All right, good morning everyone.

I'd like to call to order how we need to count supervisors transportation committee.

Meeting of Monday.

It's called well, established quorum.

Supervisor Miley.

Supervisor Howard.

We have a quorum.

Thank you very much.

The first item is an action item, a discussion, consideration of Castro Valley MAX recommendation.

Castor Valley Boulevards class two bike lane evaluation and bicycle utilization study.

Mr.

Will Dessenberg, the floor is yours.

Good morning, thank you, Daniel Old Desmond Public Post Director.

This item was heard by your uh committee a couple of months ago.

Uh at the time we did receive a clear direction that uh you committee uh understands the action taken and was in line with keeping the bike lane along Castro Valley Boulevard.

Uh however, on January 20th, 2026, uh we presented uh to the Castro Valley Mac the item again, and uh the committee discussed, heard from various uh individuals, and uh recommended that we bring this item back to the TMP uh so that uh public works can be directed to work with area businesses to identify parking needs and to modify existing signing and striping to support shared use of parking and bike lanes uh and then uh requested that the staff brings this back to the MAC within six months.

Just to give you a background, uh it's in the report, but uh we uh Castro Valley Boulevard is designated as a class two uh bike facility uh under the master plan the 2019 master plan.

Uh you know the master plan was done through extensive community process.

Uh, took a long time to put together, has been to the Castro Valley Mac a couple of times before it was adapted, and uh and uh it's established the actions that public works will take in terms of installation of sidewalks and bike in general active transportation facilities, and that's what uh public rest followed.

Uh we evaluated, however, uh as any uh action that we take uh what the appropriate strategy would be uh to implement uh the bike lane.

We looked at available parking spaces, we looked at uh parking restrictions that need to be adapted due to uh you know side distance issues, uh fire hydrants, bus stops, all those things were done.

Most importantly, we looked at what are what is the available off-street parking in that area, and and based on that, we made a decision that the appropriate action to take would be to install a class two bike lane with buffer along the corridor because one it connects two board stations.

It's a very much uh consistent with the uh the board's uh action when you adapted the 2019 facility that's connectivity, safety, uh, and and uh active transportation system was one of your uh uh decisions uh in adapting those those policies.

So uh we basically did this.

We installed the bike lanes, uh, and we removed approximately I would say uh 12 on street parking on the north side uh and then 23 spaces on the south side along about a half a mile stretch of Castro Valley Boulevard.

Castro Valley Boulevard has about 21,000 cars a day uh typically uh based on a count that was done a few years back.

So as a standard practice, we usually also evaluate uh whether it's counting cars or bikes and various things to see what happens post implementation of a project.

So we did a bicycle utilization uh study along that corridor.

We implemented uh a bike counting system where we put in about eight locations, uh, those tubes that that you see usually on cars, but this one is for bikes, uh, and counted uh how many bikes were being using, and it was done over about a two-week period.

And the study found we have on a typical day ranging at these various locations, 22 to 51 bikes a day, that were utilizing that location.

In fact, the highest maximum is as high as 89 bicycles using it per day.

So the results are summarized in attachment uh uh B, and it tells you, you know, at each location what the numbers were.

And so most importantly, I think what we learned was that there is a modest ridership, but continuously consistent ridership along the corridor.

And experience tells us whenever we install something, similar facilities that are, you know, as long as you provide that safety and continuity, this kind of infrastructure will often see increase in use as people become more aware and uh the comfort of riders become more and more uh therefore they will be using this system.

So we expect that uh utilization will increase.

But the most important thing is now we have a baseline, a starting point to compare uh these numbers.

So uh we understand, and I think uh apparent in the community discussions uh whenever you utilize parking space, I mean uh public ride away for various uses, there's certain conflicting interests.

Uh in this case, some people thought parking was more important than the bike lane, and others thought bike lanes were more important than others.

Uh so because we went through these various uh studies and evaluations and looking at what is uh safe, what is appropriate, that uh we felt, uh at least public works recommends uh that we need to continue evaluating these corridor uh with continuous data.

I would like to actually verbatim read what public was recommended.

The last page of the report has the public cost recommendation.

Uh so I would say the corridor continues to operate with a new bike lane configuration.

Public works recommends ongoing monitoring of bicycle volumes, safety performance, and overall corridor operations, including access to adjacent properties.

The public works agency does not have a role or funding authority to evaluate or manage parking for individual or businesses.

Parking supply and demand on private property are responsibilities of property owners.

Accordingly, business owners may consider strategies to increase parking availability, such as restriping existing off-street parking to improve efficiency or explore share parking arrangements.

They may also consider measures to reduce parking demand, including promoting carpooling and ride sharing.

The bicycle utilization study indicates that the class two bike lane is used consistently throughout the day with no identifiable uh peak hour concentration of bicycle activities.

As a result, piecemeal or time of a day modification, including peak hour conversation conversions of on-street parking are not supported by the data and could increase the safety risk to bicycle users.

