Union City City Council
October 8, 2024

AGENDA

CITY OF UNION CITY/

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI, Mayor
JEFF WANG, Vice Mayor (District 3)
GARY SINGH,Councilmember (District 1)
JAIME PATIÑO,Councilmember (District 2)
SCOTT SAKAKIHARA, Councilmember (District 4)
Tuesday, October 8, 2024
7:00 PM
City Hall - Council Chamber
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road Union City, CA 94587
PLEASE NOTE: Vice Mayor Wang will participate in the meeting via teleconference from the site listed below. The meeting agenda will be posted on the teleconference site, which is accessible to the public.

Anyone wishing to address the Council from the teleconference site will be provided with an opportunity to do so.

Location: Diaoyutai State Guesthouse, 2 Fucheng Rd, Haidian District, Beijing, China, 100037

1. CALL TO ORDER

1.1. Pledge of Allegiance

1.2. Roll Call

2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - None

3. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

3.1. Proclamation Proclaiming October 2024 As Cybersecurity Awareness Month

3.2. Proclamation Proclaiming October 2024 As Hindu American City Council/RSA Agenda 1 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Awareness and Appreciation Month

3.3. Proclamation Proclaiming October 2024 As Filipino American History Month

3.4. Proclamation Proclaiming October 2024 As Domestic Awareness Violence Month

4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
An individual speaker shall have three minutes to address the Council on nonagenda items under the Oral Communications section of the agenda. The Chair may, in their discretion, lower the time limit to less than three minutes based on the number of speakers and/or business to be conducted by the City Council.

Members of the public who wish to speak to the Council under the first Oral Communications section are requested to complete a speaker card, giving their name and city of residence. If a speaker wants further notification from the City, the speaker may include a mailing address. Neither a speaker card or identification of name, city of residence or mailing address are required to provide public comment but are requested for record keeping purposes.

4.1. Written Public Comments

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed on the Consent Calendar are considered routine in nature and will be enacted by one motion. If discussion is required on a specific item, it will be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered separately.

5.2. Approve The Minutes Of The September 24, 2024 City Council Special Meeting

5.3. Approve The Minutes Of The September 24, 2024 City Council Regular Meeting

5.4. Adopt A Resolution Authorizing The City Manager To Execute A First Amendment To The Software As A Service (Saas) Agreement With Granicus For The OneMeeting Agenda And Live Meeting
Management Solution And Increase The Not To Exceed
Compensation To $256,117.64

5.5. Adopt A Resolution Rejecting All Bids For The Bus Shelter Installation Project, City Project No. 24-19

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS

6.1. Hold A Public Hearing And Adopt A Resolution Approving The Closure And Vacation Of The I Street Railroad Crossing As Part Of The At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing Project At BART, City Project No. 14-14

7. CITY MANAGER REPORTS

7.1. Adopt Resolutions Of The City Council (1) Declaring Its Intention To Authorize The Annexation Of Territory To Community Facilities District No. 2006-1 (Public Services), And (2) Adopting The Boundary Map Showing Territory Proposed To Be Annexed In The Future To City Council/RSA Agenda 2 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Community Facilities District No. 2006-1 (Public Services). These Resolutions Begin The Annexation Process Of The Turk Island Subdivision Project

7.2. Adopt Resolutions Of The City Council (1) Declaring Its Intention To Authorize The Annexation Of Territory To Community Facilities District No. 2006-1 (Public Services), And (2) Adopting The Boundary Map Showing Territory Proposed To Be Annexed In The Future To Community Facilities District No. 2006-1 (Public Services). These Resolutions Begin The Annexation Process Of The Florence Street Subdivision Project

8. SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY - None

9. AUTHORITIES AND AGENCIES - None

10. CITY COMMISSION / COMMITTEE REPORTS - None

11. ITEMS REFERRED BY COUNCIL

12. GOOD OF THE ORDER

13. CLOSED SESSION - None

14. ADJOURNMENT

MEETING INFORMATION
Unless otherwise provided, the City Council's regular meetings are held in person on the second and fourth Tuesday of each month at 7:00 p.m. inside the Council Chamber at City Hall, 34009 Alvarado-Niles Road, Union City CA 94587. The City continues to offer an opportunity to observe Council meetings via Zoom at: https://unioncityorg.zoom.us/j/81719037355 Passcode: u8SH9cH^ Meetings are broadcast live through UCTV Channel 15 and via live stream at: https://unioncity.org/199/City-MeetingsVideo Members of the public will not have the ability to provide comment via Zoom except under limited circumstances specified below. The ability to observe remotely as identified above is predicated on the technology being available and functioning without technical difficulties. Should the remote platform(s) not be available, or become non-functioning, or should the City Council otherwise encounter technical difficulties that makes the platform(s) unavailable, the City Council will proceed with the items of business in person unless otherwise prohibited by law.

Any writings or documents provided to a majority of City Council members relating to each item of business referred to on this agenda are available for review on the City's website at www.unioncity.org or during regular business hours in the Office of the City Clerk located at 34009 Alvarado-Niles Road, Union City CA 94587.

In Compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, you should contact the Office of the City Clerk at (510) 675-5448. Notification 36 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City City Council/RSA Agenda 3 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to this meeting. The City also provides closed captioning of all its Regular City Council Meetings for the hearing impair.

ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL
In Person Public Comment: Members of the public may address the Council on a matter on the agenda or during the Public Input portion of the meeting. Members who wish to speak are requested to complete a speaker card, giving their name and city of residence. If a speaker wants further notification from the City, the speaker may include a mailing address.

Neither a speaker card nor identification of name, city of residence or mailing address are required to provide public comment but are requested for record keeping purposes.

Written Comment: To provide written comment on an item on the agenda or to address the Council about an issue during Public Comment, you may send an email to [email protected]. Please include the phrase "public comment" in the subject line and note the agenda item number that you want to address. Written comments will be e-mailed to the City Council and made publicly available.

Public Comment via Zoom: As indicated above, the public cannot address the Council via Zoom unless the City is required to provide such opportunity pursuant to AB 2449. In the event that members of the public are allow to participate via Zoom pursuant to AB 2449, the Mayor will make an announcement at the beginning of the meeting. Raise your virtual hand to notify the host that you would like to speak during the item that you wish to speak on.

CITY COUNCIL NORMS AND GUIDELINES (Resolution No. 6129-23; Adopted May 23, 2023) The City Council of the City of Union City comply with the following norms:

1. We conduct ourselves in a professional manner, treat everyone with respect, and act with high integrity, always putting the interests of the City of Union City ahead of self-interests in accordance with our code of ethics.

2. We respect the Council-Manager form of government, and do not interfere with the City Manager's role or any professional duties of City staff.

3. We recognize that matters of confidential nature are to be kept private and undisclosed.

4. We respect each other's opinions and are supportive of each other's work advocating for the City, and we ensure that all voices are heard. We do not criticize others for having a different point of view, and we agree to disagree respectfully.

5. We understand that the City Council acts as a body, all members are equal, and policy direction is only given by a majority vote of the City Council. Once a decision is made, all members of the City Council must respect the City Council's direction.

6. We will be prepared for City Council meetings and ask our questions of the City Manager in advance so we can avoid surprising City staff at meetings.

City Council/RSA Agenda 4 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

7. We do not criticize City staff publicly or to others and will refrain from directing them. Instead, we will take our concerns and questions privately to the City Manager.

8. We will govern on an at-large basis, although elected by districts. We will maintain a citywide perspective and consider the needs and interests of the entire community.

9. We will continue to allocate resources based on long-term strategic priorities and efforts, with consideration of citywide service levels and financial capacity.

10. We understand customer service is the priority and each member of the City Council will help constituents regardless of the district in which they reside or from which a Councilmember themselves is elected.

11. We recognize the significant importance of attendance and participation at City Council meetings in proceeding with City business. All members of the City Council should endeavor to miss no more than two regular meetings per calendar year absent extraordinary circumstances. Members of the City Council should, absent unforeseen circumstances, provide a minimum of sixty days' notice to the City Council of planned absences during the Good of the Order or Items Referred by Council portion of the City Council agenda, as appropriate.

May these Council Norms be administered and enforced in the following manner:

1. Councilmembers have the primary responsibility to assure that ethical standards are understood and met by the Council, and that the public can continue to have full confidence in the integrity of government.

2. The Mayor and the Council have the responsibility to intervene when action of its members are in violation of Council Norms.

3. The City Council can review and revise the Council Norms as needed.

4. During City Council discussions, deliberations, and proceedings, the Mayor is designated with the primary responsibility to ensure that Councilmembers adhere to the Council Norms.

CERTIFICATION OF MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA POSTING
This notice/agenda was posted at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting date, in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act, on the City's Website and on the bulletin board of City Hall.

City Council/RSA Agenda 5 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Proclamation Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 6 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

CITY OF UNION CITY

PROCLAMATION

Recognizing October 2024 as Cybersecurity Awareness Month

WHEREAS, Cybersecurity Awareness Month was launched by the National Cyber Security Alliance & the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in October 2004 and is now recognized by thousands of organizations, including federal, state, and local governments, and businesses; and WHEREAS, The City of Union City has a vital role in identifying, protecting, and responding to cyber threats that may have a significant impact on our residents, collective security, and privacy; and WHEREAS, Maintaining the security of cyberspace and being Cyber-Secure are shared responsibilities in which each of us has a critical role to play by being aware of computer security essentials that will improve the security of the City of Union City’s information infrastructure, digital economy; and community; and
WHEREAS, The community’s educational system of colleges, along with high, middle, and elementary schools, have a vital role in offering students cybersecurity programs to foster career planning and opportunities; and
WHEREAS, the City of Union City will continue to invest in cybersecurity protections to maintain its reliable and secure operations.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Union City does hereby proclaim October 2024 as “Cybersecurity Awareness Month” and calls upon all employees, residents, and businesses to be educated about cybersecurity and make our community Cyber-Secure.

DATED: October 8, 2024
__________________________________
CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI, Mayor
__________________________________
JEFF WANG, Vice Mayor
__________________________________
JAIME PATIÑO, Councilmember
__________________________________
SCOTT SAKAKIHARA, Councilmember
__________________________________
GARY SINGH, Councilmember
City Council/RSA Agenda 7 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Proclamation Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 8 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

CITY OF UNION CITY

PROCLAMATION

Recognizing October 2024 as Hindu American Awareness and Appreciation Month

WHEREAS, Union City is home to a vibrant Hindu American community, which contributes to the city’s diversity through its rich cultural, ethnic, and religious heritage; and WHEREAS, nearly 4 million Hindu Americans live across the United States, including many in Union City, where they have enriched the community through the arts, philosophy, medicine, yoga, and community service; and
WHEREAS, Hindu Americans promote values of tolerance, pluralism, and nonviolence, and their contributions in business, education, and public service have significantly benefited Union City; and WHEREAS, Hindu Americans have made significant contributions to the social, economic, and cultural fabric of Union City, particularly through the philosophies of Vedanta, Ayurvedic medicine, classical Indian art, dance, music, yoga, meditation, and community service; and WHEREAS, Hindu Americans celebrate Diwali and other important festivals that bring people together and promote unity and goodwill while engaging in charitable and public service efforts in Union City.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Carol Dutra-Vernaci, Mayor of the City of Union City, along with the entire City Council, do hereby proclaim October 2024 as Hindu American Awareness and Appreciation Month in Union City and encourage all residents to recognize and celebrate the contributions of Hindu Americans to our community.

DATED: October 8, 2024
__________________________________
CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI, Mayor
__________________________________
JEFF WANG, Vice Mayor
__________________________________
JAIME PATIÑO, Councilmember
__________________________________
SCOTT SAKAKIHARA, Councilmember
__________________________________
GARY SINGH, Councilmember
City Council/RSA Agenda 9 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Proclamation Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 10 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

CITY OF UNION CITY

PROCLAMATION

Recognizing October 2024 as Filipino American History Month

WHEREAS, October is designated as Filipino American History Month to recognize and honor the history, culture, and contributions of Filipino Americans throughout the United States and in California, which is home to over 1.6 million Filipino Americans; and WHEREAS, Filipino Americans have a long and rich history in the United States, dating back to 1587 when the first Filipinos arrived in Morro Bay, California, making them one of the earliest Asian communities in North America; and
WHEREAS, Filipino Americans have played a pivotal role in the labor movement, exemplified by the contributions of Modesto "Larry" Dulay Itliong, a leader in organizing farmworkers, and the Delano Grape Strike of 1965, which shaped labor rights for all workers in the United States; and WHEREAS, the Filipino-American community has significantly contributed to the growth and prosperity of Union City through their achievements in education, business, politics, healthcare, the arts, and public service; and
WHEREAS, Union City is proud to celebrate the rich heritage and enduring legacy of Filipino Americans, who continue to strengthen and enrich the diverse cultural fabric of our community.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Carol Dutra-Vernaci, Mayor of the City of Union City, along with the entire City Council, do hereby proclaim October 2024 as Filipino American History Month in Union City and encourage all residents to join us in recognizing the achievements and contributions of Filipino Americans to our city, state, and nation.

DATED: October 8, 2024
__________________________________
CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI, Mayor
__________________________________
JEFF WANG, Vice Mayor
__________________________________
JAIME PATIÑO, Councilmember
__________________________________
SCOTT SAKAKIHARA, Councilmember
__________________________________
GARY SINGH, Councilmember
City Council/RSA Agenda 11 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Proclamation Attachment
Public Comment - ZakiaAfrin Resolution
City Council/RSA Agenda 12 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

CITY OF UNION CITY

PROCLAMATION

Recognizing October 2024 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month

WHEREAS, October is recognized nationwide as Domestic Violence Awareness Month, aiming to raise awareness of the devastating impact that domestic violence has on individuals, families, and communities; and
WHEREAS, domestic violence affects people of all genders, ages, races, ethnicities, sexual orientations, and socioeconomic backgrounds, with California experiencing some of the highest rates of domestic violence in the nation; and
WHEREAS, 1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men in the United States have experienced severe physical violence by an intimate partner during their lifetime, and the harmful effects of domestic violence are often long-lasting, impacting mental health, economic stability, and overall well-being; and WHEREAS, domestic violence is one of the leading causes of homelessness for families in the United States, and children exposed to domestic violence can suffer from long-term effects including behavioral and emotional problems, which often persist into adulthood; and WHEREAS, Union City stands committed to supporting survivors of domestic violence by providing access to life-saving services, increasing community awareness, and encouraging efforts to prevent future violence through education and the promotion of healthy relationships.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, Carol Dutra-Vernaci, Mayor of the City of Union City, along with the entire City Council, do hereby proclaim October 2024 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month in Union City, and encourage all residents to support survivors, take action to prevent domestic violence, and work together to create a safe and supportive community
DATED: October 8, 2024
__________________________________
CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI, Mayor
__________________________________
JEFF WANG, Vice Mayor
__________________________________
JAIME PATIÑO, Councilmember
__________________________________
SCOTT SAKAKIHARA, Councilmember
__________________________________
GARY SINGH, Councilmember
City Council/RSA Agenda 13 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
1 Good Afternoon/Evening honorable Mayor, council members and the members of the public,
My name is Zakia Afrin. I am a resident of Union City since January 2024.

October is nationally commemorated as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

Today, I stand here as an advocate for victims and survivors of domestic violence to commemorate Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

I represent Maitri, an organization devoted to serving victims and survivors of domestic violence since 1991, and I want to take a few moments to talk about an epidemic that is pervasive in our homes, cities, states, country, and all over the world.
1 in 4 women (24.3%) and 1 in 7 men (13.8%) aged 18 and older in the US have been the victim of severe physical violence by an intimate partner in their lifetime. Intimate partner violence or Domestic Violence is an issue that exists in all communities irrespective of culture, religion, sexual orientation, financial status, and immigration realities. Domestic violence is the third leading cause of homelessness among families in the United States. Research also informs us about the lasting negative impact on children growing up in a household experiencing and witnessing domestic violence.

California has higher rates of domestic violence experienced by both men and women when compared to the national average. There were 103 domestic violence related homicides in California in 2023, of which 74 of the fatalities were female and 29 were male. Domestic violence has a significant economic impact in California; in 2022, the total cost of domestic violence to the state of California was $73.7 billion (about $230 per person in the US.

Last year Maitri provided culturally responsive services to 777 individuals.

Organizations around CA served more than 57, 000 individuals with lifesaving supporting services. The need for a comprehensive plan to address domestic violence in our communities is urgent and we thank the leadership of Union City for providing much needed assistance in many areas as well as request to step up the effort.

I request the City Council and its residents to become partners with us in preventing domestic violence and facilitating effective intervention methods if it happens. Here are few things to consider:

City Council/RSA Agenda 14 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
2 1. Crate a supportive environment for everyone to seek out information and services related to relationship abuse

2. Demand curriculum and practices that uplift healthy relationships at every educational level and professional spaces

3. Enact and Support policies that address an intersectional approach to addressing domestic violence; homelessness, pay equity, reproductive rights, poverty reduction, and reproductive rights, banning child marriages to name a few

4. Support funding for Domestic violence service providers at the Federal, State, County, and city levels

5. Rethink Law Enforcement responses to crises with a special focus on stopping brutality against people of color and training on domestic violence

6. Evaluate and improve Language Access at city facilities

7. Offer training on Cultural responsiveness to various local government employees and agencies

8. Involve non-governmental organizations as thought partners while planning city activities

9. Uplift the voices of minority groups whenever possible as they lack representation in committees and other policy-making spaces.

I thank you for your time.

City Council/RSA Agenda 15 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Public Comment - Crocker-Root, Cheris Attachment
Public Comment - Kennedy, Dana Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 16 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
From: Cheris Crocker-Root
To: Public Comment
Subject: Public Comment - Tuesday 10/8 City Council Meeting Date: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 2:17:56 PM
WARNING: External email. Please verify sender before opening attachments or clicking on links.

Hello,
My name is Cheris Crocker-Root and a resident of Union City and I wanted to support the request to reevaluate the public and resident parking situation and fees for the resdients of the Station Center Apartments at 34800 11th Street, most notably across the parking levels/floors 1-3. It is my understanding that the residents are low income, disabled or in need and the parking restrictions, policy and resident payment was put in place, pre Covid with public, resident and retail customers in mind. Today, its usages has largely changed or has not grown into the use it was proposed for. Is it possible to have the city charges evaluated, along with its intended use versus today’s usage and how it is accommodating or effecting the residence of the building? Further, is it possible to cease from issuing parking tickets to residents during this evaluation period? Do the 5 ADA parking spaces, only provided on the 1st floor accurately and legally, accommodate the usage and make up of the building? I have been recently, helping to take care of a resident, dropping food/items off, taking to and from appointments and otherwise helping with care during post surgery recovery. The loading zone is often full or I don’t feel comfortable leaving my car for the time it takes to unload / load and provide the necessary care.

While this is a temporary experience for myself, I do see how it can impact the residents and trying to cope with ease of access for those who might be in high need or financial hardships needing to cover the cost of the day pass of $6 dollars a day and not having a guaranteed spot (should you need to come and go).

Thank you so much for your consideration.

Cheris Crocker-Root
City Council/RSA Agenda 17 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 18 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 19 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Action Minutes Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 20 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
September 24, 2024 | 5:45 PM Page 1 of 2
City Council
Special Meeting Minutes

MINUTES

CITY OF UNION CITY

CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL MEETING
CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI, Mayor
JEFF WANG, Vice Mayor (District 3)
GARY SINGH, Councilmember (District 1)
JAMIE PATIÑO, Councilmember (District 2)
SCOTT SAKAKIHARA, Councilmember (District 4)
Tuesday, September 24, 2024 | 5:45 PM
City Hall - City Council Conference Room
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road
Union City, CA 94587

1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci called the meeting to order at 5:54 PM.

2. ROLL CALL
Attendee Name Present
Councilmember Patiño
Councilmember Sakakihara
Councilmember Singh
Vice Mayor Wang
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

3. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci opened Public Comment. There being no speakers, Mayor Dutra-Vernaci closed Public Comment.

City Council/RSA Agenda 21 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
September 24, 2024 | 5:45 PM Page 2 of 2
City Council
Special Meeting Minutes

4. CLOSED SESSION

4.1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL—ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Gov. Code § 54956.9(d)(4) (Initiation of Litigation) Agency Designated Representatives:

Number of Potential Cases: One
No reportable action.

4.2. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION
Gov. Code § 54957
Title: City Attorney
No reportable action.

5. REPORT OUT OF CLOSED SESSION
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci reported on the items referenced above and at the September 24, 2024, Regular Meeting.

6. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci adjourned the meeting at 6:32 PM.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Union City. /s/Thai Nam Pham, MMC, CPMC
City Clerk
City Council/RSA Agenda 22 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Action Minutes Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 23 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
September 24, 2024 | 7:00 PM Page 1 of 6
City Council / Successor Agency
Regular Meeting Minutes

MINUTES

CITY OF UNION CITY / SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

REGULAR MEETING
CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI, Mayor
JEFF WANG, Vice Mayor (District 3)
GARY SINGH, Councilmember (District 1)
JAMIE PATIÑO, Councilmember (District 2)
SCOTT SAKAKIHARA, Councilmember (District 4)
Tuesday, September 24, 2024 | 7:00 PM
City Hall - Council Chamber
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road
Union City, CA 94587

1. CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci called the meeting to order at 7:02 PM.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci reported that, during the closed session, the City Council had conducted an evaluation of the City Attorney. The Council acknowledged a seamless transition when the City Attorney's office moved from Meyers Nave to Redwood Public Law, continuing to provide the same exemplary service and dedication to the City.

1.a. Pledge of Allegiance
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci led the Pledge of Allegiance.

1.b. Roll Call
Attendee Name Present
Councilmember Patiño
Councilmember Sakakihara
Councilmember Singh
Vice Mayor Wang
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes

2. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
There was none.

City Council/RSA Agenda 24 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
September 24, 2024 | 7:00 PM Page 2 of 6
City Council / Successor Agency
Regular Meeting Minutes

3. PROCLAMATIONS AND PRESENTATIONS

3.a. Proclamation Commemorating Centro De Servicios 50th Anniversary Mayor Dutra-Vernaci read aloud the proclamation and presented it to Centro De Servicios Executive Director Jaime Jaramillo.

3.b. Proclamation Honoring Union City Transit's 50th Anniversary Mayor Dutra-Vernaci read aloud the proclamation and presented it to Transit Manager Adams, who then gave staff presentation on the item.

3.c. Proclamation Recognizing September As National Suicide Prevention Month
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci read aloud the proclamation and presented it to Union City Youth and Family Services Counselor Baker.

3.d. Presentation of Decoto Road Project, Phase 1 Construction Civil Engineer III Tran provided staff presentation and responded to questions from council members.

3.e. Proclamation Proclaiming September 2024 Childhood Cancer Awareness Month
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci recognized the proclamation and made a brief statement about the item.

4. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci opened Oral Communications. The following individuals spoke on items that were not on the agenda:

Wendy Huang
Craig Roberts
Lama Stella
There being no further speakers, Mayor Dutra-Vernaci closed Oral Communications.

5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion: Approve the Consent Calendar.

RESULT: Pass
MOVER: Councilmember Singh
SECONDER:Vice Mayor Wang
AYES: Councilmembers Patiño, Sakakihara, Singh, Vice Mayor Wang, and Mayor Dutra-Vernaci
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

5.a. Approve The Minutes Of The September 10, 2024 City Council Special Meeting
A motion was made to approve the minutes.

5.b. Approve The Minutes Of The September 10, 2024 City Council Regular Meeting
City Council/RSA Agenda 25 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
September 24, 2024 | 7:00 PM Page 3 of 6
City Council / Successor Agency
Regular Meeting Minutes
A motion was made to approve the minutes.

5.c. Adopt A Resolution Authorizing An Amendment To The Personnel Rules To Revise The Rules Regarding Probationary Periods By Appointment A motion was made to adopt the resolution.

Enactment No.: Resolution No. 6362-24

5.d. Adopt A Resolution Approving A Two-Year Service Agreement With Kroll Associates, Inc., For A Not-To-Exceed Aggregate Sum Of $158,000 And Authorizing The City Manager To Execute The Agreement
A motion was made to adopt the resolution.

Enactment No.: Resolution No. 6363-24

5.e. Adopt A Resolution Authorizing The City Manager To Execute An Agreement With Bay Area Tree Specialists, In The Amount Of $272,200, For The Tree Pruning & Removal Project, City Project No. 25-10, And Approving A Total Project Amount Up To $365,000, Which Includes A Contingency Of $92,800, For Fiscal Year 2024-2025; And Authorizing The City Manager, In Her Sole Discretion, To Exercise The Option To Extend The Agreement For A Second Year, For An Additional Amount Up To $365,000, For Fiscal Year 2025-2026
A motion was made to adopt the resolution.

Enactment Nos.: Resolution No. 6364-24

5.f. Adopt A Resolution Authorizing The City Manager To Execute The Student Transit Pass Program Project Funding Agreement With The Alameda County Transportation Commission, In A Form Approved By The City Attorney
A motion was made to adopt the ordinance.

Enactment No.: Resolution No. 6365-24

5.g. Adopt A Resolution Receiving And Accepting The Audited Financial Statements Of The Measure B Fund, The Measure BB Fund, The Measure F Fund, And The TDA Fund For The Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023 A motion was made to adopt the ordinance.

Enactment No.: Resolution No. 6366-24

6. PUBLIC HEARINGS

6.a. Hold A Public Hearing and Adopt A Resolution Approving The 2023-2024 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consolidated Annual Performance And Evaluation Report (CAPER) And Authorizing The City Manager To Submit The 2023-2024 CDBG CAPER To The U.S. Department Of Housing And Urban Development
Housing & Community Development Manager Gomez provided staff presentation and responded to questions from council members.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci opened the Public Hearing at 7:58 PM. There being no speakers, Mayor Dutra-Vernaci closed the Public Hearing at 7:58 PM.

City Council/RSA Agenda 26 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
September 24, 2024 | 7:00 PM Page 4 of 6
City Council / Successor Agency
Regular Meeting Minutes
Motion: Adopt a resolution approving the 2023-2024 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Consolidated Annual
Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) and authorizing the City Manager to submit the 2023-2024 CDBG CAPER to the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development.

RESULT: Pass
MOVER: Councilmember Singh
SECONDER: Vice Mayor Wang
AYES: Councilmembers Patiño, Sakakihara,
Singh, Vice Mayor Wang, and Mayor
Dutra-Vernaci
NOES: None
ABSENT: None

Enactment No.: Resolution No. 6367-24

7. CITY MANAGER REPORTS

7.a. Receive Annual Report From Townsend Public Affairs On Legislative Activities On Behalf Of The City of Union City
Deputy City Manager Phan and Townsend Director Eric Thronson gave the item presentation and responded to questions from council members.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci opened Public Comment. There being no speakers, Mayor Dutra-Vernaci closed Public Comment.

Council received the report.

7.b. Adoption Of An Ordinance Of The City Council Of The City Of Union City Amending Section 2.04.400 “Mayoral And Councilmember Salaries” Of The Union City Municipal Code To Increase The Compensation Of The Mayor And Councilmembers
City Attorney Kokotaylo provided staff presentation and responded to questions from council members.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci opened Public Comment. The following speakers spoke on the item:

Wendy Huang
Susie Garcia
Cheris Crocker-Root
Kevin Finnerty
There being no further speakers, Mayor Dutra-Vernaci closed Public Comment.

City Council/RSA Agenda 27 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
September 24, 2024 | 7:00 PM Page 5 of 6
City Council / Successor Agency
Regular Meeting Minutes
Motion: Waive further reading and adopt an ordinance amending Section 2.04.400 of the Union City Municipal Code ("Mayoral and Councilmember Salaries") to increase the salaries of City Councilmembers and Mayor by $500 per month.

RESULT: Pass
MOVER: Vice Mayor Wang
SECONDER: Councilmember Patiño
AYES: Councilmembers Patiño, Singh, and
Vice Mayor Wang
NOES: Councilmember Sakakihara and Mayor
Dutra-Vernaci
ABSENT: None

Enactment No.: Ordinance No. 926-24

8. SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
There were none.

9. AUTHORITIES AND AGENCIES
There were none.

10. CITY COMMISSION / COMMITTEE REPORTS
There were none.

11. ITEMS REFERRED BY COUNCIL
Vice Mayor Wang reported on Alameda County Waste Management Authority and New Haven Unified School District Joint Sub-Committee. He also reported he visited the Tri-City Volunteer Food Bank in Fremont.

Councilmember Singh had no report.

Councilmember Sakakihara reported on the Housing Authority of Alameda County and New Haven Unified School District Joint Sub-Committee.

Councilmember Patiño reported on Ava Community Energy.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci reported on the Youth Commission, Alameda County Mayors Conference, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, Senior Commission, and Arts and Culture Commission, Bay Area Toll Authority, and the Mega Region Working Group.

12. GOOD OF THE ORDER
Councilmember Patiño reported meeting with the Ohlone Historical Society and the Chamber of Commerce regarding a proposal for the Union City Historical Museum.

He also attended a candidate forum at the Tropics, participated in a press conference with Assemblymember Liz Ortega and City of Hayward Mayor Mark Salinas regarding Saint Rose Hospital, and attended the ribbon cutting and grand opening of Kabayan Restaurant, and the ribbon cutting for the expansion of the Tri-CED Buyback Center.

He also attended the I Street Closure Community Meeting on September 14. From City Council/RSA Agenda 28 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
September 24, 2024 | 7:00 PM Page 6 of 6
City Council / Successor Agency
Regular Meeting Minutes
September 18 to 20, he participated in the NALEO Emergency Preparedness Seminar in Houston.

