Agenda — St. Helena City Council, March 22, 2022 (part 2 of 3)

From: Preya Nixon
To: Kamille Garcia
Subject: FW: [External] Bike trail
Date: Friday, February 4, 2022 9:31:19 AM
For Vine trail.
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 →New address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia -----Original Message-----
From: Cindy Tzafopoulos <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 9:46 AM
Cc: Mark Prestwich <[email protected]>; Mark Rincon-Ibarra <[email protected]>; Preya Nixon <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: [External] Bike trail
Please do not reply all.

Mayor and City Council,
Please see the attached comment.

Thank you,
Cindy Tzafopoulos
City Clerk
City of St. Helena
*1572 Railroad Avenue – NEW ADDRESS!
St. Helena, CA 94574
Direct 707-968-2742 | Cell 707-312-1257
Fax 707-963-7748
[email protected]
www.cityofsthelena.org
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 189 of 489 ends

*Please note that City Hall is closed to the public and will not answer calls from 12:00 to 1:00 pm for lunch. Please phone individual departments to make an appointment for service.

E-mail correspondence with the City of St. Helena (and attachments, if any) may be subject to the California Public Records Act, and as such may therefore be subject to public disclosure unless otherwise exempt under the Act. -----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Micheli <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, January 24, 2022 9:33 AM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos <[email protected]> Subject: [External] Bike trail
Cindy
Please forward this email to the city manager, public works director, members of the city council and mayor. Thank you
Jeff Finney (local commercial relator) and myself would like to propose a possible route for the vine trail thru St.

Helena.

If the Vine Trail follows the railroad tracks to Pope St. Riders can enter Main St on their own using the stop lite at Pope and Main. Otherwise the Vine Trail would proceed east on Pope and hook up with the City bike Trail in front of Silverado Orchards. Then turn north on Starr Avenue across the Hunter Project. Then turn West on Adams to the intersection of the Wine Train tracks. At this point riders can enter Main St. by way of the stop lite on Adams and Main. At the Wine Train tracks the Vine Trail would continue north to Pratt Ave. Turn west on Pratt and then north thru the Elm Tunnel to Calistoga.

WE feel this route preserves the business downtown parking and the Vine Trail does not go back and forth across Main Street and riders have two access points to downtown. Thank you for this consideration. Jeff Finney and Anthony Micheli
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 190 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Kamille Garcia
Subject: FW: [External] Vine Trail Public Comments
Date: Thursday, February 3, 2022 9:02:23 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Bobbi Monnette <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2022 8:54 PM
To: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>
Subject: re: [External] Vine Trail Public Comments
Preya,
I don't think that the loss of parking spaces should be a factor in deciding the best Vine Trail route to, through, and from St. Helena. The convenience and, especially the safety of the bikers should be of highest priority.

We want to attract bikers to St. Helena, treat them well, provide bicycle routes that are safe and convenient, bike parking areas, free air and water, and easy access to our biker serving businesses.

We must change the current paradigm in order to make the transition from the auto centric past to the pedestrian/bicycle centric present and future that twenty first century awareness demands.

There will be losses and gains as a result of this transition, that are required when developing responsible responses to our current climate change conditions.

The parking issue has been acute for many years, and retaining the few spaces lost in the safest, Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 191 of 489 ends

best routes for the Bikers, will not solve it, won't worsen it that much, and will perhaps reenergize our efforts to address it with newly inspired creativity and input from other Bobbi Monnette
(707) 963-2840
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 192 of 489 ends

From: Chris Blanchard
To: Public Comment
Cc: Preya Nixon; Lauren Watters
Subject: [External] Vine Trail comments from Church St residents Date: Tuesday, February 15, 2022 7:14:16 AM
Hello and thank you for hearing our comments -
My wife and I are residents of 1114 Church Street in a house that was built in 1880, where we live with our 2 year old and 10 year old girls who attend St Helena Montessori. We have some major concerns regarding the Church Street option, and believe that this would not be the best option for the Vine Trail expansion.

Our concerns are these:
- the information and zoom sessions have communicated a plan for this small street to be reduced to one way southbound traffic, and to keep the parking on the west side of the street and build a 10ft wide bike path from the sidewalk to a dividing curb out in the street. We live on the east side of the street and have a driveway leading out to the street. How would we get out of our driveway to go to work, etc.? Would there be a stop sign or lighted signal before our house alerting riders we are coming out of the driveway? Or would the curb be non-existent at each driveway so our cars could get out? This plan would be a liability for the safety both for our family and for the bike riders, and could be the cause of numerous accidents and injuries.
- As this street is very small and narrow, there is barely enough room for 2 way traffic, and if you reduce it to one way with parked cars, it would be nearly impossible to drive safely past both an active bike lane and the parked cars and trucks, especially given the speed at which cars pass through here regularly.

Have you done the measurements of the width of the area for cars and trucks parked here, as well as the measurements and studies of the passing traffic and bike trail area to see if this would actually work safely? Considering the numerous trucks and big cars that pass through here, it would be very dangerous for the bike riders as well as the families that live here. In fact, our car has had the driver's side mirror ripped off by a passing truck recently, and we all are aware of the cars that pass by at high speeds day and night.
- Assuming then, you would not allow Safeway trucks, delivery vehicles, large cars, SUVs, and semis to be able to use this street going forward. Also assuming you have talked to Safeway and the other vendors to let them know they would have to go down Main Street instead as Edwards is also too narrow. What other safety measures and improvements would you be making? - We are also concerned with the noise of riders yelling as happens on the current bike trail as well as trash along the trail. I'm not too thrilled with legions of loud weekend warrior bike riders stopping to drink water or check their bikes or socialize along the trail on our street. Our kids play in our yard and in the front of the house, and we don't need any more tourists spouting foul language, as they do from the Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 193 of 489 ends

Airbnb and rental properties nearby. I know this as a fact because I have walked along the trail in Napa and seen and heard this happen many times.
- As far as previous violent instances, there has already been one murder and one violent beating incident on other portions of the Vine Trail toward Napa and this is highly concerning, given all of the bike traffic you are expecting.
- where else along the existing trail from Napa to Yountville does this bike path impact a residential street similar to the situation you are proposing and what have those effects been?In looking at the map, and traveling portions of the path in Napa, the Vine Trail does not utilize residential streets in Napa or Yountville, and instead follows either the existing railroad and HWY 29, and that’s why there has not been any previous outcry or impact on parking or rerouting streets.

We ride our bikes safely to our local ice cream shops, restaurants and parks without need of a bike trail in St. Helena. There is barely enough parking as it is in this very small town and we are against the idea as a whole. As Tony Leonardini pointed out, it would be beneficial to have bike parks located at the south and north end of the city, for more tourists to park and easily walk to our fine stores and restaurants. I agree with creating a 5th option to include these nice bike parking areas, with picnic tables, etc. to lead tourists into our city without the devastating impact and cost of altering our neighborhoods and removing parking.

As a matter of record, as residents of Church Street, we are vehemently opposed to your bike trail proposal to significantly alter our community, at a great cost to our financially strapped city, which would in fact be even more dangerous and disrupting to our little neighborhood and families.

Chris & Lauren Blanchard
1114 Church Street
St Helena CA
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 194 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Kamille Garcia
Subject: FW: [External] Vine trail
Date: Thursday, February 3, 2022 8:58:11 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 →New address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia -----Original Message-----
From: Jesse Duarte <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 1, 2022 4:05 PM
To: Maya DeRosa <[email protected]>; Preya Nixon <[email protected]> Subject: FW: [External] Vine trail
Here's a public comment on the Vine Trail alignment.

Jesse Duarte
St. Helena Star
967-6803
-----Original Message-----
From: James Orr [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, February 01, 2022 3:51 PM
To: Jesse Duarte
Subject: Vine trail
Hi Jesse,
I can’t attend any of the public hearings unfortunately but if you could forward my input I would appreciate it.

Due to medical reasons I cannot ride a traditional 2-wheel bicycle. Instead I ride a recumbent trike.

The problem with the whole Napa Valley bicycle access is that #1-many roads are in atrocious condition for riding (Sulpher Springs for example) or more importantly #2-the “bike lanes” are too narrow (sometimes 18” or so) and I can’t safely ride my trike. The front two wheels of my trike are 40” apart - WAY too wide for skinny bike lanes, or Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 195 of 489 ends

worse yet, NO shoulder.

I love the idea of a Vine Trail but I want to ride my trike elsewhere too. Hwy 29 and the Silverado Trail are my only two options and while the trail does have wide bike lanes, the traffic, speed and noise makes riding very unpleasant.

We need a safe way to get from Calistoga to Yountville by bike at a minimum.

Thank you and best regards,
James Orr
1389 Magnolia Ave
St Helena
(650)575-9940
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 196 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Kamille Garcia
Subject: FW: [External] Vine Trail route: Church St.

Date: Wednesday, February 23, 2022 10:42:17 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Karen Aldoroty <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2022 5:35 PM
To: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>; James McCann <[email protected]>; Cindy Tzafopoulos <[email protected]>; Geoff Ellsworth <[email protected]>; Paul Dohring <[email protected]>; Anna Chouteau <[email protected]>; Lester Hardy <[email protected]>; Eric Hall <[email protected]> Subject: [External] Vine Trail route: Church St.

To Whom It May Concern:

My name is Karen Aldoroty and I am the owner of 55 Degrees, a wine storage business on Church Street since 1999. I am writing to state my concerns about the proposed Vine Trail route down Church Street.

Our daily operation involves multiple delivery trucks pulling in and out of our parking lot across from the Lewis Station Park. This is already a narrow turn for trucks to make. My main concern would be the safety of any biker or pedestrian using the proposed lane while trucks are entering and exiting the parking lot throughout the day. In addition, my fear is that this would disrupt our daily flow of business as delivery drivers may not be able to make the turn into our parking lot and will begin to refuse delivering to our business.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 197 of 489 ends

From my understanding, the proposed plan would eliminate parking on Church St. and reduce it to a one way street. As a business, the reduction of parking in a location that is already lacking could be detrimental to our business. It would also be a huge inconvenience to all residences to lose street parking.

As it is today, we have to leave our garbage cans on the sidewalk each week for pick up as the street is too narrow to place them in the street. What would be the proposed location for the cans? Thank you for taking the time to read my concerns.

Thank you,
Karen Aldoroty
55 Degrees
1210 Church Street
Saint Helena, Ca 94574
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 198 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Kamille Garcia
Subject: FW: [External] The Vine Trail
Date: Thursday, February 24, 2022 8:38:08 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Kimberly Phinney <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 24, 2022 8:10 AM
To: James McCann <[email protected]>; Cindy Tzafopoulos <[email protected]>; Geoff Ellsworth <[email protected]>; Paul Dohring <[email protected]>; Anna Chouteau <[email protected]>; Eric Mark <[email protected]>; Eric Hall <[email protected]>; Lester Hardy <[email protected]>
Cc: Cindy Tzafopoulos <[email protected]>; Preya Nixon <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] The Vine Trail
February 24, 2022
Dear City Council Members Ellsworth, Dohring, Hall, Hardy and Chouteau, City Clerk Tzafopoulos, Assistant to the City Manager Nixon, and Interim City Manager McCann, I hope this finds you all well.

This letter is regarding the proposed arrival of The Vine Trail in St. Helena. Preya, thank you for your time and effort on this project working with Chuck McMinn and The Vine Trail crew.

Having attended a community forum and viewed the recorded Zoom meeting, I write to you Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 199 of 489 ends

expressing my disapproval of welcoming The Vine Trail into St. Helena at this time for the following reasons:

1.Our disregard for an already established ‘bike lane’ on North Crane. This fell into disrepair almost as fast as it took to paint and has yet to be swept, let alone repainted and repaired after many, many, years. I see this as an indication of how we will treat future projects of the cycling nature in town. I also have to state the obvious, the time effort, energy and resources that went into this space (and it is tiny) and it’s complete neglect, is disgraceful. What a waste.

2.The traffic impact of removing parking, changing to one-way streets, bike barriered lanes, proximity to schools, homes, and businesses, will be devastating, dangerous, and impractical given the demand on all of the four proposed routes.

3.The safety issue that is constantly spoken about and paramount to the The Vine Trails success cannot be achieved with any of the four scenarios.

4.We need a new project with proposed costs like a hole in the head. For decades, our ten parks and other open spaces have fallen in such poor condition, adding a new burden of finance, and maintenance. Our adding more open space use, seems laughable, irresponsible, and unprofessional.

5.The current condition of our streets and sidewalks needing to be repaired, replaced, and maintained should come first and with a high priority. Completing projects in order, while not creating new ones, can prove to yourself and your constituents that you are capable of maintaining said spaces.

6.The impact of any one of the proposed trails on residents and businesses will be irreparable. Not only could this be dangerous, but costly, and without a solid, well supported plan. By supported I mean more than the five of you voting and including the community you are impacting. A leap of faith cannot work with this proposal.

7.Lastly, when considering another reason to vote no at this time, the Vine Trail in its current standing, has yet to enter a city and go through the residential and business districts like it is proposal for St. Helena. We should not be the test dummy given the potential and obvious negative impacts.

I think the best way to get a feel for St. Helena being ready financially, structurally, morally, and as a community, would be to have the trail end at the south of town (around the high school area and before neighborhood and concentrated businesses begin) and pick up again north of town, about Pratt Avenue (again after the concentration of residential neighborhoods and businesses). This scenario is the “GAP” option being discussed among community members. With this “GAP” option, the use of our town as a bike friendly city, the impact both successful for safety and overall use, would be monitored before you dive all the way in without being prepared.

I urge you not to move forward with any of the four plans proposed at the community meetings or on the survey (too bad there wasn’t a no vine trail option on the survey) and go with the GAP scenario mentioned above. I strongly support not approving any of the proposed four scenarios of The Vine Trail through St. Helena at this time and hope you do as well.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 200 of 489 ends

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Ciao,
Kim Phinney
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 201 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Kamille Garcia
Subject: FW: [External] VINE TRAIL
Date: Thursday, February 3, 2022 9:02:19 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Richard Shurtz <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2022 8:59 PM
To: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>
Cc: 'Jeff Farmer' <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] VINE TRAIL
All one has to do is walk up Oak Avenue and turn right on Adams St. to see how absurd and desperate the proposal for Oak Avenue is as a part of the Vine Trail. The VT boasts over and over that they have alternative parking for the 50 irreplaceable city parking spaces. They came forth with short term remote parking that does not exist. The Catholic Church has turned down their request as the church has nothing to gain and will lose all the Oak Avenue spaces they use for services, weddings and funerals. The VT presentation to the School District received a very cool reception with every Trustee finding a different problem with the proposal. A point often overlooked is that Bike trails are not safe for pedestrians. On a safe Bike Trail you have great width, visibility and most of the walkers are walking for exercise and are alert for bicycles. It is strongly recommended that you have good hearing as bikers come up behind walkers and shout out “ passing on the left”. So, one must be alert and not hearing impaired as a fast moving bike will cause serious injury. Seniors and tourist pedestrians on Oak Avenue, not looking for bicycles, will be at risk. And then there is the Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 202 of 489 ends

made up argument that “ we are proposing Oak Avenue for the kids”. So much hoooey!. When the VT group began last summer exploring routes thru SH, they started with RR Avenue but in September they approached me and stated that they were considering Oak Avenue because they found problems on RR Ave. They have an agenda they will say anything to press their cause. They need to locate following the route proposed by Councilman Eric Hall. Richard Shurtz T
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 203 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Kamille Garcia
Subject: FW: [External] Vine Trail
Date: Tuesday, February 15, 2022 8:07:42 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Richard Shurtz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2022 7:55 PM
To: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine Trail
I strongly favor the river route or non at all. Richard Shurtz SH resident Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 204 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Kamille Garcia
Subject: FW: [External] Vine Trail
Date: Tuesday, February 15, 2022 8:07:47 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 →New address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia -----Original Message-----
From: Tom Rinaldi <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, February 14, 2022 7:19 PM
To: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine Trail
Hello Ms. Nixon,
I had the screen on mute, but would like to “pipe in” my hope that Oak St. is not considered a route through St Helena. The width and disrepair of that road say “no thank you”… Cheers,
Tom Rinaldi
(707) 235-9104
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 205 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Vine trail
Date: Friday, February 25, 2022 1:56:54 PM
Attachments: image001.png
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Xinia Gamero <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 11:11 AM
To: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: [External] Vine trail
Thank you,

XINIA GAMERO

PERMIT TECHNICIAN III- PLANNING
City of St. Helena | Planning Department
1572 Railroad Ave. | St. Helena, CA 94574
Planning: (707) 968-2659 | Direct: (707) 968-2740 | [email protected] From: Ken Stanton <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 11:08 AM
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 206 of 489 ends

To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine trail
The Vine Trail will be an important factor in improving the quality of life in St Helena and the Napa Valley. This is a major positive step in a period of negative impacts throughout the county. The council must choose one of the four options for egress for bicycles through St helena. No option is not an option.
(As a side note, rails to trails movement is gaining momentum throughout the country. I hope that some day the Wine Train will find the best use for their right of way as a valley long bicycle route.) Ken Stanton
Angwin Ca
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 207 of 489 ends

From: Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 1:23 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Cc: Tina Perriono <[email protected]>; Leslie Wightman <[email protected]>; Jerome Booker <[email protected]>; Jodie Neiman <[email protected]>; Gisela Campagne <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine trail proposal Church street
Hello City of St. Helena;
My neighbors and I want to make to sure there is official record from those living on Church street, this email represents those of the owners living on Church. One of them posted our opposition in the Napa register last week. I do hope it was read.

We are strongly opposed to the vine trail being placed on Church street. Our street is too narrow and poses a safety risk. Making it a one way street will further congest traffic. We on Church street already have to put up with the wine train behind our properties 4-5 times a day along with 2 Arbnb homes full of tourists and last but not least there are homeless people who hang out at Lewis station park doing drugs and showering there. Now you want to further impact our street and our properties with a vine trail coming in front of our homes. It’s just too much for one small street.

We are strongly opposed!
Sincerely,
Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe PhD
1155 Church street
Tina Perrino
1152 Church street
Jerome Booker
1144 Church Street
Leslie and Deacon Whiteman
1135 Church street
Jodie and Mike Neiman
1128 Church street
Lupe, Vickie, Harley Lopez
1161 Church street
Gisela Campagne
1160 Church street
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 208 of 489 ends

From: Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 1:29 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Cc: Jerome Booker <[email protected]>; Tina Perriono <[email protected]>; Jodie Neiman <[email protected]>; Leslie Wightman <[email protected]>; Gisela Campagne <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Church Street Vine trail proposal see pictures of trucks on church Dear City:

See below pictures. How in the world could a one way street work with a bike lane added? See pictures below. Fed ex and Amazon park like this all day long 5 days a week. Than there is trash day with our bins out and the trash trucks on Monday and Tuesday.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 209 of 489 ends

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 210 of 489 ends

Sincerely your neighbors on Church Street
Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe PhD
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 211 of 489 ends

From: Jodie Nieman <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 2:04 PM
To: Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]>
Cc: Tina Perriono <[email protected]>; Leslie Wightman <[email protected]>; Jerome Booker <[email protected]>; Gisela Campagne <[email protected]>; Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [External] Vine trail proposal Church street Yes. Both Mike & I strongly oppose the Vine Trail on Church Street.

Our Address is 1127 Church Street.

Thank You Jacqueline!
Jodie Nieman
Jodie’s Design
1132 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
707-967-8630
c-707-287-3129
www.jodiesdesign.com
On Feb 25, 2022, at 1:41 PM, Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]> wrote:

Oh dang… can you do a reply all and reinforce the support of my email and make the address correction?
Thanks!!
Jacqueline
On Feb 25, 2022, at 1:38 PM, Jodie Nieman <[email protected]> wrote:

This is Great! btw, our address is 1127 :)
Jodie Nieman
Jodie’s Design
1132 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
707-967-8630
c-707-287-3129
www.jodiesdesign.com
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 212 of 489 ends

On Feb 25, 2022, at 1:22 PM, Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello City of St. Helena;
My neighbors and I want to make to sure there is official record from those living on Church street, this email
represents those of the owners living on Church. One of them posted our opposition in the Napa register last week. I do hope it was read.

We are strongly opposed to the vine trail being placed on Church street. Our street is too narrow and poses a safety risk. Making it a one way street will further congest traffic.

We on Church street already have to put up with the wine train behind our properties 4-5 times a day along with 2 Arbnb homes full of tourists and last but not least there are homeless people who hang out at Lewis station park doing drugs and showering there. Now you want to further impact our street and our properties with a vine trail coming in front of our homes. It’s just too much for one small street.

Page 213 of 489 ends

Gisela Campagne
1160 Church street
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 214 of 489 ends

To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Cc: Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]>; Leslie Wightman <[email protected]>; Jerome Booker <[email protected]>; Jodie Nieman <[email protected]>; Gisela Campagne <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [External] Vine trail proposal Church street I agree with my neighbors points outlined in the emails below. And would like to weigh-in individually and go on record with my opposition to the Church Street route proposal.

The process for evaluating route options does not seem to be a thorough one. The Church St proposal feels as if it’s being jammed through without due consideration and responses to the issues and concerns so far raised by the residents, most notably the safety concerns.

Even under current conditions, it is extremely difficult to pull out of my driveway and to cross the street. I can’t imagine trying to do this with cyclists streaming by. Essentially this would create a hazard and significant potential liability.

And, indeed a routing down Church Street would change the character of this little neighborhood and not for the better. There are many improvements needed on this street including sidewalk repair, traffic control, park cleanup/restoration , etc. As a homeowner I do not include a bike trail outside my front door on this list of improvements.

Thank you.

Tina Perrino
1152 Church Street
415-505-8422
Tina Perrino
415-505-8422
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 25, 2022, at 2:04 PM, Jodie Nieman <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes. Both Mike & I strongly oppose the Vine Trail on Church Street.

Our Address is 1127 Church Street.

Thank You Jacqueline!
Jodie Nieman
Jodie’s Design
1132 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
707-967-8630
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 215 of 489 ends

c-707-287-3129
www.jodiesdesign.com
On Feb 25, 2022, at 1:41 PM, Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]> wrote:

Oh dang… can you do a reply all and reinforce the support of my email and make the address correction?
Thanks!!
Jacqueline
On Feb 25, 2022, at 1:38 PM, Jodie Nieman
<[email protected]> wrote:

This is Great! btw, our address is 1127 :)
Jodie Nieman
Jodie’s Design
1132 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
707-967-8630
c-707-287-3129
www.jodiesdesign.com
On Feb 25, 2022, at 1:22 PM, Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe
<[email protected]> wrote:

Hello City of St. Helena;
My neighbors and I want to make to sure there
is official record from those living on Church
street, this email represents those of the
owners living on Church. One of them posted
our opposition in the Napa register last week. I
do hope it was read.

Page 216 of 489 ends

wine train behind our properties 4-5 times a
day along with 2 Arbnb homes full of tourists
and last but not least there are homeless
people who hang out at Lewis station park
doing drugs and showering there. Now you
want to further impact our street and our
properties with a vine trail coming in front of
our homes. It’s just too much for one small
street.

Page 217 of 489 ends

From: Leslie Wightman <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 5:51 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Cc: Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]>; Jerome Booker <[email protected]>; Jodie Nieman <[email protected]>; Gisela Campagne <[email protected]>; Tina Perrino <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [External] Vine trail proposal Church street There is strong opposition to the Vine Trail’s location on Church Street from the majority of homeowners living there. We are included in that opposition.

You’re literally asking us to completely change our way of life here at our homes. How we negotiate the multitudes of people that would now be traversing through our neighborhood daily, how we would access our street, how we would park (if we still can), how we would leave and enter our driveways, how we would continue to enjoy the peace and tranquillity of our front and side yards, and how we would commune with each other as neighbors… on our street, at our fences and our front porches.

It’s not much, we’re a tiny street, but Church Street is our neighborhood. And, isn’t that what Saint Helena is supposed to be all about? It’s why we moved here, and if you ask our neighbors I bet they’ll tell you the same.

We love our street. Please don’t take it away from us. There has to be an alternative that doesn’t destroy a neighborhood.

Thank you,
Deacon and Leslie Wightman
On Feb 25, 2022, at 2:40 PM, Tina Perrino <[email protected]> wrote:

I agree with my neighbors points outlined in the emails below. And would like to weigh-in individually and go on record with my opposition to the Church Street route proposal.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 218 of 489 ends

Thank you.

Tina Perrino
1152 Church Street
415-505-8422
Tina Perrino
415-505-8422
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 25, 2022, at 2:04 PM, Jodie Nieman <[email protected]> wrote:

Yes. Both Mike & I strongly oppose the Vine Trail on Church Street.

Our Address is 1127 Church Street.