More importantly, uh the let me see, and not support by the data.

Incidents, you know, this is very important for the committee to understand anything that any decision we make, any incident occurring after any kind of arbitrary changes could present a significant liability to the county.

Uh so we need to be very careful as to how uh the decisions are actually advanced.

For these reasons, uh public works advises against partial or incremental alterations uh that would undermine the safety benefits of the existing design.

Any future modification should bring should preserve the safety benefits of the bike lane while thoughtfully balancing the need of residents, businesses, and visitors, ensuring that the corridor remains safe, accessible, and functional for all users.

That's our that's our recommendation.

Uh, the MAC uh at least would like to see if we can uh modify uh the by kind of allowing parking in some areas and not allowing in some areas.

I think that's that's too risky and too dangerous for uh uh for the bikers, and I would I would we would uh strongly uh recommend that we should not uh we should not do that.

So any questions I'd be happy to answer.

Supervisor Marley, any questions before we go to public comment?

Yes, thank you um I appreciate the work that public works has done on this um and obviously we're trying to balance uh the needs of a lot of different uh users of the street um and then also balance um policies associated with um congestion and uh the enhancement of uh commercial business activity uh dealing with greenhouse gases um the use of um alternative modes of transportation there's a lot that's going into the the mix here um I do respect the fact that uh believe Paul Keener before he passed away uh with our um pastor plan uh the public works uh worked on this a lot of respect for the work that Paul did um so and I do appreciate the fact that Public Works has done some analysis since um making the change what I'm trying to ascertain is I believe in Dublin they do this and maybe uh Supervisor Halbert might be aware of it since he lives in Dublin and was mayor of Dublin and on the Dublin City Council I think uh there are bike lanes on certain streets but then certain hours of the day um parking is allowed I don't know if if that is something that's uh contemplated as an option so we keep the bike lanes but we allow for parking at certain times of the day um for instance uh in non-commute uh hours for instance it was has that been uh explored or considered so that's why I'll say the data shows the bike lane utilization is there's no peak hour there's no concentration so uh that's why we need to continue to evaluate it if there is a certain pattern that emerges there's a certain bike lane utilization hours any concentration that's something that we can look at uh in the future but at this time you have a fairly random utilization of the bike lane so uh there's no way of saying during certain time we should have this and as you can see from the uh the uh the drawing that for example the area where uh we have this new restaurant large scale restaurant and event center has over 340 parking spaces off site so whether we remove five or six or nine spaces on street will have very little to no impact on the way that parking uh is being utilized that's why I think that business for example has an opportunity to reevaluate can they restrict can they rearrange their parking spaces so that they can increase the utilization so uh at this time I think uh we strongly recommend that since we do not have any patterns putting a bike lane at certain time and then eliminating that bike lane at certain time is more of a risk than uh the value add that you get from increased parking uh so uh as we move forward and as data become more available as we see what's going on throughout the years maybe we can come up with a solution that matches up what the data tells us at this time the data does not support any kind of pick our modification of the bike lane yeah but intuitively just seems to me that having parking like from I don't know 11 to 3.

I don't know why that would be a safety issue.

Obviously, how it works to the professionals.

I'm just looking at this and my own common sense.

Um I drive, I walk, I bike, and I just don't understand why a slight modification, I'm just throwing those out as possible hours of the day, wouldn't be sufficient.

Um then, furthermore, I have I need to understand with the new business in the event center, uh, they moved in um under existing zoning regulations, so there's no other conditions required.

So I don't know if we have the ability to uh get them to provide more parking.

Have we done an analysis to determine the impact of that business on the availability of parking in the in the area?

That's public works done that or planning done that.

Do we know anything like from the because we want to maybe public works isn't responsible for business vitality, but I am it's a county supervisor and it's the public official.

I'm responsible to make sure the quality of life is being um insured, maintained, and upgraded in the communities I represent.

We want safety, we want quality of life, we want business vitality, so I need to understand if this business uh has increased uh off-street parking to the detriment of other businesses, and if we can provide some type of accommodation so that you know the world's built on compromise, it's not built on uh people being, you know, rigidity, you know, this, you know, I've got my position, you've got yours, and there's no way I'm gonna take you, Daniel, but there's no way of trying to meet in the middle with some type of compromise.

So that's what I'm trying to grapple with.

Is there a way that we can compromise this?

And then I want to know from planning, um, where are we with the the downtown uh the specific plan for Castro Valley, and will the specific plan take in consideration uh the needs of parking um in downtown Castor Valley?

I believe it will extend out to this portion of Castro Valley as well.

So, so that that's a question for planning, but go ahead.

So so I totally agree, and and the the interesting part of this whole discussion is what Pablo Post recommended is exactly what it did, a compromise.

It didn't make anybody happy a hundred percent.

It was a compromise.

Uh the bikers would have liked to eliminate all parking and have a class four protected, all that stuff.

And we maintained, we kept along that corridor, I would say over 80% of the parking.

Can you put that?

