; Nguyen, Skylar@DOT
Subject: Fw: LEAVE WELL ENOUGH ALONE, GEEZE
Date: Monday, September 22, 2025 8:28:04 AM
#2 - Daglia, E.
(9/17)
(3 separate emails in succession)
Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Elizabeth Ann Daglia <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2025 10:39 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: LEAVE WELL ENOUGH ALONE, GEEZE

THE DAY
CARE, I FOUGHT, OMG, LUNACY!
I CALLED UTAH HQ's, "ARE ALL THE CHILDREN MORMON?"
NOW, WHY DIDN'T I THINK OF THAT?!

I AM IN CONTACT WITH THEIR MAIN GUY THAT IS THE MIDDLEMAN AND

CHURCH IS NOW CYCLONE FENCED, NOBODY NOW, CAN CONTINUE TO Trespass, NOT EVEN UP THE STAIRS OFF OF MONTECITO.

I TOLD HIM, "I HOPE THE CHURCH IS TORN DOWN, WE GET OUR VIEW BACK AND A NICE DEVELOPER COMES IN AND BUILDS SOME LUXURY HOMES.

E.A.D.

On Wed, Sep 17, 2025, 10:31 PM Elizabeth Ann Daglia <[email protected]> wrote:

IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE, WEIRD!

EXHIBIT A
On Wed, Sep 17, 2025, 10:29 PM Elizabeth Ann Daglia <[email protected]> wrote:

I LIVE UP ON MONTECITO BLVD AND THE 5 WAY LIGHT WORKS JUST FINE!

SOMETIMES I CUT THROUGH SILVERADO FROM SIDE STREETS AND WE HAVE A LIGHT AT FIRST ST.

WE NEED A STORE WHERE VALLERGAS IS, THAT TOO, WILL HELP WITH

LESS TRAFFIC, KEEPS PEOPLE FROM DRIVING TO OTHER GROCERY STORES, ROUND A ABOUT IS A WASTE OF MONEY AND ENDLESS CONSTRUCTION!

ELIZABETH ANN DAGLIA

EXHIBIT A
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Meligy, Amani@DOT; Susan Chang; [email protected]; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT; Nguyen, Skylar@DOT
Subject: Fw: Proposed Round About in and around Alta Heights Neighborhood Date: Monday, September 22, 2025 8:36:19 AM
#5 - Hawker, P.
(9/19)
Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2025 1:14 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed Round About in and around Alta Heights Neighborhood

Good day
Shawn,

I am writing to voice my concern regarding the proposed round about at the intersection of Silverado Trail, 3rd Street, Coombsville Road and East Avenue. I have been a resident in Napa for over 35 years, 31 in Alta Heights. I find this proposal very troubleshome to say the least. This intersection not only controls traffic flow on Silverado Trail moving north and south but also as an entrance and exit to and from Alta Heights, Coombsville Road and Third Street traveling east and west. While there may be some short delays due to stop light activity, I have to say on the whole traffic flows quiet well also maximizing parental drop off and pick up for Alta Heights Elementary and Silverado Middle school. There are additional plans for ANOTHER school on Monticito in the near future. There are numerous events at Napa Valley Fairgrounds that also travel these same routes to Soscol Avenue and beyond, especially the huge flow from Bottle Rock each year. I do not believe that adding a round about to this area would continue to be cohesive to the successful movement of traffic and pedestrians. Not only does Bottle Rock bring in extra vehicle traffic, the foot traffic is enormous. I question how a round about would be conducive with this large pedestrian activity?
Please stop and reconsider. Please visit the site for a few hours each day to watch the traffic flow, especially during drop off and pick up of children as they attend

EXHIBIT A
school. Please think about how the construction of something this large would impact these residents and businesses on the out skirts of the site, plus the affects on current traffic flow. Please stop and reconsider.

Sincerely,

Patti Hawker
707-227-9232

EXHIBIT A
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Meligy, Amani@DOT; Susan Chang; [email protected]; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT; Nguyen, Skylar@DOT
Subject: Fw: 5 way intersection
Date: Monday, September 22, 2025 8:38:43 AM
#6 - Hazelhoff, K.
(9/19)
Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Karna Hazelhoff <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2025 9:01 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: 5 way intersection

Aloha Mr.

Hallum,
Thank you for taking the time to answer questions regarding the proposed redesign.

Being European, I understand the value of roundabouts and how they work, most importantly, how to drive through them safely and avoid an accident.

