Written Public Comments Received 6-4-2024 — Richmond City Council, June 4, 2024

From: Brian Lewis
To: Eduardo Martinez; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Claudia Jimenez; Gayle McLaughlin; Lina Velasco; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Shasa Curl; Dave Aleshire; City Clerk Dept User Cc: jonathan livingston; [email protected]; Steve Chamberlin; Jeffrey Vines; Susan Hubbard; Mike Carnall; Jeff Shukis
Subject: CLosed Session June 4th Re: The Future of Terminal One Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 2:10:05 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Mayor Martinez and Richmond City Council,
We think Terminal One is an important property in Richmond. The Community would welcome a hearing to discuss and learn of different options for the property, including the much improved March 21st, 2024, revised residential plan proposed by Laconia. We encourage the City Council, in the Closed Session, to agree to the proposed hearing and to schedule the hearing date as soon as possible. Sincerely, Brian Lewis, Brickyard Cove Alliance for Responsible Development (BCARD)
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 10:26 AM Steve Chamberlin <[email protected]> wrote:

Mayor, Council and City staff:

I have a Master’s Degree in Planning and worked in both residential and commercial development for 40 years, I support Jonathan’s position and object to any action by City leadership to embark upon a change in permitted use for the T1 property without first going through the process of amending the General Plan including the required CEQA studies.

Doesn’t the City already spend enough money on litigation? Respectfully,
Steve Chamberlin
510-816-3177
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 3, 2024, at 9:49 AM, jonathan livingston
<[email protected]
> wrote:

Dear honorable mayor Martinez and City Council.

My Name is Jonathan Livignston, I am the former chair of the City of Richmond's DRB and have been living off and on in Brickyard Cove for 60 years. When I was 8 years old Terminal one was an active maritime facility , with rail service, truck service and ship traffic. It is with this historical and civic memory that I write to you as you all consider the future of Terminal One.

For the last 16 or so years I have been actively involved in many plans proposed on this parcel of land. Two versions of this plan came in front of the DRB and were approved with conditions; However the community has not been happy with these last two plans for a variety of reasons. When the property changed hands and the city transferred title to the developer there was a condition of sale that the developer would make best efforts to satisfy the communities concerns and conform to the city of Richmond's shoreline overlay district's recommendations. I am happy to say this has happened.

The new plans for Terminal One have been shown to the public. First, a general introduction of the plan to the community was done by BCARD and the feedback from the community was positive and unanimous. The second public review just happened last week when the same design was presented to the Point Richmond Neighborhood Council and its Land Use Committee. The PRNC had a similar positive and supportive reaction. The new plans integrate most of the big concerns that the community had with the previous plans including a park like waterfront environment similar to that of the Waterline development to the East, Sea level rise mitigations, environmental mitigations, a new market / cafe to provide food and beverage service to the public located on the Bay trail next to Miller knox park and homes that are designed to fit into the fabric of the neighborhood and were designed for this site.

I would urge all of you to support this community based design and vote to allow the developer to continue to develop these plans and entitle the project.

Point Richmond's residents, TRAC, and the majority of residents in the Brickyard Cove are tired of the existing blight, horrible intersection that is now an unfortunate left over from the DPW new sewer lift station project and .....the city needs the money.

Alternative:

I was briefed by the new port director that it is the desire of some on the CC to develop the old Terminal One wharf and site into a working port facility. He said that there are no other options - no other deep water port facilities.

There are much better alternatives available , they are in order of ease of getting permitted:

1. AAK wharf and existing warehouse - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease.

2. City owned graving docks next to the Red Oak. - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease. Room to build as well.

3. Sugar Dock across from Sims metals on the Santa Fe Channel. - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to exercise eminent domain rights. and the least attractive and most problematic would be

4. Terminal One - The wharf is unsuitable and in serious need of structural repairs. The water is shallow in depth and not suitable for ships, no rail service and limited truck access. It will need a General Plan Change, a Zoning Change, a full EIR and BCDC will need to approve it and amend the Seaport plan. Then you will also need to deal with a fierce and informed and well organized community that does not want this use on this land.

There are three better alternatives......

Please support the community and vote to allow T-1 to continue its development plans.

Respectfully submitted
Jonathan Livingston former DRB Chair
P.S. I have been working in Richmond for 50 years. I have more experience doing these types of projects than anyone. I also designed the Shea Homes project called " Waterline".

From: Bruce Brubaker
To: Shasa Curl; City Clerk Dept User; Dave Aleshire; Cesar Zepeda Subject: Terminal One plans
Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 12:04:04 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Manager and City Clerk:

I am writing about the recent development of new plans for Terminal One. Although I am a Planning Commissioner, I am speaking here for myself. I am a Point Richmond resident and my career has been in architecture and urban design.

I do not support the new proposal. In fact, I believe this project is going in the wrong direction. This new proposal shows fewer, and larger, houses at Terminal One.

When considering this project, I ask myself the following question: during this time of acute need for new housing, why would the City allow housing development on city-owned property that 98% of Richmond residents cannot afford?

Thank you,

Bruce Brubaker
560 Washington Avenue
Pt. Richmond, CA 94801
From: Irene Lozano
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: Shannon Moore; Shasa Curl; Trina Jackson-Lincoln; Lina Velasco Subject: FW: Support of Terminal One Laconia and Livingston Development Plan Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 1:50:13 PM
Hello,

This is the second email I’ve received about Terminal One, I presume these may qualify as public comment. I will forward the other email shortly.

Irene Lozano
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
City Manager’s Office
510-621-1264

From: [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2024 12:10 PM
To: Eduardo Martinez <[email protected]>; Soheila Bana <[email protected]>; Claudia Jimenez <[email protected]>; Gayle McLaughlin <[email protected]>; Doria Robinson <[email protected]>; Melvin Willis <[email protected]>; Cesar Zepeda <[email protected]>; Irene Lozano <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Support of Terminal One Laconia and Livingston Development Plan

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Mayor Martinez; Council Members Bana, Jimenez, McLaughlin, Robinson, Willis, and Zepeda, City Manager Curl (c/o Irene Lozano), and City Attorney Aleshire:

I fully support the current design for Terminal One presented by Laconia and Jonathan Livingston.

I been part of the Brickyard community for 40 years. When I first moved back 14 years ago to the Seacliff development in Brickyard Cove, I was told,"We’re close to finally have some lovely homes be built on Terminal One". It was a relief to hear as it has been not only an eyesore, but also a safety concern. Fourteen years have gone by, and still there’s no development and no tax revenue for the city.

After all these years, we finally have a design approved by the interested parties.

I can’t imagine how much Laconia has spent trying to please the City and the Community over so many years. I’m concerned what level of City funds may be tied up in lawsuits if this latest plan doesn’t go through.

With the housing shortage we face in the Bay Area this should be turned into housing.

It is the wrong place for any type of industrial development.

I understand the meeting will be a closed meeting. Please don’t make this choice. As your citizens we have a right to understand directly and hear clearly why you might turn down this proposal.

Thank you for doing the work you do.

