Emeryville City Council
July 7, 2026

2026 MPFA

MEASURE BB / VEHICLE REGISTRATION FEE

MASTER PROGRAMS FUNDING AGREEMENT
between the

ALAMEDA COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
and the

CITY OF EMERYVILLE
This Measure BB / Vehicle Registration Fee Master Programs Funding Agreement (“AGREEMENT”), effective the 1st of July 1, 2026, is entered into by and between the Alameda County Transportation Commission (“ALAMEDA CTC”) and the City of Emeryville (“RECIPIENT”).

RECITALS
A. On November 2, 2010, the voters of Alameda County approved Measure F, the Vehicle Registration Fee (“VRF”) Program, pursuant to Section 65089.20 of the Government Code, thereby authorizing the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency (“ACCMA”) to administer the proceeds from a $10 per year vehicle registration fee on each annual motor-vehicle registration or renewal of registration in Alameda County, starting in May 2011, six months following approval of Measure F. Vehicles subject to the VRF include all motorized vehicles, including passenger cars, light-duty trucks, medium-duty trucks, heavy-duty trucks, buses of all sizes, motorcycles, and motorized camper homes, unless vehicles are expressly exempted from the payment of the VRF.

B. Funds raised by the VRF will be used exclusively for local transportation purposes in Alameda County that have a relationship or benefit to the owners of motor vehicles paying the VRF, including projects and programs identified in the expenditure plan approved by the voters as part of Measure F (the “VRF Expenditure Plan”).

C. On June 24, 2010, the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority (“ACTIA”) and ACCMA took the final actions to create ALAMEDA CTC, a joint powers authority, with all of ACTIA and ACCMA’s functions and responsibilities. Pursuant to resolutions adopted by the ACCMA and ACTIA Boards and the governing body of the ALAMEDA CTC (COMMISSION”), ACCMA and ACTIA were terminated as of the close of business on February 29, 2012, with ALAMEDA CTC designated as the successor entity. All of its predecessors’ functions and responsibilities have been assigned to, and accepted by, ALAMEDA CTC, including duties related to the VRF Program.

D. On November 4, 2014, the voters of Alameda County, pursuant to the Local Transportation Authority and Improvement Act, California Public Utilities Code Section 180000 et seq., approved Measure BB, thereby authorizing ALAMEDA CTC to administer the proceeds from a one-half of one percent transaction and use tax applicable from April 1, 2015 through March 31, 2022, and a full one percent tax applicable from April 1, 2022 through March 31, 2045. The tax proceeds will be used to pay for the investments outlined in Alameda County’s 30-Year Transportation Expenditure Plan (“Measure BB Expenditure Plan”), as it may be amended.

E. This AGREEMENT delineates the requirements of the Measure BB and VRF Direct Local Distribution (“DLD”) funds that are directly allocated to local jurisdictions and transit operators, as Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080

2026 MPFA
authorized by the VRF Expenditure Plan, and the Measure BB Expenditure Plan. Discretionary funds identified in these expenditure plans are not the subject of this AGREEMENT, and RECIPIENT will be required to enter into a separate agreement for those funds.

F. The parties to this AGREEMENT previously entered into a Master Programs Funding Agreement applicable to DLD funds distributed by ALAMEDA CTC, which expires as of June 30, 2026 (“ORIGINAL AGREEMENT”). This AGREEMENT is generally consistent with the ORIGINAL AGREEMENT, but the parties have determined that it is appropriate to enter into a new agreement rather than extending the ORIGINAL AGREEMENT.

G. This AGREEMENT was originally approved by the COMMISSION on February 26, 2026.

NOW, THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed by and between the parties as follows:

ARTICLE I: FUNDING ALLOCATIONS

1. This AGREEMENT authorizes the ALAMEDA CTC to allocate the DLD funds derived from Measure BB and VRF receipts as described in their respective voter-approved expenditure plans and as summarized in Table A: DLD Investment Summary and described below for different fund types.

Table A: DLD Investment Summary
DLD Program Fund Program
Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Measure BB
Local Streets and Roads Program Measure BB and VRF
Mass Transit Program Measure BB
Paratransit Program Measure BB

2. All DLD distributions pursuant to this AGREEMENT, and all provisions contained herein, shall be effective as of July 1, 2026. The ORIGINAL AGREEMENT shall govern and control all DLD distributions paid on or before June 30, 2026.

A. BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROGRAM

1. ALAMEDA CTC will distribute Measure BB DLD funds pursuant to a formula weighted 100 percent by the jurisdiction’s population within the subarea. RECIPIENT’s allocations are subject to change based on variations in annual population figures.

2. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Implementation Guidelines provide program eligibility and fund usage guidelines, definitions, additional requirements, and guideline adoption details. Said guidelines are hereby incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference.

Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080

2026 MPFA
B. LOCAL STREETS AND ROADS (LOCAL TRANSPORTATION) PROGRAM

1. ALAMEDA CTC will distribute Measure BB DLD funds pursuant to a formula weighted 50 percent by the jurisdiction’s population within the subarea and 50 percent by the number of road miles with the subarea. RECIPIENT’s allocations are subject to change based on variations in annual population and road mile figures.

2. ALAMEDA CTC will distribute VRF DLD funds pursuant to a formula weighted 50 percent by the jurisdiction’s population within the subarea and 50 percent of the number of registered vehicles in the subarea. RECIPIENT’s allocations are subject to change based on variations in annual population and number of registered vehicle figures, as they are made available.

3. The Local Streets and Roads Program Implementation Guidelines provide program eligibility and fund usage guidelines, definitions, additional requirements, and guideline adoption details. Said guidelines are hereby incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference.

4. RECIPIENT shall expend a minimum of 15 percent of all Measure BB funds received on project elements directly benefiting bicyclists and pedestrians.

C. MASS TRANSIT PROGRAM

1. ALAMEDA CTC will distribute Measure BB DLD funds pursuant to set percentages detailed in the Measure BB Expenditure Plan. RECIPIENT’s percentage fund distribution, if applicable, is detailed in Measure BB Mass Transit Direct Local Distribution Summary, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference. RECIPIENT’s allocations are subject to change based on transit service changes.

2. The Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines provide program eligibility and fund usage guidelines, definitions, additional requirements, and guideline adoption details. Said guidelines are hereby incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference.

D. PARATRANSIT PROGRAM

1. ALAMEDA CTC will distribute Measure BB DLD funds by subarea pursuant to percentages in the Measure BB Expenditure Plan. RECIPIENT’s percentage fund distribution by subarea, if applicable, is shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and is incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference.

2. Measure BB distributions to cities and local transit operators are based on a percentage of the population over age 70 in each of the four planning areas for city-based and mandated paratransit services of local bus transit providers.

3. ALAMEDA CTC will distribute Measure BB DLD funds to the East Bay Paratransit Consortium pursuant to set percentages in the Measure BB Expenditure Plan to assist the Alameda-Contra Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080

2026 MPFA
Costa Transit District and the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit in meeting its responsibilities under the American with Disabilities Act (ADA).

4. Measure BB DLD funds may be further distributed to individual cities within each planning area based on a formula refined by the Paratransit Advisory and Planning Committee and approved by the COMMISSION. RECIPIENT’s allocations are subject to change based on updated annual population figures.

5. The Paratransit Program Implementation Guidelines provide program eligibility and fund usage guidelines, definitions, additional requirements, and guideline adoption details. Said guidelines are hereby incorporated into this AGREEMENT by reference.

ARTICLE II: PAYMENTS AND EXPENDITURES
A. ALAMEDA CTC’S DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS

1. Within five working days of actual receipt of the monthly Measure BB sales tax revenues and VRF revenues from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration, the bond trustee, or the California Department of Motor Vehicles, Alameda CTC shall remit to the RECIPIENT its designated amount of available DLD funds disbursed on a monthly basis by the formulas described above.

2. ALAMEDA CTC shall annually update Measure BB and VRF fund revenue projections and the resulting fund allocation formulas to reflect the most current population using the California Department of Finance’s annual population estimates (Report E-1 published in May); maintained road mileage from the California Department of Transportation; and the number of registered vehicles in each Alameda County subarea, using registered vehicle data provided by the California Department of Motor Vehicles, as it is made available. ALAMEDA CTC shall use the updated Measure BB and VRF program allocation formulas in the allocations related to the collection of revenues beginning July 1 of each new fiscal year, which is from July 1 to June 30.

3. ALAMEDA CTC shall report monthly to the public the amount of Measure BB, and VRF revenues distributed to RECIPIENT by each fund type monthly and for the fiscal year.

4. ALAMEDA CTC shall provide timely notice to RECIPIENT prior to conducting an audit of expenditures made by RECIPIENT to determine whether such expenditures are in compliance with this AGREEMENT, Measure BB Expenditure Plan, or the VRF Expenditure Plan.

B. RECIPIENT’S DUTIES AND OBLIGATIONS

1. RECIPIENT shall expend all Measure BB and VRF funds received in compliance with the applicable guidelines and Plan(s), including the Implementation Guidelines and performance measures, as they may be adopted or amended by ALAMEDA CTC from time to time.

Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080

2026 MPFA

2. RECIPIENT shall set up and maintain an appropriate system of accounts in accordance with GAAP to report on Measure BB and VRF funds received and expended. RECIPIENT must account for Measure BB and VRF funds, including any interest received or accrued, separately for each fund type, and from any other funds received from ALAMEDA CTC. The accounting system shall provide adequate internal controls and audit trails to facilitate an unmodified annual financial and compliance audit for each fund type and the respective usage and application of said funds. ALAMEDA CTC and its representatives, agents and nominees shall have the absolute right at any reasonable time to inspect and copy any accounting records related to such funds, except to the extent specifically prohibited by applicable law.

3. RECIPIENT shall expend Measure BB and VRF funds in compliance with the Timely Use of Funds Policies for Direct Local Distributions, as they may be adopted or amended by the COMMISSION from time to time.

4. RECIPIENT shall establish and maintain systems, such as policies and procedures, to ensure that Measure BB and VRF DLD funds are used exclusively for eligible transportation purposes.

5. RECIPIENT hereby agrees to and accepts the formulas used in the allocation of Measure BB and VRF revenues as reflected in the ballot measures, the Measure BB Expenditure Plan, and the VRF Expenditure Plan, and agrees to accept and utilize the California Department of Finance Estimates of Population figures (Report E-1, updated each May) for California cities and counties for the annual update of the sales tax allocation formulas related to the collection of revenues that begin in July of each new fiscal year and registered vehicle data provided by the California Department of Motor Vehicles when available.

C. OTHER EXPENDITURE RESTRICTIONS

1. Transportation Purposes Only: RECIPIENT shall use all Measure BB and VRF funds solely for transportation purposes as defined by the authorizing ballot measures. Any jurisdiction that violates this provision must fully reimburse all misspent funds, including all interest which would have been earned thereon.

2. Non-Substitution of Funds: RECIPIENT shall use Measure BB funds and VRF funds to supplement and not replace existing local revenues used for transportation purposes.

3. Fund Exchange: Any fund exchanges made using Measure BB or VRF funds must be made for transportation purposes. ALAMEDA CTC will consider exchange proposals on a case-by-case basis.

4. Staff Cost Limitations: Direct costs associated with the delivery of programs and projects associated with Measure BB and VRF programs, including direct staff costs and consultant costs, are eligible uses of Measure BB and VRF funds. ALAMEDA CTC does not allow indirect costs, unless the RECIPIENT submits an independently audited/approved Indirect Cost Allocation Plan.

Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080

2026 MPFA
ARTICLE III: REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
A. REQUIREMENTS AND WITHHOLDING
RECIPIENT shall comply with each of the reporting requirements set forth below. If RECIPIENT fails to comply with one or more of these requirements, ALAMEDA CTC may withhold payment of further Measure BB and/or VRF funds to RECIPIENT until full compliance is achieved.

1. RECIPIENT shall, by December 31st of each year, submit to ALAMEDA CTC, at the RECIPIENT’s expense, separate independently audited financial statements for the prior fiscal year ended June 30 of Measure BB and VRF funds received and used.

2. RECIPIENT shall, by December 31st of each year, submit to ALAMEDA CTC, at the RECIPIENT’s expense, annual program compliance reports regarding programs and projects on which RECIPIENT expended Measure BB and VRF funds.

3. RECIPIENT shall document expenditure activities and report on the performance of Measure BB and VRF funded activities through the annual program compliance reporting process, or through other ALAMEDA CTC performance and reporting processes as they may be requested, including but not limited to the annual performance report, annual program plan, planning monitoring reports. Program Performance Measures are attached hereto as Exhibit B.

4. RECIPIENT shall install or mount signage adjacent to Measure BB and VRF funded construction projects, and on vehicles funded with Measure BB and VRF funds (e.g., RECIPIENT and ALAMEDA CTC logos; “Your Transportation Tax Dollars Help Fund the Operation of This Vehicle!”) where practical, so Alameda County taxpayers are informed as to how RECIPIENT is using Measure BB and/or VRF funds.

5. RECIPIENT shall provide current information on RECIPIENT’s website, to inform the public about how RECIPIENT is using Measure BB and/or VRF funds.

6. RECIPIENT shall actively participate in a Public Awareness Program, in partnership with ALAMEDA CTC and/or its community advisory committees, as a means of ensuring that the public has access to the ability to know which projects and programs are funded through Measure BB and/or VRF funds.

7. RECIPIENT shall make its administrative officer or designated staff available upon request to render a report or answer any and all inquiries in regard to RECIPIENT’s receipt, usage, and/or compliance audit findings regarding Measure BB and/or VRF funds before the Commission and/or the Independent Watchdog Committee or community advisory committees, as applicable.

8. RECIPIENT agrees that ALAMEDA CTC may review and/or evaluate all project(s) or program(s) funded pursuant to this AGREEMENT. This may include visits by representatives, agents or nominees of ALAMEDA CTC to observe RECIPIENT’s project or program operations, to review project or program data and financial records, and to discuss the project with RECIPIENT’s staff or governing board.

Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080

2026 MPFA
ARTICLE IV: OTHER PROVISIONS
A. GEOGRAPHIC BREAKDOWN
In all cases the geographic breakdown by subarea is as follows:

1. North Area refers to the Cities of Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland, and Piedmont.

2. Central Area includes the Cities of Hayward and San Leandro, and the unincorporated area of Castro Valley, as well as other unincorporated land governed by Alameda County in the Central Area.

3. South Area includes the Cities of Fremont, Newark, and Union City.

4. East Area includes the Cities of Livermore, Dublin, and Pleasanton, and all unincorporated land governed by Alameda County in the East Area.

B. INDEMNITY BY RECIPIENT
Neither ALAMEDA CTC, nor the COMMISSION, any officer, consultant, agent, or employee thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RECIPIENT in connection with the Measure BB or VRF funds distributed to RECIPIENT pursuant to this AGREEMENT. It is also understood and agreed, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, RECIPIENT shall fully defend, indemnify and hold harmless ALAMEDA CTC, the COMMISSION, and all its officers, agents, and employees, from any liability imposed on ALAMEDA CTC for injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by RECIPIENT in connection with the Measure BB or VRF funds distributed to RECIPIENT pursuant to this AGREEMENT.

C. INDEMNITY BY ALAMEDA CTC
Neither RECIPIENT, nor its governing body, elected officials, any officer, consultant, agent, or employee thereof shall be responsible for any damage or liability occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ALAMEDA CTC under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to ALAMEDA CTC under this AGREEMENT. It is also understood and agreed, pursuant to Government Code Section 895.4, ALAMEDA CTC shall fully defend, indemnify, and hold harmless RECIPIENT, and its governing body, elected officials, all its officers, agents, and employees from any liability imposed on RECIPIENT for injury (as defined in Government Code Section 810.8) occurring by reason of anything done or omitted to be done by ALAMEDA CTC under or in connection with any work, authority or jurisdiction delegated to ALAMEDA CTC under this AGREEMENT.

D. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
The laws of the State of California will govern the validity of this AGREEMENT, its interpretation and performance, and any other claims to which it relates. All legal actions arising out of this AGREEMENT Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080

2026 MPFA
shall be brought in a court of competent jurisdiction in Alameda County, California and the parties hereto hereby waive inconvenience of forum as an objection or defense to such venue.

E. ATTORNEYS’ FEES
Should it become necessary to enforce the terms of this AGREEMENT, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable expenses and attorneys’ fees from the other party.

F. TERM
The term of this AGREEMENT shall be from July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2036, unless amended in writing or a new Master Programs Funding Agreement is executed between ALAMEDA CTC and RECIPIENT.

G. SEVERABILITY
If any provision of this AGREEMENT is found by a court of competent jurisdiction or, if applicable, an arbitrator, to be unenforceable, such provision shall not affect the other provisions of the AGREEMENT, but such unenforceable provisions shall be deemed modified to the extent necessary to render it enforceable, preserving to the fullest extent permissible the intent of the parties set forth in this AGREEMENT.

H. MODIFICATION
This AGREEMENT, and its Exhibits, as well as the referenced Implementation Guidelines, constitutes the entire AGREEMENT, supersedes all prior written or oral understandings regarding Measure BB and VRF program funds (but not project funding agreements), including but not limited to the ORIGINAL AGREEMENT, which is terminated as of the effective date hereof. This AGREEMENT may only be changed by a written amendment executed by both parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Implementation Guidelines, Performance Measures, and Timely Use of Funds Policies related to Measure BB and VRF funds may be changed from time to time by the ALAMEDA CTC.

[Signatures on next page]
Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080

2026 MPFA
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this AGREEMENT by their duly authorized officers as of the date first written below.

CITY OF EMERYVILLE
(RECIPIENT)

ALAMEDA COUNTY

TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
(ALAMEDA CTC)
By: By:

LaTanya Bellow Date
City Manager
Tony Tavares Date
Executive Director
Recommended
By:

Vivek Bhat Date
Deputy Executive Director of Projects
Reviewed as to Budget/Financial Controls:

By:

Patricia Reavey Date
Deputy Executive Director of
Finance and Administration
Approved as to Legal Form: Approved as to Legal Form:

By: By:

John Kennedy Date
City Attorney
Legal Counsel to CITY OF EMERYVILLE
Fennemore LLP Date
Legal Counsel to ALAMEDA CTC
E-SIGNED by John Kennedy
on 2026-06-16 22:32:50 GMT
Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080
Exhibit A – Page 1 2026 MPFA

EXHIBIT A

MEASURE BB MASS TRANSIT AND PARATRANSIT

DIRECT LOCAL DISTRIBUTION SUMMARY
Mass Transit
Alameda CTC distributes Measure BB Mass Transit Direct Local Distribution funds based on the distribution percentages for net Measure BB Revenues specified in the Measure BB Expenditure Plan, as shown below.

Table 1: Measure BB Mass Transit Distribution
Agency Area Percentage of
Net Revenues
AC Transit Alameda County 18.80 %
ACE East/South County 1.00 %
BART Alameda County 0.50 %
LAVTA East County 0.50 %
Union City Transit South County 0.25 %
SF WETA Alameda County 0.50 %
Paratransit
Alameda CTC distributes Measure BB paratransit funds to County subareas/planning areas and to AC Transit and BART based on the distribution percentages in the Measure BB Expenditure Plan, as shown below. Distributions to jurisdictions for non-mandated services within each subarea are based on allocation formulas refined by the Paratransit Advisory and Planning Committee (PAPCO) and approved by the Commission.

Table 2: Measure BB Paratransit Distribution
Area/Agency Percentage1
City-based and Locally Mandated 3.0%
North County
Cities of Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, and Oakland Central County2
Cities of Hayward and San Leandro, and unincorporated area of Castro Valley, as well as other unincorporated lands governed by Alameda County in the Central Area.

South County
Cities of Fremont, Newark, Union City, as well as Union City Transit.

East County3
Cities of Livermore, Dublin, and Pleasanton, and unincorporated lands governed by Alameda County in the East Area, and LAVTA.

AC Transit - East Bay Paratransit4 4.5%
BART- East Bay Paratransit4 1.5%

1. Funds are distributed based on the percentage of the population over age 70 in each of the four planning areas for city-based and mandated paratransit services. Funds can be further allocated to individual cities within each planning area based on a formula refined by PAPCO.

2. Funding will be assigned to Hayward to serve the unincorporated areas.

3. Funding for Livermore and Dublin will be assigned to LAVTA for their ADA-mandated paratransit program.

4. Measure BB funds are dispersed to AC Transit and BART to operate the East Bay Paratransit Consortium (EBPC).

Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080
Exhibit B – Page 1 2026 MPFA

EXHIBIT B

DIRECT LOCAL DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Direct Local Distribution (DLD) recipients are to document the performance and benefits of the projects and programs funded with Measure BB and/or Vehicle Registration Fee funds. The following performance measures are a selection of performance measures and associated standards, organized by funding program, that must be documented at minimum by DLD recipients as applicable. Additional performance measures may be requested by Alameda CTC.

Performance reporting and monitoring will be done through Alameda CTC’s standard reporting processes, including the Annual Program Compliance Reports and various planning activities, as requested and applicable. Alameda CTC’s performance reporting will concentrate on key indicators at the time of reporting.

BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN PROGRAM

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Performance Measure Performance Metrics & Standards Evaluation Frequency
& Method
Corrective Action
Infrastructure Investment
Report on bicycle and
pedestrian projects completed
or underway.

Directional lane miles of all bicycle facilities built or improved (may include bike lanes, bike routes, multi-use pathway improvements).

Linear feet of all pedestrian improvements built or
improved (may include sidewalks, trails/pathways).

Number of all intersections or midblock
bicycle/pedestrian crossing locations improved (may
include locations that received crossing improvements,
curb/ADA ramps, bicycle protection elements,
daylighting, traffic calming elements, lighting, etc.).

Annually via
Compliance
Report
N/A; Report on investments
Safety Investments
Report on bicycle and
pedestrian investments
located on countywide
priority networks:
- High Injury Network
(HIN) Proactive Safety
Network (PSN)
- Countywide Bikeways
Network (CBN)
Directional lane miles of bicycle facilities built or
improved to an All Ages and Abilities (AAA) standard
on the Alameda CTC-adopted HIN, PSN and/or CBN.

Linear feet of pedestrian improvements built or
improved on the Alameda CTC-adopted HIN or PSN
(may include sidewalks, trails/pathways).

Number of intersections and/or midblock
bicycle/pedestrian crossing locations improved on
Alameda CTC-adopted HIN, PSN, or CBN (may
include locations that received crossing improvements,
curb/ADA ramps, bicycle protection elements,
daylighting, traffic calming elements, lighting, etc.).

Annually via
Compliance
Report
N/A; Report on investments
Current Master Plan
Maintain a local current
Bicycle/Pedestrian Master
Plan (BPMP) or Active
Transportation Plan.

Plan(s) no more than 5 years old, based on adoption
date.

Annually via
Compliance
Report
Any agency without a current
plan is required to provide
schedule for a plan update.