It didn't look like it when I looked at the after the look at the after picture looked like it was all red.

No, no, the red part, most of the red was uh existing.

Can we put the picture up again?

Most of the red was existing.

All the red that you see is existing.

The green is where you see where we have removed parking.

So when you look at them, you can see whether, for example, the right aid is whether we have so one of the interesting things, for example, when we remove those nine spaces, one of the consideration was the most common complaint before this business came up was there was illegal parking.

In fact, one of the things that even some of the MAC members appreciated was because of whether the parking is removed and bike plan is installed, you don't longer have illegal parking, uh abandoned vehicles, garbage, illegal dumping activities no longer exist.

So our calculation, even though since it does not capture the essence of the absolute accuracy, is we actually had we left it the way it was, there would have been more parking loss due to illegal parking than what we have removed.

So, but this is not to kind of make the case uh which one is better, which one is not, but this compromise, and I'll be I'll be straight with you.

If you have a three hundred and forty parking space and you eliminated five to eight parking space on the street, you are not gonna make a debt for that business.

What is the percentage?

I don't mean interrupt.

I don't mean interrupt, but what is the percentage of spaces that have been removed?

35 spaces have been removed.

What is that a percentage of on street parking?

20%, 30%, 50%?

I would I would say about 30, 30 percent.

So we eliminated 30 percent of on street parking.

Yes, I don't along almost a half a mile on either side, so a mile-long stretch.

30 percent.

Yeah.

And there's other parking, I'm guessing on the lot itself.

Yes.

So the businesses have their own parking on the lot, on street parking is meant for if it's so wherever you see where we remove parking, there is ample on-site parking.

I see.

So, and that because of that, as you can see on the north side, where you see uh from the number one all the way down to Redwood Road, you don't see anything removed because the parking state and we installed the bike lane.

So, these streets are wider there or something, it's wider so it can accommodate parking and the bike lane.

It could accommodate the bike lane also, but how do we design it?

And the preference of the bike the bike folks, it would not have accommodated it.

So there this is the compromise.

This is the best compromise you can come up with.

And I think we need to allow time so that we can understand how the utilization uh is going to continue.

If if we at the end find out that the bike lane is not being utilized, or if at the end through some mechanism that this uh businesses could uh could not do uh uh additional parking modifications, and uh agree.

In fact, I think one of the the suggested recommendations through the specific plan or other mechanism is I think Castro Valley needs to start thinking about parking structures.

You know, we keep mentioning Hayward, Dublin, and all these jurisdictions have parking structures in their downtown to accommodate uh these kind of businesses.

So uh this is the compromise.

Can planning talk to me about the specific plan?

And if anything is envisioned, that area relative to parking.

Good morning.

So the specific plan is underway, as you know, it's been going on for the update of the downtown specific plan for Cash Valley for a number of years now.

Um and certainly, yeah, we do take into consideration the the bike bed plan that um that public works is working on.

We have been coordinating with them.

I don't have specific numbers about X amount of parking, but I I would just echo what Daniel said about there are there is always a need to establish um uh more parking.

I think people always want more parking.

Uh, but there is a lot of moving parts going on in the specific plan um related to the economic development strategy as well as the transit-oriented communities work that we're also doing um that centers around the the caption valley barge station, and so I think I think generally the trend is to be able to, you know, create more multimodal opportunities so that people can access the downtown area as well as the barge station on a on a variety of modes, whether it's bicycle or pedestrians, transit, um as well as uh single use automobiles, and um I think that all those things you know, essentially are essentially are working together to be able to create that uh the downtown specific plan.

I don't have um specific numbers or parking study analysis, I wasn't prepared to talk about that this morning, but um we could certainly come back and talk about that if you'd like.

When do we anticipate a specific plan being uh completed?

Uh this year.

Okay.

Um the fact that the former um light aid site where the conference center is the restaurant is so it's the need for parking because it was eliminated on that side.

Is that what's generating this this concern about parking?

Because Daniel mentioned the need that property the restrict or whatever to provide more parking.

Does the county know what's you know, what's instigating the need for more parking?

Yeah, I'm I other than a general concern about the lack of parking, I don't have specific information on that.

Yeah, maybe I don't know if you have.

I don't think the across the street.

Uh uh the truth of the matter is I don't think the on-street parking will have any impact relative to us random forty spaces available.

The other thing I want you to kind of take into consideration is we can't disregard that people on bikes are not going to go to a restaurant.

So there is a certain element that we actually would like to encourage uh, you know, active transportation people in the neighborhoods, uh, people in the uh nearby area or from BART be able to walk and bike to to these businesses.

So I would suggest uh that that I think this compromise solution is at this time the best solution for both the businesses and the bike community.

One other quick question.

So the red side of the street.

Right with road there on the south side, in the part lots down.

Yeah.

So that that street that bends down is uh Norbridge.

Right around there.

Yeah, so right there along Norbridge.

Uh the KB Homes Development has put in additional parking and uh spaces for their own development as part of their requirement.

