Attachment 2 - Richmond Parkway Transportation Plan.pdf — Richmond City Council, April 22, 2025

RICHMOND PARKWAY
Transportation Plan

REVISED FINAL DRAFT
FEBRUARY 2025
Study funded by Caltrans Sustainable Communities Grant

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Technical Advisory Committee
City of Richmond*
Daniel Chavarria
Robert Armijo
Hillal Hamdan
Lina Velasco
Hector Rojas, Former
Denee Evans, Former
Contra Costa County*
Emily Warming,
Public Health
Daniel Barrios,
Conservation and
Development
Adam Scarbrough,
Conservation and
Development
Jamar Stamps,
Transportation Planning
Samantha Harris,
Transportation Planning
Sonia Bustamante,
Supervisor Gioia's Office
Tania Pulido,
Supervisor Gioia's Office
Contra Costa
Transportation
Authority
Matt Kelly
Stephanie Hu
Hisham Noeimi
Metropolitan
Transportation
Commission
Lee Huo
Michelle Go
Dee Dohm
Caltrans
Issa Ibrahimi
Becky Frank
Bay Area Air Quality
Management District
Samuel De Perio Garcia
East Bay Regional
Parks District
Sean Dougan
West County
Wastewater District
Joseph Neugebauer
City of San Pablo
Allan Panganiban
City of Pinole
Faby Guillen
Kapil Amin
Sanjay Mishra, Former
Misha Kaur, Former
AC Transit
Jim Cunradi
Michael Eshleman
WestCAT
Robert Thompson
Finn Wurtz
BART
Rachel Factor

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Study funded by Caltrans Sustainable Communities Grant #74A1366 West Contra Costa
Transportation
Commission
(WCCTC)
WCCTC Staff
Leah Greenblat
John Nemeth
Coire Reilly
WCCTC Board
Rita Xavier, Chair
Anthony Tave, Vice Chair
Chris Kelley
Eduardo Martinez
Paul Fadelli
Jovanka Beckles
Rebecca Saltzman
Tom Hansen
John Gioia
Soheila Bana, Alternate
Doria Robinson, Alternate
Claudia Jimenez, Alternate
Chris Peeples, Alternate
Cesar Zepeda, Former
Project Team
Fehr & Peers
Karina Schneider, AICP
Carrie Modi, AICP
Amy Deng
Gaby Picado-Aguilar
Minnie Chen
Angie Chen
ESA
Beverly Choi
Shannon Wages
Stephanie Cadena
NCE
Ryan Shafer, PE, GE
Myles Goins, PE
*Project Partners
Public Advisory Group
Port of Richmond
Lucy Zhou
Lizeht Zepeda
Richmond Neighborhood
Coordinating Council
Arto Rintella
Trails for Richmond
Action Committee
Bruce Beyaert
Urban Tilth
Latifah Abdullah
Watershed Project
Juliana Gonzalez
Naama Raz-Yaseef
Groundwork Richmond
Salma Berumen
Sarah Calderon
Bike East Bay
Robert Prinz
Dani Lanis
North Richmond
Municipal Advisory
Council
Don Gilmore
Community Housing
Development
Corporation
Darrell Davis
Bay Area Outreach and
Recreation Program
Emily Seelenfreund
California Trucking
Association
Bernice Creager
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
Click on a chapter to navigate to its corresponding page.

1. Introduction ..............................................................................................5

2. Existing Conditions .................................................................................11

3. Engagement ............................................................................................35

4. Strategies ................................................................................................47

5. Priority Strategies ...................................................................................57

6. Implementation and Funding ................................................................81

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes ..............................91 Appendix B: Overview of Regional Influence .............................................117 Appendix C: Plan Strategies Goals Alignment ............................................121 Appendix D: Separated Bikeway 35% Design Concept and Cost Estimate for Northern Segment of Richmond Parkway .............................129 Appendix E: Existing Funding Sources for Priority Strategies....................141 Appendix F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates .............................................149 | 3

FIGURES
Figure 1: Plan Timeline .................................................................................................................7 Figure 2: Jurisdictions in Study Area ............................................................................................8 Figure 3: Map of Study Corridor ...................................................................................................9 Figure 4: Corridor Population Characteristics ...........................................................................12 Figure 5: Map of Equity Priority Areas in Study Area .................................................................13 Figure 6: KSI Collisions by Year, 2011-2020 ................................................................................14 Figure 7: Map of 85th Percentile 7PM-6AM Weekday Speeds ....................................................16 Figure 8: Map of KSI Collisions ................................................................................................... 17 Figure 9: Map of High Injury Networks .......................................................................................19 Figure 10: Map of Existing and Proposed Bikeways ....................................................................21 Figure 11: Map of Slowdowns During 7-9AM and 4-6PM Peak Periods .......................................24 Figure 12: Map of Northbound Daily Truck Distribution .............................................................26 Figure 13: Map of Southbound Daily Truck Distribution .............................................................27 Figure 14: Map of Pollution Burden in Study Area .......................................................................29 Figure 15: Map of Asthma Rate in Study Area ..............................................................................31 Figure 16: Map of Transit Routes in Study Area ...........................................................................33 Figure 17: Map of Richmond Parkway Transit Center Existing Conditions .................................34 Figure 18: Distribution of Need-Related Topics Heard ................................................................41 Figure 19: Distribution of Draft Strategy Category Votes .............................................................45 Figure 20: Top Five Priority Strategies Survey Ranking ...............................................................46 Figure 21: Strategy Categories ......................................................................................................48 Figure 22: Goals Alignment Ranking ............................................................................................49 Figure 23: Map of Existing Designated Truck Routes ....................................................................60 Figure 24: Intersection Safety Recommendations .......................................................................65 Figure 25: Intersection Safety Recommendations (Cont.) ...........................................................66 Figure 26: Sidewalk Gaps and Recommended Bikeways .............................................................71 Figure 27: Proposed Signalized Crossing at Wildcat Creek Trail ..................................................73 TABLES
Table 1: Qualitative Goal Alignment Metrics ............................................................................49 Table 2: Full List of Strategies ....................................................................................................50 Table 3: Priority Strategies ........................................................................................................58 Table 4: Priority Strategies Implementation Plan ....................................................................82 Table 5: Priority Strategies Implementation Next Steps ..........................................................84 4 |
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
Intersection with wide turn radius at Richmond Parkway and Lakeside Drive.

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLANRICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

ABOUT THIS PLAN
The focus of the plan is a set of
targeted strategies for WCCTC and
partner agencies to advance in the
next 10 years. The strategies were
developed in close collaboration with
project partners, technical advisors,
and members of the public and are
responsive to both the Plan-identified
transportation needs (summarized in
Chapter 2) and feedback received via
public engagement (summarized in
Chapter 3). The strategies (summarized
in Chapter 4) are projects, programs, and
policies that collectively aim to address
the following six goals of the Plan:

IMPROVE SAFETY FOR ALL
USERS

ADVANCE PLACEMAKING

INCREASE ACCESS TO KEY

DESTINATIONS

ENHANCE TRAVEL

TIME RELIABILITY AND

EFFICIENCY

IMPROVE HEAL TH

SUPPORT FEASIBLE

STRATEGIES
Plan Goals

THE RICHMOND PARKWAY
TRANSPORTATION PLAN (“PLAN”)

DEVELOPS A STRATEGIC VISION FOR

THE FUTURE OF THIS MAJOR MUL TI-

JURISDICTIONAL ROADWAY BETWEEN
I-580 AND I-80, EXTENDING TO
FITZGERALD AVENUE.
6 Figure 1: Plan Timeline
2023 2024
Mar Jun Sept Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec
2025
Feb
Info Gathering and
Analysis
Outreach and
Participation
Dra/f_t Strategies
Strategy Prioritization
Implementation and
Financing Strategy
Dra/f_t and Final Plan
Plan Adoption by WCCTC
and Project Partners
Of the full list of strategies, ten are
considered priority strategies for WCCTC
and partner agencies to implement. These
priority strategies best align with the Plan
goals and reflect engagement participant
preferences. The priority strategies are
described in Chapter 5, including the
lead implementation agency, goals
alignment, benefits, and graphics of the
top strategies. Chapter 6 introduces the
implementation time frame and funding
sources for the priority strategies.

Figure 1 shows the project timeline,
which spanned nearly two years between
March 2023 and January 2025.

Photo: Bicyclists crossing the wide intersection
at Richmond Parkway and W Ohio Avenue.

Plan Goals
History of Richmond Parkway
The Richmond Parkway was
completed in the 1990s to serve as a
regional arterial route. However, the
facility has not been adopted into
the State Highway System. Based on
a study completed by CCTA in 2008,
it would cost between $140M and
$400M (2024$) to upgrade the corridor
to Caltrans standards and transfer
ownership to the state.

Introduction | 7

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

THE STUDY AREA
Richmond Parkway is a major road
linking I-80 and I-580 and a primary route
connecting to the the Richmond-San Rafael
Bridge. The Parkway is located in both
the City of Richmond and unincorporated
Contra Costa County (North Richmond),
as shown in Figure 2. Combined with
Castro Street, a parallel roadway at
the southern end of the corridor, the
study corridor is approximately nine
miles in length. At the northeastern
end in the City of Pinole, Richmond
Parkway becomes Fitzgerald Avenue.

It serves many functions of regional and
local importance: a goods movement
(truck and rail) corridor connecting to
the Port of Richmond and local industrial
uses, a regional commuter corridor, a
critical segment of the San Francisco Bay
Trail—a 500-mile long regional walking
and biking path network looping around
San Francisco Bay—and a connector to
the Richmond Parkway Transit Center
served by AC Transit and WestCAT .

Richmond Parkway intersects Wildcat
Creek and is adjacent to several nearby
schools and parks, including Point Pinole
Regional Park. As shown in Figure 3,
industrial land uses line most of the
corridor, particularly along Castro Street
and along the Parkway in North Richmond.

The Parkway also serves residential
areas in Atchison Village, Iron Triangle,
North Richmond, and nearby Hilltop. As
new industrial and residential growth
continues along the Parkway, this Plan
presents an opportunity to design for
better corridor access and mobility before
existing challenges are exacerbated.

Richmond Parkway and Castro Street
travel through the City of Richmond and
unincorporated Contra Costa County for
A third of the corridor is adjacent to the
Bay Trail.
9 MILES9 MILES..

Created by ARISO
from the Noun Project
Figure 2: Jurisdictions in Study Area
8 WildcatCany on RP
PointPinole Reg.Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West Macdonald A v
Rob ert M i l l er
D r
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West Barrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
G i a n t
H w
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av
RichmondHigh School
PeresElement ary
B a yvi ew
Element ary
LakeElement ary Con traCostaCollege
Ve rd eElement ary

RIC HMOND

RIC HMOND
SAN
PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
7th
St
Fred
J a ckson
Wy
H en sl ey St
6th St
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
Atch i so n
V illage
Belding/
Woods
Fairmede/
Hillt op
Hillt op
Dist rict
Hillt op
V illage
I ron
Tri a n gl e
Pa rch ester
V illage
Richmore
V illage/
M etro Square
Sant a Fe
Shields-Reid
Coronado
Study Corridor
Stu d y Area
Bay T rail
Industrial Land
U se
Railroad
Richmond
Parkway T ransit
Cen ter
Schools
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
Wildcat Creek
Figure 3: Map of Study Corridor
Source: Fehr & Peers (2023). Introduction | 9

1 2
3 1. Community engagement at the North
Richmond Earth Day Festival.

2. Cars traveling along the Parkway at
RIchmond Parkway and San Pablo Ave.

3. Community engagement at the North
Richmond Flea Market.
10 | Introduction
CHAPTER 2
Existing Conditions
Signage along the Bay Trail at Richmond Parkway and Gertrude Avenue.

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

CORRIDOR COMMUNITIES
Compared to the Contra Costa County
population as a whole, residents living in
the study area tend to have higher rates
of unemployment and lower education
attainment, as seen in Figure 4. The
majority of residents living near the
corridor are Hispanic/Latino, 16% have
limited English proficiency, and nearly
38% are below the federal poverty level
(US Census, ACS 5-Year Estimates, 2019).

Overall, these groups have less access
to opportunities and are at greater
risk of displacement (ESA, 2023; Urban
Displacement Project, 2015). Given that
people living near the study corridor
reflect demographics of historically
underserved populations, most census
tracts within the study area fall within
regionally or federally-defined equity
priority areas, including MTC Equity
Priority Communities, USDOT Historically
Disadvantaged Communities, and USDOT
Areas of Persistent Poverty (Figure 5).

Chapter 3 presents outreach methods
for engaging historically marginalized
populations during the planning process.

Figure 4: Corridor Population Characteristics
63%
38%
6%
29%
64%
35%
4%
22%
69%
38%
3%
41%44%
21%
3%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
People of Color Low Income / Poverty Unemployed Less than High School Education
Study Corridor City of Richmond North Richmond Contra Costa County 63%
38%
6%
29%
64%
35%
4%
22%
69%
38%
3%
41%44%
21%
3%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
People of Color Low Income / Poverty Unemployed Less than High School Education
Study Corridor City of Richmond North Richmond Contra Costa County 63%
38%
6%
29%
64%
35%
4%
22%
69%
38%
3%
41%44%
21%
3%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
People of Color Low Income / Poverty Unemployed Less than High School Education
Study Corridor City of Richmond North Richmond Contra Costa County 63%
38%
6%
29%
64%
35%
4%
22%
69%
38%
3%
41%44%
21%
3%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
People of Color Low Income / Poverty Unemployed Less than High School Education
Study Corridor City of Richmond North Richmond Contra Costa County 63%
38%
6%
29%
64%
35%
4%
22%
69%
38%
3%
41%44%
21%
3%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
People of Color Low Income / Poverty Unemployed Less than High School Education
Study Corridor City of Richmond North Richmond Contra Costa County Source: U.S. Census
Bureau, ACS 5-Year
(2019).

This chapter introduces how Richmond Parkway is used today and the wide range of existing challenges for all types of users. On average, 25,000 vehicles use the Parkway every day to reach local destinations, including as a connection between I-580 and I-80 and to the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. Residents living near the corridor are largely Hispanic/Latino with lower incomes and are exposed to the large volumes of traffic, vehicle emissions, pollution, and noise.

Despite the availability of the Bay Trail, many sections can feel uncomfortable for pedestrians and bicyclists, particularly when crossing the Parkway.

Speeding is a major concern and is the most common collision factor. (Unincorporated Area)
12 63%
38%
6%
29%
64%
35%
4%
22%
69%
38%
3%
41%44%
21%
3%
11%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
People of Color Low Income / Poverty Unemployed Less than High School Education
Study Corridor City of Richmond North Richmond Contra Costa County WildcatCany on RP
PointPinole Reg.Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West Macdonald A v
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West Barrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av

RIC HMOND

SAN PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
Atch i so n
V illage
Belding/
Woods
Fairmede/
Hillt op
Hillt op
Dist rict
Hillt op V illage
I ron
Tri a n gl e
Pa rch ester
V illage
Richmore
V illage/
M etro Square
Sant a Fe
Shields-Reid
Coronado
Study Corridor
Equit y Priorit y
Communit ies
Hist orically
Disadv ant aged
Communit y
Area of
Persi sten t
Poverty
S t udy Cens us
Tra cts
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
Figure 5: Map of Equity Priority Areas in Study Area
Source: Fehr & Peers (2023); MTC (2018), USDOT (2021). Existing Conditions | 13

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLANRICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

SAFETY FOR ALL ROAD USERS
From 2011 to 2020, there were 322
traffic collisions on the corridor that
resulted in injury, including 46 Killed
and Severe Injury (KSI) collisions. Of
these KSI collisions, 21 resulted in a
severe injury and 25 resulted in a fatality
(Transportation Injury Mapping System
(TIMS), 2011-2020). This is an average of
4-5 KSI collisions per year, and collisions
are increasing—between 2011 and 2017,
there was an average of 3 KSI collisions
per year, however, the average jumped
to 9 between 2018 and 2020 (Figure 6).

There were increases in KSI collisions
involving unsafe speeds, traffic signal
and sign violations, driving under the
influence, and driver violations of the
pedestrian right-of-way. Concentrations
of collisions occur in areas along the
corridor that have higher intersection
density, near railroad crossings, and
at major arterials where there is more
interaction between vehicles and Bay
Trail users. Considering these locations
for redesign can reduce collisions and are
considered in Strategies (Chapter 4).

Collisions on the Parkway
Figure 6: KSI Collisions by Year, 2011-2020
Photo: Students crossing the Richmond Parkway and Lakeside Drive intersection next to Make Waves Academy.

Source: TIMS, 2011 – 2020
2 1
7 2 3 2 2
10 8 9
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
Annual KSI collisions
KSI Collisions by Year
14 Unsafe Speeds
Unsafe speed is the most common primary
collision factor making up 45% of all
injury collisions and 28% of KSI collisions.

The next most common factors in KSI
collisions are failure to obey traffic signals
and signs (15%) and driver violations
of the pedestrian right-of-way (15%).

Although the posted speed limit on the
Parkway is typically 45 miles per hour
(mph), most of the corridor sees off-peak
85th percentile speeds over 50 miles per
hour as shown in Figure 7 (Wejo, 2019).

The maximum observed speeds during
this period rise to nearly 100 mph along
the elevated segment of the Parkway
between North Richmond and Hilltop.

Bicyclists and Pedestrians
KSI collision locations are shown in
Figure 8. Although bicycle and pedestrian
collisions represent only 6% of all injury
collisions, they make up 20% of all KSI
collisions and 24% of fatal collisions,
highlighting the safety disparity for more
vulnerable bicyclists and pedestrians
along the corridor. Studies show that
for vulnerable users, collisions have a
higher likelihood of serious injury or
death, particularly at high speeds.

Photo: Vehicles on Richmond Parkway crossing San
Pablo Avenue.
of collisions on the Parkway are caused
by unsafe speed.
of fatal collisions on the Parkway
involved a bicyclist or a pedestrian
compared to only 6% of all injury
collisions.
45%45%
24%24%
Nighttime Collisions
While only 32% of all injury collisions
occurred at night, 52% of all KSI collisions
and 75% of pedestrian KSI collisions
occurred in dark conditions. Although
existing street lights were reported at most
of these KSI collision locations, reducing
unsafe speeds and improving pedestrian-
scale lighting and crosswalk striping
could address these types of collisions.

Existing Conditions | 15

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Wildcat
Cany on RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West M a cd on a l d Av
Rob ert M i l l er
D r
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West B a rrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
G i a n t
H w
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av
Richmond
High School
Peres
Element ary
B a yvi ew
Element ary
Lake
Element ary Con tra
Costa
College
Ve rd e
Element ary

RIC HMOND

RIC HMOND
SAN
PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
Atch i so n
V illage
Belding/
Woods
Fairmede/
Hillt op
Hillt op
Dis t rict
Hillt op V illage
I ron
Tri a n gl e
Pa rch ester
V illage
Richmore
V illage/
M etro Square
Sant a Fe
Shields-Reid
Coronado
Weekd a y N i gh t
O ff-P ea k 85th
Percen ti le
Ob served Sp eed
30-40 mph
40-50 mph
50-60 mph
60-70 mph
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
Figure 7: Map of 85th Percentile 7PM-6AM Weekday Speeds Source: Wejo (2019).16

WildcatCany on RP
PointPinole Reg.Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West Macdonald A v
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West Barrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av
RichmondHigh School
PeresElement ary
B a yvi ew
Element ary
LakeElement ary Con traCostaCollege
Ve rd eElement ary

RIC HMOND

SAN PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ca stro St
Richmond Pkwy
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
Schools
Railroad
Bay T rail
Study Corridor
Severe I n ju ry
Collision
Fat al Collision
Collision Type
a n d Severi ty
Collision
Inv olv ing
a Bicy clist or
Pedestri an
Figure 8: Map of KSI Collisions
Source: TIMS (2011 – 2020). Existing Conditions | 17

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
The Contra Costa
Transportation Authority
(CCTA) Contra Costa
Countywide Transportation
Safety Policy and
Implementation Guide
(2021), Contra Costa
County Vision Zero (2022),
and City of Richmond
Local Roadway Safety Plan
(2022) have all identified
Richmond Parkway as
a corridor on the High-
Injury Network (HIN).

This means that Richmond
Parkway sees higher
concentrations of KSI
collisions as compared to
other areas of Richmond
and Contra Costa County.

However, Castro Street
is not included on the
HIN. Figure 9 maps the
HIN of each agency.
/i255
/1/2/3/4/5/6/4/7/i255/9/10/9/9
/11/12/13/14/15/12/13/16/i255/18/19
/20/21/22/23/12/15/i255/20/21/24/23/15/i255/20/21/25/22/23/19/i255/26/27/24/27/21/22/i255/28/13/12/21 /29/30/31/32/33/i255/35/36/37/38 /35/39
/i255 /i255 /i255
/i255
/i255 /i255 /i255
/i255
/i255
/i255
/i255
/0/1/2/3/4/5/6/7/i255/9/5/2/10/11/i255/0/5/10/7/12/10/13/i255/14/10/15/16/17/13/i255/18/11/10/6 /19 /i255 /i255
/i255 /35/36/37/38/i255/40/41/40/40
Previous Safety
Studies
18 WildcatCany on RP
PointPinole Reg.Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West Macdonald A v
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West Barrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av
RichmondHigh School
PeresElement ary
B a yvi ew
Element ary
LakeElement ary Con traCostaCollege
Ve rd eElement ary

RIC HMOND

SAN PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
CCTA Al l M od es
HIN
Contra Costa
Cou n ty Al l
Mode s HIN
Richmond A ll
Mode s HIN
Study Corridor
City of Richmond
Schools
Railroad
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
Figure 9: Map of High Injury Networks
Source: Contra Costa Transportation Authority (2021); Contra Costa County (2022); City of Richmond (2022).
26th St
Rheem Ave
Lincoln Ave
Existing Conditions | 19

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

BIKING AND WALKING
The Bay Trail is a critical regional path that
generally traverses the Parkway’s west
side from the southern end to Goodrick
Avenue in North Richmond. The Bay Trail
is on the east side of the corridor between
Hensley Street and Gertrude Avenue, and
the City of Richmond has proposed to
realign this section to the west side for
better connectivity. While the Bay Trail
connects users to destinations like Point
Pinole, Point Richmond, and beyond,
there are few crossing locations and they
lack basic safety enhancements. Many
parts of the Bay Trail along the study
corridor are in need of repair, with cracked
and uneven pavement and overgrown
landscaping. Regular maintenance to
remove trash and vegetative overgrowth
to improve user experience is needed.

The Bay Trail also has limited lighting,
wayfinding signage, and shade, and a
narrow or nonexistent buffer from fast-
moving traffic on the Parkway. The Bay
Trail also connects to Wildcat Creek Trail,
which crosses beneath the Parkway and
floods several times throughout the year.

The Bay Trail
Limited shade in hot
conditions
Small buffer between sidewalk and fast traffic
Missing sidewalks near more active land uses
Lack of trail lighting
Trail gaps force people onto high-stress routes
like Hensley Street
Inconsistent buffer between bike trail and
roadway
Biking and Walking Experience along the Parkway
Poor pavement quality, gaps, proximity to fast-moving traffic, long infrequent pedestrian crossings, and lack of shade, lighting, signage, and vegetation buffers make Richmond Parkway unwelcoming to walk or bike on today. There is a range of opportunities to improve the comfort of people using the Bay Trail, bikeways, sidewalks, and crossings.

Poor Bay Trail
pavement quality
Limited shade in hot
conditions Lack of trail lighting
No signage indicating
shared-use path
Inconsistent buffer between bike trail and
roadway
Trail gaps force people onto high-stress routes
like Hensley Street
Missing sidewalks near more active land usesSmall buffer between sidewalk and fast traffic 20 Wildcat
Canyon RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shoreline
Richmond
High School
Peres
Elementary
Bayview
Elementary
Lake
Elementary Contra
Costa
College
Verde
Elementary
San Pablo Av
Fitzgerald Dr
Rumrill Bl
West Macdonald Av
R o b e r t M i l l e r D r
Harbour Wy
Macdonald Av
West Barrett Av
Ohio Av
22nd St
13th St
Pennsylvania Av
Carlson Bl
Giant Rd
23rd St
Hilltop Dr
McBryde Av
San Pablo Dam Rd
G i a n t H w
Parr Bl
Rd 20
Rd 20
Barrett Av
Gertrude Av
San Pablo Av
vA kcirdooG
Pittsburg Av
6th St
Fred Jackson W y
Market Av
1 1 th S t
Broadway Av
Atlas Rd
Blume Dr
H i l l t o p M a l l R d
Shane Dr
Garvin Av
Lincoln Av
Lake s id e D r

RICHMOND

SAN PABLO
NORTH

RICHMOND
Richmond Pkwy
Richmond Pkwy
Castro St
%&580
!"80
!"80
Hensley St
San Pablo Bay

HILLTOP
MALL
Study Corridor
Railroad
Railyard
Schools
Existing/Proposed
Bicycle Facilities
Shared-Use Path
Separated Bike Lane
Bicycle Lane
Bicycle Route or
Boulevard
Bay Trail
.5 Miles
Figure 10: Map of Existing and Proposed Bikeways
Source: Fehr & Peers (2023); Richmond BPAP (2023); Contra Costa County ATP (2022); CCTA Countywide Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan (2018) Existing Conditions | 21

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
3 3
miles of new bikeways are needed.
67% 67%
of intersections along the Parkway are
missing pedestrian countdown signals.

Bent crosswalks
ADA non-compliant ramps
Corner sight distance issues
Outdated push buttons
Faded markings
High vehicle turn speeds
the corridor, there are 2.6 miles of
sidewalk gaps on the west side of the
corridor and 3.4 miles on the east side.

Safety at Intersections
Most intersections are large in size with
curb radii that enable turns at high
speeds and make for long pedestrian
and bicycle crossing distances.

About 70% of the signalized intersections
do not have bicycle detection and 65%
are missing pedestrian countdown timers,
leaving pedestrians unsure of how much
time is left to safely cross the street.

Both bicycle detection and pedestrian
countdown timers are state requirements
per the California Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).

These gaps in pedestrian and bikeway
infrastructure along the corridor are
critical to address given safety and
speeding concerns along the corridor.

Closing the Gaps
There are also several gaps in the
bikeway and walkway infrastructure on
the corridor. Figure 10 (previous page)
identifies the existing and proposed
bikeways. There are currently about
three miles of bikeway gaps along the
Parkway where there are no plans for
the Bay Trail and no bicycle facilities
exist. Though there are no active
fronting land uses consistently across
Example Safety Improvement Needs
Bent crosswalks
Outdated push buttons
22 DRIVING AND GOODS MOVEMENT
Richmond Parkway is a major road linking
I-80 and I-580 and serves industrial truck
traffic, regional commuters, and local
trips. The Parkway carries between 19,000
and 37,000 vehicles every weekday, 7%
of which are trucks. Truck volumes are
highest along the southern section of
Richmond Parkway and Castro Street,
ranging between 5%-13% of total daily
vehicle volumes. Truck volumes on San
Pablo Avenue in Contra Costa County, a
comparable arterial, range only between
2%-3% of total daily volumes (Caltrans,
2022). Many of these vehicle and truck
trips serve regional destinations along the
corridor, such as the Contra Costa Landfill,
UPS and Amazon distribution centers,
Whole Foods Market Food Distribution
Center, and the Chevron Refinery.

Speeds and Signals
Along most of the corridor, signals are not
coordinated. This negatively impacts air
quality and does not optimize vehicle flow.

Slowdowns are worst in the northbound
direction in the afternoon commute period
with average speeds around 30 mph as
shown in Figure 11 (Wejo, 2019). The
slowest segment is north of the Castro
Street and Richmond Parkway merge
where speeds are less than 25 mph for
nearly a mile. To keep traffic moving,
green times along the Parkway can be
30 seconds longer compared to other
signals in Richmond, which results in more
delay for all users entering or crossing
the Parkway. Travel times are expected to
double in the future, given planned and
anticipated growth along the corridor. On
average, traffic volumes are expected to
grow about 50%-60% by 2040.

Photo: Congestion causing queue spillover at San
Pablo Avenue and and Richmond Parkway.

Up to
vehicles take the Parkway on weekdays.
of vehicles are trucks.
37,00037,000
7%7%
Existing Conditions | 23

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Figure 11: Map of Slowdowns During 7-9AM and 4-6PM Peak Periods Source: Wejo (2019).

