[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:35] City Clerk, are you ready to start?
[0:37] meeting. I'm ready if you are mayor. I think we're already in place so we will call to order
[0:42] our September 15th meeting in the afternoon of the Napa City Council but have real call, please.
[0:49] Council members, painter, here, Leros, here, Narvayas, here, Vice Mayor Dina Tolley, here,
[0:55] Mayor Sitzley, here. Next we have Pledge of Allegiance. I'm going to ask our council member
[1:00] Bernie Nerviahs to lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. He organized a very, very
[1:06] quality memorial in solemn respect for our 9-11 event last Friday. So thank you, Bernie,
[1:11] for doing that. And please lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance. Please join my pledge. I pledge
[1:17] to the agents, to the flag,
[1:22] to which the hands, the lion, the lion, and the other
[1:36] City Clerk, are there any changes to the agenda or supplemented reports?
[1:40] There are no changes to the agenda mayor.
[1:42] We do have supplemental reports for Item 5.
[1:45] We have emails received from Manel and Chew, Jim McNamara, and Tempe Wrightart.
[1:52] For Item 7A, we have a PowerPoint presentation from staff and an email from Omar Lopez from
[1:58] generation housing and for item eight we have a presentation from staff.
[2:03] Thank you and you may have noticed the chair set up in the four year we're not having live music tonight
[2:08] but we are having a public hearing at the evening session at six thirty so that's on the five way
[2:15] intersection topic and so if you're here for the five way that is your little early but you're welcome to stay for the afternoon session
[2:23] but that comes on at 6.30.
[2:28] So, special presentations.
[2:30] We always love pet of the month.
[2:32] We have Lewis Embers with the NEPA County Animal Shelter here with Sophie.
[2:38] Hello, Sophie.
[2:41] Hi, everybody.
[2:43] My name is Luis,
[2:44] and I am here with Sophie.
[2:46] Sophie is a six-year-old,
[2:48] people makes that is available for adoption
[2:49] at the NEPA County Animal Shelter.
[2:53] Honestly, I'm very, very much speechless.
[2:55] Sophie is such an amazing dog for a dog that's been at the animal shelter for as long
[3:00] as she has.
[3:01] She has such a great temperament, such a great attitude.
[3:05] In a shelter environment, it's really difficult to kind of see the best of the dogs while
[3:09] they're there because a lot of the times they're in their kennel for a really long time.
[3:13] It's really loud.
[3:14] It's really difficult for them to sleep, but then to get her out of the shelter environment
[3:18] and then behaved the way that she's behaving here is really, really impressive, she sees another dog.
[3:28] She has been around other dogs in play group at the shelter.
[3:32] She does like to swim as we notice during the hot summer days that we kind of experience, we put some kiddie pulls out.
[3:38] She's like, man, forget those dogs. I'd rather go into the pool, hang out.
[3:42] She's been to adoption events where we've seen her interact with children and she did really, really well.
[3:47] Overall, just the 10 out of 10 dog for me, if I was to adopt her, it would be the kind of
[3:52] dog that I'm looking for a little bit on the older side. She's been there, done that, has
[3:57] great social skills with people, with dogs, not too sure about cats, but we'll, we'll find out the
[4:02] hard way. And as far as just her nature, I could assume that if she was to get into a home
[4:09] saying she might be a couch potato, depending on on how she behaves there. But I've been proven wrong,
[4:16] some dogs get into a home and they get really happy and then they get that second wind
[4:20] and then they're not as catch-by-terry as I tell people.
[4:24] But yeah, that's Sophie.
[4:25] Hi, Sophie.
[4:27] Tiffany, this might be the one.
[4:31] I mean, we got to start getting on the scorecard here for adoptions.
[4:36] I don't know that we've adopted one just yet, but we're going to keep trying.
[4:40] Thank you Louise. Thanks Sophie.
[4:51] I don't forget our agenda tonight is a
[4:55] proclamation for our suicide prevention month recognition. I think.
[5:00] We have with us Marcella and from mentis in the NAPA Center for Mental Health Services.
[5:09] Council, if you will bring out your proclamations.
[5:12] City of NAPA proclamations, suicide prevention month, September 26.
[5:18] Whereas the NAPA County suicide prevention council, SBC, is a public and private collaborative
[5:23] of people and organizations for dedicated to reducing stigma around suicide, supporting those
[5:29] who have lost loved ones to suicide, identifying and advocating for resources and promoting
[5:35] a safe, connected and resilient community to reduce the risk of suicide and.
[5:40] We're as in the last nine years, NCSPC has worked tirelessly to reach their vision of
[5:46] a suicide-free community through education and training, stigma reduction, linkage to services
[5:52] and provision of resources to strengthen protective factors and support those impacted by
[5:57] Suicide Hand.
[5:59] We're as from 2021 to 2024, in Epi County and across California, the age group with the most
[6:05] death by Suicide was 25 to 44 years in the highest Suicide Rate was among those 85 years
[6:13] in the older.
[6:13] And?
[6:14] Whereas from 2021 to 2024, the suicide rate in California was 10.7 deaths per 100,000 population,
[6:23] and Napa County's was 10.2 deaths per 100,000 population, placing Napa County just
[6:28] below the state average.
[6:30] Whereas in partnership with Mintis and Napa County Health and Human Services, the NCSPC,
[6:36] organized and hosted its second annual suicide prevention conference, hope beyond darkness,
[6:41] United for Suicide Prevention and whereas every city of Napa resident can be an ally by
[6:47] knowing the signs of Suicide finding the words to communicate with someone they are concerned
[6:52] about and reaching out to local resources for help.
[6:57] Now, therefore, be it resolved that I Scott Sedgley may have the city of Napa along with an
[7:14] Come, please come forward and to the mic with your pet of the month.
[7:23] If you'd like to say anything, you're welcome to say a few words and then I'll give you the proclamation.
[7:29] Hi guys, my name is Yoni. I am the community programs coordinator for our teens connect, which is fighting against mental health and suicide prevention.
[7:42] We're very thankful for you guys to be doing this today.
[7:46] It's quite exciting.
[7:47] I wasn't aware that it was happening until right now,
[7:50] but I appreciate and thank you guys so much
[7:53] for just taking it into consideration
[7:55] and recognizing the true need that we have out here
[7:58] for Suicide Prevention and Awareness.
[8:00] So thank you so much.
[8:02] Thank you Steve right there.
[8:04] Emily, Jessica,
[8:14] can I go there, Sophie?
[8:15] Yes, I think it's just a few days ago.
[8:19] Okay,
[8:26] thank you.
[8:45] Next item for C Hispanic Heritage Month, proclaim September 15 to October 15, 206 as Hispanic Heritage Month.
[8:56] Council members?
[8:57] Whereas, in 1968, President Lyndon B. Johnson first recognized Hispanic Heritage.
[9:03] Each successive United States President has continued this tradition in declaring September 15 through October 15 to be National Hispanic Heritage Month.
[9:11] The theme for this year is Pioneers of Change, shaping the future together.
[9:17] Whereas the city of Napa has a long history of welcoming immigrants, and it's only
[9:21] to a growing multi-ethnic and multi-cultural Hispanic and Latino populations, including
[9:27] residents originate from Mexico, the Caribbean, Central and South Southern America, and the
[9:33] city of Napa is Hispanic and Latino communities comprise approximately 41% of the city's
[9:39] total population, and more than half of all public school students in the city.
[9:44] And, whereas members of this Hispanic and Latino community have made countless contributions
[9:49] to the United States economy and culture, serving in all branches of the Armed Forces
[9:53] as dedicated public servants and as leaders in education, health care, business, and entrepreneurship,
[9:59] and other.
[10:01] We're as the city of Napa, which thrives on the diversity and ingenuity of all the people. Also depends on the continued support and success of our diverse Hispanic and Latino populations.
[10:13] We will continue to be enriched by the transcultural contributions of our Hispanic and Latino friends, family and neighbors, and we will continue to make efforts to create an inclusive environment where community members can thrive.
[10:27] Now, therefore, we resolved that I
[10:29] Scott Sedgley mayor of the city of Napa
[10:31] along with the city council in deep appreciation
[10:34] to the diverse Latinx population
[10:37] of the city of Napa hereby proclaim
[10:39] September 15th through October 15th
[10:42] to be Hispanic Heritage Month
[10:44] in the city of Napa dated September 15th, 2026 outstanding.
[10:52] And I believe we have with us Kathy Gillis,
[10:54] board president and Maria Gomez here with us to accept.
[11:04] We feel high.
[11:05] I'm Kathy Gillis, president of the Napa County Hispanic network.
[11:08] I've been here before.
[11:09] It seems like just days ago, but here we are again, celebrating this awesome month.
[11:14] And the network, of course, is the oldest Latino organization here in Napa, and we are
[11:19] so grateful to be in a community that welcomes diversity of all of the works that we try
[11:25] support primarily scholarships. And so we thank you so much for letting us take the
[11:30] proclamation. This is my vice president.
[11:34] Just to say thank you Maria Gomez and the vice president of the Napa County Hispanic
[11:38] Network. And I just want to thank you once again for continuing the tradition of acknowledging
[11:45] valuing and respecting the contributions of Hispanics in the city of Napa. Thank you so
[11:49] much.
[11:50] Thank you. Stay right there.
[13:02] All right, this time we are at general public comment. This time
[13:07] during the public comment portion of the meeting, the public is invited to address the city
[13:11] council on any item within the subject matter jurisdiction of the council. That is not on the
[13:16] agenda. Please focus your comments on either past actions taken by the council or propose future items
[13:24] taken by the council. Whoever, if the subject of the public comment is not on the agenda state
[13:29] strictly limits the council's ability to respond at this meeting.
[13:34] And so we have the additional public comment portal in our city clerk will explain that.
[13:40] Thank you, Mayor.
[13:41] So for each, we are offering public comment via Zoom as well.
[13:45] And for each section of the agenda, one public comment is called members of the public who
[13:48] was to speak on the item should use Zoom's raise your hand button to indicate that you would
[13:53] like to speak for those who have joined the meeting by calling into the teleconference line.
[13:57] They would push star 9 to indicate that they would wish to speak when the item of interest comes up.
[14:03] We will be calling each speaker and allowing them to turn on their microphone to comment.
[14:07] When prompted to speak, you may be asked to unmute.
[14:10] If you are on the phone, that action is star 6.
[14:14] Time, as Mayor said, time is limited to 3 minutes as indicated on the timer.
[14:17] We will call on members of the public participating in person first followed by remote participation.
[14:24] And I do have in the audience, I have four cards that have been received for general public
[14:31] comments.
[14:32] Gail Allen, Maureen Trip, Liliana Karesh, and Madeline Chew.
[14:38] All right.
[14:38] So please come up, no particular order if you heard your name.
[14:50] Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor, and members of the Council.
[14:53] I'm speaking today on behalf of a growing coalition of Napa residents and business leaders
[14:58] at a defining
[15:00] A moment for our riverfront. While the oxbow bypass and southern wetlands delivered crucial flood protection and public space, increment 3 from the hat building down to the Amola Bridge is our final critical juncture.
[15:15] We have a rare once in a generation opportunity to transform this gateway into a vibrant public park.
[15:23] establish a continuous trail system and drive smart economic growth at the entryway to our city.
[15:30] Our community's vision for the river has evolved.
[15:32] We remain grateful to friends of the Napa River for their commitment to a living river ecosystem.
[15:38] At the same time, efforts like the Napa River Line Project reflect what residents care about most.
[15:44] seamless waterfront access, restored habitats and an active bike in pedestrian trail, a continuous trail from the Amola Bridge to the Silverado Trail.
[15:55] However, there are serious challenges ahead.
[15:58] Modern flood engineering proves that we don't have to choose between safety and community value.
[16:04] Flood protection can and must enhance recreational access without compromising our local businesses or the historic Abajo and Riverside neighborhoods.
[16:15] Right now increment three is in the active design phase with construction slated for 2028.
[16:22] The Army Corps's 25-year-old baseline design is starkly outdated and if built as originally drafted,
[16:29] We'll leave a permanent, visual, and physical barrier along our waterfront.
[16:36] To address these critical design changes, these critical design choices, the ad hoc committee
[16:42] for the NAPA County Flood Control District Board is hosting a community meeting on October
[16:47] 1.
[16:48] From 6 to 7 PM at the NAPA Valley Yacht Club.
[16:51] We urge Council and the public to participate as we work together to protect future generations
[16:56] and build the world-class waterfront NAPA deserves.
[16:59] Thank you.
[17:00] Thank you, Marie.
[17:16] Good afternoon.
[17:17] Mayor Sedgley, Navacity Council members and City staff.
[17:20] My name is Madeline Chu.
[17:21] I'm a rising sophomore at the University of Chicago, a graduate of an attorney high school,
[17:25] and most importantly, the former secretary of the Student Lead Environmental Advocacy
[17:30] Organization, NAPA Schools for Climate Action.
[17:33] Since 2024, my team and I have been working with Congressman Mike Thompson's office on
[17:37] House Concurrent Resolution 46, the Congressional Climate Restoration Resolution.
[17:42] First, introduce in 2024 and now reintroduced into the current session of Congress.
[17:47] This resolution calls for the removal of heat-trapping greenhouse gases, specifically
[17:51] carbon dioxide, to pre-industrial levels, which are below 300 parts per million by 2050.
[17:59] According to data from NASA, anthropogenic pollution has caused the concentration of carbon
[18:04] dioxide in our atmosphere to rise above 425 parts per million, while above the safe pre-industrial
[18:10] levels.
[18:10] Global Mean Temperatures have risen by over 1.5 degrees Celsius, surpassing the best case
[18:17] goals set by the Paris Agreement.
[18:19] These changes have resulted in increased frequency of natural disasters impacting communities
[18:24] worldwide, including our very own.
[18:26] Many of Earth's tipping points, including the melting of Arctic sea ice and the collapsing
[18:31] of the Atlantic, Meridian, all overturning circulation are being passed as we speak, and
[18:36] Without a doubt, we'll have huge cascading negative effects on our climate and ecosystems for
[18:41] centuries to come.
[18:43] Congressman Thompson's resolution, usher's in a new paradigm of climate action.
[18:47] It introduces a highly essential complement to not the greenhouse gas reduction paradigm
[18:52] set forth in Paris agreement.
[18:55] One that not only prevents the worst case scenario, but also revitalizes our communities
[19:00] and economy in the long term.
[19:02] We must embrace the dual solutions of both restoring the pre-industrial chemistry of our atmosphere while pursuing rapid deep emissions reductions.
[19:12] The task of climate restoration is not a small one, but the answers are well within our reach.
[19:17] To effectively restore our climate, we must remove 1,000 gigatons of legacy carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, or net 50 gigatons per year, from 2030 to 2050.
[19:27] This means that in addition to stopping our current emissions or removing those during via draw-down,
[19:33] we have an extra 50 gigatons a year of carbon that we've previously emitted that we're still left to deal with.
[19:39] The good news is that nature has removed 10 times this amount of carbon that we need to remove now in the past 1 million years.
[19:48] We can replicate and scale these processes to achieve the level of climate restoration that will be necessary to preserve our planet and for my and future generations.
[19:57] As a young person working on this resolution
[20:26] Good
[20:40] afternoon everyone. I'm an incoming, my name is
[20:43] I'm an incoming sophomore at Stanford University in majoring in Earth systems.
[20:49] I'm also a recent graduate of Napa High and the former president of a youth-led environmental activist organization called Napa Schools for Climate Action.
[20:59] During my time with the org, I worked to start a project called Climate Restoration, which focuses on uplifting local youth to draft climate policy aimed at tackling the environmental crisis.
[21:09] As my friend Maddie explained earlier, the main goal of climate restoration is to complement
[21:15] the current Paris Agreement paradigm that solely focuses on greenhouse gas reduction.
[21:20] With this topic, our team worked tirelessly back in 2024 to host workshops gathered
[21:27] student support and put together clauses for resolutions catered to the NBUSD.
[21:32] As a result of this effort, our resolution was passed in April of 2024.
[21:36] That following summer, our team used the fact that many of our student members were involved
[21:41] with the Office of Congress in Mike Thompson as a pathway to pitching him the idea of transforming
[21:46] the school district resolution into a federal level piece of policy. After him and his staff accepted
[21:53] our idea, we worked with his legislative analyst in Washington DC to transform the language into
[21:58] clauses that would be catered toward the entire nation. From that effort, Thompson first introduced
[22:04] the resolution into Congress in November of 2024, and once again into the new Congressional
[22:09] session in July of 2025.
[22:11] As House Concurrent Resolution 46 titled, expressing the sense of Congress that the U.S. is committed
[22:17] to ensuring a safe and healthy climate for future generations, and that's to restoring
[22:21] the climate.
[22:22] Needless to say, working on this huge project has been one of the most insightful and empowering
[22:26] experiences, but the work does not stop now.
[22:29] Since July last year, our team worked hard to gain endorsements from jurisdictions and community organizations across California with the goal of getting this resolution into the committee stage.
[22:39] Today, after meetings with Climate Action Manager, Deborah Elliott and City Council Member Beth
[22:45] Painter, our team is here to request the City of Napa to agendaise an endorsement in support
[22:49] of House Concurrent Resolution 46. We urge you to join the organizations, which include
[22:55] Napa Valley Vittner's Rotary Club Napa, Napa RCD, to Hamma County RCD, Ventus, Napa Valley
[23:02] Community Foundation, California Association of RCDs, and also jurisdictions which include
[23:08] of Napa County Board of Education, American City Council, and the Napa County Board of
[23:13] Supervisors in endorsing House Concurrent Resolution, 46 through a resolution in support.
[23:20] As a government officials, you, as government officials, you have the power to embody urgent
[23:25] decision-making in support of not only the environment but the safety of our futures.
[23:30] And we hope you exercise that power today.
[23:32] Thank you.
[23:33] Thank you.
[23:36] And we can address that when we finish public comment.
[23:38] Dale?
[24:02] My concerns is the Measure J project for the community and I was at your meeting at, I
[24:12] got to call it Ridgeview and Harvest.
[24:15] Anyway, I understand that the classrooms you wish to remove, but as some of the people
[24:23] were there, they were thinking of using them and I made a list of what things I had thought
[24:30] and somebody else was like a sewing club room where you teach kids how to sew, a knitting
[24:37] club, a study hall, place for you can have help with homework, a dance studio, teach different
[24:44] ages, all of these dances, place to hold dances for teens, maybe in the gym or something,
[24:52] might even be able to use it for the prom, a game room, a bridge room, place for people to meet
[24:59] or
[25:00] Organize events, daycare, preschool, shops for boys and girls to learn how to take care of a car, build items of wood or a metal, a safe place to hang out, playing games after school, a movie night on the field, give free popcorn, charge to $1.50 for hot dog and drink, reunions, family reunions, parties, like anniversary birth and other type of parties, organizations can use a room to hold a conference.
[25:30] Summer Camp for all ages, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, Dancer's Idol Place for kids after
[25:38] they learned at music classes, and then, you know, be able to play all sports for after
[25:45] school, indoor pool, maybe a small library extension, adult education, we need more classes
[25:52] for that, for the adults, a skate park, a bike area, I understand the measure was just
[25:59] community and then you through in wanting to share 2.65 acres of property, which I feel a
[26:09] conflict with the community effort of being a community place for all ages to be safe and there
[26:16] should be a clause in your government that states you cannot sell the property in the future
[26:21] for housing, at all it stays as a community for the taxpayers over the years who paved into it.
[26:29] Maybe, anyway, the housing in the community, if it's too close, I'm not sure how
[26:36] affects the kids that come, or the adults, and the traffic, because we already know
[26:41] when school was in session, it was an I live in that neighborhood, and I watched the kids
[26:45] walk.
[26:46] They probably went to Greenmails, and I'd never initiated by the school, got rivet, but that was
[26:52] my concern was the traffic, and we know the boys and girls' club is not a community center,
[26:58] so they're too small to accommodate what you could be able to deal with the classrooms, the
[27:03] sport areas, the track, yes, I'm done. And I would have used the track, then it was done.
[27:10] But if you ever considering what to do, go to Benisha. My daughter said they have a great
[27:16] community center and they use two school sites. And it's strictly for the community. They don't
[27:21] have any housing in there, and they have a community preschool, daycare, me on my me, anyway.
[27:30] Thank you for your time, and I hope there is no housing.
[27:34] You could always put it behind the buildings on the old cinema road that you're tearing
[27:37] down now.
[27:38] Thank you.
[27:48] Good afternoon, Jim Hinton, Canada for a Napa City Council District 3, 45 Spring Street,
[27:56] Napa.
[27:58] My opponent, Maryleros, voted for this campaign side ordinance that was passed back
[28:06] around in 2019 or so with Scott and Jill and Doris and Liz. And in the last two weeks,
[28:20] She's already violated her own code twice, Mary.
[28:24] You wrote the code that says you cannot have more than 20 square feet
[28:28] of signage on a commercial property.
[28:31] And on the corner of first street, and so on a trail,
[28:35] you put up two 16 foot signs, which is 32 square feet,
[28:38] 12 more than your law that you wrote aloud.
[28:41] And so the planning department and the code enforcement,
[28:44] they have to get involved, they have to go look at it,
[28:47] They have to verify it, and they have to contact you, and do all this stuff.
[28:51] Then you put a sign on First and War as on public infrastructure, which again is violating
[28:57] the code that you passed.
[29:02] Now there's another complaint because you put more signs where you were told to take them down
[29:08] at First and Sovarana Trail.
[29:09] You put these oval signs, which I guess we're going to have to have somebody figure out the
[29:16] adamant that you want to go from 16 feet to over 20 feet and now we got the planning department,
[29:23] the city attorney is involved and because you're not following your own ordinance, Mary,
[29:29] you're using up city resources and they all have much more important things to do than to
[29:34] please you over your own sign ordinance. So could you please take another look at your ordinance,
[29:40] you're an attorney, you should be able to understand it, read it all the way through and move
[29:45] forward for the rest of the campaign. Can you please try harder not to violate the code
[29:50] and waste our city's resources? I haven't violated any code yet. My science nobody's
[29:56] complained about one of them being out of place yet. Well you did compl-
[30:00] We're talking about one but you are wrong and it's still there. But please moving forward, let's just try to be respectful and not just paint the whole town with your sign when you wrote an ordinance. Just follow your own rules. Don't be like Gavin Newsom, rules for the not for me. Okay, play by the rules you wrote, please.
[30:24] City Clerk, any hands out there in the Zoom world?
[30:28] We have no hands, raisins, you, Mayor.
[30:30] Anyone in the audience, final public general public comment?
[30:35] The two items that I wanted to talk to on Matty, I guess, Matt Alene, and Loretta.
[30:43] I wouldn't share about that, did I catch it, right?
[30:46] But I know that Beth has had might have something to say, and I'm sure that Council will,
[30:51] We have a policy actually on how we look at and endorse certain resolutions or proclamations
[30:57] or other things, but Council Member Panner.
[31:02] Yes, it's appropriate now, Mayor.
[31:04] I'd be happy to first of all thank both, Madeleine and Lilliana for coming and speaking,
[31:09] so eloquently to us.
[31:11] I do have a copy of the resolution that they are referring to.
[31:17] I did meet with them and read it and it's very compelling and I would like to ask that this
[31:24] Council, if it's appropriate at this time, if majority of us are willing to move ahead
[31:29] to support the resolution that was requested, we could put it on a future agenda item.
[31:34] Yeah, I think that's the action that we need to take is that there's a consensus to ask staff
[31:38] to look at it and make sure that fits with our approval and our ordinance and then we can
[31:43] certainly move it forward.
[31:45] Would you like to put me with that?
[31:47] Looks like we have five of us, so thank you very much, and I'll provide staff the information
[31:52] that I have.
[31:52] Yeah, and we can get that done on a future agenda.
[31:54] Thank you so much.
[31:55] Thanks again for being here.
[31:55] Thank you for your hard work and claim it, because that is one of our focus areas as a council
[31:59] is climate.
[32:01] So, thank you for the work you do out there.
[32:03] And then on the harvest comment too, yeah, that's an in progress, you know, there's more
[32:09] meetings to come.
[32:10] So, a lot of people have a lot of ideas of what could be done out there.
[32:12] And we, as a council in a parks and recreation, are going to do the best we can to get everybody's
[32:20] needs met out there, but it might not be every need and every person, but we're going
[32:24] to do our best with the budget we have.
[32:26] So thank you, public comment.
[32:28] Still nothing on hands, so we're going to move along.
[32:33] We have our consent calendar next, consent calendar items are considered routine and maybe
[32:38] if approved by a single vote of the council, however, if member of the public or city council
[32:43] may request that a consent item be pulled for discussion.
[32:46] There are three consent items tonight, item 6A through six C.
[32:54] Can we have a approval of the consent calendar?
[32:57] The motion by Council Member Leros.
[33:00] Seconded by Council Member Nerviahs, all in favor.
[33:04] Aye.
[33:04] Any opposed?
[33:05] Council.
[33:07] Consent calendar moves forward.
[33:08] Item 7, our administrative reports.
[33:10] Our first one is item 7A.
[33:12] be restricted affordable housing impact and building
[33:16] fee reduction in waiver program.
[33:28] Good afternoon, Mayor Sajile.
[33:30] Members of the City Council, Molly Radigan,
[33:32] Community Resources and Development Director,
[33:34] joined by Stephanie Gaul, our housing manager.
[33:37] And we are here to talk to you today
[33:38] with Audit Pilot Proposal Program for a reduction
[33:44] in affordable housing fees.
[33:45] And I use the word reduction today.
[33:47] We use the word waiver a little bit
[33:48] in our staff report, not our resolution.
[33:50] but we were informed that waiver has a very specific connotation and reduction is the better word for us to use.
[33:57] As we talk about this program, so we're going to do that.
[34:00] And before I start, I just wanted to thank the Executive Team and my fellow department heads.
[34:06] I would not be here proposing this, we would not be here proposing this without their support
[34:11] and their conversation about impact fees and if there are questions about specific impact fees, they may be able to answer them for you.
[34:17] But it's a big ask to think about reducing impact fees for the development of affordable housing and very much so appreciate their willingness to support this pilot program.
[34:28] So the program that we're here to propose to you today is it's we're asking you to adopt resolutions that would authorize me as the CRD director to implement a pilot program that reduces certain impact and building permit fees.
[34:41] for qualifying deed restricted affordable housing units that we can report on our city of
[34:46] Napa's, what we call rena regional housing needs allocation progress report.
[34:52] And the why behind that, this is our, this is our rena report as accepted by the state. We have another
[34:58] year, but it's not going to be that-
[35:00] That drastically different. But this was what has been accepted by the state. We have a obligation to try to permit 770 very low income units between now and 2031. We have done 15 per the state report about 2%. And we have zero in progress at this moment in time. And then for our low income, we have an obligation of 444.
[35:26] We have completed 94, which is about 21%, and we have about 25 of those like in progress, and when I say in progress, meaning their building permits have been submitted and are going through that process at this point.
[35:40] What we also know is that we have about 400 to 500 potentially eligible arena reportable units that are in various phases of financing and are getting stuck in that financing phase because the state and federal resources that were once available
[35:54] are not as plentiful as they were a few years ago when we had such success in opening
[36:00] Valley Lodge, Fair Valley Verde here to tell us all of those.
[36:05] So our proposal today is, it's a little bit, it's a little bit interesting the timing.
[36:10] First off, state law has started to look at options to require that fees be produced, fees
[36:15] charged by local cities be produced and we may end up being forced to do that one day.
[36:20] But also, just yesterday, Stephanie just shared with me today, the Turner Center, put out a report on what local government should be doing to help incentivize affordable housing and one of their primary recommendations was the idea of reducing impact or building development fees, as well as other requirements for public infrastructure to incentivize affordable housing.
[36:44] So we're here today with a proposal, it's two parts, one relates to building permit fees from the building department and one relates to impact fees.
[36:52] I'm going to go over them separately, but I'm going to give you the general qualifications. Everybody has to meet these qualifications to qualify for either.
[37:00] So the first is that the unit must be evidenced by a deed restriction per our affordable housing ordinance, which means a slight exception with 80 years, but that has to do with state law.
[37:11] So if it's rental housing, the deed restriction has to be in place for 55 years or more if it is for sale housing, it's 45 years or more.
[37:20] Unless otherwise required by a state or federal funding source, again this comes from a affordable housing ordinance,
[37:26] they must utilize eight CD, the state eight CDs annual income limits, which are printed annually and where we get our renin numbers from.
[37:33] They must apply the program to qualify must apply an or obtain a building permit between July 1st,
[37:41] in December 31st, 2028, and the reason we are back dating into July 1st is we did have a project that did put in before they knew we were doing this potential proposal and we don't want to punish them for being early to the game.
[37:56] And then they must be eligible to report on the city's annual renal report.
[37:59] That's really important because as you know we have arena sharing agreement with the county of Napa and through this current cycle they have the opportunity to report some units developed in the city of Napa on their county report.
[38:11] Those would not qualify for this proposed waiver, the county, my opinion, the county can help jump in and subsidize that if they're going to take the credit for that.
[38:20] And then also, you're sometimes see a alternative equivalence to payment of the affordable housing
[38:27] impact fee.
[38:28] So if an affordable unit is being developed because it was in lieu of paying an impact fee,
[38:33] we don't want to count that either for a further discount, kind of a double dipping opportunity
[38:39] there.
[38:41] So for building permit fees, the proposal is to reduce the following fees, which are the
[38:50] That's the redeveloping unit fees with the numbers written there.
[38:54] And reduce them 100% for very low-income units,
[38:58] so that they would qualify to be reported as a very low-income unit.
[39:02] 75% for low-income units.
[39:05] And then we currently have a program where all of these fees listed here
[39:09] are currently discounted at 50% for anything that's 120 below or in ADU.
[39:15] Of below, it's currently 500 square feet.
[39:17] We're proposing to make that 749 square feet or less because state law already requires that we not charge impact fees for 80 use that are 749 square feet or less.
[39:27] So maintaining what is currently in place for moderate income units and for 80 use, increasing the 80 use size to align with the state policy that already exists, but then further reducing for low income and very low income.
[39:45] There we go.
[39:47] The impact that we estimate, which is to the building, to Manav, my budgets, the building
[39:52] department fund, which is a general fund department, is approximately if it is for fully,
[39:57] if it were fully utilized by everything we know in the pipeline.
[40:00] We estimate that over the next three years, the impact would total between $500 and $750,000.
[40:07] As you know, our fees are developed based on a study, a next study.
[40:15] I'm not concerned about being able to cover this cost over the next three years.
[40:19] Our revenues and our expenses have been on par with where they're supposed to be.
[40:23] And so I think that we will be able to absorb this just fine without a significant impact to the general fund.
[40:29] The next proposal is related to impact fees, and this is the list of eligible fees that we
[40:35] are proposing for reduction.
[40:37] I'm not going to read this entire list, but it's mainly the non-infrastructure fees.
[40:42] So if there's something like impact fees for water, for example, we can't by law reduce those
[40:48] fees because it's a fee for a service or an impact fee for a service.
[40:51] So we're looking at the ones that we have the authority to potentially reduce for affordable housing
[40:55] development.
[40:56] There's four that are city-wide, the first four, and then the others are areas specific,
[41:02] so it would really only be reduced if a project was built in the area that qualified for that.
[41:08] It's very hard to estimate what that reduction would be because we don't necessarily know that they require.
[41:13] But it's mostly the top four fees that are impacted by this.