My concerns and questions are threefold: is there any proposal to teach people how to drive on them? I was almost broadsided last month by a truck on the First St roundabout crossing in front of me from the LEFT lane onto California. It was terrifying. Americans really have NO IDEA how to navigate these roundabouts. Not to mention the lack of awareness. I spoke to an NVTA planner who said, “People will get used to it”. Actually, people need instructions because someone will get killed, and THEN there will be an outcry. Always the way it goes.

I urge the city to provide instructions on how to drive on them, as more and more roundabouts are being built. Again, I am all in favor of them; they work great to help traffic flow.

My second and most important question is, how will you mitigate the intense and prolonged construction congestion around this area? You have two or three schools that release all their students at the same time. I am two years new to Napa, and I've heard that another school is opening? Then, how will Bottlerock, the Fair, and all the events at the Expo Center be handled? If First Street is the way around, have you considered how this will affect those residents? And you cannot get past the Silverado School congestion at 3:00 pm. Forget it, it’s

EXHIBIT A
a nightmare.

As much as I love the roundabout idea, the two years of construction are enough for me NOT to want this to happen. It will be a HUGE inconvenience, and more so for residents than the tourists.

Third and last question- how is this being funded? I never received a straightforward answer on this, just as I didn't on the question of mitigating the massive inconvenience of the construction. A man told me, when I asked this, “Oh, that’s the magic of planning”… I pressed him again, and he had NO idea at all how this was going to be handled.

Thank you for hearing me out. I would like to suggest some solutions, but I have none. I heard that many people are unhappy about this, except for the NVTA person who took 45 minutes of my time trying to sell me on how great this was. I’m not convinced.

Mahalo,
Karna Hazelhoff
1014 Oakmont Ct
Napa, CA. 94559
650.504.0078

EXHIBIT A
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Meligy, Amani@DOT; Susan Chang; Ahmad Rahimi; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT; Nguyen, Skylar@DOT
Subject: Fw: Napa 5Way Project
Date: Monday, September 22, 2025 8:22:21 AM
#1 - Lindley, R.
(9/17)
Hi Will and Connor,
I will be forwarding all the public comment emails as I recieve them and in the order that they came in. (See above ex.).
(There were also 14 comment cards that were turned in the night of the public meeting. I believe that Circle Point has those unless they already turned them into you) Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Rian Lindley <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2025 6:28 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Subject: Napa 5Way Project

Good
Evening-
Firstly, I want to thank the team for listening to ideas on communication as it there seems to have more transparency regarding meetings for locals.

However, I was again disappointed to read the EIR and see that 801 Silverado Trail was still on the demolition block. I am sure that many of you on the committee are not local, both working for the state of California and even those working for the city of Napa. For those who are not aware, 801 Silverado Tr. is a local piece of history. Every Christmas there is a beautiful tree that is decorated in the big picture window- families for generations would drive by to see the tree during the holidays. If you ask anyone who grew up in this town they will tell you the same story.

Not only is this house a piece of living history, having been built in 1941, but it is one man's

EXHIBIT A
family home. A home that is going to be demolished for the most recent fad in road rehabilitation- roundabouts.Ask anyone who is actually a local, and they will tell you they go out of the way to avoid the roundabouts at First St, and the Soscol interchange.

I have lived in Napa my entire life, almost five decades, twenty years of them in this current home. Not once has anyone taken any measures to "fix" the five-way. It is now suddenly suspicious that Napa/CA has an interest. Could it be because of Bottlerock- which is the city of Napa's cash cow. Is it for tourists? Because, it sure has never been about the locals. If it had ever been for the locals, there would have been better timed lights, signs, and improved lighting. It is not about the locals to take an old man's home. It is not about the locals to have traffic diverted to Juarez St which is already treated like a highway by those avoiding the traffic lights at the five way. It will become a death trap when traffic is diverted for this project, that is for sure.

I've sat through enough meetings with the city council to know that minds have already been made up. This is a done deal, and your meetings are merely a box to check that you have all met the required number of meetings. You could have and should done better by Mr. Rossi- shame on all of you.

Sincerely,
Rian Lindley
406 Third St
Napa
707-258-8321

EXHIBIT A
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Meligy, Amani@DOT; Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; [email protected]; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT Subject: Fw: Roundabout at Third/Silverado. Proposed roundabout is a bad idea.This is a nostalgic 5 way intersection unique to Napa. The stop lights at that intersection work well for safety and flow of traffic.The roundabout will certainly cause confusion and ...