PM Peak Period
Wildcat
Cany on RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West M a cd on a l d Av
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West B a rrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av
Richmond
High School
Peres
Element ary
B a yvi ew
Element ary
Lake
Element ary Con tra
Costa
College
Ve rd e
Element ary
PINOLE

RIC HMOND

RIC HMOND
SAN
PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
Avera ge Sp eed s
≤25 mph
26-35 mph
36-45 m ph
>45 m ph
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
Wildcat
Cany on RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West M a cd on a l d Av
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West B a rrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av
Richmond
High School
Peres
Element ary
B a yvi ew
Element ary
Lake
Element ary Con tra
Costa
College
Ve rd e
Element ary
PINOLE

RIC HMOND

RIC HMOND
SAN
PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
Avera ge Sp eed s
≤25 mph
26-35 mph
36-45 m ph
>45 m ph
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
AM Peak Period
Wildcat
Cany on RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West M a cd on a l d Av
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West B a rrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av
Richmond
High School
Peres
Element ary
B a yvi ew
Element ary
Lake
Element ary Con tra
Costa
College
Ve rd e
Element ary
PINOLE

RIC HMOND

RIC HMOND
SAN
PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
Wildcat
Cany on RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West M a cd on a l d Av
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West B a rrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av
Richmond
High School
Peres
Element ary
B a yvi ew
Element ary
Lake
Element ary Con tra
Costa
College
Ve rd e
Element ary
PINOLE

RIC HMOND

RIC HMOND
SAN
PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
North Segment
Central/South Segment
AM Peak Period
PM Peak Period
PM Peak Period
Wildcat
Cany on RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West M a cd on a l d Av
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West B a rrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av
Richmond
High School
Peres
Element ary
B a yvi ew
Element ary
Lake
Element ary Con tra
Costa
College
Ve rd e
Element ary
PINOLE

RIC HMOND

RIC HMOND
SAN
PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
Avera ge Sp eed s
≤25 mph
26-35 mph
36-45 m ph
>45 m ph
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
24 Photo: Truck turning close to the
sidewalk at Atlas Road and Richmond
Parkway.

Travel Patterns
Drivers typically use the Parkway for trips
that start or end in the study area rather
than as a freeway-to-freeway connector.

In the afternoon peak period, less than a
third of northbound car drivers travel from
the I-580 interchange and get onto I-80
(Streetlight, 2022). This pattern is similar
for daily truck trips.

Over 60% of trucks getting onto the
Parkway from I-80 or I-580 travel to
destinations along the corridor. These
destinations are often sources of regional
economic activity and services, and
include the aforementioned distribution
centers, landfill and recycling yards,
Over
of northbound trucks turn off the
Parkway into North Richmond, most of
which use Hensley Street.
50%50%
hazardous waste disposal plants, water
reclaim plants, and more. For northbound
trucks that stop along the corridor,
the most popular destinations are in
North Richmond via Parr Boulevard,
Pittsburg Avenue, and Hensley Street,
as shown in Figure 12. Southbound
truck trips are more dispersed, with
21% continuing on to the Port of
Richmond as shown in Figure 13.

Existing Conditions | 25

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
San Pablo Av
Fitzgerald Dr
Rumrill Bl
West Macdonald Av
R o b e r t M i l l e r D r
Harbour Wy
Macdonald Av
West Barrett Av
Ohio Av
22nd St
13th St
Pennsylvania Av
Carlson Bl
Giant Rd
23rd St
Hilltop Dr
McBryde Av
San Pablo Dam Rd
Parr Bl
Rd 20
Rd 20
Barrett Av
Gertrude Av
San Pablo Av
vA kcirdooG
Pittsburg Av
7th St
6th St
Market Av
Broadway Av
Atlas Rd
Blume Dr
H i l l t o p M a l l R d
Shane Dr
Garvin Av
Lincoln Av
Wildcat
Canyon RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shoreline
.5 Miles
33%
6%
2%
10%
9%
5%
29%
2%
Screenline
Departures/
Destinations
Industrial
Land Use
Truck Route

RICHMOND

SAN PABLO
NORTH

RICHMOND
Atchison
Village
Belding/
Woods
Fairmede/
Hilltop
Hilltop
District
Hilltop Village
Iron
Triangle
Parchester
Village
Richmore
Village/
Metro Square
Santa Fe
Shields-Reid
Coronado
Richmond Pkwy
Richmond Pkwy
Castro St
%&580
!"80
!"80
San Pablo Bay

HILLTOP
MALL
Hensley St
Figure 12: Map of Northbound Daily Truck Distribution
Source: Streetlight (2022).26

San Pablo Av
Fitzgerald Dr
Rumrill Bl
West Macdonald Av
R o b e r t M i l l e r D r
Harbour Wy
Macdonald Av
West Barrett Av
Ohio Av
22nd St
13th St
Pennsylvania Av
Carlson Bl
Giant Rd
23rd St
Hilltop Dr
McBryde Av
San Pablo Dam Rd
G i a n t H w
Parr Bl
Rd 20
Rd 20
Barrett Av
Gertrude Av
San Pablo Av
vA kcirdooG
Pittsburg Av
7th St
6th St
Fred Jackson W y
Market Av
1 1 th S t
Broadway Av
Atlas Rd
Blume Dr
H i l l t o p M a l l R d
Shane Dr
Garvin Av
Lincoln Av
Lake s id e D r
Wildcat
Canyon RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shoreline
.5 Miles
2%
Atchison
Village
Belding/
Woods
Fairmede/
Hilltop
Hilltop
District
Hilltop Village
Iron
Triangle
Parchester
Village
Richmore
Village/
Metro Square
Santa Fe
Shields-Reid
Coronado
5%
8%
6%
35%
23%
3%
5%
2%
2%
7%
<1% I-580
8% WB I-580
5% EB I-580
21% Port
Screenline
Departures/
Destinations
Industrial
Land Use
Truck Route

RICHMOND

SAN PABLO
NORTH

RICHMOND
Richmond Pkwy
Richmond Pkwy
Castro St
%&580
!"80
!"80
Hensley St
San Pablo Bay

HILLTOP
MALL
Figure 13: Map of Southbound Daily Truck Distribution
Source: Streetlight (2022). Existing Conditions | 27

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Photo: Busy I-580 on-
ramp at Castro St.

PUBLIC HEAL TH
Climate
Increasing concentrations of greenhouse
gas (GHG) emissions are the primary
cause of global warming. This change in
the earth’s climate systems will increase
the severity, frequency, and duration
of climate hazards, including extreme
heat, wildfire, drought, and sea level rise.

Forecasts anticipate up to 12 inches of
sea level rise by 2050, and 36 inches by
2100, directly affecting the area west of
the corridor (Adapting to Rising Tides, Bay
Area Sea Level Rise Analysis and Mapping
Project, 2017). This would increase
flood risk, affecting roadways, property,
utilities and critical infrastructure,
emergency services, and evacuations.

Vulnerable populations and neighborhoods
subject to GHG emissions will be
disproportionately affected by climate
change, including people of color, children,
seniors, individuals with disabilities, and
households without access to a vehicle
(Contra Costa County Local Hazard
Mitigation Plan, 2018; Fehr and Peers, 2023;
ESA, 2023). The burden of pollution can
be visualized through the CalEnviroScreen
tool, as shown in Figure 14.

Some census tracts adjacent to
Richmond Parkway have diesel
particulate matter concentrations
higher than
of all census tracts in California.
78%78%
Local and regional sources of pollution,
noise, and increasing threat from
climate change hazards affect public
health and environmental quality for
communities along the corridor.

Pollution
Diesel particulate matter (diesel PM),
is a carcinogenic air contaminant
produced by the exhaust of trucks,
trains, ships, and equipment with
diesel engines. Given the industrial and
goods movement uses along Richmond
Parkway, diesel PM concentrations near
the corridor range from 0.08 to 0.98 tons
per year. This is greater than 78% of
communities statewide (California Office
of Health Hazard Assessment, 2021).
28 WildcatCany on RP
PointPinole Reg.Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West Macdonald A v
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West Barrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av

RIC HMOND

SAN PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
Atch i so n
V illage
Belding/
Woods
Fairmede/
Hillt op
Hillt op
Dist rict
Hillt op V illage
I ron
Tri a n gl e
Pa rch ester
V illage
Richmore
V illage/
M etro Square
Sant a Fe
Shields-Reid
Coronado
Study Corridor
Equit y Priorit y
Communit ies
(PBA 2050)
Stu dy Area Pollu ti on
Burden Percentiles
(CalEnviroScreen 4.0)
≤ 25%
26%-50%
51%-75%
≥75%
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
Figure 14: Map of Pollution Burden in Study Area
Source: California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (2021).

Existing Conditions | 29

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Photo: Vehicles turning onto the
freeway on-ramp at Canal St.

Health Impacts
Poor environmental conditions
contribute to public health issues,
including asthma, cardiovascular
disease, cancer, and low birth weight.

The highest rates of asthma attacks
based on Emergency Room admissions
near the corridor are in North Richmond
and the Iron Triangle neighborhood.

The asthma rate in Iron Triangle is
greater than 99% of other census tracts
statewide, and North Richmond’s
rate is greater than 98% of other census
tracts statewide as shown in Figure
15 (California Office of Environmental
Health Hazard Assessment, 2021).

Iron Triangle has an asthma rate higher
than
of all census tracts in California.
99%99%
30 WildcatCany on RP
PointPinole Reg.Shor eline
Sa n Pa b l o Av
F i tzgera l d D r
Ru m ri l l B l
West Macdonald A v
Robert Miller Dr
H a rb ou r Wy
M a cd on a l d Av
West Barrett Av
Oh i o Av
22n d St
1 3th St
Penns y lv ania A v
Ca rl son B l
G i a n t Rd
23rd St
H i l l top D r
M cB ryd e Av
Sa n Pa b l o D a m Rd
Giant Hw
Pa rr B l
B a rrett Av
G ertru d e Av
Sa n Pa b l o Av
G ood ri ck Av
P i ttsb u rg Av

RIC HMOND

SAN PAB LO
N ORTH

RIC HMOND
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ri ch m on d P kwy
Ca stro St
%&580
!"80
San Pablo Bay
Atch i so n
V illage
Belding/
Woods
Fairmede/
Hillt op
Hillt op
Dist rict
Hillt op V illage
I ron
Tri a n gl e
Pa rch ester
V illage
Richmore
V illage/
M etro Square
Sant a Fe
Shields-Reid
Coronado
Study Corridor
Equit y Priorit y
Communit ies
(PBA 2050)
Stu dy Area Asth m a
Percen ti les
(CalEnviroScreen 4.0)
≤85%
86%-90%
91%-95%
≥95%
.5 M iles

HILL T OP
M AL L
Figure 15: Map of Asthma Rate in Study Area
Source: California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (2021). Existing Conditions | 31

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

TRANSIT SERVICE
Limited transit service operates on the
corridor. Although there are 11 local
and regional routes, they only travel on
the northern and southern sections of
the Parkway, including at the Richmond
Parkway Transit Center (RPTC), but none
run along the full length of the corridor.

Study area routes and community
destinations like schools, hospitals, and
supermarkets are shown in Figure 16.

Many transit routes that serve corridor
residents run through residential
neighborhoods and to community
destinations instead of directly on the
Parkway, which has fewer active uses.

Photo: Bus stop at W MacDonald Ave.

Bus Connections
About 28% of total morning peak period
trips starting in the study area use the
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge in the
westbound direction. While there are
several bus routes that take riders north
and south of Richmond, there is only
one route that takes riders across the
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge: the Golden
Gate Transit 580 Route that stops at
Tewksbury Avenue and Castro Street.

Today, there are limited connections
between the study area and this bus stop
via the 607 and 72M. The 607 is a school
route with only one run on weekdays,
and the 72M only connects residents
living in the southern portion of the
corridor. Many lines run about every 30
minutes, providing limited service to
hospitals, supermarkets, and connections
like the Richmond BART station.

Photo: Buses waiting at the
Richmond Parkway Transit Center.

of households in the study area do
not own a car, compared to 5% across
Contra Costa County.
9%9%
32 Richmond
High School
Peres
Elementary
Bayview
Elementary
Lake
Elementary
Contra
Costa
College
Verde
Elementary
San Pablo Av
Fitzgerald Dr
Rumrill Bl
West Macdonald Av
Robert Miller Dr
Harbour Wy
Macdonald Av
West Barrett Av
Ohio Av
22nd St
13th St
Pennsylvania Av
Carlson Bl
Giant Rd
23rd St
Hilltop Dr
McBryde Av
San Pablo Dam Rd
Giant Hw
Parr Bl
Barrett Av
Gertrude Av
San Pablo Av
vA kcirdooG
Pittsburg Av
Wildcat
Canyon RP
Point
Pinole Reg.

Shoreline
Study Corridor
Richmond
Parkway Transit
Center
WestCAT Routes
Golden Gate
Transit Routes
AC Transit
Local and
Transbay Routes
AC Transit
School and
Night Routes
Hospitals
Supermarkets

HILLTOP
MALL
.5 Miles
16 JPX
J
76 70
71 LA 376Routes Stopping
at the Richmond
Parkway Transit
Center
Figure 16: Map of Transit Routes in Study Area
Source: AC Transit (2023); WestCAT (2023); Golden Gate Bridge Highway & Transportation District (2023).

Existing Conditions | 33

Richmond Parkway Transit Center
The RPTC includes a park-and-ride lot and serves five AC Transit and three WestCat bus routes that connect West County communities to Richmond, Hercules, San Pablo, El Cerrito, and Downtown San Francisco. However, the layout of the Transit Center requires several minutes of diversion time, which adds up to over 13,000 annual rider hours for WestCAT express routes. There is also limited bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure connecting to the transit center as shown in Figure 17.

Figure 17: Map of Richmond Parkway Transit Center Existing Conditions Source: Richmond Parkway Transit Center Existing Conditions Review (AC Transit, 2011); Fehr & Peers (2023).

Parking for
206 vehicles
Loading zone for
pick-up/drop-off
Genentech Bus
Loading Area
Pedestrian
access points
Informal
pedestrian
access point
Center island
platform
with shelters
and benches
Existing Bike Route with sharrows
Missing
sidewalk
Low-visibility
crosswalks
Existing Bike
Lanes
Low-visibility
crosswalks
Low-visibility
crosswalks

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
34 | Existing Conditions
CHAPTER 3
Engagement
Community engagement at the North Richmond Flea Market.

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLANRICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

STAKEHOLDER GROUPS
WCCTC engaged a variety of stakeholder groups, ranging from project partners who will help deliver the Plan’s recommendations to members of the public. Key stakeholder groups were:

General Public
Residents and users of the Parkway were
reached through in-person and online
activities. To ensure engagement from
marginalized residents living within
the study area, in-person methods
focused on presenting at community
meetings and tabling at events/pop-ups
in adjacent neighborhoods, including
North Richmond, Parchester Village,
and Iron Triangle. To get the word
out, opportunities were advertised
through social media ads and flyers and
engagement information was distributed
to all members of the WCCTC Board,
PAG, and Technical Advisory Committee.

Because over 48% of people living in the
area speak Spanish at home, Spanish-
speaking staff attended each pop-up
event and interactive boards, flyers,
and social media ads were translated
into Spanish. Online engagement was
conducted through an online platform that
enabled translation into any language.

Public Advisory Group (PAG)
The PAG served as community liaisons
to review and confirm the Public
Engagement Plan, share information with
community members, and provide input
on the strategies. The Public Advisory
Group consisted of representatives
from the Port of Richmond, Richmond
A robust community engagement process provided critical input to the Plan’s recommendations. This chapter summarizes the stakeholder groups, engagement methods, and feedback received. Appendix A contains the engagement approach and feedback summaries. 36 Photo: Community engagement at Thrive Thursdays event in Richmond Neighborhood Coordinating
Council, Trails for Richmond Action
Committee, Urban Tilth, Watershed
Project, Groundwork Richmond, Bike
East Bay, North Richmond Municipal
Advisory Council, Community
Housing Development Corporation,
Bay Area Outreach and Recreation
Program, and the California Trucking
Association. Four PAG meetings were
convened through the process.

WCCTC Board
The Board was continually updated
throughout the project and provided
strategic direction on the Plan.

Board members consisted of elected
officials representing the cities
of Hercules, Pinole, Richmond,
San Pablo, and El Cerrito, as well
as AC Transit, BART , WestCAT ,
and Contra Costa County.

Project Partners
WCCTC partnered with the City
of Richmond and Contra Costa
County to deliver this Plan. Project
partners participated in project
management team meetings on a
bi-weekly basis and were involved in
key decisions throughout the study.

Their feedback is foundational to
this Plan, as agencies that operate
the local right-of-way will ultimately
deliver many of the strategies and
recommendations included in this Plan.

Technical Advisory Committee (TAC)
The Technical Advisory Committee
(TAC) facilitated coordination among
various agencies and organizations,
allowing key stakeholders to provide
input and technical guidance.

The TAC included representatives
from the cities of Hercules, Pinole,
Richmond, and San Pablo, as well
as AC Transit, BART , WestCAT , Contra
Costa County, the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission, the East
Bay Regional Parks District, and the
West County Wastewater District.

Engagement | 37

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY
The public engagement plan was developed with input from the PAG. After the first engagement phase was completed, the PAG confirmed the rest of the engagement plan was on-track.

Engagement efforts resulted in...

1. Understand Needs
The first engagement phase focused on identifying needs and vision for the Parkway and confirming understanding of existing challenges and experiences using the Richmond Parkway.

Pop-Up Engagement
• August 6, 2023: North
Richmond Flea Market
(North Richmond)
• August 10, 2023: Thrive
Thursdays (Coronado)
• August 19, 2023: Walmart
(Hilltop)

Community Meetings
• September 5, 2023: North
Richmond Municipal
Advisory Council
• September 12, 2023:

Parchester Village
Neighborhood Council
• September 20,
2023: Iron Triangle
Neighborhood Council
Online Webmap
• June 15 through
September 4, 2023
PAG Meetings
• June 8, 2023
• September 21, 2023
WCCTC Board
Meetings
• May 26, 2023
• September 29, 2023
55 POP-UPSPOP-UPS COMMUNITY COMMUNITY
MEETINGSMEETINGS77

PAG PAG
MEETINGSMEETINGS44

WCCTC WCCTC

BOARD BOARD

MEETINGSMEETINGS
44 WITHWITH 142 142

PEOPLE PEOPLE

PROVIDING PROVIDING

FEEDBACKFEEDBACK
7171

PEOPLE WERE PEOPLE WERE

SPANISH SPANISH

SPEAKERSSPEAKERS
WITHWITH 268 268
FROM FROM 235235

RESPONSESRESPONSES

CONTRIBUTORSCONTRIBUTORS

ONLINE ONLINE

ENGAGEMENT ENGAGEMENT

TOOLSTOOLS
33 TAC TAC
MEETINGSMEETINGS55
ES
38 2. Explore Strategies

3. Refine Solutions
Then, stakeholders provided input on draft strategies
responding to identified needs and issues. Community
priorities for solutions were identified.

Comments on the priority strategies and Draft Plan were collected.

Pop-Up Engagement
• March 24, 2024: North Richmond Flea Market
• April 20, 2024: North Richmond’s Earth Day Festival
Community Meetings
• March 12, 2024: Parchester Village Neighborhood Council • April 2, 2024: North Richmond
Municipal Advisory Council
• April 6, 2024: City of Richmond District 2
• April 17, 2024: Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council
Public Draft Online Survey
• November 4th through
November 29th, 2024
PAG Meeting
• October 9, 2024
WCCTC Board Meeting
• October 25, 2024
Richmond Council Meeting
• November 19, 2024
Contra Costa County Board of
Supervisors Transportation, Water,
and Infrastructure Committee
(TWIC)
• December 9, 2024
Online Survey
• March 11 through
April 29, 2024
PAG Meeting
• February 22, 2024
WCCTC Board
Meeting
• March 22, 2024
Engagement | 39

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
PHASE 1: UNDERSTAND NEEDS
To kick off the Plan, WCCTC asked participants to share their challenges and experiences using the Richmond Parkway via an online webmap of the corridor and by providing input in-person. Participants provided feedback on experiences related to safety, public health, transit, biking and walking, and vehicles and goods movement.

Photo of Phase 1 pop-up at North Richmond Flea Market, 2024, and images of Phase 1 online webmap and social media ads.
40 What We Heard
Respondents cited safety as their top
concern, particularly related to speeding
along the Parkway. Nearly a third of all
responses related to biking and walking,
a majority of which noted comfort and
safety challenges while using the Parkway
and the Bay Trail. Biking and walking
comments also indicated concerns
about existing infrastructure, such as
missing sidewalks and curb ramps and
poor accessibility to trails. Participants
also brought up peak period congestion
Note: Percentages add up to more than 100% due to the open-ended nature of comments received.

More than one topic could be discussed in each comment. throughout the corridor, with specific
issues at intersections like San Pablo
Avenue, Giant Road, and Castro Street.

Maintenance was an important theme,
specifically concerning deteriorating
pavement, illegal dumping, and overgrown
trees. The distribution of need-related
topics heard can be seen in Figure 18.

Feedback on needs and desired
improvements was used as a
basis for the development of draft
strategies presented in Chapter 4.
“It’s a deadly rat race road
that I prefer not to drive on
anymore. ”
“Making the Parkway look like it’s being
cared for will go a long way towards
making people feel safe. ”
“The stretch where Parkway opens up from 2
lanes to 4 is crazy! It turns into a speedway!”
“Walking across the
Parkway is super scary. ”
40%
30%
32% 30%
14% 12%
20%
0%
10%
Distribution of Phase 1 Comments by Topic
Safety Biking & Walking MaintenanceCongestion
Figure 18: Distribution of Need-Related Topics Heard
Engagement | 41

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
PHASE 2: EXPLORE STRATEGIES
A list of over 30 strategies, organized into six different overarching topics, was developed to address the issues previously identified through existing conditions analysis, existing plans and policies, and engagement.

Stakeholders reviewed each strategy and provided a sense of relative priority.

In this phase of engagement, participants were asked to provide feedback on the draft strategies. Participants ranked strategies via an online survey, in-person verbally, or in-person on interactive boards.

Participants could also provide open-ended feedback on the draft strategies or suggest strategies that they felt were missing. Since the Parkway is also a regional facility serving a broader community whose preferred solutions may look different from residents living along the corridor, it was important to supplement the results of digital engagement strategy with in-person feedback from nearby residents.

Public Health
Strategies that reduce
neighborhood truck traffic
and reduce or mitigate
vehicle emissions.

Safety
Strategies that reduce
speeding and expand
emergency vehicle access.

Walking and Biking
Strategies that improve
walking and biking experience
on the Richmond Parkway
and the Bay Trail.

Driving and Goods Movement
Strategies that address congestion
and improve wayfinding.

Maintenance
Strategies that address
corridor and trail maintenance
and illegal dumping.

Transit
Strategies that address
transit reliability, service,
comfort, and access.

Strategy Categories
42 Images of Phase 2 Online Survey.

Photo of Phase 2 pop-up
at North Richmond Earth
Day Festival, 2024.

Photo of Phase 2 pop-up at North
Richmond Flea Market, 2024.

Engagement | 43

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLANRICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN What We Heard
Figure 19 summarizes the pop-up and
online survey results, and highlights
the top strategy categories identified.

The top four draft strategy categories
were public health, safety, maintenance,
and walking and biking. Top strategies
were ranked within each category
based on the level of support.

The top strategy categories differed
between online survey respondents
and pop-up participants. Pop-up
participants more strongly represented
Equity Priority Communities living
along the corridor compared to online
survey respondents, who represented
the broader community of regional
Parkway users. Almost half of pop-up
interactions occurred in Spanish. Pop-up
participants ranked public health as the
top strategy, followed by maintenance and
safety, while online respondents ranked
walking and biking as their top strategy,
followed by safety and maintenance.

Public health strategies that received
the most support were strategies
restricting trucks from driving through
neighborhoods and parking or idling
near sensitive land uses, as well as the
strategy to mitigate emissions through
urban greening. Safety strategies,
particularly measures to reduce speeding
and address high risk intersections,
were desired. Under maintenance,
strategies addressing ongoing roadway
maintenance and illegal dumping
received support from all audiences.

Popular strategies related to walking
and biking included upgrading on-street
bikeways and sidewalks and constructing
a new crossing for Wildcat Creek Trail.

Photo of Phase 2 pop-up at North
Richmond Flea Market, 2024.
44 22+19+17+16+14+1227+23+15+13+11+11
Feedback received during this phase
confirmed the responsiveness
of draft strategies to community
needs and identified the top
strategies for implementation.

Strategies in the highest-ranking
categories were given greater
consideration during the identification of
Priority Strategies described in Chapter 5.

Figure 19: Distribution of Draft Strategy Category Votes Pop-Up Votes
by Category
Online Survey Votes
by Category1

1. Survey respondents skew more white
and more wealthy than residents living
along the Parkway.

Note: Pop-Up events were held on
March 24, 2024 and April 20, 2024. The
Online Survey was open from March 11
through April 29, 2024.

Public Health, Maintenance, Safety, and Walking &
Biking were the most popular strategy categories.
12%
(29)
Public Health
Maintenance
Safety
Walking and Biking
Transit
Driving and Goods
Movement
22%
(51)
19%
(45)
17%
(40)
16%
(37)
14%
(33)
27%
(90)
23%
(78)15%
(52)
13%
(45)
11%
(38)
11%
(36)
Engagement | 45

PHASE 3: REFINE SOLUTIONS

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
A subset of ten priority strategies were identified
based on their ability to fulfill the Plan's six
goals outlined in Chapter 1, issues identified
in Chapter 2, and feedback from previous
community engagement phases. Details about
the priority strategies can be found in Chapter 5.

In this phase of engagement, the Draft Plan was
disseminated to the public, project partners, PAG,
TAC, WCCTC Board, Richmond City Council, and
the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure
Committee. In an online survey, participants were
asked to provide feedback on the responsiveness
of all the strategies to participant needs and which
priority strategy they wanted to see advanced
first. Participants could also provide open-
ended feedback on the Draft Plan. The ranking of
community priority strategies is listed in Figure 20.

Feedback heard during the PAG and public
meetings confirmed the importance of
implementing the priority strategies in response
to existing needs and challenges along the
corridor, while also identifying sources of
funding that acknowledge the regional benefit
of the Parkway. The regional-serving nature
of the Parkway is described in Appendix B.

The feedback on the Draft Plan was incorporated
into the Final Draft Plan, which was recirculated
to project partners. The adoption of the Final Plan
by WCCTC, the City of Richmond, and Contra Costa
County is expected to occur in early 2025. Social
media ads will be used to share the Final Plan.
92%
of survey respondents
agreed or strongly
agreed that the Plan
strategies responded
to their needs and
challenges along the
corridor.

Figure 20: Top Five Priority
Strategies Survey Ranking
18 VOTES
11 VOTES
8 VOTES
7 VOTES
7 VOTES
WB-1
Upgrade bikeways and
connect sidewalk gaps
S-1
Safety improvements
at intersections
PH-2
Trees and green infrastructure
S-2
Reduce speeding
M-1
Implement cross-jurisdictional
maintenance program
46 | Engagement
CHAPTER 4
Strategies
Photo of Phase 2 pop-up at North
Richmond Flea Market, 2024.

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

IDENTIFYING STRATEGIES
The Plan identifies 27 final strategies
that address the Plan’s six goals, issues
identified through existing conditions
analysis (Chapter 2), and community
A major outcome of this Plan is a recommended list of strategies that represent projects, policies, or programs related to transportation or transportation impacts along the corridor for WCCTC and project partners to advance.

Public Health
Strategies that reduce truck
cut-through traffic and reduce
or capture vehicle emissions.

Safety
Strategies that reduce vehicle
speeds, address intersection
conflict points, and prioritize
emergency vehicle access.

Walking and Biking
Strategies that support
comfortable walking and
biking on the Parkway and the
Bay Trail.

Driving and Goods
Movement
Strategies that encourage
carpooling, optimize
signal timing, and improve
wayfinding for drivers.

Maintenance
Strategies that holistically
address corridor and Bay
Trail maintenance and reduce
illegal dumping.

Transit
Strategies that improve
access and circulation at the
Richmond Parkway Transit
Center and support and
encourage transit ridership.
engagement feedback (Chapter 3).

The strategies are organized into six
categories described in Figure 21 below.

Figure 21: Strategy Categories
48 Meets Most Goals
All strategies meet at
least some of the Plan’s
goals, and 63% meet
many or most goals.

Table 1: Qualitative Goal Alignment Metrics
Figure 22: Goals Alignment Ranking
Goal Metric
Improve Safety for All Users* 1a Reduce severe and fatal injury collisions Increase Access to Key
Destinations*
2a Increase quality of connections
2b Expand connectivity to key destinations
Improve Health* 3a Decrease emissions
3b Reduce cut-through traffic
Advance Placemaking* 4a Improve maintenance and street beautification 4b Address key topics heard during engagement
Enhance Travel Time
Reliability and Efficiency
5a Reduce vehicle delay
5b Increase vehicle occupancy
Support Feasible Strategies 6a Advance already adopted strategies 6b Near- to Medium-term implementation
*Goal weighted more heavily given disproportionate benefit to local Equity Priority Communities.