[41:18] And in this case, we're proposing that the impact fee be reduced by 100% for very low-income units,
[41:24] 75% for low-income units, and then as I said state law already prohibits us from charging
[41:30] in-pot fees for ADUs that are 749 square feet or less, we are not proposing moderate income
[41:37] here.
[41:38] Honestly, when we did the math, it just, it didn't really make that much of a significant
[41:42] difference, and it was better to have a higher reduction for very low and low than it was
[41:46] to try to balance it amongst the moderate income units.
[41:50] We're also proposing a cap on the number of eligible units.
[41:53] So that we see how this works, and we work on getting to where we need to be with our
[41:58] rena reporting.
[41:59] So the cap is same timeline constraints to life first to December 31st, 2021, but in addition
[42:05] to that, 250 low-income units would be eligible to receive this reduction in 250 very low-income.
[42:13] And why we like that is it helps, it gets the projects that are ready to go to the finish line,
[42:20] but it also encourages projects to try to move quicker through the process and get their paperwork
[42:24] and things in so that they qualify for this reduction.
[42:29] This is where we do see a little bit more of an impact.
[42:32] These are impact-tifinds I'm going to quote Assistant City Manager Julie Lucido, who said,
[42:37] we could not have impact fees or we could not have impact fees and affordable housing.
[42:41] So we have to sort of take what we're gaining out of this, which is affordable housing.
[42:47] So we may not have impact fees, but we, if we don't,
[42:50] find ways to incentivize affordable housing,
[42:52] we may not have affordable housing either.
[42:54] So using the cap and assuming that the cap is fully utilized,
[42:58] and I will tell you, I think we can get there on low income.
[43:01] I think very low income in that number
[43:04] is a difficult number to achieve in the next two and a half years,
[43:07] but I would love to be pleasantly surprised by that.
[43:10] We're looking at about 1.3, 1.4 million dollars
[43:14] student improvement fees, which do projects like the one you're going to talk about tonight
[43:19] the roundabout.
[43:21] Part dedication fees, the ability to acquire additional park space, park development fees,
[43:28] and paramedic fees are a little bit smaller, significantly smaller, paramedic fees right
[43:33] now significant amount of that impact key fund is being used to pay for fire station, the
[43:38] capital pay about the loans for the fire station five, and then park development may have
[43:44] direct impact on some of the park projects that we're doing and reducing the funds available
[43:48] for that. So you'll see the totals total about 3.6 million dollars there. But the per unit
[43:58] reduction is quite significant for projects. It becomes about an $8,000 reduction for a very low income
[44:04] unit and a $6,200 reduction for a low income unit. So it's meaningful to the project.
[44:14] There's a lot more detail in the resolutions on how if a project is part moderate, part low,
[44:21] part very low, how we will tailor it to make sure that we're only giving the right reductions
[44:26] based on what units are being built either by square footage or by per unit cost.
[44:31] But what we're asking for is adoption of these resolutions.
[44:34] Our next steps would be that we would develop an administrative regulation.
[44:38] That would be reviewed and approved potentially by the city manager.
[44:41] and then work on our application process for this and then report back to you as we get so just
[44:47] going to return to what our proposal is today and we're happy to answer questions.
[44:52] Thank you, Molly. Any public comment on this administrative report?
[44:56] I do mayor, I have four cards, a Vinny, I keep.
[45:00] Can't read the last name? Ryan O'Connell, Rich Wallich, and Caswalker.
[45:10] Hello, Ryan O'Connell, from Napaslana for everyone in strong support of the resolution, as proposed.
[45:16] It's great to see the city being proactive about making it more affordable, especially to build
[45:21] due to search affordable housing. It's a really direct way to actually impact the costs like the staff.
[45:27] talked about and even if the state is about to push policies like this in the future, it sends a strong signal in the region to affordable housing developers
[45:36] that NAPA is a city that really welcomes that and their development and that's a good thing that comes at a very small cost.
[45:43] So, strong support. Thanks for all the hard work.
[45:45] Thank you.
[45:53] My name is Vinny Harmonino.
[45:54] I don't blame you for not being able to say it. My penmanship terrible.
[45:57] But I'm here on behalf of Generation Housing as a resident of NAPA to support this. Thank you for all your work that you're doing on this.
[46:04] I grew up in the Bay Area and I've been working with Generation Housing recently because I was a union
[46:09] rep for teachers union in Arizona where affordable housing was a huge issue across the state
[46:14] there too.
[46:15] So this is not just something that's regional but it's definitely national so it's something
[46:19] we definitely want to be on top of but we support this proposal strongly and we think it will
[46:24] reduce building permit fees and development impact fees for affordable workforce housing
[46:27] units including small accessory dwelling units.
[46:30] Impact and permit fees fund an important infrastructure, but for affordable housing projects
[46:35] they can total over $1 million on a single project, making it harder to secure the financing needed to build.
[46:41] A challenge that has stalled many projects across the North Bay.
[46:45] Reducing these fees removes a significant barrier to getting affordable housing built, this approach works.
[46:50] Sacramento adopted a similar fee waiver in 2019 and tripled its affordable housing production at a cost of roughly three to four thousand dollars per unit.
[46:59] Santa Rosa and Sonoma County have since launched their own free reduction pilots and those efforts are
[47:04] beginning to see results. The need is clear, NAPOs reach only 2% of its RHNA goal for very low
[47:11] in communits and 21% for low in communits. We additionally ask the council to consider two things going
[47:16] forward. One, review the policies impact after an initial period to inform future expansion.
[47:24] And
[47:24] If the policy proves successful, consider expanding the unit caps in the impact fee resolution
[47:28] to extend its impact further. The current cap of 250, very low income and 250 low income.
[47:36] It's reasonable and is a great starting point but we welcome future increases tied to progress
[47:40] across the city's RHNA requirements. Thank you for your time to hear me out. Thank you for the work
[47:45] you put in. Thank you.
[47:54] Good afternoon. Mayor and council members. I'm a cast walker on here representing
[47:59] and gas foundation and nap housing coalition.
[48:04] So I've been in front of you before
[48:05] and thank you for all your support
[48:07] for our recent Affordable Housing Projects.
[48:10] We pollheartedly support this pilot program.
[48:16] I hope it goes further than just being a pilot program.
[48:18] And I want to compliment city staff
[48:20] and the leadership on the council to move this forward.
[48:23] Getting 250 units in the pipeline quickly
[48:26] could make a world of difference
[48:28] to many of our families in this community.
[48:30] So we wholeheartedly support this,
[48:33] and hope it's the beginning of many other wonderful pilot programs.
[48:37] Thank you, Cass.
[48:37] It was good to see
[48:44] you.
[48:45] Hi, everyone.
[48:45] Rich Wallace with Burbank Housing,
[48:48] and just want to speak obviously in support of this program.
[48:52] It's really important.
[48:54] And we've seen this happen in Sonoma County so far.
[48:59] Sonoma County, Santa Rosa, Petaluma was really the lead.
[49:03] and actually came out of a couple of projects
[49:05] that we were struggling with because of those fees,
[49:08] which were, I think it was 1.6 million
[49:11] and one and a million on the other.
[49:15] School fees, unfortunately, can't be addressed
[49:17] by the cities, but that's always another big item.
[49:22] But we know that you're doing your part,
[49:23] and we appreciate that effort.
[49:25] So thank you.
[49:26] Thank you for coming over.
[49:33] Jerry Hanson, Napitamber of Commerce,
[49:35] We too support these resolutions and I'll just start with the end as we encourage you to approve both resolutions and authorize your director to move forward with
[49:46] Administrating the program and getting all that details out, but from our perspective as a business organization housing really is also a business issue.
[49:55] It's an economic development issue. It's helping our businesses.
[50:00] Who are trying to attract and retain employees? Housing is a barrier. And the lack of housing, I should say, is a barrier. And so, we realize there are a lot of things out of our control and out of your control that are impacting the ability of housing units to be built.
[50:16] And the supply to increase the financing is one big piece that your director mentioned. But thank you for taking something that is in your control and doing something about it.
[50:25] We again, wholeheartedly support this and our eager to help you get the word out about it and work with your staff to get the word out to our business community.
[50:34] There's anything to need from us. We are here, but we are thrilled that you're piloting this program.
[50:40] Because again, housing, it is a business issue, but it's also a human issue.
[50:44] And we would really like to have anyone who would like to live in this community, who works in this community to be able to afford to live in this community.
[50:52] Thank you, dear.
[51:00] Mary and council members.
[51:01] My name is Brandon Dnon with Legacy Development Company.
[51:04] Just heard about the policy that you guys were going to discuss today.
[51:08] I want to show a support for that.
[51:10] We've worked on this program as well as in Sacramento and San Ramon.
[51:15] It's been a very successful in helping those projects get funded with tax credits and moving the projects forward.
[51:20] I'm working on two projects right now in the city.
[51:22] My only suggestion so much of the previous speaker was to see if you could make this a permanent
[51:28] Policy to going forward as well as allow staff flexibility
[51:32] If one bucket gets overfunded over subscribed in the low income bucket
[51:37] Maybe they could borrow units from the very low bucket and algae those up as they get over subscribe
[51:43] So that might be something they bring back forward in the future
[51:46] All right, thank you. Thanks for coming over
[51:55] Jim hint in 45 spring street
[51:58] Last week, I attended this department head thing in the back as a City Council candidate and a question that I had been asking frequently was why did you raise all these fees back in February and I finally got the answer that you raised all these fees because you hired a consultant and that's what they said to do.
[52:23] And, you know, I grew up in this town and when I was younger, people had dreams of being homeowners.
[52:29] You know, they wanted to get a home in Napa and be a property owner.
[52:34] And now it's like that's not even realistic anymore.
[52:38] And it's about building affordable housing, affordable housing, affordable housing, affordable housing.
[52:45] And it's sad to see that we're not focused on getting young families into home ownership
[52:52] more than we are trying to create this whole thing here.
[52:59] And why if you're going to lower the fees for these builders, which you should do, I mean
[53:05] you've got both hands and everybody's pocket trying to build right now, or that's even more
[53:09] than both hands.
[53:10] There was like eight fees on that slide. She put up there and you create so much red tape
[53:15] You create so many fees. Why would anybody want to build
[53:20] Family housing and market rate housing and nap, but when you you you're just
[53:24] You got you the more fees you charge the more expensive everything is it's economics
[53:30] It's you know, it's simple, but if you're gonna roll back these fees
[53:34] You should consider rolling back other fees for people that are trying to build a house
[53:38] You know, if they're remodeling their house and rebuilding and whatever, there's a lot of people do that around here
[53:43] And you ought to roll back all those fees and red tape on them, too, and make it easier for people in this town to build housing
[53:53] that it would address what the community wants.
[54:01] Any hands?
[54:03] I have no hands raised on Zoom here.
[54:05] Okay, do you want else?
[54:08] All right, we'll bring it back to Council for any deliberation, action, questions.
[54:19] I have Council Member Painter.
[54:22] Okay.
[54:23] Thank you.
[54:24] Thank you for the presentation and the information and all the speakers who spoke in support
[54:28] of this pilot program.
[54:31] I'll start with the end, which is I'm very supportive of moving forward with this pilot
[54:34] program, and I would agree with some of the speakers who said, can we please consider coming back?
[54:43] I don't know, six months or something well before the end of the pilot program so that we can get an update, assess what went well,
[54:50] where we want to make amendments so that we can either extend the pilot program or continue it so that we don't have a gap in time.
[54:57] So that would be my one request.
[54:59] Um...
[55:00] But I do have one question just so that we're all clear on the impact fees. Some of them, in terms of, and I'm looking at the slide, that list by category for impact fees.
[55:16] Some may just be, as you mentioned, less money towards park development, some street improvement.
[55:23] Some may need to be made up by the general fund, is the anticipation that the general fund would cover those fees under impact
[55:30] that we really need to make sure we collect fees for.
[55:34] Yeah, where are not proposed?
[55:35] Thank you for that question.
[55:36] We're not proposing at this time to take general fund money and backfill any lost revenues and impact fee funds.
[55:43] I do think that particularly with some of the street improvement fees and part fees and why not.
[55:50] It may mean that we have to go for larger grant amounts or look at other funding sources to fill in what would be missing from some of the impact fees if there is transportation dollars or whatnot.
[56:01] But at this moment in time, we are not proposing to take general fund to back fill a dollar for dollar or even percentage loss.
[56:09] However, as projects do come out, that may be a consideration that needs to come into play, that if we do not have adequate funds in those buckets to put them towards the purpose that it may need to be necessary to make that recommended.
[56:22] It may be. We just need to be mindful of that. Thank you.
[56:27] Yeah, and I think the report back was in the next steps too, so yeah, I think we all expect that to see how it's working. Hopefully we get the numbers that we desperately need.
[56:39] Thank you for the report.
[56:41] I'm very much in support of this.
[56:43] What's happening now is not working.
[56:45] I know five developments that are out there that are just waiting to get across the finish line.
[56:49] I think we need to make the investment to get them across the finish line.
[56:52] I think this is a prudent and smart way to do it.
[56:54] Thank you.
[56:57] You can also move on.
[56:59] Right.
[56:59] I'll echo that in support.
[57:02] Thank you for bringing this up.
[57:03] You know, the cap, you know, I'm open to, you know, as we get closer, but also hoping that the commitment from developers are coming in, you know, they get close to that number to say, yeah, we have that commitment because we can't do this on our own, right?
[57:18] So I'm hoping that we're on the right path, I think that we are.
[57:22] And this is not the only thing that we see to help people be housed.
[57:26] There's a lot of other programs.
[57:28] This is complimenting, you know, wide range of programs available to our community,
[57:34] away from homelessness to first home buyers.
[57:38] So, you know, I'm really proud of the effort that we're all doing to help making housing more affordable.
[57:44] I mean, we don't build affordable housing and they make it affordable through the number of investments.
[57:50] So, you know, every word that we can come in to help lower that barrier for people.
[57:55] I'm very supportive of, and you know, I'm looking forward to the update as we get closer to that cap.
[58:02] Thank you.
[58:04] Council Mayor Lerals.
[58:05] Thank you.
[58:06] I'm on the email list for the Turner Center for Housing Innovation.
[58:09] Also, and I saw that email go out yesterday about the report regarding impact view reforms.
[58:14] And I thought, ooh, we're so on top of this. This is so timely.
[58:16] So thank you for being on top of it for bringing this to us.
[58:21] My initial response to the proposed cap was why would we want to limit it?
[58:25] But I think you're right, I think creating a bit of buzz to encourage people and incentivize
[58:30] people to move quickly is going to be really good.
[58:32] Looking at our read and numbers, we really have to do something to move the very low and
[58:37] low income numbers.
[58:38] So thank you again for bringing this to us.
[58:40] And I agree, I would like to come back and revisit it before we hit that cap so that we can
[58:44] decide, you know, whether and how to extend it, thank you.
[58:49] Thank you very much.
[58:51] Yeah, I think we're all in agreement here.
[58:52] I mean, we've looked critically at, you know, the process on, you know,
[58:57] not yesterday or maybe a couple of case studies along the way.
[59:01] Now that maybe somebody takes advantage of these reduced fees and permits
[59:05] and do an actual case study other project.
[59:08] And especially I'm taking ADUs, right, because I still get comments from people
[59:11] on, you know, to get through the simplest, the 500 square foot
[59:15] A to you.
[59:16] And so it might be interesting in that reporting out
[59:18] to see where, you know, I were doing for this effort that we've had
[59:22] a lot of hope for when we first started talking about, we called
[59:26] them Granny units then, right?
[59:28] And so, how many grandmas are there?
[59:31] So that would be a good thing that we might look
[59:33] at down the road.
[59:36] So I don't see any more questions, so I'm looking for a
[59:40] I think I heard maybe all of us in support of, but maybe Council Member Painter, I think you're out there.
[59:48] Yeah, I would go ahead and make a motion to adopt the resolutions as proposed to move forward with the pilot program as described.
[59:56] Thank you.
[59:56] The motion by Council Member Painter, second by Council Member Devices.
[1:00:00] Any opposed? Thank you very much. Thanks, Stephanie. Thanks, Molly.
[1:00:16] Item 7B. This is our lead California City's resolution, voting authorization. I think we were also Mayor Painter was our representative, but then I think we have a change and I see the assistant city manager coming up here to share a little of this.
[1:00:35] Yes, thank you Mayor Liz Habkirk with the City Manager's office.
[1:00:39] The item before you today is a reconsideration of your council's direction to the voting
[1:00:44] delegate to the League of California City's further annual conference being held next
[1:00:48] week.
[1:00:49] There's one resolution under consideration by the league.
[1:00:52] As we review the resolution with a more full packet along with letters to support provided
[1:00:57] by CalCities last week, we flag some possible concerns with the language that emphasized
[1:01:01] the potential constitutional amendment as soon as the year 2030, based on the recommendations
[1:01:06] of the working group that the resolution is proposing to establish. Although the language
[1:01:12] also includes the possibility of other legislative actions or alternate means that may come
[1:01:16] out of its recommendations. From this working group, we would encourage CalCities to first do
[1:01:21] some additional outreach to all member cities before considering moving a constitutional amendment
[1:01:25] forward based on the recommendations of this particular group that's established. For that reason,
[1:01:30] We thought it would be prudent to have the council direct their voting delegate to vote
[1:01:34] no on this specific resolution, but encouraged to discussion of alternate ways to continue
[1:01:39] the dialogue on the state's efforts regarding affordable housing development.
[1:01:44] As your voting delegate, Council Member Painter may have some additional thoughts she'd
[1:01:47] like to include.
[1:01:47] I'm happy to answer any questions at this time.
[1:01:50] Thank you.
[1:01:51] No, thank you very much for outlining that and thank you for including the packet.
[1:01:56] The only thing I would add is that this will be considered by the policy committee prior to the conference.
[1:02:06] It will also be considered by the Resolutions Committee.
[1:02:09] So we will be getting additional information.
[1:02:13] And when I looked at the packet and looked at the level of detail, I wanted to bring it back for reconsideration to this council.
[1:02:22] So I hope you had a chance to read the packet of, and I think Liz can answer questions as well.
[1:02:28] I may just add, Mr. Mayor, the league encourages councils to provide direction to their voting delegate.
[1:02:34] It's not required, but it is encouraged by the league before the delegate arrives at the conference.
[1:02:39] So the action for us is to ask you to vote in opposition, but obviously you have the opportunity to.
[1:02:46] Well, I don't want to, you know, I think as Liz described, you could, we could choose to take no action and just have me follow the recommendations of the committees that will be reviewing this or, or to ask that I vote against this policy based on the information you have in front of you right now.
[1:03:08] And the other comments from council members?
[1:03:14] Take no action on the item or instruct our voting delegate to vote in opposition.
[1:03:29] Well, because you're carrying our message if you are uncomfortable with taking that direction
[1:03:34] at this meeting, I may be no motion come forward, so I guess there's no action on the item.
[1:03:39] And we'll trust you to make the best judgment.
[1:03:41] If I'm name Mr. Mayor, because your council did vote affirmatively to have your voting delegate
[1:03:46] vote yes at the August 18th City Council meeting.
[1:03:49] I think you need to take an action to either provide the voting delegate with discretion
[1:03:53] or to vote in opposition.
[1:03:55] That's not in the agenda.
[1:04:00] Yeah, but not to undo what we did last meeting.
[1:04:03] The recommended action today is to direct your voting delegate to vote no in opposition of the
[1:04:11] policy resolution at the conference next week.
[1:04:13] Of course, in all turn of the city attorney, but I think your council has the ability to provide
[1:04:17] a different direction to your voting delegate based on that is not in staff recommendation,
[1:04:23] but in accordance with item.
[1:04:26] Well, Council Member, Vice Mayor, Dean of the House.
[1:04:31] Just one question.
[1:04:32] Going through the process, if it does go to committees, will that drastically change our
[1:04:36] feeling on it?
[1:04:36] We see that we'll get more information as it moves through committees at the conference next
[1:04:41] week?
[1:04:42] I can't say that I can speak in detail to that.
[1:04:44] I haven't seen many of these resolutions move through
[1:04:47] maybe after my colleagues can maybe have more experience
[1:04:51] with the League of Cities, but I think generally they're
[1:04:54] they're voting on the resolution.
[1:04:55] I think if it was a significant amendment,
[1:04:58] they might likely bring it back in another.
[1:05:00] So, I would expect it to be a similar, similar to the recommended resolution that we have.
[1:05:07] And then, secondly, can we rescind what we did last week without making a vote, proposed voting, no?
[1:05:14] I think you can, yes.
[1:05:16] Thank
[1:05:19] you.
[1:05:20] Councilman O'Leros.
[1:05:21] I think that sounded like a motion.
[1:05:23] And I would second it.
[1:05:25] All right, so the motion.
[1:05:27] We'll make a motion to rescind our action from last meeting.
[1:05:31] and to vote yes on the item and make no motion on direction for voting at the conference.
[1:05:37] And it was a second.
[1:05:38] We're second.
[1:05:40] Good direction.
[1:05:41] All in favour?
[1:05:42] Aye.
[1:05:43] Aye.
[1:05:43] Are you opposed?
[1:05:44] Thanks.
[1:05:45] Thank you.
[1:05:49] Okay.
[1:05:50] We are at now item eight.
[1:05:53] This is a public hearing.
[1:05:56] This is an interesting one.
[1:05:58] Assembly Bill 1572.
[1:05:59] non-functional turf irrigation regulations amendment to the Napa municipal code.
[1:06:06] So as it is a public hearing we will first we will hear a report from staff which may include
[1:06:14] responses and clarifying questions for members of council. Next members of council will be asked to
[1:06:19] disclose information learned outside of the hearing and then members of the public will be provided
[1:06:24] the opportunity to present testimony regarding the proposed ordinance amendment.
[1:06:29] Finally, we will close the public hearing testimony and Council will deliberate.
[1:06:34] So thank you so much, Ian.
[1:06:36] Pat Giselle.
[1:06:42] Yes.
[1:06:43] Good afternoon, Mayor.
[1:06:44] And Council, Pat Giselle, Utilities Department, Water Resources, Water Conservation.
[1:06:51] I'm here as a messenger today, a messenger in the sense that this AB 1572 did not arise
[1:06:59] from our department or a local proposal, it is a state mandate, but I'm not just a messenger
[1:07:06] I do understand why it arose and I do think we have a community that is well prepared for
[1:07:13] this and it affects the subset of a subset of our customer base who we are prepared to work with
[1:07:20] in partnership as this gets phased in. So I'm going to get right to what it is.
[1:07:30] Assuming I can advance
[1:07:31] slides.
[1:07:34] Okay. All right. Okay. AB 1572 prohibits the use of drinking water for the irrigation
[1:07:43] of non-functional turf, and I will be defining that for you. On commercial, industrial,
[1:07:49] and institutional properties, excluding cemeteries, and the common areas of HOA and apartment
[1:07:57] complexes. It's phased in over three years. So it begins next year for government
[1:08:04] owned properties. That would be us city property, 2028 for other institutional
[1:08:12] properties besides government owned and all commercial and industrial
[1:08:16] properties.
[1:08:21] And then in 2029 finally for the HOA and apartment complex common
[1:08:26] areas. Okay, there is an exception to use potable drinking water to ensure the health of trees
[1:08:35] and other perennial non-terf plantings. This rose because the drought of the mid-2010s
[1:08:43] resulted in a lot of tree dye off that was not the goal of the drought measures.
[1:08:48] So this actually has a provision. We do not want to kill trees that happen to be in turf areas
[1:08:55] that, you know, they've dependent on that irrigation of the lawn, their whole lives, and it's a shock to them to cut that off, so that's not the goal. There is an exception for that.
[1:09:07] Okay, single family residential properties and properties using recycled water are unaffected by AB 1572.
[1:09:17] I'm going to repeat that single-family residential properties and properties using recycled water on our
[1:09:23] fected.
[1:09:24] So no one's coming for your backyard or your front yard if you have lawn, that's functional,
[1:09:32] that's okay.
[1:09:34] The origins of this, you would think, okay, this must have started in California, right?
[1:09:39] You know, our neighbor, Nevada, AB-356, five years ago was enacted.
[1:09:49] They have a fairly dire situation in the Vegas area and other parts that use the Colorado Riverwater, and they see.
[1:10:00] A real waste in using that water on grass areas that are high water use that aren't being used, that are non-functional.
[1:10:11] Okay, something else came out the following year of a report for the Governor climate report.
[1:10:17] California's water supply strategy adapting to a hotter dryer future that looked at more extremes, more extreme droughts could happen in the future.
[1:10:26] And so this is a factor in leading to look at these grass areas that maybe aren't appropriate for our climate and why are we using this water for them when they're not performing a real function for us.
[1:10:39] Generally, the state wants to reduce reliance on the Sacramento River Delta and we of course import water from the Delta as part of our supply portfolio.
[1:10:51] And from the water supplier side, there was strong backing by the biggest water district in the state,
[1:11:00] met Metropolitan Water District of Southern California.
[1:11:02] Big proponent that see it as a means of addressing their supply demand balance in the future
[1:11:09] and their reliability in their area.
[1:11:13] And so the law was signed late 2023,
[1:11:23] I think the root of all many of our water conservation
[1:11:27] laws come from this.
[1:11:29] This is California State Constitution, Article 10, Section 2.
[1:11:36] Really, we have to remember, we know what he owns the water.
[1:11:39] We just have legal rights to the water.
[1:11:41] So this section emphasizes that the right to water from any natural stream or water course in the state is limited to water that is required for a beneficial use to be served.
[1:11:59] beneficial use, the key phrase, and the right does not extend to the waste or unreasonable use.
[1:12:09] So, wasting water is kind of forbidden in the state constitution, and that's kind of a root of many of our laws on this.
[1:12:19] So, I will, throughout the key definitions that help you understand what non-functional turf is.
[1:12:26] Okay, turf is a living ground cover surface of mode grass, okay, you know what grass with turf is.
[1:12:34] Non-functional is any turf that is not functional turf and functional turf is defined more thoroughly in the law.
[1:12:44] Okay, functional turf, what is functional turf?
[1:12:47] It's turf located in a recreational use area or community space and I'll get to those definitions next.
[1:12:57] And there is a specific, if it's enclosed by fencing or other barriers to prevent humans from entering, that's by definition, not functional.
[1:13:10] Okay, so functional areas include a recreational use area and an important, these are designated
[1:13:16] by the owner of the property or a government agency that accommodates humans for recreation
[1:13:24] such as sports field, obviously golf courses playgrounds, picnic areas, pet exercise areas.
[1:13:32] not any area that a pet might do its business on the grass, no, a pet, an area that's
[1:13:40] for pet runs and a pet exercise there. And it can be formal or informal, the recreation.
[1:13:48] Okay, another functional area is a community space. Again, designated by the owner or a government
[1:13:53] agency to accommodate human foot traffic, for civic, ceremonial or other community events
[1:14:00] or social gatherings.
[1:14:02] And here you can probably see why they didn't really need a carve-out cemeteries as being excluded
[1:14:07] because they would be a community space with the ceremonial nature that happens in cemeteries.
[1:14:14] Okay, one of the provisions in the law, of course, is for us to educate, make the affected
[1:14:19] customers aware.
[1:14:22] So we, as a public water system, shall communicate the requirements to their customers of the
[1:14:27] law.
[1:14:27] So we did gather, well, I want to point out that, unlike urban water management plan that
[1:14:36] we did a few months ago, are making water conservation away of the life regulations where
[1:14:42] we meet the gallons per capita per day that I've talked about.
[1:14:46] Those affect only urban water suppliers of a certain size, and in this county it's only
[1:14:52] the city of Napa and the city of American Canyon.
[1:14:54] This law is not like that, this affects every square foot of the state.
[1:14:59] So...
[1:15:00] Earlier this year, gathered with, we have an informal county-wide water conservation group.
[1:15:09] So anyone who deals with water use efficiency in the other cities or the county, and we had a meeting.
[1:15:16] Largely, it was enabled me to share resources that we got from CalWeb, the California water efficiency partnership.
[1:15:25] We've been members of them and their predecessor organizations since 2002 and they spent the last couple years putting together a great toolkit for agencies and things for the general public and the affected customers.
[1:15:40] So we shared those resources talked about strategy and adoption and have also shared our action tonight and the supporting documents with them and we'll be continuing to correspond with them on this as they adopt.
[1:15:54] Okay, we will in the near term be meeting with the government-owned property managers, Parks
[1:16:02] and Rec.
[1:16:05] We are not dramatically affected because you can imagine parks are pretty much all functional.
[1:16:12] There are pockets that could be considered non-functional, but I think our park staff have
[1:16:18] been doing some transformations of some of these areas into more water-wise plantings,
[1:16:23] last couple of years.
[1:16:26] But I will get to where we are right here.
[1:16:30] I'll show you a map of this parcel and talk about a little bit.
[1:16:35] So we'll meet with those entities.
[1:16:38] And then, over the course, through the rest of the year,
[1:16:42] we'll be doing notification letters to all of the potentially
[1:16:45] effective customers in ones that don't have to deal with it until
[1:16:50] It's because I have access to maps which indicate what the State Department of Water Resources considers to be non-functional turf areas in our community based on aerial imagery taken in 2020 and analysis that they have done in partnership with a contractor.
[1:17:11] So, we have that ability to correspond to the, you know, a few hundred customers, several
[1:17:20] hundred customers that could be affected by this.
[1:17:23] Okay.
[1:17:26] We will have a dedicated webpage.
[1:17:29] We will do, we can do targeted bill inserts and bill messages to just the affected customers.
[1:17:36] And through business, existing business, newsletters, however, this is a subset of the commercial
[1:17:44] customer base.
[1:17:46] You know all the businesses in town that do not have a spec of grass anywhere near them.
[1:17:51] We can do special workshops.
[1:17:54] We do our annual water-wise landscaping workshops series with a couple, especially devoted
[1:18:01] transforming unused law into something more climate appropriate.
[1:18:05] We have those for the general public coming up October 7th and 14th, but we can have dedicated workshops just dealing with non-functional turf transformation for the commercial sector.
[1:18:19] So that's something we would consider.
[1:18:21] We also have an annual climate-friendly garden tour, which shows off not just single-family homes that have transformed unused law and but commercial businesses and
[1:18:30] institutions.
[1:18:33] I do want to show you, this is from CalWeb's LAMX
[1:18:37] Flore, that stands for landscape array measurement,
[1:18:40] which is the DWR aerial imagery data,
[1:18:44] and a company called EagleAriel set this up for CalWeb
[1:18:48] members to use.
[1:18:50] So I can look at any parcel, and the gold areas,
[1:18:55] the yellow is just highlighting the parcel boundary.
[1:18:57] the gold areas are the, what BWR considers to be non-functional turf. So I'll point out some
[1:19:06] drawbacks. You see a couple pockets up on the top. That is actually mulch right now. That's
[1:19:14] not turf. And then obviously the front of City Hall, we do have non-functional turf.
[1:19:28] But
[1:19:28] round-true thing shows that they missed non-functional turf in the northeast and southeast.
[1:19:38] They're covered by the tree canopy, so the aerial imagery doesn't capture them, but we
[1:19:44] know obviously there's turf under there.
[1:19:47] But the biggest issue at this site is the tree health exemption.
[1:19:52] There are many mature trees on the lawn here that are, I'm sure they're getting, they're
[1:19:58] out of their irrigation.
[1:20:00] All of their irrigation from the lawn watering. Ideally, you'd have trees in a transformation project. You'd have trees on separate, a separate valve and they'd be drip irrigated and then you could stop watering the grass and transform it.