Councilmember Sakakihara reported attending the Firefighter Operations event on September 11, the ribbon cutting for the expansion of the Tri-CED Buyback Center on September 16, a Lions Club restaurant stroll event at Union Landing, and an interfaith peace walk hosted by local religious organizations.

Councilmember Singh reported on the Tri-CED Buyback Center expansion ribbon cutting and Firefighter Operations event on September 11 and attended the candidate forum.

Vice Mayor Wang reported attending the Firefighter Operations event on September 11, the Moon Festival concert at Kennedy Park on September 15, and a barbecue event celebrating the Moon Festival at Old Alvarado Park on September 22.

Mayor Dutra-Vernaci reported attending an event on September 14 with 150 Thai Buddhist monks at the Crowne Plaza, a first responders’ lunch in honor of September 11 at the Fremont Elks Lodge, and Ellen Corbett’s memorial service. She also noted a recent article in Patch about Union City firefighters rescuing a cat. She also announced the upcoming State of the City Address scheduled for October 1 at the Senior Center.

13. CLOSED SESSION
There were none.

14. ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Dutra-Vernaci adjourned the meeting at 9:16 PM.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council/Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Union City.
/s/Thai Nam Pham, MMC, CPMC
City Clerk/Secretary for the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency City Council/RSA Agenda 29 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
DATE: 10/8/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: THAI NAM PHAM, CITY CLERK
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE A FIRST

AMENDMENT TO THE SOFTWARE AS A SERVICE (SAAS) AGREEMENT WITH

GRANICUS FOR THE ONEMEETING AGENDA AND LIVE MEETING MANAGEMENT SOLUTION AND INCREASE THE NOT TO EXCEED COMPENSATION TO $256,117.64 The City of Union City seeks approval to execute a First Amendment to the existing Software as a Service (SaaS) Agreement with Granicus, originally signed on June 3, 2024. This amendment incorporates new services, specifically the migration of up to 10 years of historical meeting data from the IQM2 or Novus system into the OneMeeting platform, ensuring seamless transition and accessibility of records. The additional cost for these services is $6,000, increasing the total not-to-exceed amount of the five-year agreement to $256,117.64.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This initiative aligns with Goal A of the City’s Strategic Plan—Financial Stability and Sustainability. The addition of new services, including data migration, willenhance operationalefficiency by modernizing our meeting management processes and ensuring longterm fiscal sustainability through technological improvements.

BACKGROUND
The City entered into a SaaS Agreement with Granicus on June 3, 2024, to implement the OneMeeting Agenda and Live Meeting Management Solution, replacing the current NovusAgenda system which is scheduled for decommissioning. As part of the ongoing collaboration, Granicus has proposed additional services to facilitate data migration from the IQM2 or Novus system into the OneMeeting platform, as outlined in Proposal Q-372233, dated September 20, 2024.

DISCUSSION
The First Amendment to the existing SaaS Agreement with Granicus will incorporate additional services essential for the City’s City Council/RSA Agenda 30 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
transition to the OneMeeting platform. These include the migration of up to 10 years of meeting data (including agendas, minutes, and corresponding videos) from the existing NovusAgenda system, ensuring seamless continuity of services and full public accessibility of historical records.

The total cost of these additional services is $6,000, which increases the aggregate not-to-exceed amount of the five-year agreement to $256,117.64.

FISCAL IMPACT
The one-time fee of $6,000 for data migration services is accounted for within the current fiscal year’s budget. No further budget amendments are required at this time.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute a First Amendment to the Software as a Service (SaaS) Agreement with Granicus, increasing the not-to-exceed aggregate sum of the five-year agreement to $256,117.64 to incorporate additional services for data migration and system enhancements.

Prepared by:

Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
Submitted by:

Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Draft Resolution Resolution
Exhibit A - Proposal Q-372233 (dated September 20, 2024) Exhibit City Council/RSA Agenda 31 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-24

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

UNION CITY AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE A FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE SOFTWARE AS

A SERVICE AGREEMENT WITH GRANICUS FOR THE

ONEMEETING AGENDA AND LIVE MEETING

MANAGEMENT SOLUTION, INCREASING THE
AGGREGATE SUM TO $256,117.64
WHEREAS, the City of Union City entered into a Software as a Service (SaaS) Agreement with Granicus on June 3, 2024, to provide the OneMeeting Agenda and Live Meeting Management Solution for enhanced meeting management at an original not-to-exceed amount of $250,117.64; and
WHEREAS, the City has determined the need to expand the services under this agreement further to incorporate data migration from the IQM2 or Novus system into OneMeeting, as well as additional features for enhanced operational efficiency; and WHEREAS, Granicus has provided a new proposal, Q-372233, dated September 20, 2024, for these additional services, which include the migration of up to 10 years of data and other related improvements, at a cost of $6,000.00; and
WHEREAS, the total not-to-exceed aggregate sum for the original SaaS Agreement and the additional services as outlined in this First Amendment will increase to $256,117.64.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute the First Amendment to the Software as a Service Agreement with Granicus for the OneMeeting Agenda and Live Meeting Management Solution, increasing the total not-to-exceed amount to $256,117.64, in a form approved by the City Attorney.

City Council/RSA Agenda 32 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Resolution No. XXXX-24
SaaS Agreement with Granicus for Agenda Management Solution

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on this 8
th day of October by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI
Mayor
ATTESTED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

THAI NAM N. PHAM
City Clerk
KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO
City Attorney
Attachments:

1. Exhibit A - Proposal Q-372233 (dated September 20, 2024) City Council/RSA Agenda 33 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
THIS IS NOT AN INVOICE Order Form
Prepared for
Union City CA
Order #: Q-372233
Prepared: 20 Sep 2024

Granicus Proposal for Union City CA

ORDER DETAILS
Prepared By: Chloe Scheer
Phone:

Email: [email protected]
Order #: Q-372233
Prepared On: 20 Sep 2024
Expires On: 08 Oct 2024
Currency: USD
Payment Terms: Net 30 (Payments for subscriptions are due at the beginning of the period of performance.)

Period of Performance: The term of the Agreement will commence on the date this document is signed and will continue for 12 months.

ORDER TERMS
City Council/RSA Agenda 34 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Order Form
Union City CA
Order #: Q-372233
Prepared: 20 Sep 2024

PRICING SUMMARY
The pricing and terms within this Proposal are specific to the products and volumes contained within this Proposal.

One-Time Fees
Solution Billing
Frequency Quantity/Unit One-Time Fee
IQM2 or Novus Data Migration into
OneMeeting (Up to 10 years of data) Upon Delivery 1 Each $6,000.00 SUBTOTAL: $6,000.00
City Council/RSA Agenda 35 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Order Form
Union City CA
Order #: Q-372233
Prepared: 20 Sep 2024

PRODUCT DESCRIPTIONS
Solution Description
IQM2 or Novus Data Migration
into OneMeeting (Up to 10
years of data)
Granicus will migrate 10 years worth of meeting data from IQM2 or Novus into OneMeeting. This meeting data will be added into OneMeeting and available in the public portal. The Data migrated into OneMeeting can be seen but clients will not be able to access and or copy an individual file.

We will be migrating over PDFs of agenda, minutes, and corresponding videos if available. Please request the Scope of Work for more details.

City Council/RSA Agenda 36 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Order Form
Union City CA
Order #: Q-372233
Prepared: 20 Sep 2024

TERMS & CONDITIONS
• This quote, and all products and services delivered hereunder are governed by the terms located at https://granicus.com/legal/licensing, including any product-specific terms included therein (the “License Agreement”). If your organization and Granicus has entered into a separate agreement or is utilizing a contract vehicle for this transaction, the terms of the License Agreement are incorporated into such separate agreement or contract vehicle by reference, with any directly conflicting terms and conditions being resolved in favor of the separate agreement or contract vehicle to the extent applicable. • If submitting a Purchase Order, please include the following language: The pricing, terms and conditions of quote Q-372233 dated 20 Sep 2024 are incorporated into this Purchase Order by reference and shall take precedence over any terms and conditions included in this Purchase Order. • This quote is exclusive of applicable state, local, and federal taxes, which, if any, will be included in the invoice. It is the responsibility of Union City CA to provide applicable exemption certificate(s). • Any lapse in payment may result in suspension of service and will require the payment of a setup fee to reinstate the subscription.

City Council/RSA Agenda 37 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Order Form
Union City CA
Order #: Q-372233
Prepared: 20 Sep 2024

BILLING INFORMATION
Billing Contact: Purchase Order
Required?
[ ] - No
[ ] - Yes
Billing Address: PO Number:

If PO required
Billing Email: Billing Phone:

If submitting a Purchase Order, please include the following language:

The pricing, terms, and conditions of quote Q-372233 dated 20 Sep 2024 are incorporated into this Purchase Order by reference and shall take precedence over any terms and conditions included in this Purchase Order.

AGREEMENT AND ACCEPTANCE
By signing this document, the undersigned certifies they have authority to enter the agreement. The undersigned also understands the services and terms.

Union City CA
Signature:
\s1\
Name:
\n1\
Title:
\t1\
Date:
\d1\
City Council/RSA Agenda 38 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
DATE: 10/8/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARILOU AYUPAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: ADOPT A RESOLUTION REJECTING ALL BIDS FOR THE BUS SHELTER INSTALLATION PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 24-19
Staff recommends the City Counciladopt a resolution rejecting all bids for the Bus Shelter Installation Project, City Project No. 24-19, due to the bids being much higher than the budgeted funds.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This agenda item is in alignment with the following:

Goal D, Strategy 2 Environmental Sustainability and Infrastructure – Implement the City’s capital improvement plan.

BACKGROUND
On August 15, 2023, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 4 (San Francisco Bay Area) Office of Local Assistance reached out to all the transit agencies within its jurisdiction advising of a quick-built grant opportunity through the Clean California (Clean CA) Transit Initiative.

The primary objectives of the grant opportunity included enhancing the cleanliness and appeal of rail and bus stations by providing improvements such as art installations, landscaping, and other enhancements that contribute to creating a more positive and attractive commuting experience, fostering inviting transit facilities with the overall aim of increasing public transit usage, accessibility, and use of climate-friendly transportation options.

In addition to the primary objectives, proposals that focused on implementing the objectives in SB 535 Disadvantaged Communities received closer reviews. Union City Transit’s five (5) bus routes all serve Union City’s only SB 535 Disadvantaged Community.

Applications were due to Caltrans, District 4, by August 31, 2023, for consideration with an initial award announcement scheduled for September 11, 2023. Union City Transit submitted a successfulapplication, earning an award of $396,656. On October 24, 2023, the City Counciladopted Resolution 6304-23, accepting the grant funds for the Bus Shelter Installation Project, City Project No. 24-17.

The grant requires the awarded project be implemented and constructed by December 31, 2024.

City Council/RSA Agenda 39 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
On May 28, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6304-24, authorizing the purchase of twenty-one (21) bus shelters, thirtyeight (38) map cases, and twenty-nine (29) WaySine electronic bus arrival signs from the TOLAR Manufacturing Company of Corona, California.

The Bus Shelter Installation Project, City Project No. 24-19, consists of the construction of concrete pads and the installation of owner-furnished site elements, including bus shelters, benches, trash cans, and map cases at up to 37 locations along Union City transit routes around the city. On August 20, 2024, the City released a Notice Inviting Bids for this project. A total of two bids were received on September 10, 2024.

DISCUSSION
The Engineer’s Estimate for this project was $80,000. The lowest of the two bids came in at $195,830, which was 145% above the estimate. An unprecedented rise in labor costs was a major factor in the cost increase. As a result, staff plans to re-evaluate the project scope and update estimates to better reflect current market conditions. Additionally, staff will identify approximately $120,000 in supplemental funding for this project.

In consultation with the City Attorney, and in accordance with California Public Contract Code Section 20166, staff believes it is in the best interest of the City to exercise its discretion and reject all bids presented and re-advertise the project.

FISCAL IMPACT
There will be no fiscal impact to re-advertise the project and staff will return to the City Council to award a contract and approve additional funding for the project at a later date.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Counciladopt a resolution rejecting all bids for the Bus Shelter Installation Project, City Project No. 24-19, due to the bids being much higher than the budgeted funds.

Prepared by:

Trieu Tran, Engineer III (Civil)
Submitted by:

Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Draft Resolution Resolution
Exhibit A - Bid Summary Exhibit
City Council/RSA Agenda 40 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

RESOLUTION NO. XXXX-24

RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

UNION CITY REJECTING ALL BIDS FOR THE BUS SHELTER
INSTALLATION PROJECT, CITY PROJECT NO. 24-19
WHEREAS, on August 15, 2023, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) District 4 (San Francisco Bay Area) Office of Local Assistance reached out to all the transit agencies within its jurisdiction advising of a quick built grant opportunity through the Clean California (Clean CA) Transit Initiative; and
WHEREAS, the primary objectives of the grant opportunity included enhancing the cleanliness and appeal of rail and bus stations by providing improvements such as art installations, landscaping, and other enhancements that contribute to creating a more positive and attractive commuting environment, fostering more inviting transit facilities with the overall aim of increasing public transit usage, accessibility, and climate-friendly transportation options; and WHEREAS, Union City Transit submitted a successful application, earning an award of $396,656, which was accepted by the City Council on October 24, 2023, with the adoption of Resolution No. 6304-23; and
WHEREAS, the grant requires the awarded project to be implemented and constructed by December 31, 2024; and
WHEREAS, on May 28, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 6304-24, authorizing the purchase of twenty-one (21) bus shelters, thirty-eight (38) map cases, and twentynine (29) WaySine electronic bus arrival signs; and WHEREAS, on August 20, 2024, the City of Union City issued a Notice of Inviting Bids for the Bus Shelter Installation Project, City Project No. 24-19, to install bus shelters and their various components at 37 locations along Union City transit routes across the city; and WHEREAS, on September 10, 2024, two bids were received and opened, as noted in Exhibit A - Bid Summary, that came in well above the Engineer’s estimate due mainly to an unprecedented rise in labor costs; and
WHEREAS, upon consultation with the City Attorney, and in accordance with California Public Contract Code Section 20166, staff believes it is in the best interest of the City to exercise its discretion and reject all bids presented and re-advertise the project; and WHEREAS, City staff will revise the bid package, updating the Engineer’s estimate to reflect current market conditions better, and will identify approximately $120,000 in additional funding sources.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Union City does hereby reject all bids received for the Bus Shelter Installation Project, City Project 24- 19 for the reasons set forth above; and
City Council/RSA Agenda 41 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Resolution XXXX-24
Reject All Bids for the Bus Shelter Installation, Project 24-19

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Union City at a regular meeting held on the 8
th day of October 2024 by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

CAROL DUTRA-VERNACI
Mayor
ATTESTED: APPROVED AS TO FORM:

THAI NAM N. PHAM
City Clerk
KRISTOPHER J. KOKOTAYLO
City Attorney
Attachment:

1. Exhibit A – Bid Summary
City Council/RSA Agenda 42 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

CITY OF UNION CITY

BID SUMMARY
PROJECT: Bus Shelter Installation Project, City Project No. 24-19 PROJECT MANAGER: Carly Kasper, Public Works Engineer I
[email protected]
DATE: September 10, 2024
TIME: 2:00 p.m.

LOCATION: City Council Chambers
34009 Alvarado-Niles Road, Union City, CA 94587
No BIDDERS BID AMOUNT
*CORRECTED

BID AMOUNT

1. KEREX ENGINEERING, INC. $195,980.00 $195,830.00

2. SPOSETO ENGINEERING INC $286,906.50 $287,021.20

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

9. 10.

I, Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk of the City of Union City, do hereby certify that on September 10, 2024, I received and opened two (2) bids for the above-mentioned project. * Note: All bid amounts will be verified by the Engineer. Any corrections will be shown in the column above.

Thai Nam Pham, MMC, CPMC
City Clerk
City Council/RSA Agenda 43 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Agenda Item
DATE: 10/8/2024
TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: MARILOU AYUPAN, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR
SUBJECT: HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CLOSURE AND

VACATION OF THE I STREET RAILROAD CROSSING AS PART OF THE AT-GRADE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AT BART, CITY PROJECT NO. 14-14
Staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing, receive public comments, and adopt a resolution approving the closure and vacation of the I Street Railroad Crossing as part of the At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART, City Project No. 14-14.

STRATEGIC PLAN ALIGNMENT
This agenda item is in alignment with the following:

Goal C, Strategy 2: Economic, Community Development and Public Safety – Facilitate the build out of the greater Station District Area through the construction of the Quarry Lakes Parkway, completion of the pedestrian rail crossing, and implementing the recommendations of the Southern Alameda County Regional Rail Integration Study to make the Station District a passenger rail hub served by ACE.

BACKGROUND
The Framework: Redevelopment Agency Plan and the Decoto Industrial Park StudyArea (DIPSA) Specific Plan In 1988 the City formed a Redevelopment Agency (RDA) for the purpose of constructing affordable housing and investing in areas of the City that were in need of redevelopment. The focus of the 1988 Redevelopment Area Plan included the Decoto and Alvarado neighborhoods, the Contempo neighborhood, Union Landing (Dyer Street Triangle), and miscellaneous industrial properties/areas.

In 1996, an Amended Five-Year Implementation Plan (“1996 Plan”) was adopted to amend the 1988 Redevelopment Area Plan to include projects in the Decoto Industrial Park Study Area (DIPSA), now known as the Greater Station District Area, and the BART commercialarea. Specific objectives were included to provide public improvements and infrastructure, such as streets, flood control, and recreational opportunities; clean-up of contaminated land; and preparation for the construction of State Route 84 (now redesigned as Quarry Lakes Parkway) in order to facilitate redevelopment and economic development.

The five-year implementation of the 1996 Plan for non-housing programs and expenditures included many projects, but there was a City Council/RSA Agenda 44 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
significant focus devoted to the Station District:

Clean-up of the Pacific States Steel Corporation site (PSSC), which had gone bankrupt, abandoned a contaminated steel mill site, and failed to pay their pensioners
Construct road improvements and intersections, including Quarry Lakes Parkway, 11 th Street and 7th Street, and install flood
control improvements
It was recognized in 1996 that the DIPSA area of approximately 440 acres was dominated by the dilapidated former 100+ acre PSSC property, and that it would take years to address the complex issues in the area. Further, the 1996 Plan identified a transit terminal that would include passenger railand connections to regionaland local bus lines near the BART station.

The implementation plan was once again amended in 2002 (Resolution 2084-02), and the Redevelopment Agency’s primary investments focused on the projects in the Greater Station District Area (DIPSA).

Since the 1996 and 2002 Plans, the Redevelopment Agency and the City Council:

Adopted an Intermodal Station District and Transit Facility Plan, commonly called the “Station District Plan” (Attachment 1) that laid the groundwork for the redevelopment of the lands around the BART Station Caused the clean-up and redevelopment of the PSSC property Reserved the right-of-way for Quarry Lakes Parkway
Acquired and caused the clean-up of the PG&E property in order to extend 11 th Street and utilities to PSSC for redevelopment
Approved and facilitated the construction of over 2,300 new residential units, including 15 percent affordable units in the Greater Station District Area (also known as DIPSA)
Partnered with BART to design and fund the modernization improvements to the Union City BART Station to create a twosided station that would support future transit-oriented development and passenger rail Union City and BART Partnership
On February 12, 2002, the City Councilapproved Resolution No. 2108-02 certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Redevelopment Agency Plan as part of the General Plan Update.

The General Plan and Redevelopment Agency Plan included the proposed east/west pedestrian spine along with all Union City Station District infrastructure improvements and the surrounding land-use opportunities. Based on the close working partnership with BART, in September 2002 BART integrated the City’s Station District Plan into their first Comprehensive Station Plan (CSP). The CSP included: 1) reconfigured parking lots to include a new 16-bus bay transit facility with front-door connections for BART patrons; 2) improved parking areas and internal roadway circulation for pedestrians, bikes, transit and vehicles; 3) a remodeled station with longer, wider platforms, new escalators, stairways and elevators; 4) an east/west pedestrian spine to allow easy access to BART, and 5) an integrated vision of transit that connected BART, bus and future passenger rail station on the Oakland Subdivision for Altamont Commuter Express (ACE), Capitol Corridor or Dumbarton Commuter Rail.

In 2004, Union City engaged the ROMA Design Group (Resolution No. 2709-04) to develop design plans to implement the adopted Station District Plan and lay the groundwork for private investment. Working closely with BART’s engineering team, the concept of the two-sided BART Station was refined to implement the vision to make the BART/Intermodal Station the hub of the high-density district in this transit-rich area. A two-sided station would require a new east entrance and at-grade pedestrian crossing of the Oakland Subdivision railroad tracks. (See Attachment 2, Updated Station District Concept Plan.

The new east entrance to BART would create a free pedestrian pass-through, thereby linking the future high-density and multifamily developments on the east side of BART directly to transit and the Safeway Marketplace retail center. BART and bus patrons would also have a short walk to the future passenger rail. The new path would avoid a one-half mile walk from the east and west sides of the station that required crossing the tracks on Decoto Road.

City Council/RSA Agenda 45 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Approximately $160 million of Redevelopment Agency, federal, state, and regional funds have been invested in and around the BART Station to meet the goals that were established in the initial Redevelopment Agency Plan over 30 years ago. In 2011, however, the State of California dissolved Redevelopment Agencies. The implementation of the Station District vision has slowed, though not stopped.

The City continues to take steps to implement the Station District Concept Plan, open the east side of the BART Station, and facilitate Quarry Lakes Parkway.

I Street Closure
By 2011, it was clear that the new east entrance to the BART Station would not be considered by UPRR and the CPUC unless at least one other railroad crossing was closed to mitigate the new at-grade crossing. To address these requirements, the City engaged TJKM Transportation Consultants to prepare a “Traf ic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study” (Attachment 3).

The traffic analysis evaluated options for closing an existing at-grade railroad crossings throughout the City, including along the Coast Subdivision line west of I-880 and along the Niles Subdivision and Oakland Subdivision lines located in the eastern portion of the City. Both the Coast and Niles Subdivision rail lines carried active freight and passenger rail. The Oakland Subdivision rail line was not as active. Additionally, several railroad crossings were quickly identified as infeasible for closure because of major arterial roadway crossings, including Union City Boulevard, Smith Street, Dyer Street, Alvarado Boulevard, Whipple Road and Decoto Road.

With less rail traffic on the Oakland Subdivision, the potential closure of the at-grade railroad crossings at F Street, H Street and I Street were evaluated. The impacts of closing F Street and H Street were considered too significant to the pedestrian and vehicular circulation within the Decoto neighborhood to make these options feasible.

The only option remaining for possible closure was the I Street railroad crossing, which according to the study, would have the least impact on vehicles and second most impact on the pedestrians. It was also the preferred option of the fire and police departments because I Street does not connect to a major arterial such as Alvarado-Niles Road or Mission Boulevard. Thus, by the process of elimination, the I Street railroad crossing emerged as the best choice for permanent closure since it would present the least impact amongst all the potential street closure locations.

Initially, there was pushback from UPRR to provide the at-grade crossing at BART, but with the support of Congressman Swalwell (Attachment 4), UPRR modified their position in 2015. Negotiations continued with UPRR, and significant documentation was submitted to the CPUC for their consideration. Ultimately, the CPUC rendered a “Decision Authorizing the City of Union City to Construct an At-Grade Pedestrian Rail Crossing Across the Union Pacific Oakland Subdivision, Mile Post 27.10 in City of Union City, Alameda County,” (“Order”) dated December 4, 2017 (Attachment 5). The closure of the I Street railroad crossing was a condition to construct the new At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART project.

Concurrent with the ongoing evaluation by the CPUC and UPRR, the City continued to pursue the at-grade pedestrian crossing, and on June 27, 2017, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5092-17, authorizing the City Manager to negotiate an agreement with UPRR to design and construct the at-grade crossing.

On July 9, 2019, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 5503-19, authorizing the City Manager to execute the UPRR “Public AtGrade Pedestrian Crossing Agreement, BART Pedestrian Crossing, DOT 859611R, Mile Post 27.08 – Oakland Subdivision, City of Union City, Alameda County California” (Attachment 6). This became known as the “UP Original Agreement” with UPRR, and staff presented the project history, the proposed improvements, and the conditions of this agreement, including the closure of the I Street at-grade railroad crossing. At this same meeting, City staff made a presentation on the project status of the At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART, City Project No. 14-14, again, including the proposed closure of the I Street railroad crossing (Attachment 7).

DISCUSSION
Under the terms of the UP Original Agreement, the City paid UPRR to design and to construct railroad warning gates, safety equipment and communications facilities at the proposed crossing, while the City designed and will construct the non-rail elements that include a realigned concrete sidewalk, ramps, stairs, hand railing, drainage and architectural elements such as granite cladding and City Council/RSA Agenda 46 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
lights. The construction plans for the City’s portion of the work are being finalized and the bid package for the At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART, City Project No. 14-14, is expected to be ready for advertisement in late 2024. This will be Phase I of the project, which will be bid first and would consist of constructing the at-grade pedestrian crossing at the east entrance to the BART Station.

The UP Original Agreement and CPUC approval allows Union City to construct a new at-grade crossing across the Oakland Subdivision tracks in order to make available pedestrian access from the recently constructed east entrance into the BART Station provided the City makes railroad crossing safety improvements at various locations. The required improvements at the Decoto Road railroad tracks (Oakland Subdivision), include new sidewalks, flashing signals, safety gates, enhanced pre-emption signal timing, and concrete trackway extension. The UP Original Agreement and CPUC also require permanent closure of the I Street railroad crossing between 11
th
and 12
th Streets. In addition, UPRR and CPUC have required the City to make safety improvements at other railroad crossings throughout the City, including at Smith Street railroad crossing (Coast Subdivision) and Whipple Road railroad crossing (Niles Subdivision), which will be undertaken in the future.

Improvements that will be completed prior to the opening of the At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART project include updating the sidewalks that cross the Oakland Subdivision railroad tracks on Decoto Road and installing ‘queue-cutter’ signals to improve railroad pre-emption warning time associated with UPRR’s safety equipment. Also, as noted, the I Street railroad crossing across the Oakland Subdivision tracks will need to be closed. The work at these two locations is planned to be untaken as Phase II, which will overlap with the Phase I project that is expected to take almost a year to complete.

The closure of I Street would require the City to take all actions necessary to permanently close and vacate the I Street Crossing and any easements. Additionally, the City will furnish and install signage, install curbs and gutters, remove roadway pavement adjacent to the tracks and make other necessary “Safety Improvements” on UP property as part of the project.

Since the closure of I Street needs to occur prior to the opening of the new crossing at BART, the City will specify in the bid documents for the Phase II project that the timing of the closure of I Street be coordinated with the completion of work of the Phase I project so as to delay the closure to the extent feasible.

In October 2023, the City provided a project update of the At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART, City Project No. 14-14, including the proposed closure of the I Street railroad crossing, to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee (Attachment 8). An update was also provided to the City Council in November 2023 (Attachment 9).

During the month of June 2024, the City held a series of District Dialogue Meetings throughout the four City Council districts, which included a presentation from Farooq Azim, City Engineer, on the status of the At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART Project, detailing the Union Pacific Railroad permit requirements and conditions, including the potential closure of the I Street At-Grade Crossing (Attachment 10).

On September 10, 2024, the City Counciladopted Resolution No. 6361-24, authorizing the City Manager to execute the Supplemental Agreement, which amended the UP Original Agreement. The Supplemental Agreement outlined the various safety improvements at the Decoto Road/Oakland Subdivision railroad crossing and other necessary actions the City will need to take to permanently close and vacate the I Street crossing (Attachment 11). At this meeting, staff also presented on the project status and informed the City Council of the upcoming community meeting on September 14, 2024 and the Public Hearing for the I Street Closure at the October 8, 2024 City Council meeting.

Community Meeting
The Community Meeting was held on Saturday, September 14, 2024, at the Kennedy Youth Center, from 10:00 AM – 12:00 PM. City staff presented the At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART project (Attachment 12), including the associated I Street closure, followed by an open forum for questions and dialogue. In addition to the historical context that explained the need for the project, the presentation included a detailed description of the analysis that led to the determination that the closure of I Street was the least impactful among all the options that were available, based on the data collection and traffic analysis. Project Fact sheets were also provided (Attachment 13).

City Council/RSA Agenda 47 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
The presentation showed how the I Street closure offered convenient detour options for vehicles and pedestrians. The biggest concern raised by some residents was the impact to the elderly and to mothers with families who walk to the grocery store located at the intersection of I Street and 10
th Street. There was discussion about options for food delivery using the various phone apps as well as working with the owner of the food store to find a viable option to serve the elderly. Also, there was discussion of educating the elderly and others on how to use Union City’s Flea Micro-transit service.

Public Hearing Notifications
In preparation for the public hearing staff provided the appropriate public notice through advertisement on social media, in print media through the local newspaper, and with a direct mailer sent to residents in the immediate vicinity of the affected area (Attachment 14).

Three large signs in English and in Spanish were posted on I Street on September 23, 2024 to notifying the public 15 days in advance of the hearing. In addition, messaging and updates have been sent via the City’s social media as well as outreach through the New Haven Unified School District social media platform.

Next Steps
Should the City Council adopt the resolution approving of the closure and vacation of I Street, Public Works would finalize the construction package and advertise the project for construction. The At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART, Phase I project is estimated to start construction in April 2025 and will be completed by March 2026. The At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART, Phase II project, which includes the improvements (signs, fencing, pavement removal, etc.) to close I Street, is expected to be completed by November 2025.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no impact on the General Fund.