Implementing these strategies will require
coordination between WCCTC and partner
agencies and organizations. The top 10 are
identified as Priority Strategies (Chapter
5) to be advanced first. WCCTC and partner
agencies may draw from the larger list of
strategies as conditions change or as new
funding or capacity opportunities arise.

To measure the Plan’s performance, each
strategy was evaluated against the Plan’s
goals, as shown in Table 1. Consideration
of equity was incorporated by more
heavily weighting goals that would have a
disproportionate benefit to Equity Priority
Communities living along the corridor.

Appendix C lists the effectiveness of each
strategy in meeting the Plan's goals.

Based on the goal alignment metrics,
each strategy met Some Goals, Many
Goals, or Most Goals, as pictured
in Figure 22. The full list of 27
strategies is presented in Table 2.

Meets Many Goals
Meets Some Goals
Strategies | 49

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name Goals Alignment Description PH-1* Public Health Trucks Confirm and enforce truck routes in North Richmond
Confirm designated truck routes in North Richmond, which is surrounded by industrial use, to ensure connections between truck-generating uses and the Parkway avoid residential neighborhoods to the extent feasible. Install cameras for legal automated monitoring and enforcement of heavy vehicles exceeding vehicle size limits.

PH-2* Public Health Urban Greening Trees and green infrastructure Incorporate trees and green infrastructure into all capital projects where feasible.

PH-3* Public Health Air Quality Minimize vehicle impacts to air quality
Encourage clean trucks to the maximum extent feasible through new development requirements.

Ensure requirements adhere to AB98 legislation. Place no truck parking and no idling zones judiciously to reinforce but not overburden truck operations. Install signs in strategic locations such as residential areas and near sensitive receptors (schools, hospitals, parks) indicating no-idling zones and displaying the associated fines.

Identify publicly-owned buildings within the study area exposed to emissions levels beyond the Bay Area Air Quality Management District thresholds of significance and prioritize these locations for installation and regular maintenance of high-quality air filtration systems.

PH-4 Public Health EV/AV Adoption Encourage private electric vehicle adoption and usage
Add electric vehicle charging infrastructure for vehicles and provide education on electric vehicle (EV) subsidy or rebate/incentive programs.

PH-5 Public Health Noise Improve sound wall Improve the sound wall by increasing size or effectiveness of the sound barrier.

S-1* Safety Street Design Safety improvements at
intersections
Install safety treatments per the Intersection Safety Recommendations in Chapter 5. These treatments include but are not limited to:
• Lighting, which includes roadway lighting, visiblity of signage, reflectivity, and lighting of pedestrians and bicyclists; ensure bike lanes and intersections are adequately illuminated, particularly in high-traffic areas • High-visibility crosswalks, curb ramps, and curb extensions • Conflict zone markings for bicycle crossings
• Geometric changes
• Accessible pedestrian push buttons, pedestrian countdown signals, and bicycle detection at signalized intersections
S-2* Safety Speeding Reduce speeding
Add speed limit signs and radar speed feedback signs at high speed locations. Study opportunity to follow through on the legal process for speed limit reduction. When legalized, implement pilot of speed safety cameras.

S-3 Safety Monitoring Monitor high-risk intersections for speeding, red light running, etc.

Install monitoring systems for near-miss events, speeding, red light running, etc. at high-risk intersections.
v S-3vvbv
*Priority Strategies with an implementation plan in Chapter 5.

Table 2: Full List of Strategies
50 ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name Goals Alignment Description PH-1* Public Health Trucks Confirm and enforce truck routes in North Richmond
Confirm designated truck routes in North Richmond, which is surrounded by industrial use, to ensure connections between truck-generating uses and the Parkway avoid residential neighborhoods to the extent feasible. Install cameras for legal automated monitoring and enforcement of heavy vehicles exceeding vehicle size limits.

PH-2* Public Health Urban Greening Trees and green infrastructure Incorporate trees and green infrastructure into all capital projects where feasible.

PH-3* Public Health Air Quality Minimize vehicle impacts to air quality
Encourage clean trucks to the maximum extent feasible through new development requirements.

PH-5 Public Health Noise Improve sound wall Improve the sound wall by increasing size or effectiveness of the sound barrier.

S-3 Safety Monitoring Monitor high-risk intersections for speeding, red light running, etc.

Install monitoring systems for near-miss events, speeding, red light running, etc. at high-risk intersections.
v S-3vvbv
Strategies | 51

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Table 2: Full List of Strategies (cont.)
ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name Goals Alignment Description WB-1* Walking and
Biking Street Design Upgrade bikeways and
connect sidewalk gaps
Upgrade the Bay Trail to align with Bay Trail Design Guidelines, including adding clear and visible signage, particularly where the Bay Trail transitions to bikeways on Richmond Parkway. Realign Bay Trail between Hensley St and Gertrude Ave to western side of Castro St and Richmond Parkway.

Create buffers to physically separate bicyclists from motor vehicle traffic using landscaping to enhance bicyclist comfort and safety. Coordinate with the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority on the Living Levy project plans to improve pedestrian and operations access along Pittsburg Ave.

Install bike facilities, independent of the Bay Trail, with physical buffers to separate bicyclists from motor vehicles and improve bicyclist comfort and safety. Ensure bike lanes and intersections are adequately illuminated, particularly in high-traffic areas.

Install new sidewalks to close sidewalk gaps. Where sidewalk is missing on one side of the street along inactive land uses, condition future developers to install sidewalks.

WB-2* Walking and
Biking
Wildcat Creek Trail
Crossing
On-street Wildcat Creek Trail
crossing
Develop at-grade signalized multi-use crossing of Wildcat Creek Trail, install lighting, and add wayfinding signage to indicate distance traveled or what facilities are provided/nearby. In the long-term, consider a grade-separated overcrossing for the Wildcat Creek Trail over the Richmond Parkway.

WB-3 Walking and
Biking New Technology
Test innovative bicycle and
pedestrian detection at
intersections
Test new technologies (e.g. LiDAR, AI) that can help a traffic signal predict the arrival of a bicyclist or pedestrian and maintain signal protection until they have exited the intersection.

WB-4 Walking and
Biking Shared Mobility Expand electric bike share
program Support expansion of Richmond’s bikeshare program.

DG-1* Driving and
Goods Movement Cycle Length Upgrade and coordinate traffic signals
Implement signal coordination along the Parkway in the peak period and optimize corridor-wide cycle lengths. Consider signal operations, pedestrian delay, and impact on speed. Install a connected battery backup system and a central signal management system. Upgrade signal hardware and software to allow automated traffic signal performance measures. Investigate, test, and deploy a system that allows for emergency vehicle preemption and transit prioritization at signalized intersections. Consider an adaptive traffic signal system.

DG-2 Driving and
Goods Movement Congestion Add carpool lane on segments
with high congestion
Study the conversion of the northbound right turn lane into a high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lane for bus, carpool, and right turn only in the afternoon peak period. Implement recommendations in MTC’s I-580 Richmond Parkway Interchange Operational Improvements project.

DG-3 Driving and
Goods Movement Street Design Redesign Richmond Parkway/ Castro Street merge
Study reallocating merge capacity through restriping Richmond Parkway at the Castro Street merge to be one lane or introduce metering on Castro Street to control queues. Improve guidance for drivers through signage and striping.

DG-4 Driving and
Goods Movement
Signage/
Wayfinding Signage for blind turns Add a yield or prepare to stop sign/signal ahead of blind turns.

DG-5 Driving and
Goods Movement
Signage/
Wayfinding Install wayfinding for drivers Install gateway and wayfinding signage directing drivers on which lanes to use to access key destinations.
v S-3
*Priority Strategies with an implementation plan in Chapter 5. 52 ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name Goals Alignment Description WB-1* Walking and
Biking Street Design Upgrade bikeways and
connect sidewalk gaps
Upgrade the Bay Trail to align with Bay Trail Design Guidelines, including adding clear and visible signage, particularly where the Bay Trail transitions to bikeways on Richmond Parkway. Realign Bay Trail between Hensley St and Gertrude Ave to western side of Castro St and Richmond Parkway.

Install new sidewalks to close sidewalk gaps. Where sidewalk is missing on one side of the street along inactive land uses, condition future developers to install sidewalks.

WB-4 Walking and
Biking Shared Mobility Expand electric bike share
program Support expansion of Richmond’s bikeshare program.

DG-4 Driving and
Goods Movement
Signage/
Wayfinding Signage for blind turns Add a yield or prepare to stop sign/signal ahead of blind turns.

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Table 2: Full List of Strategies (cont.)
ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name Goals Alignment Description M-1* Maintenance Roadway Implement cross-jurisdictional maintenance program
Implement a consistent management program assigned to upkeep the Parkway and provide a plan on what maintenance is, how it is performed, how it can be budgeted, and why it is needed.

Consider maintenance agreement stating staff time commitments, legal resources, support from elected officials, and the process to identify a regional funding source. Identify a cross-jurisdictional maintenance manager to implement the program to rehabilitate and maintain pavement quality and striping along the corridor, as well as maintenance to extend the service life of shared use path pavement. This program would also apply to signage, tree, debris, and signal maintenance.

M-2 Maintenance Encampments Keep sidewalks and paths
clear near encampments
Partner with advocacy group for unhoused, such as SOS Richmond and Contra Costa Health, Housing and Homeless Services, to encourage people experiencing homeless to keep sidewalks and paths clear.

M-3 Maintenance Illegal Dumping Discourage illegal dumping Reduce illegal dumping on the corridor via fencing and provide education on how to properly dispose of waste.

T-1* Transit Richmond Parkway
Transit Center
Improve access to the
Richmond Parkway Transit
Center
Develop formal pedestrian connection between the northwest corner of the Richmond Parkway Transit Center and Richmond Parkway. Upgrade faded crosswalk markings within the Transit Center.

Install bike lockers at the Richmond Parkway Transit Center consistent with the Association of Pedestrian & Bicycle Professionals guidance. Install bus pullout stops to allow buses to directly serve the Transit Center from the Parkway as recommended in the WCCTC Express Bus Implementation Plan (2020).

T-2 Transit Transit Bus/Shuttle Improve bus stop comfort Enhance bus stops with features like seating, shelters, lighting, and real-time displays.

T-3 Transit Transit Bus/Shuttle New transit service to Marin County
Study a bus line that connects Central/North Richmond and Hilltop to Marin across the Richmond- San Rafael Bridge.

T-4 Transit Transit Bus/Shuttle Increase bus frequency Increase frequencies of AC Transit buses serving the corridor subject to AC Transit’s Realign Plan.

T-5 Transit Transit Bus/Shuttle On-demand shuttle service Support continued operation and expansion of Richmond Moves on-demand shuttle, including to jobs centers.

T-6 Transit Parking Parking lot for transit to Marin
County
To serve the large number of residents in the corridor commuting to the North Bay, study park-and- ride opportunities supporting transit service into Marin County.

T-7 Transit Accessibility Publicize transit options/
information
Make transit schedules more accessible, expand education for Clipper Card usage, and publicize different transit options.
v S-3
*Priority Strategies with an implementation plan in Chapter 5. 54 ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name Goals Alignment Description M-1* Maintenance Roadway Implement cross-jurisdictional maintenance program
Implement a consistent management program assigned to upkeep the Parkway and provide a plan on what maintenance is, how it is performed, how it can be budgeted, and why it is needed.

M-3 Maintenance Illegal Dumping Discourage illegal dumping Reduce illegal dumping on the corridor via fencing and provide education on how to properly dispose of waste.

T-2 Transit Transit Bus/Shuttle Improve bus stop comfort Enhance bus stops with features like seating, shelters, lighting, and real-time displays.

T-3 Transit Transit Bus/Shuttle New transit service to Marin County
Study a bus line that connects Central/North Richmond and Hilltop to Marin across the Richmond- San Rafael Bridge.

T-4 Transit Transit Bus/Shuttle Increase bus frequency Increase frequencies of AC Transit buses serving the corridor subject to AC Transit’s Realign Plan.

T-5 Transit Transit Bus/Shuttle On-demand shuttle service Support continued operation and expansion of Richmond Moves on-demand shuttle, including to jobs centers.

2 3

1. Pedestrian and bicycle crossing at W
Ohio Ave and Garrard Blvd.

2. Flooded Wildcat Creek Trail tunnel.

3. Informal pedestrian access point to
the Richmond Parkway Transit Center
currently subject to inclement weather.
1 56 | Strategies
CHAPTER 5
Priority Strategies
One of the priority strategies is to
implement safety treatments at
intersections, such as protected right-
turn phases at Richmond Parkway and
Ohio Avenue.

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
The Plan identifies ten priority strategies
to advance first based on their ability
to address the Plan’s six goals outlined
in Chapter 1, issues identified in
Chapter 2, and community engagement
feedback in Chapter 3. All the priority
strategies shown in Table 3 meet many
or most goals and received the most
support through the online survey, pop-
ups, and community meetings on the
strategies. This chapter provides cutsheets
describing the strategies’ associated
actions, benefits, timeframes, lead and
coordinating agencies, and cost ranges
shown below. Cost ranges of each priority
strategy are included in the subsequent
cutsheets. Funding must be identified
and acquired to implement the strategies,
and WCCTC will support partner agencies
in pursuing grants and regional funding
opportunities. Funding and implementation
are further discussed in Chapter 6.

Table 3: Priority Strategies
ID Topic Strategy Name Goals Alignment
PH-1 Public Health Confirm and enforce truck routes in North Richmond
PH-2 Public Health Trees and green infrastructure
PH-3 Public Health Minimize vehicle impacts to air quality S-1 Safety Safety improvements at intersections
S-2 Safety Reduce speeding
WB-1 Walking and Biking Upgrade bikeways and connect sidewalk gaps
WB-2 Walking and Biking On-street Wildcat Creek Trail crossing DG-1 Driving and Goods
Movement Upgrade and coordinate traffic signals
M-1 Maintenance Implement cross-jurisdictional maintenance program
T-1 Transit Improve access to the Richmond Parkway
Transit Center
v S-3vv = Meets Many Goals = Meets Most Goals
$$$$ = <$1M $$$$ = $1M-5M
$$$$ = $6M-$10M $$$$ = $11M+
58 Confirm designated truck routes
Confirm designated truck routes in North Richmond, where there are large industrial-use generators, to ensure connections between truck-generating uses and the Parkway avoid residential neighborhoods to the extent feasible.

Enforce designated truck routes
Install cameras for legal automated monitoring and enforcement of heavy vehicles exceeding vehicle size limits.

Confirm and enforce truck routes
in North Richmond
PUBLIC HEAL THPH-1
Completion
Timeframe
0 to 2 years
Lead Agency
Contra Costa
County: Planning,
Public Works, CHP
Goals Alignment
Meets Most Goals
Coordinating
Agency
WCCTC, CalTrans, City
of San Pablo, City of
Richmond
Actions
Benefits
Improved neighborhood sound quality
Reducing truck-related noise pollution, which can be damaging above 85 decibels 50 feet away, can decrease stress and improve sleep quality.1
Reduced exposure to emissions
Trucks emit pollutants at a rate of 1.15 times more than passenger vehicles, which contributes to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases.2 Redirecting truck traffic from sensitive sites and residential neighborhoods reduces exposure to these emissions, leading to better air quality and fewer health issues, such as asthma.3

1. Community and Environmental Defense Services, “Truck Stops & Neighborhood Quality of Life, ” 2024.

2. EPA, US EPA Archive Document on Idling Reduction; EPA, 2024.

3. OEHHA, 2021.
$$$$
Priority Strategies | 59

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Map of Existing Designated Truck Routes
Source: Richmond General Plan 2030, 2016. Industrial land use areas include land that is used for the manufacturing, storage, processing, or packaging of goods and materials.

PH-1
Figure 23:Map of Existing Designated Truck Routes
60 Incorporate trees and green infrastructure
Incorporate trees and green infrastructure, such as bioretention planters, into all capital projects where feasible.

Trees and green infrastructure
PUBLIC HEAL THPH-2
Completion
Timeframe
Ongoing
Lead Agency
City of Richmond:

Public Works, Contra
Costa County: Public
Works
Goals Alignment
Meets Most Goals
Coordinating
Agency
Groundwork
Richmond, Contra
Costa County: Planning
Benefits
Improved air quality
Planting trees along sections of the nine-mile corridor would improve local air quality by capturing 213.6 metric tons of CO2 by 2050, the equivalent of removing 46 cars from the road driving a combined 529 thousand miles annually.1
Increased tree cover and lower temperatures
Adding about 800 trees to the tree cover will provide shade along the entire corridor. This strategy can lower surface temperatures by up to 11 degrees Fahrenheit, which has the potential to save lives as climate change increases the frequency of extreme heat episodes.2 Improved drainage and water quality
Bioretention planters provide, on average, 56% to 89% stormwater volume reduction and are proven to filter pollutants from stormwater, reducing flooding along the corridor and improving water quality.3

1. ESA, 2024.

2. Rx FOR HOT CITIES, 2023.

3. EPA, NPDES: Stormwater Best Management Practice—Bioretention (Rain Gardens), 2021.

Actions
$$$$
Priority Strategies | 61

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Street trees
Increased tree cover improves air
quality by removing particulate matter,
and reduces surface temperatures
by providing shade and increasing
moisture in the air. Trees also help
manage runoff, reduce erosion caused
by rain, and promote infiltration, which
all work to reduce potential flooding.1
Public domain image.

Bioretention planters
Installing bioretention planters
helps manage stormwater runoff by
capturing, treating, and absorbing
runoff from the street, while recharging
the local groundwater supply.

Image source: City of Raleigh.

Additional Details
PH-2

1. ESA, " Soak Up the Rain: Trees Help Reduce Runoff, " 2024. 62 Encourage clean trucks and prohibit truck activity in sensitive areas Encourage clean trucks to the maximum extent feasible through new development requirements.

Install air filtration systems
Identify publicly-owned buildings within the study area exposed to emissions levels beyond the Bay Area Air Quality Management District thresholds of significance and prioritize these locations for installation and regular maintenance of high-quality air filtration systems.

Minimize vehicle impacts to air quality
PUBLIC HEAL THPH-3
Additional DetailsBenefits
Completion
Timeframe
0 to 2 years
Lead Agency
Contra Costa County:

Planning, City of
Richmond: Public
Works, BAAQMD
Goals Alignment
Meets Many Goals
Coordinating Agency
City of Richmond:

Planning, Contra Costa
County: Planning, CHP
Improved air quality
Trucks idle at a rate of 1 gallon of diesel per
hour on average, which releases more than 500
pounds of CO2 emissions per day. 1 This
strategy would reduce local exposure to these
truck emissions.

Reduced health risks
Higher CO2 levels contribute significantly to the
prevalence of asthma and the risk of heart and
lung disease. Reducing emissions will positively
affect the 99th and 98th percentile asthma
rates near the Parkway in the North Richmond
and the Iron Triangle neighborhoods.2

1. EPA, US EPA Archive Document on Idling Reduction; EPA, 2024.

2. California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, 2021.

Actions
No-idling
signage
No-idling signs are
enforcement signs
regarding truck
parking or idling
and can include
associated fines.

Detering this truck
activity can improve
the local air quality.

Image source: Traffic
Signs.
$$$$
Priority Strategies | 63

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Install safety enhancements
Install safety treatments per the following Intersection Safety Recommendations pages. These treatments include but are not limited to: high visibility crosswalks, curb ramps and curb extensions/ bulbouts, turn delineators to slow down left turn speeds, conflict zone markings for bicycle crossings, pedestrian refuge islands, removing slip lanes, and lighting (overhead lighting, pedestrian- and bicyclist-scale lighting, bus stop lighting, visiblity and reflectivity of signage). Ensure bike lanes and intersections are adequately illuminated, particularly in high-traffic areas.

Improve safety at signalized intersections
Install safety treatments per the following Intersection Safety Recommendations pages. These treatments include but are not limited to: accessible pedestrian push buttons, pedestrian countdown signals, bicycle detection, striped trail crossings, and No Right Turn on Red signage.

Safety improvements at intersections
SAFETYS-1
Benefits
Safer streets for all
This strategy could lead to a 7% reduction in all collisions.1 Safer streets for bicyclists and pedestrians
This strategy could lead to a 43% reduction in injury collisions involving bicyclists or pedestrians.1

1. Caltrans, Local Roadway Safety Manual, 2024; City of Richmond Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan, 2023; City of Richmond General Plan, 2012; City of Richmond Local Road Safety Plan, 2023; Contra Costa County General Plan, 2005; Fehr and Peers, 2024; FHWA, CMF Clearinghouse, 2024; San Pablo General Plan, 2011.

Actions
Completion
Timeframe
6 to 10 years
Lead Agency
Contra Costa County:

Public Works, City
of Richmond: Public
Works
Goals Alignment
Meets Most Goals
Coordinating
Agency
Caltrans, MTC, West
County Wastewater,

CCTA, BNSF
$$$$
64 Intersection Safety Recommendations
Recommendations include universal treatments appropriate at each intersection and site-specific treatments for use at select treatments on the corridor. These recommendations build upon the City of Richmond Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan (2023), City of Richmond Local Road Safety Plan (2023), City of Richmond General Plan (2012), San Pablo General Plan (2011), and Contra Costa County General Plan (2005).

TREATMENTS AT EVERY INTERSECTION

TREATMENTS AS NEEDED
Mark all crosswalks with high-visibility striping
and advance stop bars to improve pedestrian
crossing visibility.

HIGH-VISIBILITY CROSSWALKS
Install directional ADA curb ramps.

ACCESSIBLE CURB RAMPS
Install audible pedestrian signals and accessible
push buttons at crossings.

ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN SIGNALS
Provide protected right-turn phase to remove
vehicle-bike and vehicle-pedestrian conflicts in
time.

PROTECTED RIGHT-TURN PHASE
Install pedestrian countdown timers to display
the crossing time remaining.

PEDESTRIAN COUNTDOWN SIGNALS
Improve overhead, pedestrian-scale, and bus
stop lighting to increase visibility of all road
users. Increase visibility and reflectivity of all
signage.

LIGHTING AND REFLECTIVITY
Install reflective backplates on signals to enhance
the visibility of traﬀic signals.

REFLECTIVE BACKPLATES
Install bike detection at signalized intersections.

BIKE DETECTION
Promote self-enforcement of right-turn only lane
by installing a far-side bulbout and enhancing
related signage.

ONLY

ENFORCE RIGHT-TURN ONLY LANES
Install railroad crossing arms for pedestrian and
bicyclist safety.

RAILROAD CROSSING ARMS
Provide pedestrians a place to wait if they are
unable to finish crossing an intersection.

MEDIAN REFUGE ISLANDS
Reduce curb radii to slow down vehicle turning
speeds, shorten pedestrian and bicyclist crossing
distances, and provide more sidewalk space for
pedestrians and bicyclists.

TIGHTEN CURB RADII
Stripe crosswalk to indicate trail crossing and
improve user visibility.

STRIPE TRAIL CROSSING
Straighten crosswalks to improve sightlines and
shorten pedestrian crossing distances.

STRAIGHTEN CROSSWALKS
Install a raised crosswalk in the right-turn slip
lane to reduce turning speeds.

RAISED CROSSWALKS
Prohibit vehicle right-turn on red at path and
separated bikeway crossings of the minor street
to reduce conflicts.

NO RIGHT-TURN ON RED
Install protected intersection to support bicyclist
turning movements and create slower
interactions and clear sightlines.

MAJOR BIKE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Enhance or create new active transportation
connection between bike facility and the Parkway
with lighting and maintenance.

MINOR BIKE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
Where large vehicles must turn, install a
porkchop island to reduce crossing distances and
provide a raised crosswalk to reduce speeds.

INSTALL PORKCHOP ISLAND

WITH RAISED CROSSWALK
Figure 24:Intersection Safety Recommendations
Priority Strategies | 65

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Intersection Safety Recommendations (Cont.)
580
Provide intersection improvements
to be determined through MTCʼs
I-580/Richmond Parkway
Operational Improvements Project.

Install underpass
lighting to improve
visibility for all
users.

Provide protected phases for
southbound and westbound right-turns.
.5 mi
N
Ohio Ave
W Macdonald Ave
Nevin Ave
W Bissell Ave
Castro St
Richmond Pkwy
W Barrett Ave
1st St
2nd St
Pennsylvania Ave
Richmond Ln
Mills St
Hensley St
W Gertrude Ave
W Chanslor Ave
Existing Signalized Intersection
At-Grade Railroad Crossing
Transit Stop
ONLY
S-1
South Segment:

I-580 to Hensley St
See individual
recommendation icon
details on page 65.

Figure 25:Intersection Safety Recommendations (Cont.)
66 See proposed
Wildcat Creek Trail
signalized crossing
diagram.
.5 mi
N
W Gertrude Ave
Parr Blvd
Pittsburg Ave
Richmond Pkwy
Wildcat Creek
Goodrick Ave
Existing Signalized Intersection
Proposed Signalized Intersection
ONLY
ONLY
ONLY
Central Segment:

West Gertrude Ave
to Goodrick Ave
See individual
recommendation icon
details on page 65.

Priority Strategies | 67

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
80 *Intersection counts not taken.

Consider
right-turn phasing
depending on
changing land
uses/Hilltop
Specific Plan.

Redesign ramp
geometry to
reduce vehicle
speeds.

N
.5 mi
San Pablo AveLakeside Dr

BELLA VISTA
Hilltop Dr
Atlas Rd
Richmond Pkwy
Blum
e Dr
Signalized Intersection
Transit Stop

RICHMOND

PARKWAY

TRANSIT
CENTER
Intersection Safety Recommendations (Cont.) S-1
North Segment:

Giant Hwy Ramp to I-80
See individual recommendation icon
details on page 65 and Appendix D for the
35% design concept between San Pablo
Avenue and the entrance to the Pinole Vista
Shopping Center.
68 Install speed-monitoring systems
Add radar speed feedback signs or implement pilot of speed cameras at high speeding locations.

Speed cameras are currently not allowed under state law, but legislation passed in 2023, Assembly Bill 645, authorizes six designated cities across California to implement a speed camera pilot program.

Indicate speed limits
Add speed limit signs and lower the speed limit throughout the Parkway if allowed under state law.

Reduce speeding
SAFETYS-2
Benefits
Additional Details
Actions
Completion
Timeframe
3 to 5 years
Lead Agency
City of Richmond:

Public Works, Contra
Costa County: Public
Works
Goals Alignment
Meets Many Goals
Coordinating
Agency
City of Richmond: PD;
California Highway
Patrol
Safer streets for all
This strategy could lead to a 20% reduction in all collisions.1

1. Caltrans, Local Roadway Safety Manual, 2024; FHWA, CMF Clearinghouse, 2024.

Radar speed signs
Radar speed feedback signs are cost-effective
traffic calming solutions that reduce average
vehicle speeds and slow speeding drivers.

Image Source: Trafficalm.
$$$$
Priority Strategies | 69

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Upgrade bikeways and connect sidewalk gaps
WALKING AND BIKINGWB-1
Lead Agency
City of Richmond: Public
Works, Contra Costa
County: Public Works
Coordinating
Agency

MTC, CCTA, WCCTC,
City of Pinole, EBRPD
Goals Alignment
Meets Most Goals
Benefits
Increased access for pedestrians
Creates a more direct and usable path for pedestrians along the entire Parkway, improving connections to bus stops, Richmond Parkway Transit Center, nearby parks, schools, and community services.

Increased access for bicyclists1
Upgrade Bay Trail facilities
Upgrade the Bay Trail to align with Bay Trail Design Guidelines, including adding clear and visible signage, particularly where the Bay Trail transitions to bikeways on Richmond Parkway. Realign Bay Trail between Hensley St and Gertrude Ave to western side of Castro St and Richmond Parkway. Create buffers to physically separate bicyclists from motor vehicle traffic using landscaping to enhance bicyclist comfort and safety. Coordinate with the San Francisco Bay Restoration Authority on the Living Levy project plans to improve pedestrian and operations access along Pittsburg Ave.

Install high-quality on-street bikeways
Install bike facilities, independent of the Bay Trail, with physical buffers to separate bicyclists from motor vehicles and improve bicyclist comfort and safety. Ensure bike lanes and intersections are adequately illuminated, particularly in high-traffic areas.

Close sidewalk gaps
Install new sidewalks to close sidewalk gaps. Where sidewalk is missing on one side of the street along inactive land uses, condition future developers to install sidewalks.

Actions
Completion
Timeframe
6 to 10 years
Within 20 minutes, residents near
the Central segment would be
able to access up to...
5x more amenities2

2.5x more jobs
4x more park area by biking
Within 20 minutes, residents near
the South segment would be
able to access up to...
10% more amenities2
20% more jobs
5% more park area by biking
Within 20 minutes, residents near
the North segment would be able
to access up to...
2x more amenities2
3x more jobs
3x more park area by biking

1. ESA, 2024; TravelAccess+, Fehr and Peers, 2024; LEHD, 2023. North segment includes areas east of San Pablo Ave and north of El Portal Dr, covering Tara Hills, Hilltop Village, Hilltop District, and Rollingwood. Central segment includes areas west of San Pablo Ave and north of Gertrude Ave/Costa Ave, covering San Pablo, North Richmond, and Parchester Village. South segment includes areas south of Gertrude Ave/Costa Ave, including Shields-Reid, Iron Triangle and Santa Fe.