Date: Monday, October 13, 2025 9:33:47 AM
#9 - Lucas, J
(10/11)
Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Janis Lucas <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 11, 2025 9:30 AM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: Roundabout at Third/Silverado. Proposed roundabout is a bad idea.This is a nostalgic 5 way intersection unique to Napa. The stop lights at that intersection work well for safety and flow of traffic.The roundabout will certainly cause confusion and acci...

EXHIBIT A
I
I -

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card
()..)Q\s__\J \' i\<~ -~ \4- fc:, ~1'1/\01,rJ 0v <,. - i.J Et;
lbltmns·

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
• litltrans ·
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card
NAPA VA~Ll!Y TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
Et;
tbltn:u,s ·
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card
}'r'\ ~"P~ to ~cl (;.~OW..- ~(U\,) ro 1f\l-t..5rwC:-t- clfv>> I bikcif&~> (Ql'l ~ !0r--d2 s v-~ Ill (l.J ;tt V1f rk.. ell?J'ufr, ~ Jlv,,, 'S 'b AJ.v~'zect c 02 >>'~ '" bc,,r-~eaA K--t-- ,ovA<ic/=>()c..1--~. l ~pe..- 11...t. sfopQ.,,,st ,'a pcl'HctJ&,,"' c:;,11 l~v-~f- A;vt.., doo't b€.WML- r5>$U~. l
1 ri W/fJA,.!'j Cor\Jc.r-J L-1? ft.t. 'Mf011/L4_
\--rcS~1·c Clow w,.J re&.»u.J hev'lb(.Ck~ rt..,d I htOfL c.,,·Ure)&vlt{ri211 l:hi'> p(\? Stet-

EXHIBIT A

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
• a,1trc1111r
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card
\
~L..::,_ ~~~~l<....l- btJ..!.J~~~ :........::__-+1'--U!:e::::..._!_=-\--!-!...Y...l..4--=---..:..__::_=:__~ ~ -'-------'-<.\,~ -lV\ ~ ::-twwt? ( \Ui~\--j '.1-@✓ ~ 'Cd'w'--

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
• lb/trans·
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card

NAPA VALLIY TRAN SPORTATION AUTHORITY
• /izltran5 •
\.L ( t

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
• lbltran5·
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card

EXHIBIT A
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
•

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
• O:tltn:tns·
lit/trans·
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Ca[d
I± "'-~ • • \ , :Cu l _____,,,,,VvlOce · QIJl
)
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
• lb/trans ·

NAPA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
• lb/trans ·
jl) 0 '1 /,,, C,/ IA )c.. y O v l

EXHIBIT A
IN
NAPA VALL!Y TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
• lbltrantr
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card
A-(,,,1..... ,~ C'>(J... (' ,.'
NAPA VALL!Y TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
• lil/t:mn5·
Napa Five-Way Intersection Project Comment Card

EXHIBIT A
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Meligy, Amani@DOT; Susan Chang; [email protected]; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT; Nguyen, Skylar@DOT
Subject: Fw: 5 way intersection Napa
Date: Monday, September 22, 2025 8:31:41 AM
#3 - Stromberger, K.
(9/18)
Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Karla Stromberger <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2025 4:23 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: 5 way intersection Napa

Hello Shaun,
Farid, and Julie,
I attended the meeting last night. Thank you for hosting it. I started a blog on NextDoor two days ago and I am going to copy and paste the most salient comments for you. I know that this is a done deal, but I think you need to take into consideration what the locals are saying. There are SERIOUS concerns! Integrate those concerns into your long term planning!! I doubt I will still be alive to see this project finished. I do think it is a terrible idea. And I realize it is a done deal! The roundabouts that have been built in Napa are way too small to be safe. I know roundabouts well. I lived in England for 1.5 years and drove all over Europe on many trips in a right hand drive car. We did well with the roundabouts there - they are much larger. The only good roundabout I have seen in Northern California is the one on Corona and South Mountain parkway in Petaluma. It is big enough to handle Semi trucks, firetrucks, and cars at the same time. The space at the five-way intersection is way too small, has too great of a rise (which is poorly reflected on the drawings), and will be unable to accommodate drunk drivers leaving town on weekends, and pedestrians at all times - especially at the beginning and end of the school day. It seems to be a great place for accidents, and major injuries for pedestrians or bicyclists.