[1:20:15] But the tree health exemption is in play for this particular site. But again, I'm not finding many pockets of non-functional turf on other city properties and we don't have big grass, medians and road, middle of roads and things like that.
[1:20:30] Okay, I can't overstate enough how important the resources from CalWeb have been.
[1:20:39] The outreach toolkit will provide us good techniques that we've already started using
[1:20:46] for commercial industrial sector.
[1:20:49] The HOA's property managers, schools, the landscapers, the landscape companies that are
[1:20:57] affected and developers, however, point out developers with our long-standing enforcement
[1:21:03] of the water-efficient landscape ordinance, new construction doesn't slap in non-functional
[1:21:10] turf, you know, in middle parking lot island, a big piece of grass, that doesn't really
[1:21:14] happen anymore.
[1:21:16] So we don't have to worry about new construction.
[1:21:17] The other thing CalWeb put together is a public-facing website, non-functional turfca.org.
[1:21:25] And it has areas for all these types of customers and our ordinance, if adopted, we'll
[1:21:31] get placed in the link down here, because the idea is to search for how it affects you as a business
[1:21:38] or a property owner, and it has a little questionnaire about, do I have non-functional turf?
[1:21:44] And it goes through like this little quiz.
[1:21:46] However, as I said, we're going to reach out to ours
[1:21:48] with the individual letter with the map of their parcel.
[1:21:53] And that letter will have it give us a chance
[1:21:55] to get feedback from that and whether they agree,
[1:21:58] disagree with what we and the DWR think about their non-functional turf.
[1:22:05] OK, this log, it only requires that you
[1:22:14] It does not explicitly require you to remove this, but a brown and weedy areas like shown here are not the goal.
[1:22:24] The underlying goal of this is transformation. Transformation to more climate appropriate.
[1:22:33] Well, if you're familiar with the lost florist community center, not the renovation going on now, but the landscape areas in the frontage and along with the parking strip.
[1:22:43] and around the parking lot.
[1:22:46] And that's years ago that would have been
[1:22:48] a thing that would have had all graphs
[1:22:49] and no one would be using that grass.
[1:22:52] But now it's something really appropriate
[1:22:54] for our Mediterranean climate and a beautiful
[1:22:58] and way less water use.
[1:23:03] So again, we want to partner with customers
[1:23:06] as this gets phased in and really steer them
[1:23:09] toward transformation of landscapes
[1:23:12] of unknown functional turf areas, and to that end we have made our biggest change to the cash
[1:23:20] for grass turf removal rebate programs since its inception in 2010. We have taken the square
[1:23:29] footage originally as $50 and I was a dollar. We made it $2 per square foot turf removed
[1:23:34] across the board for all customers, but we've increased the site maximum for one account for
[1:23:41] The single-family can get up to $2,000 now instead of $750.
[1:23:46] The commercial is essentially the sector is affected by this law,
[1:23:50] can it up to $10,000 per site.
[1:23:54] We also have a bonus dollar per square foot
[1:23:56] for what would be considered rain gardens,
[1:24:01] features,
[1:24:02] areas that's a rain garden.
[1:24:06] So our compliance besides as the property owners
[1:24:09] who may have some non-functional turf ourselves, one of the things in the law is by no
[1:24:17] later than January 1st, to revise our regulations ordinances or policies governing water
[1:24:25] service to include the requirements of AB 1572.
[1:24:30] So what we have chosen to do, and this was what my instinct and also was the number one recommendation
[1:24:36] by cow up in their toolkit prepared for agencies across the state is if you already have provisions
[1:24:44] in your municipal code with water waste prohibitions then you can simply insert this as one of those
[1:24:52] prohibitions and so that's the approach we've taken here and since we have chapter 13.09 which was
[1:25:00] Last updated right after the 2021-22-23 drought was in spring 2023. We have permanent waterways
[1:25:13] prohibitions in there. But we've simply, and those include like not watering sidewalk, you know,
[1:25:22] excess runoff running down the gutter, you know, things like that. But we can simply add to that section
[1:25:29] 5 key definitions that I showed you that help define what non-functional turf is as a help
[1:25:38] to the reader. But in the waterways prohibitions, we just can add item D, which points
[1:25:45] to the California water code sections that lay out AB 1572. And that is because if they
[1:25:53] week at AB 1572 at the state level, we may not have to make any change here. We would
[1:25:59] if they did something substantive that contradicted, you know, the basic provisions of it,
[1:26:04] but I don't see them doing that. So we direct to that with, you know, a general statement
[1:26:10] of what the ban is is on the irrigation of non-functional turf. Though that's our approach, and then
[1:26:16] There's an exception for it's explicit on the tree health.
[1:26:22] It's that the irrigation zones on a property, so the valve that serves that area of the
[1:26:28] landscape, if it includes this tree that's dependent on the lawn watering, that zone can be
[1:26:36] exempt from the ban on the use of drinking water.
[1:26:40] It's not a great final product if you have a picture area that has turf and then the grass
[1:26:47] is green around the tree and then there's a brown area and then there's another green
[1:26:52] air.
[1:26:52] It would look kind of silly.
[1:26:54] So again, the goal is transformation.
[1:26:57] Ideally, we would steer properties to put trees on separate valves with trip and transform
[1:27:05] the grass into something better.
[1:27:06] But there are definitely some trees that were grown up with shallow roots because they
[1:27:11] they've been dependent on this watering and you would harm them if you just stopped cold.
[1:27:20] So these water, again, are efforts of all the education and working with customers.
[1:27:26] But all of the waterways provisions can advance to warning and then 100, 200, and then $500
[1:27:34] or administrative citations, which can be per day of violation when it gets to the extreme.
[1:27:40] So they can be enforced with fines, and so I'll go to questions.
[1:27:48] And if one of your questions is that non-functional in this photo, the answer is yes.
[1:27:56] Answer is yes.
[1:27:57] Thank you, Pat.
[1:27:59] You're welcome.
[1:27:59] Well, would comment, or disclosures for any disclosures?
[1:28:03] No disclosures. No disclosures. No disclosures. No disclosures. No disclosures.
[1:28:08] No disclosures. Well, the comment and you want to wish to address the council on this non-usable turf.
[1:28:16] I have no cards and no one on Zoom here. No hands, no cards. Thank you. Thank you.
[1:28:23] Motion to close public air. So we'll move by council on the via, second by council member
[1:28:28] for all of those. Thank you. All right, council.
[1:28:36] Council member Nervias. Just a quick question. I'm glad you've
[1:28:40] brought that photo. If somebody was to add a bench there.
[1:28:45] I'm just I don't know. It's to be left because
[1:28:49] at the CalWeb peer to peer we hosted in May at the Marriott.
[1:28:55] There were a lot of presentations about this and that's one of the things
[1:28:58] that's been happening around the state is a property owner saying,
[1:29:01] Well, we have a bench here, so therefore, so yes, the law is only so precise, there is a judgment call to be made.
[1:29:11] I personally don't think a bench makes a whole big plot of land functional.
[1:29:17] So the simpler definition for non-functional turf to me is if the only time someone's walking on it is they're pushing them lower.
[1:29:27] then that's kind of a way to look at it but yeah I mean picnic grounds are obviously
[1:29:34] functional that I think some places in Thun and Khaled somebody install a bench to try
[1:29:40] to say okay now now we're functional I we'd have to make a judgment it I lean
[1:29:49] know just because it's actually if someone just added one to evade that's a good
[1:29:57] judgment. I just wanted to it's not curious enough.
[1:30:00] Unless it's whether, is it a community space? But a property owner can say, would we hold this? Isn't it? Then we, we, we will a gentleman take their feedback. And, um, but that just came up and it was, people had photos of a lonely bench in front of this giant field. And it wasn't looking it. It was just looking at this empty. So there will be some, some vagueness to it and some judgment calls.
[1:30:26] Yeah, great. Thank you.
[1:30:31] Y'all's more painter.
[1:30:33] Thank you, Pat, for the information. First of all, as you kind of started this presentation,
[1:30:38] you're following what state law is asking us to do. So that's what you're doing.
[1:30:42] I think it makes all the sense in the world to amend the ordinance using the reference to the water code,
[1:30:49] because and it says in there as amended from time to time. So that all makes sense to make your life easier.
[1:30:56] You know, I don't know how big of an impact this is going to have or not have, but I will say I think the update to the cash-for-get-grass program is probably going to have a much larger impact.
[1:31:08] I know many of us have used that program and it's something for residential and I'm really happy to see the multifamily increase.
[1:31:16] So if one good outcome from this is we can get more folks to utilize that program
[1:31:21] I think that's going to be beneficial you know the enforcement piece of it
[1:31:25] I think is going to be difficult
[1:31:28] That's that's not our go to again. That's yeah, so but anyways
[1:31:33] It's there. I'm supportive of the of the changes to the ordinances proposed and again
[1:31:39] I'm really happy to see the cash-for-grass program augmented and your efforts to get that out to the community
[1:31:46] Thanks. I will comment on the cash regress boost. It was done in June.
[1:31:51] I've been a big response. The number of pre-inspections that Josh Dokes has been called to do
[1:31:56] had gone automatically, not quite the level of during the drought but close to it.
[1:32:02] The goal there here, though, is to get more that programs dominated by single-family homes,
[1:32:08] not exclusively, but it's way dominated. We want to get more participation from this other
[1:32:13] sector that is, it could be affected by this, and our intention is to fund these, this, that
[1:32:19] program for that sector through, through the phase in period through 2029, but we will
[1:32:26] be watching our budget that was boosted to accommodate this. And I will say that we've received
[1:32:33] nearly a million dollars of grant funding for that program since 2010. We're in a gap now
[1:32:40] we're not granted but there is a prop for at the state level in the Bay Area group might be able
[1:32:45] to get together and get some money for continuing the grant funding but intention is to keep
[1:32:51] this in place during this phase in and then eventually remove it because then that sector
[1:32:56] really just has to meet this law and so you really don't want to have you really shouldn't
[1:33:02] have any a non-functional turf left. And I'll just I'll just as a reminder and we all remember the chart
[1:33:09] that I think Joy had shared with us when we looked at our water use, even though our population
[1:33:14] has increased and our square footage and buildings have increased, our water use has actually
[1:33:19] stayed relatively flat. And I think to me it's largely because of all these efforts to try to decrease
[1:33:26] the amount of water we use in, you know, domestic water use on irrigation in general. So I'll
[1:33:36] keep
[1:33:42] I feel like this is going to affect business a lot.
[1:33:44] I'm thinking about the corporate park out there.
[1:33:47] Is that considered non-functional turf out there?
[1:33:52] Well, it's non-functional, but it's using recycled water.
[1:33:58] Oh, OK.
[1:33:58] And this is against using drinking water.
[1:34:02] So we, some signage, just like we had them put up during the drought,
[1:34:05] will be nice to explain, maybe they still have them,
[1:34:09] but they were really small.
[1:34:10] I guess it doesn't make signs and they were like this big.
[1:34:13] But in the mediums saying that this is irrigated
[1:34:16] with recycled bar, because that is exempt
[1:34:20] just as single-family homes are.
[1:34:24] And then just in terms of the impact on businesses,
[1:34:27] I'm sure you've probably already thought about this,
[1:34:29] but maybe doing an educational workshop with the Chambers
[1:34:31] would be helpful, so they know.
[1:34:33] Yeah, I, Jerry was here earlier, and when you use their newsletter,
[1:34:36] But again, it's a small subset of the business community that has any of us.
[1:34:46] So we will do those methods, of course, that'll hit a broader group than we need to.
[1:34:52] But we have the targeted ability with the direct letters and the maps.
[1:34:56] And in those letters, we will emphasize this cash-for-grass boost that will be like.
[1:35:01] And then we can do targeted bill messages in the water bills and targeted inserts in the water bills.
[1:35:08] However, water bills often go to, they can go to somebody in Colorado or Florida or something.
[1:35:14] But no, we will use those. But we do, fortunately, have the targeted ways to talk to them.
[1:35:18] Because it's a finite group. There's not 20,000 accounts for dealing with their hundreds.
[1:35:24] Thank you.
[1:35:28] All right. Thank you for that.
[1:35:30] seems like we're all understanding of this law and the implementation and the impact.
[1:35:36] So, I'm looking for emotion or silence.
[1:35:43] Councilman Revise.
[1:35:44] I'm making a motion to prove the first reading of item 8A.
[1:35:49] I'm looking for my council member Revise.
[1:35:51] Second by council or vice mayor, Dean Atale Allen-Fever.
[1:35:54] Any opposed?
[1:35:56] Here's Janana Musley.
[1:35:58] Thank you.
[1:35:58] Thank you. Thanks, Pat.
[1:36:05] All right. We are now at a break time, but first I will ask any comments by the city manager or council.
[1:36:14] Still comments.
[1:36:17] Else mayor painter.
[1:36:19] Two quick comments first of all.
[1:36:21] Thank you so much for the support for the students who came and spoke to us on HR 46. They have worked hard on that.
[1:36:27] And I was really happy to see them come.
[1:36:29] I thought they were spoke so eloquently.
[1:36:32] And that was a great move.
[1:36:33] So that's just to thank you.
[1:36:35] The other announcement is this Saturday
[1:36:37] is the annual California Coastal Cleanup Day.
[1:36:41] I will be co-capturing at Copia, which I often do.
[1:36:45] And I would encourage you, if you can, to come out
[1:36:48] and do a little coastal cleanup.
[1:36:49] There are sites all over the city in multiple places.
[1:36:52] in fact, there's even for the first year Spanish speaking, or at least by
[1:36:58] lingo, site down at Kennedy Park, so information is available on the RCD
[1:37:03] website.
[1:37:04] 9 to 12 this Saturday.
[1:37:06] Thank you.
[1:37:08] Vice Mayor, being a valley.
[1:37:10] Thank you.
[1:37:11] As it is Hispanic Heritage Month, I wanted to take this time to recognize
[1:37:14] Alibria Stavale, which is Napa's first Spanish language theater company.
[1:37:19] They were founded about a year ago by two graduates of Napa Valley College and one current student
[1:37:24] and they are currently producing their first full-length play at Napa Valley College in the Black Box Theater.
[1:37:30] It will happen Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, seven on Friday and Saturday, two PM on Sunday,
[1:37:35] and it's pay what you can because access is very important to them.
[1:37:39] Yes.
[1:37:40] And the play is Barrios, the Hollywood, which is an original play written in a producer.
[1:37:47] Thank you.
[1:37:49] Okay, before closed session, I'm going to ask the city attorney to provide the required
[1:37:55] announcement for what we go into closed session.
[1:37:59] Thank you, Mayor.
[1:38:00] Tonight we have two closed sessions.
[1:38:02] The first is initiation of litigation.
[1:38:06] One potential case.
[1:38:08] And the second is the conference with your labor negotiators.
[1:38:12] You'll have your city designated reps.
[1:38:14] Steve Potter, Liz Happkirk, Julie Lucito, MJ Turos, and Donnelly for the Employee Organization
[1:38:22] Amp Administrative Managerial and Professional Employees Unit.
[1:38:26] Thank you.
[1:38:27] And do we have any speaker cards out there?
[1:38:29] I have no request for just to speak on close session items and no one on Zoom.
[1:38:33] All right.
[1:38:34] Thank you very much.
[1:38:35] We'll see you at 6.30.
[1:38:38] During the close session.
[1:38:48] Did you know what the match was?
[1:38:59] Yeah.
[1:38:59] You did.
[1:39:08] You did.
[1:39:09] You did.
[1:39:16] City Clerk.
[1:39:17] Are you ready to start?
[1:39:23] Almost mayor.
[1:39:24] You just.
[1:39:30] Okay.
[1:39:33] All right.
[1:39:33] The technology has ready to go.
[1:39:35] We have a full house tonight.
[1:39:36] The wonderful.
[1:39:37] Welcome, everyone.
[1:39:38] To our September 15th meeting.
[1:39:41] So, City Clerk, can we have the roll call?
[1:39:45] Council Member is a painter.
[1:39:48] Leros.
[1:39:49] Narvayez.
[1:39:50] Here.
[1:39:50] Vice Mayor Dina Talle.
[1:39:52] Mayor, essentially.
[1:39:53] Here.
[1:39:53] Are there any changes to the agenda or supplemental reports?
[1:39:56] There are no changes to the agenda to the agenda mayor.
[1:40:00] We do have supplemental reports for item 14A. We have the PowerPoint presentation from city staff, as well as 31 written comments that were submitted after the agenda publication.
[1:40:11] Thank you very much. And so, as we move into tonight's meeting, I want to just explain a little bit, since we do have a full audience and want to give everybody a chance to speak. How many cards do you say?
[1:40:24] had thirty. Right now in my hands I have twenty nine cards and I know there are still some
[1:40:30] get elected. We're going to limit public comment to two minutes each instead of three
[1:40:35] minutes each. So we can get if we want to hear everybody's comments and just to three
[1:40:39] we won't get through there. So when we get to the item on the five way, if you can not be
[1:40:43] too repetitive, but let us know your thoughts, your feelings and the issues. But we want
[1:40:49] to get everybody an opportunity to chance them with without many people three minutes when you
[1:40:52] the math. It'll take us a little while. And then we're also going to stop public comment.
[1:40:59] This meeting at 9 o'clock. So if we get to 9 o'clock, we'll have to call the public comment
[1:41:04] and then move on to the other business of the council. So right now it's a general public
[1:41:10] comment. So during the public comment portion of the meeting, the public is invited to address
[1:41:15] the council on any item within the subject matter jurisdiction of the council. That is not
[1:41:19] on the agenda. So this is items that aren't on tonight's agenda. Please limit your comments.
[1:41:24] Either past actions taken by the council or future actions to be taken by the council.
[1:41:28] However, if the subject of the public comment is not on the agenda,
[1:41:32] state law strictly limits the council's ability to respond at this meeting.
[1:41:36] And also we have another way that factors that on time in the city clerk will explain that now on a zoom participation.
[1:41:43] Correct. We are allowing for zoom participation in public comment.
[1:41:47] both on public comment this evening and of course the item 14A. We will be calling members
[1:41:53] of the public who wish to speak in those who are attending via Zoom should use the
[1:41:57] raise your hand button to indicate that you would like to speak for any member of the public that
[1:42:01] has called into the meeting via the teleconference line from your phone. You would push star 9 to raise
[1:42:07] your hand. We will be calling on each speaker and allowing them to turn on their microphone to
[1:42:12] comment, when prompted to speak, you may be asked to unmute in that command as
[1:42:16] star six. As Mayor mentioned for item 14A time, we'll be limited to two minutes,
[1:42:21] and we'll be indicated on the timer. And we will be calling members, we'll probably
[1:42:28] do a few members of in public first, and then we'll swap over to Zoom. We do have a
[1:42:33] round 12 attendees total, but I'm not sure all of them will be speaking. So it's as of
[1:42:39] this moment. Thank you. So do you have any speaker cards for general public comment?
[1:42:44] For general public comment mayor, I do. I have two Dorothy Gleros and Jim Hinton.
[1:42:50] Please,
[1:42:56] you need to come up to the microphone.
[1:43:07] Let me be brief so we have time for everybody tonight. I just wanted to say that I attended
[1:43:11] the first session of the Napa City Academy last Wednesday. I was very, very favorably impressed
[1:43:17] by it. Whoever created that brainchild did a really great job and I'm looking forward to
[1:43:21] next seven minutes. Thank you. We'll see you there. We'll see you at the next one.
[1:43:25] Dorothy mentioned our net up Academy for learning about city governance and the
[1:43:30] departments that we do. So next speaker.
[1:43:38] Good evening, Jim Hinton, 45 Spring Street. Earlier
[1:43:42] today, I asked about a code violation I was waiting for. And I still haven't heard a response
[1:43:51] from it and it was 15 minutes before this meeting started and I politely walked up to our city
[1:43:57] attorney to ask her because I was told that they talked about it with Molly at 2 o'clock
[1:44:03] and I was just trying to get the results that's all and you bit my head off you were very
[1:44:09] rude you treated me like I was out of line for asking a simple question about something the other
[1:44:14] night you were very nice in the room when we're all there and then right now you were just
[1:44:18] extremely mean and rude towards me. I don't understand that. Can we not make a personal?
[1:44:23] She made it personal. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Well, I'm sorry that Mary's putting you through this.
[1:44:28] If Mary wouldn't be violent, she already violated the code twice. You enforced against her. This is one more.
[1:44:34] It's not like I'm out of line. The first two were hit out of the park. This is the third one.
[1:44:38] And you could just be a little more nice about it. You could say, I'm sorry. I can't discuss it with you.
[1:44:43] I've talked to the staff. They're going to get back you shortly. I apologize. And that would have been great.
[1:44:48] That wouldn't have been rude, that would have been a nice way to do it.
[1:44:52] But this is just getting out of control, Mary.
[1:44:55] Why don't you just not try to put your signs up so aggressively?
[1:45:12] I'm sorry that happened right now. I didn't want to start our friendship relationship this way, but it's up to you.
[1:45:26] General public comment.
[1:45:28] Is there a subject matter jurisdiction of the council?
[1:45:41] I'm sorry.
[1:45:41] Hi, my name is I reset our now and I rather talk to the people than you guys.
[1:45:46] And you get real close to the mic and then talk to us.
[1:45:49] Talk to you guys.
[1:45:52] The things you allow to happen in Napa, the things you do in Napa is unacceptable.
[1:45:56] Everybody in this town needs to learn about claim forms.
[1:45:58] They're on the city and county website for up to $10,000.
[1:46:02] And you have six months to the day of incident if you don't like something.
[1:46:04] especially this roundabout that's going in to make a complaint. You're making a complaint to their insurance company to take a
[1:46:10] old man's house and to continue to keep taxing us. This is general public home.
[1:46:15] It doesn't matter. I'm talking. Well, you're in your room to your other
[1:46:18] time. We'll come when we get on to the item. Yeah. I'm just feeling like I'm almost done and it's
[1:46:24] rude to interrupt. I have to cheer them here. Did I ask you to fix something and you didn't fix it?
[1:46:30] I have to choose.
[1:46:31] How does my dog be fixing everything in New York, but you don't fix the pot holes?
[1:46:39] I want your job.
[1:46:51] You know, and if I can please, if I can please, I ask the whole the applause and the cheering
[1:46:58] moves.
[1:46:59] It just makes the meeting run much more smoothly if people are respectful and don't
[1:47:03] cheer and applaud and boo if I can ask flat.
[1:47:06] Thank you.
[1:47:07] So no more general public comment?
[1:47:09] I will ask, if anyone, if anyone on Zoom would like to speak under general public comment,
[1:47:15] can you please raise your hand now?
[1:47:19] There are no hands on Zoom there.
[1:47:27] Okay, here's where we're getting off to a good start.
[1:47:38] All right, so sorry about that.
[1:47:40] We will now move on to the item we are all here for and want to hear each other about
[1:47:47] It's item 148 on our agenda, the five-way intersection improvement project, which includes
[1:47:52] three actions, CEQA, Memorandum of Agreement, amendment to the CalTrans Cooperative Agreement.
[1:47:59] So, what we will do, we will start with a staff report, and we'll go through the staff report.
[1:48:06] And then after the staff report, I will ask council if there's any disclosures they may have for
[1:48:11] information they might have learned outside this public hearing.
[1:48:14] And then members of the public will be provided an opportunity to present testimony during the public comment portion of the public meeting.
[1:48:22] So again, as I said, two minutes and we're going to kick it about nine for public comments so we can move on.
[1:48:28] We can little flexible on that if it goes over.
[1:48:31] So staff is up.
[1:48:34] All right. Well, thank you. Good evening, Council.
[1:48:36] I'm Jessica Low, public work director.
[1:48:38] And I'm joined tonight by Guy Preston, our project manager for the five-way intersection project.
[1:48:43] Also joining us tonight is Special Sequo Council Sarah also which from best best and
[1:48:47] recruiter and Will Burns vice president and principal principal project manager from David
[1:48:52] Jay Powers and Associates who prepared the environmental document will be discussing tonight.
[1:48:58] Representatives from Caltrans are on Zoom as well as their important partners on this project.
[1:49:08] Okay so like I said we are here tonight to discuss the environmental review that's been completed
[1:49:12] on the five-way intersection improvements project. But before I hand things over to guide to
[1:49:16] discuss that. I want to take some time to discuss the project background and overview options that have
[1:49:21] previously been considered. So here's the intersection we're talking about. It's a really
[1:49:27] important hub in the city and it's the convergence of a state highway, state route 121,
[1:49:32] 121 known as the Silverado Trail and local streets of East Avenue, third street and Coonsville Road.
[1:49:38] The Silverado Trail is a state highway running through our community, but it needs to function
[1:49:42] is more than a highway, and we need to make sure that it serves the people who live, work,
[1:49:47] walk, and bike, and napa.
[1:49:51] So as I mentioned, the Silverado Trail is a state highway that runs
[1:49:54] through the city, and it serves both local and regional traffic. Calterans has their response to-
[1:50:00] The bill for the state highway. However, the poor traffic conditions directly affect our community. And so the city has been working closely with
[1:50:06] shelterings on this project to ensure the needs of both the corridor and the people who use it every day are met. The Silverado
[1:50:13] trails identified in our general plan as a crucial corridor. Crucial corridors are primary routes for moving traffic through the community. In addition to the Silverado
[1:50:23] 3rd Street, Coonsville Road, and East Avenue are key city streets.
[1:50:28] Major roads, including crucial corridors, are intended to carry high volumes of traffic
[1:50:33] and help keep through traffic on the main roadways rather than on neighborhood streets that
[1:50:37] are primarily intended for local trips.
[1:50:40] When traffic diverse into neighborhoods to avoid congestion, drivers may speed as they try to
[1:50:45] make up for time lost by taking a less direct route.
[1:50:49] So the general plan identifies improvements on these corridors to help preserve their capacity and maintain acceptable traffic operations and levels of service over time, which also helps preserve local roads for local trips.
[1:51:03] Improvements at this intersection have been identified in the city's general plans since as early as 1989, and the intersection currently operates at a poor level of service indicating that those improvements are needed now.
[1:51:16] So you'll see level of service mentioned when traffic engineers talk about performance of a roadway or an intersection.
[1:51:22] Level of service is a measurement of how the intersection functions,
[1:51:25] graded from an A, best to F, worst.
[1:51:29] It fundamentally describes the quality of the travel experience,
[1:51:32] but it's reflected in a measurable factor like travel time and delay.
[1:51:36] The data showed in this slide came from the traffic city that was performed during the environmental review process.
[1:51:41] It shows that the intersection operated at a level of service E or a delay of 56 to 80 seconds per vehicle and that it will continue to deteriorate over time.
[1:51:51] This is an unacceptable level of service per policy that set in the general plan and data for future years represents what will happen if we do nothing at this intersection now.
[1:52:02] Delays of these links indicate that vehicles are waiting through multiple signal cycles to get through the intersection.
[1:52:10] So, along with improving traffic operations, the project also provides an opportunity to address
[1:52:15] several important safety needs at the intersection. The rate of collisions at the intersection
[1:52:19] has been consistently higher than the statewide average for similar facilities. It's really
[1:52:25] unacceptable to have a state highway that splits our community that does not have good safety records.
[1:52:30] The Silverado Trail from South School to the Northern City limit is also on the city's high injury
[1:52:34] network. As you can see in this photo, there are areas where sidewalks are missing or need to be
[1:52:39] related to me ADA requirements and bicycle facilities are not continuous through the intersection.
[1:52:46] With Silverado Middle School and Stonebridge School located along Coon's Hill Road and
[1:52:50] Alter Heights Elementary just off East Avenue. Improving these conditions would create
[1:52:54] a more complete and accessible route for students and families traveling to and from their schools.
[1:53:00] This intersection also lacks adequate storm drain infrastructure and experiences localized
[1:53:04] flooding and drainage issues during rain events. A project here will improve local drainage
[1:53:09] And I think improving journey into something that everyone, especially the adjacent property owners, has agreed will be a positive result of this project.
[1:53:19] So, many of the challenges mentioned so far have existed for decades, like I mentioned, and as early as 1989, the city's general plan identified that the intersection needed improvements to keep up with increased development and trips.
[1:53:32] In 2014, CalTrans initiated a project that was added then to the city's capital improvement program, which allowed for work to begin to study options for intersection improvements.
[1:53:41] Throughout 2014 and 2015,
[1:53:44] the series of community meetings were held
[1:53:46] to receive input from community members.
[1:53:49] Hundreds of community members provided input
[1:53:51] and that input was used to develop over a dozen options.
[1:53:54] Those options were again shared with the community
[1:53:56] and the 13 concepts were then narrowed down to three
[1:53:59] that had majority community support.
[1:54:02] In the meantime,
[1:54:03] CalTrans adjusted the signal timing to address some delay
[1:54:06] and while those adjustments could address issues
[1:54:08] experienced during off-hours, they did not fully address delays, which are prevalent during
[1:54:13] AM and PM peak hours. In 2017, the three remaining options were presented to the Council
[1:54:19] at the time and Council selected one option, a door round about for further analysis. In 2019,
[1:54:26] Caltrans approved and moved forward with the project was granted. But the project was delayed
[1:54:31] her number of years due to the pandemic. In 2023, Caltrans approved a cooperative agreement
[1:54:36] with Caltrans, detailing roles and responsibilities for the environmental review phase of the project,
[1:54:41] allowing the environmental review process to begin.
[1:54:46] So I want to talk about what we heard from the community throughout that early engagement process.
[1:54:51] Early feedback did help develop options and feedback on those options helped further shape the project,
[1:54:57] improving bicycle and pedestrian facilities.
[1:55:00] Improving safety and reducing delays were early identified priorities. In addition, the local community indicated they wanted to maintain all access through the intersection, with many commenting they wanted to open more streets, not to close them.
[1:55:14] Some community members specifically asked for a round about to be considered. Some indicated nothing needed to be done. Many folks indicated they did not want to lose the character of the community. Much of this is consistent with what we've continued to hear throughout the project.
[1:55:30] So, based on the initial feedback and ideas, like I said, 13 different options were developed.
[1:55:36] This is a significant number of options for a project of this size, and demonstrates the level
[1:55:41] of community interest and commitment to listening and finding the best possible solution.
[1:55:46] These options included signal expansion, various roundabout alternatives, roadway access restrictions,
[1:55:52] rerouting roadways, modifying roadways to one way, and tunnels.
[1:55:56] These various options were then shared with the community, and several were removed from further consideration due to what the community considered fatal flaws.
[1:56:05] Fateful flaws included unacceptable operations at the intersection.
[1:56:09] Community impacts associated with loss or restricted access and inability to meet culture and design standards.
[1:56:17] Many community members at this time express support for the development of around about solution at the intersection.
[1:56:22] Public support was also expressed for improving signal timing at the intersection on an interim basis.
[1:56:29] Like I mentioned, that was implemented in September of 2016, but did not address delays during peak hours.
[1:56:37] Signalized intersections will not be able to correct delays at this location to an acceptable level.
[1:56:42] The alternatives dropped at this point, included any and all alternatives, which altered the intersection access for either east Avenue or Cumesl Road.
[1:56:50] Any alternatives, which ignored or minimized pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and all alternatives, which did not meet
[1:56:57] counter-insminimal, minimum level of service threshold.
[1:57:01] All of the signalized intersection improvements, for example, were deemed infeasible during this process due to impacts to the adjacent facilities,
[1:57:10] access restrictions and unacceptable delays.
[1:57:13] The fatal flaw analysis resulted in those 13 options being narrowed down to 3.