2. Amenities include day cares, hospitals, schools, supermarkets and emergency services. $$$$
70 Sidewalk Gaps and Recommended Bikeways
Source: Richmond Bicycle and Pedestrian Action Plan, 2023.

Missing sidewalks on both sides of street
Missing sidewalks on one side of street
Study Corridor
Richmond Parkway Transit Center
Existing bike lane
Proposed separated bike lane
Proposed Bay Trail realignment
Existing Bay Trail
Wildcat Creek Trail Crossing
Richmond Parkway
Richmond Parkway

RICHMOND
Castro St
Sample Separated Bikeway Design Concept
For detailed design between San Pablo Ave and Pinole
Vista Crossing Shopping Center, see Appendix D.

LANDSCAPED SEPARATED BIKEWAY
Hensl e y St
Figure 26:Sidewalk Gaps and Recommended Bikeways
Priority Strategies | 71

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
On-street Wildcat Creek Trail crossing
WALKING AND BIKINGWB-2
Previous planning efforts, such as the San Francisco Estuary Partnership’s Restoring Wildcat Creek: Community-Led Watershed Health Update and Priority Project Implementation project, have identified a community desire for a grade-separated crossing at this location. The Richmond Parkway Transportation Plan recommends installing a signalized crossing to improve conditions in the nearer term as overcrossing costs are significant and will require a longer time horizon to fund and construct.

Lead Agency
Contra Costa
County: Public
Works
Coordinating
Agency
EBRPD, City of
Richmond: Public Works,
MTC, West County
Wastewater, WCCTC
Goals Alignment
Meets Many Goals
Benefits
Increased multimodal access
Improving the Wildcat Creek Trail Crossing through near-term improvements would connect nearly 1 mile of trail east of the Parkway with 1.4 miles of trail west of the Parkway when the underpass is flooded, resulting in a total of 2.2 miles of low stress bicycle facilities.1 Improved crossing usage and experience
Provides a functioning, year-round crossing resilient to sea level rise effects and resolves the current flooding of the existing tunnel.

Add a signalized crossing
Develop at-grade signalized multi-use crossing of Wildcat Creek Trail, install lighting, add signage along Wildcat Creek Trail to indicate distance traveled or what facilities are provided/nearby.

Actions
Completion
Timeframe
3 to 5 years

1. Fehr & Peers, 2024.
$$$$
72 Proposed Signalized Crossing at Wildcat Creek Trail
100 ft
N
Wildcat Creek Trail
Wildcat Creek
Trailhead
Richmond Parkway
Richmond Parkway Wildcat Creek Trail Crossing
Proposed Signalized Crossing
New Trail Connection
New
Signal
Wildcat Creek Trail
Coordinate with the
East Bay Regional Park
District to create trail
connection through
the existing fence.

Extend curb line
to slow turning
vehicles.

Existing Tunnel Alignment
Tunnel frequently
floods, requiring trail
users to turn back.

Figure 27:Proposed Signalized Crossing at Wildcat Creek Trail Priority Strategies | 73

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Implement signal coordination
Implement signal coordination along the Parkway in the peak period and optimize corridor-wide cycle lengths. Consider signal operations, pedestrian delay, and impact on speed.

Upgrade signal infrastructure
Install a connected battery backup system and a central signal management system. Upgrade signal hardware and software to allow automated traffic signal performance measures. Investigate, test, and deploy a system that allows for emergency vehicle preemption and transit prioritization at signalized intersections. Consider an adaptive traffic signal system.

Upgrade and coordinate traffic signals
in the northbound direction in
the afternoon peak period.
in the southbound direction in
the morning peak period.
13 minutes 3 minutes

1. Fehr & Peers, SimTraffic Model, 2024. Travel time savings are greater in the northbound direction since it is more heavily impacted by existing traffic congestion, particularly during the evening commute period as discussed in Chapter 2.

DRIVING AND GOODS MOVEMENTDG-1
Travel time savings1
Coordinating the signals along
the Parkway could save drivers
up to...

Reduced idling
Time travel savings may reduce vehicle emissions and driver frustrations from sitting at lights, improving local air quality and discouraging dangerous driving actions such as running red lights, speeding, and driving on the shoulder lane.

Improved emergency services and bus reliability
Signal priority for emergency services or transit at signalized intersections can improve the speed of emergency responders in reaching a scene and increase the time available for making critical decisions, as well as improve or increase bus reliability along the corridor.

Completion
Timeframe
3 to 5 years
Lead Agency
City of Richmond:

Public Works; Contra
Costa County: CCTA
Goals Alignment
Meets Many Goals
Coordinating
Agency
Caltrans, MTC
Actions
Benefits
$$$$
74 Traffic signal coordination
Coordinating traffic signals synchronizes the
timing of multiple intersections to improve traffic
flow and reduce delays. This can result in less
braking, improve goods movement efficiency,
and discourage neighborhood cut-through traffic.

Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA)
is currently leading a Smart Signals Project to
upgrade and coordinate traffic signals at over 300 intersections throughout the county to optimize traffic flow and reduce congestion, providing a potential avenue for traffic signal funding on the Parkway.

Image source: UDOT .

Emergency vehicle preemption (EVP) technology
EVP technologies allow signals to modify their signal timing to provide a green light as soon as possible for an approaching emergency vehicle.

Image source: Maripoca Association of Governments.

Additional Details
Priority Strategies | 75

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Implement a corridor-wide maintenance program with a maintenance manager Implement a consistent management program assigned to upkeep the Parkway and provide a plan on what maintenance is, how it is performed, how it can be budgeted, and why it is needed. Consider maintenance agreement stating staff time commitments, legal resources, support from elected officials, and the process to identify a regional funding source.

The program will need to determine the feasible maintenance level, associated analyses, and implementation costs for, but not limited to, the following items: roadway pavement, striping, shared use path pavement, signage life, signals, street lights, street sweeping, drainage systems, and vegetation. Following program development, which may be developed with the assistance of a maintenance consultant, identify a cross-jurisdictional maintenance manager for implementation.

Implement cross-jurisdictional
maintenance program

1. SMOOTHNESS MATTERS, Asphalt Pavement Alliance, 2008.

2. Reynolds, R. L., Molden, N., Kokaly, R. F., Lowers, H., Breit, G. N., Goldstein, H. L., et al. (2024).

Microplastic and associated black particles from road-tire wear: Implications for radiative effects across the cryosphere and in the atmosphere. Journal of Geophysical Research: Atmospheres, 129, e2024JD041116.

3. How Pavement and Bridge Conditions Affect Transportation System Performance, FHWA, 2023.

MAINTENANCEM-1
Reduced emissions and costs to drivers
Improved pavement conditions could save drivers up to 4%-10% of fuel consumption, repair and maintenance, and tire wear. Reducing fuel consumption and tire wear reduces emissions and microplastics, improving air and water quality and protecting the environment by reducing the use of natural resources.1,2
Improved safety
Improved pavement friction at intersections provides numerous benefits: improved driver control, reduced stopping distances, reduced skidding, and a 20% reduction in total intersection crashes.3 Improved coordination and response
Consolidating maintenance responsibilities under one central manager allows for improved coordination between agencies, cost savings due to consolidation, and a more timely response to concerns.

Completion
Timeframe
2 to 4 years
Lead Agency
Contra Costa County:

Public Works, City of
Richmond: Public Works
Goals Alignment
Meets Most Goals
Coordinating
Agency

CCTA, WCCTC
Actions
Benefits
$$$$
76 Pavement Condition Index (PCI) Scores
Consistent pavement maintenance helps extend the useful life of pavement. PCI scores measure the health of a road's pavement, ranging from 0 (worst) to 100 (best). A PCI score of at least 70 is desired.

Factors that affect a PCI score include the age of the pavement/when the roadway was last paved, climate and precipitation, traffic loads, and available maintenance funding. Keeping the Parkway in good pavement condition will require more constant maintenance due to consistent heavy truck traffic; this may include pavement milling and overlaying with digouts, slurry sealing, and practices that better accommodate the weight of trucks. Regularly maintaining the roadway is less costly than major pavement reconstruction.

MTC's StreetSaver software includes network PCI data as well as projected PCI information, assuming various maintenance scenarios, to help jurisdictions make maintenance decisions. The current PCI scores across different segments of Richmond Parkway range from 3 to 92. Segments with low PCI scores would require reconstruction of the pavement surface whereas segments with a high PCI score could be treated with a slurry seal.

Image source: AA Roads, 2013.

Additional Details
Castro Street approaching Richmond Lane in good pavement condition (high PCI score) in 2013.

Priority Strategies | 77

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Improve access to the Richmond
Parkway Transit Center
TRANSITT-1
Benefits
Improve transit reliability
Access enhancements would reduce travel time delays associated with buses circulating within the RPTC, saving approximately 13,000 annual rider hours for WestCAT express routes. Time travel savings across operators would be greater.2
Support potential mode shift
Providing secure bicycle lockers for long term parking (2+ hours) encourages bicycle owners to bike to transit as a first/last mile connection.3
Improve pedestrian experience
Creating a direct formal pedestrian connection from the Parkway would enhance comfort and access for users who currently walk through landscaping or take a less direct route from Blume Drive to enter the RPTC. Providing a marked crosswalk will also improve visibility of these pedestrians.

Completion
Timeframe
3 to 5 years
Lead Agency
AC Transit, City of
Richmond: Public
Works, MTC1
Goals Alignment
Meets Many Goals
Coordinating
Agency
Caltrans, CCTA,
WestCAT , WCCTC
Support transit access
Install bus pullout stops on Richmond Parkway for Richmond Parkway Transit Center (RPTC) routes and shift eastbound bikeway south of the bus stops. These bus bays would allow southbound buses traveling from I-80 or eastbound buses from Richmond Parkway to serve riders without turning onto Blume Drive and circulating within the Transit Center, saving a significant amount of time (northbound or westbound buses would still be required to enter the Transit Center).1 Support pedestrian access
Develop formal pedestrian connection between the northwest corner of the RPTC and Richmond Parkway. Upgrade faded crosswalk markings within the Transit Center.

Provide bicycle storage
Install bike lockers at the RPTC consistent with the Association of Pedestrian & Bicycle Professionals guidance.

Actions
$$$$
78 Additional Details
Richmond Parkway Transit
Center Access Enhancement
Improvements would install three new
curbside bus stops, a rerouted separated
bikeway, and a direct pedestrian connection for
users coming in and out of the RPTC.

Source: West Contra Costa County Express Bus
Implementation Plan, WCCTC, 2020.

Bike lockers
Providing bike lockers will provide safe
storage areas for people to store their bicycles,
supporting a potential mode shift, as secure
bicycle storage does not currently exist at the
Richmond Parkway Transit Center.

Blume DrBlume Dr
Richmond Parkway Richmond Parkway
Transit CenterTransit Center
Richmond PkwyRichmond Pkwy

1. MTC is considering the implementation of this strategy as part of its Bay Bridge Forward work along I-80.

2. West Contra Costa County Express Bus Implementation Plan, WCCTC, 2020.

3. Bicycle and Transit Integration, A Practical Transit Agency Guide to Bicycle Integration and Equitable Mobility, APTA, 2018.

Priority Strategies | 79

2 3

1. Existing trees along Richmond Parkway
sequester emissions, provide shade, and
create a more interesting and welcoming
roadway environment.

2. Unique bike crossing striping indicates
the existence of the Bay Trail at Richmond
Parkway and W MacDonald Ave.

3. Graffiti on Bay Trail and bike signage
reduces the visibility of signs and
contributes to a neglected environment feel.
1 80 | Priority Strategies
CHAPTER 6
Implementation
and Funding
Additional funding is needed to upgrade the Bay Trail
along Richmond Parkway to align with Bay Trail Design
Guidelines, as outlined in the priority strategies.

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Category ID Strategy Name Lead Agencies Coordinating Agencies Cost Estimate1,2 Completion
Timeframe
Target
Public Health
PH-1 Confirm and enforce truck routes
in North Richmond
Contra Costa County: Planning,
Public Works, CHP
WCCTC, Caltrans, City of San Pablo, City of
Richmond
Planning: $40,000
Truck monitoring/enforcement camera:
$30,000 per location
0-2 years
PH-2 Incorporate trees and green
infrastructure
City of Richmond: Public Works;
Contra Costa County: Public Works
Groundwork Richmond, Contra Costa
County: Planning $2,900,000 to $7,420,000 per mile3 Ongoing PH-3 Minimize vehicle impacts to air
quality
Contra Costa County: Planning;
City of Richmond: Public Works
BAAQMD, City of Richmond: Planning, Contra
Costa County: Planning, CHP Planning: $15,000 0-2 years Safety
S-1 Install safety improvements at
intersections
Contra Costa County: Public Works;
City of Richmond: Public Works
Caltrans, MTC, West County Wastewater,
CCTA $1,100,000 per intersection 6-10 years
S-2 Reduce speeding City of Richmond: Public Works;
Contra Costa County: Public Works City of Richmond: PD, CHP Speed limit study: $10,000 Speed signs: $55,000 total4 0-2 years
Walking and
Biking
WB-1 Upgrade bikeways and connect
sidewalk gaps
City of Richmond: Public Works;
Contra Costa County: Public Works MTC, CCTA, WCCTC, City of Pinole, EBRPD Sidewalks: $4,400,000 per mile
Separated Bikeways: $18,000,000 per mile
Bay Trail: $7,960,0005
6-10 years
WB-2 Install on-street Wildcat Creek
Trail crossing Contra Costa County: Public Works EBRPD, City of Richmond: Public Works, MTC, West County Wastewater, WCCTC $2,560,000 3-5 years Driving and Goods
Movement DG-1 Upgrade and coordinate traffic
signals
City of Richmond: Public Works;
CCTA Caltrans $5,500,000 for the corridor (23
intersections) 3-5 years
Maintenance M-1 Implement cross-jurisdictional
maintenance program
Contra Costa County: Public Works;
City of Richmond: Public Works CCTA, WCCTC Pavement treatment: $32,790,000 General maintenance: $483,100 annually 2-4 years
Transit T-1 Improve access to the Richmond
Parkway Transit Center
AC Transit; City of Richmond:

Public Works; MTC Caltrans, CCTA, WestCAT , WCCTC
Parkway bus stops and pedestrian
connection: $1,297,000
Bicycle lockers: $55,500
3-5 years
Table 4: Priority Strategies
Implementation Plan

IMPLEMENTING

THE PRIORITY

STRATEGIES
Given the regional and economic importance
and 9-mile span of the Parkway, implementation
will require multi-jurisdictional efforts and
substantial funding. Table 4 highlights
partnership opportunities and jurisdictional
responsibility for each of the priority strategies
introduced in Chapter 5. For each priority
strategy, lead agencies, coordinating agencies,
cost estimates, and completion timeframes
for delivering the strategy are listed. Agencies
Completion timeframe covers program development. Additional costs will vary depending on program development.

1. Assumes a 4% inflation rate with construction occurring in 2030. Some costs may be duplicated across strategies, such as landscaping under PH-2 and landscape separated bikeways under WB-1. 2. See Appendix F for more details on cost estimates.

3. Funding already secured via CNRA Urban Greening Grant for tree planting along Richmond Parkway adjacent to Atchison Village 82 Category ID Strategy Name Lead Agencies Coordinating Agencies Cost Estimate1,2 Completion
Timeframe
Target
Public Health
PH-1 Confirm and enforce truck routes
in North Richmond
Contra Costa County: Planning,
Public Works, CHP
WCCTC, Caltrans, City of San Pablo, City of
Richmond
Planning: $40,000
Truck monitoring/enforcement camera:
$30,000 per location
0-2 years
PH-2 Incorporate trees and green
infrastructure
City of Richmond: Public Works;
Contra Costa County: Public Works
Groundwork Richmond, Contra Costa
County: Planning $2,900,000 to $7,420,000 per mile3 Ongoing PH-3 Minimize vehicle impacts to air
quality
Contra Costa County: Planning;
City of Richmond: Public Works
BAAQMD, City of Richmond: Planning, Contra
Costa County: Planning, CHP Planning: $15,000 0-2 years Safety
S-1 Install safety improvements at
intersections
Contra Costa County: Public Works;
City of Richmond: Public Works
Caltrans, MTC, West County Wastewater,
CCTA $1,100,000 per intersection 6-10 years
S-2 Reduce speeding City of Richmond: Public Works;
Contra Costa County: Public Works City of Richmond: PD, CHP Speed limit study: $10,000 Speed signs: $55,000 total4 0-2 years
Walking and
Biking
WB-1 Upgrade bikeways and connect
sidewalk gaps
City of Richmond: Public Works;
Contra Costa County: Public Works MTC, CCTA, WCCTC, City of Pinole, EBRPD Sidewalks: $4,400,000 per mile
Separated Bikeways: $18,000,000 per mile
Bay Trail: $7,960,0005
6-10 years
WB-2 Install on-street Wildcat Creek
Trail crossing Contra Costa County: Public Works EBRPD, City of Richmond: Public Works, MTC, West County Wastewater, WCCTC $2,560,000 3-5 years Driving and Goods
Movement DG-1 Upgrade and coordinate traffic
signals
City of Richmond: Public Works;
CCTA Caltrans $5,500,000 for the corridor (23
intersections) 3-5 years
Maintenance M-1 Implement cross-jurisdictional
maintenance program
Contra Costa County: Public Works;
City of Richmond: Public Works CCTA, WCCTC Pavement treatment: $32,790,000 General maintenance: $483,100 annually 2-4 years
Transit T-1 Improve access to the Richmond
Parkway Transit Center
AC Transit; City of Richmond:

Public Works; MTC Caltrans, CCTA, WestCAT , WCCTC
Parkway bus stops and pedestrian
connection: $1,297,000
Bicycle lockers: $55,500
3-5 years
identified as lead have jurisdiction
over the priority strategy and will have
ultimate decisionmaking power during
implementation. Coordinating agencies
may have prior planning knowledge
or funding streams valuable for
implementation, be working on similar
efforts or efforts affected by the strategy,
or have a role in post-implementation
operation. For example, MTC could have
a role in identifying funding for Bay Trail
improvements in strategy WB-1. Lead
agencies and coordinating agencies
may work together to identify funding
sources for the priority strategies, which
altogether are estimated to cost between
$130M and $150M. Lead agencies can
look for opportunities to initiate these
strategies immediately regardless
of target completion timeframe.
and in North Richmond. Other segments require funding. Low end of range assumes general landscaping only, while high end of range assumes bioretention with landscaping. 4. Speed cameras currently not permitted under state law. Costs to be determined when legalized. 5. Includes cost of Bay Trail realignment between Gertrude Avenue and Hensley Street and path widening between Parr Boulevard and Gertrude Avenue.

Implementation and Funding | 83

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Action Priority Strategy ID Next Steps Future Steps
Advance 35% design
concept for northern
segment of Richmond
Parkway1
PH-2 S-1
S-2 WB-1
WB-2 T-1
Pursue funding, such as
from the RAISE Grant, RM3,
and OBAG, to finalize design
and construct project.2
Pursue funding for
concept development
for remaining
segments of the
Parkway and Bay Trail.

Confirm and enforce
truck routes in North
Richmond
PH-1
Given low implementation
cost, assess existing staffing
capacity and City/County
funding sources to advance
planning component.

Apply for funding if
needed.2
Minimize vehicle
impacts to air quality PH-3
Upgrade and
coordinate traffic
signals
DG-1
Confirm previously-studied
recommendations from the
2019 Program for Arterial
System Synchronization
(PASS) Report.

Apply for funding2 and
advocate for inclusion
in CCTA's Countywide
Smart Signals Project.

Implement Roadway
Pavement and
Maintenance
Management
Program
M-1
Confirm the City and
County’s interest in
pursuing the action by
considering an agreement.

Negotiate agreement,
identify a regional
funding source,
and determine
guidelines for program
development.

To advance the priority strategies in the
near-term, Table 5 includes immediate
next steps for lead agencies to undertake
as well as future steps. WCCTC and
CCTA may assist with preparing grant
applications, but lead agencies should also
consider short-term mitigation measures
for safety and accessibility through existing
City/County programs. Due to the length
of the corridor, capital improvement
strategies should be grouped by corridor
segment and assembled as packages
for funding applications. For example,
Appendix D includes a 35% design
concept for a landscape separated bikeway
on the northern segment of Richmond
Parkway, which incorporates multiple
priority strategies. Lead agencies can use
the design concept to pursue funding
in the near-term to address several
existing challenges on this segment,
including a concentration of speed-related
injury collisions, absence of separated
bikeways connecting to the Richmond
Parkway Transit Center (RPTC), and an
indirect bus connection to the RPTC.

Table 5: Priority Strategies Implementation Next Steps

1. Segment includes Richmond Parkway between San Pablo Avenue and the entrance to the Pinole Vista Shopping Center. The segment carries multiple bus routes and bike lanes, connects to the Richmond Parkway Transit Center, and borders Equity Priority Community census tracts. See Appendix D for the 35% design concept and cost estimates. 2. List of potential funding sources by priority strategy is provided in Appendix E. WCCTC and CCTA may assist with preparing grant applications.84

POTENTIAL CURRENT

FUNDING SOURCES
To fully implement the many strategies in this plan, substantial funding will be needed. A full list of potential funding sources is provided in Appendix E. A sample of current federal, state, and regional funding sources that are aligned with priority strategies are presented below. Given the recent federal administration change, federal funding sources may become less available. Therefore, regional and countywide measures may offer the most promising funding opportunities.

Lead agencies may determine how to prioritize the implementation of the strategies, including the priority strategies. WCCTC will continue to support project partners in pursuing funding options for the strategies, including regional sources.

Bay Trail at the intersection of Hilltop
Drive and Richmond Parkway.

Federal State Regional
RAISE grants are awarded to surface
transportation projects that are
consistent with the Department’s
strategic goals and will have
significant local or regional impact.

Next Cycle: FY2025
When to Apply: Early 2025
Maximum Amount: $25M per project
Funding Source:

Rebuilding American Infrastructure with
Sustainability and Equity Grant Program (RAISE)
Administered By:

Lead Agencies:

Contra Costa County
City of Richmond
Applicable Strategies:

WB-1 T-1DG-1
U.S. Department of
Transportation Office
of the Secretary
S-1
Implementation and Funding | 85

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
RM3 provides funding for a
comprehensive suite of highway and
transit improvements through an increase
of tolls on the San Francisco Bay Area’s
seven state-owned toll bridges. RM3
has about $10 million that could be
allocated to the priority strategies.

Next Cycle: Monthly
When to Apply: Monthly
Maximum Amount: $160M for
Goods Movement, $150M for Bay
Trail and Safe Routes to Transit
Funding Source:

Federal State Regional
Local Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP)
The HSIP Program funds work on any
public road or publicly owned bicycle or
pedestrian pathway or trail, or on tribal
lands for general use of tribal members,
that improves the safety for its users.

Next Cycle: Cycle 13
When to Apply: As early as May 2026
Maximum Amount: $10M per project
Funding Source:

Administered By:

Applicable Strategies:

WB-1
Federal State Regional
Caltrans Division of
Local Assistance
S-1 S-2
Lead Agencies:

Contra Costa County
City of Richmond
Regional Measure 3 (RM3)
Administered By:

Applicable Strategies:

WB-1
DG-1
PH-1
WB-2
Metropolitan Transportation
Commission
S-1
T-1
Lead Agencies:

Contra Costa County
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
City of Richmond
86 Local Partnership Program Formula &
Competitive Programs (LPP)
The LPP Program provides funding to
local and regional agencies to improve
aging infrastructure, road conditions,
active transportation, transit and rail,
and health and safety benefits.

Next Cycle: 2026
When to Apply: Fall 2026
Maximum Amount: $25M per project
Funding Source:

Administered By:

Applicable Strategies:

WB-1
T-1
WB-2
Federal State Regional M-1
S-1
Lead Agencies:

Contra Costa Transportation Authority
City of Richmond
Caltrans Division of
Local Assistance
California Transportation
Commission
One Bay Area Grant Program (OBAG)
The One Bay Area Grant (OBAG), now
in its third iteration, distributes federal
transportation funding from the Federal
Highway Administration to projects
and programs that improve safety,
spur economic development and help
the Bay Area meet climate change
and air quality improvement goals.

Next Cycle: OBAG 4
When to Apply: As early as 2026
Maximum Amount: $47.3M for
Contra Costa County for 2023-2026
Funding Source:

Administered By:

Applicable Strategies:

WB-1
DG-1
PH-2
WB-2
Federal State Regional
Metropolitan Transportation
Commission
Contra Costa Transportation
Authority
T-1
S-1
Lead Agencies:

Contra Costa County
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
City of Richmond
Implementation and Funding | 87

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

POTENTIAL FUTURE

FUNDING SOURCES
Since the Richmond Parkway is a regional
facility, funding streams paid for by
regional users should be considered.

Potential future funding sources may
include a new sales tax, regional measure,
Enhanced Infrastructure Financing
District (EIFD), and/or Benefit Assessment
District. These options are described
on the following pages. These tools
could provide long-term, stable funding
sources for priority strategies that require
ongoing efforts, such as maintenance.

Electeds and staff at the City of Richmond,
Contra Costa County, and WCCTC will
need to continue to advocate for project
inclusion in future expenditure plans.

Faded crosswalk and degraded pavement at
Goodrick Avenue and Richmond Parkway.
88 Regional Measures
Potential Regional Transportation
Measure for 2026
A new transportation revenue measure for
the Bay Area is being crafted and may be on a
future ballot as early as November 2026. The
measure is expected to generate at least $1
billion annually and is currently considering a
wide range of options for its revenue source.

Source: Toll station, East Bay Times (2023)
Walking and Biking
Safety Maintenance
Driving and Goods Movement
Transit
A new Bay Area-wide regional measure such
as a sales tax, property tax, or increased tolls
could fund transportation projects included in
an Expenditure Plan.

Potential Sponsors:

Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
Applicable Strategy Categories:

Transportation Sales Tax
A new Contra Costa transportation sales tax
would generate stable funding for capital
and operating uses laid out in an Expenditure
Plan. Approval of the sales tax requires a
ballot measure with two-thirds voter support.

Potential Sponsors:

Contra Costa Transportation Authority
City of Richmond
Applicable Strategy Categories:

Contra Costa County Measure J
In November 2004, Contra Costa voters
approved Measure J with a 71% vote. The
measure provided for the continuation of the
county’s half-cent transportation sales tax for
25 more years beyond the original expiration
date of 2009. The tax revenues fund a voter-
approved Expenditure Plan of transportation
programs and projects. Measure C, the
precursor to Measure J passed in 1988, was
used to construct the Parkway.

Source: Smart Signal Project, Contra Costa Transportation Authority (2024)
Walking and Biking
Safety
Maintenance
Driving and Goods Movement
Transit
Public Health
Implementation and Funding | 89

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Benefits Assessment Districts (BADs)
Hilltop Landscape Maintenance
Assessment District
The City of Richmond’s Hilltop Landscape
Maintenance Assessment District provides
maintenance and servicing of landscaping
in three zones located in the northern area
of Richmond. This section of Lakeside Drive
just south of Richmond Parkway is part of
the District and serviced by this Benefit
Assessment District.

Source: Lakeside Drive, Google Maps (2022)Maintenance
BADs are established for specific geographic
areas to receive special benefits from public
improvements and services, such as lighting
and landscaping. Districts are funded through
a property assessment and require majority
voter approval from impacted property owners.

Sufficient development is required to establish
a BAD, so this would not be a comprehensive
funding option for the corridor.

Potential Sponsors:

City of Richmond
Contra Costa County
Applicable Strategy Categories:

Public Health
Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD)
City of Placentia/County of Orange EIFD
The City of Placentia and County of Orange
formed the first city and county partnership
EIFD in 2019. The EIFD was formed to fund
transit-supportive and housing-supportive
infrastructure in the communities to the
north and south of the upcoming Placentia
Metrolink Station.

Source: Placentia Metrolink Station rendering, City of Placentia EIFD StoryMap, SCAG (2024)
Walking and Biking
EIFDs allow for a separate government entity
to be created by a city and/or county within a
defined area to finance infrastructure projects
with community-wide benefits. EIFDs use tax
increment financing to reallocate a portion of
future property taxes to fund infrastructure
projects, meaning this option does not
increase taxes or require voter approval.

Further analysis is needed to understand the
costs and benefits of this funding option.