Not every thing from the Blog was posted here because the old lady (ME) didn’t quite know

EXHIBIT A
how to do all of this - as I read through it there were several comments that didn’t make it into this. I have removed most last names of those who wrote. At the bottom, all of the posts came up of to the right of the page for some reason. I was again unable to change all of that. some of the comments are missing because they got deleted by accident by me - I don’t know why! This is why you don’t give an elder the job of writing and copying emails. I did leave in about 3-5 positive comments about roundabouts. It would be interesting if someone of you dared to respond to so many issues that people have with roundabouts, and the desire to not make a change.

This is the Start of the NextDoor feed:

Karla Stromberger :This meeting is about the City/county and State wanting to make the 5 way/lights intersection into roundabouts. Apparently this construction cannot happen immediately. But there are several concerns in doing this: during construction will there be exit and entrance possibilities onto East Ave from the present 5 way.? If not, how will the day care on East, the condos on East, and other homes on East South of Montecito access their properties? The new LPE at the Church will add a lot to congestion to turn North on East Ave by AH School and residents leaving on Montecito while the project is being constructed.. And how will emergency evacuations manage this exiting? And access to the area by first responders. Yes, I know that is a concern of MINE! If you have never been evacuated from this area you could consider refraining from commenting. Show up for this meeting if you have thoughts about the impact of such a change, are curious, or think that waiting a few minutes at the 5 way intersection with present signals is not a big deal! There were 18 positive responses to date to just my comment above!
Colleen .1d· Vichy
When completed, I would like to know what this intersection will look like during events like Bottle Rock. Signals at least allow for breaks in traffic so you can turn onto Silverado from side streets.

Reply
Share
9Cathy 1d· Terrace & Shurtleff
Colleen And let’s not forget SMS traffic. This is a crazy idea.

Reply
Share

6.1d· Stonecrest
This will be a mess in the mornings and afternoons while drop off and pick up for Silverado Middle School. What plan is in place for this already crazy time during construction?
Reply

EXHIBIT A
Share
5Karla StrombergerAuthor1d· Original Alta Heights
Jenespecially for parents with drop off at 8:05 at Silverado and AH , or any other school
Reply
Share
KarlaThat is the Modus Operandi of Napa county and city goverment Reply
Share
1 Karla StrombergerAuthor1d· Original Alta Heights
Jimyes! Agreed! At times I have felt like recommending that the city Council, the supervisors and the planning commission members all go in to have their hearing tested. And yes, that wasn’t a very nice comment, but it was some what humorous.

Reply
Share
3Robert 1d · Edited· Terrace & Shurtleff
Karla--- Hearing tested rather than head examined seems kind on your part.

Reply
Share
4Karla StrombergerAuthor23h· Original Alta Heights
RobertI was trying to not get bounced off! lol
Reply
Share
1 Robert 21h · Edited· Terrace & Shurtleff

EXHIBIT A
KarlaAnd you succeeded.

Reply
Share
Robin 22h· Original Alta Heights
I don't know how anyone could prefer this mess to just waiting for a minute.

Reply
Share
4Karla StrombergerAuthor1d· Original Alta Heights
Robinsomehow the slope/ hillside is not reflected in this pic! Crazy! Reply
Share
3Robin 1d · Edited· Original Alta Heights
KarlaIt doesn't reflect a lot of the true life experience, including that pedestrians have the right of way. They can cross in front of you at any time as you move into and out of and between the roundabouts. What a nightmare.

Reply
Share
1 Robin 23h· Original Alta Heights
KarlaThis will be you and me in a few years, talking to news channels about our roundabout not working. hahah
https://link.edgepilot.com/s/93aac735/vxM4gGjDf0yjqK1FHCUYbw? u=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6ESa5OXd-I
Reply
Share

EXHIBIT A
1 Karla StrombergerAuthor23h· Original Alta Heights
RobinI wonder how we could get this heard by the developers! Idk Reply
Share
Robin 22h· Original Alta Heights
KarlaAppealing to developers would be futile, I think. They don't care about anything but money. One's only hope would be in having city planners and leaders that care about community and quality of life for all who live here. I don't believe that we have that.

Reply
Share
1 Jim 22h· Original Alta Heights
RobinSad but trueBut are city and county representation does not have a stellar record of logical decision making
Reply
Share
2Karla StrombergerAuthor22h· Original Alta Heights
Jimso true!
Reply
Share
1 Karla StrombergerAuthor17h· Original Alta Heights
JimI do find it hard to believe that leaders cannot integrate information in order to make the best decisions for all humans involved! It is sad! But most people at the leadership level don’t seem to want to integrate information so that the whole of an idea, project, etc can be seen! Sad state of affairs. I know! There is not a role model at the top for integrating information. It must be a hard skill to learn! It was not hard for me to learn in my profession, but that was because information had to be integrated for the safety of the people involved! Reply
Share
Robert 22h · Edited· Terrace & Shurtleff

EXHIBIT A
Traffic lights may be slower but give you more certainty that you won't be hit and with less stress. Roundabouts are dependent on drivers yielding at the right time and some don't. I always have my thumb on the horn button when I go through one.