The estimated construction cost is approximately $7.2 million, which funded as follows:

Local Funds (Measure BB and RDA Bonds $ 1,170,000
Safe Route to BART (SRTB) Grant $ 3,000,000
Dumbarton Corridor Grant – Regional Measure 3 (RM3) Grant $ 3,000,000 $ 7,170,000

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing, receive public comment, and adopt a resolution approving the closure and vacation of the I Street Railroad Crossing as part of the At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART, City Project No. 14-14.

Prepared by:

Farooq Azim, City Engineer
Submitted by:

Marilou Ayupan, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS:

Description Type
Attachment 1 - Intermodal Station District and Transit Facility Plan Attachment Attachment 2 - Updated Illustrative Station District Concept Plan Attachment City Council/RSA Agenda 48 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Attachment 3 – Traffic Impact Analysis of theAt-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study (2011)
Attachment
Attachment 4 – Congressman Swalwell, letter (2015) Attachment Attachment 5 – CPUCDecision Authorizing the City of Union City To Construct an At-Grade Pedestrian Rail Crossing
Attachment
Attachment 6 – UPRRPublicAt-Grade Pedestrian Crossing Agreement, BART Pedestrian Crossing
Attachment
Attachment 7 – Presentation At-Grade Pedestrian Crossing at BART, City Project No. 14-14 (2019)
Attachment
Attachment 8 – BPACPresentation (10/18/2023) Attachment Attachment 9 – Presentation Project Update (11142023) Attachment Attachment 10 – District Dialogue Presentation (06/05/2024) Attachment Attachment 11 – City Council Presentation (09/10/2024) Attachment Attachment 12 – Community Meeting Presentation (09/14/2024) Attachment Attachment 13a – At-Grade Pedestrian Project Fact Sheet (English) 092024 Attachment Attachment 13b - Project Fact Sheet (Spanish) 092024 Resolution Attachment 14– Public Hearing Noticing for 10/08/2024 Attachment Draft Resolution Resolution
Exhibit A - CPUCOrder (12/4/2017) Exhibit
Exhibit B- I Street Closure Map Exhibit
Public Comment - Ferrario, Paul Attachment
City Council/RSA Agenda 49 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
SMWM
ArupFehr & PeersNelson NygaardMundie & Associates

CITY OF UNION CITY

BARTAC TRANSIT
SEPTEMBER 2001
intermodal station district and transit facility plan

UNIONCITY
City Council/RSA Agenda 50 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 51 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
table of contents

UNIONCITY
chapter pageexecutive summary 1 issues and opportunities 7 concept plan 19station district plan 27intermodal transit facility plan 39design recommendations 47implementation plan 77credits 87 City Council/RSA Agenda 52 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 53 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
1 executive summary

UNIONCITY
the vision 2the opportunity 2the process 3the solution 4 City Council/RSA Agenda 54 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
the vision

UNIONCITY
2 chapter 1 executive summary
the opportunity
Union City and the Intermodal Action Team aretaking a bold step forward by proposing a planaround the Union City BART station that is a new,compact, pedestrian- and transit-oriented, mixeduse downtown district centered on an innovativeIntermodal Transit Facility. The plan integratesdevelopment and transportation by bringing someof the region’s major transit providers together in alandmark facility that provides the focus for the newStation District. It is a plan to build on Union City’sstrengths and create a new identity for the City inthe 21st century.

As traffic conditions worsen and land values rise,the availability of transportation options will playan increasingly important role in the location andcharacter of development. The convergence oftransit, together with the large amount of availableland, make Union City an ideal location forinvestment in transit infrastructure and privatedevelopment. The location offers the opportunitynot only to make Union City a regional transferpoint for transit, but a destination as well, bringingnew development and new opportunities to UnionCity and the region in a way that will set a “smartgrowth” example for the Bay Area.

Over the past decade, the Bay Area hasexperienced unprecedented economic andpopulation growth. While bringing many benefitsto the region, this growth has produced adverseeffects as well, including ever-increasing sprawl andnightmarish traffic conditions. The challenge of this project is the envy of other BayArea communities: large expanses of vacant andunderutilized land adjacent to an existing BARTstation. This station area is further blessed withnumerous transit operators who link to BART andmake the prospect of a multi-modal mixed-useStation District a possibility in the near future. figure 1-1Looking east from the BART platform to the PG&E property and the hillsbeyond. (2000) City Council/RSA Agenda 55 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 1 executive summary 3

UNIONCITY
the processfigure 1-2The BART parking lot and surrounding development as seen from the BARTstation platform. (2000)In late October 2000 Union City brought togetheran Intermodal Action Team to oversee thedevelopment of the Intermodal Station District andTransit Facility Plan. The team includedrepresentatives from several transit operators (bothbus and rail), citizens, City officials and City staff.Through the Action Team’s intensive efforts over thesubsequent six months a preferred plan for theStation District and Intermodal Transit Facility wasdeveloped.

In cooperation with the consultants, the first step inthe planning process was to develop goals for theStation District and the Intermodal Transit Facility.Next, two workshops were held: one publicworkshop and one workshop for transit operators.As a result of these workshops several possiblealternatives were developed. A preferred land useconcept and transit facility layout was approved bythe Planning Commission and City Council inMarch, 2001. This approved concept became thebasis of the plan presented in this report.

City Council/RSA Agenda 56 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Intermodal Transit Facility and Union City’s unique
location as a gateway to the Silicon Valley to thesouth.Building the new Intermodal Transit Facility andStation District is an achievable goal based onrealistic market and public financing assumptions.It is a multi-phase project with a 20-year time frame,requiring public-private partnerships and closecooperation and coordination between Union City,major landholders, transit providers, publicagencies, and private developers. This plan was developed with input from thecommunity and all key stakeholders and serves asthe springboard for the project. It outlines theoverall vision for both the transit facility and theStation District, identifies key design components,sets a design framework for future development,and delineates public and private responsibilitiesfor phasing and implementation.The plan is at once practical and bold, a “smartgrowth” strategy for the City and the region. It is avision that makes sense for Union City, one thatoffers solutions for the region’s pressingtransportation problems and creates a signaturelandmark that inspires a new community and alasting identity for Union City. surrounding development. To the east, a townsquare and community commons provide neededopen space and community facilities and act as afocus for development along the new EleventhStreet corridor. Community- and transit-servingretail uses activate and support both sides of thecentral spine.An integrated street and pedestrian greenwaysystem will link the new Intermodal Transit Facilityand Station District with the City and the region.The streets are designed to accommodate vehicularand transit access to and through the site, whilepromoting a pedestrian- and bicycle-friendlyenvironment. They will create strong connectionswithin the District and to the surroundingneighborhoods. The greenways will integrate withand enhance the City’s network of pedestrian andbicycle trails as laid out in the Park and RecreationMaster Plan.A compact, pedestrian scaled mixed-useneighborhood, based on the General Plan’sproposed land use concept will surround theIntermodal Transit Facility. The District will be alively destination 24 hours a day 7 days a week,encouraging residents and transit riders alike tolive, work, shop, and play in Union City. It willinclude community facilities, social services, office/research and development, commercial uses,housing, and retail uses. The land uses in theDistrict draw on the synergy created by the

UNIONCITY
4 chapter 1 executive summaryTo maximize the benefits of the multipletransportation options available in Union City, thecenterpiece of the new Station District will be theIntermodal Transit Facility, including a busroundabout, pedestrian tunnel, and passenger railplatforms. It is conceived as a “spine” of linkedlandmark elements that share a unique visuallanguage, designed to enhance rider experiencewhile increasing pedestrian access and transitridership. The arrangement of the IntermodalTransit Facility enhances connections betweentransit providers, allows for future transit growth,promotes operational efficiency and flexibility, andcomplements land uses in the surrounding District.It will be an exceptional transit facility and a greatpublic structure with a landmark public face onUnion Square. A pedestrian underpass at the BART tracks willprovide connections to the proposed passenger railstation or stations and the new transit-orienteddevelopment to the east of the BART tracks. Transitand neighborhood-serving retail and services,integrated with new housing and office uses in theadjacent development, will enhance the IntermodalTransit Facility and the District as well.A series of public spaces, integrated with theIntermodal Transit Facility, define and enhance astriking mixed-use neighborhood. To the west of theBART station a public plaza incorporates openspace and transit and acts as the front door for the solution
City Council/RSA Agenda 57 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 1 executive summary 5

UNIONCITY
figure 1-3Station District Concept Plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 58 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
figure 1-4Station District Concept Plan - Aerial View6 chapter 1 executive summary City Council/RSA Agenda 59 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
2 issues and opportunities

UNIONCITY
project area description 8general plan framework 8economic background 9transportation 11land use context 16 City Council/RSA Agenda 60 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
to the south will provide alternative access options
between the Station District and the regionalroadway network.

UNIONCITY
8 chapter 2 issues and opportunitiesThe project site is approximately 50 acres in areaand surrounds the Union City BART station andparking lot. It includes three parcels: the Union CityBART station (14 acres), the Litke property (6 acres),and the PG&E pipe storage yard (31 acres).Historically, this area of the city has always beendesignated for commercial and high-densityresidential development. The Intermodal TransitFacility and accompanying high-density mixed-usedevelopment proposed for this location form thenext logical step in the planning for Union City’sdowntown area. The project area is bounded by Decoto Road to thenorth, the flood control channel to the south, the former Southern Pacific railroad tracks to the east,and Union Square to the west. The PG&E site hasbeen in use as a pipe storage yard since 1961; theBART Station was built in 1972; and the Litkeproperty has been in commercial use since the1980s with a now abandoned bowling alley andseveral auto repair businesses. All of these siteswere previously either vacant or in agriculturalproduction. Land uses surrounding the project site are quitevaried. To the north is the Decoto neighborhood,one of Union City’s oldest neighborhoods withsettlement dating to the early 1900s. Approximately24 acres of vacant land lie to the east of the formerSouthern Pacific railroad tracks. This area has beendesignated for office and research and developmentuses under the current General Plan Update. Thevacant parcels to the south of the site are known asthe PSSC (Pacific States Steel Corporation) lands.This property is expected to be redeveloped in thenear future with a mix of office/industrial andresidential uses. Directly south of the Litke propertyis a new single-family and multi-family residentialdevelopment. Across Union Square to the west ofthe project area is the Union Square Marketplace,an existing commercial center, and the Verandas, ahigh density residential development.Major streets serving the greater area includeDecoto Road, Alvarado-Niles Road, and MissionBoulevard. The proposed State Route 84 to be built project area description
SOFT SITES:VACANT/REDEVELOPMENT SITES
ALVARADO-NILES RD.

DECOTO RD.

MISSION BLVD.

PROPOSED RTE 84

FORMER SPRR
UPRR
BART
P.G.&E.

LITKE

PROPERTIES
BART
figure 2-1Project Area
general plan frameworkThe timing of this report was critical in order tocoordinate this work with the General Plan Updatethat was already underway. To meet this timeframe, the consultant team worked with the UnionCity staff to craft a six-month action plan and bringthis project from a rough idea to a refined designvision. In the General Plan Update Concept FrameworkPlan, the Union Station District was identified asone of four “Special Planning Districts”, key subareas for redevelopment in Union City. Thepreferred alternative for the Union Station Districtcalls for the creation of a transit-oriented, mixeduse, pedestrian-friendly town center. Office/researchand development, high-density mixed incomehousing, and ground floor retail are all included inthe Union Station District plan. This alternative wasused as the starting point for the Intermodal StationDistrict and Transit Facility Plan. Although theproject area of the plan comprises only three keyproperties within the General Plan’s Union StationDistrict, the relationship between the land uses,pedestrian connections, and vehicle circulation inthe entire area were considered in the developmentof the plan.

City Council/RSA Agenda 61 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 2 issues and opportunities 9

UNIONCITY
Despite recent location trends Union City has nothistorically been and has not yet become a locationfor urban office buildings or the uses that typicallyoccupy them. The Economic Background Report forthe General Plan Update reported that the existingoffice inventory of Union City and Haywardcombined totaled only 770,000 square feet. In the past year, however, the economic geographyof the Bay Area has evolved to an extent that officesare now considered the most appropriate future usefor land in the immediate vicinity of the BARTstation. This shift in perception is due to theexplosive economic growth in Silicon Valley during1999 and 2000 which resulted in dramaticincreases in rents and land prices in San Mateo andSanta Clara counties. These areas have historicallybeen the preferred location for high tech industries.As a result of soaring land values, firms began toseek less conventional locations that are readilyaccessible to the heart of Silicon Valley.Newark, immediately south of Union City, is onenon-traditional location that attracted some hightech office activity during this growth spurt. Thefact that high tech companies are beginning tomove into Union City indicates the growingpotential for Silicon Valley-related companies tooccupy office space in Southern Alameda County.With the dispersal of Silicon Valley workers tohousing located in the East Bay, Contra CostaCounty, and the adjacent Central Valley counties, traffic congestion has reached new levels on theregional roadways into Santa Clara and San Mateocounties. The proposed Union City Intermodal Transit Facility,served by a multitude of transit operators, is anadvantageous site for businesses whose employeesmay be able to reach work via transit, thus avoidingthe need to drive on the freeway network. Transitproviders that currently service the site includeBART, AC Transit, Dumbarton Express, and UnionCity Transit. The site could potentially be served byadditional transit providers in the future, includingthe Capitol Coridor (Amtrak), Altamont CommuterExpress, Silicon Valley Commuter Rail (VTA),Dumbarton Rail and possibly even high speed rail.Site-specific office development patterns in the BayArea are changing in response to increasing landprices and to the desire of office workers to belocated in urban districts. Development in existingoffice parks and commercial centers is intensifying.Surface parking lots are being replaced withparking structures, while the liberated land is thenoccupied by multi-story office buildings andincreasingly mixed uses within the site. In the few months since the market investigation forthe Intermodal Station District and Transit Failityplan was undertaken, the regional economy and themarket have weakened considerably. As a pioneering location for office-demanding economic economic background

E M P L O Y M E N T - R E L A T E D U S E S
The industrial base of Union City has traditionallybeen warehousing, distribution, and light industrial.Existing operations now include electronics, fiberoptics, recycling, and food processing. Otherindustries include chemical processing,construction equipment sales, and machine toolmanufacturing.The market for Bay Area office space, like the BayArea economy in general, has softened in the pastsix months. During the time that most of the marketresearch for this plan was conducted, the economyand the office market were strong: vacant spacewas virtually unknown, rents were climbing intopreviously uncharted territory, and all vacant landswith any potential for nonresidential developmentwere considered candidates for office uses. Properites around BART stations have beenincreasingly attractive for employmentdevelopment. Projects in the Union City pipelineduring the investigation period for this studyincluded some office/light industrial campusdevelopment, expected to be occupied by high techproduction and high tech services companies. Thisevolution of new uses into higher-value activitiesindicates that Union City can participate in the landvalue increase that has occurred throughout theBay Area during the past several years.

City Council/RSA Agenda 62 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
activities, Union City will experience market
fluctuations, and demand for office development atthe BART station site may not become viable untilthe market recovers substantially.Projections of employment prepared by the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG; Projections 2000) anticipate the addition of approximately 3,600 jobs in Union City between 2000 and2020. These projections reflect expectations aboutthe locational patterns of regional economic growthin the Bay Area. However, they do not account forthe revised Union City General Plan Update(currently underway) that promotes intensivetransit-oriented development around the BARTstation. Although ABAG projections would supportapproximately 350,000 square feet of office space,it is reasonable - in light of market factors citedabove and the General Plan Update objectives - toexpect additional office development around theBART station.

H

O U S I N G
The Bay Area housing market remains strongdespite slower overall growth and weakening of thehigh tech economy. Altogether, according to ABAG,the Bay Area counties added nearly 483,000 jobsbut only 192,200 housing units during the 1990s, orabout 2.5 new jobs for every new housing unit. Inthe two Silicon Valley counties (San Mateo plusSanta Clara) plus Alameda County, 321,700 jobs and 94,500 housing units were added, equivalent toabout 3.4 new jobs for every new housing unit.Even with multiple workers per household, thisimbalance has resulted in longer commutes bySilicon Valley workers, many from eastern AlamedaCounty and the adjacent Central Valley counties ofSan Joaquin and Stanislaus.In this context, it is reasonable to assume thathouseholds with workers in Silicon Valley, as well ashouseholds with workers in the older Bay Areaemployment centers of San Francisco and Oakland,could be attracted to well designed and built,transit-accessible housing in Union City. ABAG’sProjections 2000 anticipates 4,400 new householdsin Union City during the 20-year planning period.Based on the General Plan Update and the buildoutof residential lands in the recent growth cycle, thisfigure is considered high. Nevertheless, affordablypriced housing adjacent to transit in a strategiclocation, such as Union City, will remain attractiveto Silicon Valley workers and others with jobs alongthe I-880 corridor.To date, most residential development in Union Cityhas been at single family or townhouse densities: in1999, approximately 75 percent of the existinghousing stock was in single family units, and only 15percent was in structures of five or more units.Current projects are primarily in the single family tomedium density range. However, the Verandas, amulti-family project across Union Square from theplanning area is built at 48 units per acre indicating

UNIONCITY
10 chapter 2 issues and opportunities
an acceptance of higher-density housing adjacentto transit. In the BART station area, affordable price and highquality projects with amenities will be key. Projectamenities could include, for example, exercisefacilities, landscaped areas, security systems, andhigh quality finishes within each unit.Neighborhood features such as restaurants, retailstores, and services are also important.If affordability and quality are delivered, thenresidential development at minimum densities of 50units per acre should find acceptance in themarketplace.

R E T A I L
According to the Economic Development Strategyprepared for the Union City General Plan Update,Union City is under-served by retail businesses. Asof 1998, the city had the lowest “capture rate” (thatis, sales per resident) of any city in south AlamedaCounty. Since that report was written, the newUnion Landing project by I-880, which will containapproximately 1 million square feet of buildingspace when completed, has been substantially builtout. This center will serve not only local demand butregional demand as well. Assuming reasonablesales volumes, Union Landing will increase the city’ssales per capita to a level that is greater than thecounty-wide average.Near the Intermodal Transit Facility site, threecorners of the intersection of Decoto Road with City Council/RSA Agenda 63 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 2 issues and opportunities 11

UNIONCITY
Alvarado-Niles Road are occupied by retaildevelopment. Existing development on the twocorners north of Alvarado-Niles Road – UnionSquare Marketplace on the east side of DecotoRoad, and El Mercado Plaza on the west side – isless-than-fully occupied. In past years these centershave had inconsistent success in their ability tomaintain tenants. However, El Mercado wasrecently purchased and the new owner isreconstructing several leasing spaces for newtenants, including Marina Market, an ethnic foodstore. Two vacancies for smaller shops exist in theUnion Square Marketplace across the street.Should land values continue to rise, redevelopmentof both of these corners is expected in the 20-yearplanning period, resulting in more intensive retailcommercial uses.Station area residents, workers, and transit riderswould most likely add market support to the existingretail centers.Office workers may support additional ground floorretail space within the immediate station area. It isgenerally estimated that each 100,000 square feetof office space could support between 2,500 and4,000 square feet of retail space.Retail space included in the plan for the StationDistrict would, therefore, be oriented primarilytoward the demands of office workers and transitriders. In turn, adjacent auto-oriented retail centerswill have a pedestrian-friendly model informingtheir redevelopment potential. transportation

T R A N S I T / R A I L C O N D I T I O N S
Transit service at the project includes BART andmultiple bus agencies, including AC Transit, UnionCity Transit, and the Dumbarton Express. Theexisting railroads within the area include the formerSouthern Pacific line on the eastern edge of theproject area and the Union Pacific line immediatelyeast of the BART tracks (both tracks are now ownedby Union Pacific Railroad). The railroad tracks travelat grade and the BART tracks are elevated on anearthen berm. Both of the rail lines carry freighttraffic.The only current operating passenger rail that runsthrough the Intermodal study area is the CapitolCorridor. The Capitol Corridor runs betweenSacramento and San Jose on the former SPRR line,making four round trips daily. Presently, the trainstops in several communities, including Haywardand Fremont (Centerville). At this time there is noCapitol Corridor passenger connection to BART inAlameda County. Capitol Corridor has beenencouraging the City to proceed with plans for astation in this area.Other planned passenger rail connections includethe Dumbarton Rail connecting to BART, the SiliconValley Rapid Transit Commuter Rail, and theAltamont Commuter Express (ACE) train. TheDumbarton Rail would run between the East Bayand the Peninsula on the UPRR line. The East Bayterminus and station hub is proposed on the UPRR line directly adjacent to the BART station. VTA is currently preparing a Major InvestmentStudy for several alternative transportation modesfor the Silicon Valley Rapid Transit Corridor,including BART, light rail, commuter rail, andexpress bus. One of these options identifies a trainconnection at Union City. This train would also stopon the UPRR line adjacent to BART.Regional transportation planners have identifiedthe potential of an ACE train connection from SanJose to the Union City BART station. Layover trainsthat are currently stationed in San Jose could makeconnections to Union City. No specific track hasbeen identified for this rail connection.Lastly, the California High Speed Rail Authority hasbegun its environmental review process to identifyappropriate routes for a bullet-type train betweenthe Bay Area and the Los Angeles Area. Three raillines are under consideration. Two of thealignments run through the Station District on theUPRR and former SPRR rights-of-way. This highspeed rail train would only stop in majormetropolitan cities with priority stops at majorairport connections and principal intermodalfacilities. Several possibilities to make rail passengerconnections in the intermodal area are underconsideration. With the Capitol Corridor trainoperating on the former SPRR line, the need for a City Council/RSA Agenda 64 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
passenger rail platform is apparent. Yet the
opportunity to make a direct connection betweenBART and commuter rail services on the UPRR lineshould also remain a priority. The intermodal plandoes not preclude any passenger rail connectionson either the UPRR or the former SPRR line.

E X I S T I N G A N D P R O P O S E D R O A D W A Y S
The project area is presently accessed by DecotoRoad and Union Square. Decoto Road is a four-lanemajor arterial that runs from Mission Boulevard toI-880 and the Dumbarton Bridge. Union Square isa short two-lane street that loops between DecotoRoad and Alvarado-Niles Road. Eleventh Street and State Route 84 are proposedstreets that are necessary for full development ofthe PG&E site and PSSC lands. State Route 84 is aproposed regional parkway that will provide analternate route between Mission Boulevard and I880. State Route 84 is fully funded under the “old”Measure B. Eleventh Street will be constructed bythe developers of PSSC property.

P E D E S T R I A N A N D B I C Y C L E CI R C U L A T I O N Field observations show existing pedestrian activityis moderate (40-50 pedestrians per hour) and fewbicyclists travel near Alvarado-Niles Road/DecotoRoad intersection. The observed levels of pedestrianand bicycle activity do not impede vehicleoperations.

UNIONCITY
12 chapter 2 issues and opportunities
The existing bicycle facilities within Union Cityconsist of off-street bicycle and pedestrian trailsfollowing the Alameda and Dry Creek corridors, aswell as on-street bike lanes and bike routes. Some ofthese bike facilities are continuous throughout theCity. There are bike lanes on Alvarado-Niles Roadand Decoto Road, although on Decoto Road thebike lanes are obscured because of the on-streetparking for BART commuters. As development in theCity continues, especially around BART, there maybe pressure to add additional traffic lanes toDecoto Road and Alvarado-Niles Road. As such,these bike lanes may need to be reconfigured orrelocated in the future.

I N T E R S E C T I O N A N A L Y S I S
Existing intersection analysis is focused alongDecoto Road, at the intersections with AlvaradoNiles Road and Union Square. The intersectiontraffic data was collected during the morning (7:00- 9:00 a.m.) and afternoon (4:00 - 6:00 p.m.) periodsin November 2000 at the study intersections. The Alvarado-Niles Road / Decoto Road intersectionoperates poorly at LOS E (multiple delays at signal)during both the morning and afternoon peak hours. The Union Square/Decoto Road intersectionoperates at an acceptable service level (LOS C)during both peak hours (cars seldom wait morethen one signal change at intersection); however, its operation is impacted by vehicle back-up from theAlvarado-Niles / Decoto Road intersection.

P A R K I N G C O N D I T I O N S
Field observations conducted in November 2000reflect parking demand generated by the Union CityBART station. The existing parking demand for theBART station is about 1,441 parking spaces. Thisincludes 1,208 vehicles parked in the BART lot,some of which are parked illegally, andapproximately 233 vehicles parked on-street in theStation vicinity. Some BART parking is occuring atthe Union Square Marketplace retail center.The existing parking supply does not meet thetransit parking demand as is indicated by thesignificant number of vehicles parked illegallywithin the BART parking lot and the number ofvehicles parked on-street.

City Council/RSA Agenda 65 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 2 issues and opportunities 13

UNIONCITY

CAPITOL CORRIDOR
BART
ACE

FUTURE HIGH-SPEED RAIL

AC TRANSIT

UNION CITY

TRANSIT

DUMBARTONEXPRESS/RAIL

CALTRAIN
figure 2-2 Regional Transit Framework
City Council/RSA Agenda 66 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
14 chapter 2 issues and opportunities
figure 2-4: Street PatternThere are three primary elements to the street pattern of Union City: the major arterials, the older residential grid, andthe newer feeder road and cul de sac pattern. • Older grid pattern allows flexibility and traffic dispersal• Newer feeder road and cul-de-sac patterns are less flexible and limit connectivity 5 M I N U T E B I C Y C L E R I D E
5 M I N U T E WA L K
5 MINUTE CAR RIDE (2.5 MILES)
figure 2-3: Walking and Bicycle DiagramThe entire project site is within a five minute walk from the Union City BART station and the future Intermodal TransitFacility, making it an ideal candidate for transit-oriented, pedestrian-friendly development.

City Council/RSA Agenda 67 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
chapter 2 issues and opportunities 15
figure 2-5: Transit FrameworkThe project site sits at the confluence of a number of local, regional, and statewide public transportation elements. Assuch it is uniquely suited as the location of a major intermodal transit facility. • BART, bus and potential commuter rail serve the project area.• The project area is adjacent to major existing and proposed roadways

RAIL CROSSINGS
figure 2-6 “Connectivity”There are significant opportunities and challenges when considering the connections to be made between the project siteand the surrounding community: BART and the rail lines provide unprecedented access to the Bay Area, while at the sametime making connections to the immediate surroundings difficult. •Limited grade access to adjacent properties•Visual access to hillside open space and landmarks City Council/RSA Agenda 68 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
16 chapter 2 issues and opportunities
figure 2-7: Proposed Land Use PatternThe project site is surrounded by 5 major land use categories: industrial, residential, commercial, open space, and public function. • Existing residential to the north and south• Existing commercial development to the west• Adjacent development parcels to the east and south currently being planned The project area is surrounded by diverse land uses,including: •the Decoto neighborhood to the north;•undeveloped and underdeveloped commercial /industrial land to the east, known as the DecotoIndustrial Park; •the PSSC site, which will provide residential and
office/light industrial uses;
•a new single family and multi-family
neighborhood to the south of the Litke property;and
•commercial and high density housing across
Union Square to the west.

In addition, Kennedy Park, a major city park andcommunity center, is located directly across DecotoRoad from the study area. The proposal for mixed-use high densitydevelopment around the BART station has helpedshape the land use designations of the surroundingarea. Office and research and development landuses are proposed for the Decoto Industrial Parkbetween the former Southern Pacific railroad tracksand 7th Street. Plans for the PSSC site include multifamily housing and office/industrial uses adjacentto the south border of the project area. land use context City Council/RSA Agenda 69 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
chapter 2 issues and opportunities 17
figure 2-8: Open SpaceThe project area is close to several major open space facilities and has the potential to connect to the county-wide openspace system. In addition, the hillside open spaces provide visual relief to development in the area. • Adjacent to Kennedy Park-a major community open space• Potential to create links to planned city trails and bikeway system• Viewshed to the hills figure 2-9 Development PotentialThe project site and the surrounding properties present significant opportunities to Union City. The developmentdecisions made on these parcels will set the course for Union City for years to come. • Project area is at the center of potential growth• 197 acres are vacant or immediately available• 53 additional acres are available within General Plan timetable City Council/RSA Agenda 70 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 71 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
3 concept plans

UNIONCITY
the stakeholders 20the community process 20land use goals and objectives 20transit facility goals and objectives 21the public workshops 22alternative station area concept plans 23 City Council/RSA Agenda 72 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
Community involvement took several forms in theevolution of the project. The Intermodal ActionTeam was created to provide a vehicle forcontinuous input throughout the process betweenthe consultant team, City government, the transitagencies and landowners, and interested citizens. In order to build support for a preferred concept onthe timetable required by the General Plan Update,the Intermodal Action Team used a series of publicworkshops to develop the land use and transit goalsand objectives that would guide this project throughto its conclusion.

Three interrelated teams of stakeholders workedtogether to bring this plan to completion. Theresponsibilities of each team are outlined below.For a complete listing of each team, please see thecredits.The General Plan Team worked to ensure that theIntermodal Station District and Transit Facility Planwas consistent with the vision for the greaterStation District area, as outlined in the upcomingUnion City General Plan Update. This teamconsisted of Union City officials and staff, andrepresentatives of the General Plan consultants andthe consultant team for the Intermodal StationDistrict and Transit Facility Plan.The Intermodal Action Team worked to address theDistrict plan and design of the Intermodal TransitFacility. The team consisted of electedrepresentatives, officials, Union City staff, membersof the consultant team, representatives from transitagencies, and citizens.The Consultant Team was responsible for creatingthe final project report. The consultant teamincluded expertise in the following areas: transitstation design and engineering, transit funding,market analysis, traffic engineering, transportationservices, planning, architectural design, andconsensus building. •Planning for the Station District should
complement the General Plan goals of the City ofUnion City, and the goals of the transit providers.