Uh the other thing I want to emphasize is none of the on-street parking are part of the calculations for development approval since they since basically they are public parking.

So uh one of the things that the MAC uh at least felt was that they thought uh the on-street parking was part of the calculation in the approval process for KB homes, and we provided them the information that shows that was not the case.

Uh so uh so I would say one, I don't think we could we should absolutely discount the bikers cannot become good business uh veterans.

I think they can.

Number two, most importantly, I think this is an ideal location for active transportation projects where you want to connect the bark stations uh and provide safe uh bike routes uh for folks.

So this is the best compromise solution uh at the at the time at this time.

That's all the questions I have for the moment.

Thank you.

Let's hear from public comment um in person first and online.

If you're wanting to speak on this item, please raise your hand.

I'll ask the clerk to call the speakers.

Well, first of all, Microsoft Teams has a call-in option for telephone numbers, and it's not working.

So you call the number, push pound, give them the meeting code, don't work, so you um can't call in or using that method that's on the uh communic telecommunications guidelines.

Um the Board of Supervisors appoints these uh advisory committees, and the actions that are and uh and and um the the uh political leanings of the Castor Valley Mac are really out of touch with the Castor Valley community.

I don't even live in Castor Valley, but uh this kind of uh stuff.

I was just driving around in uh Mountain View.

Mountain View has bike lanes and they actually have traffic, you know.

And Castor Valley thinks that their parking and their traffic is so important that they can't have bike lanes.

Um this uh Casper Valley Mac went out of its way to recommend against a bike lane on Castor Valley Boulevard, which is their main street.

There's one main street on Castro Valley, and it's not um it might be Redwood Road, but really it's more likely Castor Valley Boulevard.

And uh they they went out of their way because on the agenda it said uh listen to a report on statistical uh counts of traffic, listen, and uh, and then uh they they voted to uh eliminate the bike lane or recommend against uh uh the bike line.

So that's that they went they went really, really off the deep end in their desperate headlong rush to carry out their anti-bike lane agenda.

And uh this this uh and this extends not just to bike lanes, it extends to to everything.

We got people um who uh on all these committees that are getting appointed farther and farther and farther towards one end of the political uh spectrum, which is nowhere near the middle of Caster Valley.

Thank you, caller, you're on the line.

You have two minutes, Brian.

Brian Foster.

Unmute your microphone.

Caller, you're on the line, you have two minutes, Roy.

Yes, thank you.

Um firstly, I just wanted to thank Director Will Dessenbeck for his presentation, which I think he has now done four times.

So thank you, and appreciate your patience.

Um would just like to draw the attention of the supervisors to the wording of the agenda item because I think it's important to stay within the uh defined agenda item for the discussion here.

So the agenda item that you have today to consider is a recommendation from the Mac to ask public works to work with local businesses to assess parking.

Um I think it's important for you to stay within the context of that agenda item.

This is not uh agendized as an item for discussion of whether a bike lane should have been implemented, should not have been implemented, needs to be removed, whether parking is needed, whether parking should be added, whether there's been any impact to businesses.

You know, your agenda item is very narrow and it says consider the recommendation from the Mac, and you can approve that or not approve that.

Uh, but it is quite narrow in requesting public works to assess uh work with businesses to assess their parking needs.

So I'd encourage you to stay and keep the conversation within the confines of the agenda item.

Um and quickly, the bike pet master plan was approved by you, the board of supervisors, and all that public works have done here is implement the plan that you've approved.

And that is absolutely the job is something they uh should be no distress from anyone uh with public works simply implementing a plan that's already been approved by the board of supervisors.

Thank you.

Caller, you're on the line, you have two minutes unmute your microphone.

You're on the line, you have two minutes.

Unmute your microphone, caller, you're on the line, you have two minutes.

Caller.

Hello.

Yes.

Hello?

Can you hear me?

Yes.

This is crazy.

Okay.

Good morning, supervisors.

I know I only have a couple of minutes.

Clearly, this does not make sense that public works applied one solution to fit two different types of roadway.

You have a street that travels from a business district out into a rural, very heavily traveled intersection down through five canyons.

Makes no sense on the way that they applied this.

The new bike lanes up to five canyons were well done after Marshall Street and should remain.

They absolutely should be there the way that they are in a protected class two share uh buffered bike lane, but just restore the commercial parking down there.

You know, it's about 1700 feet on one side and 700 on the other.

It's not just affecting one business as it's being said by public works.

This one size fits all mentality needs to stop.

This affects more than just one property owner on Castro Valley Boulevard.

You were sent uh some information regarding that.

At the last MAC meeting, Daniel said the property owner should figure it out on their own.

Figure it out is not the answer when the county created this problem.

By design, public works downgraded viable street-facing businesses to third class retail by removing parking that they need to survive.

A designated trend, not justifying ignoring local context, a project that removes ADA access, parking, business access while devaluing properties and limiting future development to serve a fraction of one percent of the corridor.