Oh dang… can you do a reply all and reinforce the support of my email and make the address correction?
Thanks!!
Jacqueline
On Feb 25, 2022, at 1:38 PM, Jodie Nieman
<[email protected]> wrote:

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 219 of 489 ends

Hello City of St. Helena;
My neighbors and I want to make to sure there
is official record from those living on Church
street, this email represents those of the
owners living on Church. One of them posted
our opposition in the Napa register last week. I
do hope it was read.

We are strongly opposed to the vine trail being
placed on Church street. Our street is too
narrow and poses a safety risk. Making it a one
way street will further congest traffic. We on
Church street already have to put up with the
wine train behind our properties 4-5 times a
day along with 2 Arbnb homes full of tourists
and last but not least there are homeless
people who hang out at Lewis station park
doing drugs and showering there. Now you
want to further impact our street and our
properties with a vine trail coming in front of
our homes. It’s just too much for one small
street.

We are strongly opposed!
Sincerely,
Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe PhD
1155 Church street
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 220 of 489 ends

Tina Perrino
1152 Church street
Jerome Booker
1144 Church Street
Leslie and Deacon Whiteman
1135 Church street
Jodie and Mike Neiman
1128 Church street
Lupe, Vickie, Harley Lopez
1161 Church street
Gisela Campagne
1160 Church street
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 221 of 489 ends

PO Box 5157 | Napa, CA 94581 | (707) 258-6318 | www.napabike.org February 28, 2022
Re: St. Helena Vine Trail Alignment – NCBC Public Comment To members of the St. Helena Active Transportation and Sustainability Committee and Parks and Recreation Commission,
The Napa County Bicycle Coalition (NCBC) represents over 2,000 members and supporters throughout Napa County in advocating to make riding a bicycle in our communities safe, convenient, and accessible for riders of all ages and abilities. For over 12 years, the Napa County Bicycle Coalition has worked with local organizations, businesses, elected officials, and the public to align our transportation infrastructure with the needs of cyclists and other active transportation users.

While the Napa County Bicycle Coalition supports any of the three alignments through St.

Helena proposed by the Vine Trail Coalition (Oak Avenue via Mitchell, Oak Avenue via Spring, or Church Street), understanding that we are currently looking at the big-picture alignment and that any alignment choice will be followed up with more detailed design decisions, we recognize that the Church Street alignment is best suited for the St. Helena community, based on feedback from the community, City goals, and benefits for active transportation users. This alignment will still provide a direct route through St. Helena, which is both far less expensive and more greatly needed than a meandering backroads path, while minimally impacting vehicle travel.

We strongly encourage the City of St. Helena to select the Church Street alignment for the Napa Valley Vine Trail segment through St. Helena. This option furthers several current City goals, as outlined below.

City Goal 1: Improve and maintain safe and reliable city infrastructure with a commitment to environmental stewardship, public health, and public safety • Walking, biking, and rolling provide a healthier, active, and greener alternative to driving as a form of transportation.
• Protected bike lanes have been shown to improve pedestrian and bicyclists safety, increase bicycle ridership, and produce economic benefits to businesses they provide access to.

City Goal 4: Ensure long-term economic sustainability while supporting St. Helena’s charm and rural character
• Research has found that communities with infrastructure that supports bicycling as a means of transportation and recreation have outsized economic benefits by attracting residents and tourists alike to business districts. Business owners are likely to see a positive effect on sales and customer traffic following installation of protected bike lanes, even if these lanes result in some parking removal.

City Goal 5: Support thriving families and enhance the safety, well-being, and healthy development of our youth
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 222 of 489 ends

PO Box 5157 | Napa, CA 94581 | (707) 258-6318 | www.napabike.org • By providing a safe and separated shared-use path that is near the City center and can act as the backbone of a local active transportation network, the Church Street alignment will allow youth to actively navigate their communities by walking, biking, and rolling, building a sense of independence and connection with community while building physical activity into everyday life. This is a free, accessible community resource that reaches residents of all socioeconomic backgrounds.
• The Napa County Bicycle Coalition’s Safe Routes to School Walk Audits indicated that crossing SR 29 was one of the highest barriers to students walking and bicycling to school; by selecting a Vine Trail alignment that crosses SR 29 close to City’s downtown core at Pope Street, the City will be taking a significant step towards addressing that barrier.
• The Vine Trail has proven to be a resilient and accessible source of exercise and fresh air for Napa County residents, as when Covid-19 closed gyms, exercise classes, and sports teams, folks could still safely bike, walk, run, and roll on the existing Vine Trail alignment.
o This was evidenced by an almost 70% increase in use on the existing Vine Trail during April 2020 compared to the previous 3 years.

City Goal 6: support initiatives that respond to and plan for climate change • According to the California Air Resources Board, transportation is the state’s main source of both GHGs and air pollutants, accounting for almost 40% of statewide emissions in 2019. Passenger vehicles account for 28.5% of statewide GHG emissions. • Transportation emissions in the San Francisco Bay Area (which includes Napa County) grew by 19% from 2014-2019. Transportation emissions in Napa County grew 51% from 2014 to 2019 (source).
• By providing a direct, separated bike route through the heart of St. Helena, the Vine Trail Church Street alignment will give residents and visitors safe and comfortable access to walking or biking for transportation. This not only helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but also makes the City more accessible for those who cannot/do not drive and gets more people out of cars, reducing vehicle congestion. • According to NVTA, 63% of intra-Napa County vehicle trips are 5 miles or less, and 33% are one mile or less – walking and biking distance. By providing safe and accessible bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure like the Vine Trail, the City of St. Helena can help shift these short trips from greenhouse-gas emitting vehicle trips to more sustainable modes.
• When comparing the life cycle of travel modes, emissions from bicycling were found to be 30 times lower than fossil fuel cars and ten times lower than electric cars. Walking and bicycling for transportation is a vital part of St. Helena’s shift towards a more climate-conscious future.

We urge the City to select one of the three Vine Trail alignments proposed by the Vine Trail Coalition, with Church Street as the preferred selection, as the fourth alignment along Mills Lane deviates from the Vine Trail commitment to remain close to existing transportation corridors. It also significantly increases project cost while decreasing competitiveness for state active transportation grant funds and fails to support City goals by maintaining the status quo of automobile-centered transportation and by forcing people on bikes—residents and tourists alike—on long detours away from desired destinations.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 223 of 489 ends

PO Box 5157 | Napa, CA 94581 | (707) 258-6318 | www.napabike.org Should you have any questions about the above comments, please contact Carlotta Sainato at (707) 258-6317 or [email protected]. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Carlotta Sainato
Program Manager
Napa County Bicycle Coalition
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 224 of 489 ends

February 27, 2022
To: All Transportation and Sustainability committee members.

From: Ron Arata
Mr. McMinn has done a commendable job in guiding the Vine Trail and their stated intentions to provide a bike trail from the Ferry Building in Vallejo to Calistoga. It appears that all required right-of ways, easements, etc. have been acquired from the Ferry Building to Mitchell Ave. and from Fulton Ave/Railroad Ave. to Calistoga.

On all zoom meetings with the Transportation and Sustainability committee, the Chamber of Commerce the City Council and recent public meetings the Vine Trial has displayed a placard with four listed Vine Trail goals. Two of those goals state: “Minimize conflicts with existing improvements” and “Minimize parking loss.” Both of which are ignored with the Vine Trails preferred route of Mitchell-Oak-Adams or alternate route Main-Pope-Railroad. I would not classify an attempt to move school bus parking from Oak to Adams as a minimal effort. Most of parking on Oak Ave. is 3 hour limited parking from 8:00am to 6:00pm Monday to Saturday. Six parking spaces on Adams between Oak and Money Way are limited to 20 minutes during the same time periods. As these spaces turn during the day the city permanently loses far more than 50 plus parking spaces to the Vine Trail. A fact I recently personally witnessed. On January 25th I had a lunch date with an old friend and a 3:30pm meeting afterwards in St. Helena. With time to kill between lunch and meeting I walked over to 1336 Oak Ave and had an ice Cream from Chokolatte Ice Cream. (I have ownership with family members in 1336 Oak Ave.) While sitting outside enjoying my Ice cream and catching up on emails and the news I witnessed a grandmother with three grandkids parking in front of the building enter Chokolatte with her grandkids purchase ice cream and leave. A mother with two small children did the same. Followed by a mother with a small child on crutches due to a foot cast do the same. A customer for Design four utilized a vacant space to park and entered the nail salon. I understand having one nails done takes about an hour. The point is that those 3 parking spaces in front of 1336 Oak, were used by 5 or 6 families during the 45 minutes I was present. I can only imagine how many vehicles use the six 20 minute parking spaces between Oak and Money Way on a daily basis.

On February 23rd I was again in the Napa Valley, this time lunch in Napa and an afternoon meeting in SH.

I drove north on Hwy 29, exited on Sulphur Creek, to Valley View, to Spring and then left on Oak. Yes, it is longer but avoids the congestion going into St. Helena. Every parking spot on Oak was taken and as I come to the Catholic Church, I noticed a funeral hearse parked in front. If Oak St parking is lost to a bike route this parking would not be available.

The permanent loss parking on the Mitchell-Oak-Adams would be devastating to not only every building owner, merchant, church on the route but to every resident in St. Helena The Vine Trail has suggested in past presentations to mitigate the parking loss with parking from the Catholic Church and new parking on the West end of Carpy Field. It is my understanding that the Catholic Church parking is under existing agreements and is not available to the Vine Trail.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 225 of 489 ends

Page 2 ends

Carpy Field has deed restrictions that prohibit any structures to be build on the open areas. Given Mr.

Carpy’s revered status and legacy to St. Helena, any attempt for a parking lot has less than a zero chance.

Mr. McMinn stated on a zoom, I believe with the Chamber of Commerce, that if parking could not be mitigated, the route of Mitchell-Oak-Adams was off the table. So why is it still part of the discussion? The same was true of the Main-Pope-Railroad route, if permission from the owners of the Safeway/Smiths Pharmacy parking lot was not possible the route was off the table. It is my understanding that no permission will be granted. If Mr. McMinn is true to his word, why is this route still part of the discussion?
Taking Mr. McMinn at his word that without permission for use of the Safeway/Smith parking lot or use of parking from the Catholic Church or Carpy Field both routes are off the table. Then the best solution for now would be to take the suggestion from Tony Leonardini and provide a stopping point at the North and South entrance to town. If at some point in the future easement issues with the Mill Ave route suggested by councilman Hall or some other acceptable route can be found the two points can be connected.

Regards,
Ron Arata
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 226 of 489 ends

From: Xinia Gamero <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 9:02 AM
To: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>
Subject: FW: [External] Vine trail proposal Church street Thank you.

XINIA GAMERO

PERMIT TECHNICIAN III- PLANNING
City of St. Helena | Planning Department
1572 Railroad Ave. | St. Helena, CA 94574
Planning: (707) 968-2659 | Direct: (707) 968-2740 | [email protected] From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2022 7:02 PM
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 227 of 489 ends

To: 'Tina Perrino' <[email protected]>; Public Comment <[email protected]>
Cc: 'Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe' <[email protected]>; 'Leslie Wightman' <[email protected]>; 'Jerome Booker' <[email protected]>; 'Jodie Nieman' <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [External] Vine trail proposal Church street Thank you everyone. Most definitely STRONGLY opposed.

From: Tina Perrino <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, February 25, 2022 2:40 PM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]>; Leslie Wightman <[email protected]>; Jerome Booker <[email protected]>; Jodie Nieman <[email protected]>; Gisela Campagne <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Vine trail proposal Church street
I agree with my neighbors points outlined in the emails below. And would like to weigh-in individually and go on record with my opposition to the Church Street route proposal.

Thank you.

Tina Perrino
1152 Church Street
415-505-8422
Tina Perrino
415-505-8422
Sent from my iPhone
On Feb 25, 2022, at 2:04 PM, Jodie Nieman <[email protected]> wrote:

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 228 of 489 ends

Yes. Both Mike & I strongly oppose the Vine Trail on Church Street.

Our Address is 1127 Church Street.

Oh dang… can you do a reply all and reinforce the support of my email and make the address correction?
Thanks!!
Jacqueline
On Feb 25, 2022, at 1:38 PM, Jodie Nieman
<[email protected]> wrote:

Hello City of St. Helena;
My neighbors and I want to make to sure there
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 229 of 489 ends

is official record from those living on Church
street, this email represents those of the
owners living on Church. One of them posted
our opposition in the Napa register last week. I
do hope it was read.

We are strongly opposed to the vine trail being
placed on Church street. Our street is too
narrow and poses a safety risk. Making it a one
way street will further congest traffic. We on
Church street already have to put up with the
wine train behind our properties 4-5 times a
day along with 2 Arbnb homes full of tourists
and last but not least there are homeless
people who hang out at Lewis station park
doing drugs and showering there. Now you
want to further impact our street and our
properties with a vine trail coming in front of
our homes. It’s just too much for one small
street.

Page 230 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Public Comment Special Meeting ATSC/PRC 3.2.22 Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 11:01:28 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: stephanie iacobacci <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 10:42 AM
To: Paul Dohring <[email protected]>; Lester Hardy <[email protected]>; Anna Chouteau <[email protected]>; Eric Hall <[email protected]>; Geoff Ellsworth <[email protected]>; James McCann <[email protected]>; Cindy Tzafopoulos <[email protected]>; Preya Nixon <[email protected]>; Leslie Stanton <[email protected]>; Matthew <[email protected]>
Cc: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Public Comment Special Meeting ATSC/PRC 3.2.22 Dear City Council Members, Interim City Manager McMann, ATSC and PRC Committee Members,
I am writing to express my support for the Napa Valley Vine Trail finding a route through St. Helena. I empathize with business owners' concerns of parking loss, specifically, the potential loss of parking for Adams Street Shipping as that business does demand nearby, easily accessible parking. Although I disagree with a lot of other public comment submitted that makes generalized statements on behalf of "every resident." Personally, I do not think St. Helena has a "parking problem" as many individuals claim. On weekdays, the city's Oak Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 231 of 489 ends

Avenue Parking lot is underutilized, in addition to the 80+ parking spaces between Adams Street and Library Lane. Businesses have every right to want parking spaces as close and convenient to their business as possible. Although I'd argue that perception of parking would change with improved directional signage and stronger efforts from the City of St.

Helena to find parking solutions that benefit the downtown district, such as long-term lease agreements with AT&T, Banks off Adams Street, Catholic Church, or PG&E.

Yes, any of the routes proposed and studied by engineers will cause short-term grievance and inconveniences, but that will pass. Sure, resident travel may take 90 seconds longer than it did before, but this small inconvenience does not seem like a valid enough reason for St. Helena to be the section that breaks up the Vine Trail. As a resident, I'm eager for the Vine Trail to be in St. Helena. We have an obligation to take care of our aging population and youth, the Vine Trail provides a safe place for both populations to meet and move safely without being concerned about people blowing through stop signs into crosswalks.

I'd like to voice my support for the Spring Street to Oak Avenue route or Pope to Church Street Route. I understand it's easier for me to support these options, not being a resident on Church Street or a business owner on Oak Avenue/Adams, but I'd welcome it if I were and see the value the NVVT would bring to me. To be direct, residents and businesses do not own the streets they reside and the street's purpose is for travel. So I encourage City Council, ATSC, and PRC to look at this as a way to prioritize pedestrian and bicycle travel. While I may not love having to walk 1 block for my nail appointment, coffee, or package drop - it won't stop me from continuing to patronize local businesses and in time, it'll be the new normal. In addition, the slight inconvenience may encourage me to just bike between local destinations rather than drive. (let's hope!) As a resident of St. Helena, our community should be proud to be a part of what will be the most amazing bike trail in California. Connecting the towns of Napa Valley to one another and providing a safe space for all to move from place to place. A continuing theme in St.

Helena is that residents feel strongly we need to protect St. Helena's small-town culture.

Getting the NVVT to travel through St. Helena forces drivers along the route to slow down, encourages outdoor movement, shows visitors people live, work, and play here, all while giving residents a greater opportunity to move throughout their own town by food and bike safely.

I appreciate the engagement and thoughtfulness of my neighbor's input, even if our viewpoints are not aligned. I also appreciate your time serving on committees/City Council, and your commitment to St. Helena's welfare. We need to be willing to sacrifice something for greater gain.

Be Well and Do Well,
Stephanie Iacobacci
1130 Crane Avenue
St. Helena, CA
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 232 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: Vine Trail through Saint Helena
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 11:44:23 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Nancy Tennyson <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 11:44 AM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine Trail through Saint Helena
Dear Active Transportation and Sustainability Committee and Parks and Recreation Commission,
Completing the Vine Trail through Saint Helena will greatly benefit the local community by providing a safe way for walkers and bicyclists to get around town.

I use the Vine Trail in Napa to ride to work on my 5-speed in my work clothes. This benefits me and my community in many ways. I get daily exercise, it's one less car on Hwy 29, I'm more connected with the communities and people I see along the route, I'm more likely to pop into a shop. I can speak from experience that--even though my trip is only about 3 miles--without the Vine Trail in the city of Napa, I would not ride my bike to work. Saint Helena should offer Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 233 of 489 ends

this same asset to your residents.

I know several routes are under consideration. Please choose one that serves the local population.

Thank you,
Nancy Tennyson
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 234 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 11:55:11 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Mark Anisman <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 11:55 AM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
i voice strong support for this project!!
i often use the trail and see so many tourists!!
it would be great for locals and visitors
thank you, Mark Anisman (Yountville)
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 235 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 11:57:23 AM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
image006.png
image007.png
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Triska, Mark <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 11:57 AM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Cc: Maria G - Ahsa ([email protected]) <[email protected]>; John Triska ([email protected]) <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
Cannot wait for this connection! Basically the trail really gets good only after the Park N Ride at Trancas heading north. We rode it yesterday from Kennedy Park north to Yountville. Hopefully you can get right of ways north to St Helena. Thank you, Mark Triska, SIOR
Executive Vice President| Pleasanton
[email protected]
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 236 of 489 ends

Page 237 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:36:46 PM
Attachments: image002.png
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Elaine Honig <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:25 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
Hi,
I’m writing in support of the Vine Trail coming through town. I think the benefits to our community will be immense. I also support it going on Church Street.

Thanks!
elaine
Elaine Honig
Founder
STUDIO 4Forty
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 238 of 489 ends

707-479-2055
[email protected]
www.studio4forty.com
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 239 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:37:11 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Lorraine Barker <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:34 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
As a senior citizen who has lived in Napa for 40 years, I cannot express my support loudly enough for the Napa Valley Vine Trail and its adjunct, the Napa River Trail. I have always hiked in the hills, but the last few years have made that slightly more difficult than in the past for so many different reasons. Suffice it to say, a trail up and down the valley with relatively minor elevation changes is so much more doable and provides a lovely alternative. I still hike the hills, but simple walking (or biking) up or within the valley is becoming a much more pleasant endeavor than it could ever be with no protected walkway/trail. If no such trail were available, many locals and tourists would be stuck in their cars to get anywhere in the valley! Let’s minimize the need for that, please! Let’s continue building the full length of the Vine Trail! Sincerely,
Lorraine Barker
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 240 of 489 ends

Napa
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 241 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Vine Trail Support
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:38:32 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Catherine Courage <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:37 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine Trail Support
Hello
I am writing to send my support for the continuation of the Vine Trail. The creation of this trail from Napa to Yountville has been a wonderful addition to the community. It provides a beautiful and safe means for tourists and locals to navigate between the wonderful towns of the valley without a car. As a local avid cyclist I look forward to the connection between St Helena and Calistoga. I hope we can bring this to life soon! Sincerely,
Catherine Courage
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 242 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:39:07 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Brad Lee <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:38 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
It is my strongest support for a consideration for a recommendation on the Vine Trail alignment through St. Helena. This project will benefit the residents of Napa County greatly and particularly the interest of St. Helena. Please vote yes on the recommendation! Brad Lee
650.255.3172
75 Verona Way
Napa, CA 94558
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 243 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] vine trail through st helena public comment Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 11:01:36 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Pamela Smithers <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 10:22 AM
To: Leslie Stanton <[email protected]>; Jeff Farmer <[email protected]>; Glenn smith <[email protected]>; Maddie Chandler <[email protected]>; Tye Taylor <[email protected]>; Matthew <[email protected]>; Michelle Deasy <[email protected]>; Rebekah Weeman <[email protected]> Cc: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>; Cindy Tzafopoulos <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] vine trail through st helena public comment Dear ATSC and PRC members,
Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the Vine Trail coming through St Helena and for your service to our community. It is much appreciated.

I just came home from sitting on the corner of Adams and Oak from 3-345pm (afternoon school hours). Have you done it? What I discovered is there are LOTS of RLS and SHES students on bikes and on foot there. Our General Plan says Oak Ave is supposed to be a Bike Boulevard, there’s a good reason for the designation, it links schools, libraries, and Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 244 of 489 ends

shopping.

Our General Plan mentions bicycling, bicycles, walking, pedestrians, and active transportation hundreds of times within its pages. It’s basically the theme of our General Plan! Not to mention a whole chapter on climate change. We must change our habits to allow/provide for safe bicycling on our City corridors.

The students I watched today were likely headed to the library (off Adams) or home, since most of our students live on the east side of town. Some continued south on Oak toward Mitchell. Maybe these students were headed to Sunshine or the ice cream shop or maybe to the Boys and Girls Club just off Oak. The bike riders rode on sidewalks because it is not safe to ride a bike on Adams or Oak. All these kids would benefit from a bike lane that went down Oak and Adams.

We must/should follow our General Plan and start to implement the “Complete Streets” it calls for, making streets safe for ALL users, not just cars.

Let’s try to find some solutions to parking spots (St Helena Shuttle 963-3007 needs to be in everyone’s favorite list on their phone, especially folk who cannot walk long distances, they pick up and drop off door to door). We’ve just got to adapt for the benefit of young people. (And don’t we want more shoppers here? Let’s welcome riders down Mitchell, Oak and Adams who will stop at Lang & Reed, Sunshine, Crisp, Chokolatte, NV Coffee Roastery, Sportago, etc. etc. etc.) Let’s reduce our own car trips. Let make some sacrifices for the kids and the future of our planet.

Thank you for listening to all the public comment and for serving on these committees.

Good luck.

Pam Smithers
1819 Vallejo Street, SH
32-year resident
707-696-0530
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 245 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:13:27 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 →New address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia -----Original Message-----
From: Sunshine <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:13 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
I am writing to express our extreme opposition to the Vine Trail being located on Oak Ave. The danger of being hit by or running into any number of vehicles, of all shapes and sizes, turning into and exiting driveways on Oak Ave is currently difficult at best. The addition of more pedestrians and cyclists, who will feel they are protected by the green painted area, is an unacceptable risk. Also the loss of “any” street parking in this area is unconscionable. The lack of parking in St. Helena is currently an extreme problem, especially for people working in downtown and needing to park all day while trying to leave parking available for customers. There are no viable mitigation measures to replace the loss of parking on Oak Ave or anywhere else in downtown. All of these issues are currently at unmanageable levels and becoming worse by the week. As the weather improves, leading to the Valley’s peak business time of year, all of this will become worse even without the Vine Trail. It is unacceptable to tell our local residents and employees, who must commute to work, sorry we have no safe or convenient place place for you to park. A “Gap” in the trail through St. Helena is the only viable option.

Jay K. Smith, Sunshine Foods
Partner
Sent from my iPad
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 246 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment to St. Helena Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:16:37 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Matthew Kulczycki <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:14 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment to St. Helena
To whom it may concern,
I am a Napa Valley resident and avid biker. I am sending support for the continuation of the Vine Trail through St. Helena. I truly feel the segment will connect our communities and create a better place to live and play. I love riding upvalley with my family, but its scary to do so beyond Yountville.

I am always amazed, especially this time of year, how many bikers stop and spend money in Yountville. Bouchon is packed with bikers and I believe the Station, Model Bakery, NV Coffee Roasters and other downtown business would receive much of the same business if there was a contiguous trail.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 247 of 489 ends

Thank You,
Matthew Kulczycki
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 248 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 1:26:35 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Paul Wagner <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 12:37 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
I am writing in strong support of the Vine Trail and its alignment through St. Helena. I served for eight years on the CIty of Napa's Bicycle/Alternative transportation commission, and I am well aware of the benefits of this kind of infrastructure in the community. It benefits everyone, from pedestrians and cyclists who just want a safer route to travel, to tourists who want to get closer to the real Napa Valley, to locals who enjoy exercise in the open air. IT even benefits motorists by reducing traffic on the roads: car traffic, bike traffic, and pedestrian traffic. The success of these routes is brilliantly clear in Napa, where the bicycle commuter path through the city and down to Napa Valley College and Kennedy Park is in constant use.

The River Trail has become a key element to the community of North Napa. And the Napa Vine Trail up to Yountville has become not just a local success, but a huge draw for tourists as well.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 249 of 489 ends

For generations we have designed our communities for the convenience of cars. It's about time we started designing our communities for people, instead.