[1:57:20] In all three of those options, we're around about.
[1:57:24] These remaining options were option 5F, a dual roundabout with a four-legged roundabout
[1:57:28] to the north, including East Avenue and 3rd Street, three-legged roundabout to the south,
[1:57:33] including Cumesville Road, option 6, a five-legged roundabout, an option 8, a dual roundabout
[1:57:39] with a three-legged roundabout to the north, including East Avenue, and a four-legged roundabout
[1:57:44] to the south, including 3rd Street.
[1:57:45] When these remaining options were presented to the community, property impacts were a big discussion
[1:57:50] topic with many present-ethamating, wanting to reduce the impacts to properties and preserve
[1:57:55] the character of the neighborhood.
[1:57:57] But Esther and Safety was also important and continues to be a concern of the community.
[1:58:02] Some people express they did not like roundabouts, but more common feedback about the three
[1:58:06] alternatives was that people have traveled through roundabouts elsewhere and think they
[1:58:10] function really well.
[1:58:11] Consistent with what was heard early on, some community members, excuse me, wanted to know if the intersection could be left as is.
[1:58:22] The remaining three options being roundabouts has generated some additional discussion.
[1:58:27] Roundabouts may be less familiar to some drivers but they offer several important safety features that are worth considering.
[1:58:33] Roundabouts are designed to slow vehicles down and reduce or altogether eliminate the types of higher speed or right angle and head on collisions that can occur at traditional intersections.
[1:58:43] The design also significantly reduces the number of places where vehicles can conflict with one another.
[1:58:49] A traditional intersection has 32 potential conflict points while around about has just eight.
[1:58:55] Left turns are not made in roundabouts, and without the signal there's no rush to beat the light,
[1:58:59] which can cause some drivers to speed up when entering an intersection.
[1:59:03] Vehicles not only enter around about at lower speeds, they also enter at a shallower angle compared to a traditional intersection,
[1:59:09] and if a collision does occur, the combination of lower speeds and less of your angles generally
[1:59:14] means there is less potential for serious injury. This is meaningful, as vehicle speed is the number
[1:59:20] one indicator in determining the severity and outcome of a collision.
[1:59:27] Improved safety doesn't just
[1:59:28] supply to vehicles, it's true for pedestrians and cyclists as well. Vehicles traveling at slower
[1:59:33] speeds have more time to see a pedestrian and respond, while pedestrians have more time to judge
[1:59:38] whether it's safe to cross. In addition to lower speeds, pedestrians only have to look at one
[1:59:43] lane with traffic coming from a single direction. This is not so in a traditional intersection,
[1:59:48] where traffic is coming from multiple directions, including from side streets. In the five-way
[1:59:53] intersection, the existing crossing with the varies depending on which roadways being crossed from 50 feet.
[2:00:00] A cross-coups will road to over 66 feet across the Silverado Trail at East Avenue. This new design will not only lower the individual crossing length across each direction of traffic, it will also lower the total crossing length. For example, I mentioned the crossing distance across Silverado Trail at East Avenue is currently over 66 feet. With the new design, the crossing distance across the northbound travel lane will be 17 feet and the crossing distance across the southbound travel lane will be approximately 8 feet.
[2:00:30] for a total crossing distance of 35 feet, almost half of what it is right now.
[2:00:36] These shorter crossing distances mean reduced time and conflict with vehicles.
[2:00:41] The crossings are also slightly back from the main flow of traffic.
[2:00:45] This is beneficial for both pedestrians and vehicles and is considered best practice.
[2:00:50] This is visible at the top of the image on the screen.
[2:00:53] When a driver approaches around about, they are looking to their left, searching for a gap in traffic
[2:00:58] to enter the roundabout. If the crosswalk is right at the edge of the circle, a driver might
[2:01:03] look left, see a gap, and go, accidentally striking a pedestrian on their right. A step back
[2:01:08] ensures the driver deals with the pedestrian crossing before they start hunting for that gap
[2:01:13] and traffic. When drivers exit the roundabout, they're accelerating and turning. By placing the
[2:01:18] crosswalk further down the exit lane, the driver has had time to straighten out their vehicle,
[2:01:23] and can focus entirely on looking for pedestrians ahead rather than doing so while
[2:01:28] managing a turn. Having a crosswalk setback from the intersection also provides space for vehicle
[2:01:34] queuing. If an exiting vehicle has to stop for a pedestrian, the distance between the crosswalk
[2:01:40] and the roundabout provides enough space for that vehicle to wait, without its rear ends sticking
[2:01:44] out and blocking the entire roundabout circulating traffic. Drivers waiting to enter the roundabout
[2:01:50] can pull up past the crosswalk to the yield line. This allows them to wait for a gap in traffic
[2:01:55] without blocking the sidewalk or forcing pedestrians to walk into live traffic to get around
[2:02:00] them.
[2:02:01] These pedestrian crossings can also be illuminated like they are at the first street round
[2:02:04] about, providing additional visibility to vehicles.
[2:02:08] And for this particular project, while bicycles can travel through the roundabouts like
[2:02:12] a vehicle, a shared use path will be provided around the intersection for them and pedestrians.
[2:02:23] Okay.
[2:02:25] So, going back into the options, I'll look at the first option. Option 5F is shown here,
[2:02:31] overlaid on the existing intersection. For each of these next few images, north is to the right.
[2:02:37] In this option, option 5F included two roundabouts with a four-legged roundabout to the north,
[2:02:42] serving east Avenue and third street, and a three-legged roundabout to the south, serving Cumesville Road.
[2:02:48] Silverado Trail enters and exits each roundabout.
[2:02:51] This option reduces the delay experience at all intersections for all approaches.
[2:02:56] At the northern roundabout, the delay is reduced to 9.1 seconds in the AMP hour for a
[2:03:02] level of service A and 10.2 seconds in the PMP hour for a level of service B.
[2:03:07] At the southern roundabout, which includes Cumsville Road, the delay is reduced to about
[2:03:12] 8 seconds in the AMP hour and 7.4 seconds in the PMP hour for a level of service A in
[2:03:17] both the morning and the afternoon.
[2:03:19] While delays will slightly increase in future years, the levels of service remain acceptable
[2:03:24] at either ARB depending on the roadway approach. Both levels of service indicate free-flowing
[2:03:29] traffic and are acceptable for general plan policy. This option has the fewest number of
[2:03:34] property impacts, but property impacts are not insignificant.
[2:03:42] I will go through the property impacts
[2:03:43] for this option and for the next two, I want to mention that the final property needs will
[2:03:48] We disherment which included extensive public outreach as well as preliminary engineering
[2:03:53] to develop alternatives and prescope the project.
[2:03:57] Once resources for advancing the project were identified, the city filed with known as
[2:04:03] a notice preparation and forming interested parties that the city plan to prepare an
[2:04:08] environmental impact report or EIR for a proposed 5-way intersection improvement project.
[2:04:15] After issuing the notice of preparation, the city, with oversight by CalTrans, performed additional
[2:04:22] scoping, the process included seeking and implementing public input and the development of alternatives.
[2:04:28] We also performed technical analysis needed to prepare a draft EIR.
[2:04:33] The city then issued what is called a notice of availability to announce that a draft EIR
[2:04:38] had been completed and was available for public review.
[2:04:41] After the review period, the city began working on responding to public comment and preparing a final EIR.
[2:04:50] We posted the final EIR on July 7th and issued a notice of availability which brings us here today.
[2:04:57] If certified by the first Fresnel Legion.
[2:05:00] On today's agenda, we will file a notice of determination with the state clearing house within five days of tonight's hearing.
[2:05:13] The scope and content of any IR are guided by the requirement set forth in SQL guidelines, and from input gathered from project partners and the public during the notice preparation and scoping process.
[2:05:25] The EIR includes a full analysis of the proposed project and the no-build alternative.
[2:05:31] It also provides an analysis of alternatives considered and rejected.
[2:05:37] The EIR evaluates the project's potential impacts on the 16 environmental areas shown here.
[2:05:44] Although the EIR identified potentially feasible mitigation measures that would avoid minimize or reduce significant adverse environmental effects.
[2:05:55] The EIR concluded there would potentially be significant environmental impacts into categories in the area of cultural resources the impacts were determined to be significant and unavoidable and in the area of noise and vibration potential impacts were determined to be less than significant with mitigation.
[2:06:18] The EIR determined that the impacts to noise to be less than significant, once constructed
[2:06:25] in an operation, noise would not result in a substantial increase in permanent ambient noise
[2:06:34] levels.
[2:06:35] It was determined that construction noise levels would not exceed the quantitative noise levels
[2:06:42] established by cell tramps, including in the noise category as a vibration.
[2:06:48] The analysis concluded that the proposed project would not result in the generation of excessive
[2:06:54] permanent vibration, however our studies concluded that the project's construction would result in
[2:07:00] vibration levels that could cause damage to existing buildings and last mitigation is implemented.
[2:07:11] By itself, noise was determined to be less than significant since construction equipment is required
[2:07:16] to conform to California's noise specifications.
[2:07:20] We will also be restricting construction
[2:07:21] to acceptable time periods and will locate noise-generating
[2:07:25] equipment as far as practical from sensitive noise
[2:07:29] receptors.
[2:07:31] For vibration, the proposed project was determined
[2:07:33] to be less than significant with mitigation.
[2:07:37] To reach that determination, we must employ certain mitigation,
[2:07:40] such as using quiet equipment technology
[2:07:43] We went available, avoiding vibratory rollers within 25 feet of structures, avoiding dropping
[2:07:50] heavy objects within 25 feet of structures, avoiding holograms, large bull bozers and
[2:07:57] case-on-drilling equipment within 15 feet of structure structures.
[2:08:02] Additionally, we will survey document and monitor buildings within close proximity to
[2:08:07] to potential vibration impacts during construction.
[2:08:18] The project study the impacts on cultural resources and determine that to construct the project
[2:08:23] would need to negotiate and acquire the property at 801 Silverado Trail, shown at the
[2:08:29] top left, to have sufficient public land to construct the northern roundabout.
[2:08:35] 801 Silverado Trail is listed on the city's historic resource inventory, thus impacting the
[2:08:41] of the East Napa Historic District by removing one of its contributing properties.
[2:08:48] The Historic District is shown outline and bold on the bottom graphic with contributing properties in red.
[2:08:56] The proposed project would have impacts to 801 Silverado Trail, which are considered significant under-sequa.
[2:09:07] The following mitigation was identified for impacts to the East Napa Historic District,
[2:09:12] and 801 Silverado Trail.
[2:09:16] The East Napa Historic District will be re-evaluated for listing
[2:09:19] on the National Register of Historic Places.
[2:09:23] Recordation of 801 Silverado Trail,
[2:09:25] consistent with the Historic American Building Survey,
[2:09:29] standards will also take place.
[2:09:33] Napa County landmarks will assist
[2:09:35] and salvaging materials from 801 Silverado Trail.
[2:09:39] New way-sounding fines will identify the East Napa Historic District.
[2:09:45] The city of Napa working with Napa County landmarks will develop a professional oral history documenting the neighborhood.
[2:09:53] And finally, the new interpretive displays will tell the story of the East Napa Historic District and Little...
[2:10:02] Currently, there is no signage identifying the district and far too many people don't even know it is a historic district. This mitigation will help document the district and ensure its importance to the history of Napa has preserved to the greatest extent possible.
[2:10:17] We'd like to thank, CalTranscultural Resource staff, the State Historic Preservation Office,
[2:10:24] who consulted with Napa County Landmarks and other parties to help identify the mitigation
[2:10:30] as feasible and beneficial.
[2:10:32] This mitigation is included in the EIR and a Memorandum of Agreement with the State Historic
[2:10:38] Preservation Office, which is the subject of the second resolution for which we are requesting
[2:10:43] action on today.
[2:10:45] I would also like to call out Christine Madrid-French, who is the director of Napalán
[2:10:52] Marks, and put on a very informative webinar on the East Napa Historic District, more commonly
[2:10:58] referred to as little Italy.
[2:11:01] Staff worked hard to identify this mitigation and even consider whether it would be feasible
[2:11:05] to find a new location for the Structure at 801 Silverado Trail.
[2:11:09] But, unfortunately, as Jessica explained, the building
[2:11:13] masonry construction makes it infeasible to move.
[2:11:17] So, Kalatrans in the city would implement the mitigation identified in the EIR.
[2:11:22] However, even with this mitigation, the impacts to the district are considered to be significant
[2:11:27] under sequit.
[2:11:32] Pursuant to sequitual guidelines, the city must balance the economic, legal, social, technological,
[2:11:39] or other benefits of the project against its unavoidable environmental risks
[2:11:43] and determining whether to approve the project.
[2:11:46] If the specific benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects,
[2:11:53] those environmental effects may be considered acceptable.
[2:11:57] Having reduced the adverse significant environmental effects of the project to the extent
[2:12:03] feasible by adopting the mitigation measures, having considered the entire administrative
[2:12:08] record of the project, the city has wade the benefits of the project against its unavoidable
[2:12:13] adverse impacts after mitigation in regard to cultural resources.
[2:12:19] While recognizing that the unavoidable adverse impacts are significant
[2:12:22] underseek with thresholds, the city must find that the unavoidable
[2:12:26] adverse impacts that will result from the project are acceptable and outweighed
[2:12:31] by the specific social, economic, and other benefits of the project.
[2:12:36] There are three parts of the statement of overriding considerations,
[2:12:39] which can be found at the end of attachment B to the first resolution.
[2:12:45] First, there are significant unavoidable impacts
[2:12:48] with respect to the findings and in recognition of the facts
[2:12:52] that there are included in the record,
[2:12:56] the city has determined that the project will result
[2:12:58] in a significant unmitigated or unavoidable impact
[2:13:01] associated with the residents at 801 Silverado Trail,
[2:13:05] which is listed on the historic resources inventory
[2:13:08] as a contributor to the East Napa Historic District.
[2:13:13] Second, there are overriding considerations.
[2:13:16] We ask that the City Council specifically adopt
[2:13:18] and make the statement of overriding considerations
[2:13:21] that this project has eliminated or substantially lessened
[2:13:25] all significant effects of the environment
[2:13:28] where feasible and finds that the remaining significant,
[2:13:32] unavoidable impacts of the project are acceptable,
[2:13:34] in light of the economic, legal, environmental, social, technological, or other considerations
[2:13:41] because the benefits of the project are way significant adverse environmental impact of
[2:13:47] the project. We also asked that the city council find that each of the overriding considerations
[2:13:52] constitutes a separate and independent basis for finding that the benefits of the project are way
[2:14:04] consideration, wanting approval of the project.
[2:14:08] These matters are supported by evidence in the record that includes, but is not limited
[2:14:14] to the City of Napa 2040 General Plan, the City of Napa Bicycle Plan, and the City of
[2:14:21] Napa Pedestrian Plan.
[2:14:25] Finally, the benefits of the project.
[2:14:28] We recommend that the City Council consider the public record of proceedings on the proposed
[2:14:33] project and other written materials presented to the city as well as oral and written testimony
[2:14:39] at all public hearings related to the project and does hereby determine that implementation
[2:14:45] of the project a specifically provided in the project documents would result in the following
[2:14:51] substantial public benefits. First, intersection operation improvements, consistent with the
[2:14:58] and policies have been next.
[2:15:00] City of Nath, the 2040 General Plan, the project would address existing operational deficiencies that are anticipated to increase with continued growth in the area.
[2:15:10] The project would result and reduce driver delay and congestion at the project intersection.
[2:15:16] And secondly, safety and accessibility improvements. The project would address the substandard pedestrian facilities and lack of bicycle facilities at the existing intersection.
[2:15:26] The project would improve bicycle and pedestrian facilities at the intersection and meet the American
[2:15:32] with Disabilities Act requirements to improve safety and accessibility for all modes of travel.
[2:15:46] So what are the socio-economic impacts
[2:15:50] of the alternatives? Each of the alternatives considered
[2:15:54] but rejected would result in several full acquisitions that would not occur with the proposed project.
[2:16:00] As Jessica explained, Napa Granite and Marble works, has been part of our community for over a decade and would need to be acquired if we were to build either the single roundabout or the double roundabout alternative.
[2:16:13] Would surge lead?
[2:16:14] Third Street directed to the double roundabout.
[2:16:19] 1010 East Avenue consists of two homes.
[2:16:26] Boy, that sure helps things.
[2:16:28] So we know it was more than a decade, we understand that it's misspoke and this is not helping.
[2:16:35] Is that why we're here?
[2:16:38] Please by apologies for misspeaking for more than a century.
[2:16:46] Please continue.
[2:16:50] Tent any east avenue consists of two homes behind NAPA granted marble works, where there is a multi-generational family that owns and operates the business.
[2:16:58] and that would also need to be acquired for the single roundabout alternative.
[2:17:03] There would also be impacts with the double roundabout alternative
[2:17:06] which starts free directed to the sun around about.
[2:17:09] There are four businesses on third street parcel, including also our plumbing,
[2:17:14] Pearson appliance, East Side Studio, and Rola.
[2:17:18] The third street property would likely require a full acquisition of third street
[2:17:22] was routed to the sun around about.
[2:17:24] And that alternative third street would go right through,
[2:17:27] all start plumbing, severing the building that contains all four businesses.
[2:17:32] On Silverado Trail, both Napotire and Wheel, and Palash Motors would require complete
[2:17:37] acquisitions for either of the other two alternatives.
[2:17:42] So as you can see, there would be significant socioeconomic impacts associated with either
[2:17:46] of the other two alternatives, which is why they were considered but rejected.
[2:17:52] With that I will hand the mic back over to Jessica to finish our presentation.
[2:18:02] So with Council approval of the recommended actions tonight, which I would be remiss if
[2:18:06] I didn't recognize is a different Council than the 2017 Council that considered many
[2:18:11] of these options.
[2:18:12] The next step would be to file the notice of determination with the state clearing house and
[2:18:17] advance the final design to 65% complete.
[2:18:20] Right of way work could then begin, which is a multi-step process.
[2:18:23] This would start with a cooperative agreement with Caltrans to detail each agency's responsibilities for the right-of-way process.
[2:18:31] Crippardinees would be fully mapped, and appraisals completed for the necessary acquisitions.
[2:18:37] Once appraisals are complete, offers can be made and negotiations would take place.
[2:18:42] Relocation assistance will be provided where applicable.
[2:18:45] We would also be working with various utility owners to come to agreement about utility relocations,
[2:18:50] and the cultural resource mitigation that guide detailed would begin.
[2:18:55] Throughout the right-of-way process,
[2:18:56] we would continue to apply for construction funding and finalize the design.
[2:19:01] With funding and final design, the project would be advertised for contractors to complete the work.
[2:19:06] All of this ends with construction of the project,
[2:19:08] and at this point, if all of these steps that I mentioned occur without any substantial delays,
[2:19:13] construction could begin as early as 2029.
[2:19:18] So there are three recommended actions tonight.
[2:19:23] I'm not going to read all of those words.
[2:19:26] But they are to certify the EIR, making findings,
[2:19:30] approving the proposed project,
[2:19:32] adopting a statement of overwriting considerations,
[2:19:35] and adopting a mitigation monitoring and reporting program.
[2:19:38] Your action would also authorize a approval of the memorandum of agreement
[2:19:42] with the State Historic Preservation Office, or Shippo,
[2:19:46] That details the cultural resource mitigation that minimizes the impacts due to the removal of the structure at 801 Silverado.
[2:19:54] And then finally, and somewhat separate from the EIR action, you are being asked to authorize in a minute.
[2:20:00] Amendment to a cooperative agreement with Caltrans. So this is the end of our presentation and we're here for any questions that you may have.
[2:20:09] Thank you, Jessica. I think we're going to move right into the closures.
[2:20:18] I have no disclosures. Beyond obtaining all the letters that we all have, an information that was provided prior to the hearing.
[2:20:28] The same other than letters from the public, no disclosures.
[2:20:34] Yes, similarly, since I've been working with this since 2017,
[2:20:37] talked to a lot of, a lot of, a lot of,
[2:20:39] a lot of residents have talked to property owners,
[2:20:41] but just no, no other information on working with any of the consultants
[2:20:45] or anybody else.
[2:20:46] So no, no true disclosures.
[2:20:49] No disclosures.
[2:20:51] I did attend the public meetings at Alter Heights Elementary School.
[2:20:56] Thank you.
[2:20:57] So now I'm going to open the public testimony for this public hearing so we'll get a lot
[2:21:04] of help from the clerk so like earlier if we can limit disruptions and we get through
[2:21:10] and we hear your comments and we move expediently I think we'll all benefit for that so I
[2:21:16] think the clerk is going to do like five at a time.
[2:21:19] Correct.
[2:21:19] I will call five names at a time if you are participating via Zoom we will be moving back
[2:21:27] between folks who are in the audience and also calling on those who are attending via Zoom.
[2:21:31] So if you are attending via Zoom and you do wish to provide public comment on this item,
[2:21:35] if you could raise your hands now and keep those up until we call you that would be helpful
[2:21:40] in determining how many members of the public would like to speak.
[2:21:44] I do have 42 cards in front of me and so far only one hand on Zoom may are just to give you an update.
[2:21:51] but I'll begin with the first five names, Diane Silver,
[2:21:55] Lori Donovan Lado, Courtney Priest, Vivian Brandy,
[2:22:01] and Christine French.
[2:22:02] And no particular order, just come up.
[2:22:04] If you heard your name, you can be prepared to speak
[2:22:07] in two minutes.
[2:22:08] And please be sure, you can move the microphone
[2:22:10] to speak clearly so everyone can hear.
[2:22:13] Thank you.
[2:22:14] To members of the City Council, my name is Diane Silver.
[2:22:19] I am a NAPA resident for 55 years and a local physician in private practice for 47 years.
[2:22:27] I am strongly opposed to the proposed roundabout in Alta-Hice.
[2:22:33] I have lived in the Alta-Hice neighborhood for 50 years.
[2:22:39] Nearly every day and sometimes many times in the day,
[2:22:44] I cost that intersection you are proposing to change.
[2:22:47] I am always grateful for the traffic lights and the safety I feel at that intersection.
[2:22:57] The time to traffic lights also provides safety to the many pedestrians and students
[2:23:03] that cross there.
[2:23:05] I have never seen an accident or heard screeching breaks or seen any near misses.
[2:23:14] I have seen many students and pedestrians cross safely with the welcome traffic lights.
[2:23:21] I am happy to see the well maintained White House on the corner, occasionally with Christmas decorations,
[2:23:27] and across the street, the tombstone makers who made tombstones for my dear family, my loved ones over the years.
[2:23:35] I oppose your displacing those businesses where a project that does not help our community.
[2:23:40] On the other hand, I avoid the first street round about, nearly every time,
[2:23:55] nearly every time I do go there, and I went there today, there seems to be a near miss accident.
[2:24:02] Even as a long time driver, I am usually confused as to which lane I should be in, whether
[2:24:09] I have to stop, yield, or if I have the right away.
[2:24:14] On the other hand, at the Alta Heights corner, every driver knows exactly what he needs to do.
[2:24:21] Thank you.
[2:24:30] Dean, my name is Courtney Priest, and I'm a Napa resident.
[2:24:33] I recently submitted a detailed op-ed in the register about the five-way projects, but
[2:24:37] Tonight, I want to put one question directly to the council.
[2:24:41] Before the city takes Charlie Rossi's lifelong home,
[2:24:44] has it demonstrated that doing so is absolutely necessary.
[2:24:47] I don't question that five-way has serious safety
[2:24:50] and operational concerns.
[2:24:51] My question is whether solving them requires taking this home.
[2:24:55] Five-way isn't just an intersection problem.
[2:24:58] It's the product of transportation.
[2:25:00] And economic choices, Napa has made over decades. We've built an economy that depends enormously
[2:25:06] on bringing people into this valley. We market Napa nationally and internationally. Millions
[2:25:12] visit tourism supports roughly 16,000 jobs. And I'm not arguing against tourism. It is fundamental
[2:25:19] to our economy. I'm asking whether our transportation planning has kept pace with the economy
[2:25:25] that we've built.
[2:25:26] Napa has a publicly authorized tourism improvement district specifically designed to promote tourism
[2:25:31] and increase hotel stays.
[2:25:34] With new hotels continuing to pop up across Napa, we're creating capacity for even more
[2:25:39] visitors.
[2:25:40] If we continue encouraging a visitor-based economy, how are we planning for the transportation
[2:25:45] demand that it creates?
[2:25:46] And if housing costs mean many of the people who work here must commute into the valley,
[2:25:51] How are we planning for that demand?
[2:25:53] Because right now the answer is cars.
[2:25:56] Visitors come in, workers come in,
[2:25:58] and we build a transportation system that expects them to come in cars.
[2:26:02] The Vine provides an important service,
[2:26:05] but we've never built regional public transportation
[2:26:07] at a scale comparable to the tourism economy
[2:26:10] and workforce travel demand.
[2:26:12] We spent decades creating.
[2:26:14] So why want to evaluate in five ways
[2:26:16] we begin with projected automobile demand
[2:26:19] As though that demand simply happened to us, it didn't.
[2:26:22] It is the consequence of decades of decisions about tourism, housing, growth, and transportation.
[2:26:28] And I'm not asking you to build a railroad instead of fixing five way.
[2:26:32] I'm not claiming transit would necessarily save Charlie's house.
[2:26:35] I'm asking whether anyone modeled it.
[2:26:38] Did the city cow transit or NVTA model materially improved regional transit?
[2:26:42] Recaculate automobile demand through five way end determine whether reduced demand could allow a smaller project footprint.
[2:26:51] I'm going to finish my thought here. If you did, please show us. Before government exercise is one of its most extraordinary powers, the power to take Charlie Rossi's home, the burden should be on government to prove necessity, and that means examining not just the design it's selected, but the assumptions that led to the design. We cannot encourage the demand on one hand and treat its consequences as inevitable on the other.
[2:27:16] Thank you. Because one more sentence I will finish, because if that is how we plan for
[2:27:21] Napa's future, we should all be asking who's home or business will be in the way next.
[2:27:27] Thank you.
[2:27:38] Okay. Good evening. I'm Christine Madrid-French Executive Director of Napa County Landmarks.
[2:27:44] We've been actively engaged with CalTrans on the Silverado 5way Project since 2025,
[2:27:50] and we are a consulting party on the memorandum of agreement.
[2:27:53] Throughout that process, our focus has been on recognizing and reducing impacts to the
[2:27:58] East Napa historic district and preserving the history and character of Little Italy.
[2:28:03] I'd like to thank Ray Guadani and the community for sharing the history of the neighborhood with me.
[2:28:08] And I wanted to note that more than 200 people have watched our informational webinar that we've posted to YouTube.
[2:28:16] This is one of Napa's oldest neighborhoods of place where generations of families built homes and businesses
[2:28:21] that helps shape the city we know today.
[2:28:25] We also recognize that there is enormous economic potential
[2:28:28] in a preserved and restored neighborhood.
[2:28:32] As noted, the MOA provides important opportunities for documentation,
[2:28:36] interpretations, signage, and other mitigation measures
[2:28:39] that recognize the history and stewardship of the community.
[2:28:43] We look forward to ensuring that these measures are meaningful
[2:28:46] to the community and to continue identifying
[2:28:49] and protecting the invaluable historic resources of Little Italy.
[2:28:54] Thank you.
[2:28:55] Thank you.
[2:29:01] Good evening.
[2:29:02] My name is Vivian Brandy and I live on East Avenue.
[2:29:07] I've been living there for 15 years and used a five-way intersection daily.
[2:29:13] I agree with the first commenter.
[2:29:15] I've never seen any problems there.
[2:29:17] I've never seen any accidents there.
[2:29:19] I've never seen any injuries or problems there.
[2:29:22] Um,
[2:29:25] the stop lights, uh, the centers and the stop lights were adjusted by
[2:29:30] Caltrans or whoever did that, which was, it's some, somewhat needed.
[2:29:35] Um, but I think some, I don't see any problems with the intersection.
[2:29:39] The issue is, um, a lot of drivers just don't have the patience to wait their turn
[2:29:45] at the stop light.
[2:29:46] I'd like to see the intersection, um, maintain its original character in the historical
[2:29:53] district and I'd like to see you leave the intersection alone and leave.
[2:30:00] Mr. Rossi, hello. Thank you.
[2:30:11] Hi, my name is Laurie Donovan-Ladal and I lived in Nepal my life and noted all the changes
[2:30:18] and I've been up here before on some of these other controversial subjects that we have. And I brought
[2:30:27] a some petitions for one of you to
[2:30:34] the most many of you probably are here tonight and so I
[2:30:39] appreciate the opportunity to say something and I've listened to all this yak yak about all
[2:30:47] of the studies that you've done and so on and so forth and I appreciate the thoughts that you've
[2:30:53] on it. But the environmental impact doesn't really match in my mind. I just thought of this
[2:31:01] tonight. The emotional impact that this obviously is having on this town. And I feel
[2:31:07] sorry for you folks up here because we really want a city council that respects our communities
[2:31:18] emotional impact about how we want to keep Napa Napa.
[2:31:28] I've also, I've also taken the
[2:31:31] time to go out there and study that intersection myself. There's a great number of
[2:31:37] huge trucks rolling through there every day all the time. I don't know if any
[2:31:43] of you folks have been out there too. Look at that, but that's happening. Also, I
[2:31:52] to be affected by it, I counted the employees that may or may not have a job and it's well
[2:31:59] over 50. So if this goes through the way, I think it's going to go through a lot of people
[2:32:07] and not only going to lose their land, but their employees are not going to serve their employees.
[2:32:15] Thank you. I have to hold you at the time when it.
[2:32:19] next because we have a type we have to hold you thank
[2:32:26] you. Next five speakers,
[2:32:30] Carol Finch, Theresa McKee, Steve Simich, Mike Matthews, Michelle Mc.
[2:32:40] No
[2:32:40] particular order. Come on up.
[2:32:52] My name is Carol Finch. I've lived here my
[2:32:54] entire life. I have known Charlie Rossi for 65 years. And yes, in fact, would you
[2:33:01] people quit putting online that he doesn't live there. I just visited him on Sunday for
[2:33:07] his birthday. He's 84. He has lived there his entire life. Your comments are causing
[2:33:15] more grief than help to him. He has lived there. His father bought that piece or his grandpa
[2:33:23] bought that piece of property. His father built that house. So it's way more than 100 years
[2:33:30] go because he's 83. So another fact I want to say quickly is has anybody here driven
[2:33:41] on Silverado Trail from Monticello Road to Souscle. I live on out on Monticello Road.
[2:33:51] If you start there at 4 o'clock in the afternoon unless you folks are going to put round
[2:33:55] about it at every darn stoplight, you're going to have traffic back up, and it's going to
[2:34:03] be backed up at SOSCO.
[2:34:07] Around about, you're going to stop it, Lincoln, you're going to stop
[2:34:11] it, Hague, and you're going to stop it first, and then you're going to get to the Charlie
[2:34:18] Roundabout, but they're going to be backed up at SOSCO. So I don't know if anybody's bothered
[2:34:22] to bring this up, but I don't drive there any more because of it.
[2:34:34] Tom's a waste.
[2:34:44] I've got council members.
[2:34:49] My name's Theresa McKee.
[2:34:52] I've lived on Coobsville Road for 40 plus years.
[2:34:55] I travel across this intersection, occasional to multiple times a day.