Users cannot credibly be described as equal or community centered.

Lastly, it's almost 10 years that the Castro Alley Mac has been trying to get the downtown uh specific plan done, and it's just been an absolute failure at the planning department.

We need a Pedmaster plan written.

Uh, we have a pedestrian master plan written by activists that is overriding our antiquated specific plan, and it's just not fair to the community.

This is needs to be balanced, and it's not.

So those are my comments.

Hopefully, you read my email regarding the uh other additional items.

Thank you.

Caller, you're on the line, you have two minutes.

Caller, you're on the line, you have two minutes.

Unmute your microphone.

Who is caller?

Yes.

Can you state your name?

Yes, I can.

Are you referring to me or which caller are you referring to?

Okay, thank you.

Um, my name is Danny Lanis.

I'm the advocacy manager at Bike East Bay.

I'd like to uh thank the Director of Public Works, Daniel, for a great presentation.

We're asking for your support in taking no action on the new Gastro Valley Boulevard bicycle lanes, keeping them as east and open to bike riders on this vital segment of the unincorporated area bike network.

Last month, members of the Castro Valley Municipal Advisory Council brought up the concept of a shared bicycle lane and car parking aisle on Castro Valley Boulevard, with each use being allowed at different hours of the day.

However, these concept will not work and it's not worth exploring.

Castro Valley is both a business district and a commuter corridor.

So the primary need with regard to both car parking and bicycle access is during the same daytime hours and not during alternate hours.

I appreciate the concerns voiced about car parking impacts on Castro Valley Boulevard.

However, it is not it is also important to understand the risk and liability associated with a potential removal of the bikeway.

Public Works presentations have highlighted the need for and value of this facility from a basically safety perspective.

Between the county bike plan and staff statements, it has been made very clear that the current facility was designed to prioritize safety.

So if these bikeway facilities removed, the county will be held responsible in the case of another tragedy.

Thank you.

Caller, you're on the line.

You have two minutes.

Unmute your microphone.

Jeremy.

Hello.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Hi, my name is Jeremiah Mallor.

I chair the BART Bicycle Advisory Task Force.

I urge you to keep the bicycle lanes on Castro Valley Boulevard and not enable some sort of shared use plan.

The evidence does not support shared use.

Bicycles use the bike lanes at the same hours that parking would be needed.

And there's already a compromise.

So Castro Valley Boulevard is on Alameda County's high injury network where severe and fatal crashes are concentrated with freeway ramps, fast traffic, and lots of turning cars.

Pushing people on bikes into general traffic creates more crashes and injuries.

Bikes lanes are not a luxury.

They're a basic risk reduction.

Research finds protected bikeways reduce crashes and injuries by up to 50%.

People are getting hit and injured on Castro Valley Boulevard.

We have real crash data.

UC Berkeley's Safe Transportation Research and Education Center wrote a report on Castro Valley analyzing police reported traffic collisions.

Over five years, Castro Valley had 64 reported bicycle crashes, including six serious injury crashes.

Castro Valley Boulevard had the highest concentration with 22 crashes.

About 40% of the people hit were school age youth, many between the ages of 11 and 14.

If you remove these bike lanes, you increase the risk of serious crashes on a corridor that already has the highest concentration of bicycle crashes.

This is also about access to BART.

For many residents on both sides of the station, Castro Valley Boulevard is the only direct continuous east to west route to reach BART.

These lanes connect to Redwood Road and Norbridge from the main bike routes to the station.

There is also legal and policy risk in going backwards.

On a high injury network corridor, removing an existing safety feature increases liability exposure for the county if and when serious crashes occur and it undercuts vision zero and complete street commitments.

Follow the plan you implemented, please.

Thank you.

John Spangler, unmute your microphone.

John Spangler, unmute your microphone.

You have two minutes.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Good.

Sorry, I've served since 2011.

And I have ridden my bike and driven through Castro Valley many times since then.

And I have also taken BART to Castro Valley BART in order to make it a safer place to get to for people who are riding bikes and pedestrians.

The new bike lanes make some of that possible for a large number of Castor Valley residents and most Castor Valley residents at the last several years' worth of Castor Valley MAC meetings have supported the bike lanes that are now in place.

I do understand as a former person who's worked retail 15 years, parking is important.

But if you look at the maps that this public works director has shown you this morning, there's a lot of empty asphalt off the street that could be worked into a shared cooperative cooperative parking program for the Castor Valley business corridor.

The business owners need to understand that people with bicycles and on their on feet on foot do carry credit cards.

We will patronize your businesses if we can get there.

But jamming Castor Valley Boulevard with more and more single-occupancy vehicles will not do that.

The bike lanes are a good step in the right direction to make Castor Valley Boulevard a more lively business district, but the businesses need to address that and embrace it.

Thank you very much.

Nicholas Besse, unmute your microphone.

You have two minutes.

Hi, uh, can everybody hear me?

Yes.

Great.

Uh I'm Nicholas Bess.

I moved to Castor Valley about four and a half, five years ago.