Paul Wagner
1418 Calistoga Ave
Napa, CA
Check out our outdoor adventures at http://www.backpackthesierra.com/ Or read my mystery novels set in the Sierra Nevada:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0984884963/ref=cm_sw_r_awdo_navT_g_J01PJAHMPAE6SV45PE 9G
https://www.amazon.com/-/es/Paul-Wagner/dp/B09R96CDCR
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 250 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: Napa Valley Vine Trail Support
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 3:06:39 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Holly Ong <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 2:10 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Napa Valley Vine Trail Support
To the Special Joint Active Transportation and Sustainability Committee and Parks and Recreation Commission,
The Napa Valley Vine trail has been used over 61,000 times in the last 60 days (https://vinetrail.org/ use counter). Each of those uses represents a recreational or transportation occurrence that provides healthy benefits and ways to alleviate traffic in the Napa Valley.

The proposed extension from Yountville to St. Helena would provide a safe path for residents and visitors to enjoy. The Vine Trail not only represents safe passageways, but promotes education on the trail surroundings, art and cultural opportunities and respect Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 251 of 489 ends

for our agricultural traditions.

I use the trail almost daily and have witnessed the diverse use of the trail by residents, visitors, commuters, and recreationalists.

I hope you will support the multi-use Vine Trail proposal. This project would be a positive addition to the community in St. Helena and the surrounding Napa Valley Sincerely,
Holly Ong
3808 Villa Ct.

Napa, CA 94558
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 252 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 3:11:05 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 →New address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia -----Original Message-----
From: Karen Taylor <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 3:10 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
My husband and I, along with our small dog, love the Napa Valley Vine Trail! We live off Salvador and Solano and use it for walking and bike riding several times a week—even during the winter. Best and safest place to walk and bicycle in the valley as far as we’re concerned. We often stop for lunch at restaurants near the trail, particularly at pet-friendly places with outdoor seating. I’ve even used the trail to ride my bike to the grocery store. What a fabulous asset for us as locals as well as for visitors! We just got new bikes so we can’t wait for the extension to St.

Helena. We look forward to longer rides and more restaurants for lunch along the way.

Dave and Karen Taylor
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 253 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Vine trail
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 3:19:27 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 →New address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia -----Original Message-----
From: Annette Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 3:17 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine trail
Dear Members of the Active Transportation Committee, Members of the Recreation Committee and City Council Members, I am writing this letter to express my concern and opposition to the Vine Trail going through our downtown business district and disrupting the daily lives of our citizens and taxpayers. The proposed trail along Oak and Adams with the loss of 50+ Physical parking spots will seriously impact many businesses and most likely force a few to close! (It is actually 300+ Parking spots if you recognize that each of those 50 spots are used multiple times each day and evening.) Is this how we treat our local serving businesses and their customers? I understand the appeal of a bike trail from Vallejo to Calistoga but NOT at the expense of the residents of St.

Helena! I support the “Gap Model” as a compromise. There is no reason why the Vine Trail can’t have a rest stop at the North and South end of the business district with park-like landscape, bathrooms and welcoming signage to our community and businesses. I would think the cyclists could then “share the road” for 3 blocks through our downtown areas! Perhaps they could even support some of our local merchants while downtown.

Let us all remember that our tax dollars will be used for the continual upkeep and maintenance of this path for decades. We already have sidewalks, streets and parks in dire need of repair. Let’s take care of those first! I urge you to keep the welfare of our St. Helena community and downtown business district as your first priority while making your decision.

Sincerely,
Annette Smith
Sent from my iPad
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 254 of 489 ends

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 255 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 4:18:03 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: joseph pramuk <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 4:14 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Cc: Joseph Pramuk <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
Hello….

Re; the Vine Trail: I am a resident of Napa, now for 76 yrs.. The Vine Trail project is the best evolving idea I’ve admired, ( and enjoyed using), in my time here. The vibe between cyclists, pedestrians, and yes, most motorists is great to see. Anything we can do as a community to expand this valuable resource and promote its use as an enjoyable, environmentally responsible alternative to experiencing our unique and beautiful valley gets my vote, vigorous nod of approval, and enthusiastic thumbs, actually thumb up, (keeping at least one hand on the handlebars.) Let's remove any roadblocks and red tape and move as rapidly as possible to completing the entirety of the Trail from Calistoga to the Vallejo Ferry! Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 256 of 489 ends

Thanks for your consideration,
Joseph Pramuk
Napa
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 257 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] support for the Vine Trail...

Date: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 4:40:34 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Gerardo Capiel <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 4:35 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] support for the Vine Trail...

Hello
I am writing to send my support for the continuation of the Vine Trail. The creation of this trail from Napa to Yountville has been a wonderful addition to the community. It provides a beautiful and safe means for tourists and locals to navigate between the wonderful towns of the valley without a car. As a local avid cyclist I look forward to the connection between St Helena and Calistoga. I hope we can bring this to life soon! Sincerely,
Gerardo Capiel
1401 Lake St.

Calistoga, CA 94515
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 258 of 489 ends

SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
March 1, 2022
Members of the St. Helena Active Transportation and Sustainability Committee and Parks and Recreation Commission (collectively, the “Committee Members”) City of St. Helena
1572 Railroad Avenue
St. Helena, CA 94574
Re: Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena (Agenda Item 4.1)
Dear Committee Members:

I write on behalf of Safeway Inc. (“Safeway”) which owns and operates a union-represented grocery store at 1026 Hunt Avenue (“Store #2605”) in a shopping center co-owned by Mr. Richard Shurtz (“Shopping Center”) in the City of St. Helena (“City”). This letter is in connection with the Committee Members’ review and recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment (“Project”) on March 2, 2022. Safeway conceptually supports the development of a 47-mile Vine Trail from Vallejo to Calistoga, however Safeway does not have enough information to make a formal decision on the proposed Church Street route which would run along the Shopping Center. To that end, Safeway provides the following questions and comments.

Background
Safeway has proudly served the residents of St. Helena since 1926. We are also an Essential Business during this unprecedented time. Safeway has operated a full-service supermarket in its existing footprint since 2003, which followed the timely completion of an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

In mid-January 2022, Safeway was approached by members of the Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition (“Coalition”) to consider a proposal to construct the Vine Trail along Church Street (which would be converted to a one-way street) and the westerly property line of the Shopping Center (the “Church St. Route”). This would require, among other things, approval by Safeway and Mr. Shurtz of new easements along the Shopping Center. From a timing standpoint, Safeway was advised the St. Helena City Council would be selecting a single route for the Vine Trail out of four (4) possible options (the Church St. Route being one of the possible routes) in late March 2022. The timing of this vote was important because the Coalition was applying for a grant in June 2022 and the chances of success were higher if the formal route was locked in.

Shopping Center Parking Lot
The Shopping Center’s parking lot is small and busy. The design of the lot has maximized the number of parking stalls available in this uniquely shaped site. If there was a way to increase parking count, Safeway and its professional designers and architects would have found it by now – but there isn’t. The loss of any parking would be detrimental from an operational standpoint to both Safeway and other tenants in the Shopping Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 259 of 489 ends

Vine Trail - Safeway #2605
March 1, 2022

Page 2 of 2 ends

Center, and risk non-compliance with Safeway’s entitlements. The Coalition has provided Safeway a preliminary drawing by the civil engineer BKF that shows the Vine Trail running between the Shopping Center and train tracks without impacting the Shopping Center’s parking stalls. This is encouraging, however the amount of due diligence required to fully vet this proposal is lengthy and includes, but is not limited to, a thorough review of: title, geotechnical surveys, Phase I and Phase II environmental reports, stormwater management (C3), relocation of traffic control equipment serving the railroad crossings, and possible relocation of existing utilities in the subject area.

Church Street
The Coalition indicates the Church St. Route would require Church Street to be converted to a one-way street.

Safeway has not been able to independently verify this with the City. Regardless, to ensure unobstructed access to the Shopping Center for both customers and delivery trucks, Safeway supports Church Street remaining open to two-way traffic.

Safeway was originally told the majority of residents on Church Street approved the Church St. Route. In subsequent conversations with Church Street, as well as a review of the public comments for the March 2nd meeting, it is clear that the majority of Church’s residents oppose the Church St. Route.

CEQA
There appears to be widespread acknowledgment that the selection of the alignment of the Vine Trail through St. Helena is a discretionary act by the City. The Coalition advised Safeway that an EIR would be conducted in the future, but not before the City Council votes on the route. Safeway has tried contacting the City to understand its position in foregoing environmental review at this time, however we have not received a response. The purpose of CEQA is to study and provide information so that the public and elected officials can make an informed decision. To perform that review after a discretionary decision has been made – in this case, selection of single route out of four options – is a procedural error. (Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood (2008) 45 Cal.4th 116)
Safeway requests that, at minimum, an initial study be prepared prior to City Council’s hearing to thoroughly evaluate and address all potentially significant impacts of the Project, as required by CEQA. *****
Thank you for your consideration of Safeway’s questions and comments. Please contact me at (925) 226-5754 or [email protected] with any questions.

Sincerely,
Natalie Mattei
Director of Real Estate
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 260 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Dedicated bicycle path unnecessary Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 10:14:42 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: J. j. Greene <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 5:50 PM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos <[email protected]> Cc: James McCann <[email protected]>; Preya Nixon <[email protected]>; Willinda McCrea <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Dedicated bicycle path unnecessary
Kindly distribute this email to each of the Council members.

To the City Council of St Helena:

While I have previously addressed Preya Nixon on this question I am directing this email to you, the members of the city council, as my official response to your request for input on a decision I understand you will be taking later this month.

I am opposed to any dedicated bicycle path through this shitty as it is unnecessary.

Bicyclists successfully transit St Helena at present, find their own routes through town and will Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 261 of 489 ends

continue to do so whether or not there is a so called "dedicated" pathway for them.

Additionally, there are strong arguments against designating any route through the City.

1.Any route designated by the City Will be vigorously opposed by residence along that route.

This is a NIMBY issue if there ever was one.

2.The removal of parking spaces, metered or not, necessarily attends any designated bicycle route through the City; I do not need to tell you that parking spaces are at a premium on almost every street in this town.

Jay Greene
History & Paleoanthropology
http://www.becominghuman.org/
1516 Oak Avenue • St Helena CA 94574
707.815.7432
[email protected]
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 262 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 10:14:53 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 6:04 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
Although I don't live in St. Helena, but I worked there for 17 years, and many times commuted to work on a bike. It’s a small enough town that every trip within town can conceiveably be done on a bike. St. Helena should do its utmost to provide a logical, reasonably straight, route for the vine trail. So many times multi-use trails are stopped, detoured, or re-directed into tortured circuitous paths because of some seemingly "insurmountable" obstable, when really all it takes is a shift in priorities. Car parking priorities and roads discouraging bicycle travel is doing irrepairable damage to our environment. If you care about our future more than a quick car trip to the grocery store, then the vine trail and bike routes connecting to it should have the highest priority.

Thanks,
Terry Tracy
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 263 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 10:15:09 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Samantha Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 7:28 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
Hello,
A Vine Trail alignment through St. Helena would be such a great addition to our valley. It would give locals and tourists both another way to enjoy the valley without a car, using pedal power and not creating anymore greenhouse gases in the process. Please approve this important addition to the Vine Trail. I hope I will eventually see a bike path through the entire valley, linking all towns to make a great source of recreation for all.

Thank you,
Samantha Smith
Napa, CA
[email protected]
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 264 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 10:15:16 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Julie Herdell <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 8:02 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
The Vine Trail is an outstanding community vehicle to promote health and well being. Our family treasures The Vine Trail for uniting friends and families in an outdoor space that offers positive interactions, great recreation, and a healthy environment that promotes positive interactions ! Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 265 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 10:15:19 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 →New address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia -----Original Message-----
From: Myrna David <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 1, 2022 8:47 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
To the City of St. Helena:

This is to express my strong support for a Vine Trail extension up valley. I currently live in Yountville and use the Vine Trail several days a week as a regular bike rider. I am able to ride to Napa but the opportunity to reach the city of St. Helena would be an incredible experience.

The Vine Trail provides a safe and evenly paved path to explore our valley. I and many other recreational bike riders will not ride on Highway 29 or the Silverado Trail because of safety concerns.

The Vine Trail has been a particular godsend during COVid as a source of exercise and fresh air.

From a business standpoint, users of the Vine Trail will stop in St. Helena to dine in restaurants and visit retail shops. I just saw several bike riders in a Napa restaurant today having lunch as a break from their ride. I have also done the same. Access to St. Helena via the Vine Trail will help the local economy.

Please consider all the many advantages having the Vine Trail extension in St. Helena can offer our entire community.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 266 of 489 ends

Thank you.

Myrna David
1889 Colombard Way
Yountville
Sent from my iPhone
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 267 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 10:15:30 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 →New address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia -----Original Message-----
From: Donald Hanson <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 8:14 AM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Dear committee members,
I am a regular user of the Napa Valley Vine Trail. I run on the trail every day. The trail has been a blessing. I would love to be able to bicycle all the way to Calistoga on the trail. Biking on Highway 29 is not safe or fun. The traffic is very bad. I currently run from Yountville to Oakville and part of the run in on Highway 29. It would be much safer to run on a trail north of Yountville.

The Napa Valley Vine Trail is amazing and should be built as soon a possible. Please support the trail.

Donald Hanson
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 268 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Public Comment: NAPA VALLEY VINE TRAIL Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 10:15:46 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Rebecca Kotch <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 8:33 AM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Public Comment: NAPA VALLEY VINE TRAIL

TO THE CITY OF ST HELENA,
While some might consider the VINE TRAIL an amenity, something “nice” to have in the Napa Valley - alongside the acres of vineyards, I am of the opinion that the VINE TRAIL is a necessity.

And here’s why:

Just two words:

MENTAL HEALTH
Mental health includes our emotional, psychological, and social well-being. It affects how we think, feel, and act. It also helps determine how we handle stress, relate to others, and make choices. Mental health is important at every stage of life, from childhood and adolescence Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 269 of 489 ends

through adulthood.

Up until 2020, I had been a big user of the current trail section and rode up and down. As an experienced cyclist I rode all over the valley, but I always felt comfortable and safe on this car-free section of the trail - and yearned for it to go to Calistoga. 2020 changed our way of life. Bike riding, running, walking became a way of life - not just for me but for thousands, and perhaps millions of people across the country.

I rode because I needed help - and the only way to keep my thoughts together after the feeling of loss, financial struggles, depression and isolation, was to be on my bike.

Moving our bodies is not just good for our bodies, but for our mental health. To me the VINE TRAIL has been a life-saver. This is both “free” therapy and a “free” outdoor gym if you can think of it that way.

Studies show that exercise can treat mild to moderate depression as effectively as antidepressant medication—but without the side-effects, of course. As one example, a recent study done by the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health found that running for 15 minutes a day or walking for an hour reduces the risk of major depression by 26%. In addition to relieving depression symptoms, research also shows that maintaining an exercise schedule can prevent you from relapsing.

Exercise is a powerful depression fighter for several reasons. Most importantly, it promotes all kinds of changes in the brain, including neural growth, reduced inflammation, and new activity patterns that promote feelings of calm and well-being. It also releases endorphins, powerful chemicals in your brain that energize your spirits and make you feel good. Finally, exercise can also serve as a distraction, allowing you to find some quiet time to break out of the cycle of negative thoughts that feed depression.

Adults are the only ones who need this mental health support. Our children are struggling:

NPR Schools across the country are overwhelmed with K-12 students struggling with mental health problems, according to school staff, pediatricians and mental health care workers. Not only has this surge made the return to classrooms more challenging to educators, it's also taxing an already strained health-care system.

Connecting our communities with a safe way to ride, run or walk for those who live here and those who visit is the smart and sensible way to proceed. I have always said the VINE TRAIL has been a personal game changer but it’s a county wide game changer that allows ALL of us to experience the outdoors for our physical, emotional and spiritual needs.

NOT building the VINE TRAIL through St Helena will be a stain on the city.

I SUPPORT MENTAL HEALTH. I SUPPORT THE VINE TRAIL.

Rebecca Kotch
[email protected]
[email protected]
707.278.8377 | 323.806.5900
ridenapavalley.com
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 270 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] St. Helena Vine Trail Route - Public Comment Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 10:16:06 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Christopher Cole <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 8:48 AM
To: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>; Cindy Tzafopoulos <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]; Jeff Farmer <[email protected]> Subject: [External] St. Helena Vine Trail Route - Public Comment Dear ATSC Members:

Thank you for putting this issue out for public comment. And thank you in advance for your careful consideration of this important matter.

I live north of town and I work in St. Helena. I have been riding my bike to work for 35 years and am very familiar with the obstacles that cyclists encounter every day. There is no question that the Vine Trail will improve safe connectivity for cyclists and pedestrians along our north-south corridor. As noted in the St. Helena General Plan, we live in a compact community that is conducive to alternative transportation, so please, let’s work together to make it better.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 271 of 489 ends

The Vine Trail is a unique project in that it is a gift to the City. It has been embraced by every municipality in Napa County. Unfortunately, there has been a lot of confusion about St. Helena starting this project now, when we have so much other pressing business. Please remember that this project does not draw from the City coffers, yet it takes us miles down the road towards our mandated carbon reduction goals and the 2040 General Plan. St. Helena should receive part of the $220 million that the California State Transportation Program is allocating annually to active transportation in communities like ours. We have to support the Vine Trail.

Completing the Vine Trail will not come at the expense of other City projects.

The consultants have presented two routes that work well for St. Helena. Let’s dismiss the other routes now. The Mills Lane option is dependent on a voluntary Grant of Easement that the Vine Trail will never secure. The Spring St./Oak Ave. option makes no sense when considered against a less congested Mitchell Ave./Oak Ave. route.

This leaves two routes for consideration; the Mitchell Ave./Oak Ave. route (the west side route) and the Pope St./Church St. option (the east side route).

Oak Ave. is designated as a “Bike Boulevard” in the General Plan. This is because Oak Ave. services the schools, the Boys and Girls Club, one of our grocery stores and is within one block of Main St. If reviewed in the context of the route which best serves our resident and student populations, Mitchell Ave./Oak Ave. is the logical route. Because of the lost parking, there will be an inconvenience to our tourist population, who will have to walk the extra block to downtown, unless, of course, they arrive on a bicycle – and they will. Or they can call the underutilized St. Helena Shuttle. There are solutions to lost parking.

The Pope St./Church St. route also works well, but for reasons already decided in the General Plan, it is a second choice.

It is important to remember that all of the details for the route do not have to be resolved now. Let’s find a route and make it work.

In conclusion, the City Council has two good options from which to choose:

1. Mitchell Ave./Oak St. best serves our community, as determined in the General Plan.

2. Pope St./Church St. is also good option, particularly if it bolsters community buy-in.

Anything less than option 1 or 2 is a rejection of the City’s General Plan, a rejection of a popular County wide alternative transportation plan and a refusal to accept State tax dollars that will then be diverted to other communities.

Please support the Vine Trail.

Thank you,
-Christopher Cole
[email protected]
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 272 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Napa Valley Vine Trail
Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 10:16:34 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: SUSETTE C STICKEL-RUFER <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 9:45 AM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Napa Valley Vine Trail
Good morning!
The Napa Valley Vine trail is a WELCOME addition to the Napa Valley and should be completed as soon as possible.

Our family has owned a house in Calistoga since the 1960's and back then the "sleepy" Napa Valley was easy to enjoy and navigate through. As time ticked by the Valley became more and more popular, not just with new residents but with more and more wineries and tourists to enjoy those wineries. Napa Valley is a worldwide destination. Traffic can be unbearable during peak times.

So. . . what more fabulous way to enjoy the valley than by foot or bicycle? We can't wait to be able to ride our bikes from Calistoga to St Helena and beyond instead of Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 273 of 489 ends

having to drive using highway 29 or the Silverado Trail! I'm sure there are many residents and tourists who would thoroughly enjoy the experience as well!! When you travel outside of the U.S. you find many places that are public transportation oriented and more and more places in the U.S. that are adding public trails to their list of tourist destinations. Let's not get behind in our quest to finish this great addition to the Napa Valley!!!
Let's all support finishing this great public transportation path as soon as possible!! Sincerely,
: ) susette
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 274 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St.

Helena
Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 11:03:08 AM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Alan Johnson <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 10:57 AM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Discussion and Consideration for a Recommendation on the Vine Trail Alignment through St. Helena
I am commenting in favor of extending the Vine Trail to and through the City of St. Helena. I regularly use the Vine Trail for exercise and recreation and my wife and I enjoy riding the Trail to the Town of Yountville for lunch.

Incorporating the city of St. Helena into the Vine Trail system would add an additional destination for both tourists and Napa Valley residents to safely access via bicycle and foot. The additional non-automobile traffic could increase the economic opportunities for the city's businesses without increasing road congestion.

Thank you,
--
Alan Johnson
Napa, CA
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 275 of 489 ends

From: Matthew Cook <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 1:51 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Comment to ATSC Agenda Item 4.1 - The Vine Trail My name is Matthew Cook, my parents Peter and Debby Magowan, have been landowners on Mills Lane for over 30 years. It has been brought to our attention that the city of St. Helena has asked that Mills lane be considered as a possible route for the Vine Trail through St. Helena.

Moreover, it has been reported to us that the route would necessitate the use of private land including ours and our neighbor's, the Molinari family.

I first would like to make sure that all decision makers are aware that the city has in the last 12 months requested 2 other easements on our land- for a 5 ft wide drainage pipe to handle the storm runoff from 29 as well as the additional runoff that is anticipated once the Farmstead Project (Hotel) is completed on the corner of 29 and Mills lane, and for a water treatment pipe to carry water from a reservoir to a treatment facility. As you might imagine, we are not excited about the prospect of being asked for yet another easement. I think a reasonable person would consider this an undue burden to put on one land owner.

As a resident and tax payer in the city, it also seems to me that the best route would be one that a). costs as little as possible to the tax payers, b). negatively impacts as few people as possible, c). drives as much revenue as possible to the local business owners.

The Mills lane route adds over a mile and a half to the Vine Trail, therefore costing approximately $3.0M more to build. It also requires a new trail to be created, rather than using existing streets which adds cost. It also takes potential dollars from local businesses by routing users around the city in such a way that users are far less likely to see, enjoy and spend money in St Helena.

I believe the Church street route makes the most sense as it is much shorter than the MIlls lane route, it keeps users near town but off of Main street, and the only negative impact is that a single block becomes a one way street.

To recap, the Magowans and Molinaris stand firmly against the Mills lane route.

Regards,
Matthew Cook
--
Matthew J. Cook
Realtor, MBA
Manager
MJC Development LLC
DRE#: 01415816
1699 Van Ness Avenue, SF, CA 94109
Office: 415-994-4333
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 276 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Vine Trail
Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 2:50:46 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Vivian Robison <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 2:49 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine Trail
I am very much opposed to the Vine Trail being routed into the city limits of St Helena. The Vine Trail would negatively impact residential and business district streets with major traffic congestion, loss of parking, and health and safety hazards. Every single surface street is well traveled and used daily by all demographics on both sides of Main Street. Semi trucks and delivery vans pose enough of a safety hazard for cyclists and pedestrian traffic as it is on our narrow and congested streets.

Please do not make matters worse for our busy little town.

Respectfully,
Vivian L Robison
35 Redondo Ct
St Helena CA 94574
[email protected]
cell #: 707 337-9352
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 277 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: Vine trail
Date: Wednesday, March 02, 2022 2:58:25 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Charles Crocker <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 2:57 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine trail
I would like to add my request to that of my fellow land owners whose property borders Mills Lane.

That is, the city should not choose Mills Lane as a route for the Vine Trail. Mills Lane is a quiet residential and farming section of St Helena, and residents very much want to keep it as such. We believe that there are better routes for the trail which will prove more attractive to both people using the trail and the merchants of St. Helena.

Yours sincerely
Charlie Crocker
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 278 of 489 ends

From: Preya Nixon
To: Amalia Kulczycki
Subject: FW: [External] Comment ATSC Agenda Item 4.1 - The Vine Trail Date: Thursday, March 3, 2022 3:03:53 PM
----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 àNew address Direct: (707) 968-2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320-7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: susan hallquist <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 2, 2022 4:54 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Comment ATSC Agenda Item 4.1 - The Vine Trail To whom it may concern:

I am writing to you as a property owner and citizen of St. Helena. We have lived at 150 Mills Lane for over 30 years.

It is my understanding that we have yet, another request, for the Vine Trail route to cross private properties of Mills Lane. I am completely against this request and suggest you find alternative routes.