Sincerely,
Camille Cellucci
Seacliff Owner
From: RYC Commodore
To: Eduardo Martinez; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Claudia Jimenez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson Cc: Brian Lewis; Lina Velasco; Shasa Curl; Dave Aleshire; City Clerk Dept User; jonathan livingston; [email protected]; Steve Chamberlin; Jeffrey Vines; Susie Hubbard; Mike Carnall; Jeff Shukis; Board of Directors
Subject: Re: CLosed Session June 4th Re: The Future of Terminal One Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 5:39:15 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Mayor and City Council,
I am writing to you as the Commodore of the Richmond Yacht Club. Our Board of Directors has reviewed the latest plan for Laconia’s development of the Terminal One property, which borders the Richmond Yacht Club. We support this plan, as all of our major issues with the previous plans have been addressed.

We support developing the property residential use, not industrial. Brickyard Cove is currently a vibrant residential area with well maintained recreational harbors. Miller Knox Park and its shoreline are a haven for Richmond families and the community on weekends.

Terminal One borders the park on one side and Brickyard Cove on the other. It makes no sense to put an industrial facility in the middle, when there are so many other options, with existing facilities and deep water access, in the industrial shoreline areas of Richmond.

Respectfully,
Randall Rasicot
Commodore, Richmond Yacht Club
On Jun 3, 2024, at 2:10 PM, Brian Lewis <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Mayor Martinez and Richmond City Council,
We think Terminal One is an important property in Richmond. The Community would welcome a hearing to discuss and learn of different options for the property, including the much improved March 21st, 2024, revised residential plan proposed by Laconia. We encourage the City Council, in the Closed Session, to agree to the proposed hearing and to schedule the hearing date as soon as possible. Sincerely, Brian Lewis, Brickyard Cove Alliance for Responsible Development (BCARD)
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 10:26 AM Steve Chamberlin <[email protected]> wrote:

Mayor, Council and City staff:

The new plans for Terminal One have been shown to the public.

First, a general introduction of the plan to the community was done by BCARD and the feedback from the community was positive and unanimous. The second public review just happened last week when the same design was presented to the Point Richmond Neighborhood Council and its Land Use Committee. The PRNC had a similar positive and supportive reaction. The new plans integrate most of the big concerns that the community had with the previous plans including a park like waterfront environment similar to that of the Waterline development to the East, Sea level rise mitigations, environmental mitigations, a new market / cafe to provide food and beverage service to the public located on the Bay trail next to Miller knox park and homes that are designed to fit into the fabric of the neighborhood and were designed for this site.

I would urge all of you to support this community based design and vote to allow the developer to continue to develop these plans and entitle the project. Point Richmond's residents, TRAC, and the majority of residents in the Brickyard Cove are tired of the existing blight, horrible intersection that is now an unfortunate left over from the DPW new sewer lift station project and .....the city needs the money.

Alternative:

There are much better alternatives available , they are in order of ease of getting permitted:

1. AAK wharf and existing warehouse - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease.

2. City owned graving docks next to the Red Oak. - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease.

Room to build as well.

3. Sugar Dock across from Sims metals on the Santa Fe Channel. - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to exercise eminent domain rights.
and the least attractive and most problematic would be

There are three better alternatives......

Please support the community and vote to allow T-1 to continue its development plans.

From: jeff shukis
To: Eduardo Martinez; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Claudia Jimenez; Gayle McLaughlin; Lina Velasco; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Shasa Curl; Dave Aleshire; City Clerk Dept User Subject: Re: CLosed Session June 4th Re: The Future of Terminal One Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 7:53:41 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Richmond city council and mayor,
The residents of Sandpiper Spit, represented by Brickyard Cove HOA2, fully support the latest residential development plan presented to us for the nearby "Terminal One" property, which addresses the serious flaws in the prior plan, which you also rejected. We do not support and would vigorously oppose any commercial use of the property.

Jeff Shukis
Brickyard Cove HOA2 President
From: Jeffrey Vines
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: Jeffrey Vines
Subject: Fwd: Terminal One - Closed Session
Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 4:18:27 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dar City Clerk,
I sent this earlier today, but, understand you need to receive a copy for this to be properly registered.

Thank you
Jeff Vines
Begin forwarded message:

From: Jeffrey Vines <[email protected]
>
Subject: Terminal One - Closed Session
Date: June 3, 2024 at 11:41:45 AM PDT
To: [email protected]
Cc: Jeffrey Vines <[email protected]>, Cesar Zepeda <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], Gayle McLaughlin
<[email protected]>,
[email protected], [email protected], Shasa Curl <[email protected]>, Dave Aleshire <[email protected]>, Brian Lewis <[email protected]>, Lina Velasco <[email protected]>
Dear Honorable Mayor Martinez and City Council Members, I understand that during the closed session of your Tuesday June 4th City Council meeting (or possibly the next meeting) you will be considering the fate of the Terminal One property including the agreement with Laconia, the developer.

First, I will say that I believe the whole of Point Richmond and Brickyard Cove residents concurred with your decision, following the hearing held in February 2023, not to approve or support the proposed development or the sale of the Terminal One property to Laconia. Their proposed plan to cram in 154 homes on the property was poorly designed and wholly inappropriate for such a premier site.

On March 21, 2024 many in our community were given a preview of Laconia's significantly improved, revised plan for the site which was well received by me and the vast majority others who attended the preview. I am requesting that during your closed session discussion about Terminal One you agree to, as soon as possible, schedule a public hearing to explore and evaluate the proposed revised plan as a potential development solution for the site.

Your consideration is very much appreciated.

Jeff Vines
Member - Brickyard Cove Alliance for Responsible Development (BCARD) From: John Stafford
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Terminal 1 property
Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 10:26:30 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Mayor and City Council members,
I am a 30+ year homeowner in Brickyard Cove HOA#1. I have stayed informed of the various residential projects that have been considered over the past several years. The current proposed residential concept has great merit and seems to be supported by several of our neighborhood groups.

To consider an industrial use on this property is a mistake both in lack of compatibility with the character of our community as well as legal and permitting problems. I support Jonathan Livingston’s comments on this matter and hope alternative sites will be looked at in an effort to support and protect our residential neighborhood.

Respectfully,
John Stafford
From: Brian Lewis
To: jonathan livingston; [email protected]
Cc: Jeffrey Vines; Susan Hubbard; City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Re: The Future of Terminal One - Closed session Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 2:12:10 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

You may have done it, but don't forget to CC the City Clerk. [email protected] Comments have to be received by 1 pm on June 4th. brian On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 9:49 AM jonathan livingston <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear honorable mayor Martinez and City Council.

Alternative:

There are much better alternatives available , they are in order of ease of getting permitted:

1. AAK wharf and existing warehouse - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease.

3. Sugar Dock across from Sims metals on the Santa Fe Channel. - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to exercise eminent domain rights.
and the least attractive and most problematic would be

4. Terminal One - The wharf is unsuitable and in serious need of structural repairs. The water is shallow in depth and not suitable for ships, no rail service and limited truck access.

It will need a General Plan Change, a Zoning Change, a full EIR and BCDC will need to approve it and amend the Seaport plan. Then you will also need to deal with a fierce and informed and well organized community that does not want this use on this land.

There are three better alternatives......

Please support the community and vote to allow T-1 to continue its development plans.

From: Brian Lewis
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Fwd: CLosed Session June 4th Re: The Future of Terminal One Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 5:53:18 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Three separate letters. fyi.

Dear Council Member Robinson —
I have been a Richmond Resident for some 38 years. I have very much enjoyed and am very grateful for those years.

During those years I have seen several plans for Terminal One and sometimes been invited to share my thoughts on their design/plans which I was happy to do.