[2:35:00] There are just a few issues I like you to consider. I did read the studies. I may not be as well informed
[2:35:06] about this, but I do know that this is a huge project at an exorbitant cost. Nearly due
[2:35:12] to wait times at the traffic light and not so much for safety concerns. I too have been in those
[2:35:19] long traffic lines at the beginning and end of the school day. They are temporary. A bottle rock traffic
[2:35:26] temporary. We support that. The fairest temporary. We residents that live out there know this.
[2:35:34] Regarding the traffic safety issue, we're checking only kind of speak about anecdotally because
[2:35:40] I don't have accidents to statistics like you might, but I can tell you that in my 40 plus
[2:35:45] years of living on Coobsville, I have never not once seen an accident. It's well taken care of
[2:35:54] It's safe for the kids to cross because of the lights.
[2:35:58] And which brings me to the concerns about pedestrian safety issues.
[2:36:03] There are many more Silverado, middle school students who
[2:36:06] walk and bike to school, and we choir crossing either
[2:36:09] Silverado Trail or Coobsville or both.
[2:36:12] I've experienced the pedestrians at the first street
[2:36:15] that cluster of roundabouts, the first street by Brown's Valley.
[2:36:19] And I noticed that it does stop and backup during pedestrian
[2:36:24] and crossings. And to add to that also, it's not always easy to see the pedestrians.
[2:36:32] I don't know if it's the artwork or what, but that's a problem. That's a problem for me.
[2:36:36] Seriously, if I'm certain angles, you don't always see other pedestrians. But there are so
[2:36:44] few at that section, but there are a lot at the five-way intersection and their children.
[2:36:49] Thank you, Theresa.
[2:36:50] Thanks.
[2:36:58] Hello, I'm Michelle McMaster and I've spoke at meetings in the past regarding the integrity of our community and keeping its historic value.
[2:37:08] My grandchildren are fifth generation napkins. I've lived two blocks from this intersection for 37 years now.
[2:37:15] And I'm sorry. I don't have prepared notes. I didn't think I could be here tonight.
[2:37:18] But to keep my thoughts clear, I would like to state that in that time that I've lived
[2:37:24] two blocks from this intersection, I only know of one accident.
[2:37:29] And I see the kids mine included that cross those intersections when they were going
[2:37:34] to school, travel safely in that area.
[2:37:38] I think that Napa has sold its sold to tourism.
[2:37:41] And I think that we should make,
[2:37:46] I think we should take every precaution to preserve any history
[2:37:50] that we have left, Joe Rossi's home being one of those, putting a sign in his home spot
[2:37:56] or anywhere else in our area is not the same. We need to keep the actual history in place.
[2:38:03] What I did not hear and have not read is if this project does go through and I pray that
[2:38:09] it does not, what is the impact during the construction? I want to know the timeline that
[2:38:15] It's going to attack.
[2:38:16] What is the rerouting of those two major schools and the other businesses in that area?
[2:38:21] As a homeowner in that area, I travel that intersection sometimes up to three times a day.
[2:38:27] And if that's going to impact my quality of life and the others that live in the area
[2:38:32] or pass through that, this needs to be addressed right along with the rest of the slides
[2:38:36] or presented tonight.
[2:38:38] And those were not.
[2:38:39] And I question why that is.
[2:38:41] So thank you for allowing me to have this moment.
[2:38:43] And again, I hope it does not go through.
[2:38:46] Thank you.
[2:38:56] Good evening.
[2:38:57] My name is Mike Matthews and I'm a Napa resident.
[2:39:00] I submitted a written comment yesterday regarding the five way intersection project
[2:39:05] but wanted to come here tonight because I feel strongly this decision does there is more consideration
[2:39:10] before the city moves forward.
[2:39:13] I understand this intersection needs improvement and I'm not here to argue that nothing should ever be done.
[2:39:18] What I'm asking you to consider is whether this particular solution 5F is really the right solution for NAPA.
[2:39:26] This alternative requires the city to acquire an ultimately demolish a home at 801 Silverado Trail.
[2:39:33] This is not an abandoned building or an empty parcel.
[2:39:36] It's a long time home of an 84-year-old NAPA resident who has lived their entire life.
[2:39:42] I think that should matter.
[2:39:43] The city's own environmental review identifies the loss of this historic property as significant and unavoidable impact.
[2:39:53] It also evaluated alternatives that would avoid demolishing this home.
[2:39:58] So before we make a decision...
[2:40:00] Can not be undone? I think we should absolutely be certain that we've exhausted every reasonable alternative. We've lived with this intersection for a long time. There is time to get this right. Once this man's home is gone, we can't reconsider, we can't put it back, we can't give him back the home and neighborhood, we spent his life. Transportation improvements are important, safety is important, but how we treat the people who already live in our community is important.
[2:40:30] to.
[2:40:35] I'm asking you tonight not to approve alternative 5F and not to move this project forward
[2:40:41] in its current form. Please take another look at the alternatives and determine whether we can
[2:40:46] improve this intersection without requiring this loss of this life long home. We can improve our
[2:40:53] city without losing sight of the people who make Napa a community. Thank you. Thank you.
[2:41:08] Steve Simmons, Napa California, and Native Napa, and Native Napa in 68 years.
[2:41:17] I grew up at 1010 East Avenue, and I've lived my life there.
[2:41:22] I've spent my entire life at the business 50 years, 50 years I've been working there.
[2:41:28] The main thing I'm concerned about is if you approve the CIR, I want to make sure that
[2:41:34] The city of Napa and the state of California adequately compensate the people that they're taking property
[2:41:42] from. And that is a big concern for me. Especially our business. We need access for our customers.
[2:41:49] We need access for our deliveries. And I want to make sure that all our neighboring businesses,
[2:41:55] posh motors, nap attire, and piercens, all have that same consideration when you do the project.
[2:42:05] So thank you very much.
[2:42:07] Thanks, Steve.
[2:42:12] Next five names, Vanessa Schmidt, Bailey Schmidt, Brandy Schmidt, Vanessa Struven, and Anita
[2:42:19] Hoss.
[2:42:22] And thank you, past speakers for keeping it in time.
[2:42:25] We're trying to get everybody a chance.
[2:42:36] Hi, my name is Anita Hoss.
[2:42:37] I've lived on off-a-coupsville road, I lived off-a-coupsville road for all my life.
[2:42:46] I'm just really sad that it seems like nobody has any regard for historic buildings anymore.
[2:42:54] You just put up a sign.
[2:42:57] The intersection works fine, except for during school.
[2:43:00] It gets a little backed up, but that's it.
[2:43:04] Thank you.
[2:43:06] My
[2:43:26] name is Brandy Schmidt. I do not want to compromise public safety.
[2:43:50] I do
[2:43:54] not want to
[2:43:54] is undesirable, just place, take over the place of someone or something.
[2:44:12] Good afternoon. My name is Vanessa Schmidt. I'm the owner of Schmidt Family Childcare Home
[2:44:18] and a lifelong napa local. I'm here with my family this evening to voice my opposition
[2:44:23] to moving forward with the Silver Auto Trail 5way intersection round about project.
[2:44:31] Our
[2:44:33] Affectiveness is the displacement of fellow Napa resident Mr. Rossi.
[2:44:37] As you can see by the amount of vocal support in your Napa locals, we do not want this.
[2:44:45] I speak for myself, my family, and the people I've spoken to so far when I say we're willing
[2:44:51] to wait a few extra minutes in traffic at this light in order to not displace Mr. Rossi
[2:44:57] or cause the fiscal and physical.
[2:45:00] People upheaval to our city, kicking the problem up the road,
[2:45:06] kicking the problem up the road, will not fix this issue, our problem is with highway 29 and the traffic in our small city getting worse with every hotel.
[2:45:18] It is your responsibility to fix this flow of traffic you created without harming the locals your supposed to represent.
[2:45:25] As someone who has family members with disabilities, you will not make anything ADA compliant
[2:45:33] without putting an elevator on that street.
[2:45:35] So please stop saying that that's your plan.
[2:45:38] We do not support this, we do not want this, we keep repeating ourselves because you are
[2:45:44] not listening.
[2:45:45] Thank you for your time.
[2:45:58] Good afternoon, everyone.
[2:46:00] My name is Bailey and I am an NVUSD student.
[2:46:03] I believe that this roundabout will create unsafe conditions for pedestrians and children.
[2:46:08] Let me explain why.
[2:46:10] As a person and or student who always has to cross the street to get to my vehicle to get home,
[2:46:16] I personally, personally, would not feel safe crossing a street with no stop signs or stop lights to stop cars
[2:46:22] and keep me safe from getting an crash.
[2:46:25] And I think others wouldn't feel safe either.
[2:46:28] That's why I believe this roundabout should not be built.
[2:46:30] Thank you all for listening.
[2:46:31] Thank you.
[2:46:41] Vanessa Struven?
[2:46:42] Vanessa?
[2:46:44] We're going to move on.
[2:46:46] We do have three hands raised on Zoom, so we will go ahead and take those, um, those
[2:46:51] now, um, L, we are going to give you permission to talk, and you can provide your comments.
[2:47:06] I'm so, esteemed members of the school summary and mayor.
[2:47:11] Excuse me, I'm just stepping to where I have a little bit better reception.
[2:47:14] I can a longer see the video, but I would just for a point of order like to ask everybody in the room who knows somebody who has caught their property imminent domains for public improvement in Napa to raise their hands.
[2:47:28] I would be shocked if anyone but Carol in that room has raised her hand.
[2:47:35] Do you know why, Mr. Mayor and members of the City Council?
[2:47:40] Because this family has already had one major property imminent so made.
[2:47:47] Mr. Rossi's sister, the patriarch of the family,
[2:47:52] These are the major arch of their family.
[2:47:54] Her family property was a minute-domained and split to create 5-way 29.
[2:48:02] This family has already sacrificed immensely in time, property, leverage, everything could
[2:48:11] think of for the improvement of the city of Napa.
[2:48:14] We are out that you leave our founding families alone that you let them age in their own homes.
[2:48:24] Members of the citizenry may or council members.
[2:48:27] Did you know that this family rents two Napa citizens?
[2:48:32] That role, Napa citizens.
[2:48:33] Napa families with childrens at below market rates because they believe in having people be able to survive and live in our very expensive,
[2:48:43] of high cost of living area.
[2:48:45] Do you know how I know that?
[2:48:47] Because I, myself, my husband and my children,
[2:48:52] rent from the family were well below the market rate
[2:48:56] in a home that this family built 150 years ago.
[2:49:00] They could charge us well above what they do.
[2:49:04] But they believe in our town.
[2:49:06] They believe in building families here.
[2:49:08] And they've already sacrificed for the growth of our children.
[2:49:11] It would be all the time on every time or when off I would want to move to the next.
[2:49:15] I think you are going to have to move on.
[2:49:17] Allison Rodriguez, we will now be allowing you to make comment.
[2:49:26] Hello.
[2:49:28] I just wanted to say first of all, I respect all of you who are on the City Council.
[2:49:34] I know that this is a difficult decision.
[2:49:37] I know that you are weighing these things very carefully and I just want to thank you for your public service.
[2:49:44] first of all. However I am here and I did actually come in person tonight with my daughter.
[2:49:51] Unfortunately, we just we had to we had to leave. But I wanted to say I'm here
[2:49:57] because of my conscience.
[2:50:00] Because the city that I moved to 20 years ago, I feel is an amazing community. And it just doesn't really seem right what we are about to do and what we're about to undertake with this intersection.
[2:50:14] And I feel like we could all be just a little bit more patient in our daily lives.
[2:50:26] We are talking about a matter of seconds here.
[2:50:30] And we're talking about an intersection that seems to be functioning, even if it is not
[2:50:34] functioning at its most highest efficiency, it is certainly reasonably functional and most
[2:50:42] people across the nation would think that an extra weight of 60 to 90 seconds that an intersection
[2:50:48] probably wasn't the worst thing in the world. We are about to spend almost 30 million dollars
[2:50:53] in our town to re-engineer an intersection that, in my opinion, does not need re-engineering.
[2:50:59] And we're about to take a home from someone who really has deserved and has, in my opinion,
[2:51:08] He has really earned the right to live out his life in this wonderful home.
[2:51:14] So please reconsider.
[2:51:16] Please go back to the options that are available.
[2:51:21] I know it is tempting with a project that is near complacent
[2:51:25] and not want to do that, but I really implore you to do so.
[2:51:29] Thank you very much for your time.
[2:51:35] Next up. Next up is Sam.
[2:51:39] We're resetting timer, okay, okay Sam, go ahead,
[2:51:52] are you
[2:52:00] on here?
[2:52:01] We can hear you go ahead.
[2:52:03] Hello, my name is Sam.
[2:52:04] I am a born and raised napkin of 41 years.
[2:52:07] I live in Alpahites.
[2:52:08] I live in Alpahites for 15 years.
[2:52:10] I've been a took driver in Alpah for 15 years.
[2:52:13] I can on account tell you,
[2:52:15] I have very rarely see accidents in that intersection.
[2:52:19] My both of my kids have both gone so far from middle school and I feel safe and up the left and walk home.
[2:52:25] That intersection is very well.
[2:52:28] The lights are very well timed.
[2:52:32] It's not okay.
[2:52:34] What is happening to Mr. Rossi across the street.
[2:52:38] Our neighborhood is a very old neighborhood.
[2:52:42] We should not be turned out any of these buildings.
[2:52:45] Some of these buildings are over 150 years old.
[2:52:47] You cannot go back.
[2:52:49] You cannot take these homes down.
[2:52:52] When it's been needed for years,
[2:52:54] investments improvements to the existing roads
[2:52:58] getting to the five way.
[2:53:00] It seems that every cement truck cargo truck
[2:53:02] semi-conception vehicle,
[2:53:04] and other large vehicles use the trail.
[2:53:07] We need improvements such as center turn lanes.
[2:53:09] Today, if you need to turn into a street
[2:53:11] or business from the trail,
[2:53:13] you can feel like you're taking your life in your hands.
[2:53:16] Vehicles trying to pass in the right
[2:53:17] often have to drive off the pavement to get around you.
[2:53:20] Everyone is in a hurry, and that creates a danger of situation.
[2:53:26] Thank you.
[2:53:27] Well, speed bumps are other traffic, calming measures being installed to prevent people from
[2:53:31] speeding through this neighborhood.
[2:53:32] Everyone on time, please.
[2:53:34] Okay.
[2:53:34] I oppose this.
[2:53:36] Please consider other alternatives.
[2:53:38] Thank you.
[2:53:47] Good evening, Mayor.
[2:53:48] Council members.
[2:53:49] My name is Patrick Bandom.
[2:53:50] I'm a senior transportation planner with the NAPA Valley Transportation Authority.
[2:53:53] I'd like to refer you to the letter that we said.
[2:53:55] on Friday. I believe the 11th expressing NVTA supports for the staff recommendation to move forward
[2:54:03] with this project. We greatly appreciate the continued partnership with the city,
[2:54:08] CalTrans, and other project partners. NNDTA remains committed to working with the city
[2:54:13] throughout final design and project delivery. Thank you very much. Thank you very much.
[2:54:24] You know, that's really not necessary. It's really not necessary. It tells me a lot about the audience.
[2:54:43] Good evening, Mayor and members of the City Council.
[2:54:47] My name is Ronda Prudenti.
[2:54:51] The Joint City of Napa and Cal Transfer Port
[2:54:56] proposes spending $27 million.
[2:55:00] On a roundabout project. But we've already seen how roundabouts in Apple play out. I experienced them every day as I drive them.
[2:55:14] First street has been solved, our traffic issues. Highway 29 and 121 is a daily disaster in my experience.
[2:55:24] Simply updating and re-timing the traffic lights would fix the intersection without resorting
[2:55:34] to eminent domain or stealing this man's property.
[2:55:40] I ask that you consider alternatives for that $27 million.
[2:55:46] Think of what those funds could do if actually directed toward real priorities.
[2:55:52] like building housing for our homeless, who live along the Napa River.
[2:56:00] The true environmental
[2:56:01] impact isn't just noise and vibration and a long list of things that are listed in the
[2:56:11] report. Imposing an endo main and a multi year 27 million dollar builds will cause severe
[2:56:21] extended disturbance and impending traffic for years to come.
[2:56:30] Looking at the City and CalTrans report you have to ask,
[2:56:33] who actually benefits?
[2:56:37] It certainly isn't our local small business or community residents.
[2:56:42] This project hurts our community by disrupting local business
[2:56:46] and 18 additional property acquisitions.
[2:56:50] Thank you, thank you very much.
[2:56:55] I ask each of you to look into your hearts.
[2:56:59] I didn't get to finish everything in between.
[2:57:03] But if this was your father.
[2:57:05] I appreciate it.
[2:57:06] I appreciate it.
[2:57:07] I appreciate it.
[2:57:07] Would you want to displace them?
[2:57:11] And have imminent domain imposed on their properties?
[2:57:15] I think not.
[2:57:16] Thank you.
[2:57:23] Hi, my name is Angelina.
[2:57:25] And I am Ronda's daughter.
[2:57:27] And I have lived in this beautiful town my entire life.
[2:57:36] I wasn't planning on coming up here because I don't do very well with public speaking.
[2:57:41] But this situation did not sit well in my heart.
[2:57:46] I have lived and grown up and not my entire life.
[2:57:51] And someone who is disabled, having a stable, safe home
[2:57:57] And for a familiar place means everything to me, you talk about accessibility, but taking this man's house away and hurting our small businesses is the exact opposite.
[2:58:14] The traffic lights at this intersection have always made me feel safe, whereas the roundabouts only make me nervous and feel unsafe.
[2:58:25] They are taking away from the historic beauty of this town I call Napa.
[2:58:32] My home and don't see the need for this one at the heart breaking cost of Charlie's home.
[2:58:40] I want you to ask yourself, as my mom was trying to say, if this was your family member,
[2:58:47] would you want this happening to them?
[2:58:49] If you truly want to preserve Napa, please do not proceed with this.
[2:58:56] How can, how can leaders sit comfortably, displacing Charlie or these small business owners?
[2:59:05] I hope you'll reconsider.
[2:59:08] Thank you.
[2:59:09] Thank you.
[2:59:22] Please, please, please.
[2:59:27] Please, please.
[2:59:31] You're disrupting our meeting.
[2:59:33] Yes, thank you.
[2:59:34] I think you know me well. I just didn't appreciate the booze. We have more left.
[2:59:41] There were additional cards called there Sabrina and Laurie Moody. Are they in the audience?
[2:59:48] Okay. Perfect. Okay. Moving on to the next stack then.
[2:59:52] Tony, Drady, Julie, Tingle, Sandra, Hansen, Susan, Crosby.
[3:00:00] Good evening, Dorothy Glarus.
[3:00:15] Good evening, evening in the back.
[3:00:20] I'm going to take this in, I'm Susan Crossby and I approve this message.
[3:00:26] I would like to say I'm going to take this in a direction that may seem strange.
[3:00:31] I was someone who believes in the United Nations report for climate change that we're living now in a red alert for humanity.
[3:00:39] And as a long time volunteer with Napa Climate Now, I'm very proud of our city council and our county for having adopted a very strong climate action resolution.
[3:00:51] And the promise to view every decision through the lens of the climate emergency.
[3:00:58] Now, it would be hard for me being the person that I am.
[3:01:04] have no choice being. It would be hard for me to criticize this proposal if its implementation
[3:01:10] were guaranteed to bring any substantial climate benefits.
[3:01:16] But none are expected. If approved and built, the double roundabouts are not predicted
[3:01:22] to improve the flow of traffic on Silverado Trail because of the traffic lights, north and
[3:01:29] south of the intersection, and because they are simply so much traffic.
[3:01:32] For the same reason, the project would not decrease automobile emissions.
[3:01:38] It would shorten the time for vehicles crossing Silverado Trail on 3rd Street to reach
[3:01:44] Silverado Middle School, but that seems an insufficient reason for a project of this
[3:01:49] expense and scale.
[3:01:52] Reducing fossil fuel emissions is one key to limiting atmospheric warming.
[3:01:58] Another equally powerful one is green infrastructure.
[3:02:02] planting more trees and caring for the ones that we have. It takes eight to 10 years for a young
[3:02:08] tree to begin to sequester carbon and 20 years for a tree to grow to its full potential for
[3:02:13] cooling the atmosphere and taking carbon from the air. This project would remove an estimated
[3:02:18] 60 to 80 mature trees and much more of the shrubbery. That's part of it.
[3:02:25] Thank you. I would also just let me add it as a gift or let you add on because yeah, but you know I came prepared for three minutes and I'm going to give everyone too.
[3:02:36] If you would just respect respect the ground rules that we have and try to get everybody to get their comments on here I'd been much appreciated.
[3:02:45] You know I think everybody's a little hot under the collar here.
[3:02:51] I will submit more of my reports by email and I'm sure that you'll read them with the other respect they deserve.
[3:03:00] Thank you. Thank you.
[3:03:13] My name is Sandra Hartunian Hansen. My house of 54 years backs on to East Avenue across from the children's cottage.
[3:03:21] I will be very much affected by the proposed construction and the result.
[3:03:27] Looking at the report, and I did a lot of research after reading the report, I found a lot of
[3:03:33] discrepancies that I'm concerned about.
[3:03:38] On page 8, it says, we're feasible.
[3:03:41] The roundabout will be landscape.
[3:03:43] What does that mean?
[3:03:44] What are the costs?
[3:03:45] What are the distractions of having landscape in or around around about?
[3:03:49] On page 11, equipment will have zero or me EPA or CAR 13 tier admissions or retrofitted.
[3:04:00] I don't know what any of those means, but then it says, if available.
[3:04:06] It doesn't say it's going to happen. It says if available.
[3:04:10] Page 12 ambient noise. It says, and I quote,
[3:04:15] quiet equipment, where the technology exists.
[3:04:20] Cal Transwill require noise monitoring and noise controls
[3:04:24] wear practical and feasible.
[3:04:27] That pretty much is a loophole.
[3:04:32] This summer, preliminary work was done behind my house,
[3:04:36] directly behind my house.
[3:04:37] There was no noise control, no emissions control.
[3:04:41] It was horrendous.
[3:04:42] I can't imagine being subjected to this for two years from 7 a.m. to 7 a.m. to 7 p.m.
[3:04:53] with perhaps overnight work if it can't be done in the daytime.
[3:05:00] Okay, other things that I've discovered.
[3:05:05] There is a technology that now exists called the Intelligent Traffic Management System, which controls the stoplights depending on traffic and backup.
[3:05:17] Thank you so much. I'm sorry that we have to keep on. Everybody had chance.
[3:05:23] Okay. And also we've been here for an hour and a half. I'm looking at council for a quick break.
[3:05:27] five minute break. You know,
[3:05:33] I have found research that is just that does not go along with
[3:05:40] it. So
[3:05:45] I'm trying to keep it on, you know, everybody in chance and we're going to
[3:05:50] run up against that well.
[3:05:56] Yeah, this was this was designed for two and a half minutes.
[3:05:59] All right. Thank you. The Intelligent Traffic Management System actually achieves the needed
[3:06:13] flexibility for traffic control and we're used to using traffic lights. This is a new
[3:06:20] technology that needs to be explored. The NVTA, which is the Natto Valley Transit Authority,
[3:06:29] zero plan, which was used for this report, says that there were two injuries that
[3:06:35] Coobsville in Salvarado between 2015 and 2021.
[3:06:44] Thank you.
[3:06:45] Can you please wrap it up?
[3:06:46] I will.
[3:06:51] There have only been 10 reported accidents in the last five years at that intersection and
[3:06:58] of them were fatal.
[3:07:05] Well, I guess the other things I have put in here for you.
[3:07:11] Thank you.
[3:07:11] Thank you.
[3:07:18] We have three
[3:07:41] good evening, Dorothy Gleros,
[3:07:44] lifelong resident at 360 Silver Auto Trail,
[3:07:46] and I cannot tell you how many times I've gone through that intersection.
[3:07:49] I wind up spending more time at the intersection at the so-so at the soccer and
[3:07:54] silver out of trail than I do at the five corners, just so you know that.
[3:07:58] Four points real quickly.
[3:08:00] Number one, roundabouts may not necessarily reduce accidents.
[3:08:03] You do not have any data on that.
[3:08:05] I was sitesw typed at the first street round about, my way.
[3:08:09] Some guys zoomed by me.
[3:08:11] Fiteswipenate took off.
[3:08:12] I did not follow report.
[3:08:14] No, license number.
[3:08:15] If you don't believe there's accidents there, they're not reported.
[3:08:17] you go talk to Stork's garage. Number two, roundabouts do not necessarily calm and reduce
[3:08:24] speed. Goodness gracious. Now, Pocity put in a roundabout on East Avenue north of the
[3:08:29] Alta Heights because that's what they were going to do. It was so disastrous they removed
[3:08:34] the roundabout and made street straight through. Luckily they didn't tear anyone's house down.
[3:08:40] Three, time. There was a, there is a city city, there's a city council member right now who said
[3:08:47] that they waited 15 minutes at that intersection.
[3:08:49] And let me tell you, that's impossible.
[3:08:51] Absolutely impossible.
[3:08:52] I've never had to wait more than one and a half cycles on that.
[3:08:56] Here is an alternative, perhaps,
[3:08:59] than removing somebody's house.
[3:09:01] Why don't you check and see what backs up most?
[3:09:04] When, so broad on middle school, let's out,
[3:09:07] comes for road, lengthen that light, a little bit,
[3:09:09] take away from the east avenue, take away
[3:09:12] from the third street.
[3:09:13] It averages out, reduces, reduces the backup, for nap history, and this is my last one.
[3:09:21] I can't count the number of times people said, oh gosh, I wish we hadn't turned on those beautiful old buildings during redevelopment.
[3:09:29] Let's not make that mistake again. The locals would have loved to see all those beautiful buildings today.
[3:09:35] You have a chance today to keep what makes nap special by not removing this man's home.
[3:09:45] 20 more seconds because I was planning on three minutes.
[3:09:48] Thank you.
[3:09:49] Please, this is very important to me.
[3:09:51] I'm going to try to stick to it.
[3:09:53] 20 seconds.
[3:09:55] When my husband had his stroke,
[3:09:58] and he went memory back,
[3:10:00] To take my husband and another lady through there, and then would look at the lights in that house. And the conversation that went in, in the cab of my truck, would have made your eyes tear up. Please, please, please, I'm asking you do not take this away from the locals of Napa. Please.
[3:10:31] Julie or Tony are you Julie Tingle or Tony trading going once going twice okay
[3:10:46] next set how many more do you have
[3:10:56] and T1 and 1 on Zoom 20 and 1 on Zoom so
[3:11:01] we're gonna get to 9 o'clock we look quick so we're gonna take a five minute break
[3:11:06] be back at 815 I didn't hear my name being called but I was supposed to be there
[3:11:11] Did you call it?
[3:11:12] I'm going to take you to Bernie.
[3:11:13] 20 more cards.
[3:11:14] All right.
[3:11:15] Thank you.
[3:11:16] And here's since 2013.
[3:11:18] So we need credit.
[3:11:18] Yeah.
[3:17:48] All right, we can get everybody to take their seats. We'll get going on this again, our quick five-minute break help.
[3:18:03] All right, if you can get everybody back in order, we'll move along.
[3:18:10] We're trying to get, if we can get everybody to, before I have council member, Leros and Whistle.
[3:18:20] I would do. Hang on, hitting this being rude.
[3:18:26] All
[3:18:29] right,
[3:18:39] City Clerk will have start five more names.
[3:18:49] Okay, if everyone could take a seat, I'm calling the next five names, please.
[3:18:54] Thank you.
[3:18:55] They listened to Tiffany.
[3:18:56] I don't know.
[3:18:57] All the names.
[3:18:58] Okay, the next five speakers are Kate Shorenberger.
[3:19:03] Steve Weaver.
[3:19:06] Gail Allen.
[3:19:07] Lynn Wyman.
[3:19:09] And Anne.
[3:19:11] Anne Valerga.
[3:19:12] All right.
[3:19:13] at one more time, Kate Snowberger, or Sornberger, Steve Weaver,
[3:19:19] Gail Allen, Lynn Wyman, and Valerga.
[3:19:34] Okay, again, here's a first speaker, no.
[3:19:37] Okay, the next five names, Kate Sornberger,
[3:19:41] Steve Weaver, Gail Allen, Lynn Wyman, and Ann Valerga.
[3:19:53] I'm named Steve Weaver, I've been here since 1986,
[3:19:56] and I live on the other side of town,
[3:19:57] but I've driven through this intersection plenty of time.
[3:20:00] I don't mind waiting, and I've never had wait long, I've never seen an accident there, and you talk to the people who live there. They don't see accidents, so I'm wondering if some of your data is fabricated. Because it doesn't match what these people say, and they live here. I've been here this month, and I don't mind driving through there.
[3:20:21] I also listen to next door and patch and that register and this press Democrat, and there's
[3:20:29] no mention of accidents on that location.
[3:20:33] So I think it's actually fine like it is, so I'm going to keep this short.
[3:20:39] These are your constituents, the vast majority of the people who have spoken tonight do not
[3:20:50] want this project. The ratio is all many to one so far. So I suggest that you listen to your constituents and do not approve this project.
[3:21:13] Hello. Thank you for having me tonight. My name is Anne Valerga. I want to acknowledge and appreciate the opportunity in the privilege that I have to be here tonight.
[3:21:25] I am proud to be part of a family that's spent generations in this town, built one of the very first homes in the Alter Heights area, but tonight I'm going to speak in my capacity as principal and steward of silver automittal school.
[3:21:41] And I'm going to offer another perspective and I love the engagement tonight. It's what makes democracy work.
[3:21:47] Every day, hundreds of students come to and from our Silverado campus, many of them walk
[3:21:53] ride their bikes and scoot through that corridor.
[3:21:58] It's imperative that children get to and from school safely, and I believe that intersection
[3:22:03] is not safe and ideal with incidents and reports from families on a regular basis, so
[3:22:10] just sharing another viewpoint.
[3:22:13] There are significant safety hazards at this complex intersection, especially, of course,
[3:22:18] during the peak drop-off and pick-up hours.
[3:22:22] And really, my concern is around the pavement, which is dangerous, outdated, uneven,
[3:22:28] and students having to navigate that, especially on bikes or scooters, is just too risky.
[3:22:34] CalTrans and the Federal Highway Administration Studies show that replacing intersections
[3:22:39] with modern roundabouts is data backed, and it cuts pedestrian vehicle conflict points by over 50%.
[3:22:46] Our youth, and I was shocked to learn this, are the most vulnerable. According to California
[3:22:51] Office of Traffic Safety, Napa County consistently ranks in the top of the whole state for
[3:22:57] youth, pedestrian, and bicycle injuries. We need to keep our neighborhood safe as well so that
[3:23:03] our neighbors can have access to emergency vehicles or a fire evacuation and not have the
[3:23:09] with lock experience. Thank you. It's not about time. It's about safety.
[3:23:15] Thank you.
[3:23:27] Thank you for, oh my goodness. Thank you for having us.
[3:23:33] Well, I first heard rumors about how counter-trans wanted to do this because of the tourists.
[3:23:37] I thought this is a local city. You get used to that intersection. You know what's hard not to use it
[3:23:43] when you have baseball, you're using it.
[3:23:47] But anyway, I understand it.
[3:23:49] It was started with the cattle way back.
[3:23:52] But I don't understand why you want to destroy structures
[3:23:58] in that long-term environment.
[3:24:02] You're changing the dirt to do this.
[3:24:06] And what do you do with the cemetery behind?
[3:24:09] The business that sells the tombstones for the business.