Respectfully,
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 279 of 489 ends

Deborah Magowan
Susan Hallquist
Assistant to Deborah J. Magowan
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 280 of 489 ends

Active Transportation and Sustainability Committee – Special Meeting 10/21/2020 Agenda Item 6.1
Comments below are specific to
Napa Valley Vine Trail
Crinella subdivision, Segment 3
My family and I live in Segment 3 of the proposed NVVT and I am writing with some serious concerns for the planned bike path which has been drafted to be built within mere feet of my house. My neighbors and I all have lots which face toward the bike trial and therefore we will be directly impacted by whatever traffic this trail will bring.

My main concern is regarding the potential for the NVVT bike path to become a homeless encampment similar to the Santa Rosa ‘bike path’. The Santa Rosa ‘bike path’ has become a permanent homeless encampment plagued by drug use, violence, trash, local break-ins and even a shooting. This has been a problem for 5 years, with local law enforcement unable to move the homeless due to current state laws. I would like to know what the NVVT will do if homeless decide to camp on this bike path? Referencing the proposed plans, each proposed option has shared routes for pedestrian and bike paths all the way to segment 3, then the path miraculously becomes a ‘Low’ impact for ‘pedestrian conflict’ by becoming solely a bike path. Where exactly are the pedestrians going to walk to reach the next section that again accommodates them at Pratt Ave? The train tracks? I foresee pedestrians simply carrying on the same path regardless of the designation, thereby making this a ‘high’ level potential for conflict or if walking on the tracks a dangerous liability.

Lastly, the lands that segment 3 is designated to be built on are currently unadulterated vineyards with immense pure agricultural beauty. I would like to know what the two 4’ fences being proposed will look like as my neighbors and I have houses that have faced these views for many decades and these fences will be built within 20 feet of our back yards and in our direct view. I would strongly urge that they be chosen with a high level of design element (approved by those who will be looking at the fences daily) conducive with the farmyard aesthetic that we in Napa Valley so strongly treasure and not just cheap random industrial variety that would directly impact the beauty of our neighborhood.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Annemarie Ridgway
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 281 of 489 ends

March 14, 2022
To: Saint Helena Community
From: Chuck McMinn
Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition
Re: Vine Trail Bike Boulevard option for Church Street
Dear Saint Helena Residents and Business Owners,
The Vine Trail is eager to find a solution to a safe bicycle and pedestrian route completely through Saint Helena. We don’t think the “Gap” strategy proposed by the ATSC and Planning Committees during their joint meeting will do that for three reasons:
• It would not be safe enough for a new class of users, and as such we would not see the eightfold increase in trail use that we see in other areas of the County where we have built the Trail.
• It will not provide the easy, convenient alternative to using a car for transportation-oriented trips that is a major goal of the Vine Trail. • For both these reasons, it will not score well in the ATP grant cycle process because it does not create a continuous safe corridor for bicycles and pedestrians and a greenhouse gas reducing replacement for cars. This would put the entire project application from Yountville to Saint Helena in jeopardy of not being funded at all.

We have also been thinking deeply about the concerns Church Street Residents and the ATSC/Planning Committee had about the Church Street Class IV option. We have developed this alternative that we hope can address these concerns.

Church Street Bike Boulevard. This alternative would leave Church Street configured exactly as it is today but add retractable bollards midway between Hunt and Pope. All the residents on Church Street would have transponders that could be used to retract the bollards and allow their cars to pass, but it would eliminate all through traffic on the street. With the volume so significantly reduced, a Class III Share the Road Bike Boulevard would be safe and score well in an ATP application.

The bollards could also be automatically retracted from dusk to dawn, allowing delivery trucks, garbage trucks, etc. to use the street. Also, during daylight hours Fedex, UPS or other delivery vehicles and emergency vehicles could use the street either by having their own Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 282 of 489 ends

transponder, using keypads to retract the bollards or simply making a u-turn after their delivery.

With the bollards midway between Hunt and Pope, the parking lots at each of the commercial buildings on the street would also be useable as they are today.

We think this alternative addresses many of the questions raised during the public meetings or in letters to the City about the Church Street Class IV alternative summarized here:

What route or alternative street would vehicles use, as your proposal is for a one-way street running south? With the bike boulevard alternative through vehicles and trucks would not use the street during the day but could freely use the street at night. Residents would continue to use the street as they do today.

How do the residents of the 5 homes on the east side of the street get out of our driveways and be able to pull into the driveways when there is a 10ft bike path and curb in the street? In this alternative, residents will pull out as they do now, looking for bicycles, pedestrians and cars but with a ten-fold reduction in the number of cars on the street during daylight hours. Even with the addition of more bikers and walkers on the street the total amount of car, bike and ped traffic will be reduce making driveway exiting easier.

How would garbage trucks service our street? With this alternative, they would continue to use Church Street as they do now, by having a transponder or using the keypad to retract the bollards, or by picking up garbage at night as they do sometimes now.

How would deliveries work as trucks will not be able to double park on a one-way street? As mentioned above, delivery trucks would also either have a transponder, use the keypad or make a u-turn. Also, they could continue to double park as they do now.

How do we access our homes when the street only goes northbound? With this alternative, residents would continue to access their homes as they do now, going either north or southbound. Through traffic would also be able to use the street in both directions at night.

How do you propose to adequately provide security along this Vine Trail section on Church Street? Security and safety on the street will be dramatically better with the decreased amount of traffic on the street. Also, with the increased pedestrian and bike users, there will be more “eyes on the street” than there is now. With 70% of the users being our local residents, they will also have a vested interest in keeping Saint Helena safe and welcoming.

Who will maintain the Vine Trail in our city? The Vine Trail has committed to provide 50% of the maintenance of the Vine Trail. We have already started these payments for the section from Napa to Yountville. We have seen a high level of maintenance in this section, much better than the pieces of the trail in this area that were in place before we began our maintenance support. Also, with reduced vehicle traffic, Church Street will need less road maintenance than now, saving money for the City.

What the impact do trails have on crime and home values? Here is a good overview of several studies that have been done which conclude that trails have no negative effect on crime compared to the surround community and have a moderate positive impact on home values.

In this particular case, we would suggest that there will be a more substantially positive impact on home prices on Church Street as it will become a reduced car oasis near the center of town.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 283 of 489 ends

How will the grant process work and who will pay for the construction of the Trail through Saint Helena? Here is a summary of the proposed project funding.

The Vine Trail began work to secure easements and conduct early engineering work on this section of the Vine Trail in 2019. A feasibility study was created in 2020 and reviewed with the public at a meeting on August 26, 2020. The study report can be found on our website. An application was submitted to ATP Cycle 5 which did not score well enough for funding due to the missing Saint Helena piece. The project was estimated to cost $16.2M not including this Saint Helena 2-mile section. The County of Napa Board of Supervisors committed $4.2 Million, and the Vine Trail committed $2 Million in support of grant application for $10 Million.

For this next round, including Saint Helena, we think the total project cost would be closer to $20 Million, with the Vine Trail committing $3 Million, increasing the grant size to $13 Million, maintaining the County’s $4.2 Million commitment and securing a commitment from the City of Saint Helena for $300,000 to $500,000, similar to the amount that Saint Helena is contributing to the Saint Helena to Calistoga Vine Trail project for the 0.8 miles that are in the City limits.

With a contiguous, safe route, we will have a much better chance of securing a grant in this round.

What are the Benefits of the Vine Trail Project? The wide participation of the 28 organizations on our board reflects the many benefits they see from completing the Vine Trail including:
• Increasing economic activity. As the chart below shows, when completed, the Vine Trail is forecast to generate over $165 Million in increased economic activity in Napa County each year mostly from the 30% of users that are tourists for the one-time $60 million investment to complete it.

Additionally, the profile of the typical biking/adventure tourist is college educated, over $100,000 in family income, stays for several days and tends to visit Napa Valley during the off-peak times of the year when the weather is cooler (and when we need to drive additional visits to the Valley).
• Removing traffic from our roads. The 12.5 miles of the Vine Trail that are complete today between Napa and Yountville are seeing 500,000 uses per year, removing over 600 cars a day from our stressed highways. We expect a similar reduction in the proposed section.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 284 of 489 ends

• Increasing safety. The accident rate on separated trails is over 10 times less than the accident rate for pedestrians and bicyclists on roads.
• Opening active transportation to a whole new class of users. We have seen a 8-fold increase in the users of the Vine Trail between Napa and Yountville over the bike lane use along Solano Avenue before the Vine Trail was completed. Also, when surveyed less than 5% of people say they are willing to ride in bike lanes along roadways, whereas 60% or more say they would consider using dedicated trails.
• Improving the health of our community. Over 60% of adults and 40% of our children in the county are overweight or obese and in need of the free, widely available exercise alternative that the Vine Trail provides.
• 3:1 leverage on donations. The Vine Trail project has been successful in securing $3 in local, state and federal grants for every $1 of donations we pledge as local matching funds.

The Vine Trail is happy to discuss this with the citizens of Saint Helena. This option was created in response to the outreach that we and the City have done and we want to circulate it for comments as quickly as possible in order to encourage a robust discussion of the options at the City Council meeting on March 22nd. We think this is a win-win-win for the residents of Church Street, the City of Saint Helena and the Vine Trail.

Please let Shawn and I know your thoughts.

Sincerely,
Chuck McMinn
President & Chair
Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition
cc: Shawn Casey White, Vine Trail Executive Director
Graham Wadsworth, County of Napa
Preya Nixon, Saint Helena City Staff
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 285 of 489 ends

Page 286 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Andrew Brooks <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 12:58 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] COMMENT TO COUNCIL, 03/22/22, Vine Trail Alignment Dear Councilmembers,
I am writing to express my support for the Church Street alignments of the Vine Trail through St. Helena. Given the feedback of the community, City goals, and benefits for people who walk and ride bikes as a way to get around, the Church Street alignments will do the most good for the most people and ensure that the trail can be used as a means of transportation, not just recreation, which will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions at this critical time.

Thank you for your consideration.
‐Andrew Brooks
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 287 of 489 ends

Page 288 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Charles T. Sheldon <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 4:34 PM
To: Public Comment; CityCouncil
Subject: [External] Vine Trail in St. Helena -- Church Street proposals City of St. Helena Decision‐Makers:

I write to convey my family’s positions about the routing of the bicycle/pedestrian Vine Trail in St. Helena by way of Church Street, between Pope and Hunt Streets. My wife Ingrid and I have owned 1160 Church Street since 2001, and have deep roots on the street. Although we no longer live at 1160 Church Street (our small home is a permitted short‐ term rental property), we visit it often for maintenance purposes, and maintain relationships with our Church Street neighbors.

Since last Fall, the Vine Trail has been in contact with various Church Street residents to discuss options for routing a continuation of the Vine Trail through St. Helena. We understand that a few other St. Helena route alternatives have been considered but discarded by the Vine Trail, in favor of a route down Church Street between Pope and Hunt. Since we are not full‐time Church Street residents, we defer to the wishes of our neighbors who spend all their time on the little street, but we do understand that none the Vine Trail’s proposals for the Church Street portion of the Trail have met with Church Street resident approval for a variety of good reasons. Most of Church Street’s residents support reducing the vehicle load on our little street by those who use it as a bypass around busy Main Street, and by Safeway, whose delivery trucks use the street for access (which we believe is in violation of already established Church Street use rules). Most residents believe having the Vine Trail in St. Helena is of benefit to the community. However, the method by which the Vine Trail can be brought through St. Helena, and the method by which traffic is reduced on our block of Church Street, both need further consideration.

Other Church Street residents can inform you of the specifics of their issues with the Vine Trail’s proposals for Church Street, but in general, we understand that their objections to the proposals relate to driveway access, service vehicle access, and congestion that will be caused by narrowing an already narrow little street even more. We share these concerns, and will not support any Vine Trail proposal that involves narrowing the street with middle of‐the‐street curbs added to separate new one‐way car traffic from Vine Trail foot and bicycle traffic. This major change to Church Street between Pope and Hunt seems overly burdensome, and unnecessary in light of other possible routes.

However, earlier this week, the Vine Trail floated another proposal for Church Street – one which would not involve narrowing the street and establishing major mixed‐use changes, but would instead involve the installation of retractable traffic bollards (controlled by a key pad and electronic fobs) that would restrict access to Church Street to its residents and their service providers (as well as other sometimes necessary emergency service vehicles). After a call today with the Vine Trail and various Church Street neighbors who would be impacted by this restriction, we believe we COULD support this newly proposed “bollard” alternative for Church Street, but all the residents would like more time to consider the actual details of the Vine Trail’s new bollard proposal – where they will be placed, how they will work, etc. – before we can fully support this new alternative. The Vine Trail representatives have told us they will work with us to ensure the design and operation of the bollards will meet with resident approval, and we want to believe them, but also want to ensure that all of our issues will be addressed during the design and construction process in exchange for our support for the project in this planning phase.

Finally, it would be relatively simple for me, as a practicing litigator, to file suit to stop any Vine Trail project that does not meet with Church Street resident approval, but we would all prefer to work with them and the City to create the best St. Helena Vine Trail project for all involved – particularly for those of us who live on and/or own property on, a small part of the proposed Vine Trail route.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 289 of 489 ends

2 We ask you all to consider the Church Street residents’ wishes while considering the Vine Trail’s request/proposal.

‐chuck sheldon

Charles T. Sheldon – Partner of the

WALSWORTH
One Sansome Street, Suite 1800
San Francisco, CA 94104
D (415) 544‐7117
E [email protected]
WFBM.COM
LinkedIn | Facebook
Los Angeles • Orange County • San Francisco

Disclaimer
“This message (and any associated files) is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, subject to copyright or constitutes a trade secret. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or distribution of this message, or files associated with this message, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please notify us immediately by replying to the message and deleting it from your computer. Messages sent to and from us may be monitored.

Internet communications cannot be guaranteed to be secure or error-free as information could be intercepted, corrupted, lost, destroyed, arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses. Therefore, we do not accept responsibility for any errors or omissions that are present in this message, or any attachment, that have arisen as a result of e-mail transmission. If verification is required, please request a hard-copy version. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of the company.”
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 290 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Jacqueline Hilger-Rolfe <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2022 1:32 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Church street Vine Trail new option Hello City Council and our Town;
I am an owner and live on Church street and was presented a new option of using retractable bollards for the Vine Trail.

Up to now, we were opposed to the Vine Trail on Church, however after thoughtful consideration, my husband I are very supportive of this new option. With this option, it meets our primary concern of safety, as it will eliminate speeding traffic, reduce emissions, provides a safe area for pedestrians, bike riders, and dog walking, and owners while providing our community vine trail access.

In an ideal situation, we would like 2 sets of bollards on each end of the street before the businesses driveways so that cars are not idling or making u turns in front of our homes. With two sets of bollards, cars can use the businesses driveways on both Hunt and Pope to turn around in if needed. 2 sets of bollards would further eliminate traffic on Church providing an even safer area.

If this is done, we would want the city to put measures in place to prevent increased speeding and Safeway and delivery trucks use on Edwards street. The delivery trucks should be pushed onto Hunt,Adams, and Railroad not a residential street.

We look forward to further discussion about design, but we do support this “new“ option on Church street for the Vine Trail.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Dr. Jacqueline Hilger‐Rolfe and Dr. Mark Rolfe
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 291 of 489 ends

Page 292 of 489 ends

The Honorable Geoff Ellsworth March 17, 2022
The Honorable Paul Dohring
The Honorable Anna Chouteau
The Honorable Lester Hardy
The Honorable Eric Hall
St. Helena City Council
1572 Railroad Avenue
St. Helena, CA 94574
Dear Members of the City Council:

We are writing in support of the City adopting a Vine Trail route through St. Helena. My wife and I have lived in St. Helena since 1984 and we have seen the City go through many changes. Some great, some not so great. We raised our two children here and have lived in the same house since 1985. We love St.

Helena.

We understand the infrastructure and other challenges facing us all as well as the economic hole that we have gotten ourselves in but view the opportunity to have the Vine Trail go through St. Helena as something that we should take advantage of for the future. It would increase visitation to our struggling Main Street while getting those visitors out of their cars.

We believe that it would not only provide economic improvement for our City but finally provide a safe way to travel by bike from Yountville to St. Helena. As someone who had to visit tragic scenes of bike/car collisions and meet with families of those killed in those collisions though my years in the District Attorney’s office I believe that we must find a way to do this. No price can be put on the life of a loved one. The reality is that people will continue to ride bikes on those unsafe routes to get up and down the valley.

We also believe that families and those who can’t afford any other transportation up and down the valley would benefit from the Vine Trail extension.

We welcome any route that enables us to do this!
We know that there are those that think that we can do this with the Vine Trail stopping at Mitchell from the South and Adams from the North, the “Gap” idea. I salute and thank Jeff Farmer for his creative attempt to find a way. I wish that Mr. Farmer was correct. However, the person who will be writing the grant for funds to build the extension, and who has the prior experience with ATP, believes that the adoption of that “route” will result in denial of the grant application. No grant, no funds, no Vine Trail from Yountville to St. Helena. We must have a route through the City.

Finally, we want to thank and acknowledge all of the difficult work done by the Vine Trail Coalition and your staff. You have a difficult decision ahead of you and we wish you well.

Very Truly,
Lee and Suzanne Philipson
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 293 of 489 ends

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 294 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Pat Kenealy <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 8, 2022 12:28 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Vine Trail options
Saint Helena faces many urgent problems that merit fast analysis and fast action by the City Council.

The routing of the Vine Trail through town is a complex issue but a secondary one. Please do not rush to judgement.

In the face of widespread Saint Helena support for the IDEA of the Vine Trail and seemingly widespread apprehension from Saint Helena residents about the ROUTE of the trail, I urge the City Council to ask the Vine Trail promoters to "go back to the drawing board" and bring Saint Helena some better options. This is a problem we CAN defer, and probably should.

Pat Kenealy
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 295 of 489 ends

Page 296 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Kamille Garcia
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 4:21 PM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos
Subject: FW: Vine trail
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Susan Larsen <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 6, 2022 10:16 AM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Vine trail
Church street is already very tight. The parking on our side of town has gotten difficult and with the increased density the city is forcing on our neighborhood it will only increase. I wonder why our city officials think more about people coming to our city than about improving the quality of life of the residents. ? Making a walking/biking trail to downtown would benefit the neighbors that might walk to dinner or go shopping if they had a walkway. If bikers are going by at high speeds and not stopping, how does that benefit our town? It also would be dangerous for walkers and children that would like to use the trail. An area of slow speed or walking bikes would encourage bikers to stop and enjoy our downtown and spend money with our local struggling merchants. And it would connect residents to their downtown.

This is an opportunity to greatly enhance the livability of our city. Please use it wisely.

Respectfully
Susan larsen
Sent from my iPhone
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 297 of 489 ends

Page 298 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Terra Smith-Sampson <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 12, 2022 8:27 AM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Comment to City Council - Vine Trail Alignment Dear City Council,
Thank you in advance for your consideration of Vine Trail alignment options. I am very excited to have the Vine Trail in St. Helena and look forward to using it for safely traveling throughout the valley on bike. As a member of the St. Helena Active Transportation and Sustainability Committee, I have already had the opportunity to voice my perspective.

However, I wanted to follow up with a written public comment.

I want to start off by stating my strong support for the Vine Trail. It will be important to select a route that brings the most benefit and least amount of conflict, which is no small feat as is clear from the broad spectrum of public comments.

I wanted to propose a slight variation on the routes for your consideration:
‐I suggest bringing the bike path to Spring Street* and installing a lighted crosswalk to turn east towards the bike shop ‐Then using the 3 parking spaces in front of 1200 Main Street** as a short segment of bike path ‐Which would connect with the 9 ft wide alleyway between 1200 and 1210 Main Street ‐This would then connect with the railroad area behind the Main Street buildings where the back street is wider ‐The bike path would need to be a Class III shared route for the short segment within the parking lot with bikes yielding to delivery trucks
‐The bike route could then continue north of Hunt Avenue as proposed in the Church Street route Please see the highlights in the image below. I believe this back parking lot was considered early in the study, but discontinued because of how narrow the parking lot is towards the south end. Entering the parking lot from the alleyway would hopefully alleviate this, as the parking lot is much wider toward the north end.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 299 of 489 ends

2 Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 300 of 489 ends

3 *The sidewalk from Mitchell Drive to Spring Street along Main Street has at least 9 ft wide of existing usable path space (meeting the 8ft minimum width), except for one spot in between a utility box and the stop light pole that is 6 ft wide, which could be accommodated for.
**1200 Main Street has a realtor office, insurance agency, and clothing shop If it would come down to having a ‘gap’ in the Vine Trail within St. Helena, I would like to express my strong recommendation that Council still identify a route for installing a Class III shared bike route between the two terminuses. If there is a Class III section (rather than the preferred Class I and IV classifications), I would still like to see safety features along this section such as improved crossings, street quality, striping/painting, and signage for cyclist safety and easy navigation.

During the ATSC/PRC meeting, I was concerned to hear that if St. Helena cannot pick a route, then it may put the whole section from Yountville to St. Helena in jeopardy of not receiving grant funding (if I understood this comment correctly).

Please do not let this great opportunity for a healthy, safe alternative transportation option pass us by.

Thank you for your time and attention.

Terra Sampson
St. Helena, CA
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 301 of 489 ends

Page 302 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Thomas Pickering <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2022 12:54 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] The Vine Trail Decision
Dear Councilmembers,
I am writing to express my support for the Church Street alignments of the Vine Trail through St. Helena. Given the feedback of the community, City goals, and benefits for people who walk and ride bikes as a way to get around, the Church Street alignments will do the most good for the most people and ensure that the trail can be used as a means of transportation, not just recreation, which will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions at this critical time.

Thank you for your consideration.

Tom Pickering
11 La Cuesta Ct
Saint Helena, CA 94574
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 303 of 489 ends

Page 304 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Mike Nieman <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 1:05 PM
To: Public Comment; Preya Nixon
Subject: [External] No Vine Trail one Church Street
Dear Council Members & St. Helena Citizens,
My name is Mike Nieman, 1127 Church Street. I am writing to oppose the Church Street option for the Vine Trail.

I have owned my business on Main Street, Nieman's Auto ‐ now Motorcycle Rentals, for 40 years.

I began renting my home on Church Street in 1993. When I got the opportunity to buy, I was so happy! Besides being close to my shop, I love living on Church Street. (The wine train wasn't operating yet) It was heaven.

I am concerned that this bike trail is being shoved at us in a rush, just to possibly get a grant.

Does the Vine Trail go through the town of Yountville? No. Why must it go through St. Helena to get a grant? Similar to Picasso, this will bring more tourists and strangers to our little street.

Please remember, our daily lives will be changed forever.

Thank you,
Mike Nieman
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 305 of 489 ends

Page 306 of 489 ends

March 18, 2022
To: Saint Helena City Council
From: Chuck McMinn
Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition
Re: Vine Trail Bike Route via a Bike Boulevard on Church Street Dear Saint Helena City Council
We have read the staff report for the March 22, 2022 City Council discussion on the route of the Vine Trail in Saint Helena (Item 12.1). We note that staff did not offer a sample resolution. A strong, specific resolution is important for the Council to pass and we are pleased to offer the following as the proposed resolution:

The Saint Helena City Council adopts the following Vine Trail Route through Saint Helena:

• A Class 1 route from the Southern City Limits along Main Street/Highway 29 to Pope Street.
• A Class 1 route crossing Main Street at Pope Street and continuing to Church Street.
• A Bike Boulevard (enhanced Class 3 with traffic calming) along Church Street from Pope Street to Hunt Street. The Traffic calming design will prioritize bicycle and pedestrian travel, reduce traffic speeds to 20 mph or less and reduce traffic volumes on the street to below 1,500 vehicles per day as recommended by NATCO guidelines for Bike Boulevards.
• A Class 1 route from Hunt to Adams along Railroad Avenue next to the Wine Train tracks.
• A Class 1 route from Adams to Pratt on the Wine Train ROW. • A Class 1 route on Pratt to Main Street to connect to the Saint Helena to Calistoga route.

This recommendation is in line with the generally positive feedback we have received for a Bicycle Boulevard on Church Street but leaves open the actual design details for how we will achieve the traffic calming goals which was requested by Church Street residents and City Staff.

We also recommend that the City Council involve Church Street residents as part of the design committee that looks at traffic calming alternatives for Church Street.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 307 of 489 ends

Bicycle Boulevard speed and volume goals backup information:
• Natco Urban Bikeway Design Guidelines (Volumes): On roadways with shared travel lanes such as bicycle boulevards, motor vehicle traffic volumes significantly impact bicyclist comfort. Higher vehicle volumes decrease comfort and may lead to a greater potential for conflicts, as well as a loss of perceived safety. Bicycle boulevards should be designed for motor vehicle volumes under 1,500 vehicles per day (vpd), with up to 3,000 vpd allowed in limited sections of a bicycle boulevard corridor.
• Natco Urban Bikeway Design Guidelines (Speed): Streets developed as bicycle boulevards should have 85th percentile speeds at 25 mph or less (20 mph preferred).

