Title
Summary Title: Approval of an Updated Design for the Grand Street Safety Improvement Project (Project) from Shore Line Drive to Clement Avenue; and Allocation of Funds for Design and Construction of the Project from Shore Line Drive to Encinal Avenue
Recommendation to Approve an Updated Design for the Grand Street Safety Improvement Project for a Continuous Two-Way Bikeway from Shore Line Drive to Clement Avenue and to Invalidate and Set Aside All Prior Decisions Regarding the Grand Street Safety Improvement Project Concept and Plan Previously Addressed at City Council Meetings on October 4, 2022, October 18, 2022 and November 1, 2022; and
Adoption of Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Operating and Capital Budget (Various Funds) for a Total Increase Not-to-Exceed $4,675,000, Including Appropriating $2,000,000 from General Fund (Fund 100) Residual Fund Balance, for a Total Allocation of $7,110,000 in Funds for Design and Construction of the Project from Shore Line Drive to Encinal Avenue.
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the recommendations for the Grand Street Safety Improvement Project are categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15301 (Existing Facilities - specifically, minor alterations to existing facilities including bicycle facilities) and 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land - specifically, creation of bicycle lanes on existing public rights of way). (Public Works 31041520)
Body
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Jennifer Ott, City Manager
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents a recommended design for an uninterrupted two-way bikeway on Grand Street from Shore Line Drive to Clement Avenue, referred to as the Grand Street Safety Improvement Project (Project). The report describes the four design options considered for the construction of a low-stress bicycle facility and safety improvement on the Grand Street corridor to improve the safety of the street for all users, including Wood School students walking and bicycling to school, seniors, people with disabilities, and local residents walking, driving, and bicycling on the street (Exhibit 1). Because this recommended design is significantly different than prior designs that the City Council has considered/adopted at its October 4, 2022, October 18, 2022, and November 1, 2022 meetings, for clarity, City Council action will include invalidating and setting aside all prior decisions concerning this design concept and plan. The report also includes a proposed funding allocation for the design and construction of the Project from Shore line Drive to Encinal Avenue.
BACKGROUND
Planning on Grand Street began in early 2022 for the resurfacing and restriping of a portion of Grand Street from Shore Line Drive to Encinal Avenue. City Council considered more detailed concepts and plans for this project in October and November 2022. In November of 2022, City Council:
• Approved a resurfacing and restriping plan for Grand Street from Shore Line Drive to Otis Drive (referred to in this report as “Segment A” of Grand Street) with a two-way, street-level, bicycle facility on the east side of the street adjacent to Wood School and Rittler Park. This concept was generally supported by the community and all of the Councilmembers.
• Approved a resurfacing and restriping plan for Grand Street from Otis Drive to Encinal Avenue (referred to as “Segment B”) with one-way separated bicycle lanes on each side of the street located between the curb and either parked cars or bollards. This action received less support than the action for Segment A. Two of five Councilmembers did not vote in support of the plan.
• Emphasized the need for staff to start the planning and design process with the community for the remaining portion of Grand Street from Encinal Avenue to Clement Avenue (called “Segment C”).
In December of 2022, City Council approved the City of Alameda (City) Active Transportation Plan, which identifies the Grand Street corridor from Shore Line Drive to Clement Avenue as a critical link in the City’s plan to create a citywide low-stress bicycle network. The Active Transportation Plan recommends separated bicycle lanes to be constructed on the corridor.
Since the 2022 decisions, a team of City staff and consultants from Parametrix have studied how best to create a low-stress bikeway with pedestrian improvements along the entire Grand Street corridor from Shore Line Drive to Clement Avenue.
To better manage the limited capacity of the citywide roadways and parking supply, it is essential for Alameda to create a network of streets that community members of all ages and abilities feel is safe and comfortable for them to use for those trips that can be done on foot or on a bicycle. Alameda’s population will continue to increase over the next 10 years, and Alameda is taking actions to make modes of transportation that have less environmental and health impacts than a vehicle more attractive and safe. Every non-recreational trip that an Alameda resident makes on a city street on foot or on a bicycle alleviates some congestion and reduces the need for a parking space at trip destinations, which ultimately makes it easier for those who rely on automobiles to get around. National and local studies confirm that people are reluctant to walk or use a bicycle for a local trip if they feel that it is dangerous or uncomfortable to do so. Parents will drive their kids to school if they do not feel safe letting their kids walk or bicycle to school. In addition, studies show that children who walk or bike to school benefit from the exercise, including performing better on cognitive tests for hours after arriving at school. Making it safe for children to use active modes to school supports their success.
Due to the number of documented automobile, bicyclist and pedestrian-involved crashes on Grand Street, this street is identified as a High Injury Corridor by the San Francisco Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), the Alameda County Transportation Commission (ACTC), and the City of Alameda Vision Zero Action Plan (further collision data provided in Exhibit 2). Furthermore, collisions on Grand Street disproportionately affect youth and elders: per state records from 2013-2022 for Grand Street from Shore Line to Clement, 39% of bicyclists injured in collisions were youth under age 18 (9 out of 23) and 86% of pedestrians injured or killed in collisions were elders age 65+ (6 out of 7, including one fatality).
In addition to the collisions, automobile speeding on Grand Street has been, and continues to be, a documented problem. Vehicle speeds measured on Grand from Encinal to Shore Line routinely exceed the 25 miles per hour (mph) posted speed limit, with 32 mph as the 85th percentile speed.
Finally, Grand Street plays an important role in the citywide transportation system.
• North-South Connector. Grand Street is the only street between Eighth/Westline Street and Park Street in central Alameda that provides an uninterrupted connection between Alameda’s southern shoreline and Crown Beach to the northern shoreline and the Cross Alameda Trail. (The only other street that cuts through the lagoons is Willow Street, which is narrow and jogs at Otis Drive.)
• Wood Middle School Enrollment Area. Grand Street serves as the central spine running down the center of the Wood School enrollment area which covers central Alameda from Eighth Street to Oak Street and from the northern shoreline to the southern shoreline. Students walking and bicycling to Wood School must use Grand Street for at least some portion of their trip to school. Franklin Elementary School, Franklin Park, and the Saint Joseph’s schools are all also within two blocks of Grand Street.
• Citywide Low-Stress Network. Grand Street is a critical link if the City is to create a citywide, safe, low-stress network for bicycling, as called for in the Active Transportation Plan.
DISCUSSION
FOUR OPTIONS FOR GRAND STREET
Given the citywide importance of Grand Street and the documented safety issues occurring with the current design of the street, the City staff and consultant team developed four design options that could be applied to the corridor to improve bicycle, pedestrian and automobile safety and reduce speeding on Grand Street from Shore Line Drive to Clement Avenue. All four options are described below, and they are illustrated in Exhibit 1. The options are referred to in this report as:
• City Council-Approved 2022 design extended to the full corridor
• Alternative 1: Raised Two-Way Bikeway
• Alternative 2: Raised One-Way Bikeways
• Alternative 3: Enhanced Raised One-Way Bikeways
All four options have some common features:
• Segment A (Shore Line Drive to Otis Drive.) All four options include the City Council-Approved Design for a two-way bicycle facility in front of Wood School on the east side of Grand Street, at the street level. This design is fully funded in part due to an $827,000 Caltrans grant. To avoid losing the grant funds, staff is working closely with Caltrans and Alameda Unified School District to ensure that the City is ready to request construction bids in fall of 2023 and begin construction in 2024.
• Automobile Travel Lanes. All four options provide two automobile travel lanes, similar to the current condition. The automobile capacity of the street is not reduced in any of the options.
• Low-Stress Bicycle Facilities. All four options are designed to provide a low stress, safe bicycle facility for the entire corridor. The configuration of the bicycle facility from Otis to Clement differs in each option, but staff believes that all four options provide a low-stress bicycle facility with a high level of safety that is a dramatic improvement over the level of safety and comfort provided in the current condition.
• Safer Pedestrian Crossings. All four options are designed to provide much improved pedestrian safety at all intersections. In between intersections, all four options maintain the existing sidewalk width and location immediately in front of the private properties and homes. All options provide safer pedestrian crossings by updating the lane striping, reducing exposure in the intersections, installing high visibility crosswalks, adding red curbs to improve intersection visibility, and installing three Rectangular Rapid Flash Beacon (RRFB) systems near school crossings: at the mid-block crossing for Wood Middle School and at the intersections with San Jose Avenue and San Antonio Avenue. Additional RRFBs can be considered at intersections north of Encinal Avenue. Alternatives 1, 2, and 3 also have shorter pedestrian crossing distances compared with the existing conditions and the City Council-Approved Design.
Although the four options are the same for Segment A, the options differ for Segments B and C in respect to the curb-to-curb dimension (width of street), the location and design of the bicycle facilities, the number and location of on-street public parking spaces, and the cost and time to construct each option.
Council-Approved design extended along the full corridor to Clement Ave.
As shown in Exhibit 1, the Council-Approved Design, which was approved for Segment A and Segment B only, would include the two-way bikeway on Segment A, bus stop improvements and a flashing beacon and pedestrian island by Wood School.
For Segment B (Otis Drive to Encinal Avenue), this option would provide a one-way separated bikeway adjacent to the existing curb. The City evaluated extending the same design to Segment C. The major characteristics of this design are:
Curb-to-Curb Width. The existing curb-to-curb width is maintained at 48 feet. Existing curbs and gutters are not moved or reconstructed in this option.
Location and Continuity of Bicycle Facilities. In this option, bicyclists traveling north on Grand Street past Wood School travel within a two-way bikeway past Wood School and Rittler Park until they get to Otis Drive. At Otis Drive the bikeway transitions to a one-way bikeway on each side of the street, via the protected intersection at Grand and Otis. Within the existing 48-foot space between the two curbs, a one-way 6.5-foot bicycle lane is provided on each side of the street adjacent to the curb. A 3-foot buffer is provided next to the bike lane. On one side of the street segment, parking is next to the buffer, further protecting bicyclists from moving vehicles. On the other side of the street segment, wheel stops and plastic bollards are provided within the buffer to protect bicyclists from moving vehicles.
On-Street Parking. Since there is not enough room within the 48 foot right-of-way to include separated bikes lanes, buffers and parking on both sides of the street, one parking lane must be removed. To provide parking on both sides of the street, half of the remaining parking is placed on the east side of the street and half is placed on the west side of the street. Because of this distribution of parking, the travel lanes shift mid-block to accommodate the shift in parking location, resulting in more than half of the parking spaces being removed. This shift creates a “chicane”, a feature that can reduce automobile speeds and promote traffic calming.
This option results in the largest number of lost parking spaces. Along the corridor from Otis to Clement, approximately 70% of all the on-street parking would be lost (see Exhibit 3). Because the blocks get slightly shorter in the northern portion of the street (Segment C) and because there are more curb cuts, the parking loss is greater in Segment C than in Segment B, where the lots are large, the curb cuts are fewer, and residents have more off-street parking options. If parking for Segment C were limited to the east side of the street, eliminating the chicane, the parking loss would be approximately 50%.
Access for People with Disabilities. The design provides high visibility crosswalks with minimal cross slopes to facilitate usage by people with limited mobility or using wheelchairs, upgraded truncated domes/detectable warning surface at street corners to guide people with visual impairments, shorter pedestrian crossings to reduce exposure to motor vehicles, flashing beacons with accessible features at San Jose Avenue and at San Antonio Avenue, and designated accessible on-street parking spaces on Grand Street or on adjacent side streets (approximately one per block). Additional flashing beacons may be considered north of Encinal Ave. Where the designated accessible on-street parking spaces are located adjacent to the separated bikeway, a marked accessible path and curb ramp is provided to the sidewalk. At other locations, the designated accessible on-street parking spaces are located as close as possible to an accessible curb ramp.
Costs and Time. Because this option does not require reconstruction of curbs and gutters, it is the least expensive of all the options, and the fastest to implement for the entire corridor. Based on the current cost estimates, staff believes that construction on Segment A and Segment B could commence in 2024, and construction might be able to commence on Segment C in 2026, depending on the City’s success acquiring transportation grant funds (similar to the grant already received for Segment A).
Alternative 1: Raised Two-Way Bikeway
Alternative 1, the “Raised Two-Way Bikeway,” provides an alternative design which includes a raised two-way bikeway on the east side of the street between Otis Drive and Clement Avenue. The major characteristics of this design are:
Curb-to-Curb Width. Alternative 1 reduces the curb-to-curb dimension of Grand Street from Otis to Clement from 48 feet to 37 feet. Many residential streets in Alameda are 36 feet in width. The reduction occurs as the result of moving the curb on the east side of Grand Street 11 feet into the existing roadway, making it possible to construct a new raised two-way bikeway from Otis Drive to Clement Avenue on the east side of the street.
Location and Continuity of Bicycle Facilities. In this alternative, bicyclists would have a continuous two-way bikeway for the entire length of Grand Street connecting the existing two-way bikeway along Shore Line Drive to the existing (and planned) two-way bikeway on Clement Avenue (the Cross Alameda Trail). A two-way bikeway would allow people biking to pass one another while riding in the same direction, and allow children to ride side-by-side on the way to and from school.
As shown in Exhibit 1, the two-way bikeway between Otis Drive and Clement Avenue would be raised up to the height of the sidewalk providing curb separation and elevation change between parked cars at the new curb and gutter and the elevated two-way bikeway. The existing landscape strip and street trees would border the two-way bikeway on its inside edge.
Good intersection design is critical when designing a two-way bikeway to ensure that automobile drivers making turns (right and left) onto a cross street are aware of bicyclists moving in both directions on the two-way bikeway. Similar considerations have been, or are being, addressed in the design of the Cross Alameda Trail two-way bikeway from Ferry Point to Tilden Way, the planned Central Avenue two-way bikeway between Pacific Avenue and Eighth Street, the planned two-way bikeway on the west side of Main Street, and the planned two-way bikeway on West Midway Avenue in Alameda Point. These examples have multiple intersections at signalized and non-signalized intersections. The cost estimates for this alternative include improvements to the signals to modify the phasing to provide a separate (i.e., third) phase for people bicycling and walking. This will reduce conflicts for users compared to the other alternatives, but can add some delays to motorists.
On-Street Parking. This option results in the lowest number of lost parking spaces. Along the entire corridor, approximately 5% to 10% of all the on-street parking will be lost (Exhibit 3). The parking loss is the result of providing areas of red curb at driveways to ensure that automobile drivers making the turn into and out of driveways have good visibility of bicyclists in the two-way bikeway. In some cases, adding a short area of red curb will reduce the amount of space for curbside parking between closely-spaced curb cuts. Parking would continue to be against the curb instead of “floating” next to a bikeway buffer as in the City Council-Approved Design.
Access for People with Disabilities: This option provides all the same improvements as the City Council-Approved Design, but it has two additional advantages. Since there is no change to the curbs and parking lane on the west side of the street, on-street parking for people with disabilities can be designated on the west side of the street with minimal changes. On the east side of the street, disability parking could be added with modifications to the curb and two-way bikeway at the designated location. These modifications are easier to make with Alternative 1 than with the City Council-Approved Design.
Costs and Time. Because Alternative 1 does require reconstruction of curbs and gutters on the east side of Grand Street from Otis Drive to Clement Avenue, it is a more expensive option than the City Council-Approved Design. Based on the current cost estimates, staff believes that construction could commence on Segment A in 2024, and on Segment B in 2025 if local funds are identified. If local funds are not identified for Segment B, construction would be delayed until grant funds are secured, possibly in 2026 or 2027. Work might be able to commence on Segment C in 2028 or 2029, depending on the City’s success acquiring transportation grant funds.
Alternative 2: Raised One-Way Bikeway
Alternative 2, “Raised One-Way Bikeway,” includes a raised one-way bikeway on both sides of the street from Otis Drive to Clement Avenue. Similar to the City Council-approved concept, Segment A (Shore Line to Otis) includes the two-way bikeway, but at Otis Drive, bicyclists transition to a one-way bikeway on each side of the street. The major characteristics of this design are:
Curb-to-Curb Width. Alternative 2 reduces the curb to curb dimension of Grand Street from Otis Drive to Clement Avenue from 48 feet to 36 feet due to the relocation of each curb 6.5 feet into the street. Moving each curb creates space for a raised 5-foot bike lane and 1.5-foot buffer area between the new curb and the existing landscape strip on each side of the street.
Location and Continuity of Bicycle Facilities. In this alternative, bicyclists would transition between the two-way bikeway on the east side of the street in Segment A to the one-way raised bikeways on each side of the street from Otis Drive to Clement Avenue at the Otis Drive intersection. As shown in Exhibit 1, the one-way bikeways would be raised to the height of the sidewalk, providing curb separation between parked cars at the new curb and the elevated one-way bikeway. The existing landscape strip and street trees would border the bikeway on its inside edge. The space for the bikeways, including buffer, is relatively narrow at 6.5 feet and bicyclists would need to be careful of passenger side doors opening when passing a parked car. It should also be noted that the bikeway would be crossing driveway aprons, which will result in bike lane that rises and falls as the bike lane crosses each driveway.
On-street Parking. This alternative results in approximately 10% to 30% of the existing on-street parking being removed due to the need to provide areas of red curb at driveway locations to ensure that automobile drivers making the turn into and out of a driveway have good visibility of bicyclists in the bikeway (Exhibit 1). The amount of lost parking is double the amount lost in Alternative 1 simply because the bikeways are on both sides of the street instead of just the east side. Parking would continue to be against the curb instead of “floating” next to a bikeway buffer as in the City Council-Approved Design.
Access for People with Disabilities: This option provides all the same improvements as the City Council-Approved Design. Adding disabled parking on Grand Street would be difficult given the narrow bikeway immediately adjacent to the curb and the narrower travel lanes.
Costs and Time. Because Alternative 2 requires reconstruction of all the curbs and gutters on both sides of the Grand Street from Otis to Clement Avenue, it is more expensive than Alternative 1 and the City Council-Approved Design. Based on the current cost estimates, staff believes that construction on Segment A could commence in 2024, and on Segment B in 2025 if local funds are identified. If local funds are not identified for Segment B, construction would be delayed until grant funds are secured, possibly in 2026 or 2027. Work might be able to commence on Segment C in 2028 or 2029, depending on the City’s success acquiring transportation grant funds.
Alternative 3: Enhanced Raised One-way Bikeway
This Alternative 3 improves upon Alternative 2 by moving the curb and the landscape strip into the street on both sides of the street. Similar to the City Council-approved concept, Segment A (Shore Line to Otis) includes the two-way bikeway, but at Otis Drive, bicyclists transition to a one-way bikeway on each side of the street. The major characteristics of this design are:
Curb-to-Curb Width. Alternative 3 reduces the curb to curb dimension of Grand Street from Otis to Clement from 48 feet to 38 feet, due to the relocation of each curb 5 feet into the street. Moving each curb creates space for raised 6-foot bike lanes between the existing sidewalk and a relocated landscape strip, on each side of the street. Existing trees would need to be removed, and utilities would be relocated to the new landscape strip. New trees would be planted.
Location and Continuity of Bicycle Facilities. Similar to Alternative 2, in this alternative, bicyclists would transition between the two-way bikeway on the east side of the street in Segment A to the one-way raised bikeways on each side of the street from Otis to Clement at the Grand/Otis protected intersection. This alternative provides much better separation of bicyclists from automobiles because the bikeway is separated from the parked cars by a curb and a landscape strip planted with new trees.
On-Street Parking. Similar to Alternative 2, this alternative results in approximately 10% to 30% of the existing on street parking being removed due to the need to provide areas of red curb at driveway locations to ensure that automobile drivers making the turn into a driveway have good visibility of bicyclists in the bikeway before making the turn into the driveway. Parking would continue to be against the curb instead of “floating” next to a bikeway buffer as in the City Council-Approved Design.
Access for People with Disabilities: The design provides all the same improvements as the City Council-Approved Design. Adding disabled parking on Grand Street would be easier in this alternative.
Costs and Time. Because this option requires reconstruction of all the curbs and gutters on both sides of Grand Street from Otis to Clement Avenue and relocation/replacement of all existing trees and utilities, it is significantly more expensive than any of the other alternatives. Since all of the mature street trees on Grand Street would need to be removed, this alternative is also the most disruptive to the character of Grand Street. Given its very high cost, this alternative would take the longest to build. Based on the current cost estimates, staff believes that construction on Segment A could commence in 2024. Given the very high cost for Segments B and C, it is assumed that transportation grant funds would need to be secured, with construction beginning sometime between 2028 and 2030, depending on the City’s success acquiring the funds.
COST COMPARISON
The total cost estimates, including for design, construction, construction management, escalation, and contingencies, for each option, to implement all three segments (Shore Line to Clement), are provided below. Additionally, a break-down of cost by segment is included on page 24 of Exhibit 4.
Council-Approved Design: $ 8,550,000
Alternative 1: $14,830,000
Alternative 2: $18,070,000
Alternative 3: $25,870,000
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
On May 31, 2023, staff held a public workshop, with over 110 people in attendance, to present and hear input on the new alternatives. Residents living along the full corridor received a mailing about the workshop, and flyers were posted all along Grand Street and were available at City Hall and the three City libraries. All of the workshop maps, cross sections, and other materials, along with a recording of the presentation, were posted to the project web page (www.alamedaca.gov/grand <http://www.alamedaca.gov/grand>), and the presentation is attached as Exhibit 4. On June 7, staff posted an online version of the comment form that was distributed at the workshop. In addition, an online virtual community workshop was held on June 13t, with 20 people in attendance.
The full comments received at the in-person and virtual workshops are attached as Exhibit 5, along with comments sent via email and via the online comment form. Although opinions varied, common themes from the public included:
• General agreement that the alternatives are preferable to the City Council approved restriping plan.
• Concern that changing the plan could delay implementation due to the increased costs of the alternatives.
• General agreement that Alternative 1 is the best alternative, given that it is less expensive than the other alternatives. Some did express concern about the safety of a two-way bikeway at driveways and intersections because automobile drivers are not used to seeing bicyclists travelling both ways on a two way bikeway on one side of the street.
• Some support for Alternative 2 as an alternative to Alternative 1.
• General agreement that Alternative 3 is too expensive, too disruptive to the existing streetscape, and would take too long to build, and so should not move forward.
PRIOR COUNCIL ACTIONS
Assuming City Council chooses one of the options discussed in this report, such concept and plan design, as well as the related funding, would vary significantly from any of the concept and design plans, and funding, that City Council in 2022 considered and/or approved. Accordingly, for clarity, City Council should invalidate and set aside all of its prior actions concerning this project.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends that the City Council approve Alternative 1: Raised Two-Way Bikeway as the design concept for Grand Street. Staff recommends Alternative 1 for the following reasons:
• Alternative 1 provides a continuous, uninterrupted two-way bikeway from the two-way bikeway along Shore Line Drive from Westline to Broadway, to the two-way bikeway planned and under construction for the Cross Alameda Trail from Alameda Point to the Miller-Sweeney Bridge. In combination with the other planned two-way bikeways in Alameda, Alternative 1 provides an excellent addition to a citywide low-stress bicycle network.
• Alternative 1’s two-way bikeway on the east of Grand Street is a design for a bikeway that is well-suited to young people riding to middle school in groups. Alternative 1 allows for groups of kids to ride comfortably and avoids the need for middle schoolers on bikes to negotiate a transition from one-way bike lanes on each side of the street to a two-way bikeway on one side of the street at Otis Drive intersection. All the other alternatives require this transition.
• With Alternative 1, only driveways on the east side of the street cross the bikeway. In all other options, all driveways on both sides of the street cross bikeways.
• Alternative 1 maintains more on-street parking than the City Council-Approved Design and therefore will have less of an impact on on-street parking availability for the residents of Grand Street and the adjacent neighbors on the side streets. Preserving more curb space also facilitates the growing number of delivery vehicles on our streets by reducing the likelihood that double parking will interrupt the orderly flow of traffic on the street.
• Alternative 2 is substantially more expensive than Alternative 1 and does not serve as well as Alternative 1 on the three points raised above.
• Alternative 3 is the most expensive and most disruptive alternative of the four. Staff cannot recommend removing all the mature trees and paying the costs to relocate all the utilities on both sides of Grand Street for Alternative 3, when Alternative 1 provides the advantages described above at significantly less cost.
Staff recommends that the City Council proceed with Alternative 1 as follows (and as summarized on page 26 of Exhibit 4):
Segment A: Complete preparation of construction drawing for Segment A (Shore Line to Otis). Bid project in fall 2023. Return to City Council with construction contract in spring 2024. Begin construction in 2024.
Segment B: Allocate funding to complete preparation of construction drawings for Segment B (Otis to Encinal). Bid project in spring 2024. Return to City Council with construction contract in 2024. Begin construction in 2025.
Segment C: Begin seeking grant funding for Segment C (Encinal to Clement). Prepare construction drawings when funds acquired. Begin construction by 2030, depending on grant funding.
Staff also recommends that City Council invalidate and set aside all of its prior decisions concerning this project.
Transportation Commission. At the June 21, 2023 meeting, the Transportation Commission unanimously endorsed the staff recommendation for a continuous two-way bikeway from Shore Line to Clement, with Alternative 1, the raised two-way bikeway, from Otis to Clement. The Commission also recommended that staff implement a robust education campaign for all users on how to safely navigate and interact with the two-way bikeway; that the improvements be extended all the way to the Bay Trail, north of Clement; and that the missing sidewalks north of Clement Avenue be constructed sooner than 2030.
ALTERNATIVES
• Approve staff recommendation, with Alternative 1: two-way bikeway for Grand Street from Shore Line to Clement, which includes Segment A as approved by Council in 2022 and allocate funding for design and construction of the Project from Shore Line Avenue to Encinal Avenue.
• Approve the City Council-Approved Design or Alternative 2 or Alternative 3, or a mix of these, as the design concept(s) for Segments B and C, while also including Segment A as approved by Council in 2022.
• Maintain the existing street configuration from Otis to Clement, and proceed with Segment A only, as approved by City Council in 2022. This alternative would not be consistent with the recently approved Active Transportation Plan or with General Plan policy.
• Request that staff conduct additional community outreach before making a final recommendation to City Council with a preferred concept. Given the deadlines for the use of the $827,000 Caltrans grant for Segment A, if City Council delays a decision on the preferred alternative, the City Council should decide if the delay should also include Segment A or not.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The total cost of the staff recommended design, from Shore Line to Clement, is estimated to be $14,830,000, of which $3,735,000 was previously allocated to the Grand Street Project (Table 1) and the action request tonight will increase the total project allocation by $3,375,000 (Table 2) for a total of $7,110,000 for Segments A and B (Shore Line Drive to Encinal Avenue). The two tables below provide a detail of the funds previously allocated for the Project (Table 1), and the requested commitments needed to fully implement Segments A and B, with the recommended design concept (Table 2). Funding for Segment C, estimated to cost $7,720,000, is not yet identified. Once City Council approves the concept, staff will start seeking grant funds, which will require a local match with an undetermined amount of local funds.
Table 1
|
CIP number |
Source |
Amount |
|
C11000 Pavement Management |
Grant: OBAG2 |
$827,000 |
|
C11000 Pavement Management |
Grant: Transportation Development Article III |
$76,618 |
|
C11000 Pavement Management |
Measure BB and other transportation funds |
$1,531,382 |
|
C11000 Subtotal |
|
$2,435,000 |
|
C61000 Street Safety |
General Funds to be reallocated to C11000 (see Table 2*) |
$1,300,000 |
|
Total Project Funding |
|
$3,735,000 |
Staff recommends that City Council adopt the attached resolution increasing revenue and expenditure appropriations for FY 2023-24 in the Grand Street project by $4,675,000, as shown in Table 2 below, in order to implement a continuous two-way bikeway along Grand Street from Shore Line Drive to Encinal Avenue (Segments A and B) for a total cost of $7,110,000. Staff recommends approving the attached resolution and appropriating these funds tonight. Construction contracts will be brought back for Council approval later in 2024, and in 2025.
Table 2
|
Fund/Project |
Amount |
|
C13000 Traffic Signals and Systems |
|
|
Reduce Contractual Services Expense and Reallocate |
$150,000 |
|
CIP C65100 Otis Drive Safety Improvements |
|
|
Reduce Contractual Services Expense and Reallocate |
$75,000 |
|
Fund 100 - General Fund |
|
|
Appropriate from Residual Fund Balance |
$2,000,000 |
|
Fund 231 - Measure BB Local Streets and Roads |
|
|
Appropriate from Fund Balance |
$1,150,000 |
|
Subtotal New Funding |
$3,375,000 |
|
CIP C61000 Street Safety - General Funds |
|
|
Reduce Contractual Services Expense and Reallocate* |
$1,300,000 |
|
CIP C11000- Grand Street Increase Contractual Services Expense Total |
$4,675,000 |
The proposed budget adjustments would result in a total allocation of $7,110,000 in funds for design and construction of the project from Shore Line Drive to Encinal Avenue. Staff is recommending use of $2 million of General Fund residual fund balance to help fund the project. The City’s General Fund residual fund balance increased dramatically over the past few years largely due to high real estate transfer taxes from a robust real estate market. As mortgage interest rate increases impact housing prices and mortgage affordability, layoffs in the Bay Area tech industry continue, and the possibility of a recession, it is uncertain when the City will benefit from another booming property market.
City Council’s approval of the attached resolution amending the FY 2023-24 Budget appropriating $2 million from General Fund Residual fund balance to the project will result in the FY 2023-24 General Fund ending residual fund balance being approximately $25.74 million above the City’s reserve policy and other commitments. Additionally, the adopted FY 2024-25 Operating and Capital Budget appropriated approximately $6.07 million of General Fund residual fund balance, which will reduce FY 2024-25 year end residual fund balance further to approximately $19.67 million.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
The recommended improvements to Grand Street are consistent with Alameda General Plan mobility goals, including:
• Equity: Provide for the mobility needs of all Alameda residents, workers, and visitors regardless of income, age, ability, or neighborhood.
• Safety: Eliminate fatalities and severe injuries on Alameda’s streets, sidewalks, crosswalks and trails by 2035.
• Choices: Expand and improve options to low occupancy automobile trips to incentivize mode shift to more environmentally sustainable modes of transportation while recognizing the diverse needs for mobility.
• Sustainability: Reduce the impacts of transportation systems on the environment, and transition to a more resilient transportation system to address the impacts of climate change.
They are also consistent with the Active Transportation Plan, which includes a separated bikeway along Grand Street from Shore Line Drive to Clement Avenue, in the Bikeway Vision Network and, a 2030 Infrastructure Plan that includes Project #2: Grand Street Safety Project calling for pedestrian safety improvements and separated bike lanes to be implemented south of Encinal Avenue by 2024, and north of Encinal by 2030.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the recommendations for the Grand Street Safety Improvement Project are categorically exempt from further environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15301 (Existing Facilities - specifically, minor alterations to existing facilities including bicycle facilities) and 15304 (Minor Alterations to Land - specifically, creation of bicycle lanes on existing public rights of way).
However, if City Council wishes to pursue Alternative 3, which requires trenching to underground and relocate utilities, additional environmental review will be necessary and staff will return to City Council for final approval of that review and any related determinations prior to commencement of the trenching work.
CLIMATE IMPACT
Since vehicle miles traveled in Alameda is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Alameda, City staff is expecting that the proposed improvements to Grand Street will have a positive climate impact. The concept is being developed to make it safer and more convenient to ride a bicycle, use the bus and walk and to reduce congestion and idling motor vehicles.
RECOMMENDATION
Approve an updated design for the Project for a continuous two-way bikeway from Shore Line Drive to Clement Avenue and to invalidate and set aside all prior decisions regarding the Grand Street Safety Improvement Project Concept and Plan previously addressed at City Council Meetings on October 4, 2022, October 18, 2022 and November 1, 2022; and
Adoption of Resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Operating and Capital Budget (Various Funds) for a total increase not-to-exceed $4,675,000, including appropriating $2,000,000 from General Fund (Fund 100) residual fund balance, for a total allocation of $7,110,000 in funds for design and construction of the project from Shore Line Drive to Encinal Avenue.
Respectfully submitted,
Andrew Thomas, Director of Planning, Building and Transportation
By,
Andrew Thomas, Director of Planning, Building and Transportation
Robert Vance, Public Works Deputy Director/City Engineer
Financial Impact section reviewed,
Margaret O’Brien, Finance Director
Exhibits:
1. Concept Overview
2. High Injury Corridor: Methodology and Data
3. Parking Analysis: Otis to Clement
4. 5/31/23 Community Workshop Presentation
5. 2023 Community Engagement