Resolution 14510CITY OF ALAMEDA RESOLUTION NO. 4 I
APPROVING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND THE BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
WHEREAS, the Bicycle Master Plan (Plan) includes policies, programs,
and projects to guide the future planning and implementation of Alameda's
bicycling infrastructure, in support of the General Plan Transportation Element;
and
WHEREAS, since the previous Plan was originally adopted in 1999, the
proposed Plan is necessary to improve bicycle facilities throughout the City in a
manner that is consistent with current Alameda needs and priorities; and
WHEREAS, the enhancement of Alameda's bicycle facilities network will
offer City residents, commuters, and visitors an additional mobility option and
will reduce traffic congestion; and
WHEREAS, the City's Local Action Plan for Climate Protection calls for
measures to encourage bicycling to reduce Alameda's greenhouse gas
emissions; and
WHEREAS, the draft Plan was presented to the Transportation
Commission, Economic Development Commission, Alameda Youth Advisory
Commission, and Recreation and Parks Commission for their input; and
WHEREAS, public outreach for this project included a workshop, survey,
a broad -based email list, and a web site; and
WHEREAS, adoption of a bicycle plan establishes eligibility for Bicycle
Transportation Account funding for the five subsequent fiscal years, in
accordance with Caltrans guidelines; and
WHEREAS, on September 3, 2010, the City of Alameda circulated for
public review an . Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration for the proposed
Plan Update; and
WHEREAS, the Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration was
circulated for a 21 -day review period, and
WHEREAS, staff received public comment on the draft Plan and has
recommended clarifications to be incorporated into the final Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board held a public hearing on the draft Plan
and the Mitigated . Negative Declaration on September 27, 2010, examined
pertinent maps and documents, considered the testimony, and written
comments received; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board has made the following findings:
1. The Mitigated Negative Declaration has been presented to and
independently reviewed and considered by the Planning Board, and
2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the independent
judgment and analysis of the City of Alameda, and
3. The . Mitigated Negative Declaration has been completed in
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, and all
applicable state and local guidelines, and
WHEREAS, on October 11, 2010, the Planning Board recommended
that the City Council approve a Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the
environmental impacts related to this project; and
WHEREAS, on October 11, 2010, the Planning Board recommended
that the City Council adopt the Plan, with the incorporation of the following
comments:
The Plan should be amended to elevate the Bayview Shoreline
Bicycle Path (project M2) to a high priority project; and
2. The Plan should be amended to encourage cost sharing agreements
with the neighboring jurisdiction of Oakland to help fund estuary
crossings enhancements for bicyclists and pedestrians, and
3. The Plan should be amended to recommend further evaluation of
multimodal solutions to enhance access to the Park Street and
Fruitvale [Miller- Sweeney] Bridges, including access via Tilden Way
and consideration of how the bridges link to Oakland. The City
should continue to work with Oakland to enhance bicycle access at
these locations; and
4. The Plan should be amended to indicate that additional bicycle
parking should be installed in Alameda, and staff should consult with
community groups such as BikeAlanleda regarding placement of
these facilities; and
5. The Plan should encourage that more funding for bicycle
improvements be allocated from Gas Tax or other local street and
roads improvement funds through the CIP program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City
of Alameda approves the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Plan with the
amendments described below:
• Change the title of the document to "City of Alameda 1999 Bicycle
Master Plan (Updated 2010).
• Change Page 2, paragraph 4, to read: "Projects were evaluated and
scored based on a number of criteria, such as connectivity, potential
demand, and future operations and maintenance costs. The
recommended projects and programs are listed below. Note that
definitions for Class 1, Class 11, and Class 111 are provided on Page 47."
G Change the list of high priority projects on Pages 2 -3 and pages 78 -79 to
read as follows: 1) The estimated cost of the Cross Alameda Trail will be
$1,422,000; 2) The Bayview Shoreline Bicycle Path feasibility study will
be added to the list of high priority projects, with an estimated cost of
$100 000 and 3) The Blanding Avenue bikeway, including a bicycle lane
from Park Street to Broadway and a bicycle route from Oak Street to
Park Street, will be added to the list of high priority projects, with an
estimated cost of $10,000.
O On Page 6, the last paragraph will be changed to read:
The scope of this Bicycle Plan update also included the
development of guidelines to facilitate implementation of
the Plan's recommendations: 1) bicycle facility design
guidelines, 2) bicycle parking guidelines, 3) shoreline
access guidelines, and 4) wayfinding signage guidelines.
In addition to recommended bicycle facility designs to be
utilized, the guidelines will include a formalized building
inspection checklist to ensure that bike racks are installed
according to the project conditions of approval prior to the
City issuing a permit to occupy the building or final
acceptance of the project, whichever comes first. These
guidelines are available as a companion document to this
Plan.
® Change the notes following the list of high priority projects on Pages 2 -3
and Pages 78 -79, to read:
* Railroad track removal required prior to implementation. Estimated
cost does not include cost of removing railroad tracks. It is assumed
that the tracks would be removed as part of reconstructing the street.
** Interim project. For long -term proposal see project N 1.
* ** Class 11 to be implemented on these segments only if it is determined
that removal of on- street parking or reductions in traffic capacity
would be acceptable. Otherwise, they would be implemented as
Class 111 facilities.
•
On Page 71, modify the last sentence in paragraph 1 to read: "In
addition, the City should continue to work with the City of Oakland,
Alameda County, and the Army Corps of Engineers to develop short -
and long -term solutions for improved bicycle access in the Fruitvale
Bridge corridor, and with the City of Oakland and Alameda County to
enhance access in the Park Street Bridge corridor."
®
In Chapter VIII, the estimated 85th percentile speeds for streets with
proposed bikeways will be deleted from all project descriptions.
O On Page 71, at the end of the paragraph titled "provide additional bicycle
parking," add the following:
Beach access points along the Shoreline bike path are a
major recreational destination that has been identified as
locations where bicycle parking is needed Staff should
conduct a field review to determine if bicycle racks are
currently located along the bike path. If not, staff shall work
with the East Bay Regional. Park District to install a
sufficient number of bike racks along the length of the bike
path to accommodate bicyclist demands.
• On Page 75, the following paragraph will be inserted immediately after
the section describing the project prioritization methodology:
Future updates of this bicycle plan should revise the rating
schedule by increasing the total number of points assigned
to reducing conflicts and school access (under the Livability
goal) while retaining the overall 100 total point scale. This
will provide greater emphasis for these categories in the
future.
• On Page 84, add project D14, the Oak Street to Alameda Towne Centre
connection, described as "Oak Street to Otis Drive and connection to
Alameda Towne Centre," and associated with the Alameda Towne
Centre development.
• On Page 87, insert the following immediately following the heading "High
Priority Projects ":
The Bicycle Master Plan high priority projects are described
below. For three of the identified high priority bicycle lane
projects — Central Avenue (H6), Oak Street (H7), and
Lincoln Avenue (H8) — impediments have been identified
that may render the projects infeasible. Due to the strong
public support for these projects, the City is committed to
working to remove these impediments and implementing
these projects as proposed. However, if all concerns
cannot be addressed, these projects will instead be
implemented as bicycle routes.
• On Page 87, change the title of project FPM to "West End Estuary
Crossing — Project Study Report Equivalent, and the project description
to read as follows:
After evaluating the physical constraints in the Estuary
Crossing Feasibility Study, three recommendations were
identified for additional study.
• Minor Modifications to the Posey Tube (short term)
This is considered to be a short-term solution for
improving the estuary crossing in this corridor. The
project would include improving the surface of the
existing bike path.
• Water Shuttle/Taxi - (intermediate) This would operate
between a new or modified dock in Alameda and Jack
London Square in Oakland. This could be operated on
a regular schedule or on an on -call basis.
• Bicycle - Pedestrian Bridge -- (long- term) A bicycle-
pedestrian bridge across the estuary would have to be a
drawbridge.
While the study determined that the bridge project would be
physically feasible, the City does not believe that this
project could be completed in the foreseeable future due to
the estimated $60 million construction cost and the
significant annual operations costs. Therefore, the
recommended next step is to conduct a Project Study
Report equivalent for the water shuttle /taxi option and
create a holding account to set aside some funding as it
becomes available. These steps will help ensure readiness
when funding becomes available for design, environmental,
and construction, and will facilitate efforts to pursue outside
funding for phases of the work. As part of this project,
additional consideration should be given to options for
utilizing the path in the Webster Street Tube, including
modifications to the westerly retaining wall. The estimated
cost for the PSR equivalent is approximately $500,000.
Since funding for this project and the holding account is
identified in the City's Pedestrian Plan from resources
devoted to pedestrian projects, additional resources from
bicycle- related projects are not needed for this effort.
• On Page 88, the cost of the Cross Alameda Trail (Project H2) will be
$1.422 million.
O On Pages 88 -89, under Project H3:
O The proposed facility type will be "Class 11 (subsequent to railroad
track removal)"
O At the end of the project description, insert the following sentence:
"The railroad tracks embedded in the street should be removed
prior to the implementation of a bicycle facility in this corridor."
®
On Page 90, Project H6, the proposed facility type will be: "Class 11 (if
traffic capacity needs can be accommodated) otherwise Class 111."
O On Page 91, Project H7, the proposed facility type will be: "Class 11 (if on-
street parking can be removed) otherwise Class 111."
• On Page 96, the Bayview Shoreline Bicycle Path feasibility study (Project
H16) wilt be listed with the following project description:
• On Page 96, the Bayview Shoreline Bicycle Path feasibility study (Project
H16) will be listed with the following project description:
This Bay Trail segment would eliminate the gap between
the shoreline bicycle path at Robert Crown Memorial State
Beach and the Bay Farm Island Bicycle Bridge. Currently
bicyclists need to use the on- street bicycle route on
Bayview Drive, which requires riders to navigate the
intersections of Bayview Drive at Broadway and at Otis
Drive. Both locations require bicyclists to transition
between riding in the street and an off-street bicycle path.
Currently the bicycle path along the Bayview shoreline is
unpaved and open to the public; any upgrade of the bicycle
path would require careful evaluation of design elements,
such as width, materials to be used for the bicycle path,
and appropriate buffering between the bicycle path and the
adjacent neighborhood. Due to the complex nature of this
path upgrade, the City will also work with BCDC, on an
expedited oasis, to enhance bicycle access on the existing
path until a long -term solution can be completed.
• On Page 96, the Blanding Avenue bikeway (Project H17) will be included
as a high priority project with the following:
O Proposed facility type: Class 11 (subsequent to railroad track
removal) otherwise Class 111
O Project description:
This project proposes to implement a bicycle lane on
Blanding Avenue from Park Street to Tilden Way and a
bicycle route between Oak Street and Park Street. These
facilities would connect to existing and proposed bikeways
on Oak Street, Broadway, and Fernside Boulevard, and
enhance access to the Miller - Sweeney and Park Street
bridges. The implementation of bicycle facilities on
Blanding Avenue is recommended only after the removal of
railroad tracks currently embedded in the street (in
accordance with Surface Transportation Board
requirements). The cost of the track removal has been
estimated at approximately $37.5,000; the track removal is
anticipated to be completed as part of the reconstruction of
the street, so the resources are not allocated from bicycle
plan funding.
O On Pages 96 -97, the description of the Bicycle Parking Enhancement
Program will read as follows:
To help determine locations where there is demand for
bicycle parking, Public Works should reserve funding each
year for the purpose of purchasing and installing bicycle
parking Priority locations would be determined based on
the existing availability of bicycle parking and the estimated
need for additional facilities, based on observations,
proximity to key destinations, and input from community
groups, businesses, and property owners. For locations
not identified as a priority, Public Works could partner with
adjacent property owners or business owners. For
example, if a business would be willing to purchase a
bicycle rack, the City could cover the installation costs.
• On Page 98, the description of the Safe Routes to School Program will
read as follows:
Public Works has completed Safe Routes to School
(SR2S) maps for all elementary and middle schools in the
Alameda Unified School District (AUSD). These maps
should be reviewed and updated, as necessary, every
three years, or as significant changes in traffic patterns
occur. Due to budgetary constraints, AUSD is considering
options to close and consolidate schools. If implemented,
these changes would affect the bicycling and walking
routes for students as well as existing traffic patterns.
Therefore, should the closure and consolidation of schools
occur, the City should make the updating of the SR2S
maps a high priority.
Public Works will also continue to work with the AUSD to
support other Safe Routes to School initiatives, including
Walk and Roll to School Day, and bicycle education that
specifically targets students. Funding for these activities
was identified in the City's pedestrian plan, so additional
resources have not been allocated in the bicycle plan for
this activity.
• On Page 101, the description of Bayview Shoreline Bicycle Path -W-
Construction (Project M2) will be changed as follows: "See description
for project H16 (Page 96).',
O On Page 104, under West End Water Shuttle (Project N4), add the
following sentence at the end of the project description: "To the degree
possible, the City should seek to share the cost of this project with other
stakeholder jurisdictions and agencies, such as the City of Oakland and
Caltrans."
O On Page 105, under the Fru tvale Railroad Bridge /Miller - Sweeney Bridge
Corridor Improvements description (Project N5), add the following at the
end of the project description:
To facilitate the implementation of improvements in this
corridor, the cities of Alameda and Oakland wilt need to
closely collaborate to explore options on the bridge as well
as access routes to the bridge on both sides of the estuary.
In addition, to the degree possible, the City should seek to
share the cost of this project with other stakeholder
jurisdictions and agencies, such as the City of Oakland,
Alameda County, and the Army Corps of Engineers.
• Change the third sentence on Pages 105 -106, under the Park Street
Bridge Improvements description (Project N8), to read:
The Plan recommends that the City continue to work with
the City of Oakland and Alameda County to explore
opportunities to enhance multimodal access, including
bicycle access, in the bridge corridor as well as on the
bridge structure itself as part of any future construction
projects.
O On Pages 106-107, add the following at the end of both the Park Street
and High Street Bridge Improvements (Projects N8 and N9):
To facilitate the implementation of improvements in this
corridor, the cities of . Alameda and Oakland will need to
closely collaborate to explore options on the bridge as well
as access routes to the bridge on both sides of the estuary.
In addition, to the degree possible, the City should seek to
share the cost of this project with other stakeholder
jurisdictions and agencies, such as the City of Oakland and
Alameda County."
On Page 107, add Project D14, "Oak Street to Alameda Towne Centre
connection," described as "Oak Street to Otis Drive and connection to
Alameda Towne Centre," facility type to be determined, and a project
length of 150 -500 feet.
• On Page 141, insert Projects H16 and H17 as high priority projects.
® On Page 146, insert Project D14 as a development- related project.
• The City of Alameda Proposed Bikeway Network (Figure 9) will be
amended in accordance with the changes described above.
1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and
regularly adopted and passed by the Council of the City of Alameda during the Regular
Meeting of the City Council on the 16th day of November, 2010, by the followin g vote to
wit:
AYES: Councilmembers deHaan, Gilmore, Matarrese, Tam
and Mayor Johnson - 5.
NOES: None.
ABSENT: None.
ABSTENTIONS: None.
IN WITNESS, WH E REOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the official seal of
said City this 17th day of November, 2010.
Lara Weisiger, City =e
City of Alameda