As stated in our previous letters, the Vine Trail is eager to find a solution to a safe bicycle and pedestrian route completely through Saint Helena. Our proposed resolution accomplishes this. Any route that does not describe a clear, safe well-defined path will not serve the community well since:
• It would not be safe enough for a new class of users, and as such we would not see the eightfold increase in trail use that we see in other areas of the County where we have built the Trail. • It will not provide the easy, convenient alternative to using a car for transportation-oriented trips by the 70% of users who will be locals, a major goal of the Vine Trail. • For both these reasons, it will not score well in the ATP grant cycle process because it would not create a continuous safe corridor for bicycles and pedestrians and a greenhouse gas reducing replacement for cars. This would put the entire project application from Yountville to Saint Helena in jeopardy of not being funded at all.

We also want to make clear that the joint meeting of the ATSC and Parks Commission did not make a clear, well defined route recommendation to the City Council which would meet the above criteria.

Our proposed strong statement of support for a well-defined, contiguous route that sets clear goals for safety while reserving design considerations for the appropriate time once the grant is secured will serve the City of Saint Helena and its residents and businesses well.

Sincerely,
Chuck McMinn
President & Chair
Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition
cc: Shawn Casey White, Vine Trail Executive Director
Jim McCann, Saint Helena City Manger
Preya Nixon, Saint Helena City Staff
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 308 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Jodie Nieman <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 12:43 PM
To: Public Comment; Preya Nixon
Subject: [External] No Vine Trail on Church Street
Hello All,
My name is Jodie Nieman, 1127 Church Street. I am writing in Opposition to the Church Street option for the Vine Trail. Citing all of the reasons mentioned by my neighbors Deacon & Leslie Wightman and Chris & Lauren Blanchard.

Mainly for me, a class 1 public bike trail should not go through a residential area. We haven’t been provided any studies or statistics on this issue.

We enjoy our privacy. Daytime is busy on our street, but in the evening it slows down & can be very quiet. With forced additional public access, bringing more people on foot, on bicycles, on skateboards, on electric bikes, on scooters, and on & on. I’m afraid we won’t have much privacy or quiet evenings any more.

Thank you for listening,
Jodie Nieman
Jodie Nieman
Jodie’s Design
1132 Main Street
St. Helena, CA 94574
707‐967‐8630
c‐707‐287‐3129
www.jodiesdesign.com
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 309 of 489 ends

Page 310 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Philip Norfleet <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 3:20 PM
To: Public Comment; CityCouncil
Cc: Chuck McMinn; Carol Norfleet
Subject: [External] Vine Trail
To the City Council:

Please consider this a letter of support for the passage of the resolution proposed by Mr. Chuck McMinn as detailed below:

The Saint Helena City Council adopts the following Vine Trail Route through Saint Helena:
• A Class 1 route from the Southern City Limits along Main Street/Highway 29 to Pope Street.
• A Class 1 route crossing Main Street at Pope Street and continuing to Church Street.
• A Bike Boulevard (enhanced Class 3 with traffic calming) along Church Street from Pope Street to Hunt Street. The Traffic calming design will prioritize bicycle and pedestrian travel, reduce traffic speeds to 20 mph or less and reduce traffic volumes on the street to below 1,500 vehicles per day as recommended by NATCO guidelines for Bike Boulevards.
• A Class 1 route from Hunt to Adams along Railroad Avenue next to the Wine Train tracks.
• A Class 1 route from Adams to Pratt on the Wine Train ROW. • A Class 1 route on Pratt to Main Street to connect to the Saint Helena to Calistoga route.

Thank you for your consideration.

Respectfully submitted,
Philip Norfleet
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 311 of 489 ends

Page 312 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: James King <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 4:29 PM
To: Public Comment
Cc: Chuck McMinn
Subject: [External] Vine Trial Resolution
Dear City of St. Helena Officials,
We wish to lend our support and encourage you to adopt the recommendations of the Vine Trail Coalition (VTC) in the Memorandum of March 18,2022 regarding a Bike Route via a Bike Boulevard on Church Street.

The VTC has researched and laid out a thoughtful proposal that addresses the needs of the community and potential users. We sincerely hope this project, years in the design and formulation, can finally move forward.

Thank you for your consideration.

Jim and Lili King
Yountville residents
Sent from my iPad
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 313 of 489 ends

Page 314 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Clare Barr <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2022 3:42 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Public comment for City Council meeting-Vine Trail Dear City Council,
We are writing to show our support of the Vine Trail. Reducing car trips and encouraging walking and cycling will bring multiple benefits to our city and valley.

Thank you,
Clare and Doug Barr
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 315 of 489 ends

Page 316 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Colleen Buckley-Reynolds <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 8:51 AM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Vine Trail Bike Route via a Bike Boulevard on Church Street To Whom It May Concern,
I strongly support the Vine Trail Bike Route though St. Helena as outlined in the March 18 letter to the St. Helena City Council from Chuck McMinn, President.

This is a thoughtful, reasonable, and much-needed route.

Please support this excellent design and civic enhancement.

Colleen Buckley
Colleen Buckley
[email protected]
415-317-1261
1415 Hudson Avenue
St. Helena, CA 94574
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 317 of 489 ends

Page 318 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Dan Lynch <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 7:12 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Vine trail
I heartily support the recent proposal that uses Church Street with care for the residents.

Dan Lynch
1532 Oak Ave
Cell 650‐776‐7313
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 319 of 489 ends

Page 320 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Garen Staglin <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2022 5:30 PM
To: Public Comment; CityCouncil
Subject: [External] Support for Vine Trail through Saint Helena Attachments: Church Street Bike Boulevard Recommended Action Signed.pdf To member of the St. Helena City Council:

My wife, Shari and I have been property owners and residents of the Napa Valley since 1985. Our properties are located in Rutherford. Our involvement in the community however, is county wide in support of many non‐profits and efforts that merit our support. The Vine Trail is certainly one of them.

The Vine Trail has made incredible progress since its inception but to get the full value to the economy of the Napa Valley, and the to the City of St. Helena, it must offer the trail access from Napa to Calistoga. The proposed resolution for the Church Street Bike Boulevard will be another important step in this effort.

We offer our clear support for this effort and encourage you to vote YES on the proposed resolution.

Sincerely, Garen and Shari Staglin
Garen K. Staglin
P. O. Box 680 (regular mail)
1570 Bella Oaks Lane (FedEx or UPS)
Rutherford, CA 94573
(Office): 707 963 1749
(Cell): 707 280 5374
linkedin.com/in/staglin68
www.staglinfamily.com
www.onemind.org
www.hbgi.org
Join us for our 28th Annual Music Festival for Brain Health on September 10, 2022 Visit www.music‐festival.org for info and tickets
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 321 of 489 ends

Page 322 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Kimberly Phinney <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 5:35 AM
To: James McCann; Cindy Tzafopoulos; Geoff Ellsworth; Paul Dohring; Anna Chouteau; Eric Hall; Lester Hardy
Cc: Preya Nixon
Subject: [External] The Vine Trail
Monday, March 21, 2022
Dear Mayor, City Council Members, Assistant to the City Manager, Interim City Manager and City Clerk, "However, as noted above, the City strives through its General Plan to achieve a balance between benefits to the local economy and maintaining the character of the City. The City seeks to achieve this balance by promoting “sustainable tourist practices that allow the City to enjoy the economic benefits of visitors to the region while maintaining the authentic small town quality of life, (General Plan p. 3-9) and striving to achieve a local economy that “will meet the basic needs of residents, while balancing the benefits and impacts of visitors.” (General Plan p. 1-15.) Bringing more visitors into residential neighborhoods to improve the local economy does not help to achieve that balance. It instead tips the scales in favor of the local economy, at the expense of the residential character of these neighborhoods.”
The Vine Trail is NO DIFFERENT than Pacaso in our neighborhoods according to your staff report above on the Pacasco item on tomorrow’s City Council Agenda and our quoted General Plan.

Please be consistent when tackling new projects in our town that seriously impact our residents and projects that we currently cannot afford. (Did Pacaso ever ask for money to support it’s projects?) Let’s not be bullied into saying yes to the Vine Trail through town, versus the GAP option, because of grant funding for a stretch that doesn’t include the 94574 and does not yet have full approval from the residents/businesses that are going to be impacted by the Vine Trail in a negative way.

My previous letter, included below, identifies more of my concerns. Thank you for your time.

Ciao,
Kim Phinney
On Feb 24, 2022, at 8:10 AM, Kimberly Phinney <[email protected]> wrote:

February 24, 2022
Dear City Council Members Ellsworth, Dohring, Hall, Hardy and Chouteau, City Clerk Tzafopoulos, Assistant to the City Manager Nixon, and Interim City Manager McCann, I hope this finds you all well.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 323 of 489 ends

2 This letter is regarding the proposed arrival of The Vine Trail in St. Helena. Preya, thank you for your time and effort on this project working with Chuck McMinn and The Vine Trail crew.

Having attended a community forum and viewed the recorded Zoom meeting, I write to you expressing my disapproval of welcoming The Vine Trail into St. Helena at this time for the following reasons:

1. Our disregard for an already established ‘bike lane’ on North Crane. This fell into disrepair almost as fast as it took to paint and has yet to be swept, let alone repainted and repaired after many, many, years. I see this as an indication of how we will treat future projects of the cycling nature in town. I also have to state the obvious, the time effort, energy and resources that went into this space (and it is tiny) and it’s complete neglect, is disgraceful. What a waste.

2. The traffic impact of removing parking, changing to one‐way streets, bike barriered lanes, proximity to schools, homes, and businesses, will be devastating, dangerous, and impractical given the demand on all of the four proposed routes.

3. The safety issue that is constantly spoken about and paramount to the The Vine Trails success cannot be achieved with any of the four scenarios.

4. We need a new project with proposed costs like a hole in the head. For decades, our ten parks and other open spaces have fallen in such poor condition, adding a new burden of finance, and maintenance. Our adding more open space use, seems laughable, irresponsible, and unprofessional.

5. The current condition of our streets and sidewalks needing to be repaired, replaced, and maintained should come first and with a high priority. Completing projects in order, while not creating new ones, can prove to yourself and your constituents that you are capable of maintaining said spaces.

6. The impact of any one of the proposed trails on residents and businesses will be irreparable. Not only could this be dangerous, but costly, and without a solid, well supported plan. By supported I mean more than the five of you voting and including the community you are impacting. A leap of faith cannot work with this proposal.

7. Lastly, when considering another reason to vote no at this time, the Vine Trail in its current standing, has yet to enter a city and go through the residential and business districts like it is proposal for St.

Helena. We should not be the test dummy given the potential and obvious negative impacts.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Ciao,
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 324 of 489 ends

3 Kim Phinney

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 325 of 489 ends

Page 326 of 489 ends

March 20, 2022
To: Mayor Geoff Ellsworth, Vice‐Mayor Paul Dohring, City Council members Lester Hardy, Anna Chouteau and Eric Hall
I have followed the discussions regarding the Vine Trail when published in the St. Helena Star. I don’t ride a bicycle and never will. Consequently, the discussions did not interest me a great deal. However, when it came down to the actual plans being presented, I discovered that I found every single one unacceptable. They are disruptive to residents, businesses, visitors and the general atmosphere in our city.

However, I recently was made aware of a plan that makes total sense. It is not one of the plans presented as the final choice but it should be. The plan would keep cyclists out of the middle of town, away from narrow streets that are even now barely functional, and instead route the cyclists past some beautiful vineyards, Crane park and some residential areas. This route would be Sulfur Springs west to South Crane north, continuing on to Valley View until it ends at Spring. An easterly turn to Allyn Avenue and on northerly to Madrona and back out to Highway 29. This route could also use Hudson Avenue rather than Allyn. The striping has already been done on much of that route and money budgeted for street repairs on South Crane. Why should the city spend more money to develop a far less desirable route for a bicycle trail that will serve a minority of our population? A recent survey questioned school children or more accurately questioned their parents about them using a bicycle trail to school. I don’t have that survey in front of me but I remember that very, very, few children would use the recreational bicycle trail to get to school.

Please make a wise decision for our city and make it without pressure from the organizers of the Vine Trail. Thank you.

Priscilla (Pat) Dell
25 San Juan Court, St. Helena, CA. 94575
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 327 of 489 ends

Page 328 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Rick Jones <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2022 11:25 AM
To: CityCouncil; Public Comment
Cc: Chuck McMinn; Shawn Casey-White
Subject: [External] Vine Trail Route through St Helena
This letter is in support of the Vine Trail proposal to create a dedicated safe bike and walking path through the City of St Helena.

We believe that the Vine Trail is important to the City of St Helena because it will enhance the safety and attractiveness of alternatives to automobile traffic within the city limits.

It will also have a positive economic impact on all businesses within the city.

The current proposal by the Vine Trail should be adopted as they have suggested.

Thank you.

Rick and Elaine Jones
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 329 of 489 ends

Page 330 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: David Meyers <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 12:10 PM
To: CityCouncil
Cc: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Agenda item 12.1, Vine Trail route through City of St. Helena Dear Council Members: In your consideration of a suitable route for the Vine Trail through St. Helena, I respectfully urge you to adopt the proposed Resolution presented to you for your consideration in the recent letter from the Vine Trail dated 3/18/22.

It appears evident from that letter that the Vine Trail and its consultants have thoroughly investigated the possible routes for a convenient and safe pedestrian and bicycle path through the City. I believe that its’ proposed Resolution sets forth the most carefully considered, safest, and most user‐friendly route possible.

Having been an avid cyclist for 40 years and having many times negotiated the challenges of bicycling through St.

Helena, I strongly support the many public safety and convenience benefits the route set forth in the Vine Trail Resolution will bring. Thank you. Dave Meyers
Sent from my iPhone
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 331 of 489 ends

Page 332 of 489 ends

COMMENT TO THE COUNCIL
Subject: Vine Trail Alignment
Members of the Council,
My name is David Wight, and I am one of the owners of the stone building located at 1204-1216 Church St. in Saint Helena. I am writing in reaction to the proposal to use Church Street as a part of the Vine Trail bike path in Saint Helena.

While I have no solid objection to the bike path coming through town, and actually see some benefit to it, I am concerned that the proposal seems to have taken on a fast-paced life of its own, without due regard for the people affected, residents, property owners, and tenants alike.

The particular concerns that come to mind for our building are unhindered access to and continuous business use of the parking lot north of the building, one that our partnership owns and maintains for employee parking and deliveries to our tenants. Also, maintenance of this space is currently relatively minimal, but I can envision otherwise.

While I am hopeful that our issues can be addressed, I would appreciate further consideration of the specifics of the proposal, including consultation with business owners and residents, followed by the inclusion in any proposal presented to the Council of specific plans for addressing our concerns.

At this point, the process seems rushed considering the importance of the decision. Without adequate planning, this proposal has the potential of becoming a problem for many of those concerned in the Church Street neighborhood.

Thank you, in advance, for your consideration.

David Wight
1951 Olive Avenue
St. Helena, CA 94574
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 333 of 489 ends

Page 334 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Fritz Hatton <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 1:26 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Vine Trail recommendation for route through Saint Helena via Church Street This exchange FYI.

Fritz Hatton
Proprietor, Arietta Wine
C (707) 299-0073
www.ariettawine.com
From: Fritz Hatton
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2022 6:41 PM
To: Paul Dohring <[email protected]>
Cc: Chuck McMinn <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Vine Trail recommendation for route through Saint Helena via Church Street Thank you so much Paul for your detailed response. I have now lived in St Helena for 22 years, a short time compared to many. However it is long enough to tire of the “but…but…buts” that in my view have caused Saint Helena to stagnate compared to Yountville, Calistoga, and Napa and other more vibrant small towns in the country. Saint Helena is a wonderful community if you are happy to be “late to the game” or not appear at all. Let’s get this done. If it isn’t perfect the first time, we can tweak it. There is too much drive, depth of financial and popular support, and massive amount of work behind this county wide effort to have Saint Helena throw out its sea anchors to slow or stop it by raising a host of other localized issues. I am traveling this week but look forward to hearing that the Council has done its part to move the Saint Helena portion of the Vine Trail Route forward in a constructive way at the Tuesday meeting.

Best—Fritz Hatton
1160 Edwards
Saint Helena
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 20, 2022, at 6:03 PM, Paul Dohring <[email protected]> wrote:

Hello Fritz,
Thank you for taking the time to engage again on the pocket park suggestion and to participate in the Vine Trail Route selection process (St. Helena section). I have received and reviewed your public comment and most appreciate that you have expressed your viewpoint on Mr. McMinn’s proposed resolution.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 335 of 489 ends

2 I agree that the Vine Trail is an immensely important regional project for the Napa Valley‐‐ especially for its positive effects on public safety, climate change, economic sustainability and our mental, emotional and physical health ‐‐ but, as you know, it also comes with numerous logistical challenges associated with the various options presented.

Unlike the sections running through Calistoga and Yountville, the St. Helena route options present very challenging and unique issues impacting how we navigate through a heavily used and impacted downtown corridor. Pedestrian and bicycle safety, parking needs of seniors and young families, neighborhood quality of life and safety issues, business sustainability and access concerns, Vine Trail funding opportunities and climate change all have to be reasonably evaluated. These considerations often involve competing interests which have to be weighed and balanced by the community and elected leaders (including me) for the greater good of the St. Helena community.

Moreover, irrespective of where the St. Helena section of the Vine Trail route ultimately goes, I wholeheartedly believe that much of our road infrastructure throughout the city (areas unrelated to the Vine Trail) has to be improved to ensure safety for bicyclists and other active transportation users. Users (and potential users) need to be safe and feel safe. Our parks and parklets, which could provide connecting points fo reactive transportation users, also have to be expanded and improved.

Thank you for your public engagement on these important issues. I am hopeful that we can come together civilly and productively (as you have in your note!!!) to find workable, reasonable and even creative technological solutions for the greater good of our community.

Paul
Paul J. Dohring I St. Helena Vice Mayor
[email protected]
Tel: (707) 942-1298
Sent from my City of St. Helena Issued iPad
On Mar 20, 2022, at 5:02 PM, Fritz Hatton <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Members of the Saint Helena City Council,

Re: Route of the Vine Trail through Saint Helena

I support the recommended action detailed in Chuck McMinn’s memo to the Council dated March 18, 2022.

Sincerely,

Fritz Hatton
1160 Edwards Street
Saint Helena, CA 94574

Fritz Hatton
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 336 of 489 ends

3 Proprietor, Arietta Wine
C (707) 299-0073
www.ariettawine.com

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 337 of 489 ends

Page 338 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Jim Gamble <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 12:10 PM
To: CityCouncil; Public Comment
Cc: Chuck McMinn
Subject: [External] Church Street Option for the Vine Trail Dear St. Helena City Council Members –
I am in support of the Vine Trail resolution sent to the City Council for your consideration by Chuck McMinn.

As the owner of the office building located at 1250 Church Street, I see only positives for having the vine trail go in front of the building. We have 10 off‐street parking spots on this property. Even with cyclists going by every once in a while, it will be safer to enter and exit the property than it is now. Currently, cars speed up and down this narrow street, bypassing the congestion on Main Street or to get to the Pope Street light. This makes for a hazardous situation every time we enter or exit the property.

I think a “Bike Boulevard” on Church Street makes a lot of sense. I especially like the “Bike Boulevard option with bollards”, but it sounds like there are reservations/questions about this option. Maybe those reservations can be overcome with further study?
I wish there was a perfect solution for a route through St. Helena. Since there isn’t, it appears the Church Street route is the best option. I believe having a continuous bike trail through St. Helena is incredibly important for our community (and for the continuity and viability of the entire vine trail).

A bike boulevard and traffic calming measures will make Church Street safer (reduced traffic speeds due to implemented traffic calming measures) and more enjoyable (cars not racing up and down the street). Combined, this would be a tremendous enhancement to this property, and I believe to the entire street, in terms of noise, safety, pollution and peace of mind. I don’t see any negatives.

From a community health standpoint, physical activity is the best anecdote for the two illnesses most severely impacting our community, which are mental health and childhood obesity (according to the most recent Public Health Assessment Needs Survey). The Vine Trail will provide a safe place for folks to get out and get more exercise! I’m in full support of the vine trail!
If this option is indeed approved, I would enjoy working on the committee overseeing the development of traffic calming measures.

Thank you for your consideration and please don’t hesitate to contact me with questions.

Sincerely,
Jim Gamble
Owner
1250 Church Street
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 339 of 489 ends

Page 340 of 489 ends

PO Box 5157 | Napa, CA 94581 | (707) 258-6318 | www.napabike.org March 21, 2022
Re: COMMENT TO COUNCIL AGENDA ITEM 12.1 - St. Helena Vine Trail Alignment To the Councilmembers of the City of St. Helena,
The Napa County Bicycle Coalition (NCBC) represents over 2,000 members and supporters throughout Napa County in advocating to make riding a bicycle in our communities safe, convenient, and accessible for riders of all ages and abilities. For over 14 years, the Napa County Bicycle Coalition has worked with local organizations, businesses, elected officials, and the public to align our transportation infrastructure with the needs of cyclists and other active transportation users.

We thank you for your consideration of the Napa Valley Vine Trail alignment through St. Helena and urge you to adopt the resolution during your March 22, 2022 meeting in support of the Church Street alignment that includes a Bike Boulevard. Understanding that any alignment choice will be followed up with more detailed design decisions, we recognize that the Church Street Bike Boulevard alignment is best suited for the St. Helena community, based on feedback from the community, City goals, and benefits for active transportation users. This alignment will provide a direct route through St. Helena, which is both far less expensive and much more needed than a backroads path, while minimally impacting vehicle travel and residents along Church Street. A strong, specific resolution of support is needed at this critical juncture to leverage time-limited funding opportunities and to respond to the considerable feedback on the alignments that the community has provided.

NCBC applauds Napa Valley Vine Trail for continuing to listen to the input of St. Helena residents, and especially those living along Church Street. Napa Valley Vine Trail has stayed flexible on its approach, and that openness has resulted in the creative solution that is now being proposed—the Church Street Bike Boulevard. NCBC was already in support of a Church Street alignment, as it would do the most good for the most people. With the newly proposed treatments and design elements, our stance that this is best option for the most people has only grown, as it responds to the specific safety concerns of Church Street residents involving increased active transportation users and vehicle access to their residences. The Church Street Bike Boulevard:
• removes no parking;
• reduces the speed and traffic volume on Church Street which the residents want; • utilizes an Enhanced Bike Boulevard as the design direction (vs a Class IV and 1 way street) which preserves the current streets functionality; • leaves open the design details of how to meet the speed and volume targets until the design phase of the project which Church Street residents and City Staff requested; • asks that residents on Church Street be included on the design committee that will decide on what traffic calming measures will be used on their Street which they requested;
• defines a clear, safe contiguous route through the city that will score well on funding applications.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 341 of 489 ends

PO Box 5157 | Napa, CA 94581 | (707) 258-6318 | www.napabike.org This option also furthers several current City goals, as outlined below.

City Goal 5: Support thriving families and enhance the safety, well-being, and healthy development of our youth
• By providing a safe and separated shared-use path that is near the City center and can act as the backbone of a local active transportation network, the Church Street alignment will allow youth to actively navigate their communities by walking, biking, and rolling, building a sense of independence and connection with community while building physical activity into everyday life. This is a free, accessible community resource that reaches residents of all socioeconomic backgrounds.
• The Napa County Bicycle Coalition’s Safe Routes to School Walk Audits indicated that crossing SR 29 was one of the highest barriers to students walking and bicycling to school; by selecting a Vine Trail alignment that crosses SR 29 close to City’s downtown core at Pope Street, the City will be taking a significant step towards addressing that barrier.
• The Vine Trail has proven to be a resilient and accessible source of exercise and fresh air for Napa County residents, as when Covid-19 closed gyms, exercise classes, and sports teams, folks could still safely bike, walk, run, and roll on the existing Vine Trail alignment.
o This was evidenced by an almost 70% increase in use on the existing Vine Trail during April 2020 compared to the previous 3 years.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 342 of 489 ends

PO Box 5157 | Napa, CA 94581 | (707) 258-6318 | www.napabike.org • By providing a direct, separated bike route through the heart of St. Helena, the Vine Trail Church Street alignment will give residents and visitors safe and comfortable access to walking or biking for transportation. This not only helps reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but also makes the City more accessible for those who cannot/do not drive and gets more people out of cars, reducing vehicle congestion. • According to NVTA, 63% of intra-Napa County vehicle trips are 5 miles or less, and 33% are one mile or less – walking and biking distance. By providing safe and accessible bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure like the Vine Trail, the City of St. Helena can help shift these short trips from greenhouse-gas emitting vehicle trips to more sustainable modes.
• When comparing the life cycle of travel modes, emissions from bicycling were found to be 30 times lower than fossil fuel cars and ten times lower than electric cars. Walking and bicycling for transportation is a vital part of St. Helena’s shift towards a more climate-conscious future.