Capital Project and
Program Investment
Report on capital and
program administration costs
Investment into capital projects and programs is greater than program administration costs (outreach, staffing,
administrative support).

Annually via
Compliance
Report
Any agency not achieving this
metric must explain how capital
needs will be addressed in the
future.

Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080
Exhibit B – Page 2 2026 MPFA
EXHIBIT B (cont.)
LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM (Local Streets and Roads (LSR))

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Performance Measure Performance Metrics & Standards Evaluation Frequency &
Method
Corrective Action
Infrastructure Investment
Report on roadway and
transportation improvements
completed or underway.

Lane miles of roadway improvements, pavement
rehabilitation, striping, etc.

Linear feet of all bicycle/pedestrian improvements built or improved (may include sidewalks, trails/pathways).

Number of all intersections or midblock
bicycle/pedestrian crossing locations improved (may
include locations that received crossing improvements,
curb/ADA ramps, bicycle protection elements,
daylighting, traffic calming elements, lighting, etc.).

Annually via
Compliance
Report
N/A; Report on investments
Safety Investments
Report on bicycle and
pedestrian investments
located on countywide
priority networks:
- High Injury Network
(HIN) Proactive Safety
Network (PSN)
- Countywide Bikeways
Network (CBN)
Directional lane miles of bicycle facilities built or
improved to an All Ages and Abilities (AAA) standard
on the Alameda CTC-adopted HIN, PSN and/or CBN.

Linear feet of pedestrian improvements built or
improved on the Alameda CTC-adopted HIN or PSN
(may include sidewalks, trails/pathways).

Number of intersections and/or midblock
bicycle/pedestrian crossing locations improved on
Alameda CTC-adopted HIN, PSN, or CBN (may
include locations that received crossing improvements,
curb/ADA ramps, bicycle protection elements,
daylighting, traffic calming elements, lighting, etc.).

Annually via
Compliance
Report
N/A; Report on investments
Pavement Condition Index
(PCI)
Maintain a PCI moving average rating of 60 or above.

Average PCI based on latest available data from MTC’s
Pavement Condition Index Summary Report.

Annually via
Compliance
Report
Any agency not achieving the
target must identify corrective
actions and future investments to
address PCI levels.

Equitable Investments
Report on investments within
equity communities
Identify LSR investments toward maintaining and
improving roadways and transportation infrastructure,
in equity communities as the areas are defined in:
- Equity Priority Communities as defined by
MTC
- Equity Areas as defined by Alameda CTC
- Locally-defined equity areas
- Opportunity Zones as certified by the U.S.

Department of the Treasury
Annually via
Compliance
Report
N/A; Report on investments
Measure BB LSR 15%
Requirement
Expenditure of LSR funds on
bicycle and pedestrian
projects elements (for
Measure BB funds only)
Maintain a 15% annual minimum LSR investment to
support bicycling and walking.

Annually via
Compliance
Report
Any agency not achieving the
target annual percentage must
explain and/or identify plan to
use LSR funds on future
bicycle/pedestrian improvements
to meet this target over the
duration of Measure BB.

Capital Project and
Program Investment
Report on capital and
program administration costs
Investment into capital projects and programs is greater than program administration costs (outreach, staffing,
administrative support).

Annually via
Compliance
Report
Any agency not achieving this
metric must explain how capital
needs will be addressed in the
future.

Alameda CTC Agreement No. A26-0080
Exhibit B – Page 3 2026 MPFA
EXHIBIT B (cont.)

MASS TRANSIT PROGRAM

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Performance Measure Performance Metrics & Standards Evaluation Frequency &
Method
Corrective Action
Ridership/Service
Utilization
Annual Ridership (Unlinked
Passenger Trips)
Annual Unlinked Trips as reported to the National
Transit Database (NTD).

Note: Latest fiscal year data is provided provisionally by transit operators and is subject to change. NTD
regularly revises historical year data as part of new data releases. Alameda CTC analysis will be based on the
latest available NTD data.

Annually
reported by
Transit
Operators.

N/A
On-Time Performance
Systemwide on-time
performance
Average on-time performance as reported by transit
operator. Target of 75% to 90% or based on the transit
agency’s adopted performance goals and standards.

Annually
reported by
Transit
Operators.

Any agency with significant decline
below adopted target must provide
an explanation and specify plan to
improve performance.

Cost Effectiveness
Operating Cost Metrics
Operating Cost Metrics as reported to the National
Transit Database (NTD) as requested such as:
- Operating cost per passenger mile
- Operating cost per vehicle revenue mile
Annually
reported by
Transit
Operators.

Any agency with significant
increase in costs must provide an
explanation.

PARATRANSIT PROGRAM

PERFORMANCE MEASURES
Performance Measure Performance Metrics & Standards Evaluation Frequency &
Method
Corrective Action
Ridership/Service
Utilization
Number of people served or
trips provided
Number of individuals served or trips provided by
program (for service types such as ADA mandated
paratransit, door-to-door service, taxi programs,
accessible van service, shuttle service, group trips,
travel training, meal delivery)
Annually via
Compliance
Report and
Program Plan
Review.

N/A
Cost Effectiveness
Operating Cost Metrics
Cost per trip or per passenger (for service types such as ADA mandated paratransit, door-to-door service, taxi
programs, accessible van service, shuttle service, group trips)
Annually via
Compliance
Report and
Program Plan
Review.

Any agency with significant
increase in costs must provide an
explanation.

Note: The Paratransit Program Implementation Guidelines contain additional listing of performance measures by program type.

Alameda County Transportation Commission

IMPLEMENTATION GUIDELINES
Index

1. Bicycle and Pedestrian Program

2. Local Street and Road (Local Transportation) Program

3. Mass Transit Program

4. Seniors and People with Disabilities (Paratransit) Program Alameda CTC Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Implementation Guidelines Bicycle/Pedestrian - 1
Alameda County Transportation Commission
Bicycle/Pedestrian Program
Implementation Guidelines
Section 1. Purpose
A. To delineate the eligible uses of Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Funds authorized under Alameda County Transportation Commission Master Program Funding Agreements, these implementation guidelines have been developed to specify the requirements that local jurisdictions must follow in their use of Measure B, Measure BB and Vehicle Registration Fee Direct Local Distribution and discretionary funds. These guidelines are incorporated by reference in the Master Program Funding Agreements. All other terms and conditions for programs are contained in the agreements themselves.

The intent of the implementation guidelines is to:

1. Provide guidance on Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety funds eligible uses and expenditures.

2. Define the terms in the Master Program Funding Agreements.

3. Guide Bicycle and Pedestrian Program implementation.

Section 2. Authority
A. These Implementation Guidelines have been adopted by the Alameda County Transportation Commission (Alameda CTC) and set forth eligible uses and expenditures for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Program funds. Alameda CTC may update these guidelines on an as-needed basis and will do so with involvement of its technical and community advisory committees (as applicable).

Exceptions to these guidelines must be requested in writing and be approved by Alameda CTC.

Section 3. Background
A. Alameda CTC developed Implementation guidelines for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Funds to clarify eligible fund uses and expenditures in association Master Programs Funding Agreements for the November 2000 voter-approved Measure B Direct Local Distribution funds (formally known as “passthrough funds”). In 2012, the Master Programs Funding Agreements were updated to include the voter approved Measure F - Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) program. In November 2014, voters approved the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, Measure BB, and new Master Programs Funding Agreements were subsequently developed to incorporate Measure BB funds.

Section 4. Definition of Terms
A. Alameda CTC: The Alameda County Transportation Commission is a Joint Powers Authority created by the merger of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency, which performed long-range planning and funding for countywide transportation projects and programs, and the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority, which administered the voter approved half-cent transportation sales taxes in Alameda County (the 1986 and 2000 approved Measure B sales tax programs) B. Capital project: A bicycle and pedestrian capital investment that typically requires the following phases:
planning/feasibility, scoping, environmental clearance, design, right-of-way, construction, and completion.

C. Complete Street: A transportation facility that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, truckers, and motorists, appropriate to the function and context of the facility. Complete street concepts apply to rural, suburban, and urban areas (Caltrans definition).

D. Complete Streets Act of 2008: The California Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358) was signed into law in September 2008. It requires that local jurisdictions modify their general plans as follows:

Alameda CTC Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Implementation Guidelines Bicycle/Pedestrian - 2
“(A) Commencing January 1, 2011, upon any substantial revision of the circulation element, the legislative body shall modify the circulation element to plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of the streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan. (B) For the purposes of this paragraph, “users of streets, roads, and highways” means bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, users of public transportation, and seniors.”
E. Construction: Construction of a new capital project, including development of preliminary engineering and construction documents, including plans, specifications, and estimates.

F. Cost Allocation Plans (CAPs): CAPs and Indirect cost rate proposals (IDCs) are plans that provide a systematic manner to identify, accumulate, and distribute allowable direct and indirect costs to Bicycle and Pedestrian programs funded through the Alameda CTC Master Programs Funding Agreements.

G. Direct cost: A cost completely attributed to the provision of a service, operations, a program, a capital cost, or a product. These costs include documented hourly project staff labor charges (salaries, wages and benefits) which are directly and solely related to the implementation of the Alameda CTC-funded Bicycle and Pedestrian Funds, consultants, and materials. These funds may be used for travel or training if they are directly related to the implementation of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Funds.

H. Direct Local Distribution Funds: Funds are allocated based upon a funding formula (such as population, registered vehicles, road miles, or a combination thereof) defined in a voter approved transportation expenditure plan, and provided to eligible jurisdictions on a regularly scheduled basis (such as a regular monthly payment).

I. Environmental Documents: Preparation of environmental documents, such as those related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), or permits required by state or federal permitting agencies.

J. Grants: Funding for plans, programs or projects based upon a competitive call for projects, an evaluation process based on adopted evaluation criteria and allocated based upon a reimbursement basis.

K. Indirect cost: Also known as “overhead,” any cost of doing business other than direct costs. These costs include utilities, rent, administrative staff, officer's salaries, accounting department costs and personnel department costs, which are requisite for general operation of the organization, but are not directly allocable to a particular service or product.

L. Local Bicycle Master Plan/Local Pedestrian Master Plans: Locally adopted plans that, at a minimum, examine existing conditions for walking and/or bicycling, and provide recommendations on improving the walking and/or bicycling environment, and prioritize these improvements. These plans may be stand-alone bicycle and pedestrian plans or maybe a joint plan that addresses both walking and bicycling. Also referred to as an Active Transportation Plan.

M. Maintenance: Repairs, renovation, or upgrade of existing facility or infrastructure.

N. Measure BB: Alameda County voters approved Measured BB, the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, in November 2014. It authorizes the collection of a half-cent transportation sales tax and augments the existing 2000 Measure B sales tax program. Collection of the sales tax began on April 1, 2015.

Administered by the Alameda CTC, Measure BB funds four types of programs in 20 local jurisdictions:
bicycle and pedestrian, local streets and roads, mass transit, and paratransit.

O. Operations: Provision of services that operate transportation facilities and programs. Operations costs do not include the costs to operate community outreach or other programs not directly related to a specific transportation service, program, or product.

Alameda CTC Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Implementation Guidelines Bicycle/Pedestrian - 3
P. Planning: Identification of project and program current conditions and needs and development of strategies and plans to address the identified needs.

Q. Project Completion/Closeout: Inspection/project acceptance, final invoicing, final reporting, and processes for closing out project.

R. Scoping and Project Feasibility: Early capital project phases that identify project needs, costs and implementation feasibility.

S. Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF): Measure F, Alameda County's VRF Program, approved by the voters in November 2010. It will generate approximately $12 million per year through a $10 per year vehicle registration fee. Administered by the Alameda CTC, the VRF funds four main types of programs (with the funding distribution noted in parenthesis): local streets and roads (60 percent); transit (25 percent); local transportation technology (10 percent); and bicycle and pedestrian projects (5 percent).

Section 5. Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Fund Allocations A. These Implementation Guidelines provide guidance on two types of Bicycle and Pedestrian Fund allocation processes for Measure B, Measure BB, and Vehicle Registration Fee funds: 1) Direct Local Distribution funds and 2) Grants.

1. Bicycle and Pedestrian Direct Local Distribution (DLD) Funds a. General: The Bicycle and Pedestrian DLD Funds are distributed to cities in the county and to Alameda County to be spent on planning and construction of bicycle and pedestrian projects, and the development and implementation of bicycle and pedestrian programs. These funds are intended to expand and enhance bicycle and pedestrian facilities in Alameda County, focusing on high priority projects like gap closures and intermodal connections.
b. Eligible Uses: The Bicycle and Pedestrian DLD funds may be used for capital projects, programs, or plans that directly address bicycle and pedestrian access, convenience, safety, and usage.

Eligible uses for these funds include, but are not necessarily limited to:
1) Capital Projects, including:
a. New pedestrian facilities (e.g. sidewalks, curb ramps, countdown signals, accessible signals)
b. Improvements to existing pedestrian facilities
c. New bikeways (such as bicycle routes, boulevards, lanes, multi-use pathways)
d. Improvements or upgrades to existing bikeways
e. Maintenance of bicycle and pedestrian facilities
f. Crossing improvements (at intersections, interchanges, railroads, freeways, etc.) for pedestrians and bicyclists
g. Bicycle parking facilities, including construction, maintenance and operations
h. ADA on-street improvements
i. Signage for pedestrians and/or bicyclists
Alameda CTC Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Implementation Guidelines Bicycle/Pedestrian - 4
j. Pedestrian and bicycle access improvements to, from and at transit facilities
k. Traffic calming projects
l. All phases of capital projects, including feasibility studies, planning, and environmental
2) Development and updates of Local Bicycle and/or Pedestrian Master Plans (Active Transportation Plans)
3) Compliance with complete streets policies, to comply with the California Complete Streets Act of 2008, as specified in Section 6. 4) Design and implementation of education, enforcement, outreach, and promotion programs
5) Direct staff and consultant costs to develop, plan, implement, operate, and maintain the bicycle and pedestrian projects and programs. 6) Maintenance of the portion of the street most often used for bicycling (such as bicycle lanes)
7) Bicycle/pedestrian capital projects on non-city property, such as on school district property.
8) Direct staff and consultant costs that support eligible activities, including the end-of-year compliance report
9) Crossing guards
10) Direct staff training costs directly related to implementation of projects, plans, or programs implemented with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Funds
c. Ineligible Uses: The following is a list of ineligible uses of Bicycle/Pedestrian DLD funds:
1) Non-transportation projects such as fees charged to capital construction projects for services or amenities not related to transportation 2) Repaving of the entire roadway (see “Eligible Uses” above for exceptions) 3) Capital projects, programs, or plans that do not directly address bicycle and pedestrian access, convenience, safety, and usage
4) Projects or programs that exclusively serve city/county staff 5) Indirect costs, unless the recipient submits an independently audited/approved Indirect Cost Allocation Plan
d. List of Projects/Programs: All projects and programs that use DLD funds must receive governing board approval prior to the jurisdiction expending the DLD funding on the project/program. This approval allows the opportunity for the public to provide input on planning for bicycle and pedestrian safety. These projects and programs may be included in any of the following, as long as they have been adopted by the jurisdiction’s governing board:
1) List of projects intended to be funded by DLD funds
Alameda CTC Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Implementation Guidelines Bicycle/Pedestrian - 5
2) Local Bicycle and/or Pedestrian Master Plan with priority projects 3) Capital Improvement Program
4) A resolution, such as for a grant application submittal

2. Bicycle and Pedestrian Grant Funds
a. Alameda CTC will adopt Grant Program Guidelines before each grant cycle that will establish the guiding policies for that grant cycle and will publicize each grant funding cycle. Alameda CTC will administer a bicycle and pedestrian discretionary grant program using a portion of the available funds
b. Local jurisdictions, transit operators and Community Based Organizations (CBO) in Alameda County may be eligible for these competitive funds as determined by the Alameda CTC discretionary processes and the Grant Program Guidelines.

Section 6. Complete Streets Policy Requirement
A. To receive DLD funds, local jurisdictions must do both of the following with respect to Complete Street policies:

1. Have an adopted complete streets policy

2. Comply with the California Complete Streets Act of 2008. The California Complete Streets Act (AB1358) requires that local general plans do the following:
a. Commencing January 1, 2011, upon any substantial revision of the circulation element, the legislative body shall modify the circulation element to plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of the streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan. b. For the purposes of this paragraph, “users of streets, roads, and highways” means bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, users of public transportation, and seniors.

Section 7. Local Bicycle/Pedestrian Master Plan Requirement A. To receive DLD funds, local jurisdictions must do all of the following with respect to local bicycle and pedestrian master plans.

1. Have an adopted Local Pedestrian Master Plan AND Local Bicycle Master Plan OR have an adopted combined Local Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan (Active Transportation Plan); or demonstrate that the plan is being developed and will be adopted.

2. Each plan must be updated, at a minimum, every five years.

3. Each plan must include core elements to ensure that the plan is effective, and that plans throughout the county are comparable, to the extent that is reasonable, to facilitate countywide planning. Alameda CTC will develop and maintain guidelines outlining these core elements.

The Alameda CTC will provide technical assistance and consideration for funding for local jurisdictions to meet these requirements through the competitive grants. Jurisdictions may also use DLD funds for the development of local bicycle and pedestrian master plans.

Alameda CTC Bicycle and Pedestrian Program Implementation Guidelines Bicycle/Pedestrian - 6
Section 8. Advancement of Direct Local Distribution Funds A. Alameda CTC may consider advancing future Direct Local Distribution funds, with the goal of seeing improvements made in the near term. If a jurisdiction is interested in this option, a written request to Alameda CTC must include a description of the project, scope, schedule, the amount of funds requested, the anticipated timing of when funds are required, and justification for the request. Requests will be considered on an individual basis.

Section 9. Adoption of Implementation Guidelines
A. Implementation Guidelines are adopted by Alameda CTC on an as-needed basis. Changes to Implementation Guidelines will be brought through Alameda CTC’s Technical Advisory Committee for review and comment, as well as any other Alameda CTC committees as necessary, before changes are adopted by the Alameda CTC’s Commission.

Alameda CTC Local Streets and Roads Program Implementation Guidelines LSR - 1
Alameda County Transportation Commission
Local Streets and Roads (Local Transportation) Program
Implementation Guidelines
Section 1. Purpose
A. To delineate the eligible uses of Local Streets and Roads funds authorized under Alameda County Transportation Commission Master Program Funding Agreements, these implementation guidelines have been developed to specify the requirements that local jurisdictions must follow in their use of Measure B, Measure BB, and Vehicle Registration Fees (VRF) Direct Local Distribution funds. These guidelines are incorporated by reference in the Master Programs Funding Agreements. All other terms and conditions for programs are contained in the agreements themselves. The intent of the implementation guidelines is to:

1. Provide guidance on Local Streets and Roads funds eligible uses and expenditures.

2. Define the terms in the Master Programs Funding Agreements.

3. Guide Local Streets and Roads Program implementation.

Section 2. Authority
A. These Implementation Guidelines have been adopted by the Alameda County Transportation Commission and set forth eligible uses and expenditures for the Local Streets and Roads funds.

Alameda CTC may update these guidelines on an as-needed basis and will do so with involvement of its technical and community advisory committees (as applicable). Exceptions to these guidelines must be requested in writing and be approved by the Alameda CTC Commission.

Section 3. Background
A. Alameda CTC developed Implementation Guidelines for the Local Streets and Roads (Local Transportation) funds to clarify eligible fund uses and expenditures in association with Master Program Funding Agreements for the November 2000 voter-approved Measure B Direct Local Distribution funds (formally known as “pass-through funds”. The Expenditure Plan allocates 22.34 percent of Measure B funds for Local Streets and Roads programs and projects. In 2012, the Master Programs Funding Agreements were updated to include the voter approved 2010 Measure F - Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) program. The VRF includes 60 percent of net revenues for a Local Streets and Roads Program. In November 2014, voters approved the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, Measure BB, which allocates 20.00 percent of funds for a Local Streets and Roads program. New Master Programs Funding Agreements were subsequently developed to incorporate Measure BB funds.

Section 4. Definition of Terms
A. Alameda CTC: The Alameda County Transportation Commission is a Joint Powers Authority created by the merger of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency, which performed long-range planning and funding for countywide transportation projects and programs, and the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority, which administered the voter-approved, half-cent transportation sales taxes in Alameda County (the Measure B sales tax programs approved in 1986 and 2000).

B. Bike parking: Bike racks and lockers, bike shelters, attended bike parking facilities, and bike parking infrastructure.

C. Bikeways and multiuse paths: Bike lanes, bike boulevards, side paths, bike routes, multiuse pathways, at-grade bike crossings, and maintenance of bikeway facilities.

Alameda CTC Local Streets and Roads Program Implementation Guidelines LSR - 2
D. Bridges and tunnels: Crossings above or below grade for bicycles, pedestrians, and/or autos and transit.

E. Capital project: A capital investment that typically requires the following phases: planning/feasibility, scoping, environmental clearance, design, right-of-way, construction, and completion.

F. Complete Street: A transportation facility that is planned, designed, operated, and maintained to provide safe mobility for all users, including bicyclists, pedestrians, transit vehicles, truckers, and motorists, appropriate to the function and context of the facility. Complete street concepts apply to rural, suburban, and urban areas. (Caltrans definition) G. Complete Streets Act of 2008: The California Complete Streets Act (Assembly Bill 1358) was signed into law in September 2008. It requires that local jurisdictions modify their general plans as follows:
“(A) Commencing January 1, 2011, upon any substantial revision of the circulation element, the legislative body shall modify the circulation element to plan for a balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of the streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan. (B) For the purposes of this paragraph, “users of streets, roads, and highways” means bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, users of public transportation, and seniors.”
H. Construction: Construction of a new capital project, including development of preliminary engineering and construction documents, including plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E).

I. Cost Allocation Plans (CAPs): CAPs and indirect cost (IDC) rate proposals are plans that provide a systematic manner to identify, accumulate, and distribute allowable direct and indirect costs to Local Streets and Roads programs funded through the Alameda CTC Master Programs Funding Agreements.

J. Direct cost: A cost completely attributed to the provision of a service, operations, a program, a capital cost, or a product. These costs include documented hourly project staff labor charges (salaries, wages, and benefits) that are directly and solely related to the implementation of the Alameda CTC-funded Local Streets and Roads projects, consultants, and materials. These funds may be used for travel or training if they are directly related to the implementation of the Local Streets and Roads funds.

K. Direct Local Distribution Funds: Funds are allocated based upon a funding formula (such as population, registered vehicles, roadmiles, or a combination thereof) defined in a voter approved measure and provided to eligible jurisdictions on a regularly schedule basis (such as a regular monthly payment).

L. Education and promotion: Marketing, education, information, outreach, and promotional campaigns and programs.

M. Environmental documents: Preparation of environmental documents, such as those related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), or permits required by state or federal permitting agencies.