Reply
Share
5 Karla StrombergerAuthor19h· Original Alta Heights
Robertand most don’t allow enough space for a semi truck with trailer and a car to change lanes for exits. Remembering that Silverado Trail is a STATE HWY means that Semis will be on this route. And so will people hauling boats to Berryessa!
Reply
Share
2 Scott 17h · Edited· Original Alta Heights
Roundabouts are awesome! Bring it!!
Karla Stromberger:I went to the meeting. Didn’t stay long since I can’t stand for long. No speaker, just charts to go to and hear what each chart is about. I wasn’t able to do that. Won’t be completed for 5 years. They do want ALL of us to send them feedback at this email:
[email protected]. . The comments will be reviewed between now and Nov 1st. They had a draft handout of the EIR available. I guess I could scan it and post it here if people want it. Sounds like they plan to raise the intersection about 5 feet to accommodate for the hillside rise that I think is much higher than that! Oh well! And as for pedestrians…. Get out your running shoes and pray! Especially the elderly! I doubt my wheelchair will ever try to cross there! lol
Reply
Share
5 12h· Historic Napa Abajo
ROUNDABOUTS!! Haha!! What a joke. How about aaallllll the time that

EXHIBIT A
we had to be patient with the construction of the roundabouts south of Napa. We were patient because it was supposed to help facilitate the flow of traffic, leaving Napa.The roundabouts are now finished and we STILL have a traffic mess, leaving Napa. It's just as bad, if not worse now. The powers that be acted like they were concerned about alleviating the previous traffic gridlock. Unfortunately, that's all it was...an act. If it's this bad now, what's the flow of traffice going to look like in 5 years? We should name these roundabouts Bobbitts. Just about every time I'm in a roundabout, I keep getting "cut off." Oi vey!!
Reply
Share
2Karla StrombergerAuthor3h· Original Alta Heights
Robertwrite an email to the email posted above. They want feedback! Reply
Share
Stephanie 4h· Original Alta Heights
This intersection is more in a residential zone than say the 3 round abouts by the overpass (heading towards/away from the outlets). Not supporting the round about at all. I see kids walking/riding their bikes to silverado and parents walking their kids to Alta heights. I wish we could do some type of petition to keep them from doing this. The lights are safer.

Reply
Share
Karla StrombergerAuthor3h· Original Alta Heights
Stephaniewrite a message to the person I listed in my post just above.

Reply
Share
Mary3h· Original Alta Heights
I’ve been a resident of Alta Heights most of my life. There is very little left of old Napa. The current intersection is safe and very historic to Napa.

Please, LEAVE IT ALONE.

Reply
Share

EXHIBIT A
Karla StrombergerAuthor3h· Original Alta Heights
Maryhi Mary! Write an email to the person I listed in my last text above!
Reply
Share
1 Tom 2h· Browns Valley
The city created a big mess on Browns Valley Rd. and now they want to create a bigger mess at Third and the Silverado trail..

Reply
Share
Karla StrombergerAuthor1h· Original Alta Heights
TomPlease write an email to [email protected]. Yes! This will be a big mess!
Reply
Share
Michelle 2h· Coombsville Country
I don't mind this intersection the way it is. They are taling roundabouts out of New Jersey because they are dangerous. Lots of accidents.

Reply
Share
Karla StrombergerAuthor1h· Original Alta Heights
Michelleplease write an email to [email protected]. I can't imagine how this will work!
Reply
Share
Thomas 36m· Browns Valley
Why are the having a meeting? They are going to do what the want anyway. Just like the mess with the bike lanes on 1st and browns valley .I've see two cars side swiped already. Just waiting for someone opening the car door and taking out a bicyclist, or getting a driver door rip off by another car. Who dreams up this stuff. Totally ridiculous.