I have also been a Real Estate Broker those years and for 38 years have disclosed the Terminal One site would be developed with, most likely with housing.

The most recent plans which Laconia and Jonathan Livingston have presented should be approved on so many levels.

After years of the city not receiving any revenue - only funds going out — “It’s Time”
Respectfully submitted --
Margi Cellucci
Dear Mayor, Council Members, City Manager and City Attorney, I understand that you will hold a closed meeting on Tuesday, June 4th, to determine if the City of Richmond should reclaim the property known as Terminal One so the City can change the course of the development of that property from a housing community to an industrial plant. As someone who lives in the residential area next to The Brickyard I oppose this change.

The housing development designed by Johnathan Livingston and Laconia is a community of beautiful homes that are badly needed in California. The housing shortage here is dire! The present site is an eye sore and continues to deteriorate.

Every time I drive or walk by the ugly gray buildings I wonder why this beautiful real estate property with its view of San Francisco and the Bay is neglected and wasted when we need homes so badly in California.

We should not spend years in costly litigation to put an industrial plant in a residential community and next to a park that is used by the people who live in the community and people outside the community who frequent this park every weekend.

I object to this change! I also request that the Tuesday meeting be open to the public so we can attend and voice our objections in person! I want to know why the City thinks an industrial plant is better for the community than housing. I want to know what the City will gain from this plant that is better than the property taxes that will be collected from family homes.

Sincerely,
Mickey McGovern
Dear Mayor Martinez; Council Members Bana, Jimenez, McLaughlin, Robinson, Willis, and Zepeda, City Manager Curl (c/o Irene Lozano), and City Attorney Aleshire:

I fully support the current design for Terminal One presented by Laconia and Jonathan Livingston.

After all these years, we finally have a design approved by the interested parties.

With the housing shortage we face in the Bay Area this should be turned into housing. It is the wrong place for any type of industrial development.

I understand the meeting will be a closed meeting. Please don’t make this choice. As your citizens we have a right to understand directly and hear clearly why you might turn down this proposal.

Thank you for doing the work you do.

Sincerely,
Camille Cellucci
Seacliff Owner
Margi Cellucci
BayView Realty
(510) 685-2018 (mobile)
[email protected]
BREr00894024
Dear Mayor Martinez and Richmond City Council,
We think Terminal One is an important property in Richmond. The Community would welcome a hearing to discuss and learn of different options for the property, including the much improved March 21st, 2024, revised residential plan proposed by Laconia. We encourage the City Council, in the Closed Session, to agree to the proposed hearing and to schedule the hearing date as soon as possible. Sincerely, Brian Lewis, Brickyard Cove Alliance for Responsible Development (BCARD)
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 10:26 AM Steve Chamberlin <[email protected]> wrote:

Mayor, Council and City staff:

The new plans for Terminal One have been shown to the public.

Alternative:

There are much better alternatives available , they are in order of ease of getting permitted:

1. AAK wharf and existing warehouse - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease.

2. City owned graving docks next to the Red Oak. - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease.

Room to build as well.

3. Sugar Dock across from Sims metals on the Santa Fe Channel. - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to exercise eminent domain rights.
and the least attractive and most problematic would be

There are three better alternatives......

Please support the community and vote to allow T-1 to continue its development plans.

From: Irene Lozano
To: City Clerk Dept
Cc: Shasa Curl; Shannon Moore
Subject: FW: Terminal One
Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 5:43:07 PM
Public comment for Terminal One.

Irene Lozano
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
City Manager’s Office
510-621-1264

From: Margi Cellucci <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2024 4:48 PM
To: Eduardo Martinez <[email protected]>; Soheila Bana <[email protected]>; Claudia Jimenez <[email protected]>; Gayle McLaughlin <[email protected]>; Doria Robinson <[email protected]>; Melvin Willis <[email protected]>; Cesar Zepeda <[email protected]>; Irene Lozano <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Subject: Terminal One

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Mayor, City Atty. and Council Members —

It is important and long overdue! I enthusiastically support Jonathan Livingston's solution for Terminal One.

PLEASE MAKE IT HAPPEN!!

Martin McNair
40 Year Resident of Richmond

From: Irene Lozano
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: Shasa Curl; Lina Velasco; Shannon Moore
Subject: FW: Terminal One Development, LLC
Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 2:04:25 PM
Second public comment received regarding Terminal One.

Best,

Irene Lozano
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
City Manager’s Office
510-621-1264

From: Mickey McGovern <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, June 3, 2024 10:43 AM
To: Eduardo Martinez <[email protected]>; Soheila Bana <[email protected]>; Claudia Jimenez <[email protected]>; Gayle McLaughlin <[email protected]>; Doria Robinson <[email protected]>; Melvin Willis <[email protected]>; Cesar Zepeda <[email protected]>; Irene Lozano <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Cc: Margi Cellucci <[email protected]>; Camille Cellucci <[email protected]>; MICKEY MCGOVERN <[email protected]>
Subject: Terminal One Development, LLC

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Mayor, Council Members, City Manager and City Attorney,

I understand that you will hold a closed meeting on Tuesday, June 4th, to determine if the City of Richmond should reclaim the property known as Terminal One so the City can change the course of the development of that property from a housing community to an industrial plant. As someone who lives in the residential area next to The Brickyard I oppose this change.

Sincerely,

Mickey McGovern

Mickey McGovern
[email protected]
Writer/Producer
From: Philip Rosenthal
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: Shasa Curl; City Clerk Dept User; Dave Aleshire; Cesar Zepeda; jonathan livingston; Leisa Johnson; Rod Satre; Charmain Tyler; Eric Napracca; Anna Siria Ortiz; [email protected]; Margi Sullivan Subject: Public comment, June 4, 2024 City council meeting agenda item C2 Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 5:50:29 PM
Attachments: Terminal One letter June 2024 revised project.docx This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

I am resending this statement from the Point Richmond Neighborhood Council. Although we do routinely send these out to the city staff and council members, we additionally would like to enter this letter into public record and public comment on the issue .

Thank you so much, Philip
On Jun 3, 2024, at 11:54 AM, Philip Rosenthal <[email protected]> wrote:

Hi Shasa and City Clerk,
Please confirm receipt and distribution of this email.

The community is ready to move forward.
--
Philip Rosenthal
PRNC President
[email protected]
(510)593-9017

Page 1 of 3 ends

June 3, 2024
City of Richmond
Shasa Curl, City Manager
450 Civic Center Plaza
Richmond CA

To All concerned,

The PRNC and its Land Use Design Review Committee had a public review of the newest Terminal One development plan last Wednesday, May 28th. Jonathan Livingston introduced the revised project. Below is a summary of previous community concerns from BCARD and the PRNC regarding the old project, with associated improvements to address those concerns in the revised plan.

PRNC summary:

The PRNC overwhelmingly voted to support this most recent Terminal One design presented by Mr. Livingston, with the following conditions included:

1. This project is conceptual in nature and will return to the PRNC with detailed plans that are DRB-ready.

2. The new Terminal One plans will follow "The Essential Bay Trail" design in Section 5.1 of the San Francisco Bay Trail Design Guidelines and Toolkit.*

3. The Bay Trail plan that is included in this plan is conceptual in nature, and the applicant will continue to work with TRAC prior to DRB submittal.