N. Equipment and new vehicles: Purchase or lease of vehicles and equipment for service improvements, such as information dissemination, fare collection, etc.

O. Grants: Funding for plans, programs, or projects based on a competitive call for projects; evaluated based on adopted evaluation criteria; and allocated based on a reimbursement basis.

P. Indirect cost: Also known as “overhead,” any cost of doing business other than direct costs. These costs include utilities, rent, administrative staff, officers’ salaries, accounting department costs, and Alameda CTC Local Streets and Roads Program Implementation Guidelines LSR - 3
personnel department costs, which are requisite for general operation of the organization but are not directly allocable to a particular service or product.

Q. Maintenance: Repairs, renovation, or upgrade of existing facility or infrastructure.

R. Measure B: Alameda County’s half-cent transportation sales tax, originally approved in 1986, and reauthorized by voters in November 2000. Collection of the sales tax began on April 1, 2002.

Administered by the Alameda CTC, Measure B funds four types of programs in 20 local jurisdictions:
bicycle and pedestrian, local streets and roads, mass transit, and paratransit.

S. Measure BB: Alameda County voters approved Measured BB, the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, in November 2014. It authorizes the collection of a half-cent transportation sales tax and augments the existing 2000 Measure B sales tax program. Collection of the sales tax began on April 1, 2015. Administered by the Alameda CTC, Measure BB funds four types of programs in 20 local jurisdictions: bicycle and pedestrian, local streets and roads, mass transit, and paratransit.

T. Operations: Provision of services that operate transportation facilities and programs. Operations costs do not include the costs to operate community outreach or other programs not directly related to a specific transportation service, program, or product.

U. Pedestrian crossing improvements: At-grade pedestrian crossing improvements such as crosswalks, roadway/geometric changes, or reconfiguration specifically benefiting pedestrians.

V. Planning: Identification of project and program current conditions and needs and development of strategies and plans to address the identified needs.

W. Planning area: Four geographical sub-areas of the county (Planning Areas 1, 2, 3, and 4). The subareas of the county are defined by the Alameda CTC as follows:

1. Planning Area 1 – North Area: Cities of Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland and Piedmont

2. Planning Area 2 – Central Area: Cities of Hayward and San Leandro, and the unincorporated areas of Castro Valley and San Lorenzo, as well as other unincorporated lands in that area

3. Planning Area 3 – South Area: Cities of Fremont, Newark, and Union City

4. Planning Area 4 – East Area: Cities of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton, and all unincorporated lands in that area
X. Project completion/closeout: Inspection/project acceptance, final invoicing, final reporting, and the processes for closing out a project.

Y. Scoping and project feasibility: Early capital project phases that identify project needs, costs, and implementation feasibility.

Z. Sidewalks and ramps: New sidewalks, sidewalk maintenance, curb ramps, and stairs/ramps for pedestrian and Americans with Disabilities Act access.

AA. Signage: Warning, regulatory, wayfinding, or informational signage.

BB. Signals: New traffic signals or crossing signals, signal upgrades, countdown signals, audible signals, or signal timing improvements.

CC. Street resurfacing and maintenance: Repaving and resurfacing of on-street surfaces, including striping.

DD. Traffic calming: Infrastructure primarily aimed at slowing down motor vehicle traffic.

Alameda CTC Local Streets and Roads Program Implementation Guidelines LSR - 4
EE. Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF): Measure F, Alameda County’s VRF Program, approved by the voters in November 2010 with 63 percent of the vote. It will generate approximately $12 million per year through a $10 per year vehicle registration fee. Administered by the Alameda CTC, the VRF funds four main types of programs and the distribution percentage is as follows: local streets and roads (60 percent); transit (25 percent); local transportation technology (10 percent); and bicycle and pedestrian projects (5 percent).

Section 5. Local Streets and Roads Fund Allocations
A. These Implementation Guidelines provide guidance on the Local Streets and Roads (LSR) Fund allocation process for Measure B, Measure BB and VRF Direct Local Distribution funds.

1. Measure B/BB Local Streets and Roads Direct Local Distribution (DLD) Funds a. General: Alameda CTC distributes Measure B and Measure BB Local Streets and Roads DLD funds to cities in the county and to Alameda County to be spent on transportation capital improvements for surface streets and arterial roads, and maintenance and upkeep of local streets and roads, including repaving streets, filling potholes, and upgrading local transportation infrastructure.

These funds are intended to maintain and improve local streets and roads in Alameda County, and may be used for any local transportation need based on local priorities, including streets and roads projects, local transit projects, bicycle and pedestrian projects, projects (sponsored by others) that require local agency support, and other transportation uses as approved through a public process by the jurisdiction. b. Eligible Uses: Measure B/BB DLD funds may be used for capital projects, programs, maintenance, or operations that directly improve local streets and roads and local transportation. Eligible uses for these funds include, but are not necessarily limited to:
1) Capital projects, including:
a) All phases of capital projects, including feasibility studies, planning, and environmental
b) Upgrades to or installation of new local streets and roads infrastructure including installation of streets, roads, and highways c) Street resurfacing and maintenance including repaving and resurfacing of on-street surfaces including striping
d) Improvements or upgrades to bridges and tunnels
e) Installation of or upgrades to sidewalks and curb ramps f) Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) on-street improvements, including sidewalk upgrades and curb ramp installations g) Purchase or lease of equipment or new vehicles for local streets and roads improvements
h) Crossing improvements including traffic signals, signage, and traffic lights (at intersections, interchanges, railroads, freeways, etc.) for drivers, pedestrians, and bicyclists
Alameda CTC Local Streets and Roads Program Implementation Guidelines LSR - 5
i) Improvements to or installation of new pedestrian facilities (e.g., sidewalks, curb ramps, countdown signals, accessible signals, at-grade bike crossings)
j) Improvements or upgrades to or installation of new bikeways (such as bicycle routes, boulevards, lanes, multi-use pathways) k) Maintenance of or installation of bicycle and pedestrian facilities, including construction, maintenance, and operations of bike parking facilities.
l) Pedestrian and bicycle access improvements to, from and at transit facilities
m) Traffic calming projects
2) Transit system operations, operations of traffic signal system controls and interconnections, and corridor monitoring and management 3) Mass transit project operations including bus, ferry, shuttle, rail, and Welfare to Work services
4) Paratransit services
5) Direct staff and consultant costs that support eligible activities, including the end-of-year compliance report
6) Direct staff training costs directly related to implementation of projects or programs implemented with the Local Streets and Roads Funds c. Ineligible Uses: The following is a list of ineligible uses of LSR DLD funds:
1) Non-transportation projects such as fees charged to capital construction projects for services or amenities not related to transportation 2) Capital projects, programs, maintenances, or operations that do not directly improve local streets and roads and local transportation 3) Projects or programs that exclusively serve city/county staff 4) Indirect costs, unless the RECIPIENT submits an independently audited/approved Indirect Cost Allocation Plan
d. List of Projects/Programs: All projects and programs that use LSR DLD funds must receive governing board approval prior to the jurisdiction expending the DLD funding on the project/program. This approval allows the opportunity for the public to provide input on planning for local streets and roads projects. These projects and programs must be included in any of the following, as long as they have been adopted by the jurisdiction’s governing board:
1) List of projects intended to be funded by DLD funds
2) Local Streets and Roads Master Plan with priority projects 3) Capital Improvement Program
4) A resolution, such as for a grant application submittal Alameda CTC Local Streets and Roads Program Implementation Guidelines LSR - 6

2. VRF Local Streets and Roads DLD Funds
a. General: Alameda CTC distributes VRF Local Streets and Roads DLD Funds to cities in the county and to Alameda County to be spent on transportation capital improvements for surface streets and arterial roads, and maintenance and upkeep of local streets and roads. These funds are intended to maintain and improve local streets and roads as well as a broad range of facilities in Alameda County (from local to arterial facilities).
b. Eligible Uses: The VRF Local Streets and Roads DLD funds may be used for improving, maintaining, and rehabilitating local roads and traffic signals. It will also incorporate the Complete Streets practice that makes local roads safe for all modes, including bicyclists and pedestrians, and accommodate transit. Eligible uses for these funds include, but are not necessarily limited to:
1) Street repaving and rehabilitation, including curbs, gutters and drains 2) Traffic signal maintenance and upgrades, including bicyclist and pedestrian treatments
3) Signage and striping on roadways, including traffic and bicycle lanes and crosswalks
4) Sidewalk repair and installation
5) Bus stop improvements, including bus pads, turnouts and striping 6) Improvements to roadways at rail crossings, including grade separations and safety protection devices
7) Improvements to roadways with truck or transit routing c. Ineligible Uses: The following is a list of ineligible uses of VRF Local Streets and Roads DLD funds:
1) Non-transportation projects such as fees charged to capital construction projects for services or amenities that are not related to transportation 2) Projects or programs that are not directly related to streets and roads improvements
3) Projects or programs that exclusively serve city/county staff 4) Indirect costs, unless the RECIPIENT submits an independently audited/approved Indirect Cost Allocation Plan.

Section 6. Complete Streets Policy Requirement
A. To receive DLD funds, local jurisdictions must do both of the following with respect to Complete Streets policies:

1. Have an adopted Complete Streets policy.

2. Comply with the California Complete Streets Act of 2008. The California Complete Streets Act (AB1358) requires that local general plans do the following:
a. Commencing January 1, 2011, upon any substantial revision of the circulation element, the legislative body shall modify the circulation element to plan for a Alameda CTC Local Streets and Roads Program Implementation Guidelines LSR - 7
balanced, multimodal transportation network that meets the needs of all users of the streets, roads, and highways for safe and convenient travel in a manner that is suitable to the rural, suburban, or urban context of the general plan. b. For the purposes of this paragraph, “users of streets, roads, and highways” means bicyclists, children, persons with disabilities, motorists, movers of commercial goods, pedestrians, users of public transportation, and seniors.

Section 7. Pavement Condition Index Reporting
A. To receive DLD funds, local jurisdictions must do both of the following with respect to the reporting of an agency’s pavement condition (PCI) index:

1. Annually report on the citywide pavement condition index (PCI), which rates the “health” of local streets from 1 to 100, in the Annual Program Compliance Report Form. Where applicable, this information will be consistent with material provided for MTC reporting requirements.

2. If the PCI falls below a total average index of 60 (fair condition), specify in the Annual Program Compliance Report what funding amounts, policies, or other needs are required to enable increasing the recipient’s PCI.

Section 8. Advancement of Direct Local Distribution Funds A. Alameda CTC may consider advancing future Direct Local Distribution funds, with the goal of seeing improvements made in the near term. If a jurisdiction is interested in this option, a written request to Alameda CTC must include a description of the project, scope, schedule, the amount of funds requested, the anticipated timing of when funds are required, and justification for the request. Requests will be considered on an individual basis.

Section 9. Adoption of Implementation Guidelines
A. Implementation Guidelines are adopted by Alameda CTC on an as-needed basis. Changes to Implementation Guidelines will be brought through the Alameda CTC’s Technical Advisory Committee for review and comment, as well as any other Alameda CTC committees as necessary, before changes are adopted by the Alameda CTC Commission.

Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 1
Alameda County Transportation Commission
Mass Transit Program
Implementation Guidelines
Section 1. Purpose
A. To delineate eligible uses of Mass Transit funds authorized under Alameda County Transportation Commission Master Program Funding Agreements, these implementation guidelines have been developed to specify the requirements that local jurisdictions must follow in their use of Measure B, Measure BB, and Vehicle Registration Fees (VRF) Direct Local Distributions and discretionary funds.

These guidelines are incorporated by reference in the Master Programs Funding Agreements. All other terms and conditions for programs are contained in the agreements themselves. The intent of the implementation guidelines is to:

1. Provide guidance on Mass Transit funds eligible uses and expenditures.

2. Define the terms in the Master Programs Funding Agreements.

3. Guide Mass Transit Program implementation.

Section 2. Authority
A. These Implementation Guidelines have been adopted by the Alameda County Transportation Commission and set forth eligible uses and expenditures for the Mass Transit funds. Alameda CTC may update these guidelines on an as-needed basis and will do so with involvement of its technical and community advisory committees (as applicable). Exceptions to these guidelines must be requested in writing and be approved by the Alameda CTC Commission.

Section 3. Background
Alameda CTC developed Implementation Guidelines for the Mass Transit funds to clarify eligible fund uses and expenditures in association with Master Programs Funding Agreements for the November 2000 voter-approved Measure B Direct Local Distribution funds (formally known as “pass-through funds”). In 2012, the Master Programs Funding Agreements were updated to include the voter approved 2010 Measure F - Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) program. In November 2014, voters approved the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, Measure BB, and new Master Programs Funding Agreements were subsequently developed to incorporate Measure BB funds.

Section 4. Definition of Terms
A. Alameda CTC: The Alameda County Transportation Commission is a Joint Powers Authority created by the merger of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency, which performed long-range planning and funding for countywide transportation projects and programs, and the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority, which administered the voter-approved, half-cent transportation sales taxes in Alameda County (the Measure B sales tax programs approved in 1986 and 2000).

B. Capital project: A capital investment that typically requires the following phases: planning/feasibility, scoping, environmental clearance, design, right-of-way, construction, and completion.

C. Construction: Construction of a new capital project, including development of preliminary engineering and construction documents, including plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E).

Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 2
D. Cost Allocation Plans (CAPs): CAPs and indirect cost (IDC) rate proposals are plans that provide a systematic manner to identify, accumulate, and distribute allowable direct and indirect costs to Mass Transit programs funded through the Alameda CTC Master Programs Funding Agreements.

E. Direct cost: A cost completely attributed to the provision of a service, operations, a program, a capital cost, or a product. These costs include documented hourly project staff labor charges (salaries, wages, and benefits) that are directly and solely related to the implementation of Alameda CTC-funded Mass Transit projects, consultants, and materials. These funds may be used for travel or training if they are directly related to the implementation of the Mass Transit funds.

F. Direct Local Distribution funds: Funds allocated based on a funding formula (such as population, registered vehicles, road miles, or a combination thereof) defined in a voter-approved measure and provided to eligible jurisdictions on a regularly scheduled basis (such as a regular monthly payment).

G. Education and promotion: Marketing, education, information, outreach, and promotional campaigns and programs.

H. Environmental documents: Preparation of environmental documents, such as those related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), or permits required by state or federal permitting agencies.

I. Equipment and new vehicles: Purchase or lease of vehicles. Equipment for service improvements, such as information dissemination, fare collection, etc.

J. Express bus service: Either of these types of rapid bus service:

1. Service within zones with a defined pick-up area, nonstop express bus service, and a defined drop-off zone.

2. Service that provides a simple route layout, has frequent service and fewer stops than regular fixed route service, and may include level boarding, bus priority at traffic signals, signature identification of the rapid buses such as color-coded buses and stops, and enhanced stations.

K. Grants: Funding for plans, programs, or projects based on a competitive call for projects; evaluated based on adopted evaluation criteria; and allocated based on a reimbursement basis.

L. Indirect cost: Also known as “overhead,” any cost of doing business other than direct costs. These costs include utilities, rent, administrative staff, officers’ salaries, accounting department costs, and personnel department costs, which are requisite for general operation of the organization but are not directly allocable to a particular service or product.

M. Maintenance: Repairs, renovation, or upgrade of existing facility or infrastructure.

N. Measure B: Alameda County’s half-cent transportation sales tax, originally approved in 1986, and reauthorized by voters in November 2000. Collection of the sales tax began on April 1, 2002.

Administered by the Alameda CTC, Measure B funds four types of programs in 20 local jurisdictions:
bicycle and pedestrian, local streets and roads, mass transit, and paratransit.

O. Measure BB: Alameda County voters approved Measured BB, the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, in November 2014. It authorizes the collection of a half-cent transportation sales tax and augments the existing 2000 Measure B sales tax program. Collection of the sales tax began on April 1, 2015. Administered by the Alameda CTC, Measure BB funds four types of programs in 20 local jurisdictions: bicycle and pedestrian, local streets and roads, mass transit, and paratransit.

P. Operations: Provision of services that operate transportation facilities and programs. Operations costs do not include the costs to operate community outreach or other programs not directly related to a specific transportation service, program, or product.

Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 3
Q. Planning: Identification of project and program current conditions and needs and development of strategies and plans to address the identified needs.

R. Planning area: Four geographical sub-areas of the county (Planning Areas 1, 2, 3, and 4). The subareas of the county are defined by the Alameda CTC as follows:

1. Planning Area 1 – North Area: Cities of Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland and Piedmont

2. Planning Area 2 – Central Area: Cities of Hayward and San Leandro, and the unincorporated areas of Castro Valley and San Lorenzo, as well as other unincorporated lands in that area

3. Planning Area 3 – South Area: Cities of Fremont, Newark, and Union City

4. Planning Area 4 – East Area: Cities of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton, and all unincorporated lands in that area
S. Project completion/closeout: Inspection/project acceptance, final invoicing, final reporting, and the processes for closing out a project.

T. Safety improvements: Safety or security improvements for operators, passengers, service users, facilities, and infrastructure or property.

U. Scoping and project feasibility: Early capital project phases that identify project needs, costs, and implementation feasibility.

V. Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF): Measure F, Alameda County’s VRF Program, approved by the voters in November 2010 with 63 percent of the vote. It will generate approximately $12 million per year through a $10 per year vehicle registration fee. Administered by the Alameda CTC, the VRF funds four main types of programs and the distribution percentage is as follows: local streets and roads (60 percent); transit (25 percent); local transportation technology (10 percent); and bicycle and pedestrian projects (5 percent).

W. Welfare to Work: Transit services to enhance transportation opportunities for persons making the transition from welfare to work.

Section 5. Mass Transit Fund Allocations
A. These Implementation Guidelines provide guidance on the Mass Transit Fund allocation process for Mass Transit Direct Local Distribution funds and Measure B Express Bus Services Grant Program and VRF Transit for Congestion Relief Program funds.

1. Mass Transit Direct Local Distribution (DLD) Funds
a. General: Alameda CTC distributes Mass Transit DLD Funds to transit operators in Alameda County to be spent on maintenance of transit services, restoration of service cuts, expansion of transit services, and passenger safety and security. b. Eligible Uses: The Mass Transit DLD funds may be used for capital projects, programs, maintenance, or operations that directly improve mass transit services. Eligible uses for these funds include, but are not necessarily limited to:
1) Capital projects, including:
a) All phases of capital projects, including feasibility studies, planning, and environmental
Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 4
b) Upgrades to or expansions to bus, ferry, rail, and shuttle infrastructure
c) Purchase or lease of equipment or new vehicles for transit services 2) Mass transit system operations and services, including commuter rail; express, local, and feeder bus; and ferry
3) Paratransit services
4) Welfare to Work services
5) Direct staff and consultant costs to develop, plan, implement, operate and maintain transit projects and programs
6) Direct staff and consultant costs that support eligible activities, including the end-of-year compliance report
7) Direct staff training costs directly related to implementation of projects or programs implemented with the Mass Transit Funds
c. Ineligible Uses: The following is a list of ineligible uses of Mass Transit DLD funds:
1) Non-transportation projects such as fees charged to capital construction projects for services or amenities not related to transportation 2) Capital projects, programs, maintenances, or operations that does not directly improve mass transit services
3) Projects or programs that exclusively serve city/county staff 4) Indirect costs, unless the RECIPIENT submits an independently audited/approved Indirect Cost Allocation Plan.

2. Measure B Express Bus Services Grant Program Funds
a. The Measure B Expenditure Plan dedicates 0.7 percent of net revenues for the Countywide Express Bus Service fund for express bus service projects. The Alameda CTC will administer a Measure B Countywide Express Bus Services discretionary grant program. The Alameda CTC will adopt Grant Program Guidelines before each grant cycle that will establish the guiding policies for that grant cycle and will widely publicize each grant funding cycle.
b. Two agencies are eligible to receive express bus services grant funds:
1) Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit)
2) Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA)
Fund recipients must enter into a separate agreement with Alameda CTC.

3. VRF Transit for Congestion Relief Program Funds
a. The VRF Expenditure Plan dedicates 25 percent of net revenues for transit projects that provide congestion relief. Alameda CTC awards VRF Transit for Congestion Relief Grant Program funds on a discretionary basis. These funds are intended to make it easier for drivers to use public transportation, make the existing transit system more efficient and effective, and improve access to schools and jobs. The goal of this program is to decrease automobile usage and thereby reduce both localized and area- Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 5
wide congestion and air pollution. Fund recipients must enter into a separate agreement with Alameda CTC.
b. Eligible Uses: VRF Transit for Congestion Relief Grant Program Guidelines provide program eligibility and fund usage guidelines and requirements, definitions of terms, evaluation criteria, award details, and monitoring requirements.

Section 6. Advancement of Direct Local Distribution Funds A. Alameda CTC may consider advancing future Direct Local Distribution funds, with the goal of seeing improvements made in the near term. If a jurisdiction is interested in this option, a written request to Alameda CTC must include a description of the project, scope, schedule, the amount of funds requested, the anticipated timing of when funds are required, and justification for the request. Requests will be considered on an individual basis.

Section 7. Adoption of Implementation Guidelines
A. Implementation Guidelines are adopted by Alameda CTC on an as-needed basis. Changes to Implementation Guidelines will be brought through the Alameda CTC’s Technical Advisory Committee for review and comment, as well as any other Alameda CTC committees as necessary, before changes are adopted by the Alameda CTC Commission.

Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 1
Alameda County Transportation Commission
Mass Transit Program
Implementation Guidelines
Section 1. Purpose
A. To delineate eligible uses of Mass Transit funds authorized under Alameda County Transportation Commission Master Program Funding Agreements, these implementation guidelines have been developed to specify the requirements that local jurisdictions must follow in their use of Measure B, Measure BB, and Vehicle Registration Fees (VRF) Direct Local Distributions and discretionary funds.

These guidelines are incorporated by reference in the Master Programs Funding Agreements. All other terms and conditions for programs are contained in the agreements themselves. The intent of the implementation guidelines is to:

1. Provide guidance on Mass Transit funds eligible uses and expenditures.

2. Define the terms in the Master Programs Funding Agreements.

3. Guide Mass Transit Program implementation.

Section 2. Authority
A. These Implementation Guidelines have been adopted by the Alameda County Transportation Commission and set forth eligible uses and expenditures for the Mass Transit funds. Alameda CTC may update these guidelines on an as-needed basis and will do so with involvement of its technical and community advisory committees (as applicable). Exceptions to these guidelines must be requested in writing and be approved by the Alameda CTC Commission.

Section 3. Background
Alameda CTC developed Implementation Guidelines for the Mass Transit funds to clarify eligible fund uses and expenditures in association with Master Programs Funding Agreements for the November 2000 voter-approved Measure B Direct Local Distribution funds (formally known as “pass-through funds”). In 2012, the Master Programs Funding Agreements were updated to include the voter approved 2010 Measure F - Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF) program. In November 2014, voters approved the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, Measure BB, and new Master Programs Funding Agreements were subsequently developed to incorporate Measure BB funds.