Uh I'm a major cyclist.

I ride about 6,000 miles a year, and I also drive roughly 15,000 miles a year.

I live near the Trader Joe's in Castor Valley, and so I use Redwood Road, Castor Valley Boulevard quite a bit.

I have never not patronized a business because of access to street parking.

By that I mean the existence of street parking does not influence my decision to go to a business.

However, these bike lanes and my routes on my bike are very heavily dictated by existence of safety features and how comfortable I feel on that road.

Castor Valley Boulevard, I believe that the data the public works has shown is underestimating the number of people who will use the bike lanes because I can tell you that we actively used to avoid that because it felt so unsafe with the presence of these bike lanes.

And as word gets around, I fully expect people to start using them more and more.

Lastly, we have an increasing demand of return to office.

I believe uh Walmart recently announced that all corporate employees need to return five days to work.

And the vast majority of Castor Valley residents commute to some degree.

A lot of that is through BART.

Castor Valley Boulevard is a primary artery to BART, and we need to make it safe for everyone commuting and give people freedom to choose between driving or other forms of transportation.

As my last point, I would like to uh criticize the timing of this meeting a little bit because it makes it very difficult for young families or people who work to attend and have their comments be heard.

And I would like to end on a note or quoting from the Castor Valley General Plan from 2012, which is that the community vision for Castor Valley for 2025 is to improve access for children to schools, parks, and rec and provide safer streets for walking and bicycling in order to create a good environment for raising a family.

I hope someday to raise my family in Castor Valley in a way that I don't have to drive everywhere.

Thank you for your time.

You have two minutes.

Hello?

Yes.

Yes.

First, thank you for for providing grace.

The system is not as intuitive as Zoom.

So thank you for giving me a second chance.

Supervisors Halbert and Miley.

I want to uh address two issues.

First is uh transparency.

Um, I can almost guarantee you that 99.999% of the residents of Castor Valley have no idea that this meeting was taking place.

We were left with the impression that public works was going to come back in six months, and we are now just a couple of weeks in.

Second, one of context, uh, repeated point.

I think uh Director Wolf Essenbet was quite generous in noting that the 50 or so average bicyclists are, as he said, a modest number.

In fact, it is minuscule, it is closer to zero than even one percent.

Um it and in terms of the callers coming in.

I hope you notice how many are from out of town.

I I know a number of people here who frankly resent the fact that people from around the Bay Area.

What?

Hello?

I think someone just spoke over me.

So uh we resent the fact that out-of-towners are trying to tell us how to live.

If they did live here, they would know that Castor Valley Boulevard is the only major business east-west route through town.

We have very, very few of those east-west routes.

One of them higher is going to be redone next year.

That provides bicycle lanes.

Uh, for those who live here, they know what it what a difference that will make, and that'll be a big huge difference.

Hopefully, that will garner a lot of support among the biking crowd.

In the meantime, we have businesses, and I won't speak for them who are trying to compete for spaces.

There are some that are were not represented to you that have zero or one or two spaces in front of uh in front of their businesses.

Taking away maybe a third represents like a 33% reduction in their parking spaces available.

So I would please encourage you to consider the context.

It's a very small number of bicyclists who are demanding a seat at the table in the room where it happens, and drivers, commuters, residents have no seat at the table.

They're not in the room.

Maybe you need to have a drivers, commuters, and um and and uh uh motorists uh commission as well.

Thank you.

Garland, unmute your microphone.

You have two minutes.

Sean, you have two minutes.

Unmute your microphone.

Yes, thank you guys for uh taking your comments.

I'd like to echo what the speaker before me just said.

Um, you guys have not properly when I say you guys, Alameda County, um, and I have the utmost respect for Daniel.

I think he's very good at what he does.

He's very respectful and uh very well spoken.

However, in this process, all the stakeholders were not engaged.

This was a last minute uh, I believe a knee-jerk reaction to cave into a very vocal minority, who's very well organized, and I'm not anti-bike lane.

What I'm anti is the process, not including all the stakeholders and the property taxpayers and business license taxpayers who are greatly affected by this.

Bike lanes sound like a great sexy idea, but they shouldn't come at the cost of valuable parking.

The most valuable being in front of the new KB Homes development and the commercial component that was tentatively approved through the Mac to have six on-street parking spaces, and later on through the process before that project was entitled and built, those parking spaces were removed.

So what you end up with was very low quality commercial spaces on Castor Valley Boulevard, which doesn't benefit anybody.

Now, bike riders, not car drivers, not community members, not property owners, not businesses.

What should be done is a poll taken of business owners and property owners on Castor Valley Boulevard to see how they've been impacted and how they will in the future.

We shouldn't be rolling out the red carpet for one segment of the population just because they're louder than the others.

We should be rolling out the red carpet for business owners who are the backbone of this economy.

Yes, everybody patronizes them, bike riders, drivers, everybody else, but the majority of the Castor Valley population does not live within bike riding distance of these businesses.