A D E S I G N M O D E L F O R 21 S T CE N T U R YL I V I N G A N D W O R K I N G •The Intermodal Transit Facility should be the
nucleus of a vibrant, transit-oriented mixed-usedistrict that is a destination for the City of UnionCity and the region. •Development in the Station District should be of
the highest architectural quality and reflect theimage of Union City in the 21st century. •The Station District should include a fully
integrated public art program with links to theintermodal station.

A T R A N S I T -O R I E N T E D DI S T R I C T
•The Station District land uses and urban design
should maximize transit usage and minimizeautomobile dependence. •The Station District should be designed to allow
for improved access to the intermodal station fortransit providers and patrons. •The Station District should provide maximum
connectivity between the transit faciity and thesurrounding neighborhoods.

A M I X E D -U S E DI S T R I C T
•The Station District should include opportunities
for light industrial, office, commercial, highdensity mixed-income residential, ground floorretail, and community uses. 20 chapter 3 concept planthe stakeholders community process land use goals and objectives figure 3-1Developing the vision at the community workshop.

City Council/RSA Agenda 73 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
chapter 3 concept plan 21
transit facility goals & objectives
The final facility program reflects both qualitativeperformance criteria developed by the IntermodalAction Team and quantitative data (schedules,routes, space requirements) collected by theconsultant team. The qualitative criteria arecontained in the following goals and objectives.

A S O U N D P U B L I C I N V E S T M E N T
•The Intermodal Transit Facility and the related
Station District should maximize the investmentreturn to the transit operators, the City of UnionCity, and transit patrons.

A N E F F I C I E N T T R A N S I T N E T W O R K
•The Intermodal Transit Facility should be
operationally functional, safe, and accessible toall transit providers and transit patrons. •The Intermodal Transit Facility should be
developed as a double-sided facility that promotesclear, convenient, and improved access betweenthe City, the surrounding district, and between alltransit modes. •The design of the Intermodal Transit Facility and
the Station District should provide sufficient spacefor all transit modes and transit functions andmeet all applicable transit design standards.Opportunities for shared uses and efficienciesshould also be explored.

STRONG LINKS TO THE SURROUNDING DI S TRICT S
•The Intermodal Transit Facility should provide
pedestrians and cyclists with safe and direct
connections to surrounding districts in order tominimize conflicts with automobiles and buses. •The Intermodal Transit Facility should have clear
connections to the city wide open space network.

A FLEXIBLE FRAMEWORK FOR THE FUTURE OF TRANSIT
•The design of the Intermodal Transit Facility
should anticipate the future expansion of transitservices. •The design of the Intermodal Transit Facility
should allow for flexible responses to evolvingtransit operations.

A W E L L -D E S I G N E D E N V I R O N M E N T
•The Intermodal Transit Facility should be a vibrant
center of activity with a regional presence thatencourages increased transit ridership. •The Intermodal Transit Facility should be an
architectural landmark for the City of Union Cityand transit providers. It should heighten andimprove the experience of using public transit forpatrons. •The Intermodal Transit Facility should include a
fully integrated public art program that links tothe Station District. •The Intermodal Transit Facility shall meet the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission’sparatransit and access guidelines.

A N E N H A N C E D P A S S E N G E R E X P E R I E N C E •The Intermodal Transit Facility should include
convenient access to shared parking that has
•The Station District should include inviting parks,
plazas, and community functions thatcomplement the Intermodal Transit Facility andthe surrounding land uses.

A N I N T E G R A L P A R T O F U N I O N CI T Y
•The Station District should have clear connections
to the citywide network of open spaces.
•The Station District should be easily accessible to
other neighborhoods in Union City, especially forpedestrians and bicycles.

A G O O D N E I G H B O R
•The Station District should be pedestrian-friendly
with a design that minimizes the impact ofparking on the quality of the streetscape and theneighborhood. •The range of uses and design of the circulation
systems in the Station District should minimize thedisruption of existing traffic in Union City. •The circulation, public spaces, and land uses of
the Station District should be integrated with thesurrounding neighborhoods.

City Council/RSA Agenda 74 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
figure 3-2
Hands-on 3D modeling helps develop the vision at the community workshop.

UNIONCITY
22 chapter 3 concept plan
minimal impact on the quality of the pedestrianenvironment. •The design of the Intermodal Transit Facility
should include passenger amenities,incorporating opportunities for joint developmentor community services where appropriate. •The Intermodal Transit Facility should include a
system of clear wayfinding and signage that canbe integrated with the identity programs of theCity and the transit providers. were priorities in each of the schemes. Opportunities ranged from the everyday quality oflife (a pedestrian-friendly, car-free, mixed-useneighborhood) to the visionary (a showplace andnew front door). The obstacles were almostexclusively concerned with the lack of connections,including the relationship to adjacent land uses,nearby neighboring districts, and the barriers (bothvisual and physical) created by the existing transitinfrastructure of the elevated BART tracks and theat grade rail lines. These concerns became some of the key issues inthe station design workshop with the transitproviders.

T H E T R A N S I T F A C I L I T Y W O R K S H O P
A transit facility workshop was held with theIntermodal Action Team to explore various means ofaccommodating the full transit program. Primaryelements of the program include: 19 bus bays,drop-off and pick-up facilities for privateautomobiles, taxis, paratransit and shuttles, and apassenger rail platform. This program was basedon extensive discussions with transit agencies andan evaluation of bus service prepared byNelson/Nygaard, the transportation consultants onthe Consultant Team.The interaction of the participants led to thedevelopment of three distinct Intermodal TransitFacility design concepts: the “String”, the “Combo”and the “Loop”.

T H E C O M M U N I T Y W O R K S H O P
Once the land use goals and objectives wereestablished, a community workshop was held tosolicit ideas about the future of the study area,define a public vision, and better inform the designprocess of the consulting team. In the public workshop, four working groups builtthree-dimensional land-use models of the StationDistrict, while exploring organizing principles of thearea. Organizing principles include connections tosurrounding areas, land uses (including theadjacent areas), open space networks, street grids,and big ideas. The groups were charged with answering thefollowing questions:
•What are the three defining elements that
characterize the vision for your project?
•What are the three biggest opportunities that
you seized to implement your vision?
•What are the three biggest obstacles that need
to be overcome to fulfill your vision?
•What name illustrates the concept of your
project?
There was great consistency in the possible namesfor the project - Gateway Village, the Gateway,Union Center and Union Vista – suggestive of aneed for a new town center in Union City. Thedefining elements of the schemes were also telling,with an emphasis on creating community,connectivity, and new neighborhoods. Open space,connections, and a new mixed-use neighborhood the public workshops
City Council/RSA Agenda 75 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
chapter 3 concept plan 23
The “String” utilized the vacant right of waybetween BART and the UPRR railroad tracks. Onegoal was to maximize the site area available fordevelopment, using this residual land for surfacetransit operations. This scheme was rejected due tooperational and passenger concerns.The “Combo” located the bus facility on the groundfloor of a transit-parking garage. To create a lightand airy space, a significant increase in groundfloor height was proposed at a high cost. Lightwells brought in natural light and a large glassatrium with retail amenities was designed to givethe City the strong architectural statement that itwas seeking. While this option maximized the figure 3-3The “String” Concept

BUS FACILITY BETWEEN BART

AND RAILROAD TRACKS
BART

PASSENGER RAIL STATION
figure 3-4The “Combo” Concept

TRANSIT

PARKING
figure 3-5The “Loop” Concept

BUS FACILITY ON

OUTDOOR LOOP
Building upon the results of the communityworkshop and the transit agency workshop, SMWMdeveloped three distinct land use alternatives thatwere given names to convey their primaryattributes: “Local Color”, “Town Square” and“Greenways”. Each of the alternatives depicted adifferent Intermodal Transit Facility layout andcirculation system. The concept plans were built upon four elements:•City’s General Plan goals;•Stakeholders’ goals;•Community vision from the public workshop; and•Results of planning, economic, and transportation analysis.
efficiency of the land by combining the station withparking, it also increased the size of the parkinggarage at the main entrance to the site by using thetall ground floor for transit operations. In the “Loop”, the bus facility occupied a loop roadin front of and to the left of the BART station flankedby a transit-parking garage and a community openspace that functioned as the focus for developmenton the BART property. This alternative required anoff-site layover facility for the buses not activelyusing the loading loop. This option was furtheranalyzed for efficiency and, with modifications,became the basis for the preferred bus transitalternative, known as the “Double Loop”. alternative station area concept plans
BART

PASSENGER RAIL STATION PASSENGER RAIL STATION
BART
BUS FACILITY ON 1st

FLOOR OF TRANSIT
GARAGE
City Council/RSA Agenda 76 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
figure 3-6
“Local Color” Preliminary Alternative Land Use Concept

L A N D US E
Both sides of the BART line have a mix of land uses:a residential neighborhood enclave, officedevelopment parcels and transit parking.

T R A N S I T S T A T I O N : T H E “ S T R I N G ”
The intermodal bus facility utilizes the vacant rightof way between the Union Pacific track and theBART line, preserving site area for non-transit uses.

O P E N S P A C E C O N C E P T
A series of three open spaces occur at the primarytransit facilities: at both entries to the double-sidedBART station and in front of the commuter railstation.

B L O C K P A T T E R N
The block pattern is designed to promote pedestrianactivity and to minimize through-traffic in theresidential enclaves. Pedestrian networks within theresidential blocks create a more accessible and safeenvironment.

UNIONCITY
24 chapter 3 concept planlocal color: alternative 1
City Council/RSA Agenda 77 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY

L A N D US E
This alternative emphasizes campus-style officedevelopment. Residential development is located inthe small blocks between Eleventh Street and theBART line. A frontage road provides a bufferbetween the housing and the transit lines. Thebalance of the plan is office space. Transit parkingis located in structures on both sides of the BARTstation.

T R A N S I T F A C I L I T Y : T H E “ L O O P ”
The intermodal bus facility is shown in front of thetransit parking on the BART property. This highlyvisible bus facility is also located adjacent to amajor linear open space that connects the BARTstation with Union Square. In this alternative, thecommuter rail station is on the Union Pacific track.One result of this arrangement is a double-sidedmulti-modal transit station with two front doors fortransit users.

O P E N S P A C E C O N C E P T
Two primary open spaces are included: aneighborhood park to the east of BART and a morepublic park to the west of BART that serves transitpatrons and office workers.

B L O C K P A T T E R N
The street grid pattern of small blocks for theresidential development and larger parcels for theoffice development has been designed to allow forfuture flexibility in the design of the office parcels. chapter 3 concept plan 25
town square: alternative 2
figure 3-7“Town Square” Preliminary Alternative Land Use Concept City Council/RSA Agenda 78 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
figure 3-8
“Greenways” Preliminary Alternative Land Use Concept

UNIONCITY
26 chapter 3 concept plan

L A N D US E
The predominant land use pattern places housingsouth of the BART station and office uses andtransit-related infrastructure north of the BARTstation. Public spaces are organized along the eastwest spine on either side of the BART station.

T R A N S I T F A C I L I T Y : T H E “C O M B O ”
The intermodal bus facility is located on the groundfloor of a transit parking structure located on theBART property. Retail uses ‘buffer’ the adjacentopen space from the transit parking and busfacilities and provide retail for transit patrons. Apleasant street accommodates intermodal transfersto the passenger rail station on the former SouthernPacific tracks.

O P E N S P A C E C O N C E P T
This alternative combines two distinctive openspace concepts. The east side of Eleventh Street isa 50 foot wide greenway envisioned as a usableopen space and an inviting streetscape forcommunity use, outdoor dining and cafés. The openspace spine aligned east-to-west along the BARTstation provides an opportunity for a communityfacility, a plaza to the east and a park to the west ofBART.

B L O C K P A T T E R N
Eleventh Street in envisioned as a “front door” to theStation District. The perpendicular streets provideaccess to the adjacent parcels. Streets in theresidential enclave are designed to promotepedestrian activity.greenways: alternative 3 City Council/RSA Agenda 79 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
4 station district plan

UNIONCITY
station district concept plan 28development program 32street and roadway improvements 34 City Council/RSA Agenda 80 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Based on Planning Commission review and
subsequent public testimony, the “Greenways”alternative emerged as the preferred concept forfurther development. A revised version of“Greenways” that reflects these comments wasultimately approved by the City Council as the basisfor final design development. The new plan added office and retail uses to theBART site, created a Railroad Avenue link on thePG&E site, moved housing away from the easternside of the BART station to flank the communityparcel, and located one transit parking garage onthe east side and one on the west side of the BARTstation. A modified “double-loop” option for the IntermodalTransit Facility was selected as the most conduciveto meeting transit and development goals. The mixof land uses and development intensities for theStation District creates an attractive and excitingplace to live, work, and play. It will have adistinctive identity and easily accessible facilitiesconnected to existing neighborhoods. Moreover, itwill be a district that is based on walkability andtransit access, where people can ride transit to andfrom work, walk to the corner grocery, and relaxand play in a neighborhood park.

UNIONCITY

L A N D US E
Office and retail uses are located adjacent to theBART station, the east plaza, and along EleventhStreet and Decoto Road. Residentialneighborhoods flank the community facility parceland face the existing residential development, (theVerandas) along Union Square.

T R A N S I T F A C I L I T Y
A “double loop” bus facility is placed in a transitplaza linking the BART station to Union Square. Apedestrian underpass and a new east entranceconnects to a passenger rail station on the formerSouthern Pacific tracks.

O P E N S P A C E C

O N C E P T
A central east-west community spine organizes theDistrict’s public open spaces, including a transitplaza in front of BART, and an east plaza merginginto a community commons on Eleventh Street.New pedestrian and bicycle greenways along therail lines, the canal, and throughout the Districtprovide linkages to existing greenways.

B L O C K P A T T E R N /C I R C U L A T I O N
Eleventh Street is a landscaped boulevard that willserve as the primary access for the eastern portionof the District. Secondary east-west streets provideaccess to adjacent parcels and pedestrian alleysprovide mid-block access. The loop road discussedabove provides access to BART, parking garages,and the new development parcels for the westernportion of the District on BART property. the station district concept plan28 chapter 4 station district plan City Council/RSA Agenda 81 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 4 station district plan 29

UNIONCITY
figure 4-1 The Station District Concept Plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 82 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
30 chapter 4 station district plan
figure 4-2 Land Use Context and Neighborhood Connections City Council/RSA Agenda 83 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 4 station district plan 31

UNIONCITY
figure 4-3 Intermodal Station District Land Use Plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 84 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
In addition to the Intermodal Transit Facility and the
transit parking, the overall program includesapproximately 1.12 million square feet of officespace, a minimum of 469 housing units, and up to100,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving retail.The development program includes 75,000 squarefeet for a new community facility, 40,000 squarefeet for child care and social services in the corearea near the BART station, and almost 3 acres ofnew open space on site, with an additional 1.5 acresof new open space immediately adjacent to the site.Fire service and other public safety needs for theStation District should be planned in conjunctionwith the public service needs of the surroundingareas. The plan requires a minimum floor-area ratio of 1.0for the office uses on any parcel, with an overall sitefloor-area ratio requirement of 2.0 for the District.All office developments are recommended toparticipate in a parking district for the site. Projectsdeveloped in the initial phases are proposed toprovide a master plan that indicates howsubsequent phases will be developed to meet therequired average floor-area ratio of 2.0. Thesemaster plans would also address parking and thephasing of parking structures. Residential developments are programmed at aminimum density of 50 dwelling units per acrealthough the General Plan allows for higher

UNIONCITY
32 chapter 4 station district plandevelopment program
the implementation of these strategies.
•Provide metered on-street parallel parking
throughout the Station District as shown on thestreet sections. Restrict this parking to shortterm parking to serve neighborhood retail.

P A R K I N G S T A N D A R D S
Parking for the project area should be provided in aphased strategy where surface lots are convertedinto structured parking facilities as developmentoccurs. •For commercial use, the long-term goal of the
District is an off-street parking ratio of 2.3 carsper 1000 square feet of development. Duringthe initial stages of development, parking maybe provided in off-site parking structures orinterim surface lots at ratios currently specifiedin the Union City Zoning Ordinance. Parkingshould be linked to implementation of thetransportation demand management program.Developers will be expected to create a masterdevelopment plan that outlines how reductionscan be achieved over time. •For residential uses, .5 covered spaces on site
per unit bedroom will be provided, with aminimum ratio of 1 covered space per dwellingunit. •For retail and community uses, no off-street
parking is required. Shared parkingarrangements between the transit parkinggarages and/or the parking district garagesshould be created. densities. Each residential project should include atleast 36 square feet of usable open space for eachunit on site. These open spaces might includebalconies, interior courtyards, and roof gardens.

P A R K I N G R E C O M M E N D A T I O N S
Parking requirements are one of the most importantfactors affecting the long-term success andcharacter of the Station District. Sufficient parkingmust be provided to make development functionaland economically feasible, but current parkingrequirements are not conducive to the creation of acompact, pedestrian- and transit-oriented District asoutlined in the project vision. Therefore, thefollowing parking requirements for the StationDistrict are recommended:
•Establish of an independent parking district to
regulate the parking supply and pricing for theredevelopment area. The parking district shallset parking pricing policies, define parking cashout programs, provide parking enforcement andoversee a project area transportation demandmanagement program. •Provide a transportation demand management
program for the project area that includes suchelements as parking pricing, rideshareprograms, parking cash-out programs, transitincentives, shared-over-time parking,car/vanpool preferential parking, spilloverparking management strategies, and on-siteemployee services (childcare, dry cleaning,banking, etc.). The parking district shall oversee City Council/RSA Agenda 85 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
PG&E Site (29.84 acres gross): 699,400 sq. ft. of office and research and development 204 housing units (minimum)
BART Site (14.23 acres gross): 489,600 sq. ft. of office and research and development Litke Properties Site (6 acres gross): 265 housing units (minimum) Shelton Site (24 acres gross): 546,000 sq. ft. of office and research and development Air Liquide Site (7.4 acres gross): 157,958 sq. ft. of office and research and development PSSC Site (60 acres gross): 400,000 sq. ft. of office/industrial 128 single family homes
138 town houses
232 multi-family homes
Union Square Office Properties
Atul Tandon Property (.45 acres gross): 24,000 sq. ft. of office Union Square Offices (2.9 acres gross): 156,816 sq. ft. of office chapter 4 station district plan 33

UNIONCITY
build-out as shown in the preferred plan for the station district - net acres build-out for key surrounding properties (based on general plan update in gross acres) table 4-1Project Build-Out
City Council/RSA Agenda 86 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
•Traffic signals should be installed on Eleventh
Street as indicated on the street improvementsmap (figure 4-4) to provide multiple crossingopportunities for pedestrians. • All new signalized intersections on Decoto Road
should be interconnected to the existing DecotoRoad signal system to allow for optimal timing. • Access to Union Square by way of Alvarado-Niles
Road should be encouraged in order to easetraffic on Decoto Road.

P E D E S T R I A N A N D B I C Y C L E I M P R O V E M E N T S •The project provides a multi-use trail along the
Railroad Avenue alignment through the projectsite. North of Decoto Road, a bicycle boulevardalong Railroad Avenue should be providedthrough the City, connecting the numerousplanned bike routes, lanes, and paths. •Pedestrian circulation should be the dominant
design consideration. A pedestrian environmentshould be established on both the east and westside of the BART plaza. The design shouldminimize conflicts between pedestrians, vehicles,and bicycles. •Bicycle detectors should be located at the
signalized intersections to improve bicyclecirculation. • The existing mid-block pedestrian connection at
Union Square, between the Intermodal Facilityand the Marketplace commercial center, shouldbe enhanced and improved to promote pedestrianaccess and safety.

IMPROVEMENTS TO EXISTING STREETS & ROADWAYS
•Designated dual left-turn lanes with two through
lanes should be installed for all approaches at theAlvarado-Niles Road/Decoto Road intersection.The additional turn lanes will provide circulationbenefits to local travel with additional throughlanes to benefit traffic traveling through UnionCity. •The Alvarado-Niles Road/Decoto Road
intersection is currently a constraint in thetransportation system within Union City. Analysisindicates that this intersection will continue to becongested during the AM and PM peak hoursthrough the 2015 horizon year studied in theCaltrans Route 84 Realignment Project TrafficOperations Report, (Source: Table 4 and 5). •Traffic signals should be installed at the Eleventh
Street/Decoto Road and Railroad Avenue/DecotoRoad intersections. Eleventh Street providesprimary access to development east of the BARTstation and provides a direct connection betweenDecoto Road and the State Route 84 HistoricParkway alignment. Railroad Avenue provides anexcellent multi-modal benefit, allowing bicycliststo easily access the Railroad Avenue corridor andplanned north-south bicycle circulation.Additionally, the Railroad Avenue traffic signalprovides a secondary access point to thedevelopment site. Railroad Avenue currentlyprovides no auto access into the Decoto neighborhood. street and roadway improvements

N E W S T R E E T S A N D R O A D W A Y S
•New streets and improvements to existing streets
and roadways in the project area are shown infigure 4-4 and outlined in this section. •A new intermodal loop road west of the BART
station will provide an important connection toDecoto Road. The road is currently designed forone-way circulation serving kiss-and-ride vehicles(those picking up or dropping off transit patrons)and vehicles exiting development on the northside of the intermodal transit plaza. Vehiclesaccessing parking areas south of the intermodaltransit plaza will be directed to exit via UnionSquare and not cross in front of the BART station. •The project includes three proposed greenways,
located adjacent to Railroad Avenue, on the canalfrontage to the south side of the project site, andparallel to the Union Pacific railroad tracks. TheUnion Pacific greenway will provide an off-streetbicycle path east of the Union Pacific tracks thatare located adjacent to BART. The greenwayshould minimize bicycle and pedestrian conflictswith vehicle traffic around the BART Station. Atthe greenway’s intersection with Decoto Road,bicyclists should be directed to the safety of thesignalized intersections at Eleventh Street and atthe intermodal loop road west of the BART station. •Service areas for the buildings in the
redevelopment area (PG&E property) should belocated on the side streets to minimize conflicts. 34 chapter 4 station district plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 87 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
figure 4-4Recommendations - Street and Roadway Improvements chapter 4 station district plan 35
City Council/RSA Agenda 88 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
figure 4-5Eleventh Street Section - Main Boulevard East of the BART Station figure 4-6East-West Street Section - Secondary Streets
36 chapter 4 station district plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 89 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
figure 4-7Typical Pedestrian Alley Section - Between Buildings figure 4-8Railroad Avenue Section - Adjacent to Former Southern Pacific Tracks chapter 4 station district plan 37
City Council/RSA Agenda 90 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
figure 4-9
Intermodal Loop Road Section - West Side of BART Station

UNIONCITY
38 chapter 4 station district plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 91 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 4 station district plan 39

UNIONCITY
figure 4-10Intermodal Loop Road at Litke Property - Two Way figure 4-11Typical Canal Greenway Section - South Boundary of District City Council/RSA Agenda 92 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 93 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
5 intermodal transit facility plan

UNIONCITY
intermodal transit facility concept 40intermodal transit plaza and bus roundabout 42 BART station enhancement 43passenger rail station 45transit parking facilities 46 City Council/RSA Agenda 94 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
U
N
I
O
N
C
I
T
Y
I
N
T
E
R
M
O
D
As reflected in the Station District concept planoutlined in Chapter 4, the BART station functions asthe centerpiece within the east-west pedestrianspine that runs from Union Square to the formerSouthern Pacific Railroad (SPRR) line, andpotentially through the Shelton property beyond.Organized within the spine are various transitfacilities, including the bus roundabout, passengerrail stations, and the BART station. The facility design process required the integrationof competing objectives. Goals such as thecompactness of the station (to achieve convenienttransfers between modes of transit and to maximizeland use for office and housing) and generosity oftransit-related space (to allow for current needs andadequate expansion) needed to be balanced. the intermodal transit facility concept Key issues in the design of the Intermodal TransitFacility included:
•Intermodal connectivity and efficient transfers
(rail to rail, bus to rail, bus to bus)
•Current and future capacity•User experience, including safety, comfort and amenities
•Location relative to the Station District•Operations and access for transit providers•Sufficient transit commuter parking•Joint development potential•Phasing •Existing and future context•Architectural/urban qualities, which create an elegant and distinctive landmark facility as thecenterpiece of the District.

UNIONCITY
figure 5-1Intermodal Transit Facility Concept Elevation As outlined in Chapter 3 of this report, three distinctfacility design concepts were explored: the “String”,the “Combo” and the “Loop”. Transit agency inputand public comment led to the adoption of a“Double Loop” concept as the preferred alternative.In this alternative the bus facility becomes a grandtransit plaza that acts as the forecourt for the westside of the BART station. All bus operations arehighly visible and conveniently arrayed to makeintermodal transfers as straightforward as possible.One of the key features of this alternative is a grandlinear canopy that provides a covered walkwaybetween Union Square and the front door of theBART station. This canopy orients transit riders andprovides a strong pedestrian connection betweenBART and Union Square. The canopy presents greatopportunities for a unique and elegant landmark 40 chapter 5 intermodal transit facility
City Council/RSA Agenda 95 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 5 intermodal transit facility plan 41

UNIONCITY
KEY1. Intermodal Transit Plaza and Bus Roundabout2. Enhanced Existing BART Station3. Intermodal Loop Road4. Pedestrian Underpass5. Passenger Rail Station Location (UPRR)6. Passenger Rail Station Location (former SPRR)7. Transit Commuter Parking Facilities8. Grade Separated Pedestrain Connection to Shelton Property9. North Commons10. South Commons figure 5-2Intermodal Transit Facility Concept Plan
design that will be the symbol of Union City well intothe 21st Century.Infrastructure utilities will be provided to allow forthe addition of passenger amenities under thecanopy in the future. The ground floors of the officebuildings flanking the intermodal plaza will containretail that caters to the needs of office workers andtransit patrons. Other amenities could include daycare, fitness, and services such as dry cleaning.Directly east of the BART station is a possiblepassenger rail platform location on the UnionPacific Railroad (UPRR) line. Another possiblelocation for passenger rail is on the former SouthernPacific Railroad (SPRR) line on the east side of theDistrict. All of these transit facilities are connectedby wide pedestrian walkways, including apedestrian underpass under the BART and UPRRtracks, and a grade-separated pedestrainconnection to the Shelton site at the SPRR tracks.

City Council/RSA Agenda 96 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
42 chapter 5 intermodal transit facility
KEY(1-19). Bus Bays1. Central Canopy and Waiting Area2. Side Waiting Areas3. 2-Way Bus Drive Aisle4. Raised Pedestrian Crossings5. Intermodal Loop Road6. BART Station7. BART Plaza8. Pedestrian Underpass intermodal transit plaza and bus roundabout
figure 5-3Intermodal Transit Plaza and Bus Roundabout
The future Intermodal Transit Facility is designed tomaximize the efficiency of bus operations byproviding a dedicated busway separated fromautomobile circulation. In the preferred alternative– the “Double Loop” – buses circulate in oppositedirections and stop at a center island or atperimeter bus bays. AC Transit, Union City Transitand the Dumbarton Express will have access to 19bus bays, including bays for four 60-foot articulatedcoaches and two 50-foot coaches. The center islandincorporates a continuous linear canopy connectingUnion Square to the BART station, while the sideaisle bus bays have more traditional individual busshelters. In both the center island and the sideaisles, transit patrons will have access to seatingand transit information. When crossing vehicletravel lanes, pedestrians will need to be directed tospecific crosswalks to minimize conflicts betweenbuses, other vehicles, and pedestrians.To enhance the transit user experience, a canopy oftrees and other plantings are provided to create anoverall sense of a landscaped environment. All ofthe transit operators will share rest room and breakroom facilities located in the center island toprovide casual supervision of the Facility. Publicrest rooms are also highly recommended forinclusion in the Facility at a location to bedetermined during the final design phases.

City Council/RSA Agenda 97 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 5 intermodal transit facility plan 43

UNIONCITY
BART station enhancementsfigure 5-4 BART Station EnhancementsBART station and plaza with the new intermodal loop road and pedestrianunderpass. 1 3
4 5 2
AA
5 8
13 12 11 14
10 9
11 9
6 67
See figure 5-5 for Pedestrian underpass illustration

1. Existing BART station entrance2. Existing paid underpass3. Enlarged west side BART station entrance4. New east side BART station entrance5. New pedestrian underpass: 25-feet wide minimum6. Ramps and stairs to pedestrian underpass7. Passenger rail station location (UPRR)8. BART station plaza9. Intermodal loop road10. Raised pedestrian crossing and overhead canopy from bus roundabout

11. “Kiss-and-Ride” passenger drop-off zone12. Paratransit zone13. Taxi stand14. Employee shuttle zone expansion to the South Bay, which includespassenger rail service on either the UPRR tracks, theformer SPRR tracks or both. Improvements to theexisting BART plaza are recommended tocomplement the development of the new east plazaand the intermodal transit plaza.

T H E I N T E R M O D A L L O O P R O A D
In addition to the intermodal transit plaza and busroundabout, an intermodal loop road wasincorporated to provide private autos, taxis,paratransit, and shuttles access to the BART station,while providing a necessary separation from thebus operations. The intermodal loop road alsoprovides access to the BART parking garage andparking for the adjacent offices.

KEY
The Transit Facility goals and objectives developedby the Intermodal Action Team were used as astarting point for the BART station enhancementsshown in the conceptual design plan.Recommendations outlined in the drawings and textare advisory and will be subject to change as partof BART’s future station-specific design plans. TheIntermodal Action Team recommended thefollowing enhancements:

B A R T S T A T I O N
The station entrance should be expanded to providea more generous area for passenger entry, egressand ticketing. An additional station entrance on theeast side was recommended to address the futuredevelopment on the PG&E site and regional City Council/RSA Agenda 98 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
figure 5-5 Pedestrian Underpass
Section through the new BART/Union Pacific Pedestrian Underpass

UNIONCITY
An accessible pedestrian underpass to link the twosides of the BART tracks is not only recommended,it is also considered a Phase I priority. The locationof the underpass to the north is required, due to theexisting BART infrastructure, and was sited toprevent costly construction or the interruption oftransit services. The underpass would also crossPedestrian Underpass at BART beneath the UPRR tracks and any future passengerrail platforms on this track. An additionalrecommendation is to explore the opportunities forjoint development (such as a coffee or sandwichshop) at the ends of the pedestrian link, to enhancethe sense of security. 1 2
2 4
33 5

1. BART Station Platform2. New Pedestrian Underpass3. Pedestrian Ramps

4. UPRR/Passenger Rail Station Location5. BART Station Plaza KEY
44 chapter 5 intermodal transit facility
City Council/RSA Agenda 99 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY

P A S S E N G E R R A I L I M P R O V E M E N T S
The transit infrastructure for the passenger railstations was evaluated for both current and futuredemand. While the ultimate program for eitherlocation (SPRR or UPRR) is for two 1000-footplatforms, in the short term 600-foot platforms willsuffice. Passenger facilities including ticketing,waiting areas, rest rooms, and operator facilitieswere among the required features of any railstation, regardless of location. In order to provideconvenient access for transit patrons, eachpassenger rail stations passenger rail station will require a drop-off areaand a minimum of two dedicated bus bays.

PEDES TRIAN CONNECT ION AT FORMER SPRR L INE
A grade-separated pedestrian connection is alsoproposed for the former SPRR tracks to provideaccess between the Intermodal Transit Facility andthe office, research and development, andindustrial uses east of this line. At this time nospecific location for the pedestrian connection hasbeen determined.

RAILROAD AVENUE

RAILROAD AVENUE GREENWAY

STATION

AMTRAK BUS DROP-OFF KISS-AND-RIDE PASSENGER DROP-OFF

LOADING PLATFORMLOADING PLATFORM

FORMER SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS
chapter 5 intermodal transit facility plan 45
figure 5-6 Passenger Rail StationPossible layout for a passenger rail station on the former Southern Pacific right of way location.

City Council/RSA Agenda 100 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
46 chapter 5 intermodal transit facility
transit commuter parking facilitiesThe amount of parking to provide for transitcommuters was discussed in depth by theIntermodal Action Team. The plan assumes thatalmost all of the existing surface parking on theBART property will be accommodated in structuredparking on site (shown below as Garage A). A newparking garage on the east side of the BART tracksis sized to handle the increased demand that willresult from the addition of transit providers servingthe Station District and the proposed BARTextension to San Jose.The Station District plan for the garage on BARTproperty reflects a seven-story structure toaccommodate 1,150 transit parking spaces and200 office parking spaces. As the concept isdeveloped, architectural alternatives will need to beexplored to minimize the mass of the garage. Onerecommendation is to provide two undergroundand five above ground parking levels. Alternatively,the upper floors of a seven level garage could bestepped back in order to create the appearance ofa less massive building. With the redevelopment of the PG&E parcel forcommercial space and housing, the BART stationwill serve both sides of the site. The potentialexpansion of BART to San Jose will also generatenew commute patterns. Placing the garages onopposite sides of the BART tracks helps to disperse figure 5-7 Transit Parking Garages
4 6
3 2
1 5
KEY1. Transit/Office Parking Garage A2. Transit Parking Garage B3. Intermodal Transit Plaza4. BART Station5. Passenger Rail Station - UPRR6. East Plaza parking throughout the district. Garage B, shownon the PG&E site, is designed to connect to EleventhStreet. Traffic could then feed into the proposedState Route 84 south of the site. This garagecontains 1,350 transit parking spaces and isconceived to have one below-grade and five abovegrade parking levels.

City Council/RSA Agenda 101 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
6 design recommendations

UNIONCITY
design recommendations overview 49public space and infrastructure 50streets and roadways 62buildings and structures 69sustainability 75 City Council/RSA Agenda 102 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 103 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
figure 6-2
Existing PG&E Storage Yard East of the BART Station (2001). chapter 6 design recommendations 49

UNIONCITY

I N T R O D U C T I O N
The purpose of the Design Recommendations is todefine the form and character that newdevelopment must take in order to achieve thevision as outlined in the Goals and Objectivessection of this report. In summary, these goals andobjectives call for the creation of a vital, livable,pedestrian- and transit-oriented Station District andan attractive, inviting, and efficient IntermodalTransit Facility. The expanded project team ofcitizens, City representatives, transit agencies, andplanners believes good design creates value andthat the new Station District and Intermodal Facilityshould be of the highest quality.design recommendations overview

O R G A N I Z A T I O N
Each element begins with a statement of designprinciples, which outlines the fundamentalassumptions behind the design recommendations.Following the principles is a description of thedistrict character, which outlines the overallproperties necessary to create a cohesive welldesigned Station District and Intermodal TransitFacility. These properties are further defined in asection called the General DesignRecommendations, which apply to that elementthroughout the District. Lastly, Specific DesignRecommendations are proposed, which apply tounique conditions that require further elaborationand definition. In cases where the Specific DesignRecommendations exclude or contradict theGeneral Design Recommendations, the SpecificDesign Recommendations shall apply. figure 6-1Existing BART Station and Parking Lot Looking North (2001).

S C O P E
The design recommendations shape the buildingand urban design elements that have the greatestimpact on the overall character of the district. Thischapter provides sections on each of the followingelements:•The Public Realm:
•Public Spaces and Infrastructure
•Open Spaces and Community Facilities•The Intermodal Transit Facility •Streets and Roadways
•Buildings and Structures:
•Office Development•Residential Development•Retail Development•Parking Structures In addition, a brief outline of recommended topicson sustainability is included at the end of thissection.

City Council/RSA Agenda 104 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
50 chapter 6 design recommendations PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

S C O P E
The public spaces and infrastructure of the Station District, together with the streets and roadways, form thebackbone for development. The public spaces and infrastructure include the Intermodal Transit Facility, theeast plaza, and the community commons parcel. For clarity, the general and specific design recommendationsfor the Intermodal Transit Facility are listed separately from the design recommendations for other publicspaces.

UR B A N DE S I G N P R I N C I P L E S F O R P U B L I C S P A C E S A N D I N F R A S T R U C T U R E Public spaces and infrastructure:
•provide identity and focus for the District and for Union City;•are the arenas for civic and community life in the District;•reflect the pride and care that the citizens of Union City have for their community;•promote public interaction and vitality;•promote and enhance transit use;•are accessible to all persons according to state and federal requirements;•are flexible in design to allow for future changes in use; and•are designed for the safety and security of children in the development of outdoor play areas in the District.

DI S T R I C T C H A R A C T E R
•The public spaces and infrastructure are a series of structures and linked elements that share a common design language that is unique to the Station District and identifies them as public facilities. •The public spaces and infrastructure, in particular the Intermodal Transit Facility, should be a landmark and focal point for Union City, the transit providers, and the District. •The design of the public spaces and infrastructure should be modern.•The public spaces and infrastructure should be surrounded by private development and passenger amenities to promote their use by Union City residents, Station District inhabitants, and transit users. •While recognizing that safety and security concerns will need to be addressed, sound walls and security fences should not be used to isolate or impede pedestrian access to development or create a “gatedcommunity” effect in the Station District.

M A I N T E N A N C E
•Provide a high level of maintenance to keep public property, streets, and landscaping clean and in prime condition in the Intermodal Facility and throughout the Station District. figure 6-3The public space and infrastructure will create the public identity and focus ofthe Station District. They should share an integrated design language and beof the highest quality. introduction
City Council/RSA Agenda 105 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 6 design recommendations 51

UNIONCITY
figure 6-4Safe and inviting open spaces that take advantage of Union City’s climate andculture will be critical to the District’s success.

Character
The open spaces and community facilities in the Station District should be:•safe, inviting, and comfortable;•designed to take advantage of the climate and character of the environment;•coordinated to make use of design elements that connect the east and west sides of the BART berm; •a harmonious and easily identifiable public space for the Station District;•durable and attractive in construction; and•practical and easy to maintain.

Landscape Elements
Landscape elements should include: •extensive use of attractive trees, plantings, and ground cover appropriate to the climate of Union City;•species native to the region or certified to be non-invasive; •low-maintenance and drought tolerant plants that require less water and limited chemical applications;•bio-swales, porous paving, cisterns and other natural rainwater retention systems; and •unpaved areas and porous paving to absorb rainwater, thus saving on storm water drainage costs and reducing the volume of pollutants entering the bay via run-off.

Street Furniture and Lighting
Public space amenities, such as lamp posts, trash cans, and benches should: •be distinctive and consistent in design throughout the Station District; and•contribute to the overall quality and character of the public spaces.Public space lighting should be:•scaled to the size and purpose of the public spaces; •limited to the amount necessary for safety and function, without excessive harshness or glare; and •directed down to illuminate streets and sidewalks without obscuring the nighttime sky.

Public Art
A district-wide public art program should: •be integrated into the public spaces and infrastructure elements; and •emphasize quality, originality, and community participation.

Signage
•A distinctive signage system incorporating the Union City and District logos should be created.

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE general design recommendations for open spaces and community facilities City Council/RSA Agenda 106 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
figure 6-6 A well-shaded pedestrian walkway with retail on one side and an activelyprogrammed plaza.

EAS T PLAZACharacter
The east plaza should be: •the town square for the emerging station district; •modern in design;•of the highest quality in material and execution; •integrated with the design of other elements of the public realm, especially the station underpass and the Intermodal Transit Facility.

Circulation
The plaza should: •provide generous circulation zones for pedestrian traffic to the pedestrian underpass connecting the east plaza to the BART station and the intermodal transit plaza; •maintain clear visual links between Eleventh Street, the east plaza, and the underpass; and•have a design character that unifies it with the circulation zones.

Amenities
The east plaza should: •provide ample room for programmed activities, such as farmers markets, rallies, and public performances.

The city should work with the community to determine specific program elements and characteristics forthe plaza; •use shade trees generously throughout the plaza to provide protection from sun and heat; •make use of a number of different tree species to provide character and interest; •incorporate other design elements, such as water features, public art, pavilions, and retail kiosks;•feature elements that enhance the overall character and design of the plaza as an open space and promote orderly activity and use of the plaza. The inclusion of retail kiosks should not detract from the retail usesin the adjacent properties. When the specific plaza program is determined, the City should draftperformance-based, project specific guidelines to shepherd the development of the space; and •provide clear signage, including route maps and timetables for the Intermodal Transit Facility.

Retail/Commercial Frontage on Edges
•Ground-floor retail and pedestrian entrances to commercial uses should be incorporated into development that faces the plaza edges to help generate pedestrian activity and to provide services for commuters whopass through the area. figure 6-5Quality materials and engaging design are essential to the creation of asuccessful plaza.

UNIONCITY
52 chapter 6 design recommendations
specific design recommendations for open spaces and community facilities City Council/RSA Agenda 107 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
chapter 6 design recommendations 53

UNIONCITY
C O M M U N I T Y C O M M O N SCharacter
The community commons should:
•have a distinctive architectural character that sets it apart from private development in the Station District; •Designed to integrate with the design of other elements of the public realm, especially the east plaza and the passenger rail station;
•Together with the east plaza, be the center of civic life in the Station District; and•The City should work with the community to determine specific program elements and characteristics for the community commons parcel.

Open Space to Building Standard
•Approximately 1/3 of the community commons parcel should be devoted to open space and the remainder to a community facility.

Indoor/Outdoor Quality
•Wherever feasible the community facility should have a strong indoor/outdoor relationship. Generous entrances and facades that are visually transparent should be created. •The design of the building(s) and open space should be formally and functionally integrated.•A generous covered entry or semi-covered courtyard in the community facility should be included.•The open space portion of the parcel should be visually open to the surrounding parcels and flexibly programmed to allow for different outdoor activities and events.

Landscaping
•Extensive landscaping should be included in the commons. For further information, please see the General Design Recommendations.

Parking
•No parking is permitted on the commons. Parking requirements for community commons programs and the community facility should be incorporated with other parking requirements in the Station District on ashared basis.

Street Walls and Sidewalks
•The sidewalk design should be integrated into the open space concept for the community commons parcel.•Sidewalks along the community commons should be 15 feet wide and separated from the curb to permit a double row of trees.
•Blank walls should be decorative or designed with integrated art work or murals. figure 6-7Example of the indoor/outdoor qualities for the community facility.figure 6-8Example of a landscaped courtyard in a community facility.

City Council/RSA Agenda 108 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
The following design recommendations set the framework of the passenger experience and complement thespecific design, engineering, and operational standards and criteria of BART and other transit providers.

Elements
The Intermodal Transit Facility consists of a series of coordinated and integrated elements that serve a numberof different transit agencies. For the purpose of clarity the elements of the facility are defined as follows:
•The BART station and plaza•The bus roundabout and intermodal plaza•The intermodal access road•The pedestrian underpass•The passenger rail facility•The parking facilities Character
•The Intermodal Transit Facility should be a landmark for Union City and the cornerstone of the continuing development of Union City. It should be a significant structure of the highest architectural quality, modernand inviting to pedestrians and commuters. Fundamental to the success of the facility is its safety and easeof use for the providers and patrons, combined with its operational efficiency. The following guidelinesrepresent the preferred design recommendations for the creation of the Intermodal Transit Facility. A trulysuccessful facility will only result from the committed action of the City and the transit agencies incombination with great architecture and engineering.

Accessibility
•The facility must be accessible to all persons according to state and federal accessibility requirements.•The facility should provide safe and convenient access for pedestrians, bicycles, autos, and transit vehicles.

Operational and Design Criteria
•The design of each element of the Intermodal Transit Facility shall meet the operational requirements and standards of each operator.
•The Intermodal Transit Facility must adhere to the design, construction, and maintenance standards of the respective transit agencies, as appropriate.
•The City should commit to maintaining the Intermodal Transit Facility to a high standard in coordination with the transit providers.

UNIONCITY
54 chapter 6 design recommendations
general design recommendations for the intermodal transit facility figure 6-10In Los Angeles, the new transit facility is integrated with public access toprovide direct and safe connections between its different elements.figure 6-9Union Station in Los Angeles is an example of a landmark transit facility at thecenter of a new development district.

City Council/RSA Agenda 109 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
chapter 6 design recommendations 55

UNIONCITY
figure 6-11The signage system in London’s new Jubilee Subway is clear, identifiable andeasily read both day and night.

Pedestrian Connections Between Transit Facilities
•Safe, clear, and direct pedestrian connections should be created between the various components of the Intermodal Transit Facility. They should be easily understood through design features, signage, andlighting. •Where conflicts may occur between pedestrians and vehicles, pedestrian zones should be indicated by means of signage, raised walkways, textured or colored paving, or other design means.

Signage and Wayfinding
•Each transit operator’s system-wide signage and wayfinding requirements should be incorporated into a consistent, easily readable and identifiable signage plan and designed for both the Intermodal TransitFacility and related public spaces. Visual cues, such as color-coding and pavement striping, should beincluded to indicate and differentiate pedestrian travel routes to different transit providers. Signage shouldbe visible during daytime and nighttime hours of operation. •Tactile paving must be incorporated throughout new elements of the Intermodal Transit Facility to provide way-finding for the visually impaired.
•Signage systems should be modular to allow for easy changes and additions to routes and timetables.•The use of real-time bus, BART and commuter rail information systems should be incorporated using the best available technologies.
•Maps that include the routes of all transit providers at the Intermodal Transit Facility should be provided in easily identified locations.
•Each bus stop and passenger rail platform should have signage indicating route and schedule. •Clocks should be provided in all new station elements of the Intermodal Transit Facility.

Ticket sales/Information
•Combined ticket sales and information locations should be provided at convenient locations throughout the new elements of the Intermodal Transit Facility. MTC Translink and the standards and criteria of theappropriate transit agencies should be incorporated.

Seating
•Seating shall be provided at all new Intermodal Transit Facility elements. Comfortable seating with back and arm rests is encouraged. For further information please see the Specific Design Recommendations foreach element Lighting
•The Intermodal Transit Facility should be well lit for safety and convenience during hours of operation. figure 6-12At this station in England, the information kiosk design is closely related toother elements of the station design.

City Council/RSA Agenda 110 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE

UNIONCITY
56 chapter 6 design recommendations
figure 6-13Quality amenities like seating elements are essential to the new transit facility.

Bicycle Storage
•Covered and protected bicycle storage is encouraged and should be incorporated into the transit parking garages or in free-standing facilities conveniently located for patrons of each transit system.

Public Art
•A public art program should be integrated into the new elements of the Intermodal Transit Facility. The art program should emphasize quality, originality, and community participation.

Public Restrooms and other Amenities
•Public restrooms and other amenities should be provided. •Restrooms should be integrated with other facility elements. They should not be freestanding.•Public telephones, information kiosks, and other passenger amenities should be provided as an integrated component of the Intermodal Transit Facility.
“Kiss-and-Ride”
•Dedicated and regulated taxi, shuttle, paratransit, and “kiss-and-ride” auto passenger drop-off locations should be provided.
•Drop-off locations with a loading lane should be separate from the travel lane. Loading and unloading vehicles should not obstruct the travel lanes.
•Direct curb access to the passenger side of the vehicle should be provided. Loading and unloading passengers should not cross travel lanes to reach their vehicles.

Landscape Elements
•The landscape architecture of the Intermodal Transit Facility should be closely integrated with the overall District. A rich plant palette, including trees, shrubbery, and ground cover, as appropriate, should beincorporated in order to create an inviting and attractive facility that is responsive to the climate of UnionCity. •Landscape elements must not interfere with the operational requirements or safety of the Intermodal Transit Facility.
figure 6-14Landscape elements of the Union Station transit facility in Los Angeles.

City Council/RSA Agenda 111 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
chapter 6 design recommendations 57

UNIONCITY
figure 6-15Although this transit station in Portland, Oregon has a covered waiting area, itlacks adequate seating.figure 6-16Covered walkways connect various parts of this English transit station. specific design recommendations for the intermodal transit facility B A R T S T A T I O N A N D P L A Z ACharacter
•The BART station will be the heart of the new Intermodal Transit Facility and the centerpiece of the new Station District. Architectural enhancements to the station should be consistent with this goal and madein a manner that integrates with the other elements of the Intermodal Transit Facility. The BART stationshould function as a visual landmark for Union City, the Station District, and the Intermodal Transit Facility.BART, Union City and other key stakeholders will define specific design recommendations forenhancements to the BART station as the program is developed to ensure that they complement andenhance the Intermodal Transit Facility and the Station District.

Access
•Access to the BART station should be improved for existing and new development in the Station District through new and expanded fare gates on the west side of the station, and the creation of a second paidentrance on the east side of the station. Expansion of the station to the east should be integrated with thedesign of the pedestrian underpass and acknowledge the possibility of a passenger rail station along theUnion Pacific tracks. BART, Union City, and other key stakeholders should make specific designrecommendations for access enhancements to the BART station to ensure that they complement andenhance the Intermodal Transit Facility and the Station District. Architectural improvements shouldemphasize the two-sided nature of the BART station and its importance as a key transit provider.

BART Plaza
•The construction of the intermodal loop road and the pedestrian underpass will involve redesigning the BART plaza on the west side of the existing station. It will act as the “front porch” to the BART station anda major entrance for the Intermodal Transit Facility as whole. The design of the plaza should enhancesafety, access and comfort for transit patrons and pedestrians in the Station District. Specifically, the BARTplaza is the location for paratransit stops, taxi pick-up and drop-off, and “kiss-and-ride” areas. Seating,landscaping, and other amenities will enhance the functions of the plaza. For further information pleasesee the Specific Design Recommendations for the intermodal loop road and the pedestrian underpass.

City Council/RSA Agenda 112 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
figure 6-17The bus roundabout and intermodal transit plaza form an integrated publicspace.

UNIONCITY
58 chapter 6 design recommendations
T H E B U S R O U N D A B O U T A N D I N T E R M O D A L T R A N S I T P L A Z ACharacter •As the first element visible to transit patrons, residents, and visitors coming from Union Square, the bus roundabout and intermodal transit plaza is a key functional element of the Intermodal Transit Facility.Accordingly, the roundabout should be designed as an architectural landmark of the highest architecturaland functional standards. •A landmark element at the Union Square entrance to the facility should be created that incorporates signage indicating the name of the facility.

Covered Connections
•A continuous covered connection in the center island between Union Square and the BART Plaza is recommended for both architectural and functional purposes. The plan recommends a minimum totalwidth of 35 feet for this connection.

Covered Seating
•Seating with side and overhead protection should be provided at each bus stop for the comfort of transit patrons. This seating may be arranged in freestanding shelters on the side aisles of the roundabout, orintegrated with the design of the covered walkway in the center island. •Accommodations for wheelchair users should be provided in all covered seating areas.

Operator Facilities
•Break facilities for transit operators should be located in the center island of the bus roundabout, as outlined in the programming report. Specific program requirements and design recommendations for thebreak facilities shall be defined during design of the Intermodal Transit Facility. Blank, bunker-likestructures that disrupt the architectural character of the roundabout should be avoided.

Restrooms
•Public restrooms should be provided in the center island of the bus roundabout, as outlined in the Intermodal Transit Facility Plan, Chapter 5. Specific program requirements and design recommendationsfor the restrooms shall be defined during design of the Intermodal Transit Facility.

Pedestrian Connections
•Two pedestrian connections should be provided at sidewalk level between the center island and the side aisles of the roundabout, and also one pedestrian connection between the center island and the intermodalaccess road. The Union Square sidewalk should be furnished with a continuous crosswalk between the sideaisles and the center island and across Union Square to the existing Marketplace Commercial Center. Foradditional information please see the the General Design Recommendations.

City Council/RSA Agenda 113 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
chapter 6 design recommendations 59

UNIONCITY
T H E I N T E R M O D A L L O O P R O A DCharacter
•The intermodal loop road is the primary point of vehicular access, other than buses, to the BART Station and the Intermodal Transit Facility . Accordingly, the road should be designed to complement the overalldesign and character of the Intermodal Transit Facility.

Sidewalks
•Sidewalk design of the intermodal loop road, including materials, texture, and color, should be integrated with the bus roundabout and the BART station plaza.

Pedestrian Crossing
•A pedestrian crossing between the BART station plaza and the intermodal transit plaza and bus roundabout should be provided for pedestrian safety at sidewalk level, as shown on the Intermodal TransitFacility plan. •The drop-off lane in front of the BART station should be eliminated to narrow the width of the intermodal loop road and provide a clear pedestrian crossing between BART and the bus roundabout.

Paratransit, “Kiss-and-Ride”, and Taxi Drop-off Locations •Separate paratransit, “kiss-and-ride”, and taxi drop-off zones should be provided on the intermodal loop road in the locations and amounts indicated in the Intermodal Transit Facility plan program. •Signage and curb colors should be provided to indicate the locations for each drop-off zone.

City Council/RSA Agenda 114 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
T H E P E D E S T R I A N U N D E R P A S SCharacter
•The pedestrian underpass between the BART plaza and the east plaza is the key east-west link for the Station District. The underpass should be in keeping with the overall design of the Intermodal TransitFacility. It must be designed for beauty, openness, safety, visibility, clarity of circulation, and utility. Itshould present a clear, direct and well-lit path of travel, easily visible when approached from eitherdirection. It should be open 24 hours a day throughout the year. •The design of the pedestrian underpass should be integrated into the designs for the east plaza, the passenger rail station adjacent to the BART on the UPRR tracks, and any enhancements to the BARTstation. •If market demands warrant, consider including vendors or kiosks at the ends of the pedestrian link, to provide activity and a sense of safety.

Minimum Dimensions
•The minimum recommended cross-width dimension for the underpass is 25 feet. The minimum recommended inside vertical clearance of the underpass is 9 feet. This dimension should be increased tothe maximum vertical dimension possible if analysis of the existing BART station reveals the potential foradditional height. Where possible, widen the underpass at entrances to the BART berm and increase thevertical clearance to maximize the amount of light and air entering the below grade portions. •At the passenger rail platform directly adjacent to the east side of the BART station the design of the underpass should be coordinated in order to ensure adequate dimensions for rail operations. The coveredportions of the underpass should be minimized in accordance with this goal.

Materials
•The materials should be of the highest quality to make a light-filled and enjoyable space. They should be selected for ease of maintenance, as well as attractive appearance. Finishes should be decorative in natureas well as utilitarian.

Lighting
•The pedestrian underpass should incorporate natural daylighting to the maximum extent possible.

Attractive, low-maintenance artificial lighting should be used to supplement natural light and to provideadequate lighting for nighttime use and safety.

Public Art
•Public art, such as tile murals or other decorative features, should be an integral part of the design. figure 6-18Example of a pedestrian underpass designed to maximize daylight penetration.

UNIONCITY
60 chapter 6 design recommendations figure 6-19The pedestrian underpass should be an integrated and pleasant component ofthe plaza and transit station.

City Council/RSA Agenda 115 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

PUBLIC SPACES AND INFRASTRUCTURE
chapter 6 design recommendations 61

UNIONCITY
figure 6-20An example of the components recommended for the passenger rail stations:covered seating, integrated signage and graphics, and other amenities.

Signage
•Directional signage should be placed at each end of the underpass.

Security
•”Blue phones” and cameras should be considered to support a safe environment.

P A S S E N G E R R A I L S T A T I O N ( S )
Character
•The passenger rail station(s) should be a simple and high quality building integrated with other elements of the Intermodal Transit Facility and the Station District, especially the adjacent public spaces. Site specificdesign recommendations for the station will be developed after the location of the station is finalized.

Facility Orientation: Former Southern Pacific Railroad Location Option •If a station is located on the former Southern Pacific tracks, it should be positioned along Railroad Avenue on a direct alignment with the pedestrian underpass. The building should step back from the street asnecessary to allow for passenger drop-off, plaza space and landscape elements.

Facility Orientation: Union Pacific Railroad Location Option •If a station is located on the Union Pacific tracks adjacent to BART, it should be positioned adjacent to the east plaza; its design should be integrated with the pedestrian underpass and the plaza. “Kiss-and-Ride”
•A convenient “kiss-and-ride”, paratransit, shuttle, and taxi passenger loading zone should be located in the parking lane of the parallel street closest to the passenger rail station. A station on the UPRR tracks willbenefit from the passenger loading facilities provided for BART. Some additional facilities may be neededon Eleventh Street adjacent to the east plaza.

Bus Access
•A bus passenger loading zone, as indicated in the Intermodal Transit Facility plan and program, should be provided on Railroad Avenue for any station on the former SPRR tracks.

Entrance and Exits
•One entrance and one exit to the passenger station should be located at each end of the loading platform.

Open Space
•A small plaza/open space should be provided in front of or adjacent to any passenger rail station on the former SPRR tracks. It should be large enough to allow for the gathering of a small group waiting for atrain or bus.

City Council/RSA Agenda 116 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
figure 6-21
Street Hierarchy Map

UNIONCITY
62 chapter 6 design recommendations

UR B A N DE S I G N P R I N C I P L E S F O R S T R E E T S A N D R O A D W A Y S Streets and roads in the Station District should: •enhance circulation and access for all modes of travel by maximizing connections between the City, the District, and the development parcels within the District. •be multi-modal in nature, and balance the needs of pedestrians, autos, and bicycles.•encourage activity and civic life. •define and activate the buildings and structures that flank them.•separate and delimit development parcels, buildings and structures.•permit views to the surrounding environment and provide access to light and air.•form a major component of the public realm and open spaces of the District.•have extensive landscaping with attractive trees and ground cover, providing relief from paving and buildings.
•be accessible to all persons according to state and federal requirements.

DI S T R I C T C H A R A C T E R
The streets and roadways of the Station District are organized and designed in a hierarchical system toestablish different characteristics, which reflect a variety of purposes:
•Major streets are multi-lane multi-mode divided boulevards that balance citywide linkages and access with local services and amenities. They have extensive formal landscaping, generous sidewalks, and specialpaving treatments and street lamps. In addition to circulation zones, areas for stationary activity, such ascafe seating and outdoor displays, should be provided in conjunction with retail uses. •Local streets are smaller undivided multi-mode streets and provide local site access and circulation. They have little through-traffic, wide sidewalks with street furniture, street trees, and other landscaping scaledto their width. •Pedestrian alleys provide pedestrian and bicycle links through development parcels, and access to individual buildings and residences. They are quiet green spaces with paths marked for bikes andpedestrians, ground cover, and other landscaping scaled to their width. •Pedestrian and bicycle greenways buffer development from adjoining infrastructure and provide pedestrian and bicycle links to the citywide trails system. They are extensively landscaped and provided with multi-usepaths and trails for active recreation and enjoyment. figure 6-22Important view corridors to be preserved and/or enhanced.STREETS AND ROADWAYS introduction City Council/RSA Agenda 117 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 6 design recommendations 63

UNIONCITY
Lane Widths
•Travel and parking lane widths should be minimized to calm traffic and enhance walkability.

Street Parking
•On-street parallel parking should be provided on all streets east of the BART tracks and along Union Square.

Sidewalks
•Major and local streets are required to have sidewalks or trails and street parking on both sides. •Unless otherwise noted in the Specific Design Recommendations and the Street Sections (fig. 4-5 -- 4-11), sidewalks shall have a minimum width of 10 feet.
•Bulb-outs shall be provided at all intersections where the roadway right of way is 40 feet or greater to allow for greater pedestrian safety and to enhance streetside activity at corner retail locations. The bulb-outshould extend the entire depth of the parking lane. •Street corner curb radii should be no greater than the width of the sidewalk.

Multi-use Trails and Bike Paths
•Pathways should be a minimum of 15 feet wide, marked for pedestrians and bicycles, and constructed of smooth paving suitable for bicycles, strollers, wheelchairs, and roller-skaters. •Paths should be well lit with seating areas located at regular intervals.

Street Furniture and Lighting
•Sidewalk furniture, such as lamp posts, trash cans, newspaper racks, bus shelters and benches should be modern in style and complementary in design.
•Street lights should be scaled to the size and purpose of the streets without excessive spill, harshness, or glare. Light should be directed down with special attention paid to protecting adjacent residences.

Landscaping
•A streetscape plan should be developed to create a coordinated landscape design and palette for all streets.
•Sidewalks and greenways should be planted with large shade trees properly sized for the width of the sidewalk. Trees should be deciduous or deciduous in form. •Vegetation that is native or certified as non-invasive should be used for landscaping the streets and roadways.
•Use of low-maintenance, drought tolerant native species or other climate appropriate species will require less water and fewer chemical applications.
•Naturalized seasonal plantings of native wildflowers should be used along the greenways.•Bio-swales, porous paving, cisterns and other natural rainwater retention systems should be incorporated into the streets and open spaces of the Station District in order to cut storm drain construction costs and general design recommendations for streets and roadways figure 6-23Active street frontage with many pedestrian entrances in Portland, Oregon.figure 6-24Example of curb bulb-out with street trees at pedestrian crossing in Berkeley,California.STREETS AND ROADWAYS City Council/RSA Agenda 118 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
figure 6-25
Decoto Road looking east from the BART tracks.

UNIONCITY
64 chapter 6 design recommendations
specific design recommendations for streets and roadways

STREETS AND ROADWAYS
DE C O T O R O A D E D G ECharacter
•Decoto Road is the northern gateway to the Station District, and as such the design and treatment of the street is essential to the image of the District. It is a major street and a principle route in the city with avariety of land uses along its length.

Street Frontage
•To establish the urban character of the new District, buildings should maintain a strong street wall along Decoto Road. A 10 foot landscaped setback and planted edge with large shade trees should be maintainedto ease the transition to the adjacent neighborhood. •A continuous property line street wall at the Eleventh Street and Railroad Avenue intersections should be maintained. Mid-block setbacks are allowed, but a strong Decoto Road street wall must be maintained. •Parking garage access from Decoto Road should be prohibited to prevent mid-block left hand turns.•Buildings over two stories should step back the upper floors to reduce mass along the street.

Sidewalks
•A 15 foot sidewalk should be provided, in addition to the landscaped setback.

E L E V E N T H S T R E E T
Character
•Eleventh Street is a major street, the main street of the Station District, and an important planned connection to the proposed State Route 84. As such it is a major arterial connection and a street that mustsupport and enhance local life and activity. It should function as the main commercial and retail street ofthe district. Its primary character should be one of a landscaped boulevard that is generous in scale forboth pedestrians and vehicles. The median should be extensively planted with trees, shrubs and grasses.These plantings should not obscure views to the other side of the street. See the Design Recommendationsfor Sustainability for further information.

Street Frontage
•Ground-level retail is strongly encouraged along Eleventh Street, particularly adjacent to the plaza and to the community/open space parcel.
•Main building entrances should be located on Eleventh Street to indicate its importance as the District’s main street.

Sidewalks
•Special paving is recommended for Eleventh Street to maintain a continuous character.•No curb cuts other than the east-west streets and street extensions are permitted on Eleventh Street. figure 6-26Special paving and amenities can add character and distinction to the street.

City Council/RSA Agenda 119 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
figure 6-28
Example of the potential pedestrian alley character at the commercial development.STREETS AND ROADWAYS chapter 6 design recommendations 65

UNIONCITY
R A I L R O A D A V E N U ECharacter
•Railroad Avenue is a local street. It provides neighborhood access and buffers development from the adjacent railroad tracks. The adjoining greenway provides an important link to the citywide trails system.

Sidewalks
•A 12 foot sidewalk on the west side of the street and connections to the greenway on the north and south sides of every cross street intersection should be provided.

East Side Landscape
•See the Design Recommendations for the Railroad Avenue greenway for further information.

E A S T -W E S T S T R E E T S
Character
•The east-west streets are local streets with little through traffic and limited, strategically placed retail and commercial frontages.

Street Frontages
•Parking garage and building service/loading facilities are permitted on all east-west streets except for the north and south community commons.

Landscaping
•Street trees should be planted along the outer edge of the parking lanes with sufficient space to park a fullsized car between each tree. A protective rim or grade change should be included around each tree base to protect it from exhaust with a protective planting cage to prevent collision damage.

P E D E S T R I A N A L L E Y S
Character
•In the residential blocks the pedestrian alleys provide quiet circulation, light and air, and green space for the adjoining developments. In the commercial blocks, the alleys provide an opportunity for a “campusspace” with outdoor seating, landscaping, and other amenities for adjoining development. They include apedestrian/bike path, as outlined in the General Design Recommendations section.

Street Frontage
•On residential blocks, multiple entrances and windows should be provided as “eyes on the street”. Bay windows and balconies are permitted to overhang the right of way. •On commercial blocks, at least one public entrance to each adjoining building should be provided. figure 6-27Example of street trees planted within the parking lane in Berkeley, California.

City Council/RSA Agenda 120 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

STREETS AND ROADWAYS

UNIONCITY
66 chapter 6 design recommendations
R A I L R O A D A V E N U E GR E E N W A YCharacter
•The Railroad Avenue greenway provides a landscape buffer between the development and the railroad tracks. It includes a recreational pedestrian and bicycle path connecting to the canal greenway and theproposed Railroad Avenue bicycle boulevard. Permeable surfaces should be used wherever possible.

Landscaping
•In order to provide both shade and character the greenway should be heavily planted with various tree species. Other landscape plantings including shrubs and ornamental grasses are also encouraged,although a strong visual link to Railroad Avenue should be maintained for safety. •At the cross streets, the viewshed corridors to the nearby hills should be maintained.

Separation from Railroad Tracks/Passenger Rail Station
•The bicycle/pedestrian path should be screened from the railroad tracks by heavy landscaping. Fencing, as required for safety, should be both decorative and functional. Chain link fence is not permitted. •Signage, striping, warning dots, and other safety features should be provided at the passenger rail station plaza and entrances to minimize pedestrian/bicycle conflicts.

U N I O N P A C I F I C GR E E N W A Y Please see the Railroad Avenue greenway section for a description of this greenway.

Character
•In addition to the features listed above, a public pathway that connects the open space elements of adjoining individual developments is strongly encouraged. Developers are responsible for the constructionof the pathway as it passes along their property lines. This pathway may be modified, pending final designof the possible rail station on the UPRR line.

C A N A L A R E A GR E E N W A Y
Character
•The canal greenway is the southern boundary of the Station District, and connects Eleventh Street with the Railroad Avenue and Union Pacific greenways. It provides a landscape buffer between the denserdevelopment in the Station District and the smaller-scale development in the surrounding neighborhoods,and includes a multi-use pedestrian and bicycle trail.

Building Frontage and Setback
•A minimum of 10 feet of landscaped setback designed as an extension of the greenway should be provided figure 6-29
Example of a multi-use trail in San Jose, California. Union City may elect toseparate bicycle and pedestrian traffic, and different paving materials may beused if desired.

City Council/RSA Agenda 121 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

STREETS AND ROADWAYS
chapter 6 design recommendations 67

UNIONCITY
along the canal greenway property line. Entrances, windows, and other features should be included toactivate building facades along the greenway and provide “eyes on the street.” BART Berm/RR Tracks Greenway Underpass
•The underpass should be designed for beauty, openness, safety, visibility, clarity of circulation, and utility.

It should present a clear and direct path of travel, easily visible when approached from either direction. Itshould be open 24 hours a day throughout the year. •Covered portions of the underpass should be minimized. Where feasible, a light well should be provided between the BART tracks and the Union Pacific tracks.
•Nine feet of vertical clearance space and a minimum of 15 feet horizontally should be maintained at all points for safety. Where possible, the underpass should be widened at entrances to the BART berm andrailroad tracks and the vertical clearance should be increased to maximize the amount of light and airentering the below-grade portions of the underpass. The vertical slope of the path should be minimized tomaintain accessibility and use for bicyclists and pedestrians.

Connections to Surrounding Development
•At least one pedestrian/bicycle bridge across the canal should be provided on the west side of the Station District development at the existing right of way identified by the City. •The greenway path should be connected to the intermodal loop road at the BART berm, as shown on the plans.
•The canal greenway should be connected with the Railroad Avenue greenway.

Canal Restoration
•A natural, informal character should be established along the canal with river rocks, gravel, native plantings, and other landscape materials. Concrete and other man-made stabilization efforts should notbe visible unless they are an intended design element. figure 6-30Part of the canal restoration should include a pedestrian bridge joining theneighborhoods on either side of the canal.figure 6-31Restoration of the drainage canal opens up the opportunity to provide a majoropen space amenity for Union City.

City Council/RSA Agenda 122 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

STREETS AND ROADWAYS
U N I O N S Q U A R ECharacter
•Union Square is a major street, but smaller in width than Eleventh Street. Improvements along Union Square at the Intermodal Transit Facility and along the BART and Litke frontages should anticipate theeventual transformation of the street to a double-sided boulevard.

Landscaping
•Large form-giving street trees should be planted on the east side of the street. The ultimate goal of a “new front door” for Union City suggests a coordinated landscape treatment for both sides of the street.

Street Frontage
•Bus and vehicle entrances should be well marked and signed. View lines should be maintained when planting trees and placing signage to ensure safety for pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles. Due to the splitof transit garages on both sides of the BART line, parking capacity signage might need to be incorporatedinto the design of the streetscape. •Screen service areas of the existing Marketplace Commercial Center to promote an attractive streetscape.

Pedestrian Access
•The existing mid-block pedestrian connection at Union Square, between the Intermodal Facility and the Marketplace Commercial Center, should be enhanced and improved to promote pedestrian access andsafety.

UNIONCITY
68 chapter 6 design recommendations figure 6-32
Example of an enhanced mid-block pedestrian crossing in Berkeley, Californiawith curb bulb-outs, median strip, landscaping, and an integrated streetfixture program.

City Council/RSA Agenda 123 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES
chapter 6 design recommendations 69

UNIONCITY
figure 6-33
The friendly and walkable main street of Mountain View.

S C O P E
The design recommendations for buildings and structures cover commercial, residential, and retaildevelopment, and all parking structures in the Station District. Elements of the Intermodal Transit Facility andthe community facility are covered under the Public Realm section of these design recommendations

UR B A N DE S I G N P R I N C I P L E S
•The Station District is understood as a new downtown and city center for Union City.• A cohesive, recognizable, and pedestrian-oriented Station District requires harmonious relationships at three different scales: between buildings and the landscape, between individual buildings, and betweenbuildings and people. • Individual buildings and structures are elements in a larger field, and not singular monuments in the landscape.
•Buildings and structures must enhance and contribute to the public realm while fulfilling individual development programs. They provide a background frame for and support the structures, spaces, andactivities of the public realm.

DI S T R I C T C H A R A C T E R
•A distinctive and diverse architectural vocabulary and a harmonious style that respond to the surrounding landscape, and reflect the developments current place and time should be established. •The height and bulk of buildings should be articulated to create a recognizable urban form in the landscape: a man-made “hill”, highest at the center, tapering down to the edges. To achieve this goal, thecity should encourage development immediately surrounding the Intermodal Facility to be seven or morestories in height. Development should decrease in height towards the edges of the District to complementthe scale of the existing adjacent residential neighborhoods. •The facades of buildings and structures should be articulated to create relationships between buildings, streets and public spaces; between individual buildings; and between buildings and people. •Architectural details and materials should be used to provide interest to the eye and the tactile senses.•The buildings and structures should help define and strengthen the street system.•The buildings and structures should enhance views and allow adequate light and air to reach the streets, plazas, and other public spaces.
•The public elements of individual buildings and structures, such as entrances, lobbies, and retail uses should be oriented towards the public streets, plazas, and other public spaces. introduction
figure 6-34The height of buildings should increase towards the core of the District.

City Council/RSA Agenda 124 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Construction
•Buildings and structures in the station area should be constructed of high quality and durable materials and finishes suited to the building program and local environmental conditions.

Exterior Material Palette
•Exterior materials should be chosen based on character, durability, ease of maintenance, and context.

Recommended materials include:
•Brick: natural clay colors•Stone•Steel: porcelain enamel panels, steel windows, steel exterior doors, steel rails and fences. Painted, stainless, or pre-weathered steel are acceptable.
•Aluminum: windows, panels, (luco-bond and aluminum plate), storefront, curtain wall, doors; aluminum should be natural finish anodized, powder-coated or kynar (no bronze anodized) •Glass: clear, low-e; non-reflective, solar-bronze or solar-gay glass; shadow boxes and spandrel glass permitted.
•Pre-cast concrete; glass-fiber reinforced concrete is not permitted for building facades.•High-quality, cast-in-place concrete.•Ceramic tile•Cement plaster•Wood Building Mass and Articulation
•High building densities characterize the Station District. Thoughtful building massing, sensitive treatment of parking podia, clear articulation of facades and a durable materials palette are essential to achieve agood neighborhood character. •Transitions between adjacent buildings of different heights should be considered. Possible design responses include stepping or other modeling of building bulk, or changes in fenestration, street wall plane,or color.

Architectural Details
•Architectural details should be included that add variation and interest to the building facade.

Street Wall
•The building edge should be continuous along property lines and is required at street corners to maintain an active urban character. Variations in the building edge are allowed for entrances, for mid-block general design recommendations for buildings and structures figure 6-35Porticos and other pedestrian elements are encouraged on buildings.

UNIONCITY
70 chapter 6 design recommendations BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURESfigure 6-36Example of building articulation.

City Council/RSA Agenda 125 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
chapter 6 design recommendations 71

UNIONCITY
figure 6-38The parking podium of this Colorado development is extensively landscaped tomask the function of the building beneath.BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURESfigure 6-37Elements, such as lighting, signs, canopies, outdoor displays, and seatingactivate the street. pedestrian ways, interior courtyards and for other design considerations, as long as the appearance of acontinuous built edge is maintained. •Minor street wall variations are encouraged to add architectural interest and provide pedestrian amenities, such as seating and ATMs.
•Multiple pedestrian entrances for large buildings are required to increase street activity and interest.•Vehicle entrances and exits should be kept to a minimum and the scale minimized to maintain a pedestrian environment.
•Ground floor retail is strongly encouraged where feasible. All ground floor areas should maximize window coverage to provide flexible use as office or retail.
•Ground floor retail/commercial space should have at least a 12 foot ceiling height and a 40-50 foot minimum depth.

Fenestration
•Window fenestration should be used to help define building character. In establishing fenestration patterns, the shape, scale, proportion, rhythm, groupings, relationships to plan, and exterior wall planesshould all be taken into consideration, along with the adjacent buildings, structures, and open spaces. •Typological distinctions between building uses should be created by variations in the character, scale, and size of the fenestration.

Ground Floor Treatments
•Ground floor levels should be designed so that the building imparts a sense of human activity, habitation, and interest to the street. Blank, undifferentiated street-level facades are not permitted.

Projections/Signage
•Discrete signage indicating building ownership is allowed. Signs and canopies that project over the sidewalk to indicate and demarcate shop fronts and increase pedestrian interest are encouraged. •General advertising such as commercial billboards, “A” frame signs, and excessive banners are not allowed.

Garage Podiums
•Blank podium walls at the pedestrian level should be avoided. Wherever possible, podium walls should be screened with retail uses, building lobbies, residential entries, or other habitable uses. For furtherinformation please see the Specific Design Recommendations for parking structures . •Podium rooftops should be treated as a design feature to be seen from eye level and above, with open space uses as the preferred design alternative. The perception that podium open space is located on aroof-top should be avoided.

City Council/RSA Agenda 126 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES

UNIONCITY
72 chapter 6 design recommendations
•Podiums should be designed with structure adequate to support “garden-like” plantings, mature trees, shrubs, perennial borders, ground cover, and paving materials. A balance of planted and paved surfacesshould be maintained. •Podium open areas should be activated with common lobbies and/or individual entries to garden apartments and town houses.
•Differences between common and private open space should be clearly demarcated at podium levels.•Direct access from grade to the podium level should be integrated with the street and open space network.

Preference should given to access from the pedestrian alleys.

Parking
•All parking other than curbside street parking is required to be structured. Surface parking lots are not allowed after the initial phases of development.
•Ground floor parking should be screened from the sidewalk by street-oriented uses, such as housing units with street access, retail uses, building entrances, lobbies and foyers, community facilities, or landscapeelements. •Vehicle entrances and exits should be kept to a minimum in scale and number. Entrances and exits should not occur on Eleventh Street, Union Square, the pedestrian alleys, or along the North or South CommunityCommons.

Energy Efficiency
•Buildings and structures in the station area should be incorporate solar cells, shading devices, green roofs, and other active and passive energy efficiency solutions to improve environmental quality, reduce energydemand, and enhance overall environmental sustainability. figure 6-39An example of discrete building signage.figure 6-40This research building at Stanford University uses shading devices and othermeasures to achieve a high level of energy efficiency.

City Council/RSA Agenda 127 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES
chapter 6 design recommendations 73

UNIONCITY
specific design recommendations for buildings and structures O F F I C E /C O M M E R C I A L /R E S E A R C H A N D DE V E L O P M E N T ( R + D) U S E SGround Floor Treatments •Building entrances, lobbies, and accessory public uses should be oriented to the nearest public space or street. Buildings fronting multiple streets are encouraged to provide multiple public entrances. Buildingsfacing the pedestrian alley are required to provide an entrance facing the alley. •Where office or other private uses occur at the street level, windows should be included that allow for visual transparency and a sense of interior activity to enliven the street.

Service /Loading Entries
•Service entries should be located on the east-west streets and positioned to minimize noise impacts on adjacent residential units and public open space, and to minimize pedestrian/vehicle conflicts and trafficcongestion. •Loading dock dimensions should be limited to minimum functional requirements.•Loading docks should be located on the interior of the buildings to mask their visibility from the street.

Signs
•A sign program should be developed to address temporary signs, banners, for lease signs, and window signs and applied throughout the District.

R E S I D E N T I A L US E S
Character
•Multi-family housing should be designed with the safety and security of children in mind, without creating a “gated community” effect.
•Residential development should incorporate amenities such as play areas and other open spaces within the development.
•Sound walls and security fences should not be used to isolate or impede pedestrian access to residential development in the Station District.

Ground Floor Treatments
•Multiple entries at street level are encouraged to create fine-grained, pedestrian-oriented streets. Ground floor residential units are encouraged to have individual entrances fronting the street. •A pedestrian-friendly environment should be created through the use of design features such as stairs, stoops, porches, doors and landscaping.

Open Space Orientation
•Where possible, housing should be oriented to the public open space to maximize views from individual units. This can be accomplished by the location of common open space or stepping the buildings. figure 6-41Building entrances should be oriented towards public space or the street.figure 6-42Street level entrances are encouraged to create a fine-grained, pedestrianoriented street.

City Council/RSA Agenda 128 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES
figure 6-43
Cafe seating and other street activating uses that create a strongindoor/outdoor connection are encouraged. Curb bulb-outs allow stationaryactivity as well as sidewalk circulation as shown above. figure 6-44
A well detailed parking garage with ground floor retail in Portland, Oregon.

UNIONCITY
74 chapter 6 design recommendations
•The design of residential developments that abut the canal greenway should provide convenient access to the greenway paths.

Parking Please see the General Design Recommendations.
•To promote a pleasant pedestrian experience, multiple individual garage entrances are not permitted.

Where individual garages occur, they should be interspersed with “active uses” such as housing entries oroccupied space. •Residential parking should be screened from the street.

GR O U N D F L O O R S E R V I C E /R E T A I LIndoor/Outdoor Connections •Retail establishments and restaurants/cafes should have strong indoor/outdoor connections. Sliding or removable windows/doors are encouraged.
•Limited outdoor displays and café seating are encouraged in front of commercial/retail establishments to increase pedestrian activity and interest. Low planters with wide seat walls are encouraged. •Recessed entrances and porticos that increase the indoor/outdoor quality or allow for increased outdoor seating or display are allowed.
•Awnings and canopies are encouraged.•Commercial and retail frontages should be visually transparent and have clear glass.•Buildings that abut a pedestrian alley should have an entrance on the alley.

P A R K I N G GA R A G E S
General
•Garages should be be clean, well lit, and designed for the safety and security of patrons, while avoiding excessive light spill into adjacent residential areas.
•The design of parking garages should compliment adjacent land uses.

Street Wall
•A seven foot minimum setback for landscape elements that screen the ground floor of parking is required on streets that do not have retail frontages. This setback is not allowed at street corners or along EleventhStreet. •Design of parking garages facades should complement the facades of adjacent uses.

Ground Floor Treatments
•Retail and/or commercial space is strongly encouraged at the street level to maximize window coverage.

Retail frontages are required along Eleventh Street and facing the Intermodal Transit Facility.Retail/commercial space should have at least a 10 foot ceiling height and 40 to 50 foot in depth. •In other locations, street-level garage facades should be screened with architectural or landscape elements.

Vehicle Entrances/Exits
•Vehicle entrances and exits should be minimal in width. As feasible, entrances and exits should be on separate frontages to reduce congestion.

City Council/RSA Agenda 129 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

SUSTAINABILITY
chapter 6 design recommendations 75

UNIONCITY
The new Union City Intermodal Transit Facility, a highly visible transportation venue, will promote sustainabilityand become a catalyst for increased public transit use throughout the Bay Area. “Transit first,” the watchwordof smart growth and sustainable development, is exemplified in this transit-centered project. The viable new transit hub will create a lively and sustainable Station District. Increased transit use will reducevehicular emissions and contribute to cleaner air. Traffic on city streets and parking demands will be reducedas a result of a thriving transit facility, pedestrian-oriented urban design, sensible parking practices, and theimplementation of aggressive transit demand management programs. By creating jobs and housing inconjunction with a major transit facility, and drawing transit users from surrounding regions, the Union Cityintermodal facility and Station District will become a focal point for transit and “smart growth” in NorthernCalifornia. A centrally located, sustainably functioning transit facility will promote its missions throughincreased ridership from an embarkation point that is also a design landmark and focal point for a mixed-use,pedestrian- and transit-oriented district.A full set of Sustainability Principles and Guidelines are outside of the scope of this project. It is therecommendation of the consultants that the City of Union City retain the services of a sustainability consultantto draft a report detailing the steps Union City should take to make the City and District a sustainabledevelopment. Such a report should include discussion of the following topics:
figure 6-45Example of a successful stream restoration project underway in Texas. Asimilar program in Union City will make the canal greenway an important andsustainable element in Union City’s open space system. general topics for sustainability
•Sustainability
•Societal Impacts•Economic Impacts
•Impacts to Natural Resources
•Environmental Impacts
•Approach to “green” building and planning
•Energy Conservation and Efficiency
figure 6-46The Gap’s World Headquarters in San Bruno, California with a vegetated roofthat moderates building temperature and captures stormwater demonstratesthe viability of sustainable design in a location such as Union City. •Indoor Environmental and Air Quality
•Resource Efficiency
•Site and Land Use Planning
•Transit and Parking Demand Management
•Landscape Design
•Life cycle assessment
•Codes, Regulations and Rating Systems.

City Council/RSA Agenda 130 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 131 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
7 implementation plan

UNIONCITY
regulatory framework 78phasing of improvements 79funding report 81development feasiblity 86areas of further study/next steps 87 City Council/RSA Agenda 132 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
Building the new Intermodal Transit Facility and
implementing the Station District plan will requireconsiderable coordination between multiple transitoperators, public agencies, and private propertyowners. The Intermodal Action Team convened bythe City of Union City is a good model for buildingthe necessary consensus needed to guide theproject through implementation. This team shouldcontinue under the leadership of the City of UnionCity and BART with the following key stakeholders:
•The City of Union City•BART•AC Transit•Union City Transit•The Valley Transportation Authority•SamTrans/Caltrain (Dumbarton Rail)•Capitol Corridor (Amtrak California)•PG&E•Litke Properties•Union Pacific Railroad Company•Altamont Commuter Express•California High Speed Rail•Citizen and Community Groups The project will also require coordination within acomplex regulatory framework. The bulk of the landuse decisions will be ultimately governed by the Cityof Union City General Plan and Zoning Ordinance,the former of which is currently being updated inconcert with the recommendations of this plan.Land use decisions and individual projects mustalso be approved by the Planning Commission and

UNIONCITY
the City Council. Furthermore, all components ofthe plan will be subject to California EnvironmentalQuality Act (CEQA) approval, at both a plan andproject level, and any development on the BARTproperty will be subject to design guidelinesdeveloped by BART and will require approval by theBART Board of Directors. Due to the multiple transit and rail operations onthe site and the range of potential funding optionsfor public infrastructure and elements for theIntermodal Transit Facility within the StationDistrict, the project components will be subject toadditional levels of approval, including the Boardsof Directors for each of the transit operators,especially BART, AC Transit, the Alameda CountyTransportation Authority (administrators of theCMP and the county’s allocation of state andfederal transportation funding), the MetropolitanTransportation Commission (regional allocation ofstate and federal transportation funding), the USDepartment of Transportation (approval of anyproject that receives federal funding), the FederalRailroad Administration (approval of any change inthe rail tracks), and the Union Pacific RailroadCompany (potential removal or relocation oftracks).Ultimately, the applicable regulatory frameworkand decision process will be predicated on thepreferred funding scenario developed under thedirection of the City of Union City and BART. regulatory framework78 chapter 7 implementation plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 133 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
Implementation of the Intermodal Station Districtand Transit Facility Plan will be a multi-phase effortrequiring coordination between publicimprovements and private development. Thesuggested phasing plan for the publicimprovements has been developed to maximizepotential funding sources and to facilitate efficientand beneficial development of the privateproperties.

Phase 1:
•Construction of Eleventh Street to provide
access to the east side of the BART station;
•Construction of the pedestrian underpass to
connect BART with the eastern portion of thedistrict (PG&E property); and •Acquisition (purchase/lease) of the PG&E site for
temporary BART parking area (to facilitate BARTparking needs during construction on theexisting BART parking lot). Acquisition shouldinclude the land for the public open space, thetransit parking facility, the communitycommons, and one office parcel.

Phase 2:
•Construction of the intermodal loop road on the
BART site (with possible one-way exit ontoDecoto Road). This loop road will be used fortemporary bus operations during theconstruction of the Intermodal Transit Facility; a •Construction of the intermodal transit plaza and
the bus roundabout.
phasing of improvements
Phase 3:
•Expansion of loop roadway for limited two-way
operations where needed for garage access;
•Construction of the commuter transit garage on
BART property; and
•Build-out of development on BART property.

Phase 4:
•BART station improvements to facilitate twosided station operations;•Construction of passenger rail station on the former SPRR tracks and/or UPRR tracks;
•Construction of the commuter transit garage on
PG&E site;
•Construction of Railroad Avenue and connector
roads to access the passenger rail station iflocated on former SPRR tracks; •Connection to Shelton site via grade-separated
crossing of the former SPRR tracks); and
•Construction of the public open space on the
east side of the BART station
Phase 5:
•Development of the community facilities on the
community commons
•Privately-funded construction of bicycle and
pedestrian routes along the canal (funded byadjacent property owners) •Public-private partnership for the development
of bicycle and pedestrian links across the BARTand rail tracks (might be either over or under thetracks) •Public-private partnership for the development
of bicycle and pedestrian links across the canal
chapter 7 implementation plan 79
City Council/RSA Agenda 134 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
figure 7-1Phasing Diagram of Suggested Public Improvements80 chapter 7 implementation plan City Council/RSA Agenda 135 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
The funding report in this section is a condensedversion of the full funding report available in thetechnical appendix. The purpose of this section is to identify all existingand potential public funding sources that areavailable for Union City to construct transit facilitiesand infrastructure in the Station District. Thefunding sources are broken down into threecategories: identified funding sources, traditionalfunding sources, and creative funding sources.Existing funding sources are sources that havealready been identified as key funding elements bythe City of Union City, BART, and AC Transit. Theseare essential for the ultimate construction of theIntermodal Transit Facility. Traditional fundingsources consist of sources that are commonly usedin the transit industry to fund capital projects.Creative funding sources are innovative grantopportunities not commonly identified to fund thistype of project. (Only the identified funding sourcesare excerpted in this report) Following the fundingsources is a brief discussion of public-privatepartnerships.At the end of this section is a table that provides anoverview of these funding opportunities. The tableincludes information on the applicability to theproject, eligible parties, the funding agency,estimated yield, lead-time, and the likelihood forsuccess.funding report

I D E N T I F I E D F U N D I N G S O U R C E S
Program Name: Intermodal Station
Under the Union City Redevelopment Agency
Amended Redevelopment Plan, $12,690,000 hasbeen identified to fund the intermodal station. Thetentatively proposed Five Year ImplementationPlan has programmed $8,125,000 of the amountto be allocated in the next three years.

Program Name: Eleventh Street from Decoto Roadto proposed State Route 84 Developers of the Pacific States Steel Corporation
(PSSC) lands will fund construction of 11th Street.

Program Name: Transit Center, AC Transit
AC Transit holds $1.2 million in federal funding for
bus intermodal construction. AC Transit issuedthe funds to BART for capital improvements to theUnion City station area.

Program Name: Measure B Intermodal Station
Administered by the Alameda County
Transportation Improvement Authority (ACTIA)Measure B, re-authorized in November of 2000, isan Alameda County half-cent sales tax thatprovides funding for various transit projectsthroughout the county. One of the projects listedin the measure is the Union City IntermodalTransit Facility where $9.2 million has beenidentified for the project.

Program Name: Dumbarton Commuter Rail Project
Part of the Caltrain Rapid Rail Study, the
Dumbarton Commuter Rail Project would providea link for commuters traveling between the EastBay and the Peninsula. The proposed route woulduse a railroad bridge just south of the highwaybridge of the current Dumbarton Bridge. The SanMateo County Transportation Authority spent $7million to purchase the Dumbarton railroadbridge with the hope of someday runningcommuter trains across it. $4.5 million has beenidentified to provide funding for Union City stationcomponents for this project.

Program Name: Pedestrian Grade Separation
The Governor’s Transportation Congestion Relief
Plan provides funding opportunities for projectsthat include pedestrian grade separation. TheCity of Union City may be qualified for up to $2million in funding for grade separation at theIntermodal Transit Facility. Assembly Bill 2928establishes a list of transportation projectseligible for funding from the TransportationCongestion Relief Plan. Section 14556.40 (a) listsproject 141 as Union City: Pedestrian Bridge OverUnion Pacific Rail Lines.

Program Name: Southbay Commuter Rail Project
The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
(VTA), this project is considering a commuter railline between Union City and San Jose as an optionin the Major Investment Study. VTA is working chapter 7 implementation plan 81
City Council/RSA Agenda 136 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
closely with local jurisdictions on region-wide
strategies to address traffic, access to jobs, andair quality concerns. If a connection is made atUnion City, the estimated available funding forstation improvements is $5 million.

Program Name: Capitol Corridor Passenger Rail
Union City has met with the Capitol Corridor Joint
Powers Authority (CCJPA) to discuss a passengerrail station in the Station District. CCJPA has apolicy regarding the construction and placementof new stations. Any future station would berequired to meet these standards. Based uponCCJPA’s past experience, it is expected thatapproximately $10 million would be needed fortrack improvements to mitigate the loss in runningtime that would result from operating a station inUnion City. CCJPA also relies on the localcommunity to own, maintain, and police thestation.

On behalf of Union City, the CCJPA has the
opportunity to apply for the State TransportationImprovement Program -- Inter-regionalImplementation Fund, as well as TrafficCongestion Relief Program Funds, to supporttrack and station improvements. These statefunds are available for inter-regionaltransportation projects.

The CCJPA is encouraging Union City to take the
next step to identify the track improvements

UNIONCITY
projects, the private sector partner will havesignificant involvement in all aspects of servicedelivery, in others, only a minor role.The private sector can be broadly interpreted toinclude developers, employers, merchants and retailestablishments. Local businesses and employersare often interested in helping to support transitimprovements, particularly if their employees orcustomers are provided with “front door” services. Public-private partnerships provide a uniquefunding opportunity by enlisting the help of privatecompanies in the operation and construction oftransit systems. The most common partnershipinvolves funding of operation costs such asproviding an employee pass or paying the operatingcosts of a shuttle service. This section will provideexamples of public-private partnerships andaddress some advantages and disadvantages.

T Y P E S O F P U B L I C -P R I V A T E P A R T N E R S H I P S Design-Build + Joint Development
The local government contracts with a private
partner to design and build a facility thatconforms to the standards and performancerequirements of the local government. Once thefacility has been built, the local government takesownership and is responsible for the operation ofthe facility. needed to mitigate losses in running time and toplan and design the station. This study wouldassist in determining the best tracks currentlyrunning through the Station District based onboth regional implications for other potential railoperators and local impacts on the community.Based on past CCJPA experience, the planningand feasibility study could cost approximately$80,000.

P U B L I C -P R I V A T E P A R T N E R S H I P S
Public-private partnerships are arrangementsbetween government and private sector entities forthe purpose of providing public infrastructure,community facilities, and related services. Suchpartnerships are characterized by the sharing ofinvestment, risk, responsibility and reward betweenthe partners. The reasons for establishing suchpartnerships vary, but generally involve thefinancing, design, construction, operation, andmaintenance of public infrastructure and services.The underlying logic for establishing partnerships isthat both the public and the private sector haveunique characteristics that provide them withadvantages in specific aspects of service or projectdelivery. The most successful partnershiparrangements draw on the strengths of both thepublic and private sector to establishcomplementary relationships. The roles and responsibilities of the partners mayvary from project to project. For example, in some 82 chapter 7 implementation plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 137 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
Advantages:
•Access to private sector experience; •Opportunities for innovation and cost savings; •Flexibility in procurement; •Opportunities for increased efficiency in construction;
•Reduction in construction time; •Risk shared with the private sector; and •Single point accountability for the owner.

Disadvantages:
•Reduced owner control; •Increased cost to incorporate desirable design features; and
•More complex contract award procedure.

Wrap-Around AdditionA private partner finances and constructs anaddition to an existing public facility. The privatepartner may then operate the addition to the facilityfor a specified period of time or until the partnerrecovers the investment plus a reasonable return onthe investment.Advantages:
•Public sector does not have to provide capital
funding for the upgrade;
•Financing risk rests with private partner; •Public partner benefits from the private partner’s experience in construction;
•Opportunity for fast-tracked construction using
techniques such as design-build;
•Flexibility for procurement;
•Opportunities for increased efficiency in
construction; and
•Time reduction in project implementation.

Disadvantages:
•Future facility upgrades not included in the
contract with the private partner may bedifficult to incorporate at a later date; •Perceived loss of control by agencies/public; and•More complex contract award procedure.

Temporary Privatization
Ownership of an existing public facility is
transferred to a private partner who improvesand/or expands the facility. The facility is thenowned and operated by the private partner for aperiod specified in a contract or until the partnerhas recovered the investment plus a reasonablereturn.

Advantages:
•If a contract is well structured with the private
partner, the government agency can retainsome control over standards and performancewithout incurring the costs of ownership andoperation; •The transfer of an asset can result in a reduced
cost of operations for the local government;
•Private sector can potentially provide increased
efficiency in construction and operation of thefacility; and •Access to private sector capital for construction
and operations.

Disadvantages:•Perceived or actual loss of control by agencies/ public;
•Initial contract must be written in detail to
address all future eventualities; and
•Difficulty replacing private partner in the event
of a bankruptcy or performance default.

Build-Transfer
The local government contracts with a private
partner to finance and build a facility. Oncecompleted, the private partner transfersownership of the facility to the local government.The local government then leases the facility backto the private partner under a long-term leaseduring which the private partner has anopportunity to recover its investment and areasonable rate of return.

Advantages:
•Public sector obtains the benefit of private
sector construction expertise;
•Public sector maintains ownership of the asset; •Ability to terminate agreements if service levels or performance standards not met, althoughfacility would continue to permit repayment ofcapital contributions and loans and introductionof new private partner; and •Construction, design and architectural savings,
and likely long-term operational savings.

Disadvantages:•Possible difficulty in replacing private sector entity or terminating agreements in event of bankruptcyor performance default. chapter 7 implementation plan 83
City Council/RSA Agenda 138 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

P U B L I C -P R I V A T E P A R T N E R S H I P E X A

M P L E S
The majority of public-private partnerships involveoperation costs for services. In recent years, thenumber of public-private partnerships in capitalprograms has increased. One example of asuccessful public-private partnership is the OrencoStation, developed by Pacific Realty Associates, L.P.(PacTrust) and Costa Pacific Homes, located inHillsboro near Portland Oregon(www.orencostation.com). The planning process forthe station included public agencies andjurisdictions to ensure a pedestrian-friendly design.Orenco Station is a designed community thatencourages the use of public transit byincorporating the successful elements of traditionalneighborhoods as an alternative to sprawl. A local example of a public-private partnership isthe proposed North Livermore Development byShea/Lin Homes. This development would providehousing for approximately 30,000 people. Shea/Linproposed $100 million for transit amenities. $50million would be used for operating funds, the other$50 million would be used for capital projects.Capital projects include a transit center, severalsmall satellite transfer facilities located throughouttown, an exclusive bus lane down 580 to BART inDublin, and traffic signal prioritization for buses.This project is currently on hold due to a growthmeasure passed in November of 2000.

UNIONCITY
In the short-term, Union City should focus onsecuring funding already identified in this section.Some of these sources have been identified aspotential funding opportunities, but have not beencommitted. Union City and AC Transit should workwith the Valley Transit Authority (VTA), SamTrans,Alameda County Transportation ImprovementAuthority (ACTIA), Metropolitan TransportationCommission (MTC), the Regional TransportationPlan, Congestion Management Agencies (CMAs)and the State to ensure that the Intermodal TransitFacility is included in their respective projects.Potential private partners need to be identified aswell, including interested landowners anddevelopers who will benefit from the publicimprovements in the District. Public-privatepartnerships work best when the private sector isbrought into the planning process as early aspossible. Local employers, or potential residentialdevelopment companies could be considered forpartnership in this project.

Advantages and Disadvantages
The clear advantage of a public-private partnership
is the funding provided by the private party and thebenefit they accrue from the public investment. Thisprovides a direct source of funding that does notrequire an application process. The funds are alsomore flexible. They can be used for a variety ofaspects of the project, unlike most governmentgrant applications that are specific to the task.Public-private partnerships also provide theopportunity to use private sector experience toshape the community surrounding the transitfacility.

Disadvantages of public-private partnerships are
focused on the stability of the private entity.Economic concerns can impact the private sectorfaster than the public sector. Public sector fundingis generated from tax revenue that can be projectedas a reliable source of money over a number ofyears. Private sector funds are subject to companystability and current health of the economy.

S U M
M
A R Y
Union City is in a desirable position to acquireadditional funding for this project. The $9.2 millionin local funds provided by Measure B can be used toprovide local matching dollars in securing federalfunding. Opportunities to involve private sectorfunds and to partner with AC Transit/BART in thegrant application process should make Union Citymore competitive when applying for federal money. 84 chapter 7 implementation plan
City Council/RSA Agenda 139 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY

FUN DIN G SO URCE APPLICABILITY TO PROJECT ELIGIBLE PARTIES

FUNDING

AGEN CY

ESTIMATED

YIELD LEAD TIME COMMENTS

LIKELIHOOD FOR

SUCCESS

IDENTIFIED
Dumbarton Commuter Rail Project Intermodal transit facility AC Transit, BART, Union City
SAMTrans $4.5 million Ongoing Promotes intermodal transit in the Bay Area, great potential for funding.

High Probability
Intermodal Station, City Redevelopment Intermodal transit facility Union City Union City $15.0 million Ongoing High probability Measure B Intermodal Station Intermodal transit facility AC Transit, BART, Union City
ACTIA $9.2 million 1 year High probability
Pedestrian Grade Separation Pedestrian access Union City Caltrans $2.0 million Ongoing Highly competitive Transit Center, AC Transit Intermodal transit facility AC Transit FTA $1.2 million Ongoing High probability Southbay Commuter Rail Project Intermodal transit facility AC Transit, BART, Union City
VTA $5.0 million Ongoing Moderate/Low
probability

TRADITIONAL
Section 5309 – Bus Intermodal transit facility AC Transit FTA $500,000 to $1 million
1 year Highly Competitive
Surface Transportation Program (STP) Intermodal transit facility AC Transit, BART, Union City
MTC Unknown 1-2 years Highly Competitive
Transportation Development Act, Articles 3,4, and 8 Intermodal transit facility, bicycle and pedestrian facilities
AC Transit, BART, Union City
MTC Unknown 1 year Article 3 provides funds for bicycle improvements Articles 4 and 8 provides funds for capital projects, separate applications are necessary Highly Competitive
Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) Intermodal transit facility, bicycle and pedestrian facilities
AC Transit, BART, Union City
MTC/CMA Unknown 1-2 years Highly Competitive
Transportation Enhancements (TE) Bicycle and pedestrian facilities, access for disabled persons
AC Transit, BART MTC $100,000 to
$500,000
Ongoing Highly Competitive
Regional Improvement Program Intermodal transit center AC Transit, BART, Union City
MTC Varies greatly 1 year Highly Competitive
Urbanized Area Formula Grants Program Intermodal transit center AC Transit, BART FTA Unknown 1-2 years Highly Competitive

CREATIVE
Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) Bicycle amenities Union City Caltrans $50,000 to $200,000
1 year Must have an existing bicycle plan
to qualify.

Moderate Probability
Bicycle Transportation and Pedestrian Walkways Bicycle amenities, pedestrian access AC Transit MTC Unknown Ongoing Moderate Probability
Housing Incentive Program (HIP) High density residential housing Union City MTC $1,000 to $2,000 per bedroom
1 year New program, great opportunity
for funding
High Probability
Livable Communities Intermodal transit center, pedestrian access
AC Transit, BART, Union City
FTA $50,000 to
$150,000
1 year High Probability
Transit Capital Investment Grants Intermodal transit facility AC Transit, BART, Union City
FTA $250,000 to
$400,000
1-2 years Highly Competitive
Transportation Community and System Preservation Pilot (TCSP) Intermodal transit facility Union City U.S. DOT $50,000 to $100,000
1-2 years TEA-21 program that favors
projects with public/private sector partnership.

Highly Competitive
Transportation for Livable Communities (TLC) Intermodal transit facility, pedestrian access
AC Transit, BART, Union City
MTC Unknown Ongoing Alternative mode projects that
utilize a collaborative public planning process and have significant local community benefits are favorably viewed.

High Probability
table 7-1
funding table chapter 7 implementation plan 85
City Council/RSA Agenda 140 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
86 chapter 7 implementation planThe types and intensities of uses proposed in theIntermodal Station District and Transit Facility Planrepresent a new development pattern for UnionCity. This pattern is characterized by more intensiveuse of land and less dependency on auto access(with a corresponding increase in transitorientation) than is typical in areas that are alreadydeveloped.The demand for housing in the Bay Area in generalis considered likely to support the types andamounts of residential development proposed forthe District. Although this housing is generallymore dense than is currently found elsewhere inUnion City, it will have a number of marketplaceadvantages: it will be close to Silicon Valley andother employment centers, close to transit, part ofan “urban village” environment, and – presumably– relatively affordable to middle-incomehouseholds. Development of the plannedresidential parcels is therefore expected to befeasible in the near term.The development of office space, in contrast, facesa different set of market conditions from thosefaced by the proposed housing. As noted in theeconomic summary, office space of the typeenvisioned for the Station District would represent anew use in Union City and would have to attractdemand from businesses that have not previouslylocated in the City. Furthermore, development at the density called for in the plan would not befinancially feasible (given current constructioncosts) until office rents exceed the levels currentlyobtainable in or near Union City. Therefore, it isreasonable to expect that office development willnot occur until the economy regains at least thelevel of strength that it had during most of 2000.In light of these market conditions, it is likely thatopportunities for residential development pressurewill arise soon after the plan is adopted, but thatoffice development opportunities will lag behind.However, it is the city’s intention to allow residentialdevelopment only concurrent with or followingother development on the site.In this context, the City may face pressure toconvert sites from office to residential use, in orderto achieve early build-out (which would yield earlyproperty tax increments), as well as pressure toallow lower-density/intensity projects in order toachieve early build-out. Typically, lowerdevelopment densities do not require the thresholdrent levels that higher densities require, andtherefore may be built sooner, before marketdemand has pushed rents as high as would berequired to support higher density uses.Anticipating these pressures, the City shouldestablish policies that assure the long-term direction of a mixed-use, transit-orienteddevelopment by committing to maintain:
•The mix of uses shown in the adopted plan;•Minimum development densities/floor area ratios designated in the plan;
•Coordination of the timing of different types of
development to ensure a balance of residentialand office uses; •A clear vision to ensure that long-term objectives
do not fall victim to short-term developmentconditions and market influences; and •Close coordination between transit agencies to
expand transit alternatives and availability inthe Station District. development feasibility
City Council/RSA Agenda 141 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

UNIONCITY
The Union City Intermodal Station District andTransit Facility Plan provides a tremendousopportunity to develop a high density pedestrianand transit oriented village centered on a landmarktransit facility. It is a visionary and forward lookingconcept that will redefine this area and Union Cityfor the 21st Century. In order to achieve this vision,the following actions should be undertaken:Preliminary Public Infrastructure Design andEngineering StudyThis study would encompass preliminary design andengineering of the following elements of publicinfrastructure for the Intermodal Transit Facility and theStation District:
•Eleventh Street;•Pedestrian Grade Separation at the BART and Union Pacific Railroad tracks;
•The intermodal transit plaza, bus roundabout,
and the intermodal loop road;
•Interim BART parking; and•Bicycle and pedestrian connections.

Traffic Study, Circulation and Roadway Design Plan,and Parking StudyThis effort would include a traffic study to reviewcirculation and parking needs of the overall areaand specifically focus on Decoto Road, AlvaradoNiles Road and Union Square. The study shallincorporate auto, bus, pedestrian, and bicyclecirculation analysis to determine the best method toaccommodate and minimize conflicts among thesemodes.

Public Infrastructure Design Plan and StandardsDevelop a comprehensive landscaping andstreetscape design plan and standards for theStation District. This Plan should cover:
•Street and public infrastructure landscaping,
including planting types, arrangement, andlocation;
•Street furniture and fixtures;•Lighting fixture types and locations•Paving materials; and •Other items necessary to create a cohesive and attractive streetscape and public infrastructureenvironment in the Station District.

Passenger Rail StudyThe Passenger Rail Study would identify the bestlocation or locations for the passenger rail stationcomponent of the Intermodal Transit Facility. Thestudy would identify:
•Commitment and time frame of rail providers;•Levels of service;•Location of facility or facilities;•Track improvements necessary to mitigate loss of running time due to new station stops; and
•Preliminary design and engineering of station
improvements
Sustainability GuidelinesDevelop a set of Sustainability Guidelines for theStation District. chapter 7 implementation plan 87
areas of further study and next steps
Site Clean-upClean up of any contamination on the P.G.&E. siteby the property owner prior to any development.Parking DistrictCreate an independent parking district to includethe Station District. See Chapter 4, p. 32 foradditional information.Transportation Demand Management ProgramDevelop a transportation demand managementprogram (TDM) for the Station District to reduce theuse of single-occupancy vehicles and encourage theuse of alternative transit means.Maintenance DistrictCreate a landscaping, lighting, and maintenancedistrict for the Station District to fund the higherlevel of maintenance that will be required in thedense, pedestrian-oriented core area.Intermodal Transit Facility Maintenance PlanDevelop a heightened maintenance plan for theIntermodal Transit Facility in coordination withtransit providers and other agencies City Council/RSA Agenda 142 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 143 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
8 credits

UNIONCITY
City Council/RSA Agenda 144 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

C I T Y O F U N I O N C I T Y
Community Development Department
Community Redevelopment Agency

C O N S U L T A N T T E A M
Simon Martin-Vegue Winkelstein Moris
Cathy SimonLinda SobutaEvan RoseEric StatenMatthew MyersTrey Gerfers Arup
John EddyAidan Hughes
Fehr & Peers Associates
Gerald WaltersRob ReesJamie Schmidt
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates
Linda RhineJoey M. Goldman
Mundie & Associates
Roberta MundieSuzanne Lampert

G E N E R A L P L A N T E A M
City of Union City
Mark Leonard, Community Development DirectorJoan Malloy, Planning Manager Race Studio
Bruce Race
Mintier & Associates
Larry Mintier
Simon Martin-Vegue Winkelstein Moris
Linda SobutaEvan RoseEric Staten

UNIONCITY
90 chapter 8 creditsprepared by
City Council/RSA Agenda 145 Tuesday, October 8, 2024

I N T E R M O D A L A C T I O N T E A M
City of Union City
Manny Fernandez, City CouncilCathi Sweeney, Planning CommissionChristine Tien, Deputy City ManagerSteve Carrigan, Economic Development CoordinatorRoberto Munoz, Community Relations CoordinatorMark Leonard, Community Development DirectorJoan Malloy, Planning ManagerRalph Kachadourian, Associate PlannerLarry Cheeves, Public Works DirectorMarilou Ayupan, Principal Civil EngineerValerie Crawford, Leisure Services/Transit DirectorWilson Lee, Management AnalystRod Romano, LieutenantKenneth Ryan, CitizenMargaret Edgelow, Citizen BART
Nashua Kalil, Senior Planner and Urban DesignerKenyon, Real Estate Senior Real Estate SpecialistJohn Rennels, Sr., Senior Real Estate SpecialistRobert Engle, Transit Systems Development ProjectManagerPaul Medved, Principal EngineerJames Evans, Senior Access PlannerJoanne Parker, Capital Grants AC Transit
Rick Fernandez, General ManagerKathleen Kelly, Deputy General Manager for Service Development
Tony Divito, Senior Transportation PlannerRobin Little, Manager, Special ProjectsRon Johnsen, Manager, Special ProjectsCompton Gault, Transit Projects Coordinator VTA
Lisa Ives, Principal Transportation PlannerMike Tasosa, Transportation Planner Capitol Corridor JPA/BART
David Kutrosky, Deputy Director, Finance & PlanningJim Allison, Senior Planner ACE
Stacey Mortonson, Executive DirectorKwame Reed, Transportation Planner Caltrain
Howard Goode, Chief Development Officer
ACTA
Steve Castleberry, Deputy Director
ACTIA
Rebecca Kohlstrand, Project Manager
SMCTA
Mark Poppel, Project Manager
Office of Senator Liz Figueroa
Ana Apodaca, District Director
SMWM
Linda SobutaEvan RoseEric Staten
Arup
John EddyAidan Hughes
Fehr & Peers Associates
Rob Rees
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates
Joey M. Goldman
Mundie & Associates
Suzanne Lampert
Race Studio
Bruce Race
Mintier & Associates
Larry Mintier
chapter 8 credits 91

UNIONCITY
City Council/RSA Agenda 146 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
City Council/RSA Agenda 147 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report
Traffic Impact Analysis
of the At-Grade
Railroad Crossing
Closure Study
In the City of Union City
June 29, 2011
Pleasanton
Fresno
Sacramento
Santa Rosa
TJKM
www.tjkm.com
City Council/RSA Agenda 148 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
www.tjkm.com
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
J:\JURISDICTION\U\Union City\017-061 RR Xing Closure Study\Report\R06292011-Final.docx Prepared by:

TJKM Transportation Consultants
3875 Hopyard Road
Suite 200
Pleasanton, CA 94588-8526
Tel: 925.463.0611
Fax: 925.463.3690
TJKM
Final Report
Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study
In the City of Union City
June 29, 2011
City Council/RSA Agenda 149 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Table of Contents
Introduction and Summary ................................................................................................. 1 Introduction......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Summary ............................................................................................................................................................... 1 Existing Conditions ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Existing plus ‘F’ Street Closure Conditions............................................................................................. 1 Existing plus ‘H’ Street Closure Conditions ........................................................................................... 1 Existing plus ‘I’ Street Closure Conditions.............................................................................................. 2 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................................ 4 Existing Conditions and Study Methodology ..................................................................... 5 Roadway Network ............................................................................................................................................. 5 Level of Service Analysis Methodology ......................................................................................................... 5 Criteria of Significance ...................................................................................................................................... 5 Traffic Volumes, Intersection Geometrics, and Traffic Controls ........................................................... 6 At-grade Crossing Pedestrian Volumes ...................................................................................................... 10 Study Intersections, and Scenarios............................................................................................................... 10 Collision History .............................................................................................................................................. 11 Results of Level of Service Analysis ............................................................................................................. 12 Impacts of ‘F’ Street At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure ............................................ 13 ‘F’ Street Closure Description and Traffic Redistribution ..................................................................... 13 Existing plus ‘F’ Street Closure Conditions ............................................................................................... 13 Emergency Vehicle Access Evaluation ......................................................................................................... 13 Impacts of ‘H’ Street At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure ........................................... 15 ‘H’ Street Closure Description and Traffic Redistribution .................................................................... 15 Existing plus ‘H’ Street Closure Conditions .............................................................................................. 15 Emergency Vehicle Access Evaluation ......................................................................................................... 15 Impacts of ‘I’ Street At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure ............................................. 17 ‘I’ Street Closure Description and Traffic Redistribution ...................................................................... 17 Existing plus ‘I’ Street Closure Conditions ................................................................................................ 17 Emergency Vehicle Access Evaluation ......................................................................................................... 17 Ranking and Evaluation Criteria for At-grade Crossing Closure ................................... 19 Priority Ranking Criteria ................................................................................................................................ 19 Conclusions and Recommendations ................................................................................. 20 Existing Conditions ..................................................................................................................................... 20 Existing plus ‘F’ Street Closure Conditions........................................................................................... 20 Existing plus ‘H’ Street Closure Conditions ......................................................................................... 20 Existing plus ‘I’ Street Closure Conditions............................................................................................ 20 Study Participants ............................................................................................................... 21 TJKM Personnel ................................................................................................................................................ 21 Persons Consulted ........................................................................................................................................... 21 References ......................................................................................................................................................... 21 City Council/RSA Agenda 150 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
List of Appendices
Appendix A – Level of Service Methodology
Appendix B – Existing Counts
Appendix C – SWITRS and FRA Collision Data
Appendix D – Level of Service Worksheets: Existing
Appendix E – LOS Worksheets: Existing + ‘F’ Street Closure Appendix F – LOS Worksheets: Existing + ‘H’ Street Closure Appendix G – LOS Worksheets: Existing + ‘I’ Street Closure List of Figures
Figure 1: Vicinity Map ............................................................................................................................................. 3 Figure 2: Existing Weekday At-grade Crossing Traffic Volumes: F, H and I Streets .............................. 6 Figure 3: Existing Turning Movement and Average Daily Traffic Volumes................................................ 7 Figure 4: Existing Pedestrian Counts .................................................................................................................. 8 Figure 5: Existing Bicycle Counts ......................................................................................................................... 9 Figure 6: Existing Weekday At-grade Pedestrian Crossing Volumes: F, H and I Streets ..................... 10 Figure 7: ‘F’ Street Closed – Turning Movement Volumes and Lane Geometry ................................... 14 Figure 8: ‘H’ Street Closed – Turning Movement Volumes and Lane Geometry.................................. 16 Figure 9: ‘I’ Street Closed – Turning Movement Volumes and Lane Geometry .................................... 18 List of Tables
Table I: City of Union City Oakland Subdivision Line Railroad Crossing Inventory ............................... 4 Table II: Existing Intersection Level of Service Results ................................................................................ 12 Table III: ‘F’ Street Closure Intersection Level of Service Results............................................................. 13 Table IV: ‘H’ Street Closure Intersection Level of Service Results ........................................................... 15 Table V: ‘I’ Street Closure Intersection Level of Service Results .............................................................. 17 Table VI: At-grade Crossing Closure Priority Ranking Criteria................................................................. 19 City Council/RSA Agenda 151 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

June 29, 2011
Introduction and Summary
Introduction
This report presents the results of TJKM's traffic impact analysis (TIA) for the closure of an existing at-grade crossing of one of the three Union City Streets across the railroad tracks owned by the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) Company on the Oakland Subdivision Line. The City is proposing to construct a pedestrian crossing to the Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Station to provide direct access from the existing BART parking lot located on the east side of the UPRR tracks. However, before the proposed pedestrian crossing can be built the UPPR requires the closure of an existing at-grade railroad crossing along the Oakland Subdivision Line. Figure 1 illustrates the vicinity map with the location of the ‘F’ Street, ‘H’ Street, and ‘I’ Street at-grade railroad crossings relative to the surrounding roadway network.

The purpose of this TIA is to evaluate the potential traffic impacts of the potential closure of an at-grade railroad crossing along the UPRR Oakland Subdivision Line and to identify any critical traffic issues that need to be addressed in the on-going planning process. The study primarily focused on 1) evaluating traffic conditions at six study intersections, and 2) how these intersections may be potentially impacted by the closure of an at-grade railroad crossing.

Summary
The potential impacts of a possible closure of one of the three existing at-grade railroad crossings were evaluated in accordance with the standards set forth by the level of service policies of the City of Union City and generally accepted traffic engineering principles and practices.

Existing Conditions
• Currently, all study intersections operate at LOS C or better during each of the study peak hours.
• Based on the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) and the Federal Railroad Administration Web Accident Prediction System no reported accidents on the Oakland Subdivision Line have occurred in the past five years within the City of Union City. • At present, the ‘F’ Street at grade crossing has the highest number of pedestrians crossing the railroad tracks. The ‘H’ Street crossing has the highest traffic volume, while the ‘I’ Street crossing has the lowest traffic volume.

Existing plus ‘F’ Street Closure Conditions
• Under this scenario, the intersections of ‘H’ Street/11th Street and ‘H’ Street/12th Street are expected to operate at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour. • The closure of ‘F’ Street at-grade crossing would cause the most impact to emergency vehicles and the second highest increase in Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT).

Existing plus ‘H’ Street Closure Conditions
• Under this scenario, the intersection of ‘F’ Street/11th Street is expected to operate at LOS E during the a.m. peak hour.
• Of the three at-grade crossing closures being considered, the closure of ‘H’ Street would cause the second most impact to emergency vehicles and the highest increase in VMT.

City Council/RSA Agenda 152 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

June 29, 2011
Existing plus ‘I’ Street Closure Conditions
• Similar to the existing conditions, under this scenario all study intersections are expected to operate at LOS C or better during each of the peak periods. • Of the three at-grade crossing closures being considered, the closure of ‘I’ Street would cause the least impact to emergency vehicles and the least increase in VMT. • ‘I’ Street ranks the highest for consideration of the at-grade crossing closure. However, the ‘I’ Street at-grade crossing serves 37 percent of the pedestrian traffic. As a result, it is recommended that the existing ‘I’ Street at-grade crossing be considered for closure, but allow pedestrians to cross the railroad tracks at this location.

City Council/RSA Agenda 153 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
017-061 - 5/24/11 - JB
Figure
1 Not to Scale
NORTH
City of Union City - Railroad Crossing Closure Study
Vicinity Map
UNION
CITY
BART

STATION
H ST.

G ST.

I ST.

H ST.

F ST.

E ST.

D ST.

RAILROAD AVE.

BART
WHIPPLE RD.

MISSION BLVD.

DECOTO RD.

ALVARADO-NILES RD.
11th ST.
10th ST.
1 2
3 4
5 6
J ST.

LEGEND
Study Intersection
12th ST.
13th ST.
14th ST.

City Council/RSA Agenda 154 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

Purpose and Need
The City of Union City is proposing to construct a pedestrian crossing at the BART Station/Railroad to provide direct access from the existing BART parking lot located on the east side of the UPRR tracks. As per the conditions of approval from the UPRR Company, construction of a new at-grade crossing will require the closure of an existing
at-grade railroad crossing along the Oakland
Subdivision Line. The Guidelines for the
Federal Aid At-Grade Highway Rail Crossing
Program (Section 130 program) defines AtGrade crossing closure is a condition that occurs when vehicular traffic is removed from
conflict with railroad traffic at grade by closing
the road. This includes removal of warning
devices, removal of the surfacing and
approaches, construction of barriers and/or
fencing, signage, and other measures as
deemed necessary during the diagnostic
review. The City of Union City engaged the
services of TJKM Transportation Consultants to conduct a study of three existing at-grade railroad crossings to be considered for closure to satisfy the conditions of approval of the UPRR Company.

TJKM Transportation Consultants performed a thorough review of the three existing railroad crossings and observed traffic circulation in the vicinity of the railroad crossings. TJKM analyzed the effects of the possible closure of the three separate at-grade railroad crossings and provided evaluation criteria along with recommendations for closing an at-grade crossing to traffic without causing significant negative impacts on traffic in the area.

TJKM staff reviewed the grade crossing inventory database for the Oakland Subdivision Line within the City of Union City and Table I summarizes the existing at-grade crossings in the vicinity of the study area. There are three at-grade crossings along the Oakland Subdivision Line in the vicinity of the proposed BART crossing. During the data collection periods (between 7:00 - 9:00 a.m. and 2:00 - 6:00 p.m.) for the study intersections, only one train was observed traveling in the southbound direction. This train started crossing the ‘F’ Street at-grade crossing at 4:24 p.m. and completed crossing the ‘I’ Street at-grade crossing at 4:27 p.m.

Table I: City of Union City Oakland Subdivision Line Railroad Crossing Inventory Crossing # Line Name Street Train Speed
834189R Oakland Subdivision Line ‘F’ Street 40 to 50 mph 834188J Oakland Subdivision Line ‘H’ Street 40 to 50 mph 834187C Oakland Subdivision Line ‘I’ Street 40 to 50 mph June 29, 2011
City Council/RSA Agenda 155 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

June 29, 2011
Existing Conditions and Study Methodology
Roadway Network
The project site and surrounding study area are illustrated in Figure 1. Important roadways within the project area are discussed below:
‘H’ Street is classified as a primary collector street. ‘H’ Street is predominantly an east-west collector street that extends southwesterly for 1.1 miles from its intersection with Fourth Street (near Decoto Road) and terminates at Alvarado-Niles Road. Royal Ann Drive is the southwestern extension of ‘H’ Street, south of Alvarado-Niles Road. ‘H’ Street provides direct connection to James Logan High School, New Haven Adult School, and Decoto Elementary School. Primary collector streets are intended to transfer traffic from collector and minor residential streets to an arterial. Average daily traffic volume on a primary collector will usually average less than 10,000 vehicles per day. TJKM staff observed heavy vehicular and pedestrian volumes on ‘H’ Street during the school drop-off and pick-up periods for James Logan High School. At present ‘H’ Street has an ADT of 4,445 trips across the at-grade railroad crossing. ‘F’ Street is classified as a residential street. In the study area, ‘F’ Street is predominantly an eastwest local residential street that extends between Railroad Avenue and 15th Street approximately one-quarter of a mile to the southwest. Sherman Drive is the southwesterly extension of ‘F’ Street south of 15th Avenue and provides connection to Alvarado-Niles Road. ‘F’ Street provides direct connection to Searles Elementary School. At present, ‘F’ Street has an ADT of 2,420 trips across the at-grade railroad crossing.
‘I’ Street is classified as a residential street. In the study area, ‘I’ Street is predominantly an eastwest residential street that extends between Railroad Avenue and 14th Street approximately one third of a mile to the southwest. TJKM staff observed that ‘I’ Street served as the main pedestrian access for James Logan High School for a few students. At present, ‘I’ Street has an ADT of 532 trips across the at-grade railroad crossing.

TJKM conducted preliminary field visits to the study area to determine existing vehicle and pedestrian activities on the three at-grade crossings. ‘I’ Street served as the pedestrian access for James Logan High School for few students. ‘F’ Street served as the primary access for the Searles Elementary School.

Level of Service Analysis Methodology
Level of Service (LOS) is a qualitative index of the performance of an element of the transportation system. LOS is a rating scale running from A to F, with A indicating no congestion of any kind, and F indicating unacceptable congestion and delays. LOS in this study describes the operating conditions for signalized and unsignalized intersections.

The 2000 Highway Capacity Manual is the standard reference published by the Transportation Research Board, and contains the specific criteria and methods to be used in assessing LOS.

Synchro software was used to define LOS in this study. Details regarding these calculations are in Appendix A.

Criteria of Significance
The City’s service level standard is LOS D for both signalized and unsignalized intersections.

Intersections that exceed (i.e. LOS E or LOS F) this service level threshold are considered impacted and should be considered for mitigation. The number of vehicles on the critical approach and vehicles contributed by a proposed project are taken into consideration. Exceptions to the LOS D standard arise when the project is not expected to add any trips to the critical movements at an intersection that is operating at LOS D or worse under existing conditions.

City Council/RSA Agenda 156 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

Traffic Volumes, Intersection Geometrics, and Traffic Controls The existing turning movement counts for the study intersections were collected on a typical weekday when the James Logan High School and Searles Elementary School were in session for the a.m. peak period (7:00 – 9:00 a.m.), the afternoon school peak period (2:00 – 4:00 p.m.), and the p.m. peak period (4:00 – 6:00 p.m.). TJKM also obtained ADT counts for ‘F’ Street, ‘H’ Street and ‘I’ Street near the at-grade railroad crossings. Additionally, the number of trains at each of the at-grade crossing during the peak periods was counted. The peak hour intersection turning movement and daily directional volume counts were collected in March 2011. Figure 2 illustrates the weekday hourly fluctuations in traffic volumes at the existing at-grade crossings. ‘I’ Street has very low but constant traffic volumes throughout the day, whereas both ‘F’ Street and ‘H’ Street have significant traffic volume fluctuations with high volumes between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m., and between 2:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. The existing turning movement volumes, 24-hour volume counts, lane geometry and intersection controls are illustrated in Figure 3. Figure 4 and Figure 5 illustrates the existing pedestrian and bicyclist counts at the study intersections, respectively. The raw count data are included in Appendix B.

Figure 2: Existing Weekday At-grade Crossing Traffic Volumes: F, H and I Streets

June 29, 2011
City Council/RSA Agenda 157 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
21 (17) [7]
164 (101) [71]
6 (4) [3]
21 (6) [10]
22 (18) [30]
7 (10) [10]
2 (1) [2]
174 (80) [43]
1 (5) [3]
45 (26) [12]27 (12) [33]2 (2) [0]
12 (8) [6]
235 (223) [175]
43 (20) [19]
27 (24) [17]26 (29) [44]28 (25) [39]
4 (5) [4]
377 (190) [136]
22 (13) [10]
15 (7) [6]25 (12) [21]1 (0) [0]
0 (0) [2]
3 (5) [10]
5 (13) [6]
11 (18) [22]
75 (80) [95]
9 (5) [17]
6 (1) [2]
6 (6) [11]
13 (6) [6]
1 (0) [4]83 (47) [46]2 (2) [5]
1 (2) [4]
7 (11) [13]
0 (0) [1]
1 (0) [0]0 (0) [1]0 (0) [0]
6 (5) [5]
9 (17) [27]
0 (0) [1]
0 (6) [5]0 (0) [0]3 (6) [3]
3 (6) [3]
284 (226) [189]
5 (5) [0]
4 (3) [1]1 (7) [1]1 (2) [5]
7 (3) [6]
427 (195) [149]
2 (3) [1]
2 (4) [2]3 (1) [6]12 (16) [4]
158 (91) [71]
2 (0) [2]
3 (5) [0]
40 (30) [14]
235 (107) [59]
9 (8) [6]
Intersection #1
F St./11th Street
Intersection #5
I St./11th St.

Intersection #6
I St./12th St.

Intersection #2
F St./12th St.

Intersection #3
H St./11th St.

Intersection #4
H St./12th St.

Small Pedestrian
Path/Driveway
017-061 - 5/24/11 - JB
Figure
3 Not to Scale
NORTH
City of Union City - Railroad Crossing Closure Study
Existing Turning Movement Volumes and Average Daily Traffic Volumes UNION
CITY
BART

STATION
H ST.

G ST.

I ST.

H ST.

F ST.

E ST.

D ST.

RAILROAD AVE.

BART
WHIPPLE RD.

MISSION BLVD.

DECOTO RD.

ALVARADO-NILES RD.
11th ST.
10th ST.
1 2
3 4
5 6
J ST.
12th ST.
13th ST.
14th ST.

LEGEND
Study Intersection
Stop Sign
AM Peak Hour Volumes
School Peak Hour Volumes
PM Peak Hour Volumes
Average Daily Traffic Volumes
Roadway ADT Count Location
XX
(XX)
[XX]
XX
City Council/RSA Agenda 158 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
017-061 - 5/24/11 - JB
Figure
4 Intersection #1
F St./11th St.

Intersection #2
F St./12th St.

Intersection #3
H St./11th St.

Intersection #4
H St./12th St.

Intersection #5
I St./11th St.

Intersection #6
I St./12th St.
0 (7) [4]
6 (3) [4]
1 (0) [0]
0 (3) [2]
7 (4) [7]
2 (30) [10]
4 (10) [6]
2 (17) [5]
2 (6) [1]
45 (92) [19]
1 (3) [7]
25 (27) [9]
3 (12) [3]
0 (2) [17]
64 (11) [1]
1 (0) [11]
11 (128) [6]
32 (4) [14] 18 (10) [3] 0 (3) [2]
City of Union City - Railroad Crossing Closure Study
Existing Pedestrian Counts
7 (13) [13]
0 (4) [2]
3 (12) [3]
3 (6) [3]
Not to Scale
NORTH
LEGEND
Study Intersection
AM Peak Hour Volumes
School Peak Hour Volumes
PM Peak Hour Volumes
XX
(XX)
[XX]
UNION
CITY
BART

STATION
H ST.

G ST.

I ST.

H ST.

F ST.

E ST.

D ST.

RAILROAD AVE.

BART
WHIPPLE RD.

MISSION BLVD.

DECOTO RD.

ALVARADO-NILES RD.
11th ST.
10th ST.
1 2
3 4
5 6
J ST.
12th ST.
13th ST.
14th ST.

City Council/RSA Agenda 159 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
0 (0) [1]
0 (0) [2]
0 (0) [1]
0 (0) [0]2 (0) [1]0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [2]
2 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]
2 (2) [0]1 (0) [3]0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]
4 (3) [4]
0 (0) [2]
0 (0) [0]3 (1) [1]0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]
1 (4) [3]
1 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]1 (0) [1]0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [1]
0 (2) [0]
0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]4 (0) [0]0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]
1 (3) [0]
0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]1 (1) [1]0 (0) [2]
0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [1]0 (0) [0]1 (2) [2]
0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [1]
1 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]1 (4) [0]0 (1) [0]
0 (0) [0]
1 (4) [5]
0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]0 (0) [0]0 (0) [1]
0 (2) [0]
1 (2) [2]
0 (0) [0]
2 (0) [0]1 (1) [0]3 (0) [0]
0 (3) [4]
0 (0) [0]
0 (0) [0]0 (0) [0]
2 (3) [0]
2 (2) [0]
Intersection #1
F St./11th Street
Intersection #5
I St./11th St.

Intersection #6
I St./12th St.

Intersection #2
F St./12th St.

Intersection #3
H St./11th St.

Intersection #4
H St./12th St.

Small Pedestrian
Path/Driveway
017-061 - 5/24/11 - JB
Figure
5 Not to Scale
NORTH
City of Union City - Railroad Crossing Closure Study
Existing Bicycle Counts
UNION
CITY
BART

STATION
H ST.

G ST.

I ST.

H ST.

F ST.

E ST.

D ST.

RAILROAD AVE.

BART
WHIPPLE RD.

MISSION BLVD.

DECOTO RD.

ALVARADO-NILES RD.
11th ST.
10th ST.
1 2
3 4
5 6
J ST.
12th ST.
13th ST.
14th ST.

LEGEND
Study Intersection
AM Peak Hour Volumes
School Peak Hour Volumes
PM Peak Hour Volumes
XX
(XX)
[XX]
City Council/RSA Agenda 160 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

At-grade Crossing Pedestrian Volumes
As part of the study, TJKM counted the number of pedestrians crossing the railway tracks at the three at-grade crossings at ‘F’ Street, ‘H’ Street and ‘I’ Street. Similar to the intersection turning movement counts, the pedestrian counts were collected on a typical weekday when the James Logan High School and the Searles Elementary School were in session for the a.m. peak period (7:00 – 9:00 a.m.), p.m. peak period (4:00 – 6:00 p.m.), and the school peak period (2:00 – 4:00 p.m.).

Figure 6 illustrates the weekday hourly pedestrian volumes at the existing at-grade crossings.

During the peak periods, ‘F’ Street has the highest number of pedestrians (48 percent) crossing the railroad tracks with 164 pedestrians. ‘F’ Street pedestrian crossing peaks at 78 pedestrians between the hour of 2:00 and 3:00 p.m. , which coincides with the release of students from the neighboring schools. During the peak periods, ‘I’ Street has the second highest number of pedestrians (37 percent) crossing the railroad tracks with 125 pedestrians. ‘I’ Street pedestrian crossing peaks at 42 pedestrians between the hour of 3:00 and 4:00 p.m., which coincides with the release of James Logan High School students. Finally, the number of pedestrians during the peak periods observed on ‘H’ Street was 51 pedestrians (15 percent) with the peak between the hours of 4:00 and 6:00 p.m.

Figure 6: Existing Weekday At-grade Pedestrian Crossing Volumes: F, H and I Streets June 29, 2011
Study Intersections, and Scenarios
The study focused on evaluating traffic conditions at the existing study intersections that may potentially be impacted by the potential closure of an existing at-grade crossing. The study intersections are shown in Figure 2.

Intersections:

1. ‘F’ Street / 11th Street

2. ‘F’ Street / 12th Street

3. ‘H’ Street / 11th Street

4. ‘H’ Street / 12th Street

5. ‘I’ Street / 11th Street

6. ‘I’ Street / 12th Street
City Council/RSA Agenda 161 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

June 29, 2011
The following scenarios were addressed in the study:

1. Existing Conditions – This scenario evaluates existing (March 2011) traffic volumes and roadway conditions based on traffic counts and field surveys.

2. Existing plus ‘F’ Street Closure Conditions – This scenario analyzes the effects of the possible closure of the existing at-grade railroad crossing at ‘F’ Street. The existing traffic volumes are redistributed to the adjacent roadways based on existing travel patterns and knowledge of the study area.

3. Existing plus ‘H’ Street Closure Conditions – This scenario analyzes the effects of the possible closure of the existing at-grade railroad crossing at ‘H’ Street. The existing traffic volumes are redistributed to the adjacent roadways based on existing travel patterns and knowledge of the study area.

4. Existing plus ‘I’ Street Closure Conditions – This scenario analyzes the effects of the possible closure of the existing at-grade railroad crossing at ‘I’ Street. The existing traffic volumes are redistributed to the adjacent roadways based on existing travel patterns and knowledge of the study area.

Collision History
TJKM obtained the latest collision data from the Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS) for the six study intersections from the local California Highway Patrol (CHP) office to perform collision analysis. The collision analysis was conducted for a five-year period between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2009. The records indicate that there have been four collisions near the intersection of ‘F’ Street/11th Street; two at the intersection and the other within 130 feet to the west. The records indicates that six collisions have occurred near the intersection of ‘H’ Street/11th Street, of these five collisions occurred at the intersection and the other approximately 200 feet to the west. The records indicate that two collisions have occurred near the intersection of ‘I’ Street/11th Street, of which one collision occurred at the intersection and the other at approximately 65 feet east of the intersection. However, none of the collisions included in the SWITR database were related to the at-grade crossing or occurred within the railroad right-of-way.

No collisions have been reported for the intersections of ‘F’ Street/12th Street, ‘H’ Street/ 12th Street and ‘I’ Street/12th Street. TJKM also reviewed the Federal Railroad Administration’s (FRA) Web Accident Prediction System that shows the crossing accident history and trends at all highway-railroad crossing locations. Based on the data from FRA there are no reported accidents on the Oakland Subdivision Line within the City of Union City limits. Collision diagrams based on the SWITRS and the accident prediction reports from FRA are included in Appendix C.

City Council/RSA Agenda 162 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

June 29, 2011
Results of Level of Service Analysis
Table II summarizes the levels of service at the study intersections under existing conditions scenario. Levels of service worksheets for existing traffic conditions are provided in Appendix D.

Currently, all the study intersections operate at LOS C or better during each of the study peak hours.

Table II: Existing Intersection Level of Service Results ID Intersection Control
Existing Conditions
A.M. Peak
Hour
M.D. Peak
Hour
P.M. Peak
Hour
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS
1 ‘F’ Street and 11th Street Two-Way Stop 14.3 B 11.6 B 10.3 B 2 ‘F’ Street and 12th Street Two-Way Stop 9.9 A 9.7 A 8.8 A 3 ‘H’ Street and 11th Street Two-Way Stop 17.3 C 14.7 B 12.1 B 4 ‘H’ Street and 12th Street Two-Way Stop 17.0 C 13.4 B 11.3 B 5 ‘I’ Street and 11th Street Two-Way Stop 10.0 A 9.7 A 10.1 B 6 ‘I’ Street and 12th Street Two-Way Stop 8.7 A 8.7 A 9.3 A Notes: LOS = Level of Service of worst movement on stop controlled intersections

City Council/RSA Agenda 163 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

June 29, 2011
Impacts of ‘F’ Street At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure ‘F’ Street Closure Description and Traffic Redistribution This scenario analyzes the effects of the possible closure of the existing at-grade railroad crossing at ‘F’ Street. ‘F’ Street would be closed at 12th Street and a point just east of the railroad, but southwest of 11th Street. The existing traffic volumes were then redistributed to the adjacent roadways based on existing travel patterns and knowledge of the study area. The redistributed traffic volumes and lane geometry that take into account the closure of ‘F’ Street are illustrated in Figure 7.

Existing plus ‘F’ Street Closure Conditions
The study intersection levels of service calculations are included in Appendix E. To evaluate the impacts of ‘F’ Street closure, Table III summarizes the levels of service at the study intersections under both Existing Conditions and ‘F’ Street Closed Conditions. With the closure of the at-grade crossing at ‘F’ Street, two of the six study intersections are expected to exceed acceptable LOS thresholds during the a.m. peak hour. The intersections of ‘H’ Street/11th Street and ‘H’ Street/ 12th Street are expected to operate at LOS F during the a.m. peak hour.

Table III: ‘F’ Street Closure Intersection Level of Service Results ID Intersection Control
Existing Conditions ‘F’ Street Closed Condition
A.M. Peak
Hour
M.D. Peak
Hour
P.M. Peak
Hour
A.M. Peak
Hour
M.D. Peak
Hour
P.M. Peak
Hour
Delay
(sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS 1 ‘F’ Street and
11th Street
Two-Way
Stop 14.3 B 11.6 B 10.3 B 11.2 B 10.0 A 9.7 A
2 ‘F’ Street and
12th Street
Two-Way
Stop 9.9 A 9.7 A 8.8 A * * * * * *
3 ‘H’ Street and
11th Street
Two-Way
Stop 17.3 C 14.7 B 12.1 B 103.9 F 19.5 C 14.5 B
4 ‘H’ Street and
12th Street
Two-Way
Stop 17.0 C 13.4 B 11.3 B 63.8 F 17.6 C 13.4 B
5 ‘I’ Street and
11th Street
Two-Way
Stop 10.0 A 9.7 A 10.1 B 9.8 A 9.7 A 10.0 A
6 ‘I’ Street and
12th Street
Two-Way
Stop 8.7 A 8.7 A 9.3 A 8.7 A 8.6 A 9.4 A
Notes: LOS = Level of Service of worst movement on stop controlled intersections * = Not Applicable
Emergency Vehicle Access Evaluation
The impacts on emergency vehicle access routes that may be caused by the potential closure of ‘F’ Street were qualitatively analyzed. An emergency vehicle that would currently utilize the ‘F’ Street at-grade railroad crossing would need to incur up to an additional 0.39 miles of travel distance. Of the three at-grade crossing closures being considered, the closure of ‘F’ Street would cause most impact to emergency vehicle response times. .

City Council/RSA Agenda 164 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
2 (1) [2]
88 (45) [25]
22 (18) [30]
7 (10) [10]
72 (38) [45]2 (2) [0]
108 (69) [47]
331 (284) [216]
43 (20) [19]
38 (27) [22]26 (29) [44]28 (25) [39]
4 (5) [4]
464 (230) [158]
22 (13) [10]
158 (76) [45]25 (12) [21]1 (0) [0]
0 (0) [2]
3 (5) [10]
5 (13) [6]
11 (18) [22]
75 (80) [95]
9 (5) [17]
6 (1) [2]
6 (6) [11]
13 (6) [6]
1 (0) [4]83 (47) [46]2 (2) [5]
1 (2) [4]
7 (11) [13]
0 (0) [1]
1 (0) [0]0 (0) [1]0 (0) [0]
6 (5) [5]
9 (17) [27]
0 (0) [1]
0 (6) [5]0 (0) [0]3 (6) [3]
3 (6) [3]
363 (272) [225]
5 (5) [0]
4 (3) [1]1 (7) [1]1 (2) [5]
129 (61) [39]
549 (253) [182]
2 (3) [1]
2 (4) [2]3 (1) [6]131 (92) [54]
Intersection #1
F St./11th Street
Intersection #5
I St./11th St.

Intersection #6
I St./12th St.

Intersection #2
F St./12th St.

Intersection #3
H St./11th St.

Intersection #4
H St./12th St.

Small Pedestrian
Path/Driveway
017-061 - 5/24/11 - JB
Figure
7 Not to Scale
NORTH
City of Union City - Railroad Crossing Closure Study
F Street Closed - Turning Movement Volumes and Lane Geometry UNION
CITY
BART

STATION
H ST.

G ST.

I ST.

H ST.

F ST.

E ST.

D ST.

RAILROAD AVE.

BART
WHIPPLE RD.

MISSION BLVD.

DECOTO RD.

ALVARADO-NILES RD.
11th ST.
10th ST.
1 2
3 4
5 6
J ST.
12th ST.
13th ST.
14th ST.

LEGEND
Study Intersection
Stop Sign
AM Peak Hour Volumes
School Peak Hour Volumes
PM Peak Hour Volumes
XX
(XX)
[XX]
CLOSED
CLOSED
City Council/RSA Agenda 165 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study

June 29, 2011
Impacts of ‘H’ Street At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure ‘H’ Street Closure Description and Traffic Redistribution This scenario analyzes the effects of the possible closure of the existing at-grade railroad crossing at ‘H’ Street. ‘H’ Street would be closed at 12th Street and a point just east of the railroad tracks, but southwest of 11th Street. The existing traffic volumes were then redistributed to the adjacent roadways based on existing travel patterns and knowledge of the study area. The redistributed traffic volumes and lane geometry that take into account the closure of ‘H’ Street are illustrated in Figure 8.

Existing plus ‘H’ Street Closure Conditions
The study intersection levels of service calculations are included in Appendix F. To evaluate the impacts of ‘H’ Street closure, Table IV summarizes the levels of service at the study intersections under both Existing Conditions and ‘H’ Street Closed Conditions. With the closure of the at-grade crossing at ‘H’ Street, the intersection of ‘F’ Street and 11th Street is expected to exceed acceptable LOS thresholds during the a.m. peak hour. The intersection of ‘F’ Street/11th Street is expected to operate at LOS E during the a.m. peak hour.

Table IV: ‘H’ Street Closure Intersection Level of Service Results ID Intersection Control
Existing Conditions ‘H’ Street Closed Condition
A.M. Peak
Hour
M.D. Peak
Hour
P.M. Peak
Hour
A.M. Peak
Hour
M.D. Peak
Hour
P.M. Peak
Hour
Delay
(sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS Delay (sec/veh) LOS 1 ‘F’ Street and
11th Street
Two-Way
Stop 14.3 B 11.6 B 10.3 B 39.0 E 14.2 B 12.0 B
2 ‘F’ Street and
12th Street
Two-Way
Stop 9.9 A 9.7 A 8.8 A 10.6 B 9.7 A 9.2 A
3 ‘H’ Street and
11th Street
Two-Way
Stop 17.3 C 14.7 B 12.1 B 16.2 C 11.3 B 10.7 B
4 ‘H’ Street and
12th Street
Two-Way
Stop 17.0 C 13.4 B 11.3 B 12.1 B 11.6 B 10.8 B
5 ‘I’ Street and
11th Street
Two-Way
Stop 10.0 A 9.7 A 10.1 B 18.5 C 11.7 B 11.4 B
6 ‘I’ Street and
12th Street
Two-Way
Stop 8.7 A 8.7 A 9.3 A 11.8 B 10.4 B 10.3 B
Notes: LOS = Level of Service of worst movement on stop controlled intersections

Emergency Vehicle Access Evaluation
The impacts on emergency vehicle access routes that may be caused by the potential closure of ‘H’ Street were qualitatively analyzed. An emergency vehicle that would currently utilize the ‘H’ Street at-grade railroad crossing would need to incur between 0.25 and 0.39 miles (dependent on which route is taken) of additional travel distance. Of the three at-grade crossing closure being considered, the closure of ‘H’ Street would cause the second highest impact to emergency vehicle response times.

City Council/RSA Agenda 166 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
193 (100) [72]
216 (101) [76]
26 (29) [44]28 (25) [39]
40 (19) [27]1 (0) [0]
21 (17) [7]
309 (227) [171]
6 (4) [3]
210 (101) [78]
22 (18) [30]
7 (10) [10]
2 (1) [2]
174 (80) [43]
1 (5) [3]
45 (26) [12]27 (12) [33]2 (2) [0]
0 (0) [0]
148 (131) [110]
5 (13) [6]
25 (30) [31]75 (80) [95]
9 (5) [17]
6 (1) [2]
6 (6) [11]
13 (6) [6]
203 (107) [81]83 (47) [46]191 (97) [73]
1 (2) [4]
7 (11) [13]
0 (0) [1]
1 (0) [0]0 (0) [1]0 (0) [0]
6 (5) [5]
227 (118) [105]
0 (0) [1]
15 (7) [6]0 (12) [21]146 (121) [103]
4 (3) [1]1 (7) [1]
145 (119) [98]
147 (118) [95] 2 (4) [2]
3 (1) [6]
158 (91) [71]
2 (0) [2]
3 (5) [0]
194 (159) [113]
453 (208) [137]
9 (8) [6]
Intersection #1
F St./11th Street
Intersection #5
I St./11th St.

Intersection #6
I St./12th St.

Intersection #2
F St./12th St.

Intersection #3
H St./11th St.

Intersection #4
H St./12th St.

Small Pedestrian
Path/Driveway
CLOSED
CLOSED
017-061 - 5/24/11 - JB
Figure
8 Not to Scale
NORTH
City of Union City - Railroad Crossing Closure Study
H Street Closed - Turning Movement Volumes and Lane Geometry UNION
CITY
BART

STATION
H ST.

G ST.

I ST.

H ST.

F ST.

E ST.

D ST.

RAILROAD AVE.

BART
WHIPPLE RD.

MISSION BLVD.

DECOTO RD.

ALVARADO-NILES RD.
11th ST.
10th ST.
1 2
3 4
5 6
J ST.
12th ST.
13th ST.
14th ST.

LEGEND
Study Intersection
Stop Sign
AM Peak Hour Volumes
School Peak Hour Volumes
PM Peak Hour Volumes
XX
(XX)
[XX]
City Council/RSA Agenda 167 Tuesday, October 8, 2024
TJKM
Transportation
Consultants
Final Report - Traffic Impact Analysis of the At-Grade Railroad Crossing Closure Study