Page 2 of 3 ends

General overview:

The project addresses all of the major objections to the previous plans. The developer has shown us a more community-centered design philosophy and illustrated to us a commitment to addressing the past concerns.

Examples:
• Sea Level Rise. The developer has hired a sea level rise expert that has directly advised them on the expected sea level rise, storm surge and flooding consistent with the city’s standards.
• Plan design and scale. The old plan had too many homes that were way too close together. The new plan opens up the development and the number of units was reduced from 159 to 85 to accommodate this request. • Emergency vehicle access and general ingress and egress safety issues.

With approximately 50% fewer units, adverse impacts to vital public safety routes have been reduced.
• Shoreline setback. The new design is now held back 100 feet from the shore, whereas the previous design was much closer.
• Environmental: There were unanswered and problematic issues regarding imported fill. The developer has discovered an on-site adaptive reuse of the building and the redesigned buildings mitigate this concern. • Parking. The new plan provides almost double the amount of parking for residents and guests as compared to the previous plan.
• Height of homes abutting property edges. There were many complaints about three-story homes abutting the edges of the property. The new plan has only two-story homes on all edges.
• Architecture and design.
o The architecture that was presented in the old plan seemed out- of- place and bulky. The new architecture is traditional, fits in better with its surroundings, much less bulky and massive and has been custom- designed for the site. Additionally, the new plan offers much more open space, including a green belt, community garden, tot lot, and a 100- foot- wide waterfront landscaped environment.
• Maintenance costs for a public wharf and park. In the new plan, the public wharf and associated park is gone, and with it the need for taxpayers and/or the HOA to maintain it.

Page 3 of 3 ends

Other notable improvements:
• Public cafe. The cafe has expanded and become better suited to offer services to the Brickyard Cove residents and workers, EBRPD, and the general public.

There is no retail or food service currently available in the cove or adjacent to Miller Knox Park or Ferry Point. This cafe is perfectly situated at the crossroads of a huge park, the Bay Trail and the gateway to Brickyard Cove. • Accessible units. The developer has also recognized and provided accessible units with views, allowing seniors to age in place as well as those with disabilities.
• *Bay Trail. In the previous plan, it became evident last year that the proposed Bay Trail did not work with the new sewer lift pump station. The developer has offered an alternative to this and has also worked with TRAC to make all requested modifications. Two routes for the Bay Trail remain in this plan, a “commuter” version and a “scenic “version.”

Kind Regards,

Philip Rosenthal
Philip Rosenthal, PRNC President
(510) 593-9017
[email protected]
https://pointrichmond.org/
From: Steve Chamberlin
To: City Clerk Dept User
Subject: Public comment, June 4, 2024 City council meeting agenda item C2 Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 5:51:02 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Steve Chamberlin
510-816-3177
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 3, 2024, at 4:14 PM, Steve Chamberlin <[email protected]> wrote:
Please distribute.

Steve Chamberlin
510-816-3177
Sent from my iPad
Begin forwarded message:

From: Steve Chamberlin <[email protected]>
Date: June 3, 2024 at 10:26:08 AM PDT
To: jonathan livingston <[email protected]>
Cc: Eduardo Martinez <[email protected]>, [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected],
[email protected], Shasa Curl
<[email protected]>, Dave Aleshire
<[email protected]>, [email protected], Brian Lewis <[email protected]>, Lina Velasco
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: The Future of Terminal One - Closed session Mayor, Council and City staff:

Doesn’t the City already spend enough money on litigation? Respectfully,
Steve Chamberlin
510-816-3177
Sent from my iPad
On Jun 3, 2024, at 9:49 AM, jonathan livingston
<[email protected]> wrote:

Dear honorable mayor Martinez and City Council.

My Name is Jonathan Livignston, I am the former chair
of the City of Richmond's DRB and have been living off
and on in Brickyard Cove for 60 years. When I was 8
years old Terminal one was an active maritime facility , with rail service, truck service and ship traffic. It is with this historical and civic memory that I write to you as you all consider the future of Terminal One.

For the last 16 or so years I have been
actively involved in many plans proposed on this parcel of land. Two versions of this plan came in front of the DRB and were approved with conditions; However the
community has not been happy with these last two plans
for a variety of reasons. When the property changed
hands and the city transferred title to the developer there was a condition of sale that the developer would make
best efforts to satisfy the communities concerns and
conform to the city of Richmond's shoreline overlay
district's recommendations. I am happy to say this has happened.

The new plans integrate most of the big concerns that the community had with the previous plans including a park
like waterfront environment similar to that of the
Waterline development to the East, Sea level rise
mitigations, environmental mitigations, a new market /
cafe to provide food and beverage service to the public located on the Bay trail next to Miller knox park and
homes that are designed to fit into the fabric of the
neighborhood and were designed for this site.

I would urge all of you to support this community based design and vote to allow the developer to continue to
develop these plans and entitle the project. Point
Richmond's residents, TRAC, and the majority of
residents in the Brickyard Cove are tired of the existing blight, horrible intersection that is now an unfortunate left over from the DPW new sewer lift station project
and .....the city needs the money.

Alternative:

I was briefed by the new port director that it is the desire of some on the CC to develop the old Terminal One
wharf and site into a working port facility. He said that there are no other options - no other deep water port
facilities.

There are much better alternatives available , they are in order of ease of getting permitted:

1. AAK wharf and existing warehouse - it has a deep
water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it
has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease.

2. City owned graving docks next to the Red Oak. - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport
plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease. Room to build as well.

3. Sugar Dock across from Sims metals on the Santa
Fe Channel. - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to exercise eminent domain rights.
and the least attractive and most problematic would be

4. Terminal One - The wharf is unsuitable and in
serious need of structural repairs. The water is shallow in depth and not suitable for ships, no rail service and limited truck access. It will need a General Plan Change, a Zoning Change, a full EIR and BCDC will need to
approve it and amend the Seaport plan. Then you will
also need to deal with a fierce and informed and well
organized community that does not want this use on this land.

There are three better alternatives......

Please support the community and vote to allow T-1 to
continue its development plans.

From: Irene Lozano
To: City Clerk Dept; [email protected]
Subject: FW: The Future of Terminal One
Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 10:14:41 AM
Attachments: Outlook-A blue and.png
Hello,

I am forwarding your comment to the City Clerk’s Office for further processing.

Best,

Irene Lozano
Executive Assistant to the City Manager
City Manager’s Office
510-621-1264

From: William R. Hill <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 5:27 AM
To: Eduardo Martinez <[email protected]>; Soheila Bana <[email protected]>; Gayle McLaughlin <[email protected]>; Cesar Zepeda <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Irene Lozano <[email protected]>
Subject: The Future of Terminal One

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Staff:

I'm writing to express my agreement with the opinions contained in the letters sent to you yesterday by Steve Chamberlin and Jonathan Livingston (copied below). Like them, I am a long- time resident in Brickyard Cove, having moved here in 1987, first in the Brickyard Landing condos and now on the water on Pelican Way. The property comprising Terminal One is important to the City of Richmond and to the residents in Pt. Richmond and Brickyard Cove.

Like Steve and Jonathan—and indeed like virtually everyone in the Brickyard and Pt. Richmond community--we would welcome and encourage a hearing to discuss the different options for the property, in particular the much improved residential plan proposed by Laconia.