So I think the process, whether it should be slowed down in the future for for situations like this, or in this particular situation with the bike lanes on Castor Valley Boulevard east of Redwood Road, it's very disappointing that such a big project was done without consulting property and business owners.

Thank you.

Matt Thomas, unmute your microphone.

Yeah, thank you for the time.

Uh my name is Matt Thomas, been a Castor Valley resident since 2014.

Uh, currently live over near Chabot Park.

Uh in conjunction with Ava Energy's bike e-bike rebate program.

We just bought a e-bike at a local Castor Valley business uh on Friday with the intent of having her use it instead of a vehicle to get from over here near the park to her teaching job up at Independent Elementary School.

Uh the use of those bike lanes on Castor Valley Boulevard was uh was a big part of this this plan and it would be very disappointing to see them uh see them removed.

Uh love to love to not have to drive a vehicle down the boulevard.

Thank you.

Bruce, unmute your microphone.

You have two minutes.

Uh which Bruce is this?

Is this me?

Yes.

Uh okay, Bruce Doogie here.

I'd like to make a couple of comments.

One is that um so far we have not seen any damage to the businesses.

So Public Works has presented um actual numbers on the bike count, and we have not seen any numbers um from the businesses, so we have seen no receipts.

We don't know if uh uh receipts have gone up or down, and often uh in in many studies the the receipts actually go up when you add bike lanes and remove parking.

The other thing I want to say is um that it it will be illegal.

Um there's a new uh Senate Bill 1216 that was passed that actually makes it illegal for you to uh go back to Cherrows, which is what used to be on the street before, because you can't uh uh put the Sherrows on on a street with a with a speed limit of 30 miles per hour or more, or I guess it's just greater than 30 30, and that's uh posted at 35.

So it's it's absolutely illegal to go back to Cheros, which was the previous um configuration.

But um, yeah, everybody keeps talking about the businesses.

They're really just making it up because we have no numbers.

You have no way to to um to do a trade-off uh between uh businesses and and biking, and and all of your policies support um the idea of having um bike lanes there, uh including the climate action plan that uh supervisors Miley mentioned, and um and uh vision uh 2026, the bike ped plan, complete streets that people have talked about, and and as as also has been mentioned, this is a uh first and last mile to the bar station, and before COVID, uh uh Castor Valley was the tenth uh most used um uh uh station in the whole system, and that includes all of the Oakland and San Francisco stations.

So we live in a suburban, the more suburban environment where bicycles are more useful than walking.

So uh bicycles are really key to getting around.

So thank you.

Bruce King, unmute your microphone.

You have two minutes.

Hello, this is uh Bruce King from Castor Valley.

I've lived in Castor Valley for 40 years.

I drive and I'll bicycle.

Um I have never had a problem finding parking in this section of Castor Valley Boulevard to go to businesses there.

Um what I find frustrating is and is that the MAC advanced this issue without any documentation to provide it to the public about what the parking issues concerns were.

Uh, we're now at this meeting.

No, no public information has been made available.

But when uh a public records request was submitted, it found that there was a generic letter that five business owners signed.

Um two of them were the H L I HL Peninsula Restaurant and the May May Market saying that there wasn't enough street parking, even though they've got over 300 parking spots on site.

The the pet adoption center signed a generic letter, even though they've got some some parkings, multiple parking spots on site, some of which even have no parking signs on them on them.

The the um the new townhouse developer signed a petition, the generic letter saying that they were concerned about parking on the street, and you know what I find interesting.

These are all new businesses in the last couple of years or even this year, and we've had this bike pedestrian plan since 2019 that's been presented twice to the Castor Valley Mac.

Um, and so it it seems that um uh you know nobody in writing has given any information to the public as to what the parking concerns are.

If there are parking concerns, uh what I should say that there seems to be people expressing parking concerns, but it's not defined as to what what they think the issue is.

Thank you.

Garland, unmute your microphone.

You have two minutes.

Yeah, can you hear me?

Yes, yes.

Great.

So I moved to Castro Valley um over 14 years ago to work for the auto industry, and cars are part of my lifeblood.

I'm a property uh taxpayer, I'm a pedestrian, I'm a cyclist, a Bart writer.

I live half a mile from BART or uh Castro Valley Boulevard, and I think Dr.

Wildes and Bet and his data-based approach.

I'm very concerned about the Castro Valley Mac's unbalanced and unfounded opinions on this topic that are not representative at all of public opinion.

Supervisor Pfizer Miley said he was looking for a compromise.

Supervisor Miley, you must understand that this is the compromise.

Twenty-three spots were removed, more than double that was kept, eighty percent of the parking spaces, in fact.

In the January 20th uh CV Mac meeting, not a single business owner came forward to complain about their loss of parking.

The people talking about it today were actually one of them was the activist who spoke earlier who presented no actual data that businesses were harmed.

And the data once again does not support the uh, you know, keeping these parking spots.

On the other hand, we had a petition that Bike Walk CV sent out.