Reply

EXHIBIT A
Share
Karla StrombergerAuthorNow· Original Alta Heights
ThomasPlease send an email to [email protected]. The powers that be in the State and City/County government fail to be able to integrate all of the important information into their planning. It is beyond me how they make decisions without integrating all of the important considerations!
Reply
Share

EXHIBIT A
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Meligy, Amani@DOT; Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Susan Chang; Ahmad Rahimi; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT Subject: Fw: Proposed Roundabout
Date: Monday, October 6, 2025 8:20:12 AM
#8 - Wyman, L
(10/4)
Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Lynn Wyman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 4, 2025 5:25 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: Proposed Roundabout
Thank you for reviewing my comments. Whereas single lane roundabouts reduce accidents, the Arizona State University study found that multiple lane roundabouts cause a 60% increase in accidents.

Pedestrian safety at roundabouts needs more study per The Journal of Safety Research. With Silverado Middle School, Napa County Fairgrounds and the residential areas in the proximity of the proposed roundabouts, there are significant amounts of pedestrian traffic through the intersection involved. With the current signals the vehicular traffic is stopped for the pedestrians to cross. With roundabouts, the pedestrian traffic would depend on drivers yielding to them in order to cross. This is a less safe scenario for the pedestrians. Disabled pedestrians prefer intersections without roundabouts. There is a large volume of truck, pickup and suv traffic through this intersection and the drivers of these high profile vehicles do not have good visibility of pedestrians. This creates an unsafe crossing scenario for the pedestrians.

With an increase in vehicular accidents and unsafe crossings for pedestrians, do not build the roundabouts.

Sincerely,
Lynn Wyman







EXHIBIT A
1081 Green Valley Road
Napa, CA 94558
Sent from my iPhone

EXHIBIT A
1 Will Burns
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 6, 2025 8:21 AM
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Meligy, Amani@DOT; Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Susan Chang; Ahmad Rahimi; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT
Subject: Fw: STUDY: 2-lane roundabouts cause crash increase # 8 - Wyman, L
(Supporting evidence A)

Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Lynn Wyman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 4, 2025 8:09 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: STUDY: 2-lane roundabouts cause crash increase

This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious

https://link.edgepilot.com/s/0f21baa3/qjlLLErEekKG8vC-
Ms3DwQ?u=https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.wrtv.com/traffic/study-2-lane-roundabouts-cause-increase-in- crashes__%3B!!LWi6xHDyrA!5V-
yGj9TmSFbCDscAe9AgriFvM0gJs1l9thqCuBfTIkiMIuNxOA5_9A7UQKOv8qxNMzcjI6J9Oic27j7ZHtLx4t3PR5LRw%24

Sent from my iPhone

EXHIBIT A
1 Will Burns
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 6, 2025 8:23 AM
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Meligy, Amani@DOT; Susan Chang; Ahmad Rahimi; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT
Subject: Fw: Systematic review of pedestrian safety at roundabouts - ScienceDirect #8 - Wyman, L
(Supporting evidence B)

Shawn Hallum
Office of Environmental Analysis - North Environmental Planner Caltrans District 4 (Bay Area)
(510) 406-9808
From: Lynn Wyman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 4, 2025 4:00 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: Systematic review of pedestrian safety at roundabouts - ScienceDirect

This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious

https://link.edgepilot.com/s/f3a0efab/AoD_vOo0RUSeKu2KnOKfGw?u=https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.sciencedi rect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022437525000775__%3B!!LWi6xHDyrA!6eLdmJMe17KyEwOgWF1UXWP0BuKql651u hALHuxggvVKzbnYg3dDBvk8WM7yGmGPly8M8Tb89FVEgtL5qtPnXoL6nCyIfQ%24

Sent from my iPhone

EXHIBIT A
1 Will Burns
From: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 6, 2025 10:40 AM
To: Will Burns; Connor Tutino
Cc: Meligy, Amani@DOT; Cabangangan, Anthony@DOT; Susan Chang; Ahmad Rahimi; Lammert, Maxwell@DOT
Subject: Fw: Roundabouts Increase Accidents
#8 - Wyman, L
(Supporting evidence C)

Get Outlook for iOS
From: Lynn Wyman <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 4, 2025 3:56 PM
To: Hallum, Shawn@DOT <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Roundabouts Increase Accidents

This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization. Please be careful when viewing message Report Suspicious

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Lynn Wyman <[email protected]>
Date: June 3, 2024 at 5:38:22 PM PDT
To: Lynn Wyman <[email protected]>
Subject: Roundabouts

https://link.edgepilot.com/s/531a5815/bhnXGW7XskmO7y-
fBQNU7Q?u=https://www.wrtv.com/traffic/study-2-lane-roundabouts-cause-increase-in- crashes

Shared via the Google app

Sent from my iPhone

EXHIBIT A