Section 4. Definition of Terms
A. Alameda CTC: The Alameda County Transportation Commission is a Joint Powers Authority created by the merger of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency, which performed long-range planning and funding for countywide transportation projects and programs, and the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority, which administered the voter-approved, half-cent transportation sales taxes in Alameda County (the Measure B sales tax programs approved in 1986 and 2000).

B. Capital project: A capital investment that typically requires the following phases: planning/feasibility, scoping, environmental clearance, design, right-of-way, construction, and completion.

C. Construction: Construction of a new capital project, including development of preliminary engineering and construction documents, including plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E).

Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 2
D. Cost Allocation Plans (CAPs): CAPs and indirect cost (IDC) rate proposals are plans that provide a systematic manner to identify, accumulate, and distribute allowable direct and indirect costs to Mass Transit programs funded through the Alameda CTC Master Programs Funding Agreements.

E. Direct cost: A cost completely attributed to the provision of a service, operations, a program, a capital cost, or a product. These costs include documented hourly project staff labor charges (salaries, wages, and benefits) that are directly and solely related to the implementation of Alameda CTC-funded Mass Transit projects, consultants, and materials. These funds may be used for travel or training if they are directly related to the implementation of the Mass Transit funds.

F. Direct Local Distribution funds: Funds allocated based on a funding formula (such as population, registered vehicles, road miles, or a combination thereof) defined in a voter-approved measure and provided to eligible jurisdictions on a regularly scheduled basis (such as a regular monthly payment).

G. Education and promotion: Marketing, education, information, outreach, and promotional campaigns and programs.

H. Environmental documents: Preparation of environmental documents, such as those related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), or permits required by state or federal permitting agencies.

I. Equipment and new vehicles: Purchase or lease of vehicles. Equipment for service improvements, such as information dissemination, fare collection, etc.

J. Express bus service: Either of these types of rapid bus service:

1. Service within zones with a defined pick-up area, nonstop express bus service, and a defined drop-off zone.

2. Service that provides a simple route layout, has frequent service and fewer stops than regular fixed route service, and may include level boarding, bus priority at traffic signals, signature identification of the rapid buses such as color-coded buses and stops, and enhanced stations.

K. Grants: Funding for plans, programs, or projects based on a competitive call for projects; evaluated based on adopted evaluation criteria; and allocated based on a reimbursement basis.

L. Indirect cost: Also known as “overhead,” any cost of doing business other than direct costs. These costs include utilities, rent, administrative staff, officers’ salaries, accounting department costs, and personnel department costs, which are requisite for general operation of the organization but are not directly allocable to a particular service or product.

M. Maintenance: Repairs, renovation, or upgrade of existing facility or infrastructure.

N. Measure B: Alameda County’s half-cent transportation sales tax, originally approved in 1986, and reauthorized by voters in November 2000. Collection of the sales tax began on April 1, 2002.

Administered by the Alameda CTC, Measure B funds four types of programs in 20 local jurisdictions:
bicycle and pedestrian, local streets and roads, mass transit, and paratransit.

O. Measure BB: Alameda County voters approved Measured BB, the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, in November 2014. It authorizes the collection of a half-cent transportation sales tax and augments the existing 2000 Measure B sales tax program. Collection of the sales tax began on April 1, 2015. Administered by the Alameda CTC, Measure BB funds four types of programs in 20 local jurisdictions: bicycle and pedestrian, local streets and roads, mass transit, and paratransit.

P. Operations: Provision of services that operate transportation facilities and programs. Operations costs do not include the costs to operate community outreach or other programs not directly related to a specific transportation service, program, or product.

Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 3
Q. Planning: Identification of project and program current conditions and needs and development of strategies and plans to address the identified needs.

R. Planning area: Four geographical sub-areas of the county (Planning Areas 1, 2, 3, and 4). The subareas of the county are defined by the Alameda CTC as follows:

1. Planning Area 1 – North Area: Cities of Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Oakland and Piedmont

2. Planning Area 2 – Central Area: Cities of Hayward and San Leandro, and the unincorporated areas of Castro Valley and San Lorenzo, as well as other unincorporated lands in that area

3. Planning Area 3 – South Area: Cities of Fremont, Newark, and Union City

4. Planning Area 4 – East Area: Cities of Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton, and all unincorporated lands in that area
S. Project completion/closeout: Inspection/project acceptance, final invoicing, final reporting, and the processes for closing out a project.

T. Safety improvements: Safety or security improvements for operators, passengers, service users, facilities, and infrastructure or property.

U. Scoping and project feasibility: Early capital project phases that identify project needs, costs, and implementation feasibility.

V. Vehicle Registration Fee (VRF): Measure F, Alameda County’s VRF Program, approved by the voters in November 2010 with 63 percent of the vote. It will generate approximately $12 million per year through a $10 per year vehicle registration fee. Administered by the Alameda CTC, the VRF funds four main types of programs and the distribution percentage is as follows: local streets and roads (60 percent); transit (25 percent); local transportation technology (10 percent); and bicycle and pedestrian projects (5 percent).

W. Welfare to Work: Transit services to enhance transportation opportunities for persons making the transition from welfare to work.

Section 5. Mass Transit Fund Allocations
A. These Implementation Guidelines provide guidance on the Mass Transit Fund allocation process for Mass Transit Direct Local Distribution funds and Measure B Express Bus Services Grant Program and VRF Transit for Congestion Relief Program funds.

1. Mass Transit Direct Local Distribution (DLD) Funds
a. General: Alameda CTC distributes Mass Transit DLD Funds to transit operators in Alameda County to be spent on maintenance of transit services, restoration of service cuts, expansion of transit services, and passenger safety and security. b. Eligible Uses: The Mass Transit DLD funds may be used for capital projects, programs, maintenance, or operations that directly improve mass transit services. Eligible uses for these funds include, but are not necessarily limited to:
1) Capital projects, including:
a) All phases of capital projects, including feasibility studies, planning, and environmental
Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 4
b) Upgrades to or expansions to bus, ferry, rail, and shuttle infrastructure
c) Purchase or lease of equipment or new vehicles for transit services 2) Mass transit system operations and services, including commuter rail; express, local, and feeder bus; and ferry
3) Paratransit services
4) Welfare to Work services
5) Direct staff and consultant costs to develop, plan, implement, operate and maintain transit projects and programs
6) Direct staff and consultant costs that support eligible activities, including the end-of-year compliance report
7) Direct staff training costs directly related to implementation of projects or programs implemented with the Mass Transit Funds
c. Ineligible Uses: The following is a list of ineligible uses of Mass Transit DLD funds:
1) Non-transportation projects such as fees charged to capital construction projects for services or amenities not related to transportation 2) Capital projects, programs, maintenances, or operations that does not directly improve mass transit services
3) Projects or programs that exclusively serve city/county staff 4) Indirect costs, unless the RECIPIENT submits an independently audited/approved Indirect Cost Allocation Plan.

2. Measure B Express Bus Services Grant Program Funds
a. The Measure B Expenditure Plan dedicates 0.7 percent of net revenues for the Countywide Express Bus Service fund for express bus service projects. The Alameda CTC will administer a Measure B Countywide Express Bus Services discretionary grant program. The Alameda CTC will adopt Grant Program Guidelines before each grant cycle that will establish the guiding policies for that grant cycle and will widely publicize each grant funding cycle.
b. Two agencies are eligible to receive express bus services grant funds:
1) Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit)
2) Livermore Amador Valley Transit Authority (LAVTA)
Fund recipients must enter into a separate agreement with Alameda CTC.

3. VRF Transit for Congestion Relief Program Funds
a. The VRF Expenditure Plan dedicates 25 percent of net revenues for transit projects that provide congestion relief. Alameda CTC awards VRF Transit for Congestion Relief Grant Program funds on a discretionary basis. These funds are intended to make it easier for drivers to use public transportation, make the existing transit system more efficient and effective, and improve access to schools and jobs. The goal of this program is to decrease automobile usage and thereby reduce both localized and area- Alameda CTC Mass Transit Program Implementation Guidelines Transit - 5
wide congestion and air pollution. Fund recipients must enter into a separate agreement with Alameda CTC.
b. Eligible Uses: VRF Transit for Congestion Relief Grant Program Guidelines provide program eligibility and fund usage guidelines and requirements, definitions of terms, evaluation criteria, award details, and monitoring requirements.

Section 6. Advancement of Direct Local Distribution Funds A. Alameda CTC may consider advancing future Direct Local Distribution funds, with the goal of seeing improvements made in the near term. If a jurisdiction is interested in this option, a written request to Alameda CTC must include a description of the project, scope, schedule, the amount of funds requested, the anticipated timing of when funds are required, and justification for the request. Requests will be considered on an individual basis.

Section 7. Adoption of Implementation Guidelines
A. Implementation Guidelines are adopted by Alameda CTC on an as-needed basis. Changes to Implementation Guidelines will be brought through the Alameda CTC’s Technical Advisory Committee for review and comment, as well as any other Alameda CTC committees as necessary, before changes are adopted by the Alameda CTC Commission.

Alameda CTC Paratransit Program Implementation Guidelines Paratransit - 1
Alameda County Transportation Commission
Paratransit Program
Implementation Guidelines
Section 1. Purpose
A. To delineate eligible uses of Paratransit funds authorized under Alameda County Transportation Commission Master Programs Funding Agreements, these implementation guidelines have been developed to specify the requirements that local jurisdictions must follow in their use of Measure B and Measure BB Direct Local Distributions funds and discretionary funds. These guidelines are incorporated by reference in the Master Programs Funding Agreements. All other terms and conditions for programs are contained in the agreements themselves. The intent of the implementation guidelines is to:

1. Provide guidance on Paratransit funds eligible uses and expenditures.

2. Define the terms in the Master Programs Funding Agreements.

3. Guide Paratransit Program implementation.

Section 2. Authority
A. These Implementation Guidelines have been adopted by the Alameda County Transportation Commission and set forth eligible uses and expenditures for Paratransit funds. Alameda CTC may update these guidelines on an as-needed basis and will do so with involvement of its technical and community advisory committees (as applicable). Exceptions to these guidelines must be requested in writing and be approved by the Alameda CTC Commission.

Section 3. Background
A. Alameda CTC developed Implementation Guidelines for the Paratransit funds to clarify eligible fund uses and expenditures in association Master Programs Funding Agreements for the November 2000 voter-approved Measure B Direct Local Distribution (formally known as “pass-through funds”). In November 2014, voters approved the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, Measure BB, and new Master Programs Funding Agreements were subsequently developed to incorporate Measure BB funds. The expenditure plans allocates 10.45 percent of Measure B funds and 10 percent of Measure BB funds for special transportation for seniors and people with disabilities (paratransit) programs and projects.

Section 4. Definition of Terms
A. Alameda CTC: The Alameda County Transportation Commission is a Joint Powers Authority created by the merger of the Alameda County Congestion Management Agency, which performed long-range planning and funding for countywide transportation projects and programs, and the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority, which administered the voter-approved, half-cent transportation sales taxes in Alameda County (the Measure B sales tax programs approved in 1986 and 2000).

B. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, originally passed in 1990 and revised in 2008, a law that prohibits private employers, state and local governments, employment agencies and labor unions from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities in job application procedures, hiring, firing, advancement, compensation, job training, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. The ADA also requires reasonable accommodations for individuals with disabilities and has resulted in the removal of many barriers to transportation and in better access for seniors and people with disabilities.

Alameda CTC Paratransit Program Implementation Guidelines Paratransit - 2
C. Capital project: A capital investment that typically requires the following phases: planning/feasibility, scoping, environmental clearance, design, right-of-way, construction, and completion. For paratransit programs, may be an investment in vehicles or equipment directly related to providing paratransit services.

D. Construction: Construction of a new capital project, including development of preliminary engineering and construction documents, including plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E).

E. Cost Allocation Plans (CAPs): CAPs and indirect cost (IDC) rate proposals are plans that provide a systematic manner to identify, accumulate, and distribute allowable direct and indirect costs to Paratransit programs funded through the Alameda CTC Master Programs Funding Agreements.

F. Customer service and outreach: Customer service functions as well as costs associated with marketing, education, outreach, and promotional campaigns and programs.

G. Direct cost: A cost completely attributed to the provision of a service, operations, a program, a capital cost, or a product. These costs include documented hourly project staff labor charges (salaries, wages, and benefits) that are directly and solely related to the implementation of the Alameda CTC-funded Paratransit projects, consultants, and materials. These funds may be used for travel or training if they are directly related to the implementation of the Paratransit funds.

H. Direct Local Distribution funds: Funds allocated based on a funding formula (such as population, registered vehicles, road miles, or a combination thereof) defined in a voter-approved measure and provided to eligible jurisdictions on a regularly scheduled basis (such as a regular monthly payment).

I. Education and promotion: Marketing, education, information, outreach, and promotional campaigns and programs.

J. Environmental documents: Preparation of environmental documents, such as those related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) or the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), or permits required by state or federal permitting agencies.

K. Grants: Funding for plans, programs, or projects based on a competitive call for projects; evaluated based on adopted evaluation criteria; and allocated based on a reimbursement basis.

L. Group trips: One-way passenger trips considered group trips. Includes vehicle operation and contracts. See individual demand-response trips.

M. Indirect cost: Also known as “overhead,” any cost of doing business other than direct costs. These costs include utilities, rent, administrative staff, officers’ salaries, accounting department costs, and personnel department costs, which are requisite for general operation of the organization but are not directly allocable to a particular service or product.

N. Individual demand-response trips: Taxi service, door-to-door trips, and van trips that passengers request on demand. Includes actual operation cost and contracts for vehicle operation, scheduling, dispatching, vehicle maintenance, supervision, and fare collection (including ticket or scrip printing and sales) for the purpose of carrying passengers.

O. Maintenance: Repairs, renovation, or upgrade of existing facility, infrastructure, or vehicles.

P. Management: Direct staffing costs and benefits to manage programs, projects, and services.

Q. Meal delivery: Service that includes costs associated with vehicle operation, scheduling, dispatching, vehicle maintenance, and supervision for the purpose of delivering meals, whether provided in-house, through contracts, via taxicab, or by grantees. See Meals on Wheels.

R. Meals on Wheels: Service that is part of a Senior Nutrition Program and provides delivery of meals to seniors and people with disabilities. See meal delivery.

Alameda CTC Paratransit Program Implementation Guidelines Paratransit - 3
S. Measure B: Alameda County’s half-cent transportation sales tax, originally approved in 1986, and reauthorized by voters in November 2000. Collection of the sales tax began on April 1, 2002.

Administered by the Alameda CTC, Measure B funds four types of programs in 20 local jurisdictions:
bicycle and pedestrian, local streets and roads, mass transit, and paratransit.

T. Measure BB: Alameda County voters approved Measured BB, the 2014 Transportation Expenditure Plan, in November 2014. It authorizes the collection of a half-cent transportation sales tax and augments the existing 2000 Measure B sales tax program. Collection of the sales tax began on April 1, 2015. Administered by the Alameda CTC, Measure BB funds four types of programs in 20 local jurisdictions: bicycle and pedestrian, local streets and roads, mass transit, and paratransit.

U. Operations: Provision of services that operate transportation facilities and programs. Operations costs do not include the costs to operate community outreach or other programs not directly related to a specific transportation service, program, or product.

V. Paratransit Advisory and Planning Committee: Originally named by the Measure B Expenditure Plan as the Alameda County Paratransit Coordinating Council, the committee meets to address funding, planning, and coordination issues regarding paratransit services in Alameda County. Members must be an Alameda County resident and an eligible user of any transportation service available to seniors and people with disabilities in Alameda County. PAPCO is supported by a Technical Advisory Committee comprised of Measure B and Measure BB-funded paratransit providers in Alameda County.

W. Paratransit service: Transportation services for seniors and people with disabilities including ADAmandated or non-mandated shuttle or fixed-route services, including door-to-door services, group trips, and individual demand-response trip services; taxi programs; Meals on Wheels or meal delivery; volunteer driver programs; and purchase of EBP tickets.

X. Planning: Identification of project and program current conditions and needs and development of strategies and plans to address the identified needs.

Y. Project completion/closeout: Inspection/project acceptance, final invoicing, final reporting, and the processes for closing out a project.

Z. Scoping and project feasibility: Early capital project phases that identify project needs, costs, and implementation feasibility.

AA. Shuttle or fixed-route trips: Shuttle service or fixed-route bus service, for example. Includes vehicle operation and contracts. See individual demand-response trips.

Section 5. Paratransit Fund Allocations
A. These Implementation Guidelines provide guidance on the Paratransit Fund allocation process for Direct Local Distribution funds and Paratransit Gap Grant Program funds.

1. Paratransit Direct Local Distribution Funds
a. General: Alameda CTC distributes Paratransit Direct Local Distribution (DLD) Funds to fixed-route public transit operators that are required to provide transportation services mandated by the ADA; and to cities in Alameda County and the County to provide non-mandated services, aimed at improving mobility for seniors and persons with disabilities.
1) A portion of the funds as defined in the Master Programs Funding Agreement are local DLD funds distributed to Alameda County cities to provide non-mandated transportation services for seniors and people with disabilities allocated to each city operating paratransit service through a Alameda CTC Paratransit Program Implementation Guidelines Paratransit - 4
census-based funding formula that is developed by PAPCO and approved by the Alameda CTC Commission.
2) A portion of the funds as defined in the Master Programs Funding Agreement are DLD funds distributed to Alameda County’s primary mandated ADA service provider, East Bay Paratransit Consortium. b. Eligible Uses: Paratransit DLD funds may be used for capital projects, programs, maintenance, or operations that directly improve paratransit services. Eligible uses for these funds include services as defined in Attachment A, as well as, but not limited to:
1) Direct staff and consultant costs to develop, plan, implement, manage, operate and maintain paratransit projects and programs
2) Direct staff and consultant costs to provide customer service and outreach for paratransit projects and programs
3) Direct staff and consultant costs that support eligible activities, including the end-of-year compliance report
4) Direct staff training costs directly related to implementation of projects or programs implemented with the Paratransit Funds
c. Ineligible Uses: The following is a list of ineligible uses of Paratransit DLD funds:
1) Non-transportation projects or services such as fees charged to capital construction projects for services or amenities not related to transportation 2) Capital projects, programs, maintenance, or operations that do not directly improve paratransit services
3) Projects or programs that exclusively serve city/county staff 4) Indirect costs, unless the RECIPIENT submits an independently audited/approved Indirect Cost Allocation Plan.

2. Paratransit Discretionary Grant Program Funds
a. The Measure BB Expenditure Plan dedicates 1.0 percent of the funds for paratransit coordination and services to meet the needs of seniors and people with disabilities.

Alameda CTC will administer a Measure BB Paratransit discretionary grant program. b. The Alameda CTC adopt Grant Program Guidelines through its programming and allocation processes.to guide the grant allocations.
c. Gap funds provide Alameda County with the opportunity to be innovative and explore alternative service delivery mechanisms in the face of a senior and disability population expected to grow substantially over the next 30 years. The population of people likely to need paratransit service is expected to outpace the growth in sales tax revenues that fund paratransit programs in Alameda County, including city-based programs and ADA-mandated services.
d. Gap funds provide an opportunity to minimize the differences in service experienced by consumers based on their geographic location.

Alameda CTC Paratransit Program Implementation Guidelines Paratransit - 5
Section 6. Advancement of Direct Local Distribution Funds A. Alameda CTC may consider advancing future Direct Local Distribution funds, with the goal of seeing improvements made in the near term. If a jurisdiction is interested in this option, a written request to Alameda CTC must include a description of the project, scope, schedule, the amount of funds requested, the anticipated timing of when funds are required, and justification for the request. Requests will be considered on an individual basis.

Section 7. Adoption of Implementation Guidelines
A. Implementation Guidelines are adopted by Alameda CTC on an as-needed basis. Changes to Implementation Guidelines will be brought through the Alameda CTC’s Technical Advisory Committee for review and comment, as well as any other Alameda CTC committees as necessary, before changes are adopted by the Alameda CTC Commission.

FY2026-27 FINAL
Implementation Guidelines and Performance Measures – Special Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities (Paratransit) Program
Implementation Guidelines
These guidelines lay out the service types that are eligible to be funded with Alameda County Measure B (2000) reserves and Measure BB (2014) revenues under the Special Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities (Paratransit) Program. All programs funded partially or in their entirety through these sources, including American with Disabilities Act (ADA)- mandated paratransit services, city programs and discretionary grant funded projects, must abide by the following requirements for each type of paratransit service. While the collection of Measure B has sunset, remaining funds continue to be utilized.

Fund recipients are able to select which of these service types are most appropriate for their community to meet the needs of older adults and people with disabilities. Overall, all programs should be designed to enhance quality of life for older adults and people with disabilities by offering accessible, affordable and convenient transportation options to reach major medical facilities, grocery stores and other important travel destinations to meet life needs. Although some programs may need to prioritize based on trip purpose due to capacity constraints, ideally, the importance of a trip should be determined by the consumer.

Performance Measures
The Alameda CTC collects performance data from all programs funded with Alameda County Measure B (2000) reserves and Measure BB (2014) revenues. All programs funded partially or in their entirety through these sources must at a minimum report annually through the Annual Compliance Report for Direct Local Distribution (DLD) funding on the performance measures identified within the Implementation Guidelines for each DLD program.

The performance measures for the Measure B and Measure BB Direct Local Distribution (DLD) funding distributed through the Special Transportation for Seniors and People with Disabilities (Paratransit) Program, which funds ADA-mandated paratransit services, city paratransit programs and discretionary grant funded projects, are identified below.

FY2026-27 FINAL 2
Performance data required for Compliance Reports are marked with a ✥. Additional performance-related data is listed and may be required through:
• Separate discretionary grant guidelines
• Report to the Alameda CTC’s Commission
• Report to one of its community advisory committees.

Additional performance measures include but are not limited to those below marked with a regular bullet.

ADA Paratransit Guidelines
Service
Description
Origin-to-destination trips for people with disabilities unable to ride fixed route transit. Trips are pre-scheduled and accessible.

Eligible
Population
Due to a disability or health-related condition, the individual must be unable to use fixed route transit.

Time & Days of
Service
Varies by area. Available when and where fixed route transit operates.

Fare (Cost to
Customer)
Varies by area.

Other Programs mandated by the Americans with Disabilities Act are implemented and administered according to federal guidelines that supersede these guidelines; however, all ADA-mandated programs funded through Measures B and BB are subject to the terms of the Master Programs Funding Agreement.

Historically, at the request of a health care provider or ADA provider, city programs would provide interim service through their programs to consumers awaiting ADA certification. Currently, the ADA programs meet these needs directly.

Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
 Number of one-way trips provided
 Total Measure B/BB cost per one-way trip (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the number of one-way trips provided during period.)
FY2026-27 FINAL 3
ADA Paratransit Guidelines
Compliance
Reports)
• Total program cost per one-way trip (total program cost during period divided by the number of one-way trips provided during period).
• Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Number of applicants and registrants
• Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income • On-time performance
• Number of trips provided to consumers who require an accessible vehicle
• Quantitative and qualitative information on complaints • Quantitative and qualitative information on safety incidents • Quantitative and qualitative information on outreach
• Quantitative and qualitative information on “high need” trips • Quantitative and qualitative information on ridership satisfaction Same-Day Transportation Service Guidelines
Service
Description
Same-day transportation services provide on-demand same-day services utilizing taxis, Transportation Network Companies a.k.a. TNCs (e.g. Lyft, Uber) that use ride-hailing mobile apps, or other new transportation options. Services may be subsidized in different ways including vouchers, scrip, reimbursement, a discount code on an app, call center or website payment, etc.

Transportation Network Companies (e.g. Lyft, Uber) using ride-hailing apps and web-based platforms provide curb-to-curb service that can be scheduled on a same-day basis. TNCs charge riders on a distance/time basis depending on calculations determined by the app. Subsidy programs allow eligible consumers to use TNCs at a reduced fare by reimbursing consumers a percentage of the fare, providing a coupon code, or by providing some initial fare payment, which can be used to cover a portion of the fare. These programs are intended for situations FY2026-27 FINAL 4
Same-Day Transportation Service Guidelines
when consumers cannot make their trip on a pre-scheduled basis. TNC trip services can incorporate a concierge service.

Taxis also provide curb-to-curb service that can be scheduled on a same-day basis. Taxis charge riders on a distance/time basis using a meter. Taxi subsidy programs offer a reduced fare by reimbursing consumers a percentage of the fare or by providing some fare medium, e.g. scrip or vouchers, which can be used to cover a portion of the fare.

The availability of accessible vehicles varies by geographical area and provider, but programs should expand availability of accessible vehicles where possible in order to fulfill requests for same-day accessible trips.

Programs may incorporate a parallel Specialized Accessible Van Service to meet the need for accessible trips.

Eligible
Population
Eligible Populations include:

1. People 18 and above with disabilities who are unable to use fixed route services. Cities may, at their discretion, also provide services to consumers with disabilities under the age of 18, and

2. Older adults 70 years or older without proof of a disability.

Program sponsors may use either ADA eligibility, as established by ADA-mandated providers (incl. East Bay Paratransit, LAVTA, Union City Transit) or the Alameda County City Paratransit Services Medical Statement Form, as proof of disability. Program sponsors may, at their discretion, also offer temporary or interim eligibility due to disability.

ADA-mandated providers that are not also city providers (East Bay Paratransit and LAVTA) are not required to provide service to older adults 70 years or older without ADA eligibility.

Time & Days of
Service
Service times should be consistent with transportation provider availability to public consumers.

Fare (Cost to
Customer)
Programs must subsidize at least 50% of the fare within an established reasonable service area (at a minimum the sponsoring city).

Programs can impose a cap on total subsidy per person. This can be accomplished through a maximum subsidy per trip, a limit on the FY2026-27 FINAL 5
Same-Day Transportation Service Guidelines
number of vouchers/scrip (or other fare medium) per person, and/or a total monetary subsidy per person per month/quarter/year.

Other New same-day transportation programs that utilize TNCs are subject to review by Alameda CTC staff prior to implementation.

Programs may also use funding to provide incentives to drivers and/or transportation providers to ensure reliable service. Incentives are often utilized to promote accessible service. Planned expenditures on incentives are subject to review by Alameda CTC staff prior to implementation.

Generally, same-day transportation options have been inconsistent in their ability to offer WAV (Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle) service.

These include taxis and programs offered via privately-owned vehicles (e.g. TNCs and volunteer driver programs). Programs should strive to provide an equitable suite of programs, balancing offering accessible alternatives (e.g. using an agency van to supplement a TNC program), searching for and developing new wheelchair accessible options, and meeting the needs of their community. New and/or separate WAV services should be included under Specialized Accessible Van Service.

Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
Compliance
Reports)
 Number of one-way trips provided on taxis
 Number of one-way trips provided on Transportation Network Companies (e.g. Lyft, Uber) using ride-hailing apps
 Total Measure B/BB cost per one-way trip (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the number of one-way trips provided during period.)
• Total program cost per one-way trip, including extra concierge costs if applicable (total program cost during period divided by the number of one-way trips provided during period)
• Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Number of applicants (including number of those on the waitlist) and registrants (report quantities for taxis and/or Transportation Network Companies separately)
• Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income FY2026-27 FINAL 6
Same-Day Transportation Service Guidelines
• Information in aggregate on origin and destination for same day trips by category (i.e. medical appointments, grocery store, senior center, etc.; report quantities for taxis and/or Transportation Network Companies separately)
• Quantitative and qualitative information on complaints (report quantities for taxis and/or Transportation Network Companies separately)
• Quantitative and qualitative information on safety incidents (report quantities for taxis and/or Transportation Network Companies separately)
• Quantitative and qualitative information on outreach
• Quantitative and qualitative information on ridership satisfaction • Qualitative information on program’s capacity to serve demand (e.g. status of waitlist)
Specialized Accessible Van Service Guidelines
Service
Description
Specialized accessible van service provides accessible, origin-todestination trips on a pre-scheduled or same-day basis. This service category should complement core services in communities where critical needs for accessible or other specialized trips are not being adequately met by the existing primary services. Examples of unmet needs are a taxi or TNC program without accessible vehicles, medical trips for riders with dementia unable to safely take an ADA-mandated trip, or trips outside of the ADA-mandated service area. When possible, a priority for this service should be fulfilling requests for WAV (Wheelchair Accessible Vehicle) trips as defined under the CPUC TNC Access for All (AFA)1 Program Funding.

Services may be subsidized in different ways as agreed upon by the program sponsor and transportation provider, including vouchers, scrip, 1 TNC Access for All Program https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/tncaccess/ FY2026-27 FINAL 7
Specialized Accessible Van Service Guidelines
reimbursement, a discount code on an app, call center or website payment, etc.

Eligible
Population
People 18 and above who are unable to use fixed route, ADA-mandated or same-day transportation services due to disability. Cities may, at their discretion, also provide services to consumers with disabilities under the age of 18.

Program sponsors may use either ADA eligibility, as established by ADAmandated providers (incl. East Bay Paratransit, LAVTA, Union City Transit) or the Alameda County City-Based Paratransit Services Medical Statement Form, as proof of disability. Program sponsors may, at their discretion, also offer temporary or interim eligibility due to disability.

ADA-mandated providers that are not also city providers (East Bay Paratransit and LAVTA) are not required to provide service to older adults 70 years or older without ADA eligibility.

Time & Days of
Service
At discretion of program sponsor with local consumer input. When possible, service should be available Monday – Friday between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. (excluding holidays) and accept reservations between the hours of 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday – Friday (excluding holidays).

Fare (Cost to
Customer)
Fares for pre-scheduled service should not exceed comparable same-day transportation services fares.

Other Specialized Accessible van programs must demonstrate that they are providing trips at an equal or lower cost to the provider than the ADAmandated provider on a cost per trip basis, except if providing service beyond ADA paratransit minimums (e.g. WAV). Cost per trip is defined as total transportation cost (from all sources of revenue) during a reporting period divided by the number of one-way trips, including attendant and companion trips, provided during the period.

Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
 Number of one-way trips provided
 Total Measure B/BB cost per one-way trip (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the number of one-way trips provided during period.)
FY2026-27 FINAL 8
Specialized Accessible Van Service Guidelines
Compliance
Reports)
• Total program cost per one-way trip, including extra costs for specialized service if applicable (total program cost during period divided by the number of one-way trips provided during period).
• Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Number of applicants (including number of those on the waitlist) and registrants
• Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income • On-time performance
• Number of trips provided to consumers who require an accessible vehicle
• Data required for CPUC TNC Access for All (AFA) Program funding2 • Quantitative and qualitative information on complaints • Quantitative and qualitative information on safety incidents • Quantitative and qualitative information on outreach
• Quantitative and qualitative information on ridership satisfaction • Qualitative information on program’s capacity to serve demand (e.g. status of waitlist)
Accessible Shuttle Service Guidelines
Service
Description
Shuttles are accessible vehicles that operate on a fixed, deviated, or flex-fixed route and schedule. They serve common trip origins and destinations visited by eligible consumers, e.g. senior centers, medical facilities, grocery stores, BART and other transit centers, community centers, commercial districts, and post offices.

Shuttles should be designed to supplement rather than duplicate existing fixed route transit services. Routes should not necessarily be designed for fast travel, but to get as close as possible to destinations of interest, such as going into parking lots or up to the front entrance of 2 Access Provider Information https://www.cpuc.ca.gov/regulatory-services/licensing/transportationlicensing-and-analysis-branch/transportation-network-companies/tnc-access-for-all-program/tnc--- access-for-all-program-access-provider
FY2026-27 FINAL 9
Accessible Shuttle Service Guidelines
a senior living facility. Shuttles are often designed to serve active older adults who do not drive but are not ADA paratransit registrants.

Eligible
Population
Shuttles should be designed to appeal to older adults but can be made open to the general public.

Time and Days
of Service
At discretion of program sponsor with local consumer input.

Fare (Cost to
Customer)
At discretion of program sponsor but cannot exceed local ADA paratransit fares. Fares may be scaled based on distance.

Cost of Service By end of the second fiscal year of service, the City’s cost per one-way trip per person should not exceed $50, including transportation and direct administrative costs. Cost per trip is defined as total cost (all sources) during a reporting period divided by the number of one-way trips, including attendant and companion trips, provided during period.

Other Shuttle sponsors are required to coordinate with the local fixed route transit provider.

Shuttle routes and schedules should be designed with input from the older adult and disabled communities to ensure effective design. For new shuttle services, to ensure effective program design, a well-defined plan must be submitted to Alameda CTC staff for review prior to implementation.

Deviations and flag stops are permitted at discretion of program sponsor.

Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
Compliance
Reports)
 Total ridership (One-way passenger boardings)
 Total Measure B/BB cost per one-way passenger trip (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the total ridership during period.)
• Total program cost per one-way passenger trip (total program cost during period divided by the total ridership during period). • Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
FY2026-27 FINAL 10
Accessible Shuttle Service Guidelines
• Number of applicants (including number of those on the waitlist) and registrants
• Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income • On-time performance
• Number of trips provided to consumers who require an accessible vehicle
• Quantitative and qualitative information on complaints • Quantitative and qualitative information on safety incidents • Quantitative and qualitative information on outreach
• Quantitative and qualitative information on ridership satisfaction • Qualitative information on program’s capacity to serve demand (e.g. status of waitlist)
Group Trips Service Guidelines
Service
Description
Group trips are round-trip rides for pre-scheduled outings, including shopping trips, recreational events, and community activities. These trips are specifically designed to serve the needs of older adults and people with disabilities and typically originate from a senior center or housing facility, and are generally provided in accessible buses or vans.

Eligible
Population
At discretion of program sponsor.

Time and Days
of Service
Group trips must begin and end on the same day.

Fare (Cost to
Customer)
At discretion of program sponsor.

Other Programs can impose mileage or quantity of trips limitations to individuals or organizations to control program costs.

FY2026-27 FINAL 11
Group Trips Service Guidelines
Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
Compliance
Reports)
 Number of one-way passenger trips provided
 Total Measure B/BB cost per passenger trip (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the number of passenger trips provided during period.)
• Total program cost per passenger trip (total program cost during period divided by the number of passenger trips provided during period).
• Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Number of requests (including any unfulfilled requests) • Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income • Number of trips provided to consumers who require a wheelchair accessible trip
• Quantitative and qualitative information on complaints • Quantitative and qualitative information on safety incidents • Quantitative and qualitative information on outreach
• Quantitative and qualitative information on ridership satisfaction • Qualitative information on program’s capacity to serve demand (e.g. status of waitlist)
Door-through-Door/Volunteer Driver Service Guidelines
Service
Description
Volunteer driver services are pre-scheduled, door-through-door services that are typically not accessible. These programs rely on volunteers to drive eligible consumers for critical trip needs, such as medical trips. Programs may use staff to complete intake or fill gaps in service provision. This service meets a key mobility gap by serving more vulnerable populations and should complement existing primary services (i.e. ADA-mandated, Specialized Accessible Van, or SameDay).

Volunteer driver programs may also have an escort component where volunteers accompany consumers on any service eligible for Alameda CTC funding, when they are unable to travel in a private vehicle.

FY2026-27 FINAL 12
Door-through-Door/Volunteer Driver Service Guidelines
Eligible
Population
At discretion of program sponsor.

Time and Days
of Service
At discretion of program sponsor.

Fare (Cost to
Customer)
At discretion of program sponsor.

Other Program sponsors can use funds for administrative purposes and/or to pay for volunteer mileage reimbursement purposes (not to exceed Federal General Services Administration (Privately Owned Vehicle) Mileage Reimbursement Rates) or an equivalent financial incentive for volunteers.

Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
Compliance
Reports)
 Number of one-way trips provided
 Total Measure B/BB cost per one-way trip (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the number of one-way trips provided during period.)
• Total program cost per one-way trip (total program cost during period divided by the number of one-way trips provided during period).
• Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Number of applicants (including number of those on the waitlist) and registrants
• Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income • Quantitative and qualitative information on complaints • Quantitative and qualitative information on safety incidents • Quantitative and qualitative information on outreach
• Number of active volunteer drivers
• Number of one-way trips provided by staff
• Percentage of service requests unfulfilled when requested within specified time
• Quantitative and qualitative information on ridership satisfaction FY2026-27 FINAL 13
Door-through-Door/Volunteer Driver Service Guidelines
• Qualitative information on program’s capacity to serve demand (e.g. status of waitlist)
Mobility Management and/or Travel Training Program Guidelines Service
Description
Mobility management services cover a wide range of activities, such as travel training, coordinated services, trip planning, and brokerage. Mobility management activities often include education and outreach to individuals and organizations. Individual trip planning can play an important role in ensuring that people use the “best” service for them for each trip, e.g. using East Bay Paratransit from Fremont to Berkeley for an event, using a TNC (e.g. Lyft, Uber) or taxi voucher for a same-day urgent doctor visit, and scheduling with a group trip service to go grocery shopping. Service types can include information and referral, service linkage, service coordination, or advocacy.

Travel training is short-term, one-on-one or group-based intensive instruction designed to teach people with disabilities and older adults to travel safely and independently on fixed-route public transportation in their community.3
Travel orientation, also known as transit orientation, is less formal and involved than traditional travel training and explains transportation systems by sharing information about trip planning, schedules, maps, fare systems, mobility devices, new mobility services, and benefits and services. It may be conducted in a group or one-on-one.4 This service description should not be considered all-inclusive. Programs are welcome to contact Alameda CTC staff to discuss other mobility management activities if they need guidance.

Eligible
Population
At discretion of program sponsor.
3 Easter Seals Project ACTION http://www.projectaction.com/glossary-of-disability-and-transit-terms/ 4 Easter Seals Project ACTION https://www.nadtc.org/wp-content/uploads/Module-4-NADTC-linkversion.pdf FY2026-27 FINAL 14
Mobility Management and/or Travel Training Program Guidelines Time and Days
of Service
At discretion of program sponsor.

Fare (Cost to
Customer)
N/A
Other For new mobility management and/or travel training programs, to ensure effective program design, a plan with a well-defined set of activities must be submitted to Alameda CTC staff for review prior to implementation.

Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
Compliance
Reports)
Mobility Management Program
 Number of individuals provided with mobility management support (Note: an individual may have multiple contacts)
 Number of contacts providing mobility management support  Total Measure B/BB cost per individual provided with mobility management support (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the number of individuals provided with support during period.)
• Total cost per individual provided with mobility management support (total program cost during period divided by the number of individuals provided with support during period).
• Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income of individuals
• Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Quantitative and qualitative information on outreach
• Quantitative and qualitative information on program satisfaction Travel Training Program
 Number of individuals trained and/or received travel orientation (divided by those in individual training and those participating in group trainings)
 Total Measure B/BB cost per individual trained in individual trainings and in group trainings (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the number of individuals trained during period) FY2026-27 FINAL 15
Mobility Management and/or Travel Training Program Guidelines • Total program cost per individual trained in individual trainings and in group trainings (total program cost during period divided by the number individuals trained during period)
• Number of requests for training unfulfilled
• Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income of individuals
• Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Number of individuals trained (divided by those receiving travel orientation, mobility device training, older adults, adults with disabilities, youth with disabilities, and/or people with visual impairments)
• Quantitative and qualitative information on outreach
• Percentage/number of people surveyed who used transit post workshop
• Quantitative and qualitative information on program satisfaction • Qualitative information on program’s capacity to serve demand (e.g. status of waitlist)
Means-Based Fare Program Guidelines
Service
Description
Means-Based Fare Programs can subsidize any service eligible for paratransit funding and/or fixed-route transit for paratransit customers who are low-income and can demonstrate financial need.

Eligible
Population
Subsidies can be offered to low-income consumers with demonstrated financial need who are currently eligible for an Alameda County ADAmandated or city paratransit program.

Low income requirements are at discretion of program sponsors, but the requirement for household income should not be below the HUD Very Low-Income threshold for Alameda County.5
5 Alameda County Housing and Community Development Department https://www.acgov.org/cda/hcd/hudincome-rent_limits.htm FY2026-27 FINAL 16
Means-Based Fare Program Guidelines
Time and Days
of Service
N/A
Fare (Cost to
Customer)
N/A
Other Outreach/communication plans related to means-based fares must be submitted to Alameda CTC staff annually.

Low-income requirements and the means to determine and verify eligibility must be submitted to Alameda CTC staff for review prior to implementation.

If program sponsors include subsidized ADA-mandated paratransit tickets in this program, no more than 3% of a program sponsor’s Alameda CTC distributed funding may be used for the ticket subsidy. Other services or purposes proposed for means-based fare subsidy must be submitted to Alameda CTC staff for review prior to implementation.

Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
Compliance
Reports)
 Number of unduplicated individuals who received
scholarship/subsidized fares
 Number of one-way fares/tickets subsidized
 Total Measure B/BB cost per subsidy (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the number of subsidized fares/tickets during period)
• Total program cost per subsidy (total program cost during period divided by the number of subsidized fares/tickets during period) • Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income of individuals
• Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Quantitative and qualitative information on complaints • Quantitative and qualitative information on outreach
• Quantitative and qualitative information on program satisfaction FY2026-27 FINAL 17
Meal Delivery Program Guidelines
Service
Description
Meal Delivery programs traditionally support delivery of meals to the homes of individuals who have difficulty traveling to congregate meal sites and/or have difficulty shopping for food or preparing meals for themselves.

Meal delivery program eligibility under Measures B and BB is limited to transportation-related meal delivery program costs for traditional meal delivery services provided by a local community-based organization.

Allowable expenses also include direct mileage reimbursement for volunteer drivers providing meal delivery.

Eligible
Population
At discretion of program sponsor.

Time and Days
of Service
At discretion of program sponsor.

Fare (Cost to
Customer)
At discretion of program sponsor.

Other Program sponsors may not use more than 5% of their Alameda CTC DLD Paratransit program funds expended in a given fiscal year for transportation-related meal delivery program costs. Additionally, Meal Delivery Programs (including Capital Expenditures) may not account for more than 5% of the total funding made available for a Paratransit Discretionary Grant Program Call.

Funding for traditional meal delivery provided by a local community-based organization must be limited to no more than $3 per meal delivered.

If programs are directly reimbursing volunteer drivers for meal delivery services, DLD program funds used for mileage reimbursement must be limited to no more than $8 per meal delivered (not to exceed Federal General Services Administration (Privately Owned Vehicle) Mileage Reimbursement Rates).

FY2026-27 FINAL 18
Meal Delivery Program Guidelines
For new meal delivery programs, to ensure effective program design, a well-defined plan must be submitted to Alameda CTC staff for review prior to implementation.

Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
Compliance
Reports)
 Number of meal delivery trips
 Total Measure B/BB cost per meal delivery trip (Total Measure B/BB program cost during period divided by the number of meal delivery trips during period)
• Total number of individuals served
• Total cost per meal delivery trip (total program cost during period divided by the number of meal delivery trips during period) • Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Demographic data on age, disability, ethnicity/race, and income in aggregate
• Quantitative and qualitative information on transportation program satisfaction
Capital Expenditures Guidelines
Description Capital expenditures are eligible if directly related to the implementation of a program or project within an eligible service category, including but not limited to, purchase of scheduling software, accessible vehicles and equipment, and accessibility improvements at shuttle stops.

Eligible
Population
N/A
Time and Days
of Service
N/A
Fare (Cost to
Customer)
N/A
Other Capital expenditures are to support the eligible service types included in the Implementation Guidelines and must be consistent with objectives of FY2026-27 FINAL 19
Capital Expenditures Guidelines
the Alameda CTC Special Transportation for Seniors and Peoples with Disabilities (Paratransit) Program.

Meal Delivery Programs may not account for more than 5% of the total funding made available for a Paratransit Discretionary Grant Program Call for vehicles.

If programs are purchasing passenger vehicles, they should be accessible. Planned expenditures are subject to review by Alameda CTC staff prior to implementation.

Performance
Measures
(✥ Performance
data required for
Compliance
Reports)
 Total Measure B/BB cost
• Non-Measure B/BB revenues and costs
• Photograph of new vehicle (where applicable)
City of Emeryville

C A L I F O R N I A

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: July 7, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: LaTanya Bellow, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: April Foran, City Clerk
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE

CALLING FOR THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER
3, 2026; REQUESTING APPROVAL OF CONSOLIDATION WITH THE
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA; REQUESTING THE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF

VOTERS PERFORM CERTAIN ELECTION SERVICES IN
CONNECTION WITH THE NOVEMBER 3, 2026 ELECTION; AND

AUTHORIZING REIMBURSEMENT TO THE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF

VOTERS FOR ELECTION SERVICES PERFORMED

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the above-entitled resolution.

BACKGROUND
The City of Emeryville’s General Municipal Election is held on the Tuesday following the first Monday in November in even numbered years. Two City Council seats are up for election this November which are currently held by David Mourra and Kalimah Priforce.

The at-large City Council seats are for four-year terms through 2030.

DISCUSSION
Section 10002 of the Elections Code of the State of California provides that the governing body of a City may by resolution request the Board of Supervisors of the County to permit the County elections official to render special services to the city relating to the conduct of elections. Upon approval, this resolution will be submitted to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors for approval of consolidation.

The nomination period for the November 3, 2026, election opens at 9:00 a.m. Monday, July 13, 2026, and closes at 5:00 p.m. Friday, August 7, 2026, unless an incumbent fails to file. If an incumbent does not file nomination papers by the August 7 deadline, the nomination period will be extended for non-incumbent candidates until Wednesday, August 12, 2026.

During the nomination period, any eligible and qualified Emeryville resident interested in running for City Council may request nomination papers for candidacy from the City Clerk. An appointment during the nomination period will be set, and at this meeting, the Clerk will review the Candidate Guide with the potential candidate and issue all forms Election Consolidation – November 3, 2026
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

required for a City Council candidacy. There is a $25.00 filing fee charged to all candidates, which is due and payable upon filing of their documents.

A candidate may, but is not required to, file a 200-word Candidate’s Statement of Qualifications for inclusion in the Voter Information Guide. The City pays the costs associated with the printing, handling, translating, and mailing of candidate statements in the sample ballot.

The City Council may also submit ballot measure(s) for the November 2026 election and if that occurs, the Council will take action by separate resolution(s) and/or ordinance(s) that will then be submitted to the Board of Supervisors and Elections Department for inclusion on the ballot.

FISCAL IMPACT
Election costs of $50,000 have been included in the FY 2026-27 City Clerk operating budget.

STAFF COMMUNICATION WITH THE PUBLIC
In the spring of 2026, the City Clerk’s Office updated the voting and election webpages providing information and an election calendar for residents interested in running for local office.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST
There is no conflict of interest related to this item.

CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the resolution calling for the November 3, 2026, General Municipal Election, approve consolidation with the County of Alameda, and approve other related election services and reimbursement to the County of Alameda.

PREPARED BY: April Foran, City Clerk

ATTACHMENTS
▪ Draft Resolution
RESOLUTION NO.

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE CALLING FOR THE GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION ON NOVEMBER 3, 2026; REQUESTING APPROVAL OF CONSOLIDATION WITH THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA;

REQUESTING THE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS PERFORM CERTAIN ELECTION SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH THE NOVEMBER 3, 2026 ELECTION;

AND AUTHORIZING REIMBURSEMENT TO THE COUNTY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS

FOR ELECTION SERVICES PERFORMED
WHEREAS, the next statewide General Election will take place on November 3, 2026; and
WHEREAS, in the City of Emeryville, General Municipal Elections are held in November of even numbered years; and
WHEREAS, the City of Emeryville will hold a Regular General Municipal Election on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, for the election of two at-large Council Member seats, each for a full four-year term and currently held by David Mourra and Kalimah Priforce; and WHEREAS, Section 10002 of the Elections Code of the State of California provides that the governing body of a City may by resolution request the Board of Supervisors of the County to permit the County elections official to render special services to the City relating to the conduct of elections; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council of the City of Emeryville that the Alameda County Elections Department be permitted to render specified services to the City of Emeryville relating to its conduct of the November 3, 2026 election and consolidate said election with those being held by other jurisdictions on November 3, 2026; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville that pursuant to the requirements of the laws of the State of California, there is called and ordered to be held in the City of Emeryville, California, on Tuesday, November 3, 2026, a general election for the purpose of electing two members of the City Council of the City of Emeryville for the full term of four years; and, be it, further
RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Emeryville hereby requests the Board of Supervisors of the County of Alameda to consolidate the Municipal Election and the Statewide General Election on November 3, 2026, which may be held in whole or in part of the territory of the City of Emeryville as provided in Elections Code Sections 10400, 10402 and 10403; and, be it, further
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville that pursuant to Section 10002 of the Elections Code of the State of California, the City of Emeryville hereby requests the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to permit the Alameda County Elections Department to render to the City of Emeryville the services relating to the conduct of the Resolution No. _____
Election Consolidation – November 3, 2026
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

General Municipal Election of November 3, 2026, and to consolidate said election with other elections being held by other jurisdictions; and, be it, further RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville that the City Clerk of Emeryville is hereby authorized and directed to forward a certified copy of this resolution to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors and upon notification of the granting of such permission, supply the County Elections Department with any and all other information that may be necessary in connection with the conduct of said election; and, be it, further RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville for and in consideration of the election services to be rendered by the Alameda County Elections Department, the City of Emeryville agrees to pay to Alameda County the City’s proportionate share of the reasonable expenses of said election, said share to consist of all expenses directly related to the conduct of the City of Emeryville’s Municipal Election and also the City of Emeryville’s proportionate share of expense for election services rendered by Alameda County that are being shared equally with other jurisdictions, if any, in the City of Emeryville on November 3, 2026; and, be it, further
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville that the City will bear the costs for all candidates related to the publication of the Candidate Statements pursuant to Emeryville Resolution 99-90; the limitation on the number of words that a candidate may use in their Candidate’s Statement of Qualifications being 200 words; and, be it, further RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville that, in the event a tie vote has been determined and certified the County Election Department, a successful candidate will be chosen by lot.

Resolution No. _____
Election Consolidation – November 3, 2026
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

Resolution No. _____
Election Consolidation – November 3, 2026
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville at a Regular Meeting held July 7, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

MAYOR
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

CITY CLERK SPECIAL COUNSEL
City of Emeryville

C A L I F O R N I A

M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: July 7, 2026
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: LaTanya Bellow, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Mohamed Alaoui, Public Works Director
SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE

APPROVING THE POWELL STREET REDESIGN PLAN DESIGN

CONCEPT

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt the above-entitled Resolution.

BACKGROUND
Powell Street is the main public street on the Emeryville peninsula and the only eastwest access point to the marina and shoreline on the west side of I-80. Powell Street provides access to public open spaces on the peninsula including McLaughlin Eastshore State Park, Davenport Park, and the Emeryville Marina, as well as a pedestrian path spur of the Bay Trail. Powell Street does not include any AC Transit stops but does contain four of the five Emery Go-Round stops on the peninsula.

Adjacent major land uses on Powell Street include mixed-use non-residential and medium-high density residential (Watergate Community), as well as public and open park space. Specific uses include a small shopping center inclusive of grocery, large office towers and business park, restaurants, bank, hotel, gas station, and surface level parking lots. The marina includes both the public Emeryville Marina and the private Emery Cove Yacht Harbor, both of which include some liveaboard residents. The Emeryville Police Station and Alameda County Fire Station 34 are both located on Powell Street.

The City of Emeryville’s Active Transportation Plan (ATP) was adopted on October 17, 2023, by the City Council with the aim to make walking, biking, and rolling through Emeryville easier and more enjoyable. The Plan identified a number of improvements for Powell Street west of Frontage Road and highlighted Powell Street as an area for future study in the Studies section of the Plan (F-3 Powell Street Segment A and F-8 Bay Trail Widening).

The City Council adopted the Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) at the July 1, 2025, Council meeting to proactively address traffic safety challenges, reduce fatal and severe injury collisions, and align with state and federal safety objectives. By analyzing traffic and collision data alongside Caltrans and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) guidelines, the LRSP identified key opportunities for enhancing safety on local roadways, including a toolkit of countermeasures. Data from the Plan demonstrated that Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

over a five-year period (2019-2024), the City recorded 385 collisions with 47 of those involving a person walking or bicycling. Collisions involving a vulnerable road user represented only 12% of total collisions yet account for 50% of fatal or severe injuries.

The Powell Street Redesign Plan (Plan) kicked off in June 2024 with assistance from the consultant team MIG, Inc. Staff conducted a comprehensive, multi-phase community engagement process to inform the development of the Plan. Key themes that emerged from the public engagement process include a strong community priority for safety, accessibility, and comfort for all users; enhanced walking and bicycling facilities; and improvements to the overall public realm. Respondents expressed interest in shifting toward more active and sustainable travel modes, contingent on improvements such as protected bicycle facilities, enhanced pedestrian infrastructure, and traffic calming measures. Feedback also emphasized the importance of placemaking elements, including expanded landscaping, seating, public amenities, and maintaining visual and physical access to the waterfront.

Findings from public engagement and the LRSP directly informed the development of the Plan’s preliminary design concepts. These concepts were presented at the June 10, 2025, Transportation and Sustainability Committee (TSC) and the July 14, 2025, Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC), and subsequently refined based on feedback received. Two community open houses, held in September and October 2025, provided additional opportunities for public input on the proposed designs. Feedback received during these events was incorporated into the design concept.

Overall, the community engagement process demonstrated strong support for a redesigned Powell Street corridor that prioritizes safety and multimodal access. The resulting design reflects community input and is consistent with the City’s Active Transportation Plan, the LRSP, and broader goals of creating a safe, connected, and vibrant waterfront corridor.

DISCUSSION
The Powell Street Redesign Plan focuses on improving safety of all users, managing vehicle speeds, and maintaining access for all modes, including active transportation users, police and emergency services, and boat trailer access to the Emeryville Marina.

The proposed design applies the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe System Approach to reduce the severity and likelihood of vehicle crashes along the corridor.

Speed management is the primary safety strategy of the Plan design. Safer speed is a core objective of the Safe System Approach, which is also reiterated in local and regional policies and funding objectives. Speed is particularly hazardous for people biking, walking, and rolling and the likelihood of a fatality increases exponentially with vehicle speed. Additionally, slower vehicle speeds increase the comfort of people walking, biking, and rolling, making active modes of transportation more appealing to a broader proportion of the population. To lower speeds to appropriate levels relative to activity and context, the following treatments are included in the concept design:

Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

• Narrowing lane widths to promote slower driving speeds • Lane removal to further reduce vehicle speeds and reduce crossing distances for people walking and rolling
• Convert existing parallel parking to angled parking to further narrow the roadway • Addition of curb extensions at crosswalks to reduce vehicle speeds and increasing visibility of people walking and rolling
• Reduce posted vehicle speeds by 5-10 miles per hour along the corridor In addition to speed management treatments, the Plan design includes additional treatments to enhance safety of vulnerable road users by reducing conflicts, increasing visibility, and separating users in space.

Recommended enhancements at uncontrolled crosswalks were determined using the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) STEP Guide for Enhancing Uncontrolled Crossings, roadway context, and engineering judgement. Recommendations include:
• Shortened crossing distances to improve safety by reducing exposure of people walking and rolling to vehicles
• Additional crossings at several locations to allow people walking and rolling to cross at each leg of an intersection and at key desire lines on the corridor, improving access to transit stops and services
• Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs) at all unsignalized crossing locations to alert drivers of people crossing the street • Median refuges to provide people walking and rolling a physical barrier between vehicle lanes and improve visibility
• Adding stop bars and stop signs to side streets along Powell to indicate to drivers where to stop before crosswalks, increasing driver compliance of stopping prior to entering a crosswalk.

The Plan also includes recommended improvements at controlled crosswalks at three locations, including the traffic signals at Frontage Road, Access Road, and the all-way stop at Commodore Drive.

The FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide provides bike facility recommendations based on speed and average daily traffic (ADT). Given the observed speeds along the corridor, presence of heavier vehicles with boat trailers, and the park-like environment, cycle tracks (also known as “separated bikeways”) are recommended along the corridor.

Bikeways that are separated from vehicle traffic with a physical barrier (concrete curb, flex posts, etc.) are widely recognized as one of the most effective tools for improving roadway safety. Studies have shown that separated bikeways 1) can reduce motor vehicle-bike crashes by over 50%1; 2) improve safety for all road users, including people walking, biking, rolling, and driving2; and 3) can decrease risk of injury by up to 1 Federal Highway Administration. Developing Crash Modification Factors for Separated Bicycle Lanes. Publication Number. FHWAHRT-23-078. USDOT, 2023. https://highways.dot.gov/media/33856. 2 Marshall, Wesley E., and Nicholas N. Ferenchak. “Why cities with high bicycling rates are safer for all road users.” Journal of Transport & Health 13 (June 2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2019.03.004.

Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

90% when compared to a street with no cycling infrastructure5. The City’s ATP recommends bicycle infrastructure that is comfortable for all ages and abilities, including shared-use paths and separated bikeways. In addition, the recently approved LRSP recommends separated bikeways as the preferred safety enhancement for people bicycling or scooting.

The proposed design will convert existing striped bike lanes on the eastern portion of the corridor and shared travel lanes with vehicles on the western end into a continuous, separated two-way cycle track on the south/west side of Powell Street. The proposed two-way cycle track design varies over the length of the corridor, outlined below:
• Segment A – Frontage to Access Roads and Segment B – Access Road to Anchor Drive: the protected two-way cycle track is separated from vehicle traffic by a striped buffer and vertical delineation. Where opportunities exist with project budgets, substantial materials such as concrete buffers and/or curb stops could be integrated.
• Segment C – Anchor Drive to Royal Coffee: the protected two-way cycle track is raised to sidewalk height and separated from vehicle traffic by a curb and planted buffer.
• Segment D – Marina and Hong Kong East and Segment E – Park Streetscape:
the protected two-way cycle track is at roadway grade and separated from vehicle traffic by a concrete curb. At the marina, the cycle track terminates into the bike parking area, allowing space to dismount and park before utilizing the pedestrian-only areas in the Marina Park.

At the February 10, 2026, Transportation and Sustainability Committee, the Committee forwarded the Powell Street Redesign Plan to City Council with recommendation for approval.

If the Plan is approved, the City will be well positioned for future grant opportunities.

Pending future Council direction and funding prioritization, the Plan could advance into the next phase of design through the City’s Capital Improvement Program.

STRATEGIC PLAN CONNECTION
The Powell Street Redesign Plan will 1) expand an all ages and abilities bicycle network with a recommendation to include a two-way, separated cycle track extending from Frontage Road to the terminus of Powell Street and 2) increase pedestrian safety by recommending traffic calming treatments and improved crossing facilities. These improvements align with the City’s Strategic Plan goals of 1) creating a livable, safe, and vibrant community and 2) planning for quality infrastructure and environmental stewardship.
5 Teschke, Kay et al. “Route Infrastructure and the Risk of Injuries to Bicyclists: A Case-Crossover Study.” American Journal of Public Health 102, no. 12 (2012): 2336–2343. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3519333/.

Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The proposed Plan (“the project”) qualifies for a statutory exemption from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resource Code (PRC) Section 21080.25. The project qualifies as outlined below:

PRC Section 21080.25(b): The project must meet at least one project type to qualify for this statutory exemption:

X (1) Pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including new facilities. For purposes of this paragraph, “bicycle facilities” include, but are not limited to, bicycle parking, bicycle sharing facilities, and bikeways as defined in Seciton 890.4 of the Streets and Highways Code.

X (2) Projects that improve customer information and wayfinding for transit riders, bicyclists, or pedestrians.
(3) Transit prioritization projects
(4) On highways with existing public transit service or that will be implementing public transit service within six months of the conversion, a project for the designation and conversion of general purpose lanes or highway shoulders to bus-only lanes, for use either during peak congestion hours or all day.
(5) A project for the institution or increase of new bus rapid transit, bus, or light rail service, including the construction of stations, on existing public rights-of-way or existing highway rightsof-way, whether or not the right-of-way is in use for public mass transit.
(6) A project to construct or maintain infrastructure to charge or refuel zeroemission transit buses, provided the project is carried out by a public transit agency that is subject to, and in compliance with, the State Air Resources Board’s Innovative Clean Transit regulations, and the project is located on property owned by the transit agency or within an existing public right-ofway.
(7) The maintenance, repair, relocation, replacement, or removal of any utility infrastructure associated with a project identified in paragraphs (1) to (6), inclusive.

X (8) A project that consists exclusively of a combination of any of the components of a project identified in paragraphs (1) to (7), inclusive. (9) A project carried out by a city or county to reduce minimum parking requirements.

PRC Section 21080.25 (d): The project must meet all the criteria listed below to qualify for this statutory exemption:

Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

X (1) A public agency is carrying out the project and is the lead agency for the project.

X (2) The project is located in an urbanized area.

X (3) The project is located on or within an existing public right-of-way.

X (4) The project shall not add physical infrastructure that increases new automobile capacity on existing rights-of-way except for minor modifications needed for the efficient and safe movement of transit vehicles, such as extended merging lanes. The project shall not include the addition of any auxiliary lanes.

X (5) The construction of the project shall not require the demolition of affordable housing units.

X (6) The project will not exceed $100 million ($100,000,000) in 2020 United States dollars.

Staff have reviewed the applicable conditions and limitations of PRC 21080.25 and find that no disqualifying circumstances are present. Staff recommend that the City Council find the Plan exempt from CEQA pursuant to PRC 21080.25, and direct staff to file a Notice of Exemption with the Alameda County Clerk.

FISCAL IMPACT
The planning study is CIP No. SUT-02 Project No. 24475018, as identified in the FY 2025-27 Capital Improvement Program budget.

MIG, Inc. assisted staff in completing the project work, including the original Professional Services Contract and First Amendment for a total amount of $263,721.

There were sufficient funds in Fund 475 (General Capital Fund), Fund 250 (traffic impact fees), and Fund 495 (Marina Fund) to complete project work.

The planning-level cost estimates to complete the next steps of implementation total $20.9M, including final design and construction. No funding has been identified for the next phase of implementation.

STAFF COMMUNICATION WITH THE PUBLIC
The City of Emeryville conducted a comprehensive, multi-phase community engagement process to inform the development of the Powell Street Redesign Plan.

The engagement effort was designed to capture the lived experiences, needs, and priorities of residents, workers, businesses, and visitors who use the corridor, and to ensure that project outcomes reflect community values and City policy goals.

Engagement activities were conducted between April 2024 and early 2026 and included coordination with internal departments, partner agencies, stakeholders, and the broader public. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), consisting of City staff and partner agencies, provided ongoing input throughout the process. Additional coordination Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

occurred with agencies such as the East Bay Regional Park District, Bay Conservation and Development Commission, and the Emeryville Transportation Management Association to align Plan development with regional priorities.

Stakeholder engagement included targeted outreach to business and property owners, major employers, and the Watergate residential community. These early discussions informed the development of a multilingual visioning survey, which was available from December 2024 through May 2025. The survey was distributed online and supplemented by in-person intercept surveys conducted at key locations throughout Emeryville, including parks, commercial areas, and along the project corridor. Additional outreach included pop-up events at the Emeryville Film Festival and Emery High School to reach a broader and more diverse cross-section of the community. The survey was available in multiple languages, including English, Cantonese, and Spanish. The engagement process resulted in over 520 survey responses representing a diverse range of users, including residents, employees, recreational visitors, and marina users.

A table of all the engagement activities is included below.

Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

Timing Activity Details
Fall 2024 Business owner & property
owner meetings
Online and in-person meetings with owners and managers of Emery Cove, Safe Harbor, Hilton, and Hong Kong East to understand needs and priorities around multimodal access and safety.

Fall 2024 Watergate HOA meeting Project staff attended the monthly HOA meeting of the Watergate residential complex (1,249 units, ~2,400 residents) to introduce the project and listen to resident concerns.

Nov 2024 Technical Advisory
Committee (TAC) meeting
Multi-agency meeting with City departments (Public Works, Planning, Community & Arts, Police) and allied agencies (Alameda County Fire, ETC, EBRPD, BCDC, ETMA) to review existing conditions and emerging opportunities.

Dec 2024 – May
2025
Multilingual online visioning
survey
Interactive survey available in English, Spanish, and Cantonese covering community vision, mobility preferences, and placemaking.

Publicized via City website, social media, and QR-code flyers. Over 520 respondents.

Jan – May 2025 On-site intercept surveys Project staff conducted in-person surveys at shuttle stops, local businesses (Shell, UPS, Randy's Market, Hilton, Hong Kong East, Trader Vic's), Emeryville retailers, and parks (Marina Park, Doyle Hollis, Huchiun, Emeryville Greenway, Bay Trail).

March 2025 Bay Street Emeryville Film
Festival tabling
A project booth was set up at the film festival to engage attendees and collect survey responses from a broad cross-section of the community.

Mar-25 Emery High School
engagement
Project staff visited multiple grade levels at Emery High School, explained the project goals, and had students complete the visioning survey to capture youth perspectives.

June 2025 Committee presentations Urban design framework and preliminary design concepts presented to the Transportation and Sustainability Committee and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee for review and direction on preferred design.

Sep 6, 2025 Watergate residents open
house
Four-hour event at Clipper Clubhouse (10am–2pm), open to Watergate residents only. Over 30 attendees engaged with three interactive stations covering project overview, urban design framework, and preferred design concepts.

Oct 8, 2025 Community-wide open house Two-hour public event at Emeryville Police Station (6–8pm). Over 25 participants including City Council and Committee members and ETMA staff. Same three-station format as the Watergate event.

Feb 2026 TSC 10% design review Refined 10% design presented to the Transportation and Sustainability Committee. TSC unanimously approved and recommended advancing to City Council without modifications.

May 2026 City Council review Final step in the approval process. City Council review of the TSCapproved 10% design for the Powell Street Redesign project.

Powell Street Redesign — Community Engagement Activities Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

CONCLUSION
Staff recommends that the City Council approve the design concept for the Powell Street Redesign Plan. Approval of the Plan will help position the City for future grant opportunities and funding readiness.

PREPARED BY: Jeff Jelsma, Management Analyst, Public Works

ATTACHMENTS
• Attachment 1 – Community Engagement Report
• Attachment 2 – Powell Street Design Concept Memorandum • Attachment 3 – Powell Street Design Concepts
• Draft Resolution
Powell Street Redesign Project
Community Engagement Summary Report
City of Emeryville, CA
April 2026
POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 2

INTRODUCTION
The City of Emeryville initiated a comprehensive community engagement process to inform the Powell Street Redesign project. The purpose of this e#ort was to understand and document firsthand the lived experiences, needs, priorities and aspirations of residents, workers, business owners, and visitors who use the corridor.

This section of Powell Street serving the Peninsula, is a unique streetscape extending from Frontage Road to the East, to Marina Park in the West. O#ices, businesses, restaurants, park, Marina, and the Watergate community residential complex are served by this street. The Bay Trail walking path runs along the length of the street, and both residents and visitors from across the East Bay access the waterfront and the stunning panoramic views of the Bay it o#ers.

Fig 1: Project Extent
POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 3

PROJECT GOALS
The Powell Street Redesign project seeks to advance a set of interconnected goals, including improving safety and comfort, enhancing multimodal mobility, strengthening placemaking, supporting recreation and play, fostering equitable access, and integrating habitat creation into the public realm.

Fig 2: Project Goals

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT APPROACH
The City of Emeryville was committed to a multi-pronged approach to community engagement that captures substance and ideas of workers, residents, and users in an authentic and detailed manner for the timely advancement of the Powell Street Redesign. The engagement process was structured as an inclusive e#ort ensuring broad participation and meaningful input across diverse community groups.

From analysis of the input from the community engagement process, a community vision for Powell Street emerged, which in turn guided the design team in the creation of an Urban Design Framework for the street and concepts for each segment of the street (the 10% Design) prioritizing the community’s needs and desires on safety, mobility, and the overall outdoor space character and experience.

KEY ENGAGEMENT OBJECTIVES
Fig 3: Engagement Objectives
POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 4

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
Overview of Activities and Milestones
The community engagement process, initiated in April 2024, included a coordinated series of meetings and outreach e#orts with stakeholders and the broader community using a range of tools and formats.

Following completion of the existing conditions analysis, MIG and City sta# presented findings and emerging opportunities to the Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) in Nov 2024, which included representatives from Public Works, Planning, Community and Art Programs, Alameda County Fire Department, Police Department, and the Emeryville Transportation Committee (ETC).

Additional coordination with the East Bay Regional Park District (EBRPD), Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC), Emeryville Transportation Management Association (ETMA), and Emeryville Fire and PD, occurred at di#erent stages during the process. Feedback from these agencies informed both engagement strategies and design development.

MIG conducted online/ in-person meetings with key stakeholders in the Fall of 2024: business owners and managers, property owners, and resident’s organizations, to gain an initial understanding of the communities’ priorities and needs around multi-modal access and safety.

These conversations helped inform the interactive questionnaire developed for the multi-lingual Visioning Survey, made available to the public from Dec 2024 through May 2025.

Fig 4: Project Timeline
In parallel, MIG conducted intercept surveys both at the project site and in other areas throughout the city to ensure the survey reached as broad an audience as feasible. Additional outreach e#orts included getting community feedback at Pop-up events held at the Emeryville Film Festival and Emery High School, garnering feedback from a diverse cross-section of the community.

Analysis and insight gained from the engagement process informed the development of an emerging community vision, goals and an urban design framework. This urban design framework and preliminary design concept options were presented to the City of Emeryville’s Transportation and Sustainability Committee (TSC), as well as the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) in June 2025. Based on Committee feedback, and selection of the preferred design direction, concepts were further refined, illustrated and presented to the public through two open house community events.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 5 The first open house, dedicated for Watergate residents, was conducted in in September 2025, followed by an Open House for all Emeryville residents and project users in October 2025. The Community’s feedback on the proposed concepts was positive, and feedback received during these open houses was reviewed and was incorporated into the 10% design. The 10% design was presented to the TSC in February 2026. The TSC unanimously approved the design team’s recommendations, and supported advancing the project without modifications to the City Council for review in May 2026.

Target Audiences
The Community engagement process focused on a range of stakeholders, including:

ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES
Stakeholder Meetings
Engagement activities were centered around understanding community needs and future vision for Powell Street and began with numerous stakeholder meetings to help inform the development of the community engagement survey to be shared with the broader community. These meetings included:
• Multi-agency Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) meeting including City departments and allied agencies to gain an understanding of their perspective on community needs, and concurrent outreach and projects in this location.
• Business- Emery Cove, Safe Harbor, Hilton, Hong Kong East. MIG met with property owners and business owners and operators to understand their perspective on use, needs, and improvements. Outreach extended to businesses and retail establishments near the project area.
• Watergate Community- Being the largest residential community in Emeryville, MIG and the City met with the property manager and residents at their monthly HOA meeting, introduced the project’s intent, and listened to their needs and concerns. • Residents and visitors who live, work, walk, bike, drive and take transit in and around the Project Area.
• Property owners, business merchants, employees, business and park patrons. • Local youth
• Senior community members and individuals with disabilities. • Government and institutional stakeholders
POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 6

Fig 5: Visioning Survey
The visioning survey was multi-lingual and available to the public in English, Spanish and Cantonese. The survey was publicized through the City’s website, social media account and physical posters and flyers with scannable QR codes. The survey was available online to the public from Dec 2024 through May 2025.

Intercept Surveys
To ensure the survey reached as wide an audience as possible, MIG sta# conducted a number of intercept surveys between Jan -May 2025, across locations in or adjacent to the project area and other parts of the City of Emeryville. These intercept surveys involved MIG’s sta# meeting and talking to people at locations where they live, work, or spend their leisure/ recreation time, to listen and record their feedback to the survey questionnaire.

Fig 6: Intercept Surveys
Online Survey
Based on feedback from the stakeholders, an interactive online visioning survey was developed and launched
using a dedicated survey platform. The survey was
available to the public in English, Cantonese, and
Spanish, with representative images and visuals paired
with each question for ease and clarity of understanding.

Questions in the survey covered the following broad
topics for survey takers.
• Their rela onship to Powell Street
• Overarching Community Vision and Goals
• Mobility
• Placemaking, and
• Op onal ques ons including age, iden ty, income,
disability of any, to help gather demographic informa on on the respondents.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 7 The following locations were included for intercept surveys:
• Emery Go-Around Shuttle Stops along the project site. • Local businesses: Shell, UPS, Randy’s Market, Hilton, Hong Kong East, Trader Vic’s • Emeryville Businesses: Los Moles, multiple retail businesses at the Powell St. Plaza Shopping Center businesses, Hidden Spot Restaurant.
• Parks: Emeryville Marina Park, Doyle Hollis Park, Huchiun Park, Emeryville Greenway, Bay Trail Pop Up Tabling Events

Fig 7: Pop-Up Events at Emeryville Film festival

Fig 8: Pop-Up Events at Emery High School
• Bay Street Emeryville Film Fes val: A desk at the Emeryville Film fes val was set up to talk to fes val visitors about the project and the survey. • Emery High School: MIG staff met with mul ple grades of students at the Emery High school, where the purpose and goals of the survey were explained to the students.

Students then took me to fill in the survey.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 8

SURVEY SUMMARY
A. Demographic Representation
Survey respondents reflect a community representative of Emeryville’s demographics and diversity.

Participation spanned a wide range of age groups and income levels- a significant portion of households earning above $100,000 annually. A majority (64%) identified as non-White or nonEuropean American, with Approximately 12% of respondents identified as living with a disability, underscoring the importance of accessibility in the design of public spaces.

Fig 9: Age Demographics

Fig 10 and 11: Ethnicity and Gender
POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 9 B. Participant Profile and Relationship to Powell Street The multi-lingual in person and online survey, conducted over 5 months, resulted in over 520+ respondents, providing a robust dataset of feedback and perspectives. Survey participants represented a broad cross-section of Powell Street users:
• Residents: 182 participants live within approximately 1.5 miles of the corridor • Workers: 95 participants work along Powell Street and adjacent areas • Recreation Users: 519 participants visit for exercise and recreation, particularly along the Bay Trail, Marina Park, and shoreline areas.
• Marina Users: 116 participants access boating and waterfront facilities. • Visitors (Shopping/Dining): 246 participants frequent local businesses and restaurants.

The diversity of respondents underscores Powell Street’s role as both a local neighborhood corridor and an important recreational destination for Emeryville and Easy Bay cities’ residents.

C. Existing and Future Travel Patterns
Current travel behavior reflects a reliance on driving, with 70% of respondents indicating they regularly use a car. Walking is as prominent as driving at 69%, reflective of the high numbers of walkers, and of the scenario where people drive to this segment of Powell Street to walk along the waterfront. Bicycling and transit use are less common, at 29% and 20% respectively, indicating more limited uptake of these modes under existing conditions.

In response to the question “Once all improvements are in place along Powell Street, how would you usually travel along Powell Street? “, respondents expressed a clear willingness and desire to Fig 12: Existing and Preferred Mode of Travel
POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 10 shift travel behavior if supportive improvements are made. Walking is expected to increase to 77%, reinforcing its role as a primary mode. Bicycling shows the most notable growth, rising to 49%, while transit use is anticipated to increase to 32%. At the same time, reliance on driving is projected to decrease to 59%.

Overall, these trends highlight a desire for more active and sustainable transportation options, contingent on investments in safe, accessible, and well-connected infrastructure.

D. Overarching Community Vision and Goals
When asked through the survey to ‘help identify the overall vision and goals for Powell Street’, Participants identified the following as the top (4) priorities for the Powell Street corridor:

1. Ensuring comfort, safety, and accessibility for all users was the highest priority (83%)

2. Enhancing streetscape character which included the planting of trees and improving the visual appearance of the street (68%)

3. Providing a range of public amenities and gathering spaces (65%), and

4. Ensuring that community engagement process is equitable (40%).

Fig 13: Community Vision and Goals
Additional qualitative feedback reflected key needs and concerns related to travel and the public realm. A consistent theme across responses was the importance of safety and security for all modes of travel—walking, driving, and cycling. Participants emphasized the need for measures that improve driver behavior, including traffic calming strategies such as speed bumps and speed cameras.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 11 Respondents identified opportunities to enhance the user experience through the addition of basic amenities, including restrooms, trash receptacles, and seating. Beyond mobility and comfort, many comments highlighted the value of maintaining visual and physical access to the bay.

Improving the coastal edge emerged as a priority, with a preference for low-maintenance, native planting that supports both ecological function and long-term sustainability.

E. Overall multi-modal mobility improvements
On overall multi-modal community improvements that would enhance the overall user experience, survey responses indicate strong community support for improvements that prioritize safety, accessibility, and multimodal travel along Powell Street.

The most widely supported improvement is improved walking infrastructure (85%) of respondents, underscoring the importance of walking in this part of Powell Street. Nearly half of respondents (49%) also expressed a desire for improved bicycle facilities. Slowing vehicle speeds (45%) and improving transit facilities (42%) were the other top priorities identified, collectively pointing to broad interest in creating a more balanced, multi-modal corridor that supports a range of users.

Fig 14: Survey feedback on Multi-modal mobility improvements Community comments o#ered additional suggestions that reinforced the findings, calling for better lighting, safer crossings, separated bike lane and tra#ic calming measures to support improved multi-modal travel, along with adding amenities such as seating and public art to enhance the overall experience.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 12 F. Pedestrian Improvements
Preferred Walking Location
Survey feedback clearly indicated that walking improvements should be prioritized along the water’s edge. An overwhelming 92% of respondents expressed a preference for walking along the waterfront, compared to 35% along the street. This aligns with existing use patterns, where recreational use of the Bay Trail walking path is a popular, observable activity on weekdays and weekends. In add is focused on enjoying the Bay Trail, exercising, and taking in panoramic views of the Bay and San Francisco. 35% of respondents identified walking along the street.

Fig 15: Survey Feedback on Location and Type of walking infrastructure Preferred Walking Facility
When asked about the kind of pedestrian facility that would improve walkability in the project area, a clear preference (72%) emerged for a separated sidewalk adjacent to a bike lane.

Respondent’s comments included widening walking paths to allow better access for strollers, wheelchairs and pedestrians, shade to improve walking comfort, improved crossing and intersections, specific areas for sidewalk improvements, along with amenities and improved landscaping along the waterfront.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 13 G. Bicycle Improvements
Preferred Biking Location
As with walking, there is a clear desire to bike along the waterfront (67%), consistent with recreational use in this portion of the Powell Street, and the Marina Park being a destination (or detour) o# the San Francisco Bay Trail. Results also indicate bicyclists being comfortable with biking along the street (57%).

Fig 16: Survey Feedback on Location and Type of biking infrastructure Preferred Biking Facility
Protected, separated bike lanes with a clear preference for a two-way protected facility (67%) emerged in response to question about the type of bike facility the community prefers. The two-way facility aligns with the desire to bike along the waterfront, both to and from Marina Park at the end of the peninsula. Community’s comments on this topic included protection from cars, reduced tra#ic speeds, marked bike lanes, clear separation from pedestrian facilities and additional bike parking.

H. Transit (Emery Go-Round Shuttle) Improvements
The Emery-Go Around shuttle is the sole public transit system plying within the project area, free of charge, with two westbound and two Eastbound shuttle stops. Except for one, these stops lack shelters. A desire for comfortable and protected shuttle shelters with seating (64%) and increased service frequency (63%) emerged, along with a desire for extended operating hours (47%).

Community’s comments on transit expressed a desire for real-time tracking, timing coordination with other transit facilities for seamless transfers, and restarting the express shuttle service from the Watergate complex.

The community identified locations along the project area for additional shuttle stops. Shuttle system improvements, apart from improvements to existing shuttle stops, are under the purview of Emeryville Transportation Management Association (ETMA).

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 14

Fig 17: Survey Feedback on Transit Infrastructure
I. Roadway Safety Improvements
Survey responses indicate clear support for roadway improvements that enhance safety and visibility for pedestrians. High visibility crosswalks emerged as the top priority (81%) highlighting the need for safer and pedestrian crossings. Enhanced signage such as user actuated Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon (RRFB) (55%), with protected intersections (51%) and tra#ic calming measures (51%) point to a clear community preference for a safer, more controlled roadway environment that prioritizes pedestrian safety and visibility, tra#ic calming.

Fig 18: Survey Feedback on Crosswalks
Community feedback further reinforces
these priorities, with respondents
calling for measures such as reducing
the number of travel lanes to slow
tra#ic, adding speed bumps and
cameras, and improving signage to
make pedestrians more visible to
drivers.

The community also identified several
locations for additional crossings along
the project, where currently none exist.

These crosswalk location
recommendations were taking into
consideration during the development
of the Urban Design Framework for the
project.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 15 J. Placemaking and Public Realm Enhancements
The community expressed strong interest in transforming Powell Street into a destination corridor supported by enhanced public spaces and amenities. The highest priorities include trees and streetscape planting (76%) and seating with views of the Bay (78%), underscoring the importance of a comfortable and visually appealing public realm that enhances and supports the existing scenic bayfront access and experience.

Respondents highlighted a range of complementary features that improve the social, recreational experience along the corridor including interactive public art (48%), spaces for activity and play (49%) and outdoor fitness (44%).

Comments emphasized comfortable, wind protected seating, trash bins, restrooms, water stations, and interactive signage specific to the local natural habitat. Additional improvements such as gateway features (35%) and expanded trees and streetscape planting (27%) further reflect a desire to strengthen identity and create a more inviting public realm.

Fig 19,20, 21 : Survey Feedback on Placemaking Elements POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 16 K. Community Vision
The engagement process revealed a vision for Powell Street as a safe, accessible, multi-modal street, which continues to hold access and visibility to the waterfront as a key priority. Community responses centered around creating a balanced, multimodal environment, with strong emphasis on pedestrian safety and comfort for all users.

Fig 22: Community Vision
Creating accessible and comfortable walking paths along the water’s edge emerged as critical to the overall experience, and overall improvements. High-visibility crossings were identified as essential to enhancing pedestrian safety and visibility, along with tra#ic calming measures. A protected two-way cycle track along the water emerged as the preferred mode of biking, emphasizing separation from both vehicular tra#ic and from pedestrian walkways, thereby improving safety for all users. There was support shuttle transit infrastructure and service for convenient and connected travel.

Respondents emphasized the importance of a comfortable, and visually coherent and pleasing public realm with, street trees, native plantings, and seating and gathering spaces with views of the waterfront together reinforcing the corridor’s identity and enhancing user experience.

The Powell Street community engagement process demonstrates strong public support for redesign that creates a safe, people-centered, multimodal, ecologically responsive and vibrant waterfront corridor.

These insights are consistent with the stated goals of the City of Emeryville’s Active Transportation Plan- to create a safer, more connected, and more equitable transportation network that prioritizes walking, bicycling, and transit, and to improving everyday mobility while advancing broader community and environmental objectives.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 17

COMMUNITY OPEN HOUSES
Insights from the survey provided a clear foundation to guide development of the Urban Design Framework, and multi-modal improvements to suit existing conditions and specific needs and character of each of the (5) distinct segments of the street. Improvements as part of this project included:

1. Continuous and comfortable sidewalks along the waterfront.

2. New protected two-way bike lanes on the south and west side of Powell *

3. Enhanced existing crosswalks and addition of new mid-block crosswalks.

4. Reduced travel lanes with wide ROW repurposed for enhanced sidewalks, bike facilities, and landscaping.

5. Calmed traBic speeds

6. Streetscape planting and green infrastructure

7. Street and Pedestrian walkway lighting improvements
Fig 23: Urban Design Framework
The urban design framework and preliminary design concept options were presented to the City of Emeryville’s Transportation and Sustainability Committee (TSC), as well as the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC). Based on the Committee feedback, and selection of the preferred design direction, refined concepts were presented to the Community in two Open House events.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 18 The first open house was held at the Clipper Clubhouse at the Watergate Complex on Saturday, Sep 6 th, 2025. The complex comprises of 1,249 condominium units with a population of approximately 2,400 residents. The City and MIG considered it critical to get feedback from this significant user group living at the core of the project area, as present and future users of the street, walkways and crossings and amenities on a regular basis. This event was open only to Watergate residents, and more than 30 residents attended this event.

The four-hour long community meeting (10am- 2pm) was structured to provide multiple opportunities for participants to learn about the project, ask questions and talk to the design team and City sta# present, and share their input. Brief overview presentations were delivered by MIG sta# at three points throughout the event, allowing attendees to join and engage at di#erent times.

In addition to the presentations, participants were invited to circulate through three interactive stations with boards, designed to gather focused feedback. • Station 1 provided a project overview and explored the community’s vision and desired improvements.
• Station 2 presented the urban design framework, and
• Station 3 showcased the preferred design concepts.

Fig 24: Watergate Open House
POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 19 Together, these stations created an open and flexible format for participants to walk around and review the materials presented at their own pace, discuss the design and share their opinions and feedback with the MIG team and City sta# members in attendance. The boards also allowed comments to be posted directly on the boards.

Community’s feedback on the proposed concepts was positive, and feedback received during these open houses was reviewed and incorporated into the 10% design.

The second Open House was hosted at the Emeryville Police station on Wednesday, Oct 8th, 2025.

The station also sits within the project area adjacent to the Fire station and across from the Watergate complex. The two-hour community Open house, held from 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM, was structured to provide a concise overview of the project alongside opportunities for meaningful public input. Similar to the Watergate open house (1) overview presentation took place, o#ering attendees an introduction to the project and its key elements.

Fig 25: Open House at Emeryville PD
Following the presentation, participants were invited to engage with three interactive stations organized in a similar manner to the Watergate Open House and designed to elicit focused feedback from the community. The format allowed attendees to engage with project materials, and share input in a flexible and interactive setting, with City sta# and the MIG team present to explain and answer questions. More than 25 people participated in the Open House, along with Council and Committee members from the City, and members of EMTA sta#.

POWELL STREET REDESIGN Community Engagement Summary, April 2026 20 Design concepts were well received, and comments, concerns and suggestions were recorded on the boards by MIG sta#, city sta# or the attendees themselves. The feedback received helped shape the 10% Design, by confirming design criteria and assumptions in the concepts, and considering and incorporating design interventions that address specific community concerns around safety and mobility (for example- the location and treatment of crossings, RRFB’s at all crosswalks, pedestrian lighting along the Bay trail walking path) as well as character and ambience (seating areas, planting).

Fig 26: Open House Engagement Boards with Community feedback The 10% design developed by MIG with Fehr & Peer’s input on tra#ic improvements, and City Sta# review and inputs, was presented to the Transportation and Sustainability Committee (TSC) in February 2026. The TSC unanimously approved the design team’s recommendations, and supported advancing the project without modifications, to the City Council for review in May 2026.

Fig 27: Representative intersection at Powell street- existing and proposed condition Memo
Date: April 8, 2026
To: Karthik Kumar, MIG
From: Hallet Modi, Fehr
Peers
Subject: Powell Street 10% Design Concept
This memorandum summarizes transportation-related elements of the proposed Powell Street 10% design prepared by MIG. The design focuses on improving safety of all users (e.g. people walking, biking, rolling, accessing transit, and driving), managing auto speeds, and maintaining access for all modes, including emergency services and boat trailer access to the Emeryville Marina. The design addresses the specific context and needs on Powell Street, including providing access to recreational activities, transit, and emergency services and the high presence of vulnerable road users (people walking or biking) who are more likely to suffer fatal or severe injuries if involved in a crash. The proposed design applies Safe System best practices, such as speed management strategies to reduce severity of crashes and enhanced bike and pedestrian safety to reduce the likelihood of crashes.

Speed Management
Speed management is the primary safety strategy of the project design. Safer speeds is a core objective of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe System Approach that aims to create forgiving transportation system to reduce the severity of crashes,1 and is reiterated in local (Alameda CTC) and regional (MTC) policy and funding objectives. People driving at higher speeds have a narrower field of vision and travel further before they can react and while they are breaking which increases the potential for crashes2. Speed is particularly hazardous to people biking, walking, and rolling because crashes at higher speeds are more forceful and these people don’t have the protection of being surrounded by a vehicle. The likelihood of a fatality increases exponentially with vehicle speed, so even a modest reduction in speed can substantially reduce the risk of death in a crash involving a vehicle and a vulnerable road user. Pedestrian risk of death jumps from 10% to 25% if hit by a vehicle traveling at 23 MPH versus 32 MPH.3 This corridor is used by many vehicle types, including passenger vehicles towing boats, delivery vehicles, and emergency vehicles (due to the presence of both fire and police stations). Heavy vehicles have higher kinetic energy, which increases the probability of severe outcomes of a crash. 1 https://www.transportation.gov/safe-system-approach
2 National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO) City Limits Design Guide, 2020 3 https://aaafoundation.org/impact-speed-pedestrians-risk-severe-injury-death/ Powell Street 10% Design Concept | 2
Redesigning streets to decrease a driver’s ability to operate a car at higher speeds, reduces the likelihood and severity of crashes.

To minimize the risk of a person being killed or seriously injured in a crash, streets can be designed to support appropriate speed limits based on conflict density and activity level. The National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO) recommends maximum speed limits of 25 MPH for most city streets, with 25 MPH being appropriate for major streets, 20 MPH for minor streets, and 10 MPH for shared streets and alleys.4
Additionally, slower vehicle speeds increase the comfort of people walking, biking, and rolling, making active modes of transportation more appealing to a broader proportion of the population.

Level of Traffic Stress (LTS) is a metric used to quantify the discomfort people experience when walking or biking on a roadway. Traffic speed is a key attribute in determining LTS, with higher speeds correlating to higher traffic stress and greater discomfort of people walking and biking.

Slower vehicles speeds support more trips by more people using active modes of transportation.

This is particularly important in the park-like setting of Powell Street along the San Francisco Bay frontage and Emeryville Marina.

Proposed Treatments
To lower auto speeds to appropriate levels relative to activity and context, the following treatments are included in the 10% designs:
• Narrow Lane Widths: The proposed design will reduce the lane widths of Powell Street. Narrower lane widths help promote slower driving speeds, which reduces the severity of crashes.5 • Remove Lanes: The proposed design removes right and left turn lanes at the all-way stop at Commodore Drive and removes left turn lanes at Access Road, Admiral Drive, and Captain Drive.

Removing these turn pockets narrow the roadway and reduce crossing distances for pedestrians.

Based on the low roadway ADT, gaps in oncoming traffic are likely large enough to allow vehicles to make left-turns. Removing lanes reduces auto exposure for pedestrians, enhancing safety. • Narrow Overall Travelway: The proposed design converts existing parallel parking on the north side of the street between Access Road and just west of Anchor Drive to angled parking. In addition, the design moves the westbound bike lane to a protected two-way cycle track on the south side of the street. As a result, these changes functionally narrow the overall travelway and narrow the driver’s perception of the width of the street. • New Curb Extensions at Crosswalks: The proposed design adds or enlarges curb extensions, also called curb bulb outs, along Powell Street at intersections and mid-block locations. Curb extensions cue drivers to reduce their speed by visually and physically narrowing the roadway and increasing visibility of pedestrians.
• Reduce Turning Radii at Intersection Corners: The proposed design reduces the effective turning radius at intersections and driveways throughout the corridor by extending curbs farther into the roadway and by extending medians closer into intersections. Tighter effective turning radii slow turn speeds, improving safety.6
MIG tested turns at intersections and driveways using bumper fire engine turn templates and adjust design to function for emergency access. • Reduce Target and Posted Speed Limits: The above design treatments are anticipated to enable lower posted speeds on the corridor through designing for a lower target speed. Table 1 presents 4 National Association of Transportation Officials (NACTO) City Limits Design Guide, 2020 5 NACTO Urban Street Design Guide (2013), Lane Width
6 NACTO Urban Street Design Guide (2013), Corner Radii
Powell Street 10% Design Concept | 3
the current speed conditions on the corridor. Today, the posted speed limit is 30 MPH at the eastern end of Powell Street where it intersects with West Frontage Road, and it transitions to 15 MPH at the western segments. Observed speed data collection showed that 85th percentile speeds on the project corridor are 5-10 MPH higher than the posted speed limit. When implemented, evaluate the design to confirm vehicles are traveling at the target speed.

Table 1: Current Speed and ADT Conditions (2024)
Segments Current Conditions
Eastern portion of the corridor
Posted Speed: 30 MPH
85th Percentile Speed: 35 MPH
ADT: 12,000
Middle portion of the corridor
Posted Speed: 25 MPH
85th Percentile Speed: 30 MPH
ADT: 2,613
Western portion of the corridor Posted Speed: 15 MPH
85th Percentile Speed: 24 MPH
ADT: 1,175
Source: weekday 24 hour tube counts, Fehr
Peers, 2024.

Vulnerable Road User Safety
Pedestrians and cyclists are disproportionately at risk to heavy, fast-moving vehicles, so it is critical to design a transportation system that accommodates physical human vulnerabilities. Beyond the treatments that reduce vehicles speeds described above, additional treatments are incorporated into the design of Powell Street to enhance the safety of vulnerable road users by reducing conflicts, increasing visibility, and separating users in space.

Pedestrian Safety
Uncontrolled Crosswalks
Enhancements recommendations at each uncontrolled crosswalk was determined using the FHWA STEP Guide for Enhancing Uncontrolled Crossings (2023), context, and engineering judgment.

Shortened crossing distances reduce exposure, and flashing beacons and median refuges provides safety countermeasures to encourage driver yielding. Crosswalk should be reviewed after installation of the design to confirm levels of drivers yielding to pedestrians and determine if additional treatments are needed.
• Shorten Crossing Distances: The proposed design shortens the distance pedestrians must travel to cross Powell Street through a combination of narrower lanes, removing lanes, curb extensions, tighter curb radius, and making crossings perpendicular. Shorter crossing distances improve pedestrian safety by reducing the exposure of pedestrians to vehicles. • Add Pedestrian Crossings: The proposed design adds pedestrian crossings at several locations to allow pedestrians to cross at each leg of the intersection and at key desire lines on the corridor. The added crossings improve access to transit stops and services along Powell Street.

Providing more frequent marked crossing locations and reducing out of direction travel for pedestrians to access marked crossing location reduces the likelihood of pedestrians crossing Powell Street at unmarked locations.

Powell Street 10% Design Concept | 4
• Add Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacons (RRFBs): The proposed design includes RRFBs at all unsignalized crossing locations. RRFBs include pedestrian-activated flashing lights which alert drivers of pedestrians crossing the street. RRFBs increase the visibility of pedestrians using marked crosswalks and cue drivers to slow down and yield to pedestrians. • Install Median Refuges: The proposed design extends medians up to many of the pedestrian crossing locations and many include an end cap on the intersection side of the crosswalk. Median refuges allow pedestrians to cross one direction of vehicle traffic at a time, provide physical barriers between vehicles and pedestrians, and increase visibility of pedestrians. • Add Stop Bars (and Stop Signs) on Side Streets: The proposed design adds stop bars to side streets along Powell Street and stop signs where missing today. Stop bars indicate to drivers where to stop before pedestrian crosswalks, increasing driver compliance of stopping prior to entering the crosswalk.

Controlled Crosswalks
There are three controlled intersections on Powell in the study area:

Powell Street 2 Frontage Road Traffic Signal. The San Francisco Bay Trail runs through this intersection, crossing the I-80 WB On-Ramp on the south side of the intersection and continuing north on the west crosswalk. MTC is leading a study to improve transit access on I-80 across the Bay Bridge and has proposed improvements at this signal, including a queue jump lane. As part of the Powell Street project, the eastbound right turn volume onto I-80 should be reviewed for potential conflicts with the Bay Trail. At minimum, a leading pedestrian interval (LPI) with “Bikes Use Ped Signal” signage should be installed. Separating the WB left queue jump phase and the EB right-turn from the south crosswalk should also be considered for Bay Trail safety, consistent with guidance in the NACTO Urban Streets Guide for when to phase-separate bicycle turning movements.

Powell Street 2 Access Road Traffic Signal. Today, only one crosswalk is marked across Powell Street. A second crosswalk on the east leg with an LPI should be considered with future development in the area. Curb extensions proposed will reduce crossing distances and slow right-turn vehicle speeds. Median refuges will allow pedestrian safe places to wait in the street if they cannot make it all the way across before the light changes.

Powell Street 2 Commodore Drive All-Way Stop. The project removes the left-turn lanes in both directions, as this makes the intersection complex for drivers and pedestrians to navigate, as it can be difficult to ascertain who has the right-of-way when a vehicle is stopped in each lane of a multilane approach. Curb extensions proposed will reduce crossing distances and slow right-turn vehicle speeds. Median refuges will allow pedestrians safe places to wait in the street if they cannot make it all the way across.

Anecdotally, the Emeryville Police Department reported that many people run the stop sign on Powell Street. As a result, the City is considering removing the stop-control at this location and replacing it with RRFBs. Traffic counts were collected in March 2026 on a typical weekday over three time periods to understand current traffic flows at Powell Street Commodore Drive. The data collection
indicates that in the AM peak hour, traffic volumes are relatively balanced between Commodore Drive and Powell Street, with 81 vehicles travel eastbound, 92 vehicles traveling westbound, and 61 vehicles entering Powell Street from Commodore. However, at other times of the day, Powell Street has substantially more vehicle traffic than Commodore, including in the midday and PM peak hour.

The City could conduct a stop warrant assessment as a next step to support removal of the stop signs from Powell Street.

Powell Street 10% Design Concept | 5

Powell Street 10% Design Concept | 6
Bike Safety
The FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide7 provides bike facility recommendations based on speed and average daily traffic (ADT) as shown in Table 1. Given the observed speeds, presence of heavier vehicles that tow boat trailers, and the park-like environment, cycle tracks (also known as “separated bike lanes”) are recommended, fully separating bicyclists from vehicles. This facility is consistent with the NACTO Urban Bikeway Guide and AASHTO Guide of the Development of Bicycle Facilities facility selection recommendations to support bicyclist safety and people of all ages and abilities.

The proposed design will convert existing striped bike lanes on the eastern end of the corridor and shared travel lanes with vehicles on the western end into a continuous protected two-way cycle track on the south/west side of Powell Street, connecting to the existing Bay Trail path under I-80.

Because there are relatively few conflicts on the south side of Powell Street, which runs along the Bay front, a two-way facility was selected. On the south side of the street, there are two land uses: a police station and a fire station. Where the street turns north there are additional driveways accessing the Hong Kong East Ocean restaurant and additional parking for the marina. Driveways and intersections along the two-way cycle track should be evaluated after installation to determine if additional safety treatments are needed. Driveway designs are assumed to be low speed (<10 MPH), and drivers exiting the driveways are required to stop in advance of the bikeway crossing. Green painted conflict striping at driveways is intended to increase driver awareness of two-way bike traffic.

Additionally, consolidating both directions of bike travel to one side of the road reduces the number 7 https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2022-07/fhwasa18077.pdf Powell Street 10% Design Concept | 7
of conflict points between bikes and other modes on the opposite side of the street. Pedestrians crossing the street will only need to watch for two-way bike traffic at the crosswalks.

The proposed pedestrian and bike safety features in this design are expected to reduce conflicts between the two modes. Today, bikes sometimes divert onto sidewalks at various points throughout the corridor, despite signage prohibiting this. This is less likely with the proposed facility because it is more comfortable for a wider age and ability range of bicyclists.

The bikeway design varies over the length of the corridor:
• Segment A – Frontage to Access Roads and Segment B – Access Road to Anchor Drive, the protected two-way cycle track is separated from vehicle traffic by a striped buffer and vertical delineation. Where opportunities exist with project budgets, substantial materials such as concrete buffers and/or curb stops should be integrated. • Segment C – Anchor Drive to Royal Coffee: the protected two-way cycle track is raised to sidewalk height and separated from vehicle traffic by a curb and planted buffer. • Segment D – Marina and Hong Kong East and Segment E – Park Streetscape: the protected two-way cycle track is at roadway grade and separated from vehicle traffic by a concrete curb. At the marina, the cycle track terminates into the bike parking area, allowing space to dismount and park before utilizing the pedestrian-only areas in the Marina Park.

Bus Stop Access
Every transit rider is a pedestrian at the start and end of their trips. The proposed design includes considerations to safely access transit. The Emery-Go-Round Shellmound/Powell Route provides service to the corridor, and stops at the following locations:
• Near the Hilton (westbound): The bus pulls out into the parking area to pick-up and drop off passengers.
• Captain Drive (westbound): The bus pull-off allows vehicle through-traffic to continue westbound. The design will include a sidewalk and marked crosswalks to allow passengers to easily access the bus stop.
• Commodore Drive (eastbound): The in-lane bus stop will feature a boarding island between the bike facility and the roadway, which reduces conflicts with people biking. • Near Hong Kong East (eastbound): The in-lane bus stop will feature a boarding island between the bike facility and the roadway, which reduces conflicts with people biking. Shade and places to stop and rest should be considered at each bus stop.

PROJECT AREA 2

WATERGATE

COMMUNITY HILTON

EMERY COVE

YATCH HARBOR

EMERYVILLE
MARINA
PARK

POWELL STREET MC LAUGHLIN EASTSHORE BAY PARK
URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK MAP WITH DISTINCT STREET SEGMENTS 9 Concepts for Powell Street were developed for five (5) different segments of the street, to respond to distinct built and open space conditions.

BIRD’S EYE VIEW FACING NORTHWEST ALONG POWELL STREET 10 10% DESIGN KEY PLAN 12
SEGMENT CPORT VIEW STREETSCAPE
SEGMENT BWATERGATE STREETSCAPESEGMENT AGATEWAY STREETSCAPE SEGMENT DMARINA

STREETSCAPE
SEGMENT EPARK

STREETSCAPE
15 mph 20 mph 25 mph
15 mph
ON STREET PARKING:

EXISTING: 105
PROPOSED: 110
SEGMENT A: GATEWAY – EXISTING CONDITIONS (Near Frontage Road) 13 0’ 5’ 10’
Feet
• Pedestrians: Bay trail runs along south edge of the street. Continuous sidewalk along North edge. Signalized intersections with crosswalks.
• Bicyclists: Striped, unprotected bike lane (Class II). • Automobiles: Two (Westbound) and Three (Eastbound) travel lanes, red curb, no parking.

Key Plan

MARSH HABITAT
AREA

MCLAUGHLIN EASTSHORE BAY PARK
1 LANE
25MPH
2 LANES30MPH

BUS STOP
SEGMENT A – GATEWAY STREETSCAPE 14

EXISTING
Key Plan
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
30 mph
Parking Lot

PLANTED MEDIAN
McLaughlin Eastshore Bay Park
Frontage Road

BAY TRAIL WALKING PATH
Freeway
New Intersection
Improvements
(MTA Project)
Existing
Traffic
Signal Existing Bay Trail
Shared Use Path

SIDEWALK
Gas
Station
Existing Bay Trail
Shared Use Path
Existing
Traffic Signal
Hilton
SEGMENT A – GATEWAY STREETSCAPE 15
Key Plan
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet

TWO WAY

PROTECTED
CYCLE
TRACK

BIKE RAMP
2FT RAISED
CONC.

MEDIAN
Existing Bay
Trail
Shared Use
Path

STRIPED
BUFFER
WITH

FLEXIBLE

BOLLARDS
NEW PED.

POLE LIGHTS,

TYPICAL

HIGH VISIBILITY

CROSSWALK WITH

ACCESSIBLE

CURB RAMPS

PLANTED

BULB OUT

MODIFIED

PLANTED
MEDIAN
Existing Bay
Trail
Shared Use
Path Ex. Street Lights
25 mph
Existing
Traffic
Signal
Frontage Road
Freeway

LPI WITH LIT
‘NO TURN
ON RED’
SIGN
ADDED
SPEED
TRANSITION 20 mph

PROPOSED
EX. RELOCATED

STREET LIGHT
SEGMENT B: WATERGATE STREETSCAPE – EXISTING CONDITIONS 16 0’ 10’ 5’
Feet
• Pedestrians: Meandering Bay trail along South edge, continuous sidewalk along North edge. Existing crosswalks at each street intersection • Bicyclists: Striped, unprotected bike lane (Class II) • Automobiles: One lane each way separated by median with parking Key Plan

PLANTED

MEDIANS

CLASS III(BIKE ROUTE)

CLASS II (BIKE LANE)

BAY TRAIL

DAVENPORT

PLAYGROUND

BUS STOP
SEGMENT B1 – WATERGATE STREETSCAPE 17
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan

BAY TRAIL WALKING PATH PLANTED MEDIAN

SIDEWALK
UPS
Fire Station
Bus
Stop
25 mph
Randy’s Market
McLaughlin Eastshore Bay Park
Parking Garage

EXISTING
SEGMENT B1 – WATERGATE STREETSCAPE 18
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
20 mph

PROTECTED

TWO-WAY

CYCLE TRACK

STRIPED
BUFFER
WITH

FLEXIBLE

BOLLARDS
NEW PED.

POLE LIGHTS

HIGH VISIBILITY

CROSSWALKS WITH

ACCESSIBLE

CURB RAMPS AND
RRFBs, TYPICAL

PLANTED BULB OUT

WITH STORMWATER

TREATMENT

MODIFIED

PLANTED
MEDIAN
Ex. Street Lights
Randy’s
Market

BUS AND

CASUAL CARPOOL
STOP

ON STREET

DIAGONAL PARKING
Parking
Garage
UPS
Randy’s
Market
McLaughlin Eastshore Bay Park

PROPOSED
Fire Station
EX. RELOCATED

STREET LIGHT
SEGMENT B2 – WATERGATE STREETSCAPE 19
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
25 mph
Watergate Watergate
Edge of rock Police Station Fire Station
revetment, typical

PLANTED MEDIAN

BAY TRAIL WALKING PATH

SIDEWALK

SIDEWALK

EXISTING
SEGMENT B2 – WATERGATE STREETSCAPE 20
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
20 mph

BUS ISLAND
AND

SHELTER

STRIPED
BUFFER

MARKED BIKE

CROSSING

DIAGONAL

PARKING
Watergate Watergate
Edge of rock Police Station Fire Station
revetment,
typical

BIKE SHARE

STATION
‘POLICE

BUSINESS
ONLY’

PARKING

MODIFIED
MEDIAN

STOP BAR AND

SIGN, TYPICAL AT

INTERSECTIONS

PROPOSED
‘POLICE BUSINESS
ONLY’ PARKING
SEGMENT B2 – WATERGATE STREETSCAPE 21
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
20 mph
Watergate Watergate
Edge of rock Police Station
revetment, typical
POLICE DEPT. FIRE STATION

PARKING

ENTRANCE
POLICE DEPT.

ENTRANCE

PROPOSED
SEGMENT B3 – WATERGATE STREETSCAPE 22
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
25 mph
Trader Vic’s Watergate Watergate

SIDEWALK
Edge of rock revetment

BAY TRAIL WALKING PATH

PLANTED MEDIAN

EXISTING
SEGMENT B3 – WATERGATE STREETSCAPE 23
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
20 mph
Edge of rock
revetment

PLANTED BULB OUT

WITH STORMWATER

TREATMENT

DIAGONAL

PARKING

BAY TRAIL WALKING PATH

SIDEWALK

MODIFIED

PLANTED
MEDIAN
Watergate Watergate Trader Vic’s
NEW PED.

POLE LIGHTS

PROPOSED
Ex. Street Lights
24 • Pedestrians: Bay trail is the primary public pedestrian access. Private/ discontinuous sidewalk along Emery Cove property. No crosswalks in this segment. • Bicyclists: Bikes sharing the street with vehicles.
• Automobiles: One travel lane each way, with no parking on either side ROYAL
COFFEE
Existing Plan
SEGMENT C: PORT VIEW STREETSCAPE – EXISTING CONDITIONS
Key Plan
0’ 10’ 5’
Feet

BAY TRAIL

DAVENPORT

PLAYGROUND EMERY
COVE

OFFICES
SEGMENT C – PORT VIEW STREETSCAPE 25
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
25 mph
25 mph
Emery Cove
Marina
Emery Cove
Marina
Davenport
Playground
Royal
Coffee
Edge of rock revetment

EXISTING
SEGMENT C – PORT VIEW STREETSCAPE 26
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
15 mph
15 mph
Royal
Coffee
Emery Cove
Marina
Emery Cove
Marina
Edge of rock revetment

RAMP UP CYCLE TRACK

PLANTED BUFFER TO SIDEWALK GRADE

BUS ISLAND

AND SHELTER
Davenport
Playground

PROPOSED
20 mph SPEED TRANSITION

RAMP DOWN CYCLE TRACK

TO STREET GRADE
27 0’ 5’ 10’
Feet
SEGMENT D: MARINA STREETSCAPE – EXISTING CONDITIONS
Key Plan

HONG KONG
EAST
PARK
ENTRY
GATE

SAFE HARBOR

PARKING LOT

BOAT LAUNCH
RAMP
• Pedestrians: No sidewalks; Bay trail is the primary pedestrian access. No crosswalk in this segment.
• Bicyclists: Shared bike route
• Automobiles: 13 to 14ft travel lanes, primary Marina and Boat Launch access. Three parking lot entrances/ wide driveways.

SEGMENT D – MARINA STREETSCAPE 28
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
15 mph
Safe Harbor
Parking Lot
Hong Kong East
Restaurant Parking
Bay Trail Bay Trail Edge of rock revetment
Safe Harbor
Offices
Park
Entry

EXISTING
SEGMENT D – MARINA STREETSCAPE 29
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
15 mph
Safe Harbor
Parking Lot
Hong Kong East
Restaurant Parking
Bay Trail Bay Trail
BEGIN 2FT WIDE

RAISED CONCRETE
CURB
Safe Harbor
Offices

HIGH VISIBILITY

CROSSWALK
WITH RRFBs

STOP BAR AND

SIGN, TYPICAL AT

INTERSECTIONS

PROPOSED

PROTECTED TWO-WAY

CYCLE TRACK

RAMP DOWN CYCLE TRACK

TO STREET GRADE
Ex. Park
Pedestrian Pole Light,
Typ.

Ex. Street Light,
Typ.

PARK

RESTROOM
(3) EXISTING

CROSS WALK

CONNECTIONS
MARINA

BAY TRAIL LAWN W/ TREES BERMS W/ TREES

FISHING
PIER
SEGMENT E: PARK STREETSCAPE – EXISTING CONDITIONS 30
• Pedestrians: No sidewalks, no curbs, Bay trail is primary pedestrian access. Existing Crosswalks to parking lots
• Bicyclists: Class III Shared bike route
• Automobiles: 13 to 14ft approx. travel lanes; no parking 0’ 10’ 5’
Feet
Key Plan
SAFE
HARBOR
OFFICE
Existing Plan
SEGMENT E – PARK STREETSCAPE 31
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
15 mph
Safe Harbor
Parking Lot
Park
Restroom
Edge of Rock
Revetment
Bay Trail
Safe Harbor
Offices
Park
Existing
Cul De Sac
Picnic
Area

EXISTING
SEGMENT E – PARK STREETSCAPE 32
0’ 160’ 40’
Feet
Key Plan
15 mph

PROTECTED TWO-WAY

CYCLE TRACK

BIKE PARKING

AND BIKE LANE

TERMINUS

HIGH VISIBILITY

CROSSWALKS
WITH RRFBs

END CONCRETE

CURB BUFFER
Park
Restroom
Safe Harbor
Offices
Existing
Cul De Sac
Picnic
Area
Picnic
Area
Existing Park
Pedestrian Pole
Light, Typ.

Existing Street
Light, Typ.

Bay Trail
RESOLUTION NO. _____

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF EMERYVILLE APPROVING

THE POWELL STREET REDESIGN PLAN DESIGN CONCEPT
WHEREAS, the City of Emeryville’s Active Transportation Plan was adopted on October 17, 2023, by the City Council with the aim to make walking, biking, and rolling through Emeryville easier and more enjoyable and the Plan identified a number of improvements for Powell Street west of Frontage Road and highlighted Powell Street as an area for future study in the Studies section of the Plan (F-3 Powell Street Segment A and F-8 BayTrail Widening); and
WHEREAS, the Powell Street Redesign Project kicked off in June 2024 with assistance from the consultant team MIG, Inc. and conducted a comprehensive, multi-phase community engagement process to inform the development of the Powell Street Redesign Plan to capture the lived experiences, needs, and priorities of residents, workers, businesses, and visitors who use the corridor, and to ensure project outcomes reflect community values and City policy goals; and
WHEREAS, feedback from public engagement expressed interest in shifting toward more active and sustainable travel modes, contingent on improvements such as separated bicycle facilities, enhanced pedestrian infrastructure, and traffic calming measures, emphasizing the importance of placemaking elements, including expanded landscaping, seating, public amenities, and maintaining visual and physical access to the waterfront; and
WHEREAS, Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept focuses on improving safety of all users, managing vehicle speeds, and maintaining access for all modes, including active transportation users, police and emergency services, and boat trailer access to the Emeryville Marina; and
WHEREAS, the proposed design applies the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Safe System Approach to reduce the severity and likelihood of vehicle crashes along the corridor utilizing treatments to manage vehicle speeds, enhancements to improve pedestrian safety, and a continuous, separated two-way cycle track; and WHEREAS, staff have determined the Plan design concept qualifies for a statutory exemption from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resource Code (PRC) Section 21080.25; now, therefore, be it
RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville that the Plan is exempt from environmental review under CEQA pursuant to PRC Section 21080.25 and staff shall file a Notice of Exemption with the Alameda County Clerk; and, be it, further RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville to approve the Powell Street Redesign Plan Concept.

Resolution No. _____
Powell Street Redesign Plan Design Concept
City Council Meeting | July 7, 2026

ADOPTED, by the City Council of the City of Emeryville at a regular meeting held Tuesday, July 7, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

MAYOR
ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

CITY CLERK SPECIAL COUNSEL
[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]