556 people signed it, 430 of whom were from Castro Valley and towns nearby.

They signed this uh petition asking public works to retain the bike lanes because of safety.

We need this.

Castro Valley Boulevard is a part of the high injury network.

Um we also need good routes to school shops and BART, higher does not cut it.

In fact, they're trying to get rid of bike lanes there too.

The use of e-mobility is increasing, reduction of greenhouse gases, a healthier population.

Look, supervisors, I'm asking you to put your money where your mouth is.

You approve Vision 2026, which includes safe livable communities, thriving and uh resilient population, healthy environment.

You uh you must keep Castro Valley Boulevard's bike lanes.

Thank you.

I have no additional speakers for item one.

Very good.

Um I do have some clarifying questions of Daniel.

Comment was made that we have a legal obligation to not uh return to Cheros.

Is that true?

And I could you also clarify when you say we haven't had enough data, we need to give it six months or whatever.

Are you maintaining that the changes you've made may be temporary and you're going to evaluate them?

Or I'm trying to understand this because I'm hearing that the Castle Valley Mac didn't know about it, then they don't like it, so they want to go back to Cheros.

I'm hearing that we can't go back to Cheryl's legally because of a state law, and then I'm hearing you say we don't have data and and that you wanted to collect data.

So help me understand this.

Yeah, so let me start with the latter question that's not temporary.

We actually adopted the bike paid master plan that was adopted by the board in 2019.

So we took an advantage of a resurfacing project when we were maintaining the roadway to install the bike uh the uh class two bike lane.

But that decision was made in 2019 when the board adapted that uh that policy, and that policy was vetted through an extensive community process, so all relevant parties were aware of that policy.

So hold on, let me just stop there.

2019, this was adopted.

Yes, and a resurfacing program comes up, and you take advantage of that.

Yes.

I'm not being critical, but it could have been the case that you would let everybody know what happened six years ago, and completely forgotten about perhaps by some, like the city council.

Okay, the Mac is the city council, that you're gonna go do this now.

But anyway, we we didn't, yes, or did we?

The the 2019 master plan indicates that it does not just say you know, adapt this one, but we always put a condition that says that you need to do a study to make sure it's viable.

It's a plan that was adapted, sometimes the plan and what's reality on the ground doesn't go together.

So the study that you saw the the parking losses are and analyzing available parking versus all that stuff is done prior to installing the the uh the bike lane, but the bike lane installation itself is an adapted board action, so uh you know that that uh I agree with one of the statements uh one of the individual made.

We follow your direction, your policy that you adopt, and we implemented accordingly.

Now, but we also took the time to say what are the implications, and those implications are the one that were presented at the MAC a couple of times and uh to your body here uh about uh a couple of months ago.

Now, just I'm sorry to stop you, but the study that indicated 50 or so bike riders a day versus 21,000 cars a day was actually done before you did the resurfacing and the implementation of these lanes.

Yes, that's correct.

That's that information is always available.

So we what we wanted to make sure was how many parking spaces would be losing and where would be the appropriate location if we were to lose parking.

So as you can see in front of the KB homes, uh, I mean, in front of the Ride Aid, they're thrown in some parking spaces, and there's a loss of about nine or so parking spaces on the street, not to mention those nine spaces prior to KB homes were actually used by a lot more 12 to 13 uh uh illegal parking.

So uh that comp that's why I said uh survival miley.

This is a problem, uh, I appreciate the question.

But but in what reality is 50 out of 21,000 a justification for making these changes.

We don't make that numeric judgment between number of cars versus number of bikes, uh, because these are two different things.

Is that the same numbers that existed in 2019 that led to the master plan?

That's what I said.

The 2019 master plan did not do any analysis.

It was a 2019 we didn't do any of that.

No, that was a community process that we're gonna go through right now in about a couple of uh weeks.

We'll come to the board to approve the renewal of this master plan, which I would encourage everybody to participate, because this is the policy that the board will be adapting for the next five years.

Okay, so we didn't do a study then to know that it's maybe more than or less than.

I don't know.

My guess is it hasn't changed much.

We didn't do a study then, but we did a study now.

We did the study before, after taking the uh 2019 plan.

We need to make sure that what's proposed as a class two will fit in that in that right away, for example.

Every one of the bike lane, the sidewalk projects that we are doing is coming from that 2019 master plan.

Somebody mentioned higher, for example, higher was part of the master plan.

The welling boulevard that we were doing was part of the master plan.

Redwood Road that we installed was part of the master plan.

So, but there are areas where the master plan says put in a class four, when we go out there, there's not enough space.

So we make that adjustment based on that follow-up study.

So the master plan is a guiding document that the board has adapted, just like the climate action plan or the various specific plan that your board adopts.

But in reality, you have to go and make it context sensitive, which means you need to be contextually accurate for the available space.

So this is the case in this scenario.

I'm not aware of that specific law, but uh there is uh another law that actually uh prevents us from installing uh shareholes, uh, high speed uