Castro Valley Municipal Advisory Council Meeting - January 21, 2026

The Castro Valley Municipal Advisory Council (MAC) held its general purpose meeting on January 21, 2026. The primary agenda item was a discussion and recommendation to the Alameda County Board of Supervisors Transportation and Planning Committee regarding the bike lanes on Castro Valley Boulevard, including parking impacts and a utilization study. The meeting also included public comments, approval of previous minutes, and council announcements.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of November 17, 2025 Minutes: Approved unanimously.
• Approval of December 15, 2025 Minutes: Approved as amended to reflect that due to noticing concerns, the council's decision on the bike lane item was not forwarded to the Transportation and Planning Committee.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Gary Wolf: Announced his candidacy for East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD) director, citing issues of water affordability, truck traffic, and renewable energy. He distributed business cards and offered to answer questions.
• CHP Officer Pabs: Reported December 2025 statistics for Castro Valley: 214 traffic citations, 10 DUI arrests, 28 injury crashes, 39 non-injury crashes, 2 stolen vehicles recovered. Announced upcoming educational programs: Age Well Drive Smart (Feb 10, 12:30 PM at CV Library) and Start Smart for youth (Feb 10, 6 PM at CHP Hayward). Also noted National Passenger Safety Week (Jan 19-23).
• Matt Turner: Expressed concern about Caltrans studying opening the scenic portion of I-580 to big rig traffic, which could add 5.5 million extra truck miles annually and increase cut-through traffic on Crow Canyon Road. He urged the MAC to get involved in the technical advisory committee meetings.
• Public Comment on Bike Lanes (multiple speakers): The majority of speakers supported keeping the bike lanes, citing safety for cyclists (especially children and seniors), climate action, and the need for safe routes to school and BART. Several speakers noted that the bike lane usage study was a baseline and that usage would increase over time. Some speakers opposed removal, arguing that parking concerns were overstated and that businesses had ample off-street parking. A few speakers raised concerns about parking impacts on specific businesses, particularly the burrito shop and Thai restaurant, and called for a compromise. One speaker (Bruce King) criticized the lack of documentation and noted that businesses like HL Peninsula and May May have large parking lots. Another speaker (Robert Prince, Bike East Bay) warned of liability if the bike lane is removed, citing a lawsuit in Indian Wells. Several youth and parents spoke about the dangers of biking without lanes.

Discussion Items

• Bike Lane Utilization Study and Recommendations: Daniel Desenberg, Director of Public Works, presented a summary of the Castro Valley Boulevard Class II bike lane evaluation. The study, conducted over 16 days in October 2025, recorded an average of 22-51 bicycles per day at eight locations, with maximum daily counts up to 89. Desenberg emphasized that the bike lane provides a safety separation from 21,000-30,000 daily vehicles and aligns with the county's bike/ped master plan. He recommended continued monitoring and no immediate removal, noting that the design is a balanced compromise that retained over 90% of on-street parking.
• Council Discussion: Councilmembers debated the trade-offs between bike safety and business parking needs. Councilmember Davis (a registered traffic engineer) proposed alternatives such as shared lane markings (broken white lines) for specific areas and time-of-day parking (bike lane 8 AM-4 PM, parking otherwise). Councilmember Thomas expressed concern for small businesses like the burrito shop and Thai restaurant, and suggested a parking structure as a long-term solution. Councilmember Mota emphasized safety but wanted options for businesses. Councilmember Fiebig sought a compromise. Councilmember DeVinny argued that the bike lane benefits a small group and that parking loss affects many businesses and residents; he favored restoring parking but was open to exploring shared designs. Vice Chair Mulgrew noted that the community should have been consulted before implementation and supported studying alternatives.
• Public Works Director Response: Desenberg strongly opposed removing the bike lane, citing safety and liability risks. He stated that piecemeal or shared lane designs would create additional safety hazards and that the current design is optimal. He recommended allowing at least one year of data collection before making changes, and encouraged businesses to propose their own solutions.

Key Outcomes

• Motion and Vote: Councilmember Davis moved that Public Works be instructed to work with area businesses to identify needed parking spaces and modify signing/striping to create shared parking and bike lane areas, and to facilitate on-street parking at specific locations between 4 PM and 8 AM. The motion was seconded and passed unanimously (6-0, with Chair Moore excused). The motion included a friendly amendment to set a six-month timeframe for Public Works to report back.
• Other Announcements: Councilmember Thomas requested an agenda item on streamlining business permits in unincorporated areas. Councilmember Fiebig asked for an update on the All-MAC meeting and follow-up. Councilmember Davis inquired about county policies on privately owned bus benches with advertising; staff will investigate. Councilmember Thomas also asked about garbage can maintenance; staff noted CVSAN recently installed new cans.