We urge the City to adopt the proposed resolution in support of the Church Street Bike Boulevard alignment. This alignment will benefit local businesses and be a community asset that serves residents and tourists alike, and recreational and active transportation users alike. With the disruptions our society has weathered in recent years, as well as the price of gas making headlines, a Vine Trail alignment through the city center will establish a reliable form of transportation that will not only have positive impacts on the environment and the health of residents, it may also be a necessary and essential transportation corridor for a growing number of people.

Should you have any questions about the above comments, please contact Kara Vernor at (707) 258-6318 or [email protected]. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Kara Vernor Carlotta Sainato
Executive Director Program Manager
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 343 of 489 ends

Page 344 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Meredith,Kimberly <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 11:34 AM
To: CityCouncil
Cc: Public Comment; Nancy Tennyson; Shawn Casey-White
Subject: [External] Letter of Support for Vine Trail through St Helena Please help support the Napa Valley Vine Trail’s recommendation for the vine trail route through St. Helena. I am not a resident of St Helena but I do bike commute from Napa to Adventist Health St. Helena (vs versa frequently). This will help ensure a clear, safe contiguous route through the city. Other benefits include – reduce speed and traffic on Church Street, and this route will score well for the next ATP grant cycle.  A Class 1 route from the Southern City Limits along Main Street/Highway 29 to Pope Street.  A Class 1 route crossing Main Street at Pope Street and continuing to Church Street.  A Bike Boulevard (enhanced Class 3 with traffic calming) along Church Street from Pope Street to Hunt Street.

The Traffic calming design will prioritize bicycle and pedestrian travel, reduce traffic speeds to 20 mph or less and reduce traffic volumes on the street to below 1,500 vehicles per day as recommended by NATCO guidelines for Bike Boulevards.
 A Class 1 route from Hunt to Adams along Railroad Avenue next to the Wine Train tracks.  A Class 1 route from Adams to Pratt on the Wine Train ROW.  A Class 1 route on Pratt to Main Street to connect to the Saint Helena to Calistoga route.

Page 345 of 489 ends

Page 346 of 489 ends

«Ly
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 347 of 489 ends

Page 348 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Leslie Stanton <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 1:08 PM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos
Subject: [External] Vine trail
Attachments: Core Trail.HEIC
Dear City Council ‐
Please help establish the Vine trail through Saint Helena. I would like to use it in my lifetime. EVERYtime I am in Steamboat Springs, CO (which is often!) I use their Core Trail, walking or biking. I have attached a photo from this morning of the Core Trail that I used from the Bus Stop to the Steamboat Library and onto their main street, which is also a State Highway. No car needed. Thank you , Leslie Stanton Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 349 of 489 ends

Page 350 of 489 ends

Matthew D. Francois
Direct Dial: (650) 798-5669
E-mail: [email protected]
March 21, 2022
R u ta n & T uck e r, L L P | 4 5 5 Ma rk e t S tre e t, S u i te 1 8 7 0 S a n F ra n ci sc o , C A 9 4 1 05 | 6 5 0 -263 -7 9 0 0 | F a x 6 5 0 -263 -7 901 Ora n g e C o un t y | P a l o A lto | S a n F ra n c i s c o | www.ru ta n .c o m 2696/031700-0001
17629446.2 a03/21/22
VIA E-MAIL ([email protected])
Honorable Geoff Ellsworth, Mayor
and Members of the City Council
City of St. Helena
1572 Railroad Avenue
St. Helena, CA 94574
Re: Discussion and Consideration of Recommended Alignment of the Napa Valley Vine Trail Corridor Through the City of St. Helena; March 22, 2022 City Council Agenda Item No. 12.1.

Dear Mayor Ellsworth and Members of the City Council:

We write on behalf of our client, Safeway Inc. (“Safeway”) in regard to the City Council’s consideration of the Napa Valley Vine Trail alignment through the City of St. Helena (“City”). As you know, Safeway owns and operates a full-service grocery store at 1026 Hunt Avenue, St. Helena (the “Store”) within a shopping center co-owned by Mr. Richard Shurtz (the “Shopping Center”).

In concept, Safeway fully supports the proposed Napa Valley Vine Trail. But Safeway is very concerned that the proposed Church Street alignment, which we understand would run adjacent to (and possibly on) the Store site and Shopping Center and alter circulation patterns on Church Street, including by potentially closing it to through traffic or making it one-way, would adversely impact access to and operation of the Store and Shopping Center. As detailed below, Safeway opposes selection of the Church Street alignment because it conflicts with the City’s General Plan and the environmental impacts of such a route have not been studied in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

1. Background
Safeway has proudly served the residents of St. Helena since 1926. Safeway has operated a full-service supermarket in the Store since 2003. The Store was constructed following the timely completion of an environmental impact report (“EIR”) in accordance with CEQA. During the past two years, Safeway has served as an essential business for City residents and visitors alike.

In mid-January 2022, Safeway was approached by members of the Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition (the “Coalition”) to consider a proposal to construct the Vine Trail along Church Street and the westerly property line of the Shopping Center. This would likely require approval of easements by Safeway and other affected property owners. Safeway is not willing to grant such easements because they would adversely affect customer and employee parking and traffic circulation and flow in the vicinity of the Store.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 351 of 489 ends

Honorable Mayor Geoff Ellsworth and
Members of the City Council
March 21, 2022

Page 2 ends

2696/031700-0001
17629446.2 a03/21/22
From a timing standpoint, Safeway was advised that the City Council would be selecting a single route for the Vine Trail out of multiple possible options at a Council meeting in late March 2022. Coalition representatives stated that the timing of this vote was important because the Coalition was applying for a government grant in June 2022 and the chances of securing this funding were higher if a formal route had been chosen by then.

The Staff Report for the March 22, 2022 City Council meeting outlines four alignment options for the Vine Trail. The Church Street alignment is Option 3. A fifth option was discussed at a March 2, 2022 joint meeting of the Active Transportation & Sustainability Committee and the Parks & Recreation Commission. Under this fifth option, the Vine Trail would end at Mitchell Drive going north and Adams Street or Hunt Avenue going south with a Class II or Class III bike facility added between the two segments.

2. The Church Street Alignment is Inconsistent with the General Plan.

Figure 5.5 of the City’s General Plan depicts the City’s approved Bicycle Network. The Bicycle Network “aims to maximize connectivity throughout the city . . ..” (General Plan, p. 5-26.) The Bicycle Network was prepared in collaboration with the Napa Valley Transportation Authority (“NVTA”) to outline “existing and planned bicycle routes intended to provide safe and convenient bicycle access to parks, open spaces, commercial areas, residential neighborhoods, and community facilities.” (General Plan, p. 5-26; see also General Plan, p. 5-3.) The pedestrian and bicycle facilities shown in Figures 5.4 and 5.5 of the General Plan are supposed to be developed to “[c]reate a comprehensive bicycle and pedestrian network that expands neighborhood connectivity.”1 (General Plan, Policy CR2.1; see also General Plan, Policies CR1.1, CR1.9, CD6.2, PR6.3 and General Plan, Implementing Actions CR1.L, CR2.A, CR2.C.) Figure 5.5 includes an alignment for the proposed Napa Valley Vine Trail. The General Plan alignment appears to correspond to the Vine Trail alignment shown on the Coalition’s website.2 From south to north, that alignment generally follows State Route 29 to Charter Oak Avenue to Pope Street to Starr Avenue to Adams Street to the Railroad right-of-way back to State Route 29. No portion of the Vine Trail alignment shown in the General Plan traverses Church Street or is located in close proximity to the Store or Shopping Center.

Church Street is identified in the General Plan as a Downtown/Mixed-Use Street. (General Plan, Figure 5.1.) Such streets are intended to support “all travel modes.” (General Plan, p. 5-15.) Figure 5.5 depicts Church Street as a proposed Class III bicycle route, which is a route “marked for

1 While Policy CR2.1 only refers to Figure 5.4 (Pedestrian Facilities), the text also clearly refers to the Bicycle Network depicted on Figure 5.5.
2 See https://www.vinetrail.org/images/NVVT%20trail%20map%20FULL%20ROUTE.pdf Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 352 of 489 ends

Honorable Mayor Geoff Ellsworth and
Members of the City Council
March 21, 2022

Page 3 ends

2696/031700-0001
17629446.2 a03/21/22
shared use with motor vehicles.” (General Plan, p. 5-22.) Unlike other designated streets, Church Street is not identified as one of the “key” north-south routes for bicycle traffic. (General Plan, p. 5- 27.)
A city’s general plan is effectively the “constitution for future development” in the community, and subordinate land use actions that are not consistent with the general plan are “void ab initio.” (Lesher Communications, Inc. v City of Walnut Creek (1990) 52 Cal.3d 531, 540; Elysian Heights Residents Assn. v. City of Los Angeles (1986) 182 Cal.App.3d 21, 38.) “The propriety of virtually any local decision affecting land use and development depends upon consistency with the applicable general plan and its elements.” (Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 570.) In order to be deemed “consistent,” a decision must actually be “compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in the general plan.” (Napa Citizens for Honest Government v. Napa County Board of Supervisors (2001) 91 Cal.App.4th 342, 378-79 [county abused its discretion in adopting a specific plan that permitted development without “definite affirmative commitments to mitigate” impacts to traffic and housing contrary to policies and objectives set forth in its general plan].) “Consistency requires more than incantation, and [an agency] cannot articulate a policy in its general plan and then approve a conflicting project.” (Endangered Habitats League, Inc. v. County of Orange (2005) 131 Cal.App.4th 777, 789.)
Failure to comply with even one general plan policy is enough to render an agency action or decision “inconsistent” with its general plan and thus invalid. (See, e.g., Spring Valley Lake Assn. v. City of Victorville (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 91 [invalidating city’s approval of permit for commercial development because of failure to show consistency with one general plan policy]; California Native Plant Society v. City of Rancho Cordova (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 603, 640-642 [finding a project to be inconsistent with an agency’s general plan based on its failure to comply with a single policy requiring the agency to “coordinate” with specified resource agencies on mitigation for impacts to special-status species]; accord, Endangered Habitats League, supra, 131 Cal.App.4th at 789 [project failed to comply with a single general plan provision calling for use of a prescribed traffic study methodology].)
The Church Street alignment is fundamentally and inescapably inconsistent with the City’s General Plan. Any Council action or decision to select such an alignment would be void ab initio.

It could not be rectified by a post hoc amendment to the General Plan. If the Coalition desires an alignment for grant funding in June 2022, it should rely on the approved alignment contained in Figure 5.5 of the General Plan until such time as the General Plan is amended.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 353 of 489 ends

Honorable Mayor Geoff Ellsworth and
Members of the City Council
March 21, 2022

Page 4 ends

2696/031700-0001
17629446.2 a03/21/22

3. The City Cannot Select the Church Street Alignment Prior to Conducting Full CEQA Review.

A public agency must undertake CEQA review prior to approving a project. (Public Resources Code §§ 21100(a), 21151(a); CEQA Guidelines § 15004(a).) Specifically, “[b]efore granting any approval of a project subject to CEQA, every lead agency or responsible agency shall consider a final EIR or negative declaration . . ..” (CEQA Guidelines § 15004(a).) A “project” includes an activity which may cause either a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect effect on the environment and which is undertaken by a public agency or involves the issuance to a private entity of permits or other entitlements for use. (Public Resources Code § 21065.) “Approval of a project” means a decision by a public agency which “commits the agency to a definite course of action” in regard to a project. (CEQA Guidelines § 15352.) “Legislative action in regard to a project often constitutes approval.” (Id.) “With public projects, at the earliest feasible time, project sponsors shall incorporate environmental considerations into project conceptualization, design, and planning.” (CEQA Guidelines § 15004(b)(1).) To implement this principle, public agencies must not undertake actions concerning a proposed public project that could have a significant adverse effect on the environment, or limit the choice of alternatives or mitigation measures, before completing CEQA review. (CEQA Guidelines § (b)(2).) For example, an agency shall not make a formal decision to proceed with the use of a site for facilities until it has conducted CEQA review. (CEQA Guidelines § 15004(b)(2)(A).)
There is a recognized exception to the above rules for land acquisition agreements entered into by a public agency. (CEQA Guidelines § 15004(b)(2)(A).) However, to pass legal muster, any such agreement must: (1) be conditioned on compliance with CEQA, (2) not bind any party or commit to a definite course of action prior to CEQA compliance, (3) not restrict the lead agency from considering any feasible mitigation measures and alternatives, including the no project alternative, and (4) not restrict the lead agency from denying the project. (CEQA Guidelines § 15004(b)(4).) In Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood (2008) 45 Cal.4th 116, 134, the California Supreme Court observed that this exception for agency land purchases “should not swallow the general rule (reflected in the same regulation) that a development decision having potentially significant environmental effects must be preceded, not followed, by CEQA review.” In Save Tara, supra, the court struck down an agreement entered into between a city and a developer whereby the city agreed to transfer land to the developer for an affordable housing project prior to undertaking CEQA review. Although the agreement was conditioned on CEQA compliance, the court found that based on the circumstances the agency had impermissibly Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 354 of 489 ends

Honorable Mayor Geoff Ellsworth and
Members of the City Council
March 21, 2022

Page 5 ends

2696/031700-0001
17629446.2 a03/21/22
committed to the project prior to undertaking CEQA review. Those circumstances included, among others, that the agreement stated its purpose was to facilitate/enable the project.

Even assuming that the City were a responsible agency in regard to the Vine Trail, the City still cannot legally select the Church Street alignment without the benefit of full CEQA review.3 (CEQA Guidelines §15004(a).) Contrary to CEQA, doing so would foreclose the consideration of alternatives, such as alternative alignments. This is especially true if the lead agency were to rely on an exemption or mitigated negative declaration as it has done for other Vine Trail alignments. Selection of the Church Street alignment would not fall under the recognized exception for land acquisition. No agency acquisition is at issue here. 4 Proof that the City is being
asked to formally commit to the Church Street alignment is evidenced by the Coalition’s March 18, 2022 letter urging the City Council to adopt a “strong, specific resolution” embracing it.

4. Installing Bollards On Church Street Would Violate State Law.

In a March 11, 2022 letter, the Coalition suggests adding retractable bollards on Church Street midway between Hunt Avenue and Church Street. The letter states that the bollards would be in place during daytime hours wherein only residents of Church Street would have unrestricted access to that street. Such a proposal is in plain contravention of State law.

Vehicle Code Section 21101.6 states that “local authorities may not place gates or other selective devices on any street which deny or restrict the access of certain members of the public to the street, while permitting others unrestricted access to the street.” This section was added to the Vehicle Code to codify the decision of the First Appellate District in City of Lafayette v. County of Contra Costa (1979) 91 Cal. App. 3d 749.

In the City of Lafayette case, a city proposed an ordinance partially closing a public street through installation of a gate, with local residents provided devices to open the gate. The Court of Appeal held that the city did not have the constitutional or statutory authority to deny use of the road to some members, while allowing it to others. The court reasoned that “the streets of a city belong to the people of the state, and the use thereof is an inalienable right of every citizen, and that all persons have an equal right to use them for purposes of travel.” (91 Cal.App.3d at 757; see also 91 Cal.App.3d at 753 [court further observes that the use of streets and highways for travel

3 The NVTA appears to be the lead agency for the Napa Valley Vine Trail project. The NVTA is a Joint Powers Agency comprised of the cities of St. Helena, Calistoga, Yountville, Napa, and American Canyon as well as Napa County. (General Plan, p. 5-11.) 4 Even if it were, the action is not being conditioned on compliance with CEQA and restricts the agency from considering feasible alternatives and mitigation measures.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 355 of 489 ends

Honorable Mayor Geoff Ellsworth and
Members of the City Council
March 21, 2022

Page 6 ends

2696/031700-0001
17629446.2 a03/21/22
and transportation “is not a mere privilege, but a common and fundamental right, of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived.”].) In short, the proposal to partially close Church Street violates state law. We agree with City Staff that such a proposal would be “highly problematic.” ********************
Thank you for your consideration of Safeway’s views on this important matter.

Representatives of Safeway, including the undersigned, will be in attendance at your March 22, 2022 hearing. In the meantime, please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions regarding this correspondence.

Very truly yours,

RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP
Matthew D. Francois
MDF:cm
cc: Natalie Mattei, Director of Real Estate, Safeway, via email James McCann, Interim City Manager, via email
Preya Nixon, Assistant to the City Manager, via email
Ethan Walsh, City Attorney, via email
Cindy Tzafopoulos, City Clerk, via email
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 356 of 489 ends

March 21, 2022
Dear City Council,
Regarding the Vine Trail. According to the Report to the City Council selecting an option at this time is NOT MANDATORY. “The probability of grant award is greater if a potential, though not necessarily final, path for a corridor through St. Helena is identified on the application.” Also, keep in mind grant monies are not going to cover all initial or ongoing costs. According to the Report, “There will be costs in the establishment of the bike facilities in the City of St.

Helena and those costs will vary depending on the alignment, right-of-way or easement acquisition/cost if necessary and level of improvements desired/approved. Presently, the design details or funding role for St. Helena are not yet known or agreed upon. As with any infrastructure project, there will be on-going costs relative to maintenance of any new facility, and the relative maintenance cost will vary depending on the type of bike lane facility and infrastructure improvements.

Given the inevitable and significant disruptions to quality of life for St. Helena residents with accompanying safety concerns embedded in literally every option currently presented by the Vine Trail Coalition I urge you to offer your support for eventually having the Vine Trail connect with St. Helena while declining all current proposals as to how that will be accomplished.

Please don’t give in to the tyranny of the urgent. Poor choices now will have negative impacts that live on for decades to come.

Sincerely,
Nancy Dervin
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 357 of 489 ends

Page 358 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Paul De Martini <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:50 AM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Comment to Council re: Vine Trail Alignment Through Saint Helena Council Members,
I support NVVT (donation and as an active member), however, the NVVT's proposed 4 routes through St.

Helena are not acceptable given the impact to the community as noted in the many public comments.

From the information provided it is not clear that a more complete traffic impact assessment has been conducted in our small town which has only a few north‐south streets between Madrona and Spring. I am concerned that partial closure, for NVVT's proposed dedicated 10' wide bike lane, of any of the north‐south streets/byways will increase the commercial and personal vehicle traffic on Stockton Street which is effectively a one lane road. Stockton Street currently has considerable traffic flow as a Main street/Oak Street bypass and any additional traffic would be unacceptable and present safety issues for the residents including a number of senior citizens and children.

Given that the NVVT has had significant cost escalation for the St. Helena to Calistoga section which now threatens to take money from a St Helena critical infrastructure program, I urge you to delay action on the VT proposals until a more complete assessment of the options including the 5th option of (A) Vine Trail comes north to Mitchell and stops. (B) Vine Trail comes south from Calistoga and stops at Adams or Hunt along Railroad ROW (Right of Way). I appreciate the efforts of the Active Transportation and Parks and Recreation Commission to explore other options.

Such a delay, would allow for a more complete assessment of traffic flows and safety considerations across the city and any financial implications (first costs and ongoing) that St. Helena would directly or indirectly impact us. Also, a more rigorous assessment of NVVT's benefit claims should be substantiated. For example, claiming significant green house emissions savings is highly questionable when the Bay Area leads the nation in electric vehicle adoption and California policy is to have 100% electric vehicles sold by 2035.

In short, the NVVT should focus its efforts on building the St. Helena to Calistoga section including better options for closing their funding shortfall and allow St Helena to re‐evaluate the best permanent option for our community.

Paul De Martini
Paul De Martini | 1525 Stockton St. | Saint Helena, CA 94574 415.272.6935 | [email protected]
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 359 of 489 ends

Page 360 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Eric Hall
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 4:00 PM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos
Subject: FW: [External]
Cindy,
I found Charlie’s public comment in my City junk email box…rest of Council may have missed it, too. Will you please include in your public comment? Thank you.

Best,
E
From: Charles Crocker <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 6:33 PM
To: CityCouncil <[email protected]>
Subject: [External]
Dear Council Members,
As a long time St Helena resident I would like to recommend a vote in favor of the Church Street option for the Vineyard trail. It seems to me this option represents the best alternative for St. Helena.

With thanks for your continuing efforts to improve our city, Charlie Crocker
Sent from Mail for Windows
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 361 of 489 ends

Page 362 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Kamille Garcia
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 9:12 AM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos
Subject: FW: Support of Vine Trail Resolution
Attachments: 2022_03_19_13_19_06.pdf
From: Barbara Nemko <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 19, 2022 1:30 PM
To: CityCouncil <[email protected]>
Cc: Public Comment <[email protected]>
Subject: [External] Support of Vine Trail Resolution
To Whom It May Concern:

I have previously expressed my strong support for the proposed route of the Vine Trail in St. Helena and sent letters to Congressman Thompson requesting funding to achieve this goal. I believe this will be a wonderful addition for both residents of Napa County and visitors. It will definitely encourage our students to get out and walk and/or bike, which will add to their physical and mental good health.

Please pass the strong resolution outlined in the attached letter from Chuck McMinn, as well as the recommendation to involve the residents of Church Street in the design committee. A safe bicycle and pedestrian route through St. Helena will be an excellent enhancement to the many positive attributes the City of St. Helena already offers.

Thank you for your consideration,
Barb Nemko
Napa County Superintendent of Schools
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 363 of 489 ends

Page 364 of 489 ends

Mayor Ellsworth, Vice Mayor Dohring, Council Members Chouteau, Hall & Hardy I have reviewed the staff report and all the published public comments regarding the proposed Vine Trail thru St. Helena. I do not live on Church St, but I do live in Vineyard Valley where the only entrance to and exit from the park is Pope Street. As you all know Pope St. is the main entrance to St. Helena from the Silverado trail. There is so much traffic on Pope Street that sometimes it is difficult to leave the park. There is traffic to and from the park, to and from the college, more traffic to and from the Montessori school and the Stonebridge Apartments, traffic and many elderly pedestrians from Silverado Orchards. I must add that all this traffic is generated before you get to the first cross street on Pope.

Add traffic on this street where we already have unsafe traffic conditions due to the irregularities caused by the bicycle striping on Pope Street plus trying to navigate the tight curve next to the old barn and over the creek.

Church St is one of the main ways the residents I described above use to go to Safeway, Steve’s Hardware, the Library, Lyman Park, the P.O., City Hall and numerous other businesses and banks. To have bicyclists come from Main Street up Pope and make a left turn on to Church Street would add to the traffic and be extremely dangerous. It would also destroy the Offices on the corner and any other businesses on the street. I would also say that many of the trucks that unload at Safeway and many of the downtown businesses also frequently use Church.

I believe that there is another possibility that is being discussed for the Vine Trail. The trail thru St.

Helena would start with a left tune from Highway 20 on to Sulfur Springs Road, Sulfur Spring Road to North Crane, make a right turn. Stay on No. Crane which becomes Valley View. Continue on Valley View to the end and turn right on to Spring Street go one block to Allyn Ave. Turn left on Allen and proceed on to Madrona.

Much of this route has already been stripped and painted green which was paid for by the City. Money has already been budgeted by the City to improve So Crane. Please get smart and add the Vine Trail to the already proposed improvements in the area. Please apply for some of the available grants to help with the financing.

Best,
Grace
Grace Kistner
25 San Juan Court
St. Helena
03‐21‐22
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 365 of 489 ends

Page 366 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Kamille Garcia
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 9:12 AM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos
Subject: FW: Vine Trail Options
From: Jack Oliver <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 18, 2022 5:03 PM
To: Public Comment <[email protected]>; Preya Nixon <[email protected]> Cc: Geoff Ellsworth <[email protected]>; Paul Dohring <[email protected]>; Anna Chouteau <[email protected]>; Lester Hardy <[email protected]>; Eric Hall <[email protected]> Subject: [External] Vine Trail Options
Dear City Council Members,
This letter is in support of a Vine Trail option that works for the Vine Trail and provides net benefits to St. Helena.