[3:24:12] And I patronize the businesses that you want to destroy, because I prefer to do the local businesses instead of the big chain stores.
[3:24:22] And the habitat, while alive habitat, we have that in that area.
[3:24:26] How would it affect the streams and the creeks in that area?
[3:24:31] We know that it gets dry.
[3:24:34] Okay.
[3:24:35] Anyway, I believe that we don't need the round of doubt, these community people here feel like we know how to drive our streets.
[3:24:45] We know how to watch the kids on that street and I've watched them because I've been in that area often not.
[3:24:52] So I don't understand the need of it.
[3:24:54] And then who has the right to take the businesses away? Who has the...
[3:25:00] Right, to say, who's going to fund for this? Well, it's going to be us that will fund it. It won't be just you.
[3:25:12] And then who, I know this is Ron Potter, say, but who paid you an accept this project? And I know, back in the past, and I'm almost done. Martha would have been very interesting to listen to if she was alive today in this meeting.
[3:25:30] Thank you.
[3:25:41] Thank you for taking our comments. Lynn Wyman, Green Valley Road, Napa County.
[3:25:46] I've been traversing this intersection for over 30 years and have never seen an accident there.
[3:25:53] I'm going to reference an article that comes from Sart City's dive.
[3:25:57] And it says roundabouts have mixed results for pedestrian and cyclists safety.
[3:26:02] It's still being studied. Roundabouts are still relatively new in this country.
[3:26:07] And I think we're finding out for pedestrian and bicyclist safety, they aren't the panacea that they're being sold to us has.
[3:26:17] And by concern is the students that go through there are not going to get yielded to with it's time for them to cross.
[3:26:24] And there's going to be pedestrian accidents that are going to be catastrophic. Thank you.
[3:26:37] Kate Sorinberger?
[3:26:40] Okay. Thank you. We we do have one let's jump to we do have one person on zoom with their hand that mayor so we're going to switch or two people now.
[3:26:50] So Lori Alderman on zoom.
[3:26:56] Hi. I'm live at Gatati and I wanted to tell you what it's like watching day.
[3:27:05] they should view what happened in Gatotti issues of
[3:27:09] eminent domain and everything and the city wanted to put in roundabouts for traffic.
[3:27:19] Well, we got creative in Gatotti and we did a ballot measure and band roundabouts and for 14 years roundabouts were banding Gatotti.
[3:27:32] And it was never about roundabouts themselves.
[3:27:38] It was about people not listing the city not listing to us.
[3:27:45] And dictating what was going to be there.
[3:27:49] And anyways, I just wanted to tell you what happened in Gethati.
[3:27:53] I mean, might be with all this people, it might be good to get a ballot measure together.
[3:28:03] Thank you.
[3:28:13] And, Jason, officer?
[3:28:25] You're unmuted.
[3:28:27] There we go.
[3:28:29] Are you able to hear me?
[3:28:30] Yes.
[3:28:32] All right.
[3:28:33] So there were a few things that I heard that we're not mentioned.
[3:28:36] We actually rushed home with our kids to get them to bed from that meeting.
[3:28:41] It's been a very great meeting showing our opposition.
[3:28:47] There's a lot of things that I have questions about.
[3:28:50] And some of those things are the financial responsibility for how
[3:28:53] Trans in a project like this.
[3:28:56] And then what the financial responsibility for the city of Napa would be.
[3:29:01] This is something to where I see a $27 million project.
[3:29:05] That's what's quoted now, but as we know, the prices have only gone up and if we're looking to have this completed by 2030, I can only imagine what those prices are.
[3:29:15] I look at things like Fuller Park, which is wonderful. I love it.
[3:29:20] But that was also a very expensive project that was much higher than what it was originally quoted.
[3:29:26] There are a lot of cough and time directly tied to some of the regulatory red tape, taking
[3:29:37] 18 months to just put in this seems excessive.
[3:29:44] The highway 29 isn't crossing, and the evening is much worse than this intersection.
[3:29:51] Highway 29, going through all the lights through town in the morning and in the evenings.
[3:29:57] People have to sit through three or four cycles.
[3:30:00] I feel like those would be better suited to have other alternatives, as well as making it more desirable of a view of looking at something that is
[3:30:12] map that screams Napa to bring tourists who are struggling wineries.
[3:30:19] We all have, for me, spending that kind of money on a project like this.
[3:30:28] I've made several complaints about my streets, along with a lot of my neighbors on neighboring
[3:30:32] streets, about the quality.
[3:30:35] And my children cannot ride scooter, state, state board.
[3:30:37] Did you hear the timer?
[3:30:39] We're at two minutes.
[3:30:40] I have to ask you to wrap it up.
[3:30:42] Yep.
[3:30:42] So I will, I will be seeing that, and I hope you take the
[3:30:49] consideration. So that people there were there.
[3:30:53] Thank you.
[3:30:56] We have, we do have one, we do have another hand on a zoom.
[3:31:02] Melissa Officer.
[3:31:06] Yes.
[3:31:07] Hi. Thank you for letting me comment.
[3:31:10] I wanted to preface this by saying that generally I am
[3:31:15] around it about. I like roundabouts. I think they work great in the proper settings. I am
[3:31:20] definitely not programmed about in this case. I have, I used to work in Berkeley and there is a
[3:31:28] big roundabout in a residential neighborhood really similar to this neighborhood here in Napa.
[3:31:35] And it takes just as long to get through that intersection as the current five way intersection
[3:31:40] that comes though, takes now. So, around about, we'll not solve that issue of weight times.
[3:31:49] And again, I echo everyone else who has said that it is uncontrollable for us to even be
[3:31:56] considering using eminent domain here in Napa to take away the home of a man who's lived in his
[3:32:01] house as a whole life for 86 years. That house is a treasure. I grew up, I was born and raised in Napa,
[3:32:08] I grew up seeing that house during the holidays and loving it.
[3:32:13] And everyone else here probably has those same memories.
[3:32:17] So again, I don't think the roundabout is the right decision
[3:32:19] for this intersection.
[3:32:21] I echo everyone else.
[3:32:22] And I say please vote to oppose this measure.
[3:32:27] Thank you.
[3:32:31] OK, we are moving back to cards.
[3:32:36] we have Lisa Doxy, Clint Holiday, Leanna Gracie, Colleen Moore, and Carol Lennon.
[3:32:55] My name is Clint Holiday and I've lived in this town for her well over 80 years and what
[3:33:02] I would appear for the people that will be impacted with the property.
[3:33:11] Some of my know, some of my don't.
[3:33:13] But number one, I think that the city of Napa cannot afford to buy these people out and they cannot afford the time limit that it takes to do the roundabout.
[3:33:36] I have lived in Westwood, my entire life except, well, I don't live there now, but I own
[3:33:46] property there.
[3:33:48] I get in the first street overpass, or the roundabout, and up on your brochure there, you
[3:33:59] said, oh, these people, they're shooting a red light, they're shooting a green light.
[3:34:03] If you've ever been through it around about these people will all but kill you to not let you in a yield you stop there, especially first straight.
[3:34:21] It's so small that you're so busy looking to the left, you don't know you're going to hit on the right.
[3:34:29] and I see I'm about out of time. I would ask all of you people. How would you feel, if somebody came, knocked on your door, said we're going to come in, we're going to tear it down tomorrow and put a neighborhood project in there.
[3:34:49] You all somebody lives somewhere, whether you own or rent and you're going to be asked to move.
[3:35:00] If I thank you, I'll make time for the somebody else. Thank you.
[3:35:14] Hi, my name is Leona and I was born in Napa and raised in Nata Heights.
[3:35:20] You should not have the right to take a person's home.
[3:35:26] If I was to steal, I would get in trouble. If you steal, you should also get in trouble.
[3:35:32] I walk home and the only issue I have is not having sidewalks on the south side.
[3:35:38] of Conesville, from my school, all the way down to Salvador,
[3:35:43] there are also no bike lanes for the Salvador students.
[3:35:49] Thank you.
[3:35:49] Thank you.
[3:36:01] My name is Lisa Doxie and I am a resident of Alta Heights.
[3:36:06] I'm here to advocate for our elderly and what the impact could have on the Serasi's
[3:36:11] life span.
[3:36:13] I'm a speech language pathologist with a background in neural plus
[3:36:16] in the aging brain. As we age, our neural connections and pathways are reduced and our ability to learn
[3:36:23] and retain new information and the routines are compromised. Elderly people can experience
[3:36:29] the decline in health and or longevity after moving into unfamiliar environments. This is clinically
[3:36:36] recognized as relocation stress syndrome, also known as transfer trauma. One common example is when
[3:36:44] elderly people need to relieve themselves during the night.
[3:36:48] When living in a familiar space, they rely on long and green patterns of memory and routine
[3:36:53] to move to the bathroom back to bed, although they can likely do this in the dark in familiar
[3:36:58] environments with long-term memories developed, they aren't unable to do so in new, unfamiliar
[3:37:04] environments, which leads to false, broken hips, limbs, head injuries, etc.
[3:37:10] Please imagine being in your familiar home during an electrical
[3:37:15] outage and how you're able to move through your home from a chair and a sofa
[3:37:20] navigate your body around expected furniture, walk down a hall to a separate
[3:37:25] room, and then find a specific drawer or a cupboard where you keep a flashlight. All in
[3:37:31] the dark. Now imagine being in an unfamiliar environment where walls, furniture,
[3:37:36] doorways, covers, and drawers are not where they're expected. Before you move ahead with
[3:37:42] the timing of this project, I encourage you to consider the impact upon Charlie Rossi's
[3:37:48] longevity. Thank you. Thank you.
[3:37:58] Do we have Colleen Moore or Carol Linin?
[3:38:03] I've been here before. I've been here for, and again, I'm going to ask you what's really important about
[3:38:11] that. I mean, what is really important here? I think people are important. I was a nurse. I gave my life to that. I think people are very important. And I think we should care about people. And I think it's inexcusable to try and take an old man's house away from him. This other lady is an expert in aging. She's right.
[3:38:38] I've been with people in horrible combat, less than hospitals, I've seen when people are disrupted from their home or their environment.
[3:38:48] They just go downhill. They just go downhill. There's no use. You know, they just give up. And you see it every day.
[3:38:56] We can't do this to Mr. Rossi. And also, I know that you only going to give me two minutes. That's okay. But you gave them all the time they wanted.
[3:39:07] also I want to make one other statement. Who's going to pay for this? I'm a tax payer,
[3:39:13] I probably don't pay as much taxes as you do, could you probably live in far greater houses
[3:39:18] than I do? But I'm going to pay for this. So I have a right to say something, maybe longer
[3:39:24] than two minutes. You're not going to pay for this. You're not going to pay for this. I'm going
[3:39:29] Okay, we deserve better, and we deserve you who represent us to at least care about us, to care about us.
[3:39:44] I care about you as a nurse.
[3:39:45] If you were any of my patients in a hospital, I'd be there for you in a heartbeat if you needed me.
[3:39:52] I care, and I wouldn't even know your name.
[3:39:55] Well, I know your name, but what I'm trying to say is, I care.
[3:39:58] And...
[3:40:00] And I think that's the most important thing about Napa. You don't want to make this great. I know we have money. I know we, you know, this is a blind country. But what care what makes this great is that all the people say this, they care. Thank you. The tourists say, people care about us a little when we come here. And you know why? It's that community spirit. Don't take that away from us.
[3:40:30] One last call for Carol, women. Okay. And moving on to the next
[3:40:35] five J.C.S. Smith. I think it's like Leilani Berg, Allison Rodriguez, Samuel Gracie, and Denise
[3:40:46] Bertilucci.
[3:40:53] Hello. My name is Leilani Bergen. I live in the avenues. I have raised two
[3:41:00] boys here in the app Valley. We went to Mount George, Silverado, middle school, so I don't know
[3:41:08] what she's talking about kids at Silver Auto
[3:41:11] are having problems.
[3:41:13] I have never seen any problems at this intersection,
[3:41:17] at all.
[3:41:18] And I drive the valley as my job as well.
[3:41:23] I go through that intersection multiple times,
[3:41:26] maybe five or six times a day.
[3:41:29] And I never see any problems.
[3:41:33] And Charlie's house, it's been an monument.
[3:41:36] When I grew up in Voleo, when I was a little kid, I went to the Mormon Church, and we always
[3:41:43] drove by there, and the Christmas lights, it puts a smile on your face, my roots really are
[3:41:51] deep here in the Napa Valley, like all of these people behind me, and I want to thank everyone
[3:41:57] for showing up, and I know there's even more who couldn't make it, who would be here, but we need
[3:42:04] get back to the basics of what Napa was what it was supposed to be. That's why I lived here,
[3:42:12] caring about our community, about the people, and the values that we have. I don't see any reason
[3:42:19] that roundabout needs to be there. It's not going to stop the traffic. You have the traffic down on
[3:42:26] Monticello. You need to put the money somewhere else like why don't you go down to James and
[3:42:31] and Hydeway 29 and doing overpass there.
[3:42:36] That has all the accidents.
[3:42:39] I don't understand, please I beg you.
[3:42:43] Really think deep down in your heart do not pass this.
[3:42:47] We do not need those roundabouts.
[3:42:50] Thank you.
[3:43:06] That's Dennis Bertolucci,
[3:43:14] longtime resident from Health the Heights
[3:43:17] and I basically have two questions.
[3:43:20] Presently the five corner intersection, the level of services considered by
[3:43:25] cow trams is the worst level they have due to congestion and stack up time at
[3:43:31] the intersection. My question is, with the new double roundabout improvement,
[3:43:37] how long does cow trams estimate the improvement will meet the new level of
[3:43:42] service over time? What factors would lower the improvement rating for the new
[3:43:48] about section. At a cost of approximately $28 million, well, they maintain this, this LOS over time
[3:43:58] after the construction. I'm concerned that at the cost of $28 million for one intersection,
[3:44:06] improvement on this stretch of Highway 121 is not an effective use of my taxpayer money or a return
[3:44:13] of investment. The second question is, at the cost of improving this one intersection at
[3:44:20] $28 million for changing the single intersection that is handling both local and highway
[3:44:28] traffic from congestion, why has the idea of rerouting the highway traffic off silver
[3:44:36] are trail not been considered. The double roundabout is replacing signals, lights, disrupting
[3:44:43] local businesses, some with memories considering the historic home, not only the public
[3:44:49] Christmas decoration, joy, visual for the town, but it's one of a few, sire built, construction
[3:44:56] blockhouses that was manufactured in built in Apple.
[3:45:00] I have to wonder why 28 million dollars is being spent on a single intersection. Well, it still is connecting to the north and south highway.
[3:45:15] Okay, basically it's a two lay intersection and it's connecting to two lanes on either side, which is going to stack up the traffic anyway no matter what.
[3:45:28] So, re-ground it and make the fiscal avenue the new highway.
[3:45:37] You can change that.
[3:45:38] CalTrans can do it.
[3:45:39] Thank you.
[3:45:40] And Napa can put a, we're the link which agreement that would cover the justification
[3:45:45] of them handling it.
[3:45:48] Thank you.
[3:45:55] Do we have Samuel, Gracie, or J.C. Schmidt?
[3:46:00] I think.
[3:46:01] Okay.
[3:46:02] And then Allison arrived to leave here.
[3:46:04] Have a heard comment on Zoom.
[3:46:05] So I'm moving along.
[3:46:08] We have Ryan Lindley.
[3:46:12] Rolf and Rowe.
[3:46:14] Heather McLaughlin.
[3:46:15] As Marilda Rose Bush.
[3:46:17] Christina McDonald and Robert Francis.
[3:46:25] Hello.
[3:46:25] Good evening.
[3:46:26] I'm Ryan Lindley.
[3:46:27] I want you to look around because all these people.
[3:46:30] and all the people that left, we're here for one man, and that was for Charlie Rossi.
[3:46:35] And all of you, every single one of you should be absolutely ashamed of yourselves
[3:46:40] that you even remotely considered and put it through your minds that you would take this
[3:46:46] man's home. And I'm going to end because I'm ditching my comments to say,
[3:46:51] Mr. Sedgley, the contempt you have for your constituents, is absolutely appalling.
[3:46:57] Absolutely.
[3:47:01] I yield my time.
[3:47:14] I live here in Napa. I wanted to let you know that I have reported every member of the City Council to adult protective services because you are abusers of this elderly man.
[3:47:28] You sit there really with a smirk on your face, most of the meeting, Mr. Sejli. You're not far away from his age.
[3:47:34] I pray for you that the karma that visits you isn't something similar to what you're doing.
[3:47:41] Even the idea that he has to leave his home possibly based on your decision, that's abuse.
[3:47:49] Regardless of what you guys decide to do moving forward, you are abusing a man right now with your position that this is even a possibility.
[3:48:00] This is so far fetched. I can't even believe I'm standing here before you pleading with you, not to kick a man out of his house.
[3:48:10] It's that simple. Stop. You want to talk about time and hurry up and we've got this thing.
[3:48:17] Well, all you got to do is just quit this and we could all go home right now.
[3:48:31] The good evening, thanks for giving us this opportunity to speak.
[3:48:38] I know you have a lot of time and effort invested in these roundabouts, and today I want
[3:48:46] to presentation you've given us three different options for roundabouts.
[3:48:51] What I'm concerned about is this is only option you've given, and I think there's another
[3:48:57] option, and that is intelligent traffic management.
[3:49:04] What this does, it takes, you can actually use your existing traffic lights and reprogram
[3:49:10] with an artificial intelligence to monitor in real time the flow of traffic and the lights
[3:49:18] will make the change.
[3:49:22] I think going this route would be much less disruptive to the whole area.
[3:49:27] It would take less time to implement this and there's a good chance to cause a lot less even if there is some maintenance cause.
[3:49:38] And, you know, I would really ask you to consider this option before and give it a pause before you accept the roundabouts.
[3:49:49] And I think in doing so, this was in the midst of all of us, this is actually listening to the community and have a real concern for us.
[3:50:10] Mr. Sedgley, are you okay? I'm just checking on you. Okay. My name is Heather McLaughlin. I'm here for so many reasons tonight. My friend was somebody that worked for historical preservation for many years. Here in Napa, in Florida, in Chicago, and she would want me to be here tonight. Not for the fact that we should save a historical home.
[3:50:40] but for the fact that you are not considering the human, the human being that this is affecting.
[3:50:52] And I think that's obvious by what people have said at all the meetings.
[3:50:57] I think it's obvious by the people that have shown up.
[3:51:00] I think it's obvious by the people that have written in.
[3:51:03] And I understand government works a certain way.
[3:51:10] I also think that humans work a certain way,
[3:51:15] and the impact that this will have for the future
[3:51:19] on children, on the adults that live here,
[3:51:24] but especially for one man, Mr. Rossi,
[3:51:28] and the legacy of His family, and I look around this town and there are things that are
[3:51:37] just gone. That's it. They're gone. I was raised in this valley, and I've been back here
[3:51:44] 25 years, and I'll miss that Christmas tree, and I'll miss the lions. So please take a
[3:51:54] and really do listen to us and what we have to say.
[3:52:00] I'm advocating for Charlie.
[3:52:02] Thank you.
[3:52:03] You'll be happy.
[3:52:18] Hi there.
[3:52:18] My name's Christina McDonald.
[3:52:20] I'm a local resident.
[3:52:21] Third generation on my mom's fourth on my dad's.
[3:52:24] I wanted to make sure I came up and represented a generation of Napa.
[3:52:28] It residents that whole heart at least will believe in the community.
[3:52:33] I chose to stay here and put down even deeper roots to make sure that
[3:52:38] of our city was upheld. As an artist in the community I worked diligently with small businesses
[3:52:44] to bring charm back into Napa. It's quite disappointing actually to speak on the behalf of locals
[3:52:54] when the incoming conversation is what happened in Napa. I work over in Sonoma and occasionally
[3:53:02] the locals there are blatantly pretty disrespectful for how we've decided to treat our
[3:53:08] community and we are kind of a joke. So in regards to the way that we uphold the
[3:53:15] important aspects of our spaces, I believe the five way round about could be more
[3:53:21] creatively assessed through better, you know, government action. I believe in the way
[3:53:28] that the Napa bike coalition has instated more traffic control spaces and creative markings on
[3:53:35] the ground, indicate a little bit more safety for all pedestrians and in that utilizing
[3:53:41] a creative management style to create more safety for students, which I know is an issue and
[3:53:48] to also help facilitate the environment to its fullest.
[3:53:53] That intersection has been neglected, and I wonder if it's because this roundabout has
[3:53:57] been in the forefront of the plan and I think that's a real disappointment because the roads
[3:54:04] themselves are garbage. I take that hill every day, I live up in the old tights area,
[3:54:09] I have my whole life and I just feel like this is an opportunity to think more creatively
[3:54:13] and for the people and for younger residents who choose to be here and live here and love it.
[3:54:19] So thank you.
[3:54:26] Do we have Esmeralda Rose Bush still in the room?
[3:54:31] Okay, we do have one last hand raised on Zoom.
[3:54:36] We did.
[3:54:37] I think if you do wish to speak on Zoom, please raise your hand.
[3:54:42] There was a hand and it's gone.
[3:54:45] I got one more.
[3:54:47] Jim Hinton.
[3:54:49] If you want the one on Zoom has put their hand down.
[3:54:54] Jim Hinton, candidate for Napa City Council District 3.
[3:55:00] Now, if this is a democracy, then this project will probably get killed tonight, because all the residents
[3:55:08] in the area that are affected by it are very upset and against it. But if this is an oligarchy, then the
[3:55:17] project will probably move forward. So you'll let us know what kind of government we have after the vote tonight.
[3:55:23] But the real problem is, nobody likes what you did to Brown's value road.
[3:55:30] And you
[3:55:33] can't even recognize you made a mistake and everyone's unhappy and fix it.
[3:55:39] No, you're just pushing forward on Lincoln Avenue.
[3:55:42] You're pushing forward on the roundabout.
[3:55:44] You literally don't care about residents input.
[3:55:48] You just keep raising our taxes, raising our fees, taking our money,
[3:55:53] chopping it up up amongst yourselves running us over now you're taking people's property. You know if I get elected
[3:56:00] I'll
[3:56:01] Get as clever as I can maybe we can
[3:56:04] In a minute domain Sejali's house and see how he likes it.
[3:56:17] I know you want to end this meeting. Okay, the mic's not on. Please spoke
[3:56:22] I'm okay
[3:56:23] Thank you
[3:56:25] Thank you
[3:56:33] Is your intent to disrupt this meeting?
[3:56:48] Thank you
[3:56:50] Thank you. Thank you.
[3:56:55] Sorry. I'm sorry, but my role is trying to maintain order and a meeting.
[3:57:01] That's what they expect me to try to do.
[3:57:03] And that's what I've been trying to do is maintaining order.
[3:57:07] Mayor, we do have one more.
[3:57:09] The caller that had their hand up on Zoom is back.
[3:57:12] So Emily, if you would like to give your comment.
[3:57:14] All right.
[3:57:18] Hi there. Thank you. My name's Emily.
[3:57:20] I just wanted to express my gratitude for everyone that's passionately advocated for Charlie Rossi.
[3:57:28] And I just wanted to bring up the point, the fact that Charlie Rossi himself has not attended this meeting to speak for himself.
[3:57:35] And I'd be very curious to hear what he has to say.
[3:57:38] That's all. Thank you.
[3:57:41] Thank you.
[3:57:48] Okay. That's all you guys.
[3:57:49] How about we got to get back on track here folks.
[3:57:52] It was not cold.
[3:57:53] Did he clerk can we have more cards?
[3:57:55] Yeah.
[3:57:55] I have no more cards.
[3:57:57] But you have no more cards.
[3:57:58] Is there anyone left in the audience that wants to speak that has not already spoken?
[3:58:02] Yes.
[3:58:02] I do.
[3:58:04] I don't understand when my card was in full moon.
[3:58:06] My daughter went up and spoke.
[3:58:07] And he called my husband same.
[3:58:08] So I'd like to know what my card went.
[3:58:10] I am talking.
[3:58:11] Already.
[3:58:12] Thank you.
[3:58:12] Don't interrupt me.
[3:58:13] I didn't interrupt.
[3:58:14] If you can state your name, I can.
[3:58:15] Yes.
[3:58:16] My name is Ori Gracie.
[3:58:19] It's not on.
[3:58:20] It's on the mic.
[3:58:22] So.
[3:58:23] My name is Ori, Gracie.
[3:58:26] I've lived in Alteyes for 13 years, and I have children who have gone to the school
[3:58:30] Alteyes and Silverado Trail.
[3:58:32] I go through the five-way intersection multiple times a day, and what I see are mass amounts
[3:58:36] of big rigs and work vehicles, which I think could use alternate routes.
[3:58:42] If you change the section of Silverado Trail to a road and not a highway, it would lower
[3:58:47] and made it blower the gross vehicle weight and reroute the big rigs through
[3:58:53] sawscle and trinkets. This would ease up a lot of the traffic in the area and
[3:58:58] which then we wouldn't need roundabouts. You talk about pedestrian concerns at the
[3:59:05] five way, but what about the rest of the trail? What about Cum'sville? East Avenue and
[3:59:12] also third street. There are sections with no sidewalks or ones without need
[3:59:16] massive repairs and the lack of bike lanes on those stated roads need to be implemented
[3:59:23] sections leading up to silver auto middle school
[3:59:27] They're like I said there's no sidewalks they're at all and also like my daughter
[3:59:32] had mentioned there's also no bike
[3:59:34] way for the kids getting to and from school on those sections so really that's the issue not necessarily the five way
[3:59:42] I don't understand how you say that the 10 seconds that you mentioned would save time
[3:59:52] just through around about it's 10 seconds for a man's home.
[3:59:58] I don't think that is something like that.
[4:00:00] You guys should be doing. I don't think taking a man's home will fix the issues. At all, I urge you to fix the surrounding streets and provide adequate routes for the pedestrians and do not take the man's home for a roundabout.
[4:00:22] Basically, I guess my name is Sharon Miller-Wittington, and I live on the other side of town, but I drive on this side of town all the time.
[4:00:29] But what I've listened to all through the thing, it sounds like it just needs to have the
[4:00:34] roads where you fix, put sidewalks and fix the things around there, it's said it's
[4:00:40] spending 27 million dollars to have something that nobody wants.
[4:00:44] I really think that's all I've really heard all night is the only thing that needs to be done
[4:00:48] is to have it fixed, have it, you know, where it's safe for the children.
[4:00:52] So that's all.
[4:00:53] Thank you.
[4:00:56] Thank you.
[4:01:04] Thank you.
[4:01:05] heights, and I just want to be very brief, years ago I learned from a very wise philosopher.
[4:01:14] This wisdom that I would like to express tonight, if it ain't broke, don't try to fix it.
[4:01:28] Also, there are many streets in Napa that need repairing.
[4:01:33] I don't know if the money is coming from the state or what it's doing, but that's what I think the council
[4:01:39] with the people would very much more appreciate this council if you repaired those streets.
[4:01:46] Thank you.
[4:01:53] Hi, my name's Lori George.
[4:01:54] I'm a teacher and a parent here in Napa for the last 30 years.
[4:01:59] I just wanted to state that anyone who was cut off earlier because they prepared for three minutes speaking
[4:02:06] and we're told it was going to be two minutes based on the number of people who showed up at this meeting,
[4:02:12] which I think is unethical, personally. And I thank you, though. I do thank you, council and mayor,
[4:02:20] said, for allowing us to go past, I'm two minutes past the nine o'clock you gave us until.
[4:02:26] But anyone who didn't get to finish saying what they wanted to say, please seek me out after this meeting,
[4:02:32] Tomorrow, I would like to post any local government on a local government page offering people the chance to post the rest of their thoughts.
[4:02:42] I do believe the way some of the people were cut off and the reaction to some of the clapping or the bullying that took place was very unprofessional.
[4:02:54] And I'm very surprised by the gentleman that I voted for.
[4:03:08] All right, sir.
[4:03:09] Clerk, we there?
[4:03:10] I have no additional cards, Mayor, and we have no hands, please.
[4:03:13] No hands, no cards.
[4:03:14] All right.
[4:03:15] I think we made it to our bench mark, what we were trying to do.
[4:03:19] So thank you all for your participation, and thank you for your respect and consideration
[4:03:25] of each other and the council that does this job.
[4:03:31] I know all of the council does this job in the interest of our community.
[4:03:35] And so to be told to hold otherwise is just simply not true.
[4:03:39] So I can share that. So Council, I don't know.
[4:03:42] We'll start back with the, it's close to public hearing.
[4:03:47] Need a motion, close to public hearing.
[4:03:48] Make a motion, close to the public hearing.
[4:03:50] That motion by vice mayor.
[4:03:52] Dean Antali.
[4:03:54] A second by council member.
[4:03:55] Senator vice.
[4:03:57] Honour and favor.
[4:03:58] Aye.
[4:03:59] Here's.
[4:04:00] Thank you.
[4:04:01] Public testimony is closed, but stick around.
[4:04:02] that this the good part is going to come next.
[4:04:04] So we're going to talk about what we heard.
[4:04:08] And if you don't mind, Council, I'll just have a few.
[4:04:10] There was a couple of questions that came out
[4:04:12] in a couple of probably clarifications
[4:04:15] that I should make.
[4:04:16] There was a lot of discussion that evolved around the city.
[4:04:21] This project is taking Mr. Rossi's home.
[4:04:27] There's no interest in taking any home.
[4:04:30] It's part of capital improvement, and there's negotiations,
[4:04:33] And there's solutions, you work towards, you work with the property owner, property acquisition.
[4:04:38] It's not simply knocking on somebody's door and say, we're going to take your house tomorrow.
[4:04:42] I've worked with other agencies that do property acquisitions for public benefit projects.
[4:04:48] And it's an negotiated arrangement to be fair to all.
[4:04:53] And as one business owner in the area pointed out, it's just once,
[4:04:58] So the insurance is that the company...
[4:05:00] The compensation is just in fear for any property acquisition that may happen. And yes, it does. And generally, it comes out higher than the appraised value of the property. And the experience that I've seen.
[4:05:14] But that doesn't create the problem of if Mr. Rossi does not want to negotiate. That's his choice. But the imminent domain has not been brought up by this council or staff. It's just part of the process.
[4:05:28] So just to make that clear, it's an associated arrangement
[4:05:32] with a property owner.
[4:05:34] That's what it means.
[4:05:35] And so
[4:05:38] there was a question about on the beacons,
[4:05:42] there'll be beacons at the pedestrian crosswalks
[4:05:45] at this roundabout, like the other roundabouts we have.
[4:05:48] Yeah, so there was a comment about it.
[4:05:50] It's not gonna make it any safer
[4:05:51] because they gotta get across,
[4:05:52] but those flashing beacons really work.
[4:05:56] I've been in this town my whole life
[4:05:58] And when the beacon goes off, I'm paying attention, I slow down.
[4:06:03] I don't run yellow lights, but the beacons would be on that
[4:06:06] two for the pedestrian safety. So what to make sure that was clear?
[4:06:12] One question that came up on level of service.
[4:06:15] When the project is done, I guess we would expect the level of service
[4:06:19] goes up immediately.
[4:06:23] As soon as construction is over, yes, that's anticipated.
[4:06:26] And then in the report is showed that over time it could degrade on down third street and other things but over decade.
[4:06:36] With the existing or with the proposed alternative, the level of service does stay at an A through the out years and we did look at 20 years out. So 2046 was the out year where the level of service was still A and I think a B at one approach which is still considered acceptable.