Potential Sponsors:

Contra Costa County
City of Richmond
Applicable Strategy Categories:

Maintenance Transit
Public Health

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
90 Appendix A:

Community Engagement
Summary Notes
Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 91

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

2201 Broadway | Suite 602 | Oakland, CA 94612 | (510) 834-3200 | Fax (510) 253-0059 www.fehrandpeers.com
Memorandum

Date: October 19, 2023
To: Leah Greenblat, WCCTAC
From: Karina Schneider and Minnie Chen, Fehr & Peers
Subject: RPTP Phase 1 Engagement Summary
OK23-0506
Phase 1 of the Richmond Parkway Transportation Plan (RPTP) engagement focused on identifying and confirming needs. The goals of this phase were to:
• Share information about the RPTP’s purpose, process, and desired outcomes • Connect with Equity Priority Community residents who live near or use Richmond Parkway
• Confirm understanding of existing challenges and experiences using Richmond Parkway • Hear concerns and new ideas from members of the public This phase consisted of both in-person and digital strategies to reach a range of community members along the corridor between August and September 2023. This memorandum provides an overview of the Phase 1 engagement process and summarizes the feedback received.

Phase 1 Engagement Overview
Phase 1 Engagement consisted of the following strategies:

1. Pop-Ups (3)

2. Neighborhood Council Meetings (3)

3. Online Webmap (1)

4. Public Advisory Group (PAG) Meeting (2)

5. WCCTAC Board Meeting (2)
The project team also considered hosting a bike ride along the Bay Trail to collect feedback, however, MTC and Rich City Rides led a total of three bike rides in this area on April 30th, May 28th, and August 17th, 2023. Given the number of rides already hosted in the area, the project 92 Leah Greenblat
October 19, 2023

Page 2 of 9 ends

team elected to forgo the ride activity and requested that MTC and Rich City Rides share feedback received.

To publicize the engagement opportunities #1-3 above, the project team developed social media ads through WCCTAC’s Facebook page in both English and Spanish, sent emails to the Technical Advisory Committee, PAG members, and neighborhood council contacts, and released a notice to the Executive Director Reports for the WCCTAC Board. The strategies and community members reached are described in further detail below.

Pop-Up Events
The RPTP project team coordinated and attended three pop-up events during this Phase. The following includes a description of each pop-up event:
• North Richmond Flea Market (North Richmond)
o Location: 716 W Gertrude Avenue
o Date/Time: Sunday August 6, 2023, 10:30a-2:30p
o Total Attendance: 38, 89% Spanish
o Total Comments: 68
• Thrive Thursdays (Coronado)
o Location: Martin Luther King, Jr. Park at Harbour Way and Virginia Avenue o Date/Time: Thursday, August 10, 2023, 6:30PM – 8:00 PM o Total Attendance: 12, 25% Spanish
o Total Comments: 41
• Wal-Mart Pop-Up (Hilltop)
o Location: 1400 Hilltop Mall Rd, Richmond, CA 94806
o Date/Time: Saturday August 19, 2023, 12p-4p (when foot traffic is highest) o Total Attendance: 34, 17.6% Spanish
o Total Comments: 61
Three boards were utilized for pop-up engagement to visualize existing conditions findings and to collect feedback from community members. Overall, the project team connected with 84 people and collected 170 comments. At least one Spanish-speaking staff was present at each event and just over half (51%) of participants were Spanish speakers.

Responses Breakdown
The RPTP team collected feedback during the pop-up events and found that most comments received were related to safety or driving/goods movement. One of the top sub-categories for driving/goods movement was congestion, whereas biking and walking comments primarily concerned wayfinding and signage. Of the “Other” category, the most common sub-category comments were related to cleanliness and landscaping along the Parkway. Regarding public health, air quality was the most common sub-category while speed management was the top Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 93

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
October 19, 2023

Page 3 of 9 ends

sub-category for safety. Finally, transit related comments expressed a common desire for more transit service and connections. Figure 1 shows the overall distribution of the different categories of comments received at pop-ups.

Figure 1: Distribution of Pop-up Comments by Category

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023.

Webmap
The webmap was hosted on Social Pinpoint between June 15th and September 4th, 2023. Users could drop pins in the webmap and leave a location-specific comment related to the following categories:
• Biking
• Walking
• Driving
• Transit
• Other
A total of 87 people provided 129 comments digitally. As seen in Figure 2, 109 comments were received on the webmap, while the remaining comments were collected from responses left on the Facebook ad post.
17%
25%
15%
4%
29%
10%
Biking and Walking
Driving and Goods Movement
Other
Public Health
Safety
Transit
94 Leah Greenblat
October 19, 2023

Page 4 of 9 ends

Figure 2: Webmap Performance Summary

Responses Breakdown
Nearly half of the comments were driving/truck related, of which approximately a third of the comments regarded general safety and speeding. More than a fourth of all comments relate to roadway conditions/comfort using the Parkway. Multiple landscaping comments mention trees blocking signals and creating hard braking incidents. Figure 3 shows the distribution of Webmap comments by category.

Figure 3: Distribution of Webmap Comments by Category

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2023.
48%
13%
17%
6%
16%
Driving/Goods Comment
Walking Comment
Biking Comment
Transit Comment
Other Feedback
Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 95

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
October 19, 2023

Page 5 of 9 ends

Community Meeting Events
The RPTP project team presented at three community meetings in neighborhoods near/along Richmond Parkway. These include:
• North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council (North Richmond) o Location: North Richmond Senior Center, 515 Silver Avenue, Richmond CA 94801 o Date/Time: Tuesday, September 5, 2023, 5:00p-7:00p
• Parchester Village Neighborhood Council (Parchester Village) o Virtual over Zoom
o Date/Time: Tuesday, September 12, 2023, 7:00p
• Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council Meeting (Iron Triangle) o Location: 598 Nevin Avenue, Richmond, CA 94801
o Date/Time: Wednesday, September 20, 2023, 5:30p-7:30p There were comments regarding debris on sidewalks and roadways, as well as calls for infrastructure that improve biking and pedestrian connectivity, increased signage, and better signal coordination. Many comments expressed concern about speeding cars and unsafe driving behavior along the Parkway. Congestion was brought up as another issue along the Parkway, especially due to the large truck volumes. Aside from collision safety, public health impacts from toxic diesel were stated as equally problematic. In regard to project implementation, residents suggested hiring local residents.

Public Advisory Group
The Public Advisory Group (PAG) meeting for Phase 1 was held on September 21, 2023, though the group previously met once in Phase 0 in June 2023 to provide guidance on the draft Public Engagement Plan. While the Phase 1 meeting focused on existing conditions, feedback relevant to potential strategies was received in both meetings. In Phase 1, following a presentation on existing and future conditions findings, PAG members primarily discussed topics related to safety, maintenance, truck volumes, and community-serving solutions. Regarding trucking impacts, participants noted that a transition to electric fleets would require electrification infrastructure, such as charging stations, along the corridor. One member shared that despite a grant to invest in this, there is difficulty in acquiring the necessary equipment due to material shortages. Another member expressed the community’s concern of trucks cutting through the neighborhoods and briefly touched upon approved projects that involve truck electrification and truck-specific routes to encourage use of Parkway. The topic of electrification also brought about discussion of addressing pollution as a public health concern, to which green infrastructure and planting trees were suggested as mitigation strategies that could also contribute to beautification of the Parkway. Regarding safety, there were suggestions of adjusting signal cycle lengths to curb impatient driving behavior and discussion of methods of slow vehicle speeds. Light indications for crosswalks and blinking pavement lights were suggested for pedestrian safety. Safety and public health were identified as the highest priorities by several members, with maintenance and 96 Leah Greenblat
October 19, 2023

Page 6 of 9 ends

beautification suggested as good strategies to consider in the process of addressing these priorities.

Relevant feedback heard in Phase 0 included concerns about gaps in the pedestrian and bicycle networks due to a lack of facilities and outdated equipment. Regarding trucking, there were suggestions to request fair share contributions from distribution centers. Discussion of enforcing clean vehicle requirements also suggested a need for charging stations along the corridor to support truck electrification.

WCCTAC Board
The project team presented to the Board with updates on existing and future conditions findings during Phase 1 on September 29, 2023, though the group previously met once in Phase 0 in May 2023. While the Phase 1 meeting focused on existing conditions and potential strategies, feedback relevant to potential strategies was received in both meetings. Members of the board discussed trucking impacts, safety, and maintenance. Director Bana revealed plans to write to the legislature about banning newer, heavier trucks, while Director Tave suggested exploring time period limits for truck deliveries to reduce truck traffic during peak times. Director Bana added that although electrification could reduce future emissions, there should also be strategies to address existing contaminants from pollution. To address safety related to speed management, Chair Paul Fadelli (City of El Cerrito) suggested looking into lowering vehicle speeds through policies such as adjusting speed limits or designing to lower speeds. Director Cesar Zepeda (City of Richmond) emphasized the importance of bicycle safety as he shared that the Parkway experiences a high volume of fatal bicycle collisions, and that most of them are due to speeding vehicles. Director Bana also reminded the audience that beautification is a priority for Richmond.

There were suggestions to incorporate more trees in the design, which could contribute to both beautification and public health efforts.

Relevant comments heard in Phase 0 included feedback from Director John Gioia (Contra Costa County) who shared that increased trucking is expected due to recent approval of new fulfillment centers. He added that recent studies reveal trucks leaving the congested Parkway to travel through local roads, so there are efforts to design new facilities that produce direct routes to the Parkway. Pavement damage was another trucking concern highlighted by Director Soheila Bana (City of Richmond) and Director Chris Kelley (City of Hercules). Director H.E. Christian Peeples (AC Transit) shared that special pavement for trucks and heavy vehicles can be used to address pavement damage. Director Eduardo Martinez (City of Richmond) additionally suggested passing an extra charge on distribution companies to help with the mitigation of truck impacts. On the topic of safety, Director Anthony Tave (City of Pinole) hoped to see efforts to address pedestrian safety through signage and crosswalk repair and Director Kelley hoped to see protected bikeways and consideration for electric bikes. Director Bana and Gioia also shared hopes of bringing the Parkway up to Caltrans standard so that the corridor could be adopted by Caltrans. Due to funding constraints, they would like to see costs incorporated in the evaluation of priorities in this project.

Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 97

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
October 19, 2023

Page 7 of 9 ends

Phase 1 Feedback
Most comments received from the public referenced four topic areas:

1. Safety
a. 29% of pop-up comments
b. 37% of online comments

2. Biking & Walking
a. 26% of pop-up comments
b. 35% of online comments

3. Congestion
a. 13% of pop-up comments
b. 16% of online comments

4. Maintenance & Street Beautification
a. 12% of pop-up comments
b. 13% of online comments
A summary of feedback received on these topics is described below.

Safety
Safety was the top safety concern amongst pop-up and online engagement comments, and comments specifically related to speeding were common (15% of pop-up comments and 13% of online comments). PAG and Board members also expressed the desire to prioritize addressing preventable collisions.

Residents cited speeding through intersections and red lights as frequent occurrences. Some specifically pointed out that the stretch of Parkway opening from two lanes to four lanes near Giant Rd often sees speeding. Other speeding hotspots noted include the North Richmond area near Parr Blvd and by I-580 and I-80. Racing has also been reported to be an issue, especially at night, between Hilltop Dr and San Pablo Ave. Furthermore, there is a noticeable lack of police presence or cameras to discourage speeding. On the other hand, drivers remarked on unsafe driving conditions due to faded or nonexistent lane striping, which made lane demarcation barely visible, especially at night.

During peak period congestion, residents pointed out that drivers misuse turning lanes as a route to circumvent traffic. Some suggestions to address speed management include speed limit signs, speed bumps, and rectangular rapid flashing beacons (RRFBs). Chair Fadelli suggested adjusting the speed limit and providing better traffic enforcement. Other comments by pedestrians and bicyclists similarly were concerned about bad driving behavior and insufficient traffic enforcement. As a result, they felt that trails, bike lanes, and crosswalks were inadequate in addressing this.
98 Leah Greenblat
October 19, 2023

Page 8 of 9 ends

Biking & Walking
The majority of comments related to biking and walking reflected a need for better comfort and safety while using the Parkway and the Bay Trail. Participants mentioned infrastructure issues such as missing sidewalks and curb ramps, poor accessibility to trails, and lack of signage. Director Zepeda’s comment on ADA improvements further underscores the lack of existing disability accommodations. The community found crossing the Parkway to be difficult and would like to see better crossing conditions, especially on Parr Blvd and Goodrick Ave.

Bicyclists also desire better bikeway connectivity to the Parkway and to connecting streets. There was strong interest in addressing unreliable access to the Wildcat Creek tunnel. Due to the tunnel’s tendency to flood, there were requests to investigate strategies that eliminate flooding, or building an overpass that would maintain the trail’s connection across the Parkway. Sidewalk and trail repair was also requested as potholes and railroads tracks on the Bay Trail near Hensley St make it hazardous to bike over. Bicyclists stated that adding more protected and separate lanes on the Parkway, Canal Blvd, and Castro St would make them feel much safer and comfortable.

Director Zepeda also emphasized the importance of addressing bicyclist safety as he called attention to the numerous crash memorials along the Parkway.

Lighting was also noted to be absent or unreliable and the community asked for signalized crossing to have longer crossing times. Several members of the public stated that homeless encampments block portions of the Bay Trail and sidewalk, making walking and biking difficult.

These concerns contributed to an overall sense of feeling unsafe while walking or biking along the Parkway.

Congestion
Congestion during peak periods was reported to be consistent on various intersections throughout the Parkway, including San Pablo Avenue, Giant Road, Canal Blvd, and 23rd Street.

Comments state that congestion is particularly bad during 4:00-7:00PM and identified the signals at the San Pablo Ave intersection to be problematic and a source of traffic back up. There were suggestions to improve and adjust signals for congestion, such as better detection, coordination, and shorter signal cycle lengths. As a result of congestion, residents stated they sometimes take local roads instead.

The community and WCCTAC board would also like to see truck traffic in the area addressed.

Discouraging trucks from cutting through neighborhoods was desired, as well as reducing the public health impacts from trucks. The Board offered a variety of solutions, including truck- specific routes, hour restrictions for trucks, and passing extra charges on distribution companies.

Truck electrification was discussed extensively during the WCCTAC Board and PAG meetings as methods of emissions reductions in the future. A recurring suggestion throughout these meetings is incorporation of trees in design to mitigate air quality impacts to nearby residential areas from congestion.

Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 99

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
October 19, 2023

Page 9 of 9 ends

Maintenance
There were strong desires to improve street maintenance as pedestrians, bicyclists, and drivers all experience hindrances that prevent comfortable navigation of the Parkway. Garbage and overgrown landscaping on the sidewalks and bike lanes pose safety hazards for people walking and biking. Additional trees and greening could also allow for better shade and contribute to overall beautification of the Parkway, which Director Bana and Zepeda confirmed was one of Richmond’s priorities. Director Bana added that this could be a good way to capture diesel pollutants. Drivers requested overgrown trees to be cut back as they block traffic signals and street lights or obstruct view of the intersection corners, contributing to hard braking incidents.

Faded and missing lane striping on the Parkway also make it difficult for drivers to stay in their lanes. Commenters further noted that trucks contribute significantly to poor pavement conditions and discussed the possibility of special pavement as a mitigation method.

Other
Transit was not one of the most common topics, but some commenters suggested providing better transit frequency and improving transit reliability on the Parkway. A few participants also noted the poor conditions of bus stops on and near the Parkway.

Members of the public have expressed frustration that despite multiple planning efforts, there is a lack of project implementation. Additionally, at the Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council meeting, several public speakers and council members expressed strong interest in requiring local hiring for any project implementation.
100

2201 Broadway | Suite 602 | Oakland, CA 94612 | (510) 834-3200 | Fax (510) 253-0059 www.fehrandpeers.com
Memorandum

Date: May 24, 2024
To: Leah Greenblat, WCCTAC
From: Karina Schneider and Minnie Chen, Fehr & Peers
Subject: RPTP Phase 2 Engagement Summary
OK23-0506
Phase 2 of the Richmond Parkway Transportation Plan (RPTP) engagement focused on receiving feedback on the draft strategies, including which strategies to prioritize. The goals of this phase were to:
• Share information about the RPTP’s purpose, process, and desired outcomes • Connect with Equity Priority Community residents who live near or use Richmond Parkway
• Confirm draft strategies respond to existing challenges and experiences using Richmond Parkway
• Hear preferences about which strategies to prioritize This phase consisted of both in-person and digital strategies to reach a range of community members along the corridor between March and April 2024. This memorandum provides an overview of the Phase 2 engagement process and summarizes the feedback received.

Phase 2 Engagement Overview
Phase 2 Engagement consisted of the following engagement methods:

1. Public Advisory Group (PAG) Meeting (1)

2. WCCTAC Board Meeting (1)

3. Pop-Ups (2)

4. Community Meetings (4)

5. Online Survey (1)

Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 101

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
May 24, 2024

Page 2 of 10 ends

To publicize the engagement opportunities #3-5 above, the project team developed social media ads through WCCTAC’s Facebook page in both English and Spanish and posted the details on the project webpage. For each engagement method the strategies were presented in the following categories:

1. Driving and Goods Movement: Strategies that encourage carpooling, optimize signal timing, and improve wayfinding for drivers.

2. Maintenance: Strategies that holistically address corridor and Bay Trail maintenance and reduce illegal dumping.

3. Public Health: Strategies that reduce truck cut-through traffic and reduce or capture vehicle emissions.

4. Safety: Strategies that reduce vehicle speeds, address intersection conflict points, and prioritize emergency vehicle access.

5. Transit: Strategies that improve access and circulation at the Richmond Parkway Transit Center and support and encourage transit ridership.

6. Walking and Biking: Strategies that support comfortable walking and biking on the Parkway and the Bay Trail.

The strategies and community members reached are described in further detail below.

Public Advisory Group
The 3rd Public Advisory Group (PAG) meeting was held on February 22, 2024 as part of Phase 2 Engagement. Following a presentation on the draft strategies and Phase 2 Engagement Plan, the RPTP team requested feedback from participants. The PAG members primarily discussed strategies related to trucking and bicycling.

Although the PAG members generally expressed support for the draft strategies, members believed some trucking strategies would need to be implemented thoughtfully. One member shared that rerouting truck traffic is difficult and would need the City and County involvement to vet truck route updates. Another concern was the possibility of increased truck traffic when converting from diesel to electric trucks.

Some members expressed strong support for the walking and biking strategies as they currently found these modes to be uncomfortable on the Parkway. Another member hoped that proposed upgrades to on-street bikeways would go beyond striping and painting and incorporate physical buffers. The City of Richmond’s new e-bike bikeshare program was also suggested to be incorporated into the strategies. Members would also like to receive updates on available grants that the City and County could secure.

WCCTAC Board
The 3rd WCCTAC Board meeting presentation occurred on March 22, 2024 and focused on the draft strategies. Members of the board wanted to see strategies in the Safety, Driving and Goods 102

Leah Greenblat
May 24, 2024

Page 3 of 10 ends

Movement, and Public Health categories prioritized and discussed the feasibility and funding of various strategies. Board members highlighted Safety as a very important category due to speeding on the Parkway and several WCCTAC Directors expressed strong interest in enforcement against speeding, especially speed cameras.

Driving and Goods Movement discussion centered around the enforcement of carpool lanes. A WCCTAC Director shared they may not be effective without proper enforcement and that in person enforcement can be dangerous on a road with such high speeds. There were also suggestions to add lighting to vehicle-oriented wayfinding signage due to low visibility at night.

Another WCCTAC Director supported the strategy to coordinate signals during the peak period and further suggested leaving the signals uncoordinated during off-peak periods due to high speeds during this time.

Comments related to Public Health primarily focused on trucking and incorporation of electric vehicle infrastructure. To help fund ongoing maintenance, a WCCTAC Director raised the possibility of enforcing a special tax on trucks based on their size or weight. There was also interest in new electric vehicle technology involving pad charging stations, which also received support from Director Peeples (AC Transit), as they are expecting to run battery electric buses in the future. Finally, for the topic of Transit strategies, a WCCTAC Director emphasized the importance of improving access to the Richmond Parkway Transit Center for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Some board members emphasized how the Wildcat Creek Trail overpass strategy (as opposed to the on-street crossing alternative) would be costly, although members of the public, including Urban Tilth and the North Richmond Shoreline Levy Project, indicated heavy interest in this strategy due to flooding in that area. For Walking and Biking, Director Peeples (AC Transit) also asked for consideration of paratransit access when proposing separated bikeways and suggested using AC Transit’s guidelines on multi-modal design as a reference.

The board members also shared feedback on how the strategies should be prioritized. A WCCTAC Director agreed with the goals alignment levels assigned to the strategies and suggested prioritization of strategies based on that assignment. Another WCCTAC Director noted that cost of projects should be considered as part of the prioritization process to favor strategies that can be implemented with fewer resources. There were further suggestions to prioritize strategies with the greatest effectiveness in the near-term and can be accomplished in the next five to ten years.

Another WCCTAC Director recommended investigating relevant ongoing projects that could incorporate some strategies, allowing these strategies to be immediately started and providing a funding source. An example provided was the incorporation of the urban greening strategy into an existing landscaping project led by a special assessment district for a section of the Richmond Parkway.

Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 103

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
May 24, 2024

Page 4 of 10 ends

Pop-Up Events
The RPTP project team coordinated and attended two pop-up events during this Phase. The following includes a description of each pop-up event:
• North Richmond Flea Market
o Location: 716 W Gertrude Avenue
o Date/Time: Sunday March 24, 2024, 10:30AM-2:30PM
o Total Attendance: 23, 78% Spanish
• North Richmond’s Earth Day Festival
o Location: Shields-Reid Park, 1410 Kelsey Street
o Date/Time: Saturday, April 20, 2024, 8:30AM – 12:30 PM o Total Attendance: 35, 29% Spanish
Three boards were utilized for pop-up engagement to visualize draft strategies and collect votes for draft strategies that the participants would most like to see. Participants were asked to vote for their top five strategies and could vote for the same strategy more than once. They were also able leave comments about any strategies that they felt were missing. Overall, the project team connected with 58 people and received a total of 235 votes. At least one Spanish-speaking staff was present at each event and nearly half (48%) of participants were Spanish speakers.

Responses Breakdown
Figure 1 shows the overall distribution of strategy votes by category. The top three strategy categories based on the votes received were Public Health, Maintenance, and Safety. Within the Public Health category, the most popular strategies included expanding urban greening and prohibiting truck parking and idling in neighborhoods. Maintenance strategies that were most popular pertained to illegal dumping, formalizing a cross-jurisdictional roadway maintenance program, and incorporating the latest signal technology. Under Safety, the voting results indicated a preference for reducing speeding and monitoring high-risk intersections for unsafe driving behavior. Top voted strategies in other categories included upgrading on-street facilities for walking and biking, improving biking and walking access to the Richmond Parkway Transit Center, and coordinating traffic signals.
104

Leah Greenblat
May 24, 2024

Page 5 of 10 ends

Figure 1: Distribution of Pop-Up Votes by Category

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024.

In addition to strategy voting, participants were able to leave open comments. Most open comments suggested a strategy regarding improved lighting conditions, though lighting would be incorporated into existing strategies related to intersection- and segment-level design improvements. A few other comments expressed support for the draft strategies, particularly for speed reduction and maintenance as they either pointed out specific locations experiencing the problems that these strategies addressed or expressed desire for continued maintenance efforts.

A few comments also noted support for Transit strategies, particularly improved bus comfort and publicizing transit information.

Online Survey
The survey was hosted on Social Pinpoint between March 11th and April 29th, 2024. Users could select categories that they were most interested in and rank strategies in the selected categories.

The survey received a total of 124 responses.

Responses Breakdown
Participants were asked to select a minimum of two out of six strategy categories that they were most interested in. Based on the responses to this question, the top three categories selected were: Walking and Biking (27%), Safety (23%), and Maintenance (15%). Figure 3 shows this distribution of votes by category.
22%
19%
17%
16%
14%
12% Public Health
Maintenance
Safety
Walking and Biking
Transit
Driving and Goods
Movement
Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 105

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
May 24, 2024

Page 6 of 10 ends

Figure 3: Distribution of Survey Votes by Category

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024
Participants were also asked to rank strategies in the categories they selected. For Walking and Biking, the top strategies included upgrading on-street walking and bicycling facilities, spot improvements to the Bay Trail, and construction of a Wildcat Creek Trail overpass. The top Safety strategies were installation of intersection safety improvements and speed reduction measures.

Maintenance was selected by 15% of the responses, of which the top strategies included cross- jurisdictional management programs for roadway maintenance and the Bay Trail.

Although Transit, Public Health, and Driving and Goods Movement category were in the bottom three categories of interest, the top strategies in these categories included upgrading bus stop features for Transit, urban greening for Public Health, and coordinating signals for Driving and Goods Movement.

Survey Demographics
Optional demographic questions were included at the end of the survey. Nearly 70% of survey respondents provided at least one response to these questions. Most respondents live in Richmond/North Richmond (60%) or San Pablo (11%). Over 65% of respondents have a household income of $100,000 or more. Additionally, nearly 70% of respondents identified as White and 16% identified as Hispanic or Latino. Given that 56% of the residents along the study corridor are Hispanic or Latino and 38% are low-income1, the survey results are not representative of residents living adjacent to the corridor. However, the Parkway is also a regional facility serving a broader community whose preferred solutions may look different from residents living along the corridor. Thus, it is important to supplement the results of this digital engagement strategy

1 Low income is defined as 200% of the federal poverty level or below. 27%
23%
15%
13%
11%
11%
Walking and Biking
Safety
Maintenance
Transit
Public Health
Driving and Goods
Movement
106

Leah Greenblat
May 24, 2024

Page 7 of 10 ends

with in-person feedback from nearby residents to ensure balanced recommendations that accommodate all users of the Parkway while reducing harm to equity priority populations along the corridor.

Community Meetings
The RPTP project team presented at four community meetings in neighborhoods near/along Richmond Parkway. These include:
• Parchester Village Neighborhood Council (Parchester Village) o Virtual over Zoom
o Date/Time: Tuesday, March 12, 2024, 7:00PM
• North Richmond Municipal Advisory Council (North Richmond) o Location: North Richmond Senior Center, 515 Silver Avenue, Richmond CA 94801 o Date/Time: Tuesday, April 2, 2024, 5:00PM-7:00PM
• City of Richmond District 2 Meeting (Santa Fe)
o Location: Bridge Art Space, 23 Maine Avenue, Richmond CA 94804 o Date/Time: Saturday, April 6, 2024, 10:00AM-12:00PM
• Iron Triangle Neighborhood Council Meeting (Iron Triangle) o Location: 598 Nevin Avenue, Richmond, CA 94801
o Date/Time: Wednesday, April 17, 2024, 5:30PM-7:30PM
Feedback received in the community meetings revealed the following categories to be highest priority: Safety, Maintenance, and Public Health. Community members were concerned about safety related to speeding and wanted traffic calming on the Parkway. Another Safety concern related to personal safety with requests for improved lighting and camera enforcement. For Maintenance, participants discussed the need for roadway repaving and sidewalk repair. For Public Health, truck impacts were a common topic, including negative impacts to roadway pavement, traffic, driving safety, and air quality. Community members in North Richmond asked to be continually included in the discussion of all truck-related strategies, such as location of truck routes and truck enforcement. Additionally, the Wildcat Creek Trail Overpass strategy was repeatedly emphasized as a heavily desired project in multiple meetings. Community members in Iron Triangle added concerns regarding personal safety when using the overpass. They suggested locking up entrances at night and/or adding an emergency button, but felt that this would be insufficient with slow response time.

Strategy voting was conducted at the District 2 meeting, which produced results suggesting Maintenance, Transit, and Driving and Goods Movement as top categories. Maintenance received one-fourth of the votes while the other two categories each received 17% of the votes. Within the Maintenance category, there were equal votes for upgrading signal technology, discouraging illegal dumping, and implementation of a roadway maintenance management program. The top Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 107

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
May 24, 2024

Page 8 of 10 ends

Transit strategy was publicizing transit options and information while the top Driving and Goods Movement strategy was coordination of traffic signals.

Phase 2 Feedback
Based on a review of feedback received across all engagement opportunities, the top four draft strategy categories include Public Health, Safety, Maintenance, and Walking and Biking. The distribution of votes from the pop-ups and online survey were both considered, though greater weight was given to the pop-up votes given the feedback from equity priority populations living along the corridor. Due to the open-ended nature of the WCCTAC Board and Community Meetings, the results of these discussions were qualitatively measured in terms of level of support.2 The draft strategy categories, ranked in order of greatest preference to least based on all engagement activities, were:

1. Public Health
a. 22% of votes at pop-ups
b. 11% of votes on online survey
c. Strong support from the WCCTAC Board
d. Strong support at Community Meetings

2. Safety
a. 17% of votes at pop-ups
b. 23% of votes on online survey
c. Strong support from the WCCTAC Board
d. Strong support at Community Meetings

3. Maintenance
a. 19% of votes at pop-up
b. 15% of votes on online survey
c. Moderate support from the WCCTAC Board
d. Moderate support at Community Meetings

4. Walking and Biking
a. 16% of votes at pop-ups
b. 27% of votes on online survey
c. Limited discussion from the WCCTAC Board
d. Moderate support at Community Meetings

5. Transit
a. 14% of votes at pop-ups
b. 13% of votes on online survey
c. Limited discussion from the WCCTAC Board
d. Limited discussion at Community Meetings

2 Attendees at the City of Richmond District 2 meeting were able to vote on strategies via boards. These votes are taken into account when assessing the most popular strategy categories across Community Meetings.
108

Leah Greenblat
May 24, 2024

Page 9 of 10 ends

6. Driving and Goods Movement
a. 12% of votes at pop-ups
b. 11% of votes on online survey
c. Strong support from WCCTAC Board
d. Limited discussion at Community Meetings
A summary of feedback received on these categories is described below.

Public Health
Public Health was the top category at pop-ups and received 11% of the survey votes in online engagement. This category was also repeatedly discussed at community meetings, the PAG meeting, and the Board meeting. Conversations on Public Health typically focused on truck- related strategies. Participants at community meetings were interested in reducing truck traffic in neighborhoods and reducing emissions. PAG members were interested in these strategies but noted potential difficulties in implementing them. Board members were particularly interested in electric vehicle infrastructure and briefly discussed the issue of truck traffic as truck-generating uses continue to develop along the Parkway. Aside from trucking, urban greening was also a strategy that received support across most engagement events. It was the top Public Health strategy at pop-ups and was strongly supported by a member of the WCCTC Board.

Safety
Safety was the third most popular category in strategy voting at pop-ups and received support from 23% of the survey respondents in online engagement. The Board stated that Safety is a priority category, as they echoed the same concerns as the public regarding speeding and other dangerous driving behavior along Richmond Parkway. Two strategies that stood out in online engagement and pop-up events were speed reduction measures and monitoring of high-risk intersections. The Board discussed methods of enforcing these strategies, specifically installation of cameras and other automated methods. A WCCTAC Director also highlighted the importance of the Emergency Vehicle Preemption strategy. Members at the Iron Triangle community meeting shared concerns of personal safety due to criminal activity and requested improved lighting, which was also a popular comment at the community meeting in Parchester Village and pop-ups.

Maintenance
Maintenance was the second most popular category at pop-up events and received 15% of the votes in the online survey. Recurring strategies that received the most support was implementation of cross-jurisdictional management programs for roadway maintenance and the Bay Trail. Discouraging illegal dumping received a substantial amount of support at pop-ups and there were multiple open comments from the participants asking for continued maintenance of the roadway and abandoned buildings on and near the Parkway. Maintenance, particularly roadway maintenance, received significant support at community meetings. A WCCTAC Director Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 109

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
May 24, 2024

Page 10 of 10 ends

also shared that the illegal dumping was a strong concern due to how costly it is and would like stronger enforcement to discourage this.

Walking and Biking
Walking and Biking was the fourth most popular category at pop-up events and received votes from 27% of the online survey respondents. PAG members strongly supported this category as they expressed how uncomfortable it is for pedestrians and bicyclists on Richmond Parkway and the Bay Trail. They asked for improved walking and biking infrastructure and suggested that City of Richmond’s newly launched e-bike bikeshare program could be incorporated. The strategies that received the most votes across all engagement events included upgrades to on-street facilities and the Bay Trail as well as the Wildcat Creek Trail overpass. While the Wildcat Creek Trail overpass received a lot of support from the public, the Board expressed concerns over its cost and thus preferred the signalized crossing improvements strategy instead.

Transit
The Transit category did not appear to be a priority category based on limited input and discussion via online engagement, pop-ups, and community meetings. However, the transit strategy to improve bicycling and walking access to the Richmond Parkway Transit Center received support from pop-up engagements and a member of the WCCTAC Board. The strategy to improve bus stop comfort was another transit strategy that received support from pop-up and online engagement.

Driving and Goods Movement
While engagement participants did discuss the impacts of trucks at pop-ups and Community Meetings (e.g. neighborhood emissions, pavement quality, etc.), strategies that support the movement of trucks and vehicles under the Driving and Goods Movement category received limited input from most engagement events. However, the Board discussed this topic at length.

Coordinating traffic signals was a strategy that received consistent support across all engagement events and the WCCTAC Board provided some feedback how to implement this strategy.

Redesigning the merge at the intersection of Richmond Parkway with Castro Street received some support in pop-ups and online engagement. The strategy to add carpool lanes in areas of high congestion was also supported by a WCCTAC Director, but the Board discussed the difficulties of enforcing these lanes.
110

2201 Broadway | Suite 602 | Oakland, CA 94612 | (510) 834-3200 | Fax (510) 253-0059 www.fehrandpeers.com
Memorandum

Date: December 23, 2024
To: Leah Greenblat, WCCTC
From: Karina Schneider, Fehr & Peers
Subject: RPTP Phase 3 Engagement Summary
OK23-0506
Phase 3 of the Richmond Parkway Transportation Plan (RPTP) engagement focused on receiving feedback on the priority strategies and the Draft Plan. The goals of this phase were to:
• Confirm priority strategies respond to key challenges using Richmond Parkway • Understand concerns and preferences related to funding and implementation This phase consisted of both in-person and digital strategies to reach community members and policy makers between October and December 2024. This memorandum provides an overview of the Phase 3 engagement process and summarizes the feedback received.

Phase 3 Engagement Overview
Phase 3 Engagement consisted of the following engagement meetings and methods:

1. Public Advisory Group Meeting: October 9, 2024

2. WCCTC Board Meeting: October 25, 2024

3. Richmond City Council Meeting: November 19, 2024

4. Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee Meeting: December 9, 2024

5. Online Survey: November 4, 2024 through November 29, 2024 Presentations given to groups listed under #1 through #4 above focused on the priority strategies in the Draft Plan, suggested next steps for implementation, and an overview of different potential funding sources.

Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 111

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
December 23, 2024

Page 2 of 5 ends

Phase 3 Engagement Feedback
Feedback received during this phase generally supported the Draft Plan priority strategies with suggestions on how to implement and fund them. A summary of feedback provided by community members and policy makers is described below.

Public Advisory Group
The 4th Public Advisory Group (PAG) meeting was held on October 9, 2024. Following a presentation, the project team requested feedback from participants on the priority projects and implementation strategies. The PAG members primarily discussed strategies related to trucking and active transportation.

PAG members were appreciative to see strategies addressing truck-related impacts included in the priority strategy list as truck impacts continue to be a consistent topic raised in community discussions. Members noted that North Richmond community leaders would like to be involved during the implementation phase of the truck-related strategies.

Some members expressed strong support for the walking and biking strategies, specifically the strategy to realign the Bay Trail between Hensley Street and Gertrude Avenue. One member noted that they supported the signalized Wildcat Creek Trail crossing strategy as an alternative to a grade separated bicycle and pedestrian crossing recommended in previous planning efforts, which would be more expensive and difficult to implement. They noted the importance of going after grant funding to advance these types of strategies.

WCCTC Board
The 4th WCCTAC Board meeting presentation occurred on October 25, 2024. Some members of the board supported the near-term implementation of less expensive strategies, such as the truck route update strategy and signal coordination, and strategies that could be implemented through ongoing efforts like tree planting to be able to communicate early wins with the public. Other members noted the importance of strategies that aim to protect vulnerable roadway users, like safety improvements at intersections, but recognize the relatively high cost and longer implementation horizon for these infrastructure strategies. They expressed the desire to identify opportunities to implement these types of strategies in batches and in conjunction with other strategies where feasible.

Specific funding and implementation feedback recommended tapping into Regional Measure 3 funding with approximately $10M dedicated to Richmond Parkway projects. A Board member also recommended looking into Measure X to support implementation of public health strategies .

One public comment was received from Bike East Bay representative Robert Prinz. Prinz recommended focusing roadway safety improvements on high demand or high collision areas 112

Leah Greenblat
December 23, 2024

Page 3 of 5 ends

and incorporating safety improvements into repaving projects. He also noted a potential need for more commuter bus service to support congestion relief in the area.

Richmond City Council Meeting
The project team presented to the Richmond City Council on November 19, 2024. While Councilmembers generally supported the strategies in the Draft Plan, some noted concerns with putting too much implementation responsibility on the City of Richmond given the regional- serving nature of the corridor and existing staff capacity constraints. Councilmembers discussed the desire for County and WCCTC staff to support the City in identifying, pursuing, and managing funding sources for strategy implementation. No public comment was received.

Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee Meeting
The project team presented to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee (TWIC) Meeting on December 9, 2024. The TWIC members consist of Supervisor Diane Burgis of District III and Supervisor Candace Andersen of District II.

The Supervisors supported the strategies recommended in the Plan, but did not provide specific recommendations or changes to the strategies given that the study area falls outside of their districts in District I. They discussed that an important next step would be for WCCTC, City of Richmond, and County staff to identify which strategies to fund and implement first. No public comments was received.

Online Survey
The survey was hosted on SurveyMonkey between November 4th and November 29th, 2024. Users responded to the following four questions:

1. What’s your zip code?

2. The Draft Plan’s strategies respond to your needs and challenges on the corridor. (Multiple choice)
a. Strongly Agree
b. Agree
c. Somewhat Agree
d. Disagree
e. Strongly Disagree

3. Which of the priority strategies do you want to see advanced first? (Choose up to 3) a. Public Health: Incorporate trees and greening into all infrastructure projects on the corridor
b. Public Health: Update designated truck routes in North Richmond to avoid residential areas to the extent feasible
Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 113

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Leah Greenblat
December 23, 2024

Page 4 of 5 ends

c. Public Health: Implement no truck idling or parking zones near sensitive land uses
d. Safety: Install safety treatments at intersections along the corridor e. Safety: Implement measures to reduce speeding and conduct a study to lower the speed limit
f. Walking and Biking: Upgrade bikeways and the Bay Trail and connect sidewalk gaps
g. Walking and Biking: Install on-street signalized Wildcat Creek Trail crossing h. Maintenance: Implement a cross-jurisdictional Roadway Pavement and Maintenance Management Program
i. Driving and Goods Movement: Upgrade and coordinate traffic signals along the Parkway
j. Transit: Improve biking and walking access to the Richmond Parkway Transit Center

4. Is there any other feedback you would like to share about the Draft Plan? (Open ended—optional)
The survey received a total of 24 responses. Over half (63%) of survey responders live in zip codes that overlap the study area.

Responses Breakdown
Participants were asked to provide feedback on the responsiveness of all the strategies to participant needs and which priority strategies they wanted to see advanced first. Based on the responses to Question #2, over 70% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the Draft Plan strategies respond to their needs and challenges on the corridor, as seen in Figure 1.

Based on the responses to Question #3, the top five priority strategies selected were:

1. WB-1: Upgrade bikeways and connect sidewalk gaps (n=18)

2. S-1: Safety improvements at intersections (n=11)

3. PH-2: Trees and green infrastructure (n=8)

4. S-2: Reduce speeding (n=7)

5. M-1: Implement cross-jurisdictional maintenance program (n=7) Figure 2 show the distribution of results for Questions #3. 114

Leah Greenblat
December 23, 2024

Page 5 of 5 ends

Figure 1: Survey Response to Q2 The Draft Plan’s strategies respond to your needs and challenges on the corridor.

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024
Figure 2: Top 5 Survey Responses to Q3 Which of the priority strategies do you want to see advanced first?

Source: Fehr & Peers, 2024
Most open response comments reiterated the need for the strategies recommended in the Plan with major themes related to improving maintenance of the Parkway, supporting bicyclist protection along the corridor, and retiming signals.
29%
42%
21%
4% 4% Strongly Agree
Agree
Somewhat Agree
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
16 18
WB-1: Upgrade
bikeways and
conecct sidewalk
gaps
S-1: Safety
improvements at
intersections
PH-2: Trees and
green infrastructure
S-2: Reduce speeding M-1: Implement
cross-jurisdictional
maintenance
program
Appendix A: Community Engagement Summary Notes | 115

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Photo of pop-up event during Phase 1 of engagement in the Coronado neighborhood. 116
Appendix B:

Overview of Regional Influence
Appendix B: Overview of Regional Influence | 117

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLANRICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLANRICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN Appendix B
Overview of Regional Influence
Richmond Parkway is an important
transportation corridor in the San Francisco
Bay Area with state and national significance
for commerce. The Parkway facilitates access
to the Port of Richmond, railroads, distribution
centers, and a multitude of other regional
utilities, establishing physical connections that
enable services well beyond the local area.

Key Connection Enabling Regional Economic Hubs and Services The Parkway links parts of Richmond to I-580,
I-80, and the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge,
providing crucial access to regional destinations
such as San Francisco, San Rafael, Oakland,
North Richmond, unincorporated Contra Costa
County, and other parts of the East Bay.

Richmond Parkway provides direct access to
the Port of Richmond and regional-serving
warehouse distribution centers, facilitating
regional trade. The Port of Richmond ranks #1
in liquid bulk and automobile tonnage among
the five ports on San Francisco Bay, and in 2019
alone, trade totaled $9.51 billion for the five
city-owned terminals and ten privately-owned
terminals.1 The Port is also served by the two
largest transcontinental railroads, BNSF Railway
and Union Pacific, which hold a duopoly on
freight rail lines in the Western, Midwestern
and West South Central United States.

Other major employment hubs and
industrial sites that draw workers from
throughout the region and are accessed via
Richmond Parkway include the following:
• Richmond Chevron Refinery;
• UPS and Amazon distribution
centers near Point Pinole;
• Landfill and recycling yards,
which serve the region;
• Hazardous waste disposal plants;
• Water reclaim plants;
• West County Wastewater in North Richmond;
• Tow yards and tire recycling centers;
• Iron manufacturers;
• Building materials distribution centers;
• Large-scale construction equipment
rental centers; and
• Future developments, including over

1.2 million square feet of manufacturing
and warehouse space and 537,000
square feet of office space.

As a transportation backbone for these sites
and services, Richmond Parkway supports
significant vehicle and truck traffic that
serves not only the local area but the entire
region, state, and country. The Parkway
carries between 19,000 and 37,000 vehicles
every weekday, with 7% being truck traffic
along the corridor. Truck volumes along the
southern segments of Richmond Parkway
and Castro Street range between 5%-13%
of total daily vehicle volumes while truck
volumes on San Pablo Avenue, a comparable

1. California Association of Port Authorities, 2024, https://californiaports.org/ports/port-of-richmond/. 118 118 118

arterial, range between 2%-3% in Contra
Costa County.2 Truck traffic causes significant
wear to the road that requires consistent
proactive maintenance for pavement upkeep.

Despite the corridor’s wide-reaching
importance, maintenance responsibilities fall
solely on the City and County. The constant flow
of heavy trucks accelerates wear and tear on
the roadway, yet current maintenance funding
is insufficient to keep it at an appropriate level
of care. Without additional support, the City
and County face challenges in meeting the
maintenance needs to ensure the Parkway
remains reliable and safe for its users.

Originally intended to be constructed as a
Caltrans facility, the Parkway was developed
by local officials when the state did not
implement it. However, a lack of funds and
the urgency to build the Parkway sooner
rather than later has resulted in a facility
that would require hundreds of millions
of dollars to bring to a condition required
for Caltrans to adopt into its network.

Regional Multimodal Access and Public Health Effects
Walking and Biking
The Bay Trail, a 360 mile-long bicycle and
pedestrian trail that travels along the shoreline
of San Francisco Bay, partially travels along
Richmond Parkway. The corridor connects
to the Richmond-San Rafael (I-580) Bridge
path, the Richmond Greenway, and major
recreational destinations, including Point
Richmond, Point Pinole Regional Shoreline,
and Wildcat Canyon Regional Park. Existing
limited and poor east-west access points
should be enhanced to allow residents in and
around the Parkway better access to the Bay
Trail and regional recreational facilities.

Transit
Richmond Parkway provides a direct
connection to the Richmond Parkway Transit
Center and 11 transit routes stop on the
corridor. This access to public transit enhances
mobility for individuals without cars, as 9%
of households near the study corridor do
not own vehicles. Additionally, express bus
service to job centers along the corridor
significantly improves access to employment
opportunities for low-income residents and
Equity Priority Communities. Furthermore, the
Parkway facilitates access to the Richmond
Ferry and BART , further connecting residents
to vital regional transportation options and
enhancing overall mobility in the area.

Regional Public Health Effects
Given the industrial and goods movement
uses along Richmond Parkway, diesel PM
concentrations near the corridor range from

0.08 to 0.98 tons per year. This is greater than
78% of communities statewide. Exposure
to emissions contributes to public health
issues, including asthma, cardiovascular
disease, cancer, and low birth weight.3
The negative health impacts of these
emissions is exacerbated when trucks
avoid using the Parkway; the lack of timed
signals push trucks to take “cut through”
shortcuts through local neighborhoods for
more efficient routes. Coordinating signals
along the Parkway would dissuade this
behavior as well as reduce unsafe speeding
rooted in driver frustrations with signals,
improving health and safety for the region.

3. California Office of Health Hazard Assessment, 2021.2. Caltrans Traffic Census Program, AADT Truck Volumes, 2022.

Appendix B: Overview of Regional Influence | 119Appendix B: Overview of Regional Influence | 119Appendix B: Overview of Regional Influence | 119

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Photo of pop-up event during Phase 1 of engagement in the Hilltop neighborhood. 120
Appendix C:

Plan Strategies Goals Alignment
Appendix C: Plan Strategies Goals Alignment | 121

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Page intentionally left blank.
122

Table C-1: Strategies Evaluation Framework
Each strategy was qualitatively assessed against metrics associated with each goal as described in Table C-1. Each strategy was assigned a High, Medium, or Low goal alignment assessment.

1. Goal identified as one that would disproportionately benefit Equity Priority Communities along the corridor. These goals are given greater weight in total goal alignment assessment.

2. Note that the entire corridor is on the CCTA High Injury Network. Typically safety projects located on the HIN may score higher, but in this case, that would be the entire corridor.

Goal Metric Qualitative Evaluation Method (High, Medium, Low) Improve
Safety for All
Users1,2
• Reduce severe
and fatal injury
collisions
H = Includes substantial active transportation improvements (e.g. crossing visibility, sidewalk bulb-outs, protected bikeway, etc.) OR strategy that slows down speeding vehicles
M = All other road safety improvement strategies
L = All other strategies
Increase
Access to Key
Destinations1
• Increase quality
of connections
• Expand
connectivity to
key destinations
H = Close an active transportation gap between existing facilities with Class I or Class IV bikeway OR increase access through transit frequency/reliability M = Improve quality of sidewalks, crossings, bus stops, or Bay Trail OR provide access through/over a barrier
L = All other strategies
Improve
Health1
• Decrease in GHG
emissions and
other pollutants
• Reduce cut-
through traffic
H = Strategies that reduce neighborhood cut-through traffic OR that promote ZE technology or GHG reduction OR support active travel M = Multimodal and transit strategies
L = All other strategies
Advance
Placemaking1
• Maintenance
and street
beautification
• Community
support
H = Strategy with placemaking elements (e.g. public art, beautification, greening, lighting, traffic calming, etc) and maintenance (e.g. removing litter, improving pavement/markings, reducing illegal dumping) OR reduce truck throughput and parking in residential areas
M = Addresses other key concern raised during Phase 1 community engagement process (i.e. safety, biking and walking, and congestion) L = All other strategies
Enhance
Travel Time
Reliability
and
Efficiency
• Reduce vehicle
delay
• Increase vehicle
occupancy
H = HOV/Express lane strategies OR Transit-priority strategies (e.g. bus lane, signal priority)
M = Signal or capacity efficiency improvements OR all other transit service strategies
L = All other strategies
Support
Feasible
Strategies
• Advance feasible
strategies
• Develop cost-
effective
transportation
solutions
H = Strategy can be delivered in the the next 5 years depending on staffing and priority levels (includes first phase of capital projects or quick-build version of strategies where applicable) OR recommended in an adopted plan M = Strategy can be delivered in the next 6-10 years
L = All other strategies
Appendix C: Plan Strategies Goals Alignment | 123

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
*Priority Strategies with an implementation plan in Chapter 5.

Table C-2: Strategy Goals Alignment Assessment
ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name

1. Improve
Safety for All
Users

2. Increase
Access to Key
Destinations

3. Improve
Health

4. Advance
Placemaking

5. Enhance
Travel Time
Reliability
and
Efficiency

6. Support
Feasible
Strategies Goals Alignment
DG-1* Driving and Goods
Movement Signals Upgrade and coordinate traffic signals M L L M M H Meets Many Goals DG-2 Driving and Goods
Movement Congestion Add carpool lane on segments with high congestion L H H M H M Meets Most Goals
DG-3 Driving and Goods
Movement Street Design Redesign Richmond Parkway/Castro Street merge L L L M M H Meets Some Goals
DG-4 Driving and Goods
Movement Signage/Wayfinding Signage for blind turns M L L M L H Meets Some Goals DG-5 Driving and Goods
Movement Signage/Wayfinding Install wayfinding for drivers L L L H L H Meets Some Goals M-1* Maintenance Roadway Implement cross-jurisdictional maintenance program M M H H L H Meets Most Goals
M-2 Maintenance Encampments Keep sidewalks and paths clear near encampments M M H H L H Meets Most Goals
M-3 Maintenance Illegal Dumping Discourage illegal dumping L L L H L H Meets Some Goals PH-1* Public Health Trucks Confirm and enforce truck routes in North Richmond M L H H L H Meets Most Goals
PH-2* Public Health Urban Greening Trees and Green Infrastructure L M H H L H Meets Most Goals PH-3* Public Health Air Quality Minimize vehicle impacts to air quality L L H H L H Meets Many Goals PH-4 Public Health EV/AV adoption Encourage private electric vehicle adoption and usage L L H L L M Meets Some Goals
PH-5 Public Health Noise Improve sound wall L L L L L L Meets Some Goals 124

ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name

1. Improve
Safety for All
Users

2. Increase
Access to Key
Destinations

3. Improve
Health

4. Advance
Placemaking

5. Enhance
Travel Time
Reliability
and
Efficiency

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
*Priority Strategies with an implementation plan in Chapter 5.

Table C-2: Strategy Goals Alignment Assessment (continued) ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name

1. Improve
Safety for All
Users

2. Increase
Access to Key
Destinations

3. Improve
Health

4. Advance
Placemaking

5. Enhance
Travel Time
Reliability
and
Efficiency

6. Support
Feasible
Strategies Goals Alignment
S-1* Safety Street Design Safety improvements at intersections H M H M L M Meets Most Goals S-2* Safety Speeding Reduce speeding H L L H L M Meets Many Goals S-3 Safety Monitoring Monitor high-risk intersections H L L M L M Meets Some Goals T-1* Transit Richmond Parkway
Transit Center
Improve access to the Richmond Parkway Transit
Center L H H M L M Meets Many Goals
T-2 Transit Bus/Shuttle Improve bus stop comfort L H M H L H Meets Most Goals T-3 Transit Bus/Shuttle New transit service to Marin County L H M M M H Meets Most Goals T-4 Transit Service Increase bus frequency L H M M M H Meets Most Goals T-5 Transit Bus/Shuttle On-demand shuttle service L H M M M H Meets Most Goals T-6 Transit Parking Parking lot for transit to Marin County L H M L M M Meets Many Goals T-7 Transit Accessibility Publicize transit options/information L L M M L H Meets Some Goals WB-1* Walking and Biking Street Design Upgrade bikeways and connect sidewalk gaps H H H M L M Meets Most Goals WB-2* Walking and Biking Wildcat Creek Trail
Crossing On-street Wildcat Creek Trail crossing H M H M L L Meets Many Goals WB-3 Walking and Biking New Technology Test innovative bicycle and pedestrian detection at intersections H L H M L L Meets Many Goals
WB-4 Walking and Biking Shared Mobility Expand electric bike share program L L H L L H Meets Some Goals 126

ID Topic Subtopic Strategy Name

1. Improve
Safety for All
Users

2. Increase
Access to Key
Destinations

3. Improve
Health

4. Advance
Placemaking

5. Enhance
Travel Time
Reliability
and
Efficiency

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Photo of community meeting during Phase 2 of engagement in the Santa Fe neighborhood. 128

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Appendix D:

Separated Bikeway 35% Design
Concept and Cost Estimate* for
Northern Segment of Richmond
Parkway
*Final cost estimate pending.
| 129
Appendix D: Separated Bikeway 35% Design Concept and Cost Estimate for Northern Segment of Richmond Parkway

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Photo of Earth Day pop-up event during Phase 2 of engagement in North Richmond. 140
Appendix E:

Existing Funding Sources for
Priority Strategies
Appendix E: Existing Funding Sources for Priority Strategies | 141

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Appendix B: Existing Funding Sources 1 of 3
Appendix B: Existing Funding Sources for Priority Strategies ID
Program Funding
Source Acronym WB-1 WB-2 DG-1 S-1 S-2 M-1 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 T-1 Administering
Agency Type Administering Agency
Programming
Authority Eligible Applicants Purpose and Eligibility Website Maximum Amount Available 1 Strengthening Mobility
and Revolutionizing
Transportation Grants
SMART 1 Federal Office of Secretary
USDOT
Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs
Act (IIJA)
State, Cities, Counties, MPO,
public transit agency/authority,
public toll authority
Demonstration Projects Utilizing Innovative Technology to Improve Transportation Efficiency and Safety. In general, a Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation grant may be used to carry out a project that demonstrates at least one of the following: Coordinate Automation Connected Vehicles; Intelligent, sensor-based infrastructure; Systems integration; Commerce delivery and logistics; Leveraging use of innovative aviation technology; Smart grid; Smart technology traffic signals. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2022/05/BUILDI

NG-A-BETTER-AMERICA-
V2.pdf#page=65
https://www.transportation.gov/si
tes/dot.gov/files/2024-
05/SMART%20FY24%20Stage%20
l d dd
Max award for each stage are -
Stage 1: $2M; Stage 2: $15M
2 RAISE Grant RAISE 1 1 1 1 Federal Office of Secretary USDOT
U.S. Department of
Transportation
Cities, Counties, transit
operators, public agency,
special district or public
authority with a transportation
function or multijurisdictional
group of entities that are
separately eligible
Road, rail, transit and port projects that promise to achieve national objectives. Projects should leverage development and help to build and repair critical pieces of our freight and passenger transportation networks. Eligible projects for RAISE grants are:

Relevant capital projects include but are not limited to: highway, bridge, or other road projects; public transportation projects; passenger and freight rail transportation projects; port infrastructure investments; intermodal projects; and any other surface transportation infrastructure project that the Secretary considers to be necessary to advance the goals of the program.

Planning projects which include planning, preparation, or design (for example - environmental analysis, equity analysis, community engagement, feasibility studies, benefit cost analysis (BCA), and other pre-construction activities) of eligible surface transportation capital projects that will not result in construction with RAISE FY 2024 f di
https://www.transportation.gov/R
AISEgrants
https://www.transportation.gov/si
tes/dot.gov/files/2024-
02/FY%202024%20RAISE%20NOF
O%20Amendment%201.pdf
Max award for capital and planning grants:
$25M
3 Active Transportation
Program
ATP 1 1 1 State Caltrans Senate Bill 99,
California Assembly
Bill 101
Local, regional, or state
agencies, Caltrans, Transit
Agencies, Natural Resources or
Public Land Agencies, schools,
tribal governments, nonprofits,
any other entity with oversight
of transportation/recreational
trails
Funds safe routes to to school, pedestrian, bicycle, and trail projects. Disadvantaged communities must receive at least 25 percent of the program's funding. California Transportation Commission oversees guidelines and programming. https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-
assistance/fed-and-state-
programs/active-transportation-
program
Total Funding Available in Cycle 7 = $568M
made up of Federal, State SB1, and State
Highway Account (SHA) funding
No specific maximum amount provided.

Minimum request is $250,000. The Program
anticipates application for Large projects
with total project cost of greater than $10M,
Medium projects between $3.5M to $10M,
etc.
4 Urban Greening Grant 1 State CA Natural Resources
Agency
Cap and Trade City, county, special district,
nonprofit org, or agency/entity
formed pursuant to the Joint
Exercise of Powers Act
The Program supports the development of green infrastructure projects that reduce GHG emissions and provide multiple benefits. Must include at least one of the following:
• Sequester and store carbon by planting trees
• Reduce building energy use by strategically planting trees to shade buildings • Reduce commute vehicle miles traveled by constructing bicycle paths, bicycle lanes or pedestrian facilities that provide safe routes for travel between residences, workplaces, commercial centers, and schools.

Gives priority to, projects that are located within and benefit the State’s disadvantaged communities and those communities facing the most significant threat from extreme heat. https://resources.ca.gov/grants/ur
ban-greening/
No max or min grant amounts. 80% of
awarded funds to disadvantaged and low
income communities (AB 1550)
Approx. $47.5M available in 2021.
5 Clean Transportation
Incentives (various
programs including
Electric Bicycle
Incentives Project)
1 1 1 State CARB California Air
Resources Board
varies by program; but previous
investments suggest largely
state agencies
Annual budget appropriation guided by the priorities in the Cap and Trade Auction Proceeds Investment Plan
• Facilitate greenhouse gas reductions
• Benefit priority populations
• Maximize health, environmental, economic co-benefits
• Continue investments in existing programs
• Provide funding certainty over multiple years when possible • Support job training and apprenticeship opportunities https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-
work/programs/low-carbon-
transportation-investments-and-
air-quality-improvement-
program/low-1
Varies by program
6 Transformative Climate
Communities
TCC 1 1 1 State Strategic Growth Council
and CA Department of
Conservation
Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund
(GGRF)
CBOs, local governments,
nonprofit orgs, philanthropic
orgs/foundations, faith-based
orgs, coalitions or associations
of nonprofits, community dev
finance institutions, community
dev corporations, joint powers
authority, CA native american
tribes
The Program funds community-led development and infrastructure projects that achieve major environmental, health, and economic benefits in California’s most disadvantaged communities. (California Climate Investments)
Eligible Types:
• Bicycle and pedestrian facilities
• Bike share programs (However must be part of a larger placebased strategy) http://www.sgc.ca.gov/programs/
tcc/
Based on Round 5 TCC Program included 3
grant types: 1) implementation grants could
be requested for up to $29.5M, 2) project
development grants could be requested up to
$5M, and 3) planning grants could be
requested up to $300,000.
142

Appendix B: Existing Funding Sources 1 of 3
Appendix B: Existing Funding Sources for Priority Strategies ID
Program Funding
Source Acronym WB-1 WB-2 DG-1 S-1 S-2 M-1 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 T-1 Administering
Agency Type Administering Agency
Programming
Authority Eligible Applicants Purpose and Eligibility Website Maximum Amount Available 1 Strengthening Mobility
and Revolutionizing
Transportation Grants
SMART 1 Federal Office of Secretary
USDOT
Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs
Act (IIJA)
State, Cities, Counties, MPO,
public transit agency/authority,
public toll authority
Demonstration Projects Utilizing Innovative Technology to Improve Transportation Efficiency and Safety. In general, a Strengthening Mobility and Revolutionizing Transportation grant may be used to carry out a project that demonstrates at least one of the following: Coordinate Automation Connected Vehicles; Intelligent, sensor-based infrastructure; Systems integration; Commerce delivery and logistics; Leveraging use of innovative aviation technology; Smart grid; Smart technology traffic signals. https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2022/05/BUILDI

Appendix E: Existing Funding Sources for Priority Strategies | 143

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Appendix B: Existing Funding Sources 2 of 3
ID
Program Funding
Source Acronym WB-1 WB-2 DG-1 S-1 S-2 M-1 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 T-1 Administering
Agency Type Administering Agency
Programming
Authority Eligible Applicants Purpose and Eligibility Website Maximum Amount Available 7 Sustainable
Transportation Equity
Project
STEP 1 1 1 1 State CARB Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund
(GGRF)
Lead applicants: CBO, tribal
governments, local
governments, school
Sub applicants: CBOs,
consultants, higher education
institutions, joint powers
authorities, local governments,
non-profits, philanthropic
orgs/foundations, private
companies, schools, small
businesses transit agencies,
tribal govs, utilities and
community choice aggregators,
other public agencies
Planning and capacity building grants. Funding is intended to help low-income and disadvantaged communities identify residents’ transportation needs and prepare to implement clean transportation and land use projects. The Program makes $20 million available for 1-3 implementation block grants to fund clean transportation and land use projects in disadvantaged communities. Funded projects will work together to increase community residents’ access to key destinations so they can get where they need to go without the use of a personal vehicle.

Eligible Types:
• Bike or pedestrian facilities
• Active Transportation Plan
• Safe Routes to School Plan
• Capacity Building (NI Programs– education, engagement, demo projects, campaigns) • Publicly-accessible bike parking, storage, and repair infrastructure (e.g., bike racks, bike lockers, bike repair kiosks)
• New walkways that improve mobility/access/safety of pedestrians (non-motorized users) • Street crossing enhancements, including accessible pedestrian signals https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/lcti-step Max available for each grant type - Planning and Capacity Building grant max:
$750,000
CMIS and STEP grant: $15M
8 Highway Safety
Improvement Program
HSIP 1 1 1 State Caltrans Local Assistance Caltrans local public agency that owns, operates and maintains public
roadways in CA, includes city,
county or tribal government
The Program funds work on any public road or publicly owned bicycle or pedestrian pathway or trail, or on tribal lands for general use of tribal members, that improves the safety for its users. Project maximum funding- $10M. Solicitation varies from annually to semi-annually
Eligible Types:
• Safety projects on Bike facilities
• Safety projects on Ped facilities
https://dot.ca.gov/programs/local-
assistance/fed-and-state-
programs/highway-safety-
improvement-program
https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-
media/programs/local-
assistance/documents/lapg/g09.p
Max amount an agency can review varies by
calls-for-projects, but Cycle 12 max is $10M.
9 Low Carbon Transit
Operations Program
(LCTOP) LCTOP
1 State Caltrans Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund
(GGRF)
transit operators and
transportation planning
agencies
Operating and capital assistance for transit agencies to reduce GHG emissions and improve mobility with a priority on serving disadvantaged communities; new or expanded intermodal transit facilities; operational expenditures that increase transit mode share. http://www.dot.ca.gov/drmt/splct
op.html
Varies depending on auction proceeds
10 Local Partnership
Program (LPP) Formula
& Competitive
Programs
LPP 1 1 1 1 1 State CTC State Senate Bill 1 CCTA, Cities (Jurisdictions with voter approved taxes, tolls, or
fees, which are dedicated solely
to transportation improvements
or that have imposed fees,
including uniform developer
fees, which are dedicated solely
to transportation
improvements.)
Improvements to state highways, transit facilities and local roads; acquisition, retrofit or rehab of rolling stock, buses or other transit equipment including facilities; improvements to bicycle and pedestrian safety; environmental mitigation projects, soundwalls, road maintenance, and rehabilitation projects.

The primary objective of this program is to provide funding to counties, cities, districts, and regional transportation agencies in which voters have approved fees or taxes dedicated solely to transportation improvements or that have imposed fees, including uniform developer fees, dedicated solely to transportation improvements. Improve aging Infrastructure, Road Conditions, Active Transportation, Transit and rail, Health and Safety Benefits.
https://catc.ca.gov/programs/sb1/
local-partnership-program
Competitive Program funding request has
maximum of $25M per project nomination.

The 2022 Local Partnership Program will
include two years of programming with $400
million in funds ($40 million formulaic
incentive funding set aside; $216 million via
Formulaic; and $144 million via Competitive)
covering Fiscal Years 2023-24 and 2024-25.
11 One Bay Area Grant
Program - Regional and
County
OBAG 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 Regional MTC, CCTA Federal Highway
Administration
cities, counties, transit agencies,
federally-recognized Tribal
governments, and CTAs
Maintain MTC's commitments to regional transportation priorities while also advancing the Bay Area's land-use and housing goals. Contra Costa County is focusing efforts on around encouraging active transportation like bicycling and walking, supporting safe routes to schools, implementing complete streets, and upgrading the countywide traffic signal system to "smarter" signals that can prioritize transit and emergency vehicles and hlep improve safety for people walking/biking at intersections. https://mtc.ca.gov/funding/federa
l-funding/federal-highway-
administration-grants/one-bay-
area-grant-obag-3
https://ccta.net/planning/one-bay-
area-grant-3/
https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/fi
les/documents/2024-05/RES-
4505_approved_0.pdf
Total available for Contra Costa County: $47.3
million between 2023-2026
12 Transportation
Development Act
Article 3
TDA 3 1 1 1 1 Regional MTC, Contra Costa
County
Transportation
Development Act
(TDA)
Cities, counties 2% of County TDA funds are set aside for bicycle and pedestrian projects through Article 3.

MTC oversees program. Funding is allocated by formula according to population in each jurisdiction, and jurisdictions may spend funds or roll them over to a future year. Some counties competitively select projects, while other counties distribute the funds to jurisdictions based on population. Each County determines program of projects through review process. Each local jurisdiction receive funds that can roll over to accomplish local priorities.

Amount varies by jurisdiction based on
formula
13 Regional
Transportation
Improvement Program
RTIP 1 1 1 Regional MTC, CCTA State Transportation
Improvement Program
(STIP)
transit operators, cities,
counties
The STIP is the biennial five-year plan adopted by the Commission for future allocations of certain state transportation funds for state highway improvements, intercity rail, and regional highway and transit improvements. Local agencies should work through their Regional Transportation Planning Agency (RTPA), County Transportation Commission, or Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), as appropriate, to nominate projects for inclusion in the STIP.
https://mtc.ca.gov/tags/rtip Individual project limit not found. 2025 TIP awarded total of $345M for 49 projects in
Contra Costa County. Countywide Smart
Signals is one TIP project with a cost of $30M.
14 Transportation Fund
for Clean Air
TFCA 1 1 1 Regional BAAQMD, CCTA BAAQMD Clean Air
Plan
Public agencies, CCTA
subregions
Funds eligible projects that reduce on-road motor vehicle emissions http://www.baaqmd.gov/funding- and-incentives/public-
agencies/regional-fund
https://www.alamedactc.org/fund
ing/fund-sources/transportation-
fund-for-clean-air/
For the TFCA 40% Fund Policy, WCCTC is
allocated 22.2% of the Program, and CCTA
annually distributes $1.5M in total, giving a
maximum allocation of $333,000 to WCCTC.

For the remaining 60%, each public agency
may be awarded up to total award of
$5,500,000 per agency per fiscal year.
144

Appendix B: Existing Funding Sources 2 of 3
ID
Program Funding
Source Acronym WB-1 WB-2 DG-1 S-1 S-2 M-1 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 T-1 Administering
Agency Type Administering Agency
Programming
Authority Eligible Applicants Purpose and Eligibility Website Maximum Amount Available 7 Sustainable
Transportation Equity
Project
STEP 1 1 1 1 State CARB Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Fund
(GGRF)
Lead applicants: CBO, tribal
governments, local
governments, school
Sub applicants: CBOs,
consultants, higher education
institutions, joint powers
authorities, local governments,
non-profits, philanthropic
orgs/foundations, private
companies, schools, small
businesses transit agencies,
tribal govs, utilities and
community choice aggregators,
other public agencies
Planning and capacity building grants. Funding is intended to help low-income and disadvantaged communities identify residents’ transportation needs and prepare to implement clean transportation and land use projects. The Program makes $20 million available for 1-3 implementation block grants to fund clean transportation and land use projects in disadvantaged communities. Funded projects will work together to increase community residents’ access to key destinations so they can get where they need to go without the use of a personal vehicle.

For the remaining 60%, each public agency
may be awarded up to total award of
$5,500,000 per agency per fiscal year.

Appendix E: Existing Funding Sources for Priority Strategies | 145

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Appendix B: Existing Funding Sources 3 of 3
ID
Program Funding
Source Acronym WB-1 WB-2 DG-1 S-1 S-2 M-1 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 T-1 Administering
Agency Type Administering Agency
Programming
Authority Eligible Applicants Purpose and Eligibility Website Maximum Amount Available 15a
Regional Measure 3 -
Safe Routes to Transit
and Bay Trail Program
RM3 -
SR2TBT
1 1 1
Regional MTC, BATA RM3
City, County, transit agencies,
school districts, community
colleges and universities
Improve bicycle and pedestrian access on and near the region’s toll bridges connecting to rail transit stations and ferry terminals. Access improvements include sidewalks, bike paths, traffic signal improvements, clearer signage and secure bicycle parking. The improvements will be funded via an increase in bridge tolls on all Bay Area toll bridges except the Golden Gate Bridge.
https://mtc.ca.gov/funding/reg
ional-funding/regional-
measure-3
https://planbayarea.org/sites/
default/files/meetings/attachm
Per expenditure plan,
$150M available for Bay Trail/Safe Routes to
Transit over 3 cycles.
15b
Regional Measure 3 -
Goods Movement and
Mitigation
RM3
1 1
Regional MTC, ACTC RM3
City, County, countywide
transportation agencies, rail
operators, and the Port of
Oakland
Reduce traffic congestion and improve transportation options throughout the SF Bay Area's state-owned toll bridge corridors. The improvements will be funded via an increase in bridge tolls on all Bay Area toll bridges except the Golden Gate Bridge. Eligible projects include, but are not limited to, improvements in the County of Alameda to enable more goods to be shipped by rail, access improvements on Interstate 580, Interstate 80, and Interstate 880, and improved access to the Port of Oakland. https://mtc.ca.gov/funding/reg
ional-funding/regional-
measure-3
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.g
ov/faces/codes_displaySection
.xhtml?lawCode=SHC&section
Num=30914.7
https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/defaul
t/files/documents/2024-
02/__03_04_2024%20Full%20A
genda%20Packet%20RM3%20I
ndependent%20Oversight%20
Committee_v4.pdf
https://mtcdrive.app.box.com/
s/x35lm2ocq0qw147fo7qpxchb
vfb59l70
Per expenditure plan,
$160M for Goods Movement and Mitigation
15c
Regional Measure 3 -
Corridor-specific
Projects
RM3
1 1 1
Regional MTC MTC BATA, CCTA
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Access Improvements. Fund eastbound and westbound improvements in the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge corridor, including westbound access and operational improvements in the vicinity of the toll plaza east of the bridge in Contra Costa County, and Richmond Parkway interchange improvements. https://mtc.ca.gov/funding/reg
ional-funding/regional-
measure-3
$75M for projects in Contra Costa County
16 Innovative
Deployments to
Enhance Arterials
through Transit Signal
Priority (IDEA TSP)
1 Regional MTC MTC cities, counties, and transit
agencies; multi-jurisdictional
partnerships will receive priority
This Call for Technical Assistance dedicates $2 million to further the project-readiness of conceptual Transit Priority Projects by developing them into shovel-ready projects that would be more competitive for capital implementation funding. MTC’s has over $20 million reserved for near-term capital Transit Priority projects through its BusAID (Bus Accelerated Infrastructure Delivery) and IDEA programs, and anticipates funding opportunities in the future.
https://abag.ca.gov/technical-
assistance/idea-tsp-transit-signal-
priority#:~:text=The%20Innovativ
e%20Deployments%20to%20Enh
ance,transit%20faster%20and%2
0more%20reliable.

Maximum award of $1M
17 Measure J Programs 1 1 1 1 1 Regional CCTA CCTA Contra Costa County Subregions Richmond Parkway is allocated $16 million as one of the Capital Improvement Projects in Measure J's Expenditure Plan. The objective/reason for this allocation is detailed as follows:

Upgrade the Richmond Parkway to facilitate transfer of ownership to the California Department of Transportation, including potential intersection and interchange upgrades, and/or provide funds to maintain the roadway. The Richmond Parkway is the priority project for this funding; however, funds not expended for this project may be reprogrammed at the City of Richmond’s request for Richmond ferry service. https://ccta.net/about-
us/funding/
https://ccta.net/wp-
content/uploads/2018/10/5297b1
21d5964.pdf
Allocated $16M in total
23 Promoting Resilient
Operations for
Transformative,
Efficient,
and Cost-saving
Transportation
PROTECT 1 Federal FHWA Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs
Act (IIJA)
States, MPOs, local
governments, special districts or
public authorities with a
transportation function, tribal
governments, and federal land
management agencies
Formula funding to states to support planning, resilience improvements, community resilience and evacuation routes, and at-risk coastal
infrastructure. Includes transit, highways, and certain port projects. Additional competitive funding available.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2022/05/BUILDI

NG-A-BETTER-AMERICA-
V2.pdf#page=272
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/biparti
san-infrastructure-
law/fact_sheets.cfm
No max grant amount but expected
distrbution of up to $7.3B total over 2022-
2026.
32 Reconnecting
Communities Grant
Program
RCP 1 1 Federal FHWA Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs
Act (IIJA)
States, units of local
government, Tribal
governments, Metropolitan
Planning Organizations, and
non-profit organizations.

The purpose of the RCP Program is to reconnect communities by removing, retrofitting, or mitigating transportation facilities, like highways or rail lines, that create barriers to community connectivity, including to mobility, access, or economic development. The program funds planning and capital construction to address infrastructure barriers, reconnect communities, and improve peoples’ lives.
https://www.transportation.gov/r
econnecting
$150 million for planning, $457 million for
construction in FY24
33 Advanced
Transportation
Technologies and
Innovative Mobility
Deployment
ATTAIN 1 Federal FHWA Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs
Act (IIJA)
State Governments; Local
Governments; Planning and
Project Organizations; Academic
and Research Institutions; U.S.

Territories
Provides funding to deploy, install, and operate advanced transportation technologies to improve safety, mobility, efficiency, system performance, intermodal connectivity, and infrastructure return on investment.
https://www.transportation.gov/r
ural/grant-toolkit/advanced-
transportation-technologies-and-
innovative-mobility-deployment
$12 million
34 Active Transportation
Infrastructure
Investment Program
ATIIP 1 1 1 1 Federal FHWA Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs
Act (IIJA)
State Governments; Local
Governments; Federally
Recognized Tribes and Affiliated
Groups; Planning and Project
Organizations; U.S. Territories
ATIIP projects will help improve the safety, efficiency, and reliability of active transportation networks and communities; improve connectivity between active transportation modes and public transportation; enhance the resiliency of on- and off-road active transportation infrastructure; help protect the environment; and improve quality of life in disadvantaged communities through the delivery of connected active transportation networks and expanded mobility opportunities.
https://www.transportation.gov/r
ural/grant-toolkit/active-
transportation-infrastructure-
investment-program-atiip
$15 million
146

Appendix B: Existing Funding Sources 3 of 3
ID
Program Funding
Source Acronym WB-1 WB-2 DG-1 S-1 S-2 M-1 PH-1 PH-2 PH-3 T-1 Administering
Agency Type Administering Agency
Programming
Authority Eligible Applicants Purpose and Eligibility Website Maximum Amount Available 15a
Regional Measure 3 -
Safe Routes to Transit
and Bay Trail Program
RM3 -
SR2TBT
1 1 1
Regional MTC, BATA RM3
City, County, transit agencies,
school districts, community
colleges and universities
Improve bicycle and pedestrian access on and near the region’s toll bridges connecting to rail transit stations and ferry terminals. Access improvements include sidewalks, bike paths, traffic signal improvements, clearer signage and secure bicycle parking. The improvements will be funded via an increase in bridge tolls on all Bay Area toll bridges except the Golden Gate Bridge.
https://mtc.ca.gov/funding/reg
ional-funding/regional-
measure-3
https://planbayarea.org/sites/
default/files/meetings/attachm
Per expenditure plan,
$150M available for Bay Trail/Safe Routes to
Transit over 3 cycles.
15b
Regional Measure 3 -
Goods Movement and
Mitigation
RM3
1 1
Regional MTC, ACTC RM3
City, County, countywide
transportation agencies, rail
operators, and the Port of
Oakland
Reduce traffic congestion and improve transportation options throughout the SF Bay Area's state-owned toll bridge corridors. The improvements will be funded via an increase in bridge tolls on all Bay Area toll bridges except the Golden Gate Bridge. Eligible projects include, but are not limited to, improvements in the County of Alameda to enable more goods to be shipped by rail, access improvements on Interstate 580, Interstate 80, and Interstate 880, and improved access to the Port of Oakland. https://mtc.ca.gov/funding/reg
ional-funding/regional-
measure-3
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.g
ov/faces/codes_displaySection
.xhtml?lawCode=SHC&section
Num=30914.7
https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/defaul
t/files/documents/2024-
02/__03_04_2024%20Full%20A
genda%20Packet%20RM3%20I
ndependent%20Oversight%20
Committee_v4.pdf
https://mtcdrive.app.box.com/
s/x35lm2ocq0qw147fo7qpxchb
vfb59l70
Per expenditure plan,
$160M for Goods Movement and Mitigation
15c
Regional Measure 3 -
Corridor-specific
Projects
RM3
1 1 1
Regional MTC MTC BATA, CCTA
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge Access Improvements. Fund eastbound and westbound improvements in the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge corridor, including westbound access and operational improvements in the vicinity of the toll plaza east of the bridge in Contra Costa County, and Richmond Parkway interchange improvements. https://mtc.ca.gov/funding/reg
ional-funding/regional-
measure-3
$75M for projects in Contra Costa County
16 Innovative
Deployments to
Enhance Arterials
through Transit Signal
Priority (IDEA TSP)
1 Regional MTC MTC cities, counties, and transit
agencies; multi-jurisdictional
partnerships will receive priority
This Call for Technical Assistance dedicates $2 million to further the project-readiness of conceptual Transit Priority Projects by developing them into shovel-ready projects that would be more competitive for capital implementation funding. MTC’s has over $20 million reserved for near-term capital Transit Priority projects through its BusAID (Bus Accelerated Infrastructure Delivery) and IDEA programs, and anticipates funding opportunities in the future.
https://abag.ca.gov/technical-
assistance/idea-tsp-transit-signal-
priority#:~:text=The%20Innovativ
e%20Deployments%20to%20Enh
ance,transit%20faster%20and%2
0more%20reliable.

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Photo of Earth Day pop-up event during Phase 2 of engagement in North Richmond. 148
Appendix F:

Priority Strategy
Cost Estimates
Appendix F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates | 149

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Page intentionally left blank.
150

UNIT UNIT C OS T

QUANTITY
PER 100 L F
C OS T
PER 100 L F
COST

P ER MILE
Clear and Grubbing SF 3$ 1600 4,800$ 253,440$ Irrigation LS 10,000$ 1 10,000$ 528,000$ Shrub Planting - 5 Gal. EA 50$ 28 1,400$ 73,920$ T ree Planting - 15 Gal. EA 250$ 25 6,250$ 330,000$ Mu l c h SF 1$ 1600 1,600$ 84,480$

GRAND TOTAL
1,270,000$
2,900,000$
A ssumptions

DESCRIPTION QUANTITCOST /SF C OS T/ LF C OS T/ MILE

BIORETENTION BASIN
(4') 4 $180 $720 $3,258,514
$3,258,514
7,430,000$
STRATEGY PH-2 - TREE PLANTING AND LANDSCAPING (NON-BIORETENTION) 2024 CONST RUCT ION COST
2 0 3 0 TOTAL C OS T WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS ( 3 )

2. T opsoil not included.

1. L abor is included in the cost of plant materials.

4. A ssume all plants will be hand watered within an establishment period of one year with maintenance and monitoring by others.

3. A ssume approximately 16 ft planting width.

5. A ssume that after a one year establishment period, plants will be drought tolerant native plants with no irrigation requirements.

STRATEGY PH-2 - BIORETENTION WITH LANDSCAPING
2 0 3 0 TOTAL C OS T WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS ( 3 ) 2024 CONST RUCT ION COST
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates
Strategy PH-2
Appendix F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates | 151

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Richmond Parkway Transportation Plan
Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Costs
Strategy S-1
L ocation
I80 WB ramp/Blume Dr/Richmond Parkway
I580 WB ramps & Castro Street
I80 HOV off-ramp & Richmond Pkwy
I80 EB ramp & Richmond Pkwy/Fitzgerald Dr
Mills Street & Castro Street
Castro Street & Richmond Lane
Hensley Street & Castro Street
W Ohio Avenue/Garrard Street & Richmond Pa
MacDonald Avenue & Richmond Parkway
W Barrett Avenue & Richmond Parkway
Hensley Street & Richmond Parkway
Gertrude Avenue & Richmond Parkway
Pittsburgh Avenue & Richmond Parkway
Parr Boulevard & Richmond Parkway
Goodrick Ave & Richmond Parkway
Hilltop Drive & Richmond Parkway
Atlas Rd & Richmond Parkway
San Pablo Ave & Richmond Parkway
Lakeside Drive & Richmond Parkway
Bella Vista & Richmond Parkway
Canal Blvd & I580 WB ramps
Canal Blvd & I580 EB ramps
Castro St/Standard Ave & Chevron Wy I580 EB
TOTAL
Proposed High
Vis Crosswalks
(per Crossing)
Proposed
Directional
Ramps (per
Each)
Proposed
PPB (per
Intersection)
Proposed
Reflective
Backplates
(per
Proposed
Bike Video
Detection
(per
Proposed
Ped Scale
Lighting (per
Intersection)
Proposed
Ped
Countdown
Signal (per
Straighten
Crosswalks
(per
Crosswalk)
Tighten
Curb Radii
(per corner)
Raised
Crosswalks
(per Each)
Porkchop
Island with
Raised
Crosswalk
Major Bike
Intersection
Improvements
(per
Minor Bike
Intersection
Improvements
(per
Enforce
Right-
Turn Only
Lane (per
NRTOR
(per
Intersect
ion)
Protected Right-
Turn Phase (per
Intersection)
Median Refuge
Islands (per
Intersection) TOTAL
$47,374 $109,324 $39,858 $0 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $49,218 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $84,270 $728,619 $47,374 $127,544 $19,929 $0 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $271,031 $49,218 $91,354 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $84,270 $1,011,858 $0 $0 $0 $14,576 $0 $0 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,110 $0 $0 $37,352 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $49,218 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $347,581 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $582,376 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $582,376 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $271,031 $0 $182,707 $0 $120,028 $0 $9,110 $0 $84,270 $1,249,523 $23,687 $127,544 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,110 $77,438 $0 $607,087 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $135,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $775,400 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $182,707 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $842,520 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $542,063 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $1,087,997 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $365,414 $0 $0 $120,711 $0 $77,438 $84,270 $1,196,615 $47,374 $109,324 $0 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,711 $9,110 $0 $84,270 $706,504 $47,374 $127,544 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $365,414 $0 $0 $120,711 $0 $0 $84,270 $1,114,622 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,751,765 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,186,668 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,751,765 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $3,391,650 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $365,414 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $891,420 $47,374 $182,206 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,751,765 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $3,428,091 $35,530 $109,324 $19,929 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $0 $0 $271,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $84,270 $819,357 $35,530 $109,324 $19,929 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $271,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $84,270 $755,585 $0 $163,985 $19,929 $0 $113,879 $207,259 $6,833 $0 $271,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $782,916 $0 $163,985 $0 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $271,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $784,397 $11,843 $36,441 $19,929 $0 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $389,351 $25,299,864

SUBTOTALS
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates

QUANTITY UNIT C OS T TOTAL C OS T
Speed Feedback Signs 4 $5,000 $20,000
Speed Limit Signs 6 $700 $4,200

GRAND TOTAL
24,200$
55,117$
A ssumptions

2. See G eneral Cost F actors below.

General Cost Factors
M obilization, Demobilization, Environmental Protection, T raffic Control 1.20 Engineering, Design, and Construction M anagement1.20
Inflation 1.22
Contingency 1.30
TOTAL - Combined Cost Factor2.28
2024 CONST RUCT ION COST
2 0 3 0 TOTAL C OS T WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS ( 3 ) STRATEGY S-2 - SPEED FEEDBACK AND LIMIT SIGNS

1. Speed Feedback Signs will be spaced about 5 miles apart and speed limit signs will be spaced about 3 miles apart.

APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates

QUANTITY UNIT C OS T TOTAL C OS T
Speed Feedback Signs 4 $5,000 $20,000
Speed Limit Signs 6 $700 $4,200

GRAND TOTAL
24,200$
55,117$
A ssumptions

2. See G eneral Cost F actors below.

1. Speed Feedback Signs will be spaced about 5 miles apart and speed limit signs will be spaced about 3 miles apart.

APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates
Strategy S-1
Strategy S-2
152

Richmond Parkway Transportation Plan
Engineer's Estimate of Probable Construction Costs
Strategy S-1
L ocation
I80 WB ramp/Blume Dr/Richmond Parkway
I580 WB ramps & Castro Street
I80 HOV off-ramp & Richmond Pkwy
I80 EB ramp & Richmond Pkwy/Fitzgerald Dr
Mills Street & Castro Street
Castro Street & Richmond Lane
Hensley Street & Castro Street
W Ohio Avenue/Garrard Street & Richmond Pa
MacDonald Avenue & Richmond Parkway
W Barrett Avenue & Richmond Parkway
Hensley Street & Richmond Parkway
Gertrude Avenue & Richmond Parkway
Pittsburgh Avenue & Richmond Parkway
Parr Boulevard & Richmond Parkway
Goodrick Ave & Richmond Parkway
Hilltop Drive & Richmond Parkway
Atlas Rd & Richmond Parkway
San Pablo Ave & Richmond Parkway
Lakeside Drive & Richmond Parkway
Bella Vista & Richmond Parkway
Canal Blvd & I580 WB ramps
Canal Blvd & I580 EB ramps
Castro St/Standard Ave & Chevron Wy I580 EB
TOTAL
Proposed High
Vis Crosswalks
(per Crossing)
Proposed
Directional
Ramps (per
Each)
Proposed
PPB (per
Intersection)
Proposed
Reflective
Backplates
(per
Proposed
Bike Video
Detection
(per
Proposed
Ped Scale
Lighting (per
Intersection)
Proposed
Ped
Countdown
Signal (per
Straighten
Crosswalks
(per
Crosswalk)
Tighten
Curb Radii
(per corner)
Raised
Crosswalks
(per Each)
Porkchop
Island with
Raised
Crosswalk
Major Bike
Intersection
Improvements
(per
Minor Bike
Intersection
Improvements
(per
Enforce
Right-
Turn Only
Lane (per
NRTOR
(per
Intersect
ion)
Protected Right-
Turn Phase (per
Intersection)
Median Refuge
Islands (per
Intersection) TOTAL
$47,374 $109,324 $39,858 $0 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $49,218 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $84,270 $728,619 $47,374 $127,544 $19,929 $0 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $271,031 $49,218 $91,354 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $84,270 $1,011,858 $0 $0 $0 $14,576 $0 $0 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,110 $0 $0 $37,352 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $49,218 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $347,581 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $582,376 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $582,376 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $271,031 $0 $182,707 $0 $120,028 $0 $9,110 $0 $84,270 $1,249,523 $23,687 $127,544 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $9,110 $77,438 $0 $607,087 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $135,516 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $775,400 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $182,707 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $842,520 $47,374 $145,765 $39,858 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $542,063 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $1,087,997 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $365,414 $0 $0 $120,711 $0 $77,438 $84,270 $1,196,615 $47,374 $109,324 $0 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $120,711 $9,110 $0 $84,270 $706,504 $47,374 $127,544 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $365,414 $0 $0 $120,711 $0 $0 $84,270 $1,114,622 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,751,765 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,186,668 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,751,765 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $3,391,650 $47,374 $145,765 $19,929 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $365,414 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $891,420 $47,374 $182,206 $19,929 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,751,765 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $0 $3,428,091 $35,530 $109,324 $19,929 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $0 $0 $271,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $77,438 $84,270 $819,357 $35,530 $109,324 $19,929 $14,576 $0 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $271,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $84,270 $755,585 $0 $163,985 $19,929 $0 $113,879 $207,259 $6,833 $0 $271,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $782,916 $0 $163,985 $0 $14,576 $113,879 $207,259 $13,665 $0 $271,031 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $784,397 $11,843 $36,441 $19,929 $0 $113,879 $207,259 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $389,351 $25,299,864

SUBTOTALS
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates
Appendix F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates | 153

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

DESCRIPTION QUANTITYAC AB C OS T/ LF C OS T/ MILE
RO ADWAY ( 8 " AC / 2 3 " AB) 48 2.64 7.084 $1,157 $6,110,016 BIKEWAY ( 3 " AC / 1 2 " AB) 12 0.2475 0.924 $134 $710,028 $170 $100

DESCRIPTION QUANTITYCOST /SF C OS T/ LF C OS T/ MILE
S IDEWALK ( LF ) 12 $30 $360 $1,900,800
BIORETENTION BASIN (4') 4 $180 $720 $3,258,514
P LANTER S TRIP ( 4 ' ) 4 $25 $100 $603,429
CENTER PLANTER/ MEDIAN 14 $25 $350 $1,848,000

DESCRIPTION QUANTITY C OS T/ LF C OS T/ MILE
RUMBLE STRIPS 4 $2 P ER LF $8 $42,240
LANE STRIPING 6 $1 P ER LF $6 $31,680
S D INLET RELOC ATIONS 1 $10,000 PER EACH $15 $80,000
SD CX N TO EX ISTING (15" RCP) 6 $530 P ER LF $5 $25,440 HARDS C AP E BUFFER ( 2 ' , AT EXIS TING
BRIDGE) 2 $100 P ER LF $200 $1,056,000
$366 $1,932,480
$834 $4,401,367
$988 $4,751,331
$2,251 $10,821,509
$1,253 $6,381,073
$2,853 $14,533,368
$206 $1,087,680
$469 $2,477,272
$2,856 $14,610,147
$6,504 $33,275,694
STRATEGY WB-1- ROADWAY TYPICAL SECTION COSTS
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS * , 2 0 3 0
TOTAL, 2 0 2 4 C ONS TRUC TION C OS T

C AS ES

TONS / LF

NEW SIDEWALKS

SECTION COMPONENTS
TOTAL, 2 0 2 4 C ONS TRUC TION C OS T
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS * , 2 0 3 0

NEW BIKEWAYS WITH P LANTERS
ONE SIDE FULL SECTION: TWO NEW LANES, BIKE LANE

WITH P LANTER, AND S IDEWALK
C OS T ( $ / TON)
COST

P AVEMENT

CONCRETE WITH GREEN ELEMENTS

OTHER ASSUMED COSTS
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS * , 2 0 3 0
TOTAL, 2 0 2 4 C ONS TRUC TION C OS T
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS * , 2 0 3 0
TOTAL, 2 0 2 4 C ONS TRUC TION C OS TFULL SECTION - ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION INCLUDING MEDIAN
SPECIAL CASE: EXISTING BRIDGE. HARDSCAPE SHARED

USE PATH BUFFER AND RESTRIPE
TOTAL, 2 0 2 4 C ONS TRUC TION C OS T
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS * , 2 0 3 0
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL COST FACTORS*, 2030 RANGE: $3M - $33M PER MILE (Median of $18M) APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates

1.20 M obilization, Demobilization, Environmental Protection, T raffic Control

1.20 Engineering, Design, and Construction M anagement

1.22 Inflation

1.30 Contingency

2.28 TOTAL - Combined Cost Factor
C3 Estimates per mile
75 LF
396000 SF
15840 SF
4526 LF
6034 LF
A ssumptions
Does not take into account ROW acquisitions or agency coordination.

Existing mulitiuse paths will remain and not be replaced.

L F of 4' nominal width of bioretention planter (3.5')
Remaining planter, non bioretention basin
T otal Impervious of Cross Section
T otal Impervious A rea
4% = R equired A rea of T reatment
*General Cost Factors
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates
Strategy WB-1
154

UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS EA 2 8,000$ 16,000$ SIDEWALK SF 200 30$ 6,000$
HIGH VIS CROSSWALK LF 100 40$ 4,000$ BOLLARDS EA 2 2,000$ 4,000$
TRAFFIC SIGNAL RELOCATION EA 1 50,000$ 50,000$ TRAFFIC SIGNAL PED UPGRADES LS 1 27,000$ 27,000$ UTILITY COORDINATION LS 1 50,000$ 50,000$
ASPHALT FOR TRAIL TONS 690 170$ 117,300$ AGGREGATE BASE FOR TRAIL TONS 2590 100$ 259,000$ PLANTER/FLOW THROUGH SF 15400 25$ 385,000$ BIOSWALE SF 1400 100$ 140,000$
WAYFINDING SIGNS EA 10 1,000$ 10,000$
PATH LIGHTING LF 2800 125$ 350,000$
DIRECTIONAL CURB RAMPS EA 2 8,000$ 16,000$ MEDIAN REFUGE ISLAND EA 1 15,000$ 15,000$
SIDEWALK SF 200 30$ 6,000$
HIGH VIS CROSSWALK LF 100 40$ 4,000$ BOLLARDS EA 2 2,000$ 4,000$
TRAFFIC SIGNAL PED UPGRADES LS 1 27,000$ 27,000$ 1,490,300$
3,394,269$
Assumptions

UNIT QUANTITY UNIT COST TOTAL COST
ASPHALT FOR TRAIL TONS 1210 170$ 205,700$ AGGREGATE BASE FOR TRAIL TONS 4530 100$ 453,000$ PLANTER SF 29400 25$ 735,000$
PATH LIGHTING LF 4900 125$ 612,500$
2,006,200$
4,569,269$
7,963,538$ TOTAL FOR REALIGNMENT AND WIDENING

BAY TRAIL REALIGNMENT (GERTRUDE TO HENSLEY)

1. Pavement section is 3" hot mix asphalt over 12" aggregate base.

2. Trail is 12' wide and planter is 6' wide and does not require new curb.

4. Trail length is approximately 2,800 feet.

HENSLEY ST INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
TRAIL
TOTAL, 2024 CONSTRUCTION COST

GERTRUDE AVE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
WIDEN PATH TO 12' (PARR TO GERTRUDE)
TOTAL, 2024 CONSTRUCTION COST
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL COST FACTORS*, 2030
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL COST FACTORS*, 2030

3. No right of way acquisition.

4. Utility coordination is with West County Waste Water (facility on SW corner of Gertrude/Richmond

5. Path lighting does not necessarily illuminate the roadway.

BAY TRAIL REALIGNMENT (GERTRUDE TO HENSLEY)

1. Pavement section is 3" hot mix asphalt over 12" aggregate base.

2. Trail is 12' wide and planter is 6' wide and does not require new curb.

4. Trail length is approximately 2,800 feet.

HENSLEY ST INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
TRAIL
TOTAL, 2024 CONSTRUCTION COST

GERTRUDE AVE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
WIDEN PATH TO 12' (PARR TO GERTRUDE)
TOTAL, 2024 CONSTRUCTION COST
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL COST FACTORS*, 2030
TOTAL, WITH GENERAL COST FACTORS*, 2030

3. No right of way acquisition.

4. Utility coordination is with West County Waste Water (facility on SW corner of Gertrude/Richmond

5. Path lighting does not necessarily illuminate the roadway.

Assumptions
Does not take into account ROW acquisitions or agency coordination.

No work will be performed on bridges.

Existing mulitiuse paths will remain and not be replaced.

C.3 requirements not applicable (<1 contiguous acre).
*General Cost Factors
Mobilization, Demobilization, Environmental Protection, Traffic Control 1.20 Engineering, Design, and Construction Management 1.20
Inflation 1.22
Contingency 1.30
TOTAL - Combined Cost Factor 2.28
Assumptions

1. Pavement section is 3"
hot mix asphalt over 12"
aggregate base.

2. Trail is 12' wide and
planter is 6' wide and does
not require new curb.

3. Trail length is
approximately 2,800 feet.

4. No right of way
acquisition.

5. Utility coordination is
with West County Waste
Water (facility on SW corner
of Gertrude/Richmond
Pkwy) and others.

6. Path lighting does not
necessarily illuminate the
roadway.

Assumptions

1. Does not take into
account ROW acquisitions
or agency coordination.

2. No work will be
performed on bridges.

3. Existing mulitiuse paths
will remain and not be
replaced.

4. C.3 requirements not
applicable (<1 contiguous
acre).

Strategy WB-1 (cont.)
Appendix F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates | 155

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN

UNIT Q UANTITYUNIT C O S TTOTAL C OS T
MILLING (3" DEPTH) SY 510 10$ 5,100$ HO T MIX AS P HALT TO N 130 170$ 22,100$ AGGREGATE BAS E TO N 80 100$ 8,000$
GRADING CY 320 80$ 25,600$
HO T MIX AS P HALT TO N 60 170$ 10,200$ AGGREGATE BAS E TO N 230 100$ 23,000$

CONCRETE (SIDEWALKS, CURB & GUTTER, CURB RAMPS,
M EDIA NS/PED ISL A NDS, M EDIA N NOSES) SF 1700 30$ 51,000$ CURB RAMPS (EACH, EXTRA COSTS, FORMWORK, DWS) EA 5 5,000$ 25,000$ NEW SIGNAL (INCL. TRAFFIC SIGNALS, PED LIGHTED CROSS/STOP SIGNAGE, VIDEO DETECTION, EMS OVERRIDE, ETC.) LUMP SUM 1 800,000$ 800,000$ HIGH VISIBILITY CROSSWALK LF 100 100$ 10,000$ P AVEMENT MARKINGS LUMP SUM 1 10,000$ 10,000$ FENCES LF 30 100$ 3,000$
GATES EA 2 3,000$ 6,000$
REMO VABLE BO LLARDS EA 4 2,000$ 8,000$
ENVIRO NMENTAL P RO TEC TIO N ( ~ 2 % C O NS TRUC TIO N C O S TS )LUMP SUM 1 21,000$ 21,000$ COORDINATION WITH EBRPD LUMP SUM 1 100,000$ 100,000$ 1,122,900$
2,557,488$
A ssumptions

2. T rail section is 3" asphalt ov er 12" aggregate base.

3. See G eneral Cost F actors below.

1. Road section is 4,600 sf of 3" mill and overlay, plus 500 sf of new roadway section, which is 8" asphalt over 23" aggregate base.

GRAND TOTAL
STRATEGY WB-2 - WILDCAT CREEK TRAIL CROSSING
2024 CONST RUCT ION COST
2 0 3 0 TOTAL C OS T WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS ( 3 ) NEW P AVEMENT - ROAD ( 1 )
NEW PAVEMENT - TRAIL CONNECTIONS (2)

CONCRET E

ELECTRIC

STRIPING AND SIGNAGE

HARDS C AP E
OTHER
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates
Strategy WB-2
156

Signal Strategy Component Cost per Intersection Total Cost Signal coordination $ 4,400 $ 101,200 Connected battery backup system $ 13,750 $ 123,750 Central signal management system $ 141,900 $ 1,844,700 Signal hardware and software update $ 30,000 $ 690,000 Emergecy vehicle preemption/transit signal priority $ 200,000 Adaptive traffic signal system $ 45,000 $ 855,000 Connected Vehicle Roadside Unit $ 5,000 $ 115,000 Subtotal - hardware and software $ 3,929,650 Design (15%) $ 589,448
Construction Management (10%) $ 392,965 Contingency (15%) $ 589,448
Grand Total (2024 Estimate) $ 5,501,510
STRATEGY DG - 1 -- SIGNALS COSTS
Strategy DG-1
Appendix F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates | 157

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Strategy M-1 - Pavement
Maintenance Cost Notes:
1) The cost table attached shows the maintenance treatment and costs both in 2024 and 2030 (2030 based on when this project may actually be constructed) and assumes a 4% inflation rate. 2) The treatments shown are based on the projected 2030 pavement condition index (PCI) with an assumed deterioration of 3 PCI points per year.

Richmond Parkway Transportation Plan
Maintenance Cost Strategy M-1 - Pavement
Year StreetID Street Name SectionID From To Area (SY) Current PCI 2030 PCI Treatment PCI After Treatment
2024
Unit Cost
($/SY)
2024 Cost
2030
Unit Cost
($/SY)
2030 Cost
2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 010 N/O CASTRO N/O REDWOOD 2,951 85 67 THIN OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 55.00 $ 162,000 $ 70.00 $ 207,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 020 N/O REDWOOD N/O MILLS 6,490 55 37 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 594,000 $ 116.00 $ 753,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 030 N/O MILLS N/O GENERAL CHEMICAL ENTR 12,280 42 24 RECONSTRUCT SURFACE (AC) 100 $ 148.00 $ 1,817,000 $ 187.00 $ 2,296,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 040 N/O GENERAL CHEMICAL ENTR N/O HENSLEY 7,957 56 38 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 728,000 $ 116.00 $ 923,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 050 N/O HENSLEY 2,277' @ CASTRO MERGE 8,594 55 37 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 786,000 $ 116.00 $ 997,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 060 2,277' @ CASTRO MERGE N/O GERTRUDE 6,773 37 19 RECONSTRUCT SURFACE (AC) 100 $ 148.00 $ 1,002,000 $ 187.00 $ 1,267,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 080 CITY LIMIT @ 1400' W/O GOODRICK AVE W/O GOODRICK AVE 5,444 47 29 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 498,000 $ 116.00 $ 632,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 090 W/O GOODRICK W/O PKWY BRIDGE 8,089 60 42 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 740,000 $ 116.00 $ 938,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 100 W/O PKWY BRIDGE E/O PKWY BRIDGE 9,396 90 72 Do Nonthing - PCC $ - $ - $ - 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 110 E/O PKWY BRIDGE S/O HILLTOP 28,722 59 41 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 2,628,000 $ 116.00 $ 3,332,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 120 S/O HILLTOP S/O ATLAS 9,778 49 31 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 895,000 $ 116.00 $ 1,134,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 130 S/O ATLAS W/O SAN PABLO 7,233 41 23 RECONSTRUCT SURFACE (AC) 100 $ 148.00 $ 1,070,000 $ 187.00 $ 1,353,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 140 W/O SAN PABLO WIDTH CHANGE (630' E/O SAN PABLO) 2,660 91 73 SLURRY SEAL 79 $ 3.50 $ 9,000 $ 4.50 $ 12,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 150 WIDTH CHANGE (630' E/O SAN PABLO) E/O LAKESIDE 2,418 91 73 SLURRY SEAL 79 $ 3.50 $ 8,000 $ 4.50 $ 11,000 2030 RPKYEB RICHMOND PKWY EB 160C E/O LAKESIDE W/O BLUME 17,991 69 51 THIN OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 55.00 $ 990,000 $ 70.00 $ 1,259,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 020C E/O SIERRA RIDGE E/O LAKSIDE DRIVE 10,550 69 51 THIN OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 55.00 $ 580,000 $ 70.00 $ 739,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 040 E/O LAKESIDE DRIVE WIDTH CHANGE (630' E/O SAN PABLO) 2,342 46 28 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 214,000 $ 116.00 $ 272,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 050 WIDTH CHANGE (630' E/O SAN PABLO) W/O SAN PABLO 4,340 57 39 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 397,000 $ 116.00 $ 503,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 060 W/O SAN PABLO S/O ATLAS 7,233 50 32 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 662,000 $ 116.00 $ 839,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 070 S/O ATLAS S/O HILLTOP 8,800 47 29 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 805,000 $ 116.00 $ 1,021,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 080 S/O HILLTOP E/O PKWY BRIDGE 24,288 62 44 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 2,222,000 $ 116.00 $ 2,817,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 090 E/O PKWY BRIDGE W/O PKWY BRIDGE 9,396 90 72 Do Nonthing - PCC $ - $ - $ - 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 100 W/O PKWY BRIDGE W/O GOODRICK 8,089 44 26 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 740,000 $ 116.00 $ 938,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 110 W/O GOODRICK AVE CITY LIMIT @ 1500' W/O GOODRICK AVE 5,833 36 18 RECONSTRUCT SURFACE (AC) 100 $ 148.00 $ 863,000 $ 187.00 $ 1,091,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 140 N/O GERTRUDE 1,350' @ ROAD SPLIT 6,300 89 71 SLURRY SEAL 77 $ 3.50 $ 22,000 $ 4.50 $ 28,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 145 1,350' @ ROAD SPLIT N/O HENSLEY 8,178 50 32 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 748,000 $ 116.00 $ 949,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 150 N/O HENSLEY END PCC 3,025 82 64 THIN OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 55.00 $ 166,000 $ 70.00 $ 212,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 155 END PCC PENNSYLVANIA 2,383 92 74 SLURRY SEAL 80 $ 3.50 $ 8,000 $ 4.50 $ 11,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 160 N/O GENERAL CHEMICAL ENTR N/O MILLS 11,169 20 2 RECONSTRUCT SURFACE (AC) 100 $ 148.00 $ 1,653,000 $ 187.00 $ 2,089,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 170 N/O MILLS 400 N/O REDWOOD 5,067 27 9 RECONSTRUCT SURFACE (AC) 100 $ 148.00 $ 750,000 $ 187.00 $ 948,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 180 400 N/O REDWOOD N/O REDWOOD 3,300 42 24 RECONSTRUCT SURFACE (AC) 100 $ 148.00 $ 488,000 $ 187.00 $ 617,000 2030 RPKYWB RICHMOND PKWY WB 190 N/O REDWOOD N/O CASTRO 3,504 3 0 RECONSTRUCT SURFACE (AC) 100 $ 148.00 $ 519,000 $ 187.00 $ 655,000 2030 GARRNB RICHMOND PKWY EB 010 W OHIO MACDONALD 8,462 86 68 THIN OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 55.00 $ 465,000 $ 70.00 $ 592,000 2030 GARRNB RICHMOND PKWY EB 020 MACDONALD BARRETT 3,911 70 52 THIN OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 55.00 $ 215,000 $ 70.00 $ 274,000 2030 GARRNB RICHMOND PKWY EB 040 S/O BARRETT N/O PENNSYLVANIA / COP 7,076 61 43 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 647,000 $ 116.00 $ 821,000 2030 GARRSB RICHMOND PKWY WB 010 N/O PENNSYLVANIA S/O BARRETT 7,076 64 46 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 647,000 $ 116.00 $ 821,000 2030 GARRSB RICHMOND PKWY WB 020 BARRETT N/O MACDONALD 3,911 61 43 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 358,000 $ 116.00 $ 454,000 2030 GARRSB RICHMOND PKWY WB 040 MACDONALD W OHIO 8,462 52 34 THICK MILL AND OVERLAY W/DIGOUTS 100 $ 91.50 $ 774,000 $ 116.00 $ 982,000 2024 Total 25,870,000$ 2030 Total 32,787,000$
NCE 1/1 8/8/2024
Maintenance Cost Notes:
1) The cost table attached shows the maintenance treatment and costs both in 2024 and 2030 (2030 based on when this project may actually be constructed) and assumes a 4% inflation rate. 2) The treatments shown are based on the projected 2030 pavement condition index (PCI) with an assumed deterioration of 3 PCI points per year. 3) Total costs include the section of Castro Street which was the former Richmond Parkway and is labeled as part of the Richmond Parkway in the City’s StreetSaver database. The sections of Castro are at the end of the spreadsheet and are separated by a darker line. If you wanted to take out these sections from the 2030 costs would be about $4 million less.

APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates
158

APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates
3) Total costs include the section of Castro Street which was the former Richmond Parkway and is labeled as part of the Richmond Parkway in the City’s StreetSaver database. The sections of Castro are at the end of the spreadsheet and are separated by a darker line. If you wanted to take out these sections from the 2030 costs would be about $4 million less. Appendix F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates | 159

RICHMOND PARKWAY TRANSPORTATION PLAN
Public Works Division Annual Cost
Street sweeping Streets Maintenance Division $160,431.84 Weed abatement, removal of illegal dumping, graffiti abatement, encampments (West Ohio to Giant Road) Abatement Division, Parkway $102,831.00 Weed abatement, removal of illegal dumping, encampments (Castro – Hensley to Pt. Richmond, Parkway – Giant Road to HWY I-80, Parkway – West Ohio to Pt. Richmond). Abatement Division, Parkway $219,792.40 GRAND TOTAL (2024 Estimate) $483,055.24
STRATEGY M-1 -- MAINTENANCE (GENERAL)
Strategy M-1 - General
160

UNIT Q UANTITYUNIT C O S T TOTAL C OS T
RETAINING WALLS LF 250 600$ 150,000$
GRADING CY 370 80$ 29,600$
HO T MIX AS P HALT TO N 40 170$ 6,800$ AGGREGATE BAS E TO N 150 100$ 15,000$

CONCRETE (SIDEWALKS, CURB & GUTTER, CURB RAMPS,
M EDIA NS/PED ISLA NDS, M EDIA N NOSES) SF 2800 40$ 112,000$ CONCRETE BUS PAD SF 1500 60$ 90,000$
CURB RAMPS (EACH, EXTRA COSTS, FORMWORK, DWS) EA 2 5,000$ 10,000$ PAVEMENT MARK INGS AND SIGNAGE LUMP SUM 1 40,000$ 40,000$ DEMOLITION (GENERAL) SF 6600 10$ 66,000$
BUS SHELTERS, BENCHES, ETC. LUMP SUM 1 50,000$ 50,000$ 569,400$
1,296,851$
A ssumptions

1. See General Cost Factors below.

3. T rail section is 3" asphalt over 12" aggregate base.

4. Demolition (General) includes work to clear the site and remove roadway material and ex isting concrete improv ements.

BIKE LOCKER PRODUCTS & SERVICES UNIT Q UANTITYUNIT C O S T TOTAL C OS T EQUIPMENT 4 9,880$ 39,520$
ACCESS HUB EQUIPMENT AND SERVICE 2 1,995$ 3,990$ DELIVERY 1 1,000$ 1,000$
INS TALLATIO N L OCK ER SPA CE 7 375$ 2,625$ ANNUAL S ERVIC E AND O P ERATIO NS AGREEMENT YE AR 5 840$ 4,200$ 51,335$
4,117$
55,452$
1,352,303$
G eneral Cost F actors
M obilization, Demobilization, Environmental Protection, T raffic Control 1.20 Engineering, Design, and Construction M anagement 1.20
Inflation 1.22
TOTAL COST FOR STRATEGY T-1 - TRANSIT STRATEGY
STRATEGY T-1 - TRANSIT STRATEGY (Bike lockers)
STRATEGY T-1 - TRANSIT STRATEGY (Bus/Walking Improvements) 2024 CONST RUCT ION COST
2 0 3 0 TOTAL C OS T WITH GENERAL C OS T FAC TORS ( 3 )

NEW PAVEMENT - SHARED USE PATH

CONCRET E

STRIPING AND SIGNAGE
OTHER

S TRUC TURAL - RETAINING S TRUC TURES

S UBTO TAL
2024 BIKE LOCKER INSTALLATION COST
TAX

2. A ssume the retaining structures will be less than 4' tall.

GRAND TOTAL

1.30Contingency
TO TAL - Combined Cost Factor 2.28
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates

UNIT Q UANTITYUNIT C O S T TOTAL C OS T
RETAINING WALLS LF 250 600$ 150,000$
GRADING CY 370 80$ 29,600$
HO T MIX AS P HALT TO N 40 170$ 6,800$ AGGREGATE BAS E TO N 150 100$ 15,000$

1. See General Cost Factors below.

3. T rail section is 3" asphalt over 12" aggregate base.

4. Demolition (General) includes work to clear the site and remove roadway material and ex isting concrete improv ements.

NEW PAVEMENT - SHARED USE PATH

CONCRET E

STRIPING AND SIGNAGE
OTHER

S TRUC TURAL - RETAINING S TRUC TURES

S UBTO TAL
2024 BIKE LOCKER INSTALLATION COST
TAX

2. A ssume the retaining structures will be less than 4' tall.

GRAND TOTAL

1.30Contingency
TO TAL - Combined Cost Factor 2.28
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates

UNIT Q UANTITYUNIT C O S T TOTAL C OS T
RETAINING WALLS LF 250 600$ 150,000$
GRADING CY 370 80$ 29,600$
HO T MIX AS P HALT TO N 40 170$ 6,800$ AGGREGATE BAS E TO N 150 100$ 15,000$

1. See General Cost Factors below.

3. T rail section is 3" asphalt over 12" aggregate base.

4. Demolition (General) includes work to clear the site and remove roadway material and ex isting concrete improv ements.

NEW PAVEMENT - SHARED USE PATH

CONCRET E

STRIPING AND SIGNAGE
OTHER

S TRUC TURAL - RETAINING S TRUC TURES

S UBTO TAL
2024 BIKE LOCKER INSTALLATION COST
TAX

2. A ssume the retaining structures will be less than 4' tall.

GRAND TOTAL

1.30Contingency
TO TAL - Combined Cost Factor 2.28
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates

UNIT Q UANTITYUNIT C O S T TOTAL C OS T
RETAINING WALLS LF 250 600$ 150,000$
GRADING CY 370 80$ 29,600$
HO T MIX AS P HALT TO N 40 170$ 6,800$ AGGREGATE BAS E TO N 150 100$ 15,000$

1. See General Cost Factors below.

3. T rail section is 3" asphalt over 12" aggregate base.

4. Demolition (General) includes work to clear the site and remove roadway material and ex isting concrete improv ements.

NEW PAVEMENT - SHARED USE PATH

CONCRET E

STRIPING AND SIGNAGE
OTHER

S TRUC TURAL - RETAINING S TRUC TURES

S UBTO TAL
2024 BIKE LOCKER INSTALLATION COST
TAX

2. A ssume the retaining structures will be less than 4' tall.

GRAND TOTAL

1.30Contingency
TO TAL - Combined Cost Factor 2.28
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates

UNIT Q UANTITYUNIT C O S T TOTAL C OS T
RETAINING WALLS LF 250 600$ 150,000$
GRADING CY 370 80$ 29,600$
HO T MIX AS P HALT TO N 40 170$ 6,800$ AGGREGATE BAS E TO N 150 100$ 15,000$

1. See General Cost Factors below.

3. T rail section is 3" asphalt over 12" aggregate base.

4. Demolition (General) includes work to clear the site and remove roadway material and ex isting concrete improv ements.

NEW PAVEMENT - SHARED USE PATH

CONCRET E

STRIPING AND SIGNAGE
OTHER

S TRUC TURAL - RETAINING S TRUC TURES

S UBTO TAL
2024 BIKE LOCKER INSTALLATION COST
TAX

2. A ssume the retaining structures will be less than 4' tall.

GRAND TOTAL

1.30Contingency
TO TAL - Combined Cost Factor 2.28
APPENDIX F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates
Strategy T-1
Appendix F: Priority Strategy Cost Estimates | 161

Richmond City CouncilApril 22, 2025

Richmond City Council
April 22, 2025