Sincerely,

William R. Hill
1325 Pelican Way
510.909.6295

Mayor, Council and City staff:

Doesn’t the City already spend enough money on litigation?

Respectfully,
Steve Chamberlin
510-816-3177
Sent from my iPad

On Jun 3, 2024, at 9:49 AM, jonathan livingston <[email protected] >
wrote:

Dear honorable mayor Martinez and City Council.

Alternative:

There are much better alternatives available , they are in order of ease of getting permitted:

1. AAK wharf and existing warehouse - it has a deep water dock, is consistent with BCDC's seaport plan, it has rail service and is zoned for it. - will need to amend the existing lease.

and the least attractive and most problematic would be

There are three better alternatives......

Please support the community and vote to allow T-1 to continue its development plans.

Respectfully submitted

Jonathan Livingston former DRB Chair

P.S. I have been working in Richmond for 50 years. I have more experience doing these types of projects than anyone. I also designed the Shea Homes project called " Waterline".

William R. Hill
Attorney
Representing Innovators for Over 140 Years
Donahue Fitzgerald LLP
1999 Harrison Street, 26th Floor, Oakland CA, 94612
[email protected]| (510) 451-0544 (w)
Important: This email may contain confidential or privileged information. If it is not meant for you, please do not retain, read, copy, or disseminate any part of it, and please immediately notify us. Thank you.

Meeting Date
Agenda Item
Name
Email
Comment
Position
Status
City Council
6/4/2024 4:30 PM OPEN FORUM FOR

PUBLIC COMMENT
Jacob Dirt world is still
closed. Kids and
youth have been
deprived for over 6
months of a fun
safe place to ride
their bikes.

Apparently most of
the work is done
except for
irrigation. These
"improvements"
were a waste of
time & money.

There was nothing
wrong with Dirt
World, people
loved it as it was.

Chasing
unnecessary grant
funding has now
caused it to be
permanently
altered, more
expensive to
maintain, and
closed for an
extended period of
time, leaving kids
with no safe place
to have fun on the
bikes.

Against Appro
6/4/24, 1:17 PM richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment https://richmond.escribemeetings.com/Pages/ReportingPrintFriendly.aspx?reporting-reporttype=PublicComment 2/2 From: Alec Gwinn-Scott
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; [email protected] Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 12:49:11 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

I live near Solano Ave between highway 80 and San Pablo Ave, in the flats of East Richmond. Together with neighbors, we have made 75 comments via email and in-person, asking for this stretch of Solano Ave to be addressed. On Sunday, 40 of us met with Claudia Jimenez at a resident's back yard. As you are aware, the City has already determined that this stretch of Solano Ave is part of the “Vehicle High Injury Network”. According to the Richmond Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP), 56% of all motor vehicle-involved crashes occur on this network, which accounts for only 8% of Richmond roadways. Additionally, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Plan adopted by City Council in February 2023 identified Solano Ave as a "High-Priority Pedestrian Improvement Spot", with a high rating of 76 (out of 100).

We are requesting two things:
(1) in line with recent conversations at council meetings, temporary measures to address the Solano issue until a more finalized project is planned, and (2) an estimated date for when our project will be presented to City Council for a vote, along with the next batch of traffic calming projects for the next fiscal year.

As has been discussed in recent meetings, and for clarification -- there are currently no crosswalks to "enhance". It's a long stretch of a speedway between a freeway entrance and the San Pablo corridor, without crosswalks, signage, or measures to quell speeding to the freeway and San Pablo Ave.

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano) Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility) One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light- up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

As we've mentioned in meetings, educating children about street safety is unfortunately not that effective in preventing accidents; but installed traffic calming measures are highly effective to prevent pedestrians from being hit by cars.

If we don't take action on temporary measures, what happens when someone gets hurt after so much public comment has been made, highlighting the dangerous speeding and pedestrian crossing issue on Solano Ave? Please see the below graphic for a visual of temporary measures we are asking for. And please let us know when Public Works will present the next batch of traffic calming projects to the City Council for a vote.

Thank you,
Alec Gwinn-Scott
1(510)219-6412
[email protected]
From: Dan Keady
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; Heather Bristow
Subject: Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist
Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 11:17:45 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

I live on Ventura street inbetween near Solano Ave and Garvin St. My neighbors and I are asking for the stretch of Solano Ave between highway 80 and San Pablo to be addressed. On Sunday, 40 of my neighbors met with Claudia Jimenez at a resident's back yard. We are requesting two things:
(1) in line with recent conversations at council meetings, temporary measures to address the Solano issue until a more finalized project is planned, and (2) an estimated date for when our project will be presented to City Council for a vote, along with the next batch of traffic calming projects for the next fiscal year.

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano)
Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility)
One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work
Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely.

Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

I am worried for the safety of our neighborhood's children and elderly citizens; I believe installed traffic calming measures will be highly effective to prevent pedestrians from being hit by cars.

Thank you for your consideration,
-Dan Keady
From: Heather Bristow
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; Heather Bristow
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist - SOLANO AVE Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 10:46:46 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass
In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano)
Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility) One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work
Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally- located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

With gratitude,
Heather
Ventura near Solano
From: John Wehrle
To: Claudia Jimenez
Cc: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist" Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 11:30:56 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

I live on Lassen Street, near Solano Ave between highway 80 and San Pablo Ave, in the flats of East Richmond. Together with neighbors, we have made 75 comments via email and in- person, asking for this stretch of Solano Ave to be addressed. On Sunday, 40 of us met with Claudia Jimenez at a resident's back yard. As you are aware, the City has already determined that this stretch of Solano Ave is part of the “Vehicle High Injury Network”. According to the Richmond Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP), 56% of all motor vehicle-involved crashes occur on this network, which accounts for only 8% of Richmond roadways. Additionally, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Plan adopted by City Council in February 2023 identified Solano Ave as a "High-Priority Pedestrian Improvement Spot", with a high rating of 76 (out of 100).

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano) Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility) One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

If we don't take action on temporary measures, what happens when someone gets hurt after so much public comment has been made, highlighting the dangerous speeding and pedestrian crossing issue on Solano Ave?
Please see the below graphic for a visual of temporary measures we are asking for. And please let us know when Public Works will present the next batch of traffic calming projects to the City Council for a vote.

Regards,
John Wehrle
www.troutinhand.com

From: Mike Reynolds
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; Heather Bristow Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 12:26:53 PM
Attachments: image.png
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano) Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility) One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

If we don't take action on temporary measures, what happens when someone gets hurt after so much public comment has been made, highlighting the dangerous speeding and pedestrian crossing issue on Solano Ave?
Please see the below graphic for a visual of temporary measures we are asking for. And please let us know when Public Works will present the next batch of traffic calming projects to the City Council for a vote.

All the best,

Mike Reynolds
Senior Creative Director - Product Design & Development Seasonal Visions International

[email protected] | www.svigloballtd.com | tel. 510-957-4230 | fax. 510-428-3922

This email is CONFIDENTIAL and is LEGALLY PRIVILEGED (including any attachments). If you have received this email in error, please reply to sender and delete all copies from your computer.

From: Dean Tran
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; [email protected]
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 11:07:26 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

Additionally, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Plan adopted by City Council in February 2023 identified Solano Ave as a "High-Priority Pedestrian Improvement Spot", with a high rating of 76 (out of 100).

We are requesting two things:
(1) in line with recent conversations at council meetings, temporary measures to address the Solano issue until a more finalized project is planned, and
(2) an estimated date for when our project will be presented to City Council for a vote, along with the next batch of traffic calming projects for the next fiscal year.

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass
In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano)
Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility)
One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work
Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

If we don't take action on temporary measures, what happens when someone gets hurt after so much public comment has been made, highlighting the dangerous speeding and pedestrian crossing issue on Solano Ave?
Please see the below graphic for a visual of temporary measures we are asking for. And please let us know when Public Works will present the next batch of traffic calming projects to the City Council for a vote.

All the best,
My (Dean) Tran
From: Rion Angeles
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; [email protected]
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 12:50:33 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

We are requesting two things:
(1) in line with recent conversations at council meetings, temporary measures to address the Solano issue until a more finalized project is planned, and
(2) an estimated date for when our project will be presented to City Council for a vote, along with the next batch of traffic calming projects for the next fiscal year.

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass
In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano) Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility) One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

If we don't take action on temporary measures, what happens when someone gets hurt after so much public comment has been made, highlighting the dangerous speeding and pedestrian crossing issue on Solano Ave?
Please see the below graphic for a visual of temporary measures we are asking for. And please let us know when Public Works will present the next batch of traffic calming projects to the City Council for a vote.

All the best,
Rion Angeles
From: Westcoastrobyn
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; [email protected] Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 12:54:17 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano) Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility) One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

All the best,
Robyn Futterman
From: SarahMichael Hannah
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; Heather Bristow
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 10:54:06 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

I am writing in support of targeted traffic calming and pedestrian safety measures along Solano Ave between 80 & San Pablo. It has been documented that this stretch of road is unsafe and it is only a matter of time before someone is hurt trying to cross this street.

We are asking for a concrete commitment and plan of action from the city council to ensure that our neighborhood is as safe as possible for pedestrians.

Currently, there are no stop signs and no pedestrian supports for the entire stretch of road. This creates a situation where cars speed over the speed limit and have little or no time to respond to pedestrians.

We are requesting the following:
- 3 crosswalks where Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin cross Solano. - 2 enhanced crosswalks and Humbold & 80 overpass
- Mounted traffic delineators at crosswalk signage at each crosswalk - Red painted corners at each intersection
- Solar powered light up pedestrian signage.

Our neighborhood will continue to lift up this issue until it is addressed by this council. Please act before someone gets hurt.

Thank you,
Sarah Salazar
From: Susan Wehrle
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby Subject: "Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist" Date: Monday, June 3, 2024 11:08:44 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

I live 1/2 a block from Solano Ave between highway 80 and San Pablo Ave, in East Richmond.

Together with neighbors, we have made 75 comments via email and in-person, asking for this stretch of Solano Ave to be addressed. On Sunday, 40 of us met with Claudia Jimenez at a resident's back yard. As you are aware, the City has already determined that this stretch of Solano Ave is part of the “Vehicle High Injury Network”. According to the Richmond Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP), 56% of all motor vehicle-involved crashes occur on this network, which accounts for only 8% of Richmond roadways. Additionally, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Plan adopted by City Council in February 2023 identified Solano Ave as a "High-Priority Pedestrian Improvement Spot", with a high rating of 76 (out of 100).

We are requesting the following two things:
(1) Temporary measures to address the Solano issue until a more finalized project is planned. This is in line with recent conversations at council meetings and (2) an estimated date for when our project will be presented to City Council for a vote, along with the next batch of traffic calming projects for the next fiscal year.

Has been discussed in recent meetings, and for clarification -- there are currently no crosswalks to "enhance". It's a long stretch of a speedway between a freeway entrance and the San Pablo corridor, without crosswalks, signage, or measures to quell speeding to the freeway and San Pablo Ave.

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano)
Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility)
One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar- powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

If we don't take action on temporary measures, what happens when someone gets hurt after so much public comment has been made, highlighting the dangerous speeding and pedestrian crossing issue on Solano Ave?
Please see the below graphic for a visual of temporary measures we are asking for. And please let us know when Public Works will present the next batch of traffic calming projects to the City Council for a vote.

All the best,
Susan Wehrle
775 Lassen Street
Richmond, Ca 94805
From: William David Bristow
To: Daniel Chavarria
Cc: Shasa Curl; City Clerk Dept User; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; Claudia Jimenez; Doria Robinson; Eduardo Martinez; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; [email protected]; Gayle McLaughlin
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #P.3 Budget Checklist - Solano Ave Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 12:55:21 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

We are requesting two things:
(1) in line with recent conversations at council meetings, temporary measures to address the Solano issue until a more finalized project is planned, and
(2) an estimated date for when our project will be presented to City Council for a vote, along with the next batch of traffic calming projects for the next fiscal year.

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass
In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano) Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility) One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work
Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

All the best,
William Bristow
From: Alec Gwinn-Scott
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; [email protected]
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #Q.2 Traffic Calming Division Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 12:50:37 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

On Sunday, 40 of us in the East Richmond flats met with Claudia Jimenez at a resident's backyard. While larger and more involved Capital projects for the City of Richmond are appreciated, traffic calming projects are a necessity to day-to-day life, healthy living, and walkability. I am very much in support of hiring two FET Planners to build a Traffic Calming Division within Public Works, so we can get a lot of smaller traffic calming projects done all over the City. Please pass this into the budget for the next fiscal year. Small acts added up all over the City will make a big difference to health, safety when walking and biking, and pride in our home. We need this! Thank you,
Alec Gwinn-Scott
1(510)219-6412
[email protected]
From: Cory Johnson
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; [email protected] Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #Q.2 Traffic Calming Division Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 9:46:52 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

On Sunday, 40 of us met with Claudia Jimenez at a resident's back yard. As you are aware, the City has already determined that this stretch of Solano Ave is part of the “Vehicle High Injury Network”. According to the Richmond Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP), 56% of all motor vehicle-involved crashes occur on this network, which accounts for only 8% of Richmond roadways. Additionally, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Plan adopted by City Council in February 2023 identified Solano Ave as a "High-Priority Pedestrian Improvement Spot", with a high rating of 76 (out of 100).

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano) Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility) One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely. Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some.

All the best,
(Your Name)
(#2) TRAFFIC CALMING DIVISION:

Please copy/paste/email the below before 1pm Tuesday 6/4! - AND/OR -
Make it a verbal public comment at Tuesday's City council meeting, 6/4 via Zoom.

Verbal comment:

Via Zoom
WEBINAR ID: 993 1220 5643
PASSCODE: ccmeeting
Please note: wait for closed session to finish and for public session to begin, around 6:30pm (wait for Agenda Item #Q.2 "Traffic Calming Division")
Email comment:

Deadline: 1pm Tuesday 6/4!
Subject line must say: "Public Comments Agenda Item #Q.2 Traffic Calming Division" Email
to: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Comment Script:

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

On Sunday, 40 of us in the East Richmond flats met with Claudia Jimenez at a resident's backyard. While larger and more involved Capital projects for the City of Richmond are appreciated, traffic calming projects are a necessity to day-to-day life, healthy living, and walkability. I am very much in support of hiring two FET Planners to build a Traffic Calming Division within Public Works, so we can get a lot of smaller traffic calming projects done all over the City. Please pass this into the budget for the next fiscal year. Small acts added up all over the City will make a big difference to health, safety when walking and biking, and pride in our home. We need this! All the best,
Cory Johnson
From: Dan Keady
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; Heather Bristow
Subject: Agenda Item #Q.2 Traffic Calming Division
Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 11:19:22 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

I am very much in support of hiring two FET Planners to build a Traffic Calming Division within Public Works, so we can get a lot of smaller traffic calming projects done all over the City. Please pass this into the budget for the next fiscal year.

I appreciate your time and consideration,
-Dan Keady
From: Heather Bristow
To: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana; Shasa Curl; Daniel Chavarria; Robert Armijo; Josef Munoz; Tawfic Halaby; Heather Bristow
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #Q.2 Traffic Calming Division Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 10:48:14 AM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear City Council, Mayor, Staff, and Public Works:

On Sunday, 40 of us in the East Richmond flats met with Claudia Jimenez at a resident's backyard to discuss the traffic calming program (and Solano Ave). While larger and more involved Capital projects for the City of Richmond are appreciated, traffic calming projects are a necessity to day-to-day life, healthy living, and walkability. I am very much in support of hiring two FET Planners to build a Traffic Calming Division within Public Works, so we can get a lot of smaller traffic calming projects done all over the City. Please pass this into the budget for the next fiscal year. Small acts added up all over the City will make a big difference to health, safety when walking and biking, and pride in our home. We need this! With gratitude,
Heather
Ventura near Solano
From: Katie McKnight
To: City Clerk Dept User
Cc: Eduardo Martinez; Claudia Jimenez; Gayle McLaughlin; Doria Robinson; Melvin Willis; Cesar Zepeda; Soheila Bana
Subject: Public comment Agenda Item # Q.2
Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 12:42:43 AM
Attachments: Letter to Richmond City Council - June 3 2024 (2).pdf This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Hello,
I would like to submit the attached letter (pdf) to be included for public comment in regards to agenda item # Q.2 for tomorrow's 1pm meeting.

Thank you,
Katie
--
Katie McKnight
she/hers
cell: 252.725.9883
Secretary, Executive Committee/Board Member
Bay Area Young Survivors
Monday, June3, 2024Subject: Publiccomment AgendaItem#Q.2 Dear Mayor MartinezandRichmondCityCouncilmembers,
MynameisKatieMcKnight andI’maconstituent livingintheRichmondAnnex(District 5). I’mwritingtovoicemyconcernover trafficonPlumasAvenueandurgeyoutosupport andimplement trafficcalmingmeasures. PlumasAveisoverburdenedbyhigh-speed, high-volumetraffic, compoundedbyfloodingproblems, air pollution, urbanstormwater pollution, illegaldumping, andvariousother issues.

I’vebeenlivingonPlumasAve. for sixyearsandinthat timeI’vewitnessedmultiplewrecks(usuallyhit andruns), countlesscarsspeedingthewrongway(Plumasisaone-waystreet), anddozensof closecallsnearlygettinghit byspeedingvehiclesasI attempt tocrossmystreet. Ondozensof occasions, I’veturnedontoPlumastobemet withanear head-oncollisionduetodriversspeedingthewrongdirection. Additionally, mycat, Fleck, washit byaspeedingvehicleafewyearsago, andtheperpetrator droveawaywithout stopping.

WeneedmeasuresimplementedtoslowandreducetrafficonPlumasandmakethestreet safefor themanykids, seniors, andpetslivingintheneighborhood. Acrossthestreet frommyhouseisadaycarethat receivesnumerousyoungchildrenfivedaysaweek. AsI watchthekidsbeingunloadedfromtheir parent’scars, I shudder tothinkwhat wouldhappenif onechildmomentarilyslipsawayfromtheir parent’sgraspandturnsthewrongdirection. RusheddriversoftenspeeddownPlumastoget toCarlsonBlvdfromMoeser AveandSanPabloAvetowardtheI-80/I-880onramps, but Plumasisnot zonedtobeahigh-trafficthoroughfarenor isit safetooperateasone. Wehavenoslowsigns, nospeedbumps, nostopsigns, nocrosswalks, andnoeffective“oneway” signsasevidencedbythenumber of wrong-waydrivers.

Inadditiontothetrafficsituationposinganimmediatethreat toresidents’ safetyandwell-being,residentsonPlumasAvealsoexperienceadisproportionatelyheavier environmental burden.Weareexposedtohigher trafficandthushigher air pollutionexposure. Wealsohavefloodwater that easilyaccumulatesduringrainfall events, renderingPlumasintoanephemeralcreek. Asthewater slowsandaccumulates, sodoesthesediment, heavymetals, oilsandgreasefromvehicles, pesticidesandherbicidesfromlandscaping, nutrientsfromfertilizers, andbacteriaandother pathogensfromanimal waste, amongst other pollutants, onour street.PlumasAveissitedonahistorical creekchannel, sorainwater naturallywantstoaccumulate,andthehighamountsof impervioussurfacesfromsurroundingstreetsonlyexacerbatesthistendency. Additionally, thehightrafficflowsleadtomorelitter whichleadstoblockedstormdrainswhennot clearedout. ThestormdrainsalongPlumasareoftenoverwhelmedwithevenalight rainfall—evidencethat thestormdrainsystemiseither undersizedor not maintainedasfrequentlyasneeded, or likelyacombination. Astheintensity, durationandfrequencyof stormeventscontinuetoincreasewithclimatechangeliketheatmosphericriverswehaveseenoflate, theresidentsof PlumasAveareat anincreasedriskfor damagetoour homesandbeinginjuredinfloods.

Myhomehasalreadybeenfloodedtwiceinsixyearsdespitemyandmyhusband’sbest effortstomitigatetherisksusingacombinationof sumppumps, sandbags, anundergroundcistern,andour collectiveprofessional knowledgeinenvironmental planning, landscapearchitecture,andconstruction. Acritical issueisthat thestormdrainsonour street arenot workingproperlysofloodwatersaccumulatealongthestreet andeventuallyjumpthecurbandsheet downourdriveway, overwhelmingall attemptstokeepfloodwatersat bay. Wearenot thefirst neighborstodeal withthisrepeatedchallengenor will webethelast. Nearlyeveryhouseandapartmentcomplexonthesouthsideof Plumasdealswiththisissue, someof whichfor decades. Addspeedingcarsontoafloodedstreet andtherisktopeopleandpropertygoesupexponentially.

I recognizethat Richmondat largeisaveryoverburdenedcity, andmanychallengeslikelivingintheshadowof oil refineries, highways, railroads, andindustrial wastearedifficult toovercome. But twothingsthat wecanchangearetrafficpatternsandwater drainage. PlumasAveisanexcellent candidatefor agreenstreet toslowbothfloodwatersandtrafficandbecomemorepedestrianfriendly. Withamixof lowtomiddleincome, long-timeresidents, severalmultifamilyapartment buildingsandadiversemixof residents, alleviatingsomeof theburdensthat Plumasresidentsfacewill helpadvanceequityinDistrict 5. Measureslikespeedbumps,crosswalks, abikelane, raingardens, andthroughtrafficrestrictionsusingclear signageandissuingpenaltieswouldgoalongwaytomakingour street safer andhealthier for all wholiveandvisit PlumasAve.

I appreciateyour timeandall that youdofor our wonderful city. I wouldbeveryhappytocollaborateontrafficmitigationandstormwater reductioneffortsonPlumas. I haveattachedafewphotosbelowtoillustratethepointsabove. If youhaveanyquestions, pleasedonothesitatetoreachout. Thankyoufor your consideration.

Sincerely,KatieMcKnight–6214PlumasAve.,[email protected] FloodingalongPlumasAveduringarainstorm.

Floodinginour homein2019duetostormdrainsonPlumasAve. not drainingproperly.

Speeder goingthewrongwaydownPlumasAve., infront of anin-homedaycarefacility.

Aspeedingvancrashedintomyparkedworktruckandthenspedoff. Thevan(pictured) wasfoundlater, abandonedinanearbyneighborhood. Theincident wasreportedtotheRichmondPoliceDepartment.

From: Neil Harkins
To: Daniel Chavarria
Cc: City Clerk Dept User; Claudia Jimenez; Eduardo Martinez; Josef Munoz; Melvin Willis; Robert Armijo; Shasa Curl; Tawfic Halaby
Subject: Re: Public Comments Agenda Item #Q Budget
Date: Tuesday, June 4, 2024 12:55:09 PM
This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Dear Daniel (cc: Council and Staff),
I’m including a response some neighbors in the area have drafted:

Thank you for the thoughtful response. I think we're at a point where neighbors need a concrete plan on how to address the dangerous walking and speeding conditions on Solano Ave. We've had 75 comments via email and in-person, since the budget meetings in April, and on Sunday 40 of us met with Claudia Jimenez to discuss Solano and the Traffic Calming Program. And now today, we are starting another batch of comments.

You mentioned a few ideas (speed feedback trailer and enhancing crosswalks). To clarify, there are no crosswalks to enhance, and that is part of what we have been saying this whole time.

While we appreciate the gesture of a speed feedback trailer, the City has already determined that this stretch of Solano Ave is part of the “Vehicle High Injury Network”. According to the Richmond Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP), 56% of all motor vehicle-involved crashes occur on this network, which accounts for only 8% of Richmond roadways. Additionally, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Plan adopted by City Council in February 2023 identified Solano Ave as a "High-Priority Pedestrian Improvement Spot", with a high rating of 76 (out of 100).

We'd like to address the problem instead of studying it further than it already has been, which will unnecessarily delay temporary solutions to an already documented dangerous corridor.

These are the temporary measures we are requesting:
(3) new crosswalks @ Solano intersections of Ventura, Lassen, McLaughlin, and (2) enhanced crosswalks at Humboldt and the Hwy 80 freeway overpass
In-street mounted traffic delineators (yellow post style or “State law: yield to pedestrians within crosswalk” sign style, at each crosswalk intersection along Solano)
Red-painted corners at each intersection (to improve pedestrian and driver visibility) One pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, designated at one of the crosswalks, to help people crossing Solano in the evenings after work Ultimately, because we have so many residents who walk at night (which can start at 5pm for part of the year), we will eventually need one centrally-located light-up crosswalk with illuminated lights in the street, so pedestrians can cross Solano Ave safely.

Temporarily, one pair of solar-powered, light-up, pedestrian crosswalk signs, centrally located along the stretch of Solano Ave, will help buffer the safety issue some. This is an affordable temporary measure, as it doesn't require 120V electrical hookup.

Please let us know when Public Works will present the next batch of traffic calming projects to the City Council for a vote.

Thank you for your further consideration on this matter, -Neil Harkins (& other East Richmond Residents)
On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 10:23 PM Daniel Chavarria
<[email protected]
> wrote:

Dear Neil,

We appreciate you bringing the traffic situation at Solano Avenue to our attention. Your feedback is invaluable in helping us address community concerns effectively.

Currently, our team is actively focused on addressing the 15 priority locations identified by the City Council in November 2022. Concurrently, we are collaborating with a Traffic Engineering firm to assess over 350 new requests, including those related to Solano Avenue. To effectively manage the growing number of requests and ensure a sustainable solution, we are in the process of developing a comprehensive Traffic Calming Program with an allocated annual budget. This initiative will involve close collaboration between our staff, residents, and the City Council.

In line with this, the Public Works Department (PW) and Human Resources Department (HR) are working together to recruit additional engineers to enhance the Engineering Division of PW. This will enable us to dedicate an engineer to focus solely on developing and implementing the Traffic Calming Program.

Regarding the concerns raised at Solano Avenue, we are exploring immediate measures that City crews can undertake, such as installing temporary speed feedback trailers and enhancing crosswalks.

We value your input and would appreciate any further insights or suggestions you may have regarding this matter. Your continued support is instrumental in creating safer and more efficient traffic conditions in our community. Thank you for your understanding and cooperation as we work towards a solution.

Warm regards,

Daniel Chavarria, P.E.

Director
Public Works Department
City of Richmond, California
Tel: 510-620-5478
[email protected]

From: Neil Harkins <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2024 12:38 PM
To: Daniel Chavarria <[email protected]>; Shasa Curl <[email protected]>; Cesar Zepeda <[email protected]>; City Clerk Dept User <[email protected]>; Claudia Jimenez <[email protected]>; Doria Robinson <[email protected]>; Eduardo Martinez <[email protected]>; Gayle McLaughlin <[email protected]>; Melvin Willis <[email protected]>; Soheila Bana <[email protected]>
Subject: Public Comments Agenda Item #Q Budget

This email originated from outside of the City's email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.

Hello Elected Richmond City Council Members,

I am writing in support of the community initiative for "traffic calming"--more specifically:
speed calming--even more specifically: increased safety on Solano Ave between San Pablo and the 80 onramp.

This is a MAJOR highway onramp in a VERY residential neighborhood, and the street is fairly wide, which seems to result in drivers feeling "safer" from hitting parked cars (although I've often seen cars almost hit larger vehicles/wide trucks parked along the street), so they drive even faster to get on the highway.

In the past several years, Richmond has finally attracted more businesses on the stretch of San Pablo near Solano: Factory Bar, Waffles & Ice Cream, Tacos Tucan, El Jardin, etc in addition to longer term fixtures like Catahoula, Tres Hermanas, and more. I walk to these establishments along Solano every weekday morning (Catahoula), some lunch hours, and some weeknights (other spots). I see the speeding firsthand, as well as hear the sideshow/donuts some night. Something must be done, and we're asking you to please do it:
make this stretch of road safe for pedestrians (and other cars even), by utilizing any/all of the means at your disposal: lighted painted crosswalks, signs stating fines, etc.

One member of our community group has even done some research, and found that the Richmond Local Roadway Safety Plan (LRSP) considers this section of Solano Ave to be part of the “Vehicle High Injury Network”. According to their report, 56% of all motor vehicle-involved crashes occur on this network, which accounts for only 8% of Richmond roadways. It also shows one fatal and severe collision on Solano Ave. Also, "The Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Plan" adopted by City Council in February 2023 identified Solano Ave as a "High-Priority Pedestrian Improvement Spot", with a HIGH rating (76 out of 100).

I really hope all this is enough to convince you to invest in our community's safety. A young pedestrian getting seriously injured by a speeding car while walking to get ice cream on a warm summer evening is a very realistic fear, and something which you can help prevent by allocating a small amount to fund the traffic calming initiative in this location specifically.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter,
-Neil Harkins
East Richmond Concerned Resident

Richmond City CouncilJune 4, 2024

Richmond City Council
June 4, 2024