[4:06:55] Okay.
[4:07:00] And then I'll just, as the tutorialized a little bit, I grew up here, as I said,
[4:07:07] in highway 29, I went down I'm all avenue. That's it came up around Stuart's curve and went down.
[4:07:14] I'm all avenue to hit what's now to 21. So when, when 29 was constructed, I think as one of the speakers said,
[4:07:22] Maybe even one of the Rossi families lost some property for 29.
[4:07:25] Well, a lot of people lost some property on 29 when the two lanes was created because it was just a two-lane road.
[4:07:32] So I watched that was probably the first project I watched as a young boy building those overpasses.
[4:07:39] I'm old, old Sonoma Road, Furst Lincoln, those were pretty big projects.
[4:07:45] And so the next one was the interesting was the Southern Crossing that connected now 29 to 21.
[4:07:51] And that was a huge public works project that took some farmland and wetlands for the
[4:07:58] the betterment of traffic circulation and, you know, for the community to get
[4:08:03] the highway off of I'mole Avenue. Redwood Road and Trangus was an element, a big deal
[4:08:09] that affected some property owners, but in the interest of improving safety and circulation
[4:08:15] and moving commerce and moving people, those were those projects were done.
[4:08:19] And the last one for Council, I can't forget is the Linda Vista Bridge.
[4:08:24] You know, the city built a fire station on Browns Valley Road to sort of Browns Valley
[4:08:29] and also sort of the West Park neighborhood with the intention of building a small bridge
[4:08:34] across the creek right there.
[4:08:36] That's why that station is there.
[4:08:38] But at the time, the Council decided I was in the minority, I lost, because I retired
[4:08:44] firefighter from the city of Napa and I knew what response times mean and that bridge was
[4:08:49] critically important for that neighborhood plus school kids to get to West Park School because
[4:08:55] all those kids on the south side of the creek can't get to that school so they either go
[4:08:58] at Brown's Valley School where they go to NVL-A. But I lost out when it was similar that the people
[4:09:04] in the neighborhood just simply did not want it. It didn't matter that it was going to increase safety
[4:09:09] or pedestrian or school anything and it just didn't want the change and I understand that
[4:09:13] I understand change, so this is where the council, we had, we get our time too, so I will move over to council members or else.
[4:09:22] I have some questions, I have a lot of questions.
[4:09:25] There was something that came up during public comment that I want to make sure get answered, because I thought they were really good questions.
[4:09:30] The issue came over, the question came up about, can we reroute the highway over to South Skull?
[4:09:39] Yeah, thanks for asking that.
[4:09:42] Actually, the answer is no, we can't reroute all of the highway and the traffic over to
[4:09:47] South School.
[4:09:49] South School is not built for that level of additional traffic and we would have similar issues
[4:09:53] there if 121 were to be rerouted.
[4:09:57] And then I follow up to, I have a lot of questions, so just hang on.
[4:10:00] On, it came up, I think, or he asked, can we lower the gross vehicle weight and re-out large vehicles through
[4:10:06] the law school? Again, that would be something that we would have to look at, but the immediate
[4:10:14] response would be no, we can't, we can't do that. We need to keep the track vehicles on the
[4:10:21] crucial corridors and make sure that the 121 is still carrying those vehicles. And then it came up a
[4:10:28] Several times, questions about paving, putting in sidewalks, is that part of this project
[4:10:34] specifically, I'm thinking about rooms available between this intersection to Silverado
[4:10:39] Middle School.
[4:10:41] That's not part of this particular project.
[4:10:43] We do have a separate capital improvement project.
[4:10:46] We're working on design right now to install a sidewalk and improve bike lanes from the end
[4:10:52] of this project at the intersection all the way to the eastern city limits.
[4:10:55] And that that's getting paved.
[4:10:58] It will also be paved when that happens.
[4:11:01] And then I wasn't on the council in 2017 when this alternative was selective.
[4:11:05] So I have a lot of questions just kind of about how we got here in specific.
[4:11:10] So it was mentioned about the intelligent traffic management system being an option
[4:11:14] and you had talked about signal timing changing years ago.
[4:11:17] Is that something that has been evaluated as part of this
[4:11:21] just looking at the safety and the operational deficiencies in the intersection?
[4:11:24] have we looked at that as an option?
[4:11:28] Signal improvements were looked at at looked at as an option during those earlier phases.
[4:11:33] 2014 through 2016-2017. Signal improvements are not able to handle the amount of traffic
[4:11:41] at this intersection. Significant backup since safety concerns would still remain.
[4:11:48] Those intersections are excuse me the signal upgrades there were some minor tweaks that were made
[4:11:53] And I think it was 2016 that just did not address the delay issues that we're experiencing.
[4:11:59] And then specifically, what is it that roundabouts could accomplish that signal timing
[4:12:04] couldn't?
[4:12:07] That's a good question.
[4:12:10] The roundabout fundamentally changes the intersection, allowing traffic to move more smoothly.
[4:12:16] Signals require, especially if this five-way intersection requires that only one approach
[4:12:21] many cases can go at a time where around about changes that allowing multiple
[4:12:26] movements to happen all at the same time and allowing flow to be more
[4:12:30] efficient.
[4:12:32] Okay, and then just kind of shifting gears for a second, looking at
[4:12:35] about whether or not the house can be saved as part of this, you mentioned that
[4:12:39] it's infeasible to move the house.
[4:12:41] And I've heard that come up a few times, explain what you mean by
[4:12:45] infeasible.
[4:12:46] Does that mean it is impossible or is it expensive or a combination
[4:12:50] about. I would say first it would be extremely costly to do that. It is a concrete or a
[4:12:59] basalite block house. It's very heavy. You would not be able to simply pick it up and move it
[4:13:05] like you can a wood frame house. If the home did need to be moved it would need to be dismantled
[4:13:14] block by block and reassembled which would be very costly and the home would not be exactly the same
[4:13:20] when it was put back together in a new location.
[4:13:23] Why is that?
[4:13:24] It would lose some character of the house
[4:13:28] when taking a part the home.
[4:13:30] It's possible that blocks could be damaged
[4:13:33] and would need to be replaced.
[4:13:35] And so there would be new pieces that would be required.
[4:13:37] The mortar in between the blocks would be new.
[4:13:40] And so pieces of it would be newer.
[4:13:43] It would not be exactly the same house that it is now.
[4:13:45] All right, thank you.
[4:13:46] I appreciate that.
[4:13:47] You know, looking at attachment for in the map,
[4:13:49] It looks like the proposed travel lane goes right through the house.
[4:13:54] So I've been trying to figure out, you know,
[4:13:56] understanding the current design, does the house actually have to be removed?
[4:14:00] Is there any way that that is unavoidable?
[4:14:04] So I'm not an engineer.
[4:14:06] How far would the roadway have to shift to miss the house?
[4:14:09] Are we talking a few feet, 10 feet, 20 feet?
[4:14:13] And have you looked specifically at modifying the 5F alternative itself to do that?
[4:14:20] In the early iterations, there were numerous, during the early years of study, there were numerous iterations of different roundabouts that could be shifted.
[4:14:30] This is the one, this is the option that was landed on that there really had the least impacts.
[4:14:36] You could see an option 8. It's a very similar configuration, but requires a lot more property acquisition.
[4:14:43] And so could there round about be shifted a bit, it can.
[4:14:46] It will have additional impacts to the other properties that are nearby.
[4:14:50] Yeah.
[4:14:50] And just to be clear, I'm not asking to go back to Alternative 6 or Alternative 8.
[4:14:54] I understand how the council got there.
[4:14:56] I'm just wondering if we could keep the 5F design but make...
[4:15:00] Localised changes, you know, shifting the roadway, changing the curve of the radius, adjusting the round about geometry, something similar to try to preserve the house. And I think we haven't gone about it with that intention of preserving the house. We've looked at kind of all the options. And I just want to kind of know, I want to hear from you, I know I'm kind of harping on the same thing, but in your professional engineering judgment is there no reasonable modification to 5F that could preserve the house or do we know at this point?
[4:15:30] based on what we've looked at.
[4:15:31] Yeah, thank you.
[4:15:32] There really is not, not without impacting other properties
[4:15:36] and also meeting design standards that we have to meet
[4:15:40] because it is a culture and intersection.
[4:15:43] We need to make sure that we can continue to have the same
[4:15:46] types of vehicles traveled through safely,
[4:15:48] that requires the geometry that we're seeing right now.
[4:15:53] Assuming that there may still be something worth exploring
[4:15:56] during the final design, I want to understand
[4:15:58] what options we have tonight to allow the project to keep moving without making demolition
[4:16:04] of the House of Oregon conclusion, and maybe this is more of a question for our attorney.
[4:16:09] But is there a way for us to, you know, approve this alternative subject to a condition
[4:16:15] that staff pursues preservation of 801 Silverado during the final design and come back to us
[4:16:22] before we acquire the parcel and move forward in that way?
[4:16:29] there also it's with best best and
[4:16:31] Krieger. Is this on? Yes, okay, great. So I'm gonna try to cover
[4:16:36] I think I caught all of your questions, but let me know if I don't
[4:16:40] catch all of it. The answer is that nothing you would be
[4:16:46] approving tonight would mandate the acquisition of the property that
[4:16:57] That's still something that would have to be either negotiated or approved in some other
[4:17:03] way in the future.
[4:17:04] And I'm not, it's not actually clear to me that that would even be done by the city of
[4:17:08] Napa.
[4:17:09] It might be done by CalTrans.
[4:17:11] But we'll set that aside and just talk about what you're doing tonight.
[4:17:15] So what you're doing tonight is essentially creating what I think of it as from a
[4:17:20] secret perspective of balloon.
[4:17:21] These are the maximum impacts.
[4:17:23] And we think these, if everything happened, we think the benefits of this project going forward
[4:17:31] at way everything potentially happening that we are discussing in this EIR.
[4:17:37] And we agree that we want to enter into a memorandum agreement as organized with the State
[4:17:44] preservation officer and CalTrans and Napa Landmarks to undertake the historic resource protection measures,
[4:17:53] the Mr. President outlined.
[4:17:56] So that's the next thing.
[4:17:57] And then also an amendment to the cooperative agreement that with CalTrans to continue design of the project,
[4:18:04] moving it toward final design.
[4:18:06] So then I think we get to the last part of your question, which is whether you could certify the EIR,
[4:18:11] approve the project to approve the MOU, approve the amendment to the cooperative agreement.
[4:18:16] But conditions somehow, I guess the amendment to the cooperative agreement, to try to pursue
[4:18:24] a variation of option F that would preserve the home, or I don't know, but Barbie do that.
[4:18:32] You might want a different slightly different condition,
[4:18:36] and but the question would be if the
[4:18:40] determination in final design was that the House was not
[4:18:43] preservable based on the standards that were just articulated
[4:18:47] with that what how would the condition be written and I'm going to
[4:18:51] actually now flop this over to the city staff to ask whether and I'm
[4:18:57] not an expert in the parameters of the
[4:19:01] cooperative agreement with Calthrands would they accept because there is
[4:19:05] funding involved a lot of funding would they accept a condition like this
[4:19:13] I don't think it's an issue of the cooperative agreement with
[4:19:18] CalTrans.
[4:19:19] I think the question at hand is whether or not the roadway could be
[4:19:22] realigned in a way that would miss the house.
[4:19:26] And we looked at that and had determined that it could not.
[4:19:31] And if we were to realign the roadway so the roundabout was placed in a
[4:19:37] different position so it didn't impact the Rossi property, it would be a
[4:19:41] from project. It would be a different design. It would have different environmental impacts,
[4:19:46] and this environmental impact report would no longer be the hell.
[4:19:49] Yeah, that's I appreciate hearing that because that's really the question what I'm getting to
[4:19:53] is would we have to redo the EIR if we moved it over a couple feet or is that yeah and I I want to be clear.
[4:20:00] A brand new project is not what you're asking about, nor was it what I was talking about. Not at all. Not talking about a new AIR. If you certify the AIR tonight, that would be the maximum impact. Anything else would be less, I think, is what you're asking. Could they look at something less.
[4:20:16] And if that redesign had other impacts to get to the less that you're concerned about with regard to Mr. Rossi's house,
[4:20:28] I was actually not asking whether it, I was only asking whether Caltrans would even be willing to continue the process of refining the structure of the project.
[4:20:39] I think counter-trans would be willing to make minor adjustments in the project, but as the council woman mentioned, the roadway goes pretty much right through the house.
[4:20:52] So moving it a few feet is not going to solve the problem.
[4:20:55] So then I think that kind of gives you then your binary, which is you can ask them to consider a design that protects some more of the property.
[4:21:04] because remember the Rossi property is actually two structures. I believe 81 Silverado is two structures.
[4:21:10] There are two structures. One of the homes belonging to the Rossi
[4:21:14] Rossi family is renting on Whereas. And that will remain. That will remain.
[4:21:19] I think we'll you talk about two different things. There's two parcels. This particular
[4:21:23] parcel has two buildings on it. The red barn and the house. The red barn is actually
[4:21:27] on the personal with the home for a team or as okay yeah so those are not proposed so
[4:21:36] I mean they could probably protect a little bit more of the property they probably couldn't
[4:21:40] protect the home and still have this design okay if we looking at the three options could we
[4:21:47] move forward with the CalTrans Cooperative Agreement and not certify the AR tonight you can do the
[4:21:57] won't move the project forward per se because you still have to do the EIR and the MLA and all
[4:22:03] that stuff. You could have been the cooperative agreement tonight, yes.
[4:22:07] If we had to redo the EIR, what kind of delay would we be talking about?
[4:22:14] Well, you mean a new project? Same amount of time. I would assume it took maybe a slightly better
[4:22:23] but otherwise, I would just conservatively seem to take the same amount of time.
[4:22:28] Again, 2017.
[4:22:30] Yeah, that's what I've 12 years as a long time, our nine years.
[4:22:34] I mean, my first priority is to preserve the house even if it means a small delay to explore
[4:22:40] options and answer questions, and that's kind of why I'm asking about this train of questions,
[4:22:45] is can we still move forward and still explore options?
[4:22:49] If there's really no feasible way to build this and preserve the house, then I also
[4:22:54] want to understand what happens to Charlie, so I have some questions about that.
[4:22:59] When would the city actually need possession of 801 Silverado?
[4:23:04] We wouldn't need possession of 801 Silverado Trail until we's advertised the construction
[4:23:12] contract. So in order to what CalTrans calls ready to list, the project for Advertisement,
[4:23:22] it needs to show that it has possession of all of the properties. It wouldn't need to demolish
[4:23:27] the house before then, and Mr. Rossi could live in it as long as possible as a condition
[4:23:38] So if you could potentially like lease back the property or otherwise stay in the property,
[4:23:43] even if we acquired it.
[4:23:44] Absolutely.
[4:23:45] We could include demolition as part of the construction cop contract and not demolished
[4:23:51] the house until the construction contract began.
[4:23:56] And then I think it would be helpful for us all to just kind of know a little bit more about what
[4:23:59] the property acquisition would look like.
[4:24:01] Would we be negotiating that?
[4:24:02] how transmitting and negotiating that. Beyond the purchase price and I think relocation benefits
[4:24:08] were mentioned, what flexibility do we have to negotiate and agreement if it's our negotiation?
[4:24:15] What flexibility do we have to make sure that Charlie is made whole and that he's treated
[4:24:19] fairly? So the state of California has pretty strict laws on property acquisition for public projects.
[4:24:29] We have to make doopraisals.
[4:24:33] We have to map the property, a prison, and make an offer
[4:24:37] of fair market value for the property.
[4:24:42] Right now we're in negotiations with Caltrans
[4:24:44] in terms of who actually will lead the right away
[4:24:48] phase of the project.
[4:24:50] Right now it appears that the city is going to be leading
[4:24:53] the right away phase of the project.
[4:24:55] We have a consultant on board prepared to start.
[4:25:00] Our depraisals and make offers. We've met with the Rossi family. They thought we were going to be making
[4:25:07] them an offer. We had to explain to them that we can't make an offer until we certify the environmental
[4:25:13] impact report. So, they seem to be willing to talk to us and negotiate and want to be treated
[4:25:21] fairly.
[4:25:24] We would offer relocation assistance, help Mr. Rossi locate, you know, find a new home,
[4:25:36] pack his possessions, move him, and, you know, ensure his safety and well-being during the entire process.
[4:25:48] It's a pretty comprehensive and effective way of protecting individual rights.
[4:25:56] I'm going to do main laws in this country and the state changed quite a bit several years ago.
[4:26:05] When we make an offer to them, we also have to pay them to hire their own appraisals,
[4:26:13] So they can independently, you know, look at value, and there is a negotiation that takes place.
[4:26:20] If the council was to take action today to certify the EIR, it doesn't mean that we have
[4:26:29] immediately have the ability to take his house as people have been saying.
[4:26:35] There's a process that needs to be followed.
[4:26:37] And if Mr. Rossi did not want to negotiate and sell his house, then we could exercise
[4:26:46] eminent domain, but that's another process that requires approval by a government body.
[4:26:51] You have to prove that it's in the best interest of the public at the least private harm
[4:26:57] and past that resolution.
[4:27:00] And then from there it would be decided by a court in terms of what the compensation would be.
[4:27:05] So there, you know, action today would not necessarily mean that the house would, would follow into the city's inventory, it would not.
[4:27:16] There's a process that would have to follow after that tonight.
[4:27:20] Thank you. I apologize for asking so many questions. I'll wait to give my comments until everybody's had a chance.
[4:27:29] I appreciate those questions because I have a lot of similar questions, so there's a lot of
[4:27:33] of the questions we're going to miss to Rosy, so we made a comment and I didn't catch
[4:27:39] that catch a little thing about who will have the right of way and I just want to make sure
[4:27:44] I heard correctly, has that been decided as far as if this moves forward, it will cause
[4:27:50] have the lead or will we have the lead?
[4:27:56] We plan to bring a cooperative agreement to the city
[4:27:59] at a future meeting.
[4:28:01] We're working with CalTrans right now to negotiate that.
[4:28:05] We have set in the past that the city would take the lead
[4:28:09] and acquiring the right away.
[4:28:11] We've also talked to CalTrans about them taking the lead.
[4:28:15] If this body wants to take the lead, it'd be good to know
[4:28:18] so that we could go that path.
[4:28:21] But if we went that path, it may be that later on,
[4:28:25] we would have to come to this body for our resolution
[4:28:28] of necessity hearing.
[4:28:30] That would be the first step in eminent domain.
[4:28:32] If CalTrans were to take the lead in acquiring
[4:28:36] the right way on the project, then it would go
[4:28:39] to the California Transportation Commission.
[4:28:41] All right, so that means that Mr. Rossi,
[4:28:44] when we're as a partner, I would think
[4:28:46] of call transfers is with us, right? So, okay, that's crazy. So, the point of that decision
[4:28:53] is done when, is that, is that come back to us to say, to you want to see the decision to call
[4:29:00] trends? I just want to understand the timeline if this moves forward, you know, each, each
[4:29:05] timeline of the decision. So, being understanding of the impacts to Mr. Rossi, I feel that if this
[4:29:14] was forward much better for us to lead the way, right?
[4:29:19] And my question is, what point would that decision
[4:29:22] need to be made?
[4:29:24] We would want to make that decision fairly
[4:29:25] sin.
[4:29:27] CalTrans has drafted a cooperative agreement
[4:29:29] to have us be the lead.
[4:29:31] I have not seen that draft cooperative agreement.
[4:29:34] As soon as we see it, I would forward it to legal counsel
[4:29:38] for a review.
[4:29:39] We would write a staff report.
[4:29:41] We would schedule it for the next available city council meeting.
[4:29:44] So probably in a month or two, we would come forward with a cooperative agreement spelling out who was going to take the lead in acquiring the right away for the project.
[4:29:54] And I'm going to jump in and just with one small fact and guide correctly, but I don't believe Keff...
[4:30:00] All trans will go through that process until there's a certified EIR.
[4:30:07] They won't start the right away process, but they would approve a right away cooperative agreement.
[4:30:14] So, even before certification, if I had read away agreement, now I could bring it forward.
[4:30:19] count times would be okay with that. I see, okay. And then again at the timeline,
[4:30:25] this was forward. We lead the way and we start negotiating and you kind of answer this question
[4:30:33] by just want to be clear, you know, because I heard 2029, but at what point would the demolition take place?
[4:30:42] What's our earliest, and really, realistically, what's the longest, the farthest time away
[4:30:50] that this could take place.
[4:30:52] What's the window where that realistically could place, take place for this kind of project?
[4:30:57] It somewhat depends on negotiations.
[4:30:59] So let's say we start to negotiate with the Rossi family and hypothetically speaking.
[4:31:06] They love our offer, take our offer.
[4:31:09] We find a new home from Mr. Rossi, he's all excited and wants to move out.
[4:31:15] We could demolish the house, you know, as soon as he moves out.
[4:31:20] On the flip side, let's say we decide, we want to stay in the house as long as humanly possible.
[4:31:29] Then we could have it as the first order of work for the construction package and then it would be
[4:31:33] sometime in 2029.
[4:31:35] Okay, so I know, I know, aging in place for people retiring and, and I'm already focused
[4:31:42] really important.
[4:31:43] So, could that be a condition of the project of, you know, I don't know what, what,
[4:31:49] along that, that would be, I'm just trying to give some flexibility to, to the
[4:31:54] finances.
[4:31:54] Is this really the, the property with the most impact, is, you know, is that something
[4:32:00] And that's normally discussed in those negotiations that could be a condition.
[4:32:07] It sometimes says, I mean, I've seen it negotiated that the individual that resides in
[4:32:14] the property is allowed to stay in the property as long as possible, so yes, that could
[4:32:19] possibly be a condition.
[4:32:22] And if this doesn't move forward, because I know there's funding from different venues and VTA
[4:32:26] health trends are local dollars. There's different sources. How would that be impacted? If
[4:32:34] one or one of these items are not approved, what happens to the funding and being at 65%
[4:32:41] is that the lay the project is at stop in place or do we have to come back at a later time?
[4:32:48] Well, we cannot start negotiating for real property rights. That's the big impact on the schedule.
[4:32:54] And that is, yeah, until and unless the EIR certified, we cannot start negotiating for real property rights.
[4:33:06] Look, that is on the critical path. The time it's going to take to acquire real property.
[4:33:12] And it's not just the Rossi House. There are several properties that need to be acquired.
[4:33:18] And part but still all of the even partial acquisitions can take just as long as the full acquisition sometimes longer sometimes even a temporary construction easement can take longer than a full acquisition it really depends on the parties that you're negotiating with so we would be delayed you know if the city did not take action tonight.
[4:33:44] There are good funding opportunities that write out right now that we're applying for and this project
[4:33:52] presents itself very well in terms of its project benefits and the state's goals for
[4:33:59] bike and pedestrian safety and sustainability. So we do have money that is allocate that is
[4:34:07] program to right away, we can't allocate that money for, you know, until the EIR certified.
[4:34:15] So that money has a timeframe on it, too.
[4:34:19] It needs to be allocated by 2027.
[4:34:22] You know, so if we start delaying things, it makes it harder for us to acquire the construction funding.
[4:34:28] It makes it harder for us to, you know, deal with the money that we have set aside,
[4:34:37] right now for right away, you know, and possibly we could lose some of that money.
[4:34:42] That's, you know, been programmed to right away if we can't allocate it by 2027.
[4:35:00] Is that number?
[4:35:05] So the adopted EIR gives us the opportunity to enter into discussions with these
[4:35:09] property owners, Mr. Rossi, and I believe their families involved. And that allows us to get feedback
[4:35:15] from them because I know that there is a lot of concern about taking something from their home, but that's
[4:35:29] there's no agreement. And then the next step will be imminent domain.
[4:35:36] Who makes that decision? When does that come back to us to discuss what negotiations took place
[4:35:41] before we even consider imminent domain? Because we're far away from, we're not even close to that.
[4:35:47] Right? And a lot of the comments tonight was concerning about imminent domain,
[4:35:51] ever moving this, you know, Mr. Rossi from your home. So, what point does that occur? And what's
[4:35:58] process for that in the decision behind that.
[4:36:02] So the process for that is, of course,
[4:36:05] to make the, you know, do the appraisals,
[4:36:08] make an offer, and negotiate.
[4:36:11] And if negotiation doesn't go well,
[4:36:14] then we would have to decide whether we wanted to go to
[4:36:17] a political body, and it would either be this one,
[4:36:21] the California Transportation Commission,
[4:36:23] possibly the Napa Valley Transportation Authority.
[4:36:26] They also have the ability to exercise eminent domain as a responsible agency on the project.
[4:36:33] We could decide which agency we want to go to to ask for a resolution of necessity to determine if the project is in the best public interest at the least private harm.
[4:36:46] And out that hearing, if the body says no, then the project would not be able to acquire the right away and we wouldn't be able to move forward with the project.
[4:36:57] Okay.
[4:36:57] The body was to say yes.
[4:36:59] Well, then it would go to the courts to determine what the fair market value is.
[4:37:03] Okay.
[4:37:04] So tonight we're not deciding, you know, as many comments I wanted to make sure,
[4:37:08] the audience knew and heard that process that we're not making the decision to remove and to rush from its home.
[4:37:14] But this does allows us to enter negotiations with them to see if there's a reasonable
[4:37:19] agreement to be reached. That doesn't then we we're gonna have a decision of which
[4:37:26] government entity will enter or take leader in an intimate domain. And in my personal
[4:37:34] recommendations, if we are going to adopt a IR, we should be leading the negotiation.
[4:37:38] And, you know, that MBTA and our college entrance
[4:37:41] should go back to us since most of the discussions is here.
[4:37:45] We're here in the public comment
[4:37:46] from the community here that we should take on their responses.
[4:37:50] That's my take on that.
[4:37:52] I feel a little bit better about that answer
[4:37:55] because I'm not ready to, to this place anybody from their home.
[4:38:01] I do want to have the opportunity to have a conversation
[4:38:04] negotiations to see if we can come to a reasonable agreement.
[4:38:07] I know people here don't want to remove, I don't want to remove anybody against their will.
[4:38:13] But I do, I am interested in hearing their feedback as is their reasonable offer there that they're willing to take.
[4:38:22] And I'm not saying we're going to go in a minute domain, but if what I'm hearing here is we do that EIR that gives us permission to move forward and have those conversations.
[4:38:31] That's why I am interested in supporting that, but I'm very cautious about when we get to the
[4:38:37] amendment domain who leads that and also make sure that we take every effort to do
[4:38:43] the right by Mr. Rossi and the other property owners, so that's one.
[4:38:49] Then doing construction, there was concern about noise, vibration, and disruption, so doing
[4:38:58] construction, I know in the other projects, we were able to provide resources, phone numbers
[4:39:03] for residents to be able to reach out to some of something that is maybe not working
[4:39:09] was too loud. How do we hold the people, the companies doing the construction
[4:39:15] countable with staying within reasonable noise and using the right equipment that the
[4:39:21] because some of the commas was when reasonable one available.
[4:39:27] So how do we hold that accountable to make sure we're doing the best
[4:39:29] to lessen the disruption to the neighborhood?
[4:39:33] So we have a traffic management plan, which addresses construction impacts.
[4:39:39] And then we, before we advertise the project, when we call it ready to less,
[4:39:45] one of the other requirements in addition to right away is to have a complete set of plans
[4:39:50] and specifications, specifications have a section on maintaining traffic and what time.
[4:40:00] It'd be specified in the contract specifications and the contractor would have to follow those who are based penalties.
[4:40:08] And to be clear, there is already a call transfer in the city.
[4:40:12] In the EIR has a, what's called an avoidance and minimization measure called noise.
[4:40:19] Dash 1.2, we're pleased to build noise in a rating construction activity shall be
[4:40:24] restricted between 7am and 7pm. On weekdays, no construction occurring on weekends
[4:40:30] or holidays, it will work as necessary outside, CalChance shall require implementation
[4:40:34] of a construction noise monitoring program provided additional noise controls.
[4:40:40] And then what's the protocol for keeping neighborhoods informed of changes of, you know,
[4:40:47] roads and other changes on construction of my disrupt traffic flow and just the everyday
[4:40:54] lives of the residents.
[4:40:57] We could certainly, as the city, take a very proactive approach to doing so.
[4:41:04] Often, Cal Trans is criticized for not having proper public information and notification.
[4:41:10] If the city council of directs us to have somebody dedicated to informing the public of the construction
[4:41:22] happenings, one roadways are going to be closed, one work is going to be occurring.
[4:41:27] We would certainly do so.
[4:41:29] I already heard when I met with some of the property owners out there in the field about
[4:41:35] instances when they were not informed about lane closures and whatnot, and so when we went out there
[4:41:41] to do our soil testing and our drilling that required a lane closure, I personally called them
[4:41:48] and let them know that a lane closure was going to be in place and we would make sure that they're
[4:41:52] driveway access was maintained during. You were also considering adopting a mitigation monitoring
[4:42:01] in reporting program tonight, and you can add any measure to that mitigation monitoring reporting program
[4:42:08] regarding what you just described in terms of noise and reporting to that MMRP as part of
[4:42:15] your adoption of the end.
[4:42:17] Well, absolutely. I mean, one of our focus areas is commitment engagement, right? So that's
[4:42:22] that's a given to me that we have to make sure that we keep that neighborhood proper informed,
[4:42:27] Right? I mean, good, you know, dropping off kids going to work and something changes, you know,
[4:42:32] that that can really, or the quiet life of people who make sure that we can properly inform them.
[4:42:38] Also, there, and the different item, there was a lot of conversation about not seeing accidents,
[4:42:47] and then I also heard that this is a high-endry corridor.
[4:42:51] Can we talk about the data about injuries and accidents that we found to show what the public
[4:42:59] that has not seen that?
[4:43:03] Yeah, so you mentioned a couple of things.
[4:43:06] The high injury network, that is in the city of Napa, local roadways safety plan.
[4:43:10] It is the Silverado Trail from South Skull to the Northern City
[4:43:14] So the entire corridor is on that, meaning that is one of the corridors that in our city that has the highest number of severe and fatal collisions.
[4:43:25] Not necessarily attributed to the intersection, but to the entire corridor.
[4:43:30] You did also mention collisions that were studied.
[4:43:35] We have been looking at the collision data for a number of years, well over a decade, and
[4:43:41] since we have started this project, collisions at this intersection specifically have been
[4:43:47] higher than the statewide average for other similar facilities.
[4:43:51] Thank you for sharing that.
[4:43:52] It sounds like there's a disagreement with that data.
[4:43:54] Is there a place where people can see that that way they can compare it to the information
[4:44:00] that they have?
[4:44:01] because it sounds like they may be looking at different data,
[4:44:04] which will make sure that we're informing the public
[4:44:06] with the information we're using.
[4:44:07] That information is in both the draft
[4:44:09] and the final EIR E.A. is a table regarding collisions
[4:44:15] and that table sites to the CalTrans traffic accidents,
[4:44:20] surveillance and analysis system and documents
[4:44:23] and 10 accidents over five years in the intersection.
[4:44:28] But again, that is in both the draft, EIR slash and EIA, EIA is the NAPA component of it, and in the final EIR.
[4:44:38] Thank you.
[4:44:38] That's not a question to have for now.
[4:44:42] Council Member Painter.
[4:44:45] These are good questions, and I want to kind of continue on a few of the threads.
[4:44:49] And thank you to everybody who's sticking it out.
[4:44:52] To let us ask these questions, I've been on Council for six years, so this is really my first opportunity to even have a conversation.
[4:44:59] and about the five way.
[4:45:00] Intersection. And many of us do have a lot of questions. We have read all these documents. We have heard everybody tonight. So I just want to say, you know, at least for myself, I'm really kind of be thoughtful about how we move ahead to create what I hope is going to be a win-win situation where we can improve traffic safety. We can do our best to preserve the house. I don't know if it's possible, but I think it's something that we really need to consider. And I know you
[4:45:29] We've looked at other designs and we've looked at things, but I'll start with that to kind
[4:45:35] of follow up on Councilmember Leros' question, and this has to do with certifying the
[4:45:39] EIR.
[4:45:40] And I'm trying to determine if we're better off considering certification of the EIR knowing
[4:45:47] we may want to consider some other alternatives, which I don't know what those alternatives
[4:45:52] now.
[4:45:53] They may include redesign, they may include utilizing some of what we heard about the intelligent
[4:45:59] traffic management system. I don't know. I'm not a traffic engineer. But I do think, at least
[4:46:05] for myself, I'd like to take some time to look at some of those alternatives to address
[4:46:10] some of the issues we've heard about. So my long-witted question here is, and what I'm
[4:46:16] trying to figure out is, should we consider delay on certification of the EIR to look at
[4:46:23] First, or do we, or can we certify the EIR and and and the county finish my thought and consider modifications as we go through the process because this isn't like, you know, when we look at a use permit or some other project where we have a project we're approving we're only certifying the EIR.
[4:46:46] So I'd like to understand when we have another opportunity to look at some of the modifications
[4:46:53] that we've, you know, those of us on council and we care about this and we want to see
[4:46:58] some solutions, but we're not designers or engineers, so what's the best process in that regard?
[4:47:06] So I think actually what you just described is three different options.
[4:47:10] Okay, I know. So if you certify tonight, unless you certify tonight, there can be no negotiations.
[4:47:17] So that's, it's a full stop. Until any IR certified, nobody can talk to anybody about partial or temporary or complete acquisition of property.
[4:47:27] So none of that's going to happen. If you don't certify tonight. What could also happen if you don't certify tonight, you could give staff direction to look at it in a new process.
[4:47:37] that kind of gets us back to the new project question that another council member asked and
[4:47:44] anything new or substantially new likely would require to some degree restarting the whole process.
[4:47:52] So that's what that was your second question but let me give you a third version which kind of gets
[4:47:57] I think to where you're going maybe a little bit and you can tell me if I haven't understood it correctly.
[4:48:01] So, if you did certify,
[4:48:05] California still has to design this.
[4:48:07] And if you want to direct what you want them,
[4:48:12] and this also goes to another council members question,
[4:48:15] if you want to direct them to how you want it to look like,
[4:48:19] you certainly can do that.
[4:48:21] And certainly if Cal Frans is not,
[4:48:24] but the city is the only entity
[4:48:27] who will be considering whether to adopt a resolution of necessity if negotiations were not to proceed.
[4:48:36] You could simply say, Caltering City can come up with a better design.
[4:48:39] We're not interested in adopting a resolution of necessity and that would stop it there, too.
[4:48:46] Okay, so in that case, that comes back to Councilmember Narviz.
[4:48:50] This question in terms of confirming that the city of Napa is the body that would determine
[4:48:56] and that process and potential for eminent domain.
[4:48:59] How do we get certainty on that tonight?
[4:49:03] That is something like guys that we are still negotiating
[4:49:05] with Calterians, if that is the desire,
[4:49:07] that is what we will go back to them with,
[4:49:09] make sure it's very clear to them
[4:49:11] that that is what how we want to move forward,
[4:49:14] and complete negotiating that agreement
[4:49:16] before bringing it back to you.
[4:49:20] And then, so I understand that I don't 100% agree
[4:49:24] that we're back to square one on NER if we did redesign because we've done a lot of work.
[4:49:31] So there are portions of the IR that could probably stay in place and there are other portions
[4:49:35] that would need to be amended and change.
[4:49:38] So I don't want to necessarily discount that, but I do understand the notion that it means
[4:49:43] that we're not able to enter into negotiations.
[4:49:47] My next question, and it came up in some of the public comments, and I'd like to have a
[4:49:51] better understanding.
[4:49:52] I'm sorry if I don't. And that is how the cost, the ultimate not cost of the AR and design
[4:49:58] process, but ultimate cost.
[4:50:00] Construction is allocated between various funding sources. What do we know about that?
[4:50:11] Right now for construction, the state has placed $3.9 million on construction, and that comes
[4:50:19] from actually, it's $3.48 million on construction. They have 3.9 total of state highway
[4:50:27] operational and protection funding that has been placed on the construction phase of the project.
[4:50:35] There is a need of $17.8 million still.
[4:50:43] We've applied for 4.5 million from NVTA through the one Bay Area grant.
[4:50:52] We were told they were going to move forward and recommend that we receive about 2 to 1.5 million of that for 1.5.
[4:51:05] We plan to apply for state and local partnership program, which is part of Senate Bill 1 funding.
[4:51:12] That was past several years ago. That requires a 1 to 1 match.
[4:51:18] We can use the one Bay Area Grant funding as a match and then the rest of the match would have to come from city funds.
[4:51:28] So we're looking at contributing somewhere in the neighborhood of seven, seven and a half million.
[4:51:35] If we get the one Bay Area Grant and then we would possibly be able to get Senate Bill 1 local partnership program to fill the remaining shortfall.
[4:51:46] That application is due in November.
[4:51:49] We're already starting to work on that application.
[4:51:52] We would hear whether that was successful
[4:51:55] about the middle of the next year.
[4:51:58] One of the things they're going to be looking at is
[4:52:00] where is the project?
[4:52:01] Now we certify the EIR yet.
[4:52:05] How does the project meet various performance measures?
[4:52:09] They like projects that are not increasing
[4:52:11] greenhouse gas emissions.
[4:52:13] This is not a greenhouse gas emission increase in projects.
[4:52:17] It's not a capacity increase in project.
[4:52:19] In fact, it's expected to decrease greenhouse gas emissions,
[4:52:23] because you're not going to be having idle eaten cars at a stoplight anymore.
[4:52:27] It also is promoting mode shift, so that people that right now feel unsafe,
[4:52:32] traveling through an intersection where you have to cross several lanes of traffic,
[4:52:38] may choose to ride their bike or walk up to Silverado Middle School,
[4:52:42] because you only have to cross, you know, 10 or 15 feet to get cross one lane before they
[4:52:49] hit a refugee area. There will be rapid, you know, rapid flashing weekends to help, you
[4:52:54] know, alert drivers. It has been shown that roundabouts are, you know, good for pedestrian and
[4:53:02] bike safety. So we expect this project to compete fairly well and that's how we, you know,
[4:53:08] and to try to fund this project.
[4:53:12] And for specifically city of Napa-Fans, we have a certain amount dedicated at this point
[4:53:17] is it all for the EIR and design and what should we anticipate in terms of any future
[4:53:23] needs from any of our existing transportation funds?
[4:53:29] The funding that we have committed to this point has been to go toward the EIR to design
[4:53:35] in an interactive way, so getting us through that point,
[4:53:39] we would need to identify additional funds for construction.
[4:53:45] Well, that's a big question.
[4:53:46] I'm not going to answer it tonight, but it's just good to know,
[4:53:49] sort of what the different funding pots are.
[4:53:51] And I realize it's complicated, and I realize how much work it takes.
[4:53:56] So those are my questions for right now.
[4:53:59] I'll let other council members.
[4:54:00] Vice Mayor Dina Thalian.
[4:54:02] Thank you.
[4:54:02] Thank you to my colleagues for your questions.
[4:54:04] You had most of mine. I did have one question being the newest member of the council. Can you speak to this has been a long haul starting in 2017 the public outreach that got us to 14 to 3 to 1 and what went into that process leading up to the night.
[4:54:20] Yeah, I actually started in 2014 when the project initiated a number of community meetings were held the first community meeting I believe was in 2015 late 2014 sometime in 2015.
[4:54:33] and was held only to listen to the community and hear what some of the needs were, no options were presented at that point.
[4:54:41] It was just to listen to take feedback about what folks were experiencing and what they wanted to see for the intersection.
[4:54:49] Based on that input in at that initial meeting, staff at the time went back and did develop a few options and took them back to the community to a second meeting.
[4:54:59] Thank you.
[4:55:00] At that meeting, there was additional feedback on what the community was okay with and not okay with.
[4:55:07] I think I mentioned some of that, not cutting off access. A few of the initial options that were developed, cut off access to, well, both the Coonsville and to East Avenue and the community expressed that that would not be acceptable.
[4:55:20] And so after that second meeting with those additional feedback areas I would say that fatal
[4:55:27] flaw analysis was completed which did eliminate down to the eliminated some additional options
[4:55:34] and eventually got to three. There was also a third community meeting where the roundabouts were
[4:55:40] shown and folks like I think I think I did mention tonight you know some people are were at that time
[4:55:47] against roundabouts and a number of folks showed up in support as well. Recognizing that
[4:55:53] they had been to around about another areas, they thought they functioned really well. Hundreds
[4:55:58] of people participated in those meetings. We still have records of the comments that were
[4:56:03] received the people that were there. And then after that, in early 2017, February of 2017 is
[4:56:11] when staff came back to the 2017 council. I only see one familiar face from that meeting.
[4:56:17] I wasn't here with the video of that meeting and that was when Council moved forward and
[4:56:24] selected the option that has been studied and we're here talking about tonight.
[4:56:31] One additional clarifying question and a little bit of some discussion. This
[4:56:34] chosen one does not close any businesses. It takes limited property from some, but all the
[4:56:40] businesses remain correct. That is correct. This option that we are presenting option 5F does not
[4:56:46] require full acquisition of any business.
[4:56:49] I did mention that the some of the parking area
[4:56:54] for the marble and granite business would be removed.
[4:56:57] And so we have been talking with them already.
[4:57:00] And we'll continue to do so to find alternative options
[4:57:03] for them on a different side or behind the business.
[4:57:06] And that would be part of those acquisition
[4:57:08] negotiations that we were talking about earlier.
[4:57:11] Thank you.
[4:57:14] You've, thanks very much for that.
[4:57:16] Yeah, we heard that comment about losing all the businesses, but that was early on, you know,
[4:57:22] a big consideration on the small business population in that area.
[4:57:27] And when we came to the, the option that we're looking at today, it was, I know it was
[4:57:34] a big impact on one, one private ownership, but it was collectively the, well, be the least
[4:57:40] impactful on the whole area.
[4:57:41] And so the council decided to go with that option and, you know, the engineers, the
[4:57:47] traffic engineers and the people look at grade and there is a, you know, 17 foot
[4:57:51] grade there that, you know, we couldn't do a lot of things.
[4:57:54] We had to move it down and north a little bit to make it all work, but I see Mary still
[4:58:00] up there too.
[4:58:01] But yeah, the, a lot of the comments tonight were about whether roundabouts are a good
[4:58:06] thing were a bad thing.
[4:58:08] And then a lot of it was about the Rossi family of the impact.
[4:58:12] And so I think we've both shared our concerns.
[4:58:16] We want to make that work.
[4:58:17] The best it can possibly work with the Rossi family.
[4:58:22] And roundabouts, they do work.
[4:58:26] And they meet the requirements of what the state's working for.
[4:58:28] We have a focus area of climate change.
[4:58:31] We want to reduce greenhouse gases.
[4:58:33] We want to reduce all those things.
[4:58:34] it kind of aligns with our focus areas, and I'm going to go over to Councilman Rurals.
[4:58:40] Well, I just want to clarify in question before I kind of make my comments.
[4:58:44] I want to just clarify something that our outside Council said earlier when you were talking to Council member Painter.
[4:58:49] If we don't certify the EIR, you said that no one can talk to anyone about acquisition of the property.
[4:58:55] And I just want to clarify, I really, as we can't negotiate, unless the EIR is certified, we can't make an offer.
[4:59:03] But I just want to make sure we can still talk to Charlie about what's important to him.
[4:59:07] I just want to clarify.
[4:59:09] Yes, you are correct.
[4:59:10] We cannot make an offer.
[4:59:11] We cannot negotiate.
[4:59:12] We can discuss.
[4:59:13] And I believe that has already begun.
[4:59:16] But it's, there's no, I don't believe we can, can we praise even?
[4:59:23] I believe you can, you can't, you can't, you can't make, you can't make an offer.
[4:59:27] It's certainly he could, he could do an appraisal.
[4:59:29] I mean, he could do it appraisal too.
[4:59:31] And we do it now.
[4:59:32] Yes.
[4:59:32] And we met with the Rossi family, and they're the nicest people in the world.
[4:59:36] I mean, it breaks our hearts, too.
[4:59:40] This was a project that was really threading the needle.
[4:59:44] There was no really way of not impacting anybody.
[4:59:50] But they were very kind, and we're very concerned.
[4:59:54] And we did explain to them their rights and how the process worked.
[4:59:59] and
[5:00:00] We tried to set them at least at ease that there were protections in place and that everything is not guaranteed that we would follow the process and make sure that they were heard and that they're interests were considered.
[5:00:18] Okay, thank you. I just wanted to clarify just to make sure that we can still, if we don't
[5:00:22] certify the AR tonight, we can still talk to him about some of this. I don't want to kick an
[5:00:29] 84-year-old man out of his family home. I don't think anybody up here does. I also live in this
[5:00:35] neighborhood. My personal experience has been that this intersection is not great. It is failing,
[5:00:41] and I think it needs to be fixed. But I also don't think that those are only two options tonight.
[5:00:46] And before I'm willing to make a finding that demolishing, you know, the house is unavoidable,
[5:00:52] I want to know that we've actually tried everything to design around the house.
[5:00:56] And I'm not an engineer, like most people here, I don't know if we can make adjustments to the property,
[5:01:02] to make it fit without disturbing, excuse me, make adjustments to the project, to make it fit without disturbing the house.
[5:01:08] But I do know that the EIR only looks at doing the project the way the previous council approved or not doing the project.
[5:01:15] those are those are the two things it considers. It doesn't consider design changes
[5:01:20] and at this point the project is not comprehensively designed and I'm not asking for us to
[5:01:26] to redesign it tonight. I think we need to keep moving forward while treating the preservation
[5:01:32] of the house as a design objective during the final engineering. If we can require staff to return
[5:01:38] to council before we take action about regarding demolishing or property acquisition that would be
[5:01:44] my preference. I think from a technical perspective and we have three recommended actions
[5:01:49] here tonight. I think that looks like just approving number three and doing and moving forward
[5:01:55] with the cooperative agreement and not certifying the EIR tonight. I think that would allow staff
[5:02:00] to continue working with CalTrans, continue the design work and allow us to get more information.
[5:02:05] So we feel more comfortable making this determination.
[5:02:10] You know, Council Member Narvis spoke
[5:02:11] about wanting to approve the AR in order to move forward
[5:02:14] with negotiating with Charlie.
[5:02:16] I think there's a difference between negotiations
[5:02:18] and discussions, and I think that's really important.
[5:02:21] And I don't think we have to certify the AR tonight
[5:02:24] to ask Charlie what's important to him.
[5:02:27] And if we approve the AR, we're approving a project
[5:02:29] that will require negotiation of acquisition of the properties.
[5:02:33] So it is a big decision to certify that AR tonight.
[5:02:37] We've heard from a lot of people who care really deeply
[5:02:40] about Charlie and about our community who want to make sure that he's treated fairly and
[5:02:45] compassionately through the process and I think that's really important but I think the most
[5:02:48] important voice in the conversations is Charlie's. You know at this point I'd really like
[5:02:54] sap to sit down with Charlie and his family listen to what he actually wants and I know we've done
[5:02:59] a lot of that work already but I want to work with him to understand what an outcome that truly
[5:03:04] makes him whole could look like, maybe that's finding a comparable house nearby. If that's
[5:03:10] what he wants, maybe it means providing meaningful assistance with a physical move, preserving
[5:03:16] important parts of his home, finding other ways to honor things about the property that matter
[5:03:21] most to him. We shouldn't assume that we know the answer. We should ask him and listen to him.
[5:03:27] And then you know, do everything within our power to find a solution that treats him with
[5:03:30] and respect. So I think continuing this seems appropriate given the circumstances, it would allow
[5:03:37] us to get more clarification, preserve all the work that's been done so far as Council Member
[5:03:41] Painter pointed out. And then I just wanted to say Mike Matthews made a great comment during
[5:03:45] public comment. He said, there's time to get this right. And I think we're not going to lose funding
[5:03:50] on a project that we've been working on for a decade just because we hit the breaks and do this
[5:03:54] All right, so that's what I'd like to do.
[5:04:02] Councilmember Nubas.
[5:04:03] Thank you.
[5:04:04] Councilmember Louros.
[5:04:05] Thank you for those comments.
[5:04:07] And just to clarify, because I got this information after my comments.
[5:04:11] I heard a lot of comments from the audience, particularly about Mr. Rossi.
[5:04:16] Why did not hear from was Mr. Rossi.
[5:04:18] Even though he was here, also then I want to make him a comfortable train
[5:04:22] to talk if you want to. But have any conversation with him, whether we move forward that
[5:04:28] EIR or not, we can still have the conversation I agree. We can move forward with number three,
[5:04:34] continue to conversation with Mr. Rossi, without putting in the project in jeopardy. Is that correct?
[5:04:42] I mean, if we just do three and have how we want to solve conversations with Mr. Rossi and
[5:04:48] family about what we're making them whole what that looks like. Does that jeopardize the project
[5:04:54] and moving forward? Is that, is that, is that pause button kill the project or just delays it a moment longer?
[5:05:00] It does not kill the project. We can continue to talk with him, like I heard Councilmember Loro say, understanding
[5:05:09] what's important to him and come back later and discuss that. I think approaching it with the
[5:05:16] little more not that we're not sensitive because there's a lot of technical definitions that we use
[5:05:23] alive a lot of legal words, you know, but when it comes down to it, we also being sensitive,
[5:05:31] not just, you know, speaking about EIRs and data, but also get the human element, have a conversation
[5:05:39] with him.
[5:05:40] I'm comfortable with the suggestion, Council Member Lourke, came up with number three, having
[5:05:47] conversation Mr. Ross, I want to hear what I haven't talked to him, I've been heard
[5:05:51] feedback from that family yet. I'm really interested to know what they're saying. Before we
[5:05:56] adopt and move forward with negotiations, I was thinking we needed negotiations to really get
[5:06:01] that feedback. But if we don't need that feedback adopting that EIR number one to move forward
[5:06:07] for feedback then I'm okay with number three but really I want to hear back from what that looks like
[5:06:15] because I think moving forward a little more caution, especially what this nature of this project
[5:06:26] in that home, I'm more comfortable doing that and then coming back and then revisiting
[5:06:32] number one.
[5:06:34] One point of clarification to the extent that you would proceed a motion or consider adopting
[5:06:41] the third item, it would have to be minorly revised because currently it's being approved
[5:06:46] pursuant to certify the IR. We would take we would we would have to amend it to remove
[5:06:50] that reference. It would that would be fine. We could certainly do that. The other thing
[5:06:54] I'd just end up so that's just just to be clear on that. And just a quick clarification
[5:06:59] would this just be to continue for discussion with Mr. Rossi would not be any direction
[5:07:06] and with regard to the EIR itself.
[5:07:10] Well, what, well, I'm, did you want to?
[5:07:12] Well, no.
[5:07:13] Well, I just want to, what I want to do is move forward
[5:07:19] with getting feedback from Mr. Russell
[5:07:21] without jeopardizing the project.
[5:07:24] Right, because, you know, I don't,
[5:07:27] I know we're far away from even having a discussion
[5:07:29] that meant domain, but a lot of the conversation
[5:07:31] that I've heard has not included feedback from them.
[5:07:35] that's why that's why I want to hear and I wasn't I wasn't
[5:07:39] inquiring I was just confirming that the two elements you were referring to are simply
[5:07:43] adopt that third item with that revision I just discussed full stop and that's it.
[5:07:49] That's the only thing you're proposing to do. Yeah that's that's what I'm proposing right now.
[5:07:54] I'm I think that's what you mentioned comes from our laurels is number three and I think we're kind of
[5:08:06] I'm sorry. I'm sorry to interrupt Mayor. I think Zoom just went down and with our new requirements.
[5:08:12] I think we have to pause the moment. Pause the meeting a moment to address. I'm sorry to interrupt,
[5:08:17] but I also want to make sure we're hearing to the law. So we'll have to take a pause looking at legal counsel to confirm that that's okay.
[5:08:29] Reboot. Okay, let me see.
[5:11:05] Attaining to what you did for summer? I'm not going to talk about this. We got to wait till we go back in.
[5:11:30] It wasn't a real roundabout. It was kind of a traffic calming measure.
[5:11:37] It didn't seem to be working.
[5:11:42] But it was not around about, it was there, it was trying to sow people down.
[5:11:49] Yeah. It didn't achieve the results we would hoped.
[5:12:01] It wasn't around about.
[5:12:06] It
[5:12:09] wasn't even in an intersection, I don't think.
[5:12:19] Yeah, then it went to have to sleep.
[5:12:51] Yeah, I'm on 5G.
[5:12:52] It's not working very well.
[5:13:06] I can't get online to check the video.
[5:13:10] We will have the record because there's also a secondary recording going on in the background.
[5:13:15] There will be meeting recording, but per the requirements of the new Senate bill.
[5:13:20] We have to ensure, okay, we might be working.
[5:13:24] We're working on that, but we can't proceed until we make good faith efforts to re-establish the Zoom.
[5:13:29] and may have to wait up to an hour of reviewing our policy.
[5:13:33] So, bear with us.
[5:14:34] Recording in progress.
[5:14:47] Okay, we just to confirm Zoom is back up.
[5:14:50] I'm hoping that there's no way for me to notify folks who are in
[5:14:53] got kicked out, but Zoom is back up and running so we can proceed. Thank you.
[5:15:00] For that small technical break.
[5:15:03] All right, I think the mic was going to a council member.
[5:15:07] Okay, and I don't think I forgot my question. First of all, I agree with moving forward with the amended concept of item three.
[5:15:17] I think that makes all the sense in the world. I'm still would ask the question of whether or not we want to have staff take another look at some sort of reduced project alternative.
[5:15:29] that would also potentially preserve the house or, and I realize it may not meet all the objectives of the project, and it may be something different.
[5:15:38] But I'd like to come to that resolution tonight so that we can at least look at those options and know if it's something that's feasible or not feasible.
[5:15:48] And it may not be possible. It may just be that, you know, we're going to impact properties under one scenario or another.
[5:15:56] you've brought us an alternative that minimizes impacts to commercial properties and minimizes
[5:16:01] a lot of other impacts, but not the one that we really want to try to address tonight.
[5:16:08] So I'd like to also consider an addition looking at, at least having staff take a look
[5:16:13] at a reduced project alternative that would potentially preserve the home at 801s of
[5:16:18] auto trail.
[5:16:19] Preserve the home, and you said may not meet all project objectives, but what project objectives
[5:16:24] would you like it to meet?
[5:16:27] Well, I would ask staff to take a look at that.
[5:16:30] I mean, something better than the no-prote no-build,
[5:16:32] no-project alternative.
[5:16:35] I just said that I think it may not meet the same level
[5:16:39] of objectives that the proposed alternative does,
[5:16:43] but that doesn't mean it's not something we could look at.
[5:16:47] Well, with that, I'll go with the vice mayor next,
[5:16:51] but let me go to the vice mayor before I say that.
[5:16:53] I can't agree with that.
[5:16:55] I'll come back later.
[5:16:56] Thank you.
[5:16:58] Jumbo Corners, as we've always
[5:17:00] called it, has been near and dear to my family.
[5:17:02] My father-in-law actually wrote the history of it,
[5:17:05] and did the oral history, Regadani, who
[5:17:07] Ms. French talked about early.
[5:17:10] So it's near and dear to my family.
[5:17:12] We've waited this long.
[5:17:13] I would be in support of moving forward number three,
[5:17:19] and then continuing to look at better options,
[5:17:21] talking to the Rossi family,
[5:17:24] I'm not sure looking at all where we're at, that it's an option
[5:17:29] to rework the project. I don't know that many of the options would be, or many of the outcomes
[5:17:35] would be fulfilled if we looked at, I mean we looked at 14 different projects, so I don't know
[5:17:41] that there's more to look at, but I think it's definitely worth talking to the Rossi family
[5:17:45] and doing right by them. I think that's the most important thing we can do, so that is what I support.
[5:17:52] Thank you, Chris.
[5:17:55] Yeah, the Councilman Panner to go back and say, well, let's have staff look at other options.
[5:17:59] We did that exercise and we did it thoroughly and staffed it thoroughly and prior councils
[5:18:06] in engineers and we looked at it and we've hired consultants and to just say, well, let's
[5:18:11] go redo the, let's go do it just basically scrapping the project in my opinion, you know, so we've put
[5:18:18] a lot of effort and time into this and I think we're very close and I don't want to jeopardize
[5:18:25] all this work that's been done and money spent.
[5:18:28] We often get accused of, you know, mispending money, I don't know, it's expensive project
[5:18:32] that we've got a lot into it and I just want to make everybody as whole as we can, but
[5:18:39] the project still needs to move forward in my opinion and that's what I'm believing so.
[5:18:45] And that would be to certify the e-e-e-e or tonight.
[5:18:52] Council member Lerals.
[5:18:54] I don't hold on to it.
[5:18:56] You're holding on to it.
[5:18:56] You give us a break.
[5:18:58] I'm trying to find a solution that works for everybody.
[5:19:01] So Council member Painter talked about reduce project design alternatives.
[5:19:08] I think there's a difference between putting everything back on the table and making minor
[5:19:12] adjustments that could lead to a better result.
[5:19:14] And I don't want to speak for you, but I think that's what you meant.
[5:19:17] And if that is, then I would approve of moving forward with number three, not approve any IR tonight and directing staff to have conversations with Charlie Rossi and his representatives and look at reduced project design alternatives that could preserve the house.
[5:19:32] If we may, we would need a little bit, we would need a little bit more direction than that.
[5:19:39] We have studied multiple different alternatives. So what kinds of things may a reduced alternative look like?
[5:19:47] That's not clear what we would be looking for.
[5:19:55] I kind of is okay if I jump back in. I mean, I mean, I talked about it earlier, but you know
[5:20:00] I'm not an engineer. If there are slight adjustments that we can make to the size of the roundabout, where the road is, the, you know, the degrees, the angles, if there's anything that we can do to shift things over, that's what I would be interested in looking at to see if there are any options that we haven't considered.
[5:20:19] That's a new project.
[5:20:27] Again, to clarify, if after taking your directive, would you want a report as to whether it was determined that that there wasn't an option or what would you like to done with that information?
[5:20:41] I would want to know definitively that there is no way that we could move forward without demolishing the house before I could move forward with the ER tonight.
[5:20:49] So I would I would want that report and I do want staff to go back and look and see to make sure that there's nothing else that can be done.
[5:20:58] We have studied this extensively. We have started the final design.
[5:21:03] We have looked at trying to make the roundabouts fit in the footprint that we have to absolutely minimize impacts.
[5:21:11] with this option, there is not a way to shift
[5:21:14] around about out of where the house currently stands.
[5:21:18] As Guy said, it goes right through the middle of the home.
[5:21:21] There is not a way to shift that
[5:21:23] and keep this alternative, preserve the work
[5:21:26] that's happened on this EIR and save the house.
[5:21:38] So I think I'm going back to proven number three
[5:21:44] in having conversation with the girls.
[5:21:45] Because, again, I haven't heard from him, I haven't gotten a report, but that looks like.
[5:21:50] We're all concerned about his well-being, their family, and preserving that, but also
[5:21:56] want to make sure that other than hearing from the public and ourselves, what is the same
[5:22:02] was his family saying.
[5:22:04] So, I'm going to come to move in number three only, and then again, report back and what
[5:22:08] that feedback is from Mr. Rosner family to know what that next step will look like before
[5:22:15] we adopt the IRR.
[5:22:18] And I think, OK, go ahead.
[5:22:21] Go ahead.
[5:22:25] Because I brought this up.
[5:22:27] And I would agree.
[5:22:29] I think it's probably our first priority to have those discussions
[5:22:33] with Mr. Rossi and his family and bring that back to us, but just
[5:22:38] knowing that at least, from my position, the next step, if we don't
[5:22:44] come to at least, you know, some sort of net determination
[5:22:48] that we can make this project work,
[5:22:51] we may be coming back and asking for some alternatives.
[5:22:55] And maybe we don't ask for it tonight,
[5:22:56] maybe we take this step tonight.
[5:22:59] We hold, we hit the hot pause button at least
[5:23:01] on the EIR itself, which we can revisit
[5:23:06] when we come back and learn a little bit more
[5:23:08] about what our options are for these negotiations.
[5:23:11] So I would be comfortable with that.
[5:23:16] Is that a motion was that motion I I would be sure it's clear for staff I would like to be clear on the motion
[5:23:24] That we move forward
[5:23:26] At this time with a modification to recommendation number three, which is adopting a resolution
[5:23:34] To move forward with a modified cooperative agreement with CalTrans that is as you've already stated not pursuant to certified EIR
[5:23:42] But otherwise as written
[5:23:46] in item three and bring that back to a report to council so that we can then make further
[5:23:53] determinations on certification of the EIR.
[5:24:01] I kind of blended that together. Bring back
[5:24:06] just results or a report on discussions with the Rossi family regarding the property.
[5:24:14] I'd like to second that but also does that seem to go line. I think one of the same
[5:24:19] pages want to make sure sounds like we are. Yes. Okay. So I'm going to second that motion.
[5:24:24] Okay. I just can I I just want to make sure that I understand what you are saying.
[5:24:30] Just just to be totally sure you are saying that you would move forward with adopting your
[5:24:35] resolution or proving and authorizing the public works director to execute amendment number one
[5:24:40] to counter his cooperative agreement. Number, basically the recommended action number three,
[5:24:46] but removing the pursuant to a certified EIR piece, and then you are also asking that staff
[5:24:55] go back, listen to Mr. Rossi, get feedback from him directly, understand.
[5:25:00] What he wants, what would make him whole, and then report back to council with that information. Okay. Thank you.
[5:25:10] So we have a motion on the floor by Council Mayor Painter, seconded by Councilmember Nerviahs. Any other further discussion on the question?
[5:25:20] See, Chris is ready to cast these votes. So all in favor of that motion.
[5:25:23] I'm sorry by saying aye, and I will say nay. So passes four one.
[5:25:35] All right.
[5:25:39] Thank you, everyone.
[5:25:42] Staff, do we need a motion? Then to continue the hearing, too. Is that where do we?
[5:25:48] There's a close. It'll come back. Yeah, it'll come back to us once.
[5:25:53] Okay.
[5:25:55] We'll put it back on the agenda.
[5:25:56] All right, uh, city attorney was any reportable action and co-session.
[5:26:05] There was none, mayor.
[5:26:08] No reportable.
[5:26:08] I'm close.
[5:26:09] Thank you.
[5:26:09] Comments by city manager.
[5:26:11] Comments.
[5:26:12] Comments by city council.
[5:26:17] No comments by council.
[5:26:19] We will adjourn at 10.
[5:26:22] 20.
[5:26:23] Five.
[5:26:24] 25.
[5:26:25] Five.
[5:26:26] Wait, let me go to real time.
[5:26:28] That's 25.
[5:26:30] 25.
[5:26:31] Sorry.
[5:26:32] You're welcome.