At this point, despite lots of studies and consultants, none of the current options seem to provide a net positive benefit to St. Helena. It is not about pro or anti-Vine Trail; it is about a good intentioned idea exacerbating preexisting challenges in our town. Any proposal that would remove over 25 parking spaces downtown in a city with a parking crisis seems to ignore serious second and third order effects. While locals would love to use the Vine Trail on a daily basis, the reality is most folks don’t have the luxury to bike to work due to the constraints of their job or requirements to travel out of town for work. Kids already have the option to bike to school and despite many attempts to encourage more biking, most don’t because they have gear and equipment they can’t transport on a bicycle. Therefore, despite some weekend pleasure use, the majority of the daily Vine Trail use would appear to be by tourists, which is great, but the “experts” insist otherwise. It is important to get viewpoints from out of town, but I would hope that the 40% of survey respondent data from outside city limits would be considered by the city in the same way that you cannot vote for city council or tax bonds if you don’t live in city limits (and won’t be on the hook to pay taxes or be impacted?). Is running a mostly tourist and transportation focused endeavor through residential neighborhoods consistent with the General Plan? If the goal is to promote tourism and active transportation, then why not leave the Trail on Main Street/Hwy 29, which is the active transportation and tourist route through town. The Trail can “end” at Sunshine Market and the bikers will then have three options to cross Main at existing crosswalks (Pope, Spring and Hunt), maybe shop along the way, and then pick the Trail up at the railroad right-of-way at Hunt/Railroad Avenue. Bikers can easily navigate three blocks through town to find the next connection (maybe add some signage to help them?). No residential streets would be impacted. No small businesses on Adams become practically inaccessible. Please consider a new route that is not so disruptive to residential neighborhoods and small businesses on Spring/Oak/Adams streets.

Sincerely,
Jack Oliver
St. Helena
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 367 of 489 ends

Page 368 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Jenny Krenz <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 8:26 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] COMMENTS Vine Trail Proposal
Dear City Council,
I appreciate the opportunity to share my brief thoughts regarding the proposed Vine Trail, as I am opposed to this recommendation.

I moved to St. Helena just shy of 6 months ago, and selected my home based on the immediate location, the small community, peaceful neighborhood and privacy it affords.

Although I generally enjoy bike trails for walking and cycling, typically these are not built in an immediate neighborhood and on top of private property. It would be quite devastating to have a public thoroughfare right behind our house. Currently the Wine Train passes only one‐time a day, and the occasional neighbor walks past ‐ it is very peaceful. However, adding a public path mere inches from our home could significantly compromise our privacy, safety, cleanliness and serenity.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Jenifer Krenz
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 369 of 489 ends

Page 370 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Kamille Garcia
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 9:13 AM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos
Subject: FW: Vine Trail Bike Route via a Bike Boulevard on Church Street Attachments: Church Street Bike Boulevard Recommended Action Signed.pdf From: Latife Hayson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 11:33 AM
To: CityCouncil <[email protected]>; Public Comment <[email protected]> Subject: [External] Vine Trail Bike Route via a Bike Boulevard on Church Street As an avid biker, I support the Vine Trails Resolution as per the attached recommendation.

Thank you, Latife
Latife Hayson
Luxury Estates Vineyards & Wineries
Compass | Napa Valley
707.738.4820
latifehayson.com
Podcasts DRE# 01341252
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 371 of 489 ends

Page 372 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Pim Dubbeldam <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 6:47 PM
To: Preya Nixon
Cc: Public Comment; Maryam Malek
Subject: [External] COMMENT TO COUNCIL - Agenda Item Napa Valley Vine Trail Corridor Dear Mayor, City Council Members, Assistant to the City Manager, Interim City Manager and City Clerk, My family and I reside on Crinella with our backyard directly facing the railroad tracks, which is targeted for the “Wine Train - Segment 3” Class 1 Bikeway of the NVVT. While a considerable amount of attention has been given to the Church St. options recently, we would like to remind you of the trail’s negative impact on the residents of the Crinella Subdivision, whose yards face the railroad tracks and are just a few feet away from it.

We fully empathize with the Church St. residents and ask that you consider, regardless of front entrance of home or backyard, how the implementation of this trail can impact our day to day lives, especially if you lived on one of these proposed streets of concern.

I spent the first 37 years of my life in Holland and can attest to the effectiveness of a well planned, funded, and maintained cycling infrastructure that is incorporated into all aspects of life from commuting, leisure, day to day activities including errands, and exercise. The success of such a program takes into account a common culture and full understanding of how to use the trails with which everyone grows up.

As a resident of St. Helena, I feel that our beautiful small city may not be prepared to take such a leap with huge ongoing responsibilities to ensure the safety and well being of all its residents and visitors alike, based on the current NVVT proposal. The quick decision to approve the NVVT through St. Helena is forcing a bike path through a malaligned existing infrastructure instead of designing a community that includes a bike path from the onset of urban design. This hasty decision because of grant funding deadlines will result in a negative impact to a large portion of our community of residents. We all would like a bike trail to use, but not just at any cost.

Please consider in which other cities similar to St. Helena, the NVVT or similar bike trails have been successfully implemented and maintained through residential and business districts. If such a case exists, please study that information for planning long-term safety and maintenance, and forecasting both our financial and operational abilities as a small town with our budgetary restrictions. How will maintenance of the trail compete with other city priorities? If we act in haste in order to meet a grant funding deadline we risk inheriting a responsibility we may not be positioned to maintain.

The “Gap Model” where the Bike path stops at the south end of town and starts again at Pratt, beyond any residential areas such as the Crinella subdivision, may be the only option to alleviate the many concerns of the St. Helena residents.

Our family’s objections to the NVVT going through the town of St. Helena, as well as our concerns specific to the Wine Train - Segment 3 Bikeway are outlined below. When at a crossroad, we often read language that suggests a trail along the wine train tracks is a viable solution, without taking into consideration how it impacts the lives of those residents who face the tracks and appreciate the natural surrounding areas. We appreciate your review of these concerns and taking our input into consideration.

1. Safety of Riders, Pedestrians, Residents
While the intended purpose of the trail is to create safety from motor vehicle collisions for cyclists, there are other safety concerns that are being created as a result. My wife who is co-writing this letter with me has been Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 373 of 489 ends

2 run over as a pedestrian in a crosswalk and seriously hurt by a motor vehicle and can fully understand the need to avoid collisions. If the path is for cyclists and pedestrians alike, are all segments of it designed to be walk-friendly too? The safety of pedestrians on these trails is also of concern. What kind of studies have been performed to ensure the children, people with strollers, seniors on foot, or our disabled community can safely walk the trail without a collision with a bicycle? Our experience walking shared trails throughout northern california has been to get out of the bicycle’s way or get yelled at or worse, knocked over. Now imagine a large group of serious avid cyclists going through. Add the effect of alcohol to the formula as many tourists may find the trail as a way to visit wineries. Will there be police presence to check for cyclists under the influence on the trails as they are on the road with drivers? What kind of police presence is budgeted for ensuring adherence to speed limits on the trail? Do bicycles always have the right of way on the trail? Besides bicycles, what other types of manual or electric devices are permitted on the trail? Imagine the noise and speed from scooters and electric hoverboards. Who and how will the trail use policies be enforced? Are dogs going to be permitted on trails? As owners of dogs with years of experience in dog behavioral training with professionals we can assure you that many dogs will be reactive to fast moving bicycles and runners especially in a closed trail with little outlet to get out of the way (e.g., no way to cross the street). Currently if we walk or ride our bicycles near the tracks there is plenty of room without a bounding fence to maneuver and avoid such issues, setting everyone up for success.

As the Santa Rosa bike trail and the southern end of the NVVT have already proven to us, homeless encampments are a matter of time. From friends in San Francisco who live near encampments we hear horrible stories of feces and needles in front of their home. Years ago we used to ride our bicycles on the Santa Rosa trail and now we cannot out of safety concerns. Our friends who live in Sebastopol talk about the absolute horror and danger of going anywhere near that trail. Imagine that we are now rightfully fast forwarding to several years from now and seeing this horror in our own backyards by the train tracks. There are known concerns of drug use, needles and other litter, smells, violence, and fire risks from these encampments that may appear a mere few feet from our backyards. Can we still feel safe living here? Is lighting planned to improve trail security at night? How is the city planning to pay for maintaining the lighting? Lighting is much needed on a trail to help with security but right outside our windows it can illuminate our home’s interiors at night, negatively impacting our health. Additionally, lighting impacts our ability to enjoy the beautiful night sky. Consider light pollution and look at how Arizona has fought it to keep the night sky dark.

The violent beating and murder of a man riding home after work on the NVVT remains unsolved. But we are not just talking about the use of the trail, rather living adjacent to it which increases the opportunities for violent incidents or home break-ins significantly. Is nighttime police presence budgeted for the trail? Just two nights ago on March 19th we witnessed illegal fireworks activities right outside our windows on an empty lot at the corner of Fulton and the tracks. It created a lot of concern on NextDoor and Facebook groups from residents due to fire risk. It made us reflect and ask what precautions will be put in place to prevent fires starting if encampments were there or even if a tourist disposed of a lit cigarette? In summary, it's not just the safety of cyclists we need to consider, but the safety and physical and mental health of all of our residents!

2. Privacy, Noise, Views, and Cleanliness
Noise pollution is inevitable as groups use the trail, yelling to hear each other over the noise of wind in their ears. While the Napa Wine Train runs on the tracks and with it brings noise, it is at very few predictable times during the day and is fast moving. No one disembarks the train to loiter outside our yards. Cyclists and pedestrians may take breaks for their phone calls (ever enjoy listening to a one-way conversation while the other party wears an earphone? Or worse yet use speakerphones?), drink or smoke stops, bio breaks (please do not assume everyone will look for a legitimate bathroom as we already observe some workers using the empty lot at the corner of Fulton for bio breaks). Meanwhile we lose the ability to use our yards and will lose Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 374 of 489 ends

3 natural light by pulling down our shades. That is not the kind of life we envisioned when purchasing a property with open views. The charm of living in St. Helena is not just limited to Main Street and its historic buildings we adore, but the nooks and crannies we find as locals in the back roads and among the vineyards. We will lose an important part of where we get our respite, safe recreation, and calm.

Are trash bins planned for along the trail? Who will be cleaning them and in what frequency? We have started reading about people not picking up after their dogs on the sidewalk. Is the same going to happen on the trails? What about other trash from people using the trail recreationally? Where are bathrooms going to be located along the trail?
With the projected number of cyclists, runners, walkers, families, tourists, and commuters on the NVVT, we lose privacy in our backyards. Are we all to raise our fences, give up any views that our properties came with, for a select few who want to make that area their trail? One neighbor facing our backyard on Fulton (former property of M. Chiarello), is one of the two properties with vineyards on the east side, directly facing the tracks between Pratt and Fulton. Just last week they planted very tall and large trees to add privacy against the NVVT. We not only lost our beautiful vineyard view as a result, the remaining beauty brought by these trees will be obfuscated by the NVVT fence. We also can in no way compete with the budget those larger properties have to plant trees and will be directly looking onto the NVVT fence.

We understand 4’ fences are planned for around the trail. What will these fences look like? How will they affect our views? If they were planned for your neighborhood, would you not want to have input into their aesthetic to ensure they are not purely functional in nature but complement the beauty of the natural surrounding area?
And how will the trails be maintained when we have so many streets with potholes? With the recent Crinella subdivision road work, one section of the town’s roads has been repaved (thank you!). We notice such a huge difference just by walking on foot on Pratt, let alone with our vehicle. The rest of our town’s streets and sidewalks need a lot more attention at present time and funding for their repair should be a higher priority.

Are you willing to take on all the above risks while the Gap model is an available option, less costly, and has a significantly less negative impact to our community? We appreciate your time and thoughtful consideration to hear our collective voices on all aspects of the safety, security, and well being of the community. We implore you to not take our feedback as a community of residents lightly. We are more vested in this beautiful town than non-residents who voice their opinion in support of it. St. Helena is a charming town and a lovely place we have the privilege to call home. We live on the quieter end of town. The peace and nature around us is healing – my wife can attest as she savors it every moment she steps out of the house, even to go to the backyard, commenting how this environment is healing after having finished her immediate cancer treatments. We need this peace and quiet in our backyards to continue to live and heal, rather than add the noise, commotion, and lack of safety the trail will bring. The Gap Model remains our only option to adopt the NVVT. Thank you again for your tireless efforts to consider our input and help make St. Helena a safe and enjoyable town to live in.

Sincerely,
Pim and Maryam Dubbeldam
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 375 of 489 ends

Page 376 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Steve Kinney <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 10:08 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Vine Trail
Saint Helena City Council
I am excited to see that the Bike Trail (Vine Trail) in the Upper Valley is finally being acted on. One of the most perplexing issues to me is the routing through parts of town that are already congested with traffic. The ‘suggested’ route down Church, and the one on Oak St, both rely on cyclists having to cross and use Main Street (Highway 29) at very busy points. As a Cyclist living in town, Main Street is a difficult navigation. I regularly use Sulfur Springs to S. Crane which transitions into Valley View. This stretch is already marked for bike lanes and is quite scenic. It also has little car traffic. At Spring St., where it dead ends, there are several options. Right to either Hudson or Allyn or left up to Sylvaner.

All end at Madrone and then back down to 29. This affords the rider a wonderful vista of vineyards and distinctive views. This is also a pre-Marked route! No added expense or other routing nonsense being proposed. If you’re not going to build an actual “Vine Trail” away from traffic and through the vineyard, use what you have already available.

Steven Kinney
415-341-3853
[email protected]
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 377 of 489 ends

Page 378 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Christopher Cole <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 11:48 AM
To: Preya Nixon; Cindy Tzafopoulos
Subject: [External] Public Comment in support of the Vine Trail - Church Street Bike Boulevard To the City Council:

Chuck McMinn's most recent proposal for a Bike Boulevard on Church Street, with bollards, is a forward thinking solution that I support.

I have closely followed this discussion through the planning process and it is now evident the the Oak Street alternative does not have sufficient citizen traction to be successful, despite Oak Street being a primary Bike Boulevard in our current General Plan. The Mills Lane route cannot be built without voluntary private easement(s), so we can eliminate the Mills Lane option now.

This leaves Church Street as our single and best option for the Vine Trail.

I have been commuting to work by bicycle for 30 years and I can assure you that I will use the Church Street route every day. Let's welcome the Vine Trail to St. Helena and move towards the mandated alternative transportation goals in our General Plan.

Please support the Vine Trail,
Christopher Cole
St. Helena
[email protected]

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 379 of 489 ends

Page 380 of 489 ends

PO Box 537, Napa, CA 94559 [email protected] www.fonr.org
The community's voice for the protection, restoration, responsible development, and celebration of the Napa River and its watershed through education and advocacy.

March 21, 2022
St. Helena City Council
City Hall
St. Helena, CA 94574 Via Email
Re: Vine Trail Route, St. Helena
Dear Councilmembers,
We are writing in support of the Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition’s “Resolution”, which requests adoption of a clear definition of a route through City of St. Helena.

The Vine Trail Coalition is a private-public partnership constructing a safe pedestrian and cycling route through the Napa Valley for the overall public benefit.

The Coalition depends on government support (ATP grant) to match the significant private support already demonstrated and ongoing.

Adoption by St. Helena City Council, of a clear definition of a route through the City of St. Helena, will help the Vine Trail Coalition attract competitive federal funding (ATP grant) which otherwise would be awarded to some other community that demonstrates a more compelling plan and more public support.

As active members of the Vine Trail Coalition, we urge your support.

Thank you for your kind consideration.

Board of Directors
Friends of the Napa River, Inc.

Board of Directors
Francie Winnen
President
Dennis Rinehart
Secretary
Chuck Shinnamon
Treasurer
Bernhard Krevet
President Emeritus
Phill Blake
Barry Christian
David Graves
Rex Stults
Andy Szmidt
Bob Zlomke
Honorary
Advisory Board
Moira Johnston Block
(In Memoriam)
Chip Bouril
David Garden
Shari Gardner
Roger Hartwell
Tracy Krumpen
Tony Norris
Laurie Puzo
Mike Rippey
Kent Ruppert
Ginny Simms
Barbara Stafford
Karen Bower Turjanis
A “living” Napa River
conveys equilibrium
and harmony with all
that it touches and
resonates through
the human and
natural environment
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 381 of 489 ends

Page 382 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Gary Fisch <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 10:51 AM
To: CityCouncil; Public Comment
Subject: [External] Napa Valley Vine Trail
Hello,
I hope you are doing well. My name is Gary Fisch and I am the founder and CEO of Gary's Wine & Marketplace, located at 607 Saint Helena Highway. My wife and I also own a home in Saint Helena.

I wanted to write to you in support of the Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition’s latest proposal with regard to a bike route through Saint Helena.

I am excited by the prospect of a safe bicycle and pedestrian route through Saint Helena – I believe it will increase tourism and benefit commerce in town in addition to providing recreational activities for residents and tourists alike.

Please let me know if there is anything I can do to help.

Best,
Gary
Gary Fisch
Founder/CEO
Gary's Wine and Marketplace
www.garyswine.com
To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 383 of 489 ends

Page 384 of 489 ends

Dear Saint Helena City Council,
I'm writing in support of the Vine Trail Coalition's proposed resolution for the Vine Trail's routing through St. Helena and urge you to affirm this resolution in your upcoming meeting.

St. Helena's support of a viable route through the town is critical to the Vine Trail's efforts to secure ATP funding as well as its mission to build a route that serves the local community with a functional path that will most effectively encourage replacing car trips with bike trips (for errands, commuting, etc.).

The proposed resolution defines a clear, safe contiguous route through the city, removes concerns about parking attrition and invites Church Street residents to be involved in the design of the portion of the trail that will be on their street.

I work for the leading bike tour and rental company in Napa Valley and can personally attest to the dramatic increase in recreational visitors the Vine Trail has brought since the Oak Knoll Section opened in 2016.

I would estimate that at least 75% of our rental guests (13,000 last year) choose to plan their bike rides predominantly around the Vine Trail due to hesitance of riding in bike lanes on Hwy. 29 or Silverado Trail.

When the Vine Trail connects Yountville to St. Helena, many of our rental guests will be excited to venture north for the first time. Providing these recreational visitors with a seamless and intuitive continuation of the Vine Trail through the city is vital for rider safety and for inviting visitor commerce to St. Helena's businesses.

The proposed gap solution would have unintended consequences for St. Helena. With no defined trail through the city, bike rental companies such as the one I work for will be forced to create maps to provide visitors with a suggested route through the city along existing streets. We would greatly prefer to be able to send our bike rental guests on a continuous ride along the Vine Trail and feel strongly that St. Helenans will appreciate visitors having a safe, seamless and intuitive path to navigate through the city.

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 385 of 489 ends

Sincerely,
Kellie Macway | Group Sales & Marketing | (o) 707.947.3018 Napa Valley Bike Tours | #willbikeforwine
Please note my regular days off are Sunday & Monday
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 386 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Preya Nixon
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 11:26 AM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos
Subject: FW: Vine Trail Item 12.1 Old Business

----
Preya B. Nixon
Assistant to the City Manager
City of St. Helena | City Manager’s Office
1572 Railroad Avenue | St. Helena, CA 94574 New address Direct: (707) 968‐2635 | Mobile/Text (707) 320‐7904
[email protected]
Wash your Hands | Wear a Mask | Watch your Distance
Lávese sus manos | Use mascarilla | Mantenga su distancia From: Ronald Arata <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 21, 2022 8:02 PM
To: Geoff Ellsworth <[email protected]>; Paul Dohring <[email protected]>; Anna Chouteau <[email protected]>; Lester Hardy <[email protected]>; Eric Hall <[email protected]> Cc: Preya Nixon <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: [External] Vine Trail Item 12.1 Old Business
To all city council members.

St Helena is the only community on the proposed Vine trail that has a proposed route going thru both residential and commercial zones leaving many questions still unanswered regarding the Vine Trail and until they are answered the city council should accept the recommendation of the Transportation, Sustainability and Parks & Recreation Commission of a "stop and shop" option
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 387 of 489 ends

2 The vine Trail is only paying for 50% of future Vine Trail maintenance. The Vine Trial is a non‐profit, what happens if the Vine Trail ceases operation? Is the city on the hook for 100% of future maintenance? What guarantees are the Vine Trail providing? .

It my understanding the the Vine Trail has offered indemnity clauses to property owners in exchange for easements.  Given the projected "thousands" of users of a Vine trail route thru St. Helena is the city asking for indemnification as well from any liability action against the city as the result of use of the Vine trail?
In the public comments section to both the recent Transportation,Sustainability  and Parks and Recreation committee and up coming City Council meeting there were proposals offered by St. Helena residents for alternate routes thru St. Helena.   Would it not be prudent to fully explore these options as well before making a
decision?
In a March 1, 2022 letter from Albertsons (Safeway) they asked for information from the city in regards to CEQA requirements, prior to making any decision in regards to easements  for Safeway./Smiths Pharmacy parking lot.  In the original proposed Church St. route an easement was required to proceed north on Railroad Ave.

Mr. McMinn's letter of March 18, 2022 he outlines adjustments to the original Vine Trail proposal but still has a Class ! route north on Railroad Ave. Has owners of the Safeway/Smiths Pharmacy parking lot provided easements or are they do longer needed for a Class ! route on Railroad Ave.?
I have read several comments that if St. Helena does not select a defined route that grant funding may be in jeopardy for the Yountville to St. Helena section. I think that puts an unfair burden on the city council members. If I have understood correctly from Vine Trail personnel from previous zoom meetings, they have stated that all necessary easement for the entire section from Yountville to St. Helena has been secured. There have been several conversations that say that is not true. There are several landowners for liability reasons, even with offered indemnity clauses that have not given permission for the Vine Trail to cross their property. If this is accurate there is no urgency to select a route thru St. Helena as there will be no completed section from Yountville to St. Helena. I would suggest that the City of St.

Helena require documentation from the Vine Trail that all easements required for the Yountville to St. Helena section has been secured. Not in discussion, hopefully so, I think we can secure, but signed, sealed and in hand.

Regards,
Ron Arata

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 388 of 489 ends

3 Sent from Mail for Windows

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 389 of 489 ends

Page 390 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: TOM BELT <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 12:28 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Vine Trail Route
Dear Mayor Ellsworth and City Council Members Chouteau, Dohring, Hall and Hardy I'm writing to add my opinion to the large number of comments received opposing Church Street as one of the route sections for the Vine Trail. My comments are based upon Church Street being a rather narrow street and the fact that residents living along the street will be subjected to an increase in traffic, loss of privacy and property value.

While I support the idea of the Vine Trail, I agree with other St. Helenan's who have suggested the trail run along St. Helena's wider streets where the negative impacts of traffic will be mitigated. Of the options being considered, my preference would be using Hwy 29 to Sulphur Springs, to Crane, Valley View, east on Spring to Allen St., then east on Madrona and back to Hwy 29.

It would be interesting to consult with real estate agents to obtain their opinions on how the Vine Trail would effect the future property values of the homes located along the route of the trail. Can you imagine trying to sell one's home at an open hose on a weekend when there maybe hundreds of bike riders using the trail on that day?
In conclusion, who among our city council would support the Vine Trail running in front of their home, especially if their home was located on a narrow street? Respectfully submitted,
Tom Belt
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 391 of 489 ends

Page 392 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: EARLE PRESTEN <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 3:43 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Vine Trail
Importance: High
Dear City Council Members,
Re: Proposed Vine Trail route through St. Helena
I will not reiterate the numerous letters and suggestions from others who have written to you, but will try to succinctly summarize my thoughts.

Any of the plans for routing the Vine Trail through St. Helena seem fraught with:
* incredible inconvenience to people who live here, especially those who live on the proposed streets
* numerous parking spots would be removed, in a city where parking is already a problem * expediting a quick route through town will not encourage bicyclists to shop with our downtown merchants, which are already dwindling and suffering * if whole streets are blocked off, fire, police and first-responders access to victims or problems would be greatly compromised - sometimes with fatal results * bollards seems almost too ludicrous to even discuss - who controls? what if transponders fail - is there a back-up? what if one neighbor wants them down and another neighbor wants them up - who decides, or does someone make a 911 call and expect the police to decide? they're bulky and when placed on a narrow street like Church how much room anyway will there be for bicyclists? or do they have to go single-file (which they don't seem to like to do)? who pays for the bollards?
* maybe I've missed the conversations around monetary costs to the city - installation, maintenance, responsibility and liability.
* are we having a problem with serious incidents between bicyclists and the rest of us? * have bicyclists complained about not having a free and clear route through town, with nothing to hinder their journey?
* who/what will be allowed on the Vine Trail? what about strollers and scooters or motorcycles?
Why not have the Vine Trail stop at the south end of town and resume at the north end of town - seems to me I've seen this suggested before? These folks are interested in being outdoors, are presumably healthy and fit enough to bike the length of the valley, why not let them walk Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 393 of 489 ends

2 for a bit, enjoy our downtown area (it's only a few blocks), and maybe even leave a few dollars and their good will?
Or - let them ride wherever they want through town and deal with other traffic - cars, buses, trucks, walkers - like the rest of us do as we ride our bikes.

Has anyone done valid traffic (foot, motorized) studies to see for example, how many people actually ride bikes through town? or even just around town? Have the people who use the Vine Trail as it is now (don't see very many), ever been polled for their ideas? I do not understand why a relatively small number of people can have so much power and influence over so many. I have lived in St. Helena for 50 years, on two of the busiest streets in town (Spring and Pope), and rarely have I/do I ever see more than a handful of bicyclists (other than marathons or group rides). Yet, we have whole blocks of streets where parking is not allowed so there is unobstructed 'road' for bicycles. Many days I do not see any bicyclists - adults or children.

And, a big big question - how much is the Vine Trail going to cost St. Helena - initially and going forward? St. Helena already supposedly does not have enough money to pay to repair our streets and sidewalks - potholes, undulating sidewalks, extremely rough streets, manhole covers that stick up so high they are harmful to tires and suspensions; decrepit water system; gas delivery lines - I could go on, but will spare you.

Thank you for your consideration,
Valerie Presten
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 394 of 489 ends

1572 Railroad Avenue
St. Helena, CA 94574
Phone: (707) 967-2792
Fax: (707) 963-7748
www.cityofsthelena.org
City of St. Helena
“We will conduct city affairs on behalf of our citizens using an open and creative process.”

MEMORANDUM
To: St. Helena City Council
From: Ethan Walsh, City Attorney
Date: March 22, 2022
Subject: Responses to March 21, 2022 Safeway Letter
On March 21, 2022, Safeway Inc. (“Safeway”), via its counsel, wrote the City Council to state that it opposes selection of the Church Street alignment of the Napa Valley Vine Trail (“Church Street Alignment”). It contends that the Church Alignment conflicts with the City’s General Plan, that the impacts of whatever alignment is chosen for the Vine Trail must be evaluated under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) before the City Council can discussion and consider the Vine Trail in the City, and finally, that installing bollards on Church Street would violate State law.

Based on review of Safeway’s letter, City Staff has the following comments/responses:
• Safeway states “From a timing standpoint, Safeway was advised that the City Council would be selecting a single route for the Vine Trail out of multiple possible options at a Council meeting in late March 2022.”
o This is not correct. As detailed in the Staff Report for the City Council’s March 22, 2022 meeting, the only potential Council action on the Council’s agenda is the discussion and consideration of a preferred alignment of and direction to staff to communicate this consideration with Napa County and the Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition.
• Safeway states “Coalition representatives stated that the timing of this vote was important because the Coalition was applying for a government grant in June 2022 and the chances of securing this funding were higher if a formal route had been chosen by then.”
o The Coalition’s communications with Safeway are outside of the City’s scope of knowledge and do not bind the City. As detailed in the Staff Report, Napa County and the Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition are the entities that will be selecting a Vine Trail alignment through the City, and will conduct the appropriate environmental analysis under CEQA prior to approval of an alignment. • Safeway states “the Church Street Alignment is inconsistent with the General Plan. First, it states that Figure 5.5 of the City’s General Plan, which depicts the City’s approved Bicycle Network, includes an alignment for the proposed Napa Valley Vine Trail, and that “no portion of the Vine Trail alignment shown in the General Plan traverses Church Street or is located in close proximity to the Store or Shopping Center.” Second, it argues that because Church Street is marked on Figure 5.5 as a proposed Class III bicycle route, which is a route “marked for shared use with motor vehicles” and Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 395 of 489 ends

it is not identified as one of the “key” north-south routes for bicycle traffic, that it cannot be part of the Vine Trail.
o Figure 5.5, Bicycle Network, of the City’s General Plan includes a note that “The proposed Napa Valley Vine Trial will include Class 1, Class II and Class III segments.” As such, Church Street is designated to be a Proposed Class III Bicycle Route in the adopted General Plan. The absence of Church Street from the narrative text on page 5-27 in no way invalidates its future use as a Class III pathway. Further, the City finds that the Church Street Proposed Class III Bicycle Route implements Circulation Element policy CR6.C as it specifically would provide a connection to a local shopping center: “Develop a plan for all non-motorized vehicles, including bicycles, pedestrians, and scooters. To create a meaningful alternative to automobile usage for short trips, multi-use paths should connect home-to-work or home-to-local shopping locations. Link neighborhoods and commercial areas on a path system and encourage active modes of transportation.”
• Safeway states “even assuming that the City were a responsible agency in regard to the Vine Trail, the City still cannot legally select the Church Street alignment without the benefit of full CEQA review.” It further states that “[p]roof that the City is being asked to formally commit to the Church Street alignment is evidenced by the Coalition’s March 18, 2022 letter urging the City Council to adopt a ‘strong, specific resolution’ embracing it.”
o The City Council March 22, 2022 Agenda and Staff Report are express: the City is not “legally select[ing] the Church Street alignment.” At most it is considering a preferred alignment and directing staff to share that information with Napa County and the Napa Valley Vine Trail Coalition. The information does not, and could not, bind the County or the Coalition in any manner. As stated in the Staff Report, “[b]ecause the Vine Trail segment known as the St. Helena Vine Trail will also include a portion of trail north of Yountville through Pratt Street located in Napa County, the County will be taking the lead on environmental review of the construction and operation of this segment under [CEQA] seeking funding from the Action Transportation Program’s Recreation Trail Program funds, and considering any approval of this segment.” Further, Safeway’s reference to the Coalition’s March 18, 20221 letter to the Council does not, and could not change the City’s discussion/consideration item into a binding action. o In the event that the County prepares and adopts/certifies a CEQA document for a segment of the Vine Trail that requires any subsequent approvals from the City, the City will comply with all of CEQA’s requirements with regard to the actions of responsible agencies. In no manner does its discussion/consideration item of March 22, 2022 preclude the City from considering the entirety of whatever CEQA documents that the County prepares and adopts/certified for a segment of the Vine Trail. • Safeway states that ‘installing bollards on Church Street would violate State law. It notes that “[i]n a March 11, 2022 letter, the Coalition suggests adding retractable bollards on Church Street midway between Hunt Avenue and Church Street.

The letter states that the bollards would be in place during daytime hours wherein only residents of Church Street would have unrestricted access to that street. Such a proposal is in plain contravention of State law.”
o Safeway’s objections are not with the City. As Safeway agrees in its letter, the Staff Report already states that “bollards or other measures to close the street to through traffic is highly problematic” and that “such details would need to be discussed and determined during the next phases of design involving broad stakeholder groups.”
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 396 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Pamela Smithers <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 4:44 PM
To: Cindy Tzafopoulos
Subject: [External] public comment: reconsider Oak Ave for VT Dear Mayor and City Council members,
Thank you for your service to our community. You have a tough decision before you tonight regarding the Vine Trail route through town. I hope you will vote to continue the Vine Trail through St Helena as a Class I path. If Church Street isn't perfect, please take another look at Oak Ave as the route, which will benefit locals immensely. The Vine Trail is not just for tourists! Locals will use bikes for local travel if given safe routes.

Class I paths are guaranteed to make people feel safer on bikes, in fact its the safest type of bike path you can have on a street with vehicles. Many of our streets are already low vehicle volume but Oak Ave is not. This is just the place for Class I path like the Vine Trail.

The chart that shows the ATSC/PRC voting results for the various options has two options for Oak Ave - one starting at Mitchell, one starting at Spring. If you add those two together, Oak Ave had the most votes. Interesting!
Although the Vine Trail designers are bending over backward to find a viable alternative to Oak Avenue due to protests early on in the process, Oak Avenue was originally selected as the route of choice by Vine Trail (and by a previous ATSC) for a number of reasons:
 it doesn't stray too far from the main route
 it is a busy vehicle street which would benefit from a Class I path, making it safe for local bicyclists as a mode of transportation
 it connects schools
 it runs adjacent to businesses which would benefit from the exposure  it is fairly uncomplicated in terms of engineering, and  it is already designated as a bicycle route in our General Plan Please vote to continue the Vine Trail through St Helena as a Class I path.

We just have to have safer bicycle routes for the "interested but concerned" rider. Now is the time to take advantage of this opportunity.

Thank you for your service and good luck with your decision making tonight.

Pam Smithers
Former ATSC Chairperson
1819 Vallejo Street, SH

Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 397 of 489 ends

Page 398 of 489 ends

1 Cindy Tzafopoulos
From: Paul Pelosi <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 22, 2022 4:54 PM
To: Public Comment
Subject: [External] Public comment for 3/22 meeting on Vine Trail Dear Council Members,
As a resident of Chiles Avenue I strongly urge you to NOT approve the Church Street option for the Vine Trail path through St. Helena tonight.

There has been ZERO outreach in my neighborhood, nor any outreach on Edwards Street, by VTrail personnel to ask what us residents think and feel about the Church Street option.

As an avid cyclist, I am all for getting people on bicycles and out of cars. However, this Church Street option, aka Bicycle Boulevard, doesn't seem fair to the residents of Church Street in particular, but would also include those surrounding blocks close to Church.

Slow down on this decision, more research and outreach MUST be done. Have the VT send a clear detailed map to the residents on the east side of Main Street.

In addition, who will monitor these bollards and transponders 24/7 when they malfunction? Life for Church Street residents will be highly impacted should this option move forward and to say otherwise is not acknowledging reality.

Thank you,
Paul Pelosi
1110 Chiles Avenue
Sent from my iPhone
Agenda Item #12.1.

Page 399 of 489 ends

Page 400 of 489 ends

Report to the City Council
Regular City Council - 22 Mar 2022
Agenda Section: NEW BUSINESS
Subject: Consideration and recommended approval of:

1. Resolution approving a Professional Services
Agreement with Raftelis Financial Consultants to
provide services associated with a Water and
Wastewater Rate Study for a total not to exceed amount
of $146,310 and a budget increase to 561-43-00-21-45 in the amount of $73,155 utilizing water enterprise fund
balance and a budget increase to 571-43-00-21-45 in the amount of $73,155 utilizing wastewater enterprise fund
balance; and

2. Provide preliminary direction on rate study approach CEQA
Determination:

Not a CEQA project
Prepared By: Mandy Kellogg, Asst. Administrative Services Director Reviewed By: April Mitts, Administrative Services Director Approved By: James C. McCann, Interim City Manager

BACKGROUND
The City of St. Helena provides water and sewer services for approximately 2,600 residents and businesses both within and outside City limits. The City water and sewer rates are established by City Council.

The purpose of a water and wastewater rate study is to determine the level of funding required over the next five years to ensure that each utility is meeting financial obligations for ongoing operations and maintenance, debt service, and capital improvements while maintaining prudent reserves. Updating the water and wastewater rates to keep up with the rising costs of providing safe and high-quality drinking water and wastewater services is a key component of maintaining the financial viability of the utilities, including maintaining healthy fund balances/reserves for emergencies and applicable bond Agenda Item #13.1.

Page 401 of 489 ends

covenants, and debt coverage ratios for bond covenants, and strong credit ratings.

Updates to the rate study are also necessary to fund investments in infrastructure maintenance and improvements which are mandated or otherwise necessary for safe and efficient operation of the utilities.

California's Proposition 218 requires that rates be equitably apportioned and proportional to the cost of providing services. The water and wastewater rate study conducts a Costof-Service analysis, which evaluates the cost of providing water and wastewater and allocates those costs to rate structure components to ensure the proposed rates are aligned with the costs to provide service and that all customer classes are subject to the equitable cost recovery whether they are located inside or outside of City limits.

The City conducted a water and wastewater rate review in 2016 and the City Council adopted its current water and wastewater rates in 2017. The final rate increase approved in the current rate study was implemented in November 2021.

The current rate structure for water services includes a fixed monthly service charge based on meter size and a variable use charge. The fixed monthly charges account for approximately 40% of the revenues, whereas the variable use charge accounts for the remaining 60%. The structure utilizes seasonal rates rather than tiered rates that increase the use charge as customers use higher amounts of water. All customers pay the same usage rates per One Hundred Cubic Feet (HCF) for water use. Additionally, HCF rates vary between off-peak (November - April) and peak (May - October) seasons. The peak rate is higher than the off-peak rate to reflect additional costs of water operations during the peak period.

The current water rate structure includes a drought-period surcharge. When the City implements Phase 1 drought restrictions, or higher, the drought rates go into effect.

Drought rates are only applied to use charges and do not impact the base fees.

The current rate structure for wastewater services include a fixed monthly service charge based on meter size and a variable sewer commodity charge that bases rates on typical flow and characteristics of each customer type. Residential, Multi-family dwellings, and Mobile Home parks' sewer commodity fee is determined by average winter water use to exclude water that does not go the wastewater treatment plant (applied outdoors or otherwise does not enter the sewer collection system). Nonresidential customers' sewer commodity is determined by actual water use per billing period.

DISCUSSION
On Friday, December 3, 2021, the City released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for professional services to complete an updated Water and Wastewater Rate study. The RFP closed on Friday, January 21, 2022. The City received a total of eight proposals and completed the review and selection process as follows:

Agenda Item #13.1.

Page 402 of 489 ends

1. A review committee consisting of the two Water Ad Hoc Council members, two City employees, and one member of the public reviewed all proposals received, the initial review was completed individually.

2. On February 2, 2022, the review committee met to discuss each proposal and provided direction to move forward with interviewing the top three firms.

3. Interviews took place on Friday, February 11, 2022 and on Monday, February 14, 2022.

4. On Thursday, February 17, 2022, the review committee met with the City attorney and Proposition (Prop) 218 attorney to further review and discuss the qualifications of the three top firms.

5. On Thursday, February 24, 2022, a follow-up meeting of the review committee was held to further discuss and solidify the recommended rate consultant.

6. On Monday, February 28, 2022, Staff worked with the recommended rate consultant for the final contract for presentation to City Council for award of contract.

Based on the proposal, consultant’s relevant experience, capacity for public engagement, references and interview, staff has selected Raftelis. Raftelis is one of the largest firms in California and the country specializing in financial, rate, and management consulting for water, wastewater, and stormwater utilities. Raftelis has assisted numerous agencies in California implementing conservation-based rate structures, with special consideration for climate variation, cyclical drought conditions, and long-term passive conservation.

The scope of work for this project includes the following tasks:
• Task 1: Project Initiation, Management, and Data Collection. Public input and engagement will be sought at this initial stage, as well as throughout the rate study process during public outreach and workshops identified in the project tasks.
• Task 2: Financial Plan Development for Water and Wastewater Services - This will include creation of a model to examine the utilities' 10-year financial plan to determine additional revenue required to ensure the financial integrity of the City's water and wastewater enterprise funds.
• Task 3: Cost-of-Service Analysis - This analysis will determine updated cost allocations to the City's utility systems to ensure costs are fairly recovered across user classes.
• Task 4: Rate Survey - This survey will provide a comparative rate analysis of comparable communities.
• Task 5: Rate Design - Rate models will be developed with flexibility to compare the current rate structures with proposed alternatives. • Task 6: Capital Renewal & Replacement (R&R) Considerations and Scenarios - Alternative capital financing strategies will be developed to allow the City best meet its fiscal and public policy objectives.
• Task 7: Rate Study Report - This report will document the methodology used to calculate the City's water rates and demonstrate conformance with cost-ofAgenda Item #13.1.

Page 403 of 489 ends

service principles, developed with the legal requirements of Proposition 218, and guidance from the City's legal counsel.
• Task 8: Customer Impacts and Sensitivity Analysis - The customer impact analysis will include data that shows projected rate impacts by customer class at various levels of usage.
• Task 9: City Council Workshops - This task will include three Rate Workshops. • Task 10: Proposition 218 Noticing and Public Hearing
• Task 11: Community Engagement and Stakeholder Information Sessions - This task will include four community meetings conducted in an Open House format and one virtual community meeting.

The projected timeline for this project is outlined as follows:

In addition to the approval of the agreement with Raftelis and allocation of funds for the study, staff is seeking preliminary Council direction on certain aspects of the rate study approach. While this is not an exhaustive list, initial elements identified tonight for consideration include the following:
• Interest in development of a tiered water rate structure. • Interest in exploring different rate structures based on location, including (a) rate surcharges for customers served in locations that require pumping to benefit a defined area, (b) sourced-based rate tiers based on the differences in cost between the three water sources providing water to the system, (c) peakingfactor rate tiers based on the differences in costs generated by peak-demand factors, (d) distance-based rates related to distance from key service points, such Agenda Item #13.1.

Page 404 of 489 ends

as the water treatment plant or the corporation yard, (e) location-based rates that distinguish between customers located inside the city limits and those located outside the city limits if the cost of recovery analysis supports this structure. • Interest in having the consultants initial task amended to include a preliminary report regarding different rate structures of interest to the City Council, and attendance at one City Council meeting to discuss the recommendations. • Interest in the formation of a Water and Wastewater Advisory Committee to provide feedback on the draft rate study prior to a decision by the City Council - and direction as to whether the Advisory Committee meetings should be included in the three meetings identified in Task 9 or should be part of a separate, additional task.

Additionally, it is important to note the following:
• The list above is not exhaustive and, as the rate study progresses, additional decision points will be brought to City Council for consideration. • Any recommended rate study approaches will be vetted through the rate consultant as well as the City's attorney and Prop 218 attorney to verify compliance with the requirements of Prop 218.
• There may be additional costs incurred due to changes to the scope of work as a result of City Council direction or additions made during the progression of the rate study.

FISCAL IMPACT
The total fiscal impact is $146,310.00, which will utilize $73,155 from Fund 561 - Water Enterprise and $73,155 from Fund 571 - Wastewater Enterprise fund balances. The updated estimated Water fund balance will be 37% and the estimated Wastewater fund balance will be 25%.

RECOMMENDED ACTION
Adopt the attached resolution and provide preliminary Council direction on certain aspects of the rate study approach.

ATTACHMENTS
Resolution Raftelis PSA Water and Wastewater Rate Study Attachment 1 - PSA Raftelis Water and Wastewater Rate Study Exhibit A - Raftelis - Proposal
Agenda Item #13.1.

Page 405 of 489 ends

CITY OF ST. HELENA
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-__
Resolution approving a Professional Services Agreement with Raftelis Financial Consultants to provide services associated with a Water and Wastewater Rate Study for a total not to exceed amount of $146,310.00 and a budget increase to 561-43-00-21-45 in the amount of $73,155 utilizing water enterprise fund balance and a budget increase to 571-43-00-21-45 in the amount of $73,155 utilizing wastewater enterprise fund balance.

RECITALS
A. The City of St. Helena supplies water and sewer services for approximately 2,600 residents and businesses both within and outside City limits. The City water and sewer rates are established by City Council; and
B. The purpose of a water and wastewater rate study is to determine the level of funding required over the next five years to ensure that each utility is meeting financial obligations for ongoing operations and maintenance, debt service, and capital improvements while maintaining prudent reserves; and
C. Updating the water and wastewater rates to keep up with the rising costs of providing safe and high-quality drinking water and wastewater services is a key component of maintaining the financial viability of the utilities, including maintaining healthy fund balances/reserves for emergencies and applicable bond covenants, and debt coverage ratios for bond covenants, and strong credit ratings; and D. Updates to the rate study are also necessary to fund investments in infrastructure maintenance and improvements which are mandated or otherwise necessary for safe and efficient operation of the utilities; and
E. The City conducted its last water and wastewater rate study in 2016 and the final rate increase approved in the current rate study was implemented in November 2021; and
F. In December 2021, the City released a Request for Proposals (RFP) for professional services to complete an updated Water and Wastewater Rate study; and G. The City received a total of eight proposals, which were reviewed by a selection committee consisting of the two Water Ad Hoc Council members, two City employees, and one member of the public; and
Agenda Item #13.1.

Page 406 of 489 ends

H. Based on the proposal, consultant’s relevant experience, capacity for public engagement, references and interview, staff has selected Raftelis Financial Consultants.

RESOLUTION
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of St. Helena resolves as follows:

1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement with Raftelis Financial Consultants for services associated with a Water and Wastewater Rate Study for a total not to exceed amount of $146,310.00; and

2. Authorize a Water Fund budget increase of $73,155 to 561-43-00-21-45; and

3. Authorize use of Water Operations Fund balance of $73,155; and

4. Authorize a Wastewater Fund budget increase of $73,155 to 571-43-00-21-45; and

5. Authorize use of Wastewater Fund Balance in the amount of $73,155 Approved at a Regular Meeting of the St. Helena City Council on March 22, 2022, by the following vote:

Mayor Ellsworth:

Vice Mayor Dohring:

Councilmember Chouteau:

Councilmember Hall:

Councilmember Hardy:

APPROVED: ATTEST:
________________________ ________________________
Geoff Ellsworth, Mayor Cindy Tzafopoulos, City Clerk
Agenda Item #13.1.

Page 407 of 489 ends

Page 1 of 12 ends

Raftelis Financial Consultants March 22, 2022

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into on March 22, 2022 by and between the City of St. Helena, located in the County of Napa, State of California (City), and Raftelis Financial Consultants (Consultant).

RECITALS:

A. City desires to employ Consultant to furnish professional services in connection with the project described as Water and Wastewater Rate Study.

B. Consultant has represented that Consultant has the necessary expertise, experience, and qualifications to perform the required duties.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual premises, covenants, and conditions herein contained, the parties agree as follows:

SECTION 1 – BASIC SERVICES
Consultant agrees to perform the services set forth in Exhibit A, “Scope of Services” and made part of this Agreement.

SECTION 2 – ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Consultant shall not be compensated for any services rendered in connection with its performance of this Agreement that are in addition to or outside of those set forth in this Agreement or Exhibit A, “Scope of Services” (the “Services”), unless such additional Services and compensation are authorized in advance and in writing by the City Council or City Manager of the City.

SECTION 3 – TIME FOR COMPLETION
The time for completion of Services shall be as identified in Exhibit A, “Scope of Services”. The parties expressly agree that time is of the essence in the performance of this Agreement.

SECTION 4 – COMPENSATION AND METHOD OF PAYMENT
A. Subject to any limitations set forth in this Agreement, City agrees to pay consultant the amount specified in Exhibit A, “Compensation” attached hereto and made a part hereof. Total compensation shall not exceed $146,310.00 unless additional compensation is approved in accordance with Section 2.

B. Consultant shall furnish to City an original invoice for all work performed and expenses incurred during the preceding month. The invoice shall detail charges by the following categories if applicable: labor (by sub-category), travel, materials, equipment, supplies, subconsultant contracts, and miscellaneous expenses. Each original invoice furnished shall include the expenses incurred during the preceding month, the cumulative Agreement amount, Agenda Item #13.1.

Page 408 of 489 ends

Page 2 of 12 ends

Raftelis Financial Consultants March 22, 2022
and the amount remaining on the Agreement. City shall independently review each invoice submitted to determine whether the work performed and expenses incurred are in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. If no charges or expenses are disputed, the invoice shall be approved, and City will use its best efforts to cause Consultant to be paid within 30 days of receipt of invoice. If the City disputes any charges or expenses, the City will return the original invoice to Consultant for correction and resubmission. If the City reasonably determines, in its sole judgment, that the invoiced charges and expenses exceed the value of the Services performed to date and that it is probable that the Agreement will not be completed satisfactorily within the contract price, City may retain all or a portion of the invoiced charges and expenses.

Within thirty (30) days of satisfactory completion of the project, City shall pay the retained amount, if any, to Consultant.

C. Payment to the Consultant for work performed pursuant to this Agreement shall not be deemed to waive any defects in work performed by Consultant.

SECTION 5 – STANDARD OF PERFORMANCE
A. Consultant represents and warrants that it has the qualifications, experience and facilities necessary to properly perform the Services required under this Agreement in a thorough, competent and professional manner. Consultant shall at all times faithfully, competently and to the best of its ability, experience and talent, perform all Services described herein. In meeting its obligations under this Agreement, Consultant shall employ, at a minimum, generally accepted standards and practices utilized by persons in the same or similar geographical area engaged and at the same time in providing Services similar to those required of Consultant under this Agreement.

B. In order to induce City to enter into this Agreement, Consultant represents that it is duly organized, existing and in good standing under applicable state law; Consultant is licensed to perform all aspects of the Services; Consultant will employ only persons and Subconsultants with all required licenses and certifications; that Consultant is duly qualified to conduct business in the State; that Consultant has duly authorized the execution, delivery and performance of this Agreement and the Services to be performed herein; and that the Agreement does not violate or create a default under any instrument, agreement, order or decree binding on Consultant.

SECTION 6 – INSPECTION AND FINAL ACCEPTANCE
City may inspect and accept or reject any of Consultant’s work under this Agreement, either during performance or when completed. City shall reject or finally accept Consultant’s work within sixty (60) days after submitted to City, unless the parties mutually agree to extend such deadline. City shall reject work by a timely written explanation, otherwise Consultant’s work shall be deemed to have been accepted. City’s acceptance shall be conclusive as to such work except with respect to latent defects and fraud. Acceptance of any of Consultant’s work by City shall not constitute a waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement including, but not limited to, the sections pertaining to indemnification and insurance.

Agenda Item #13.1.

Page 409 of 489 ends

St. Helena City CouncilMarch 22, 2022

St. Helena City Council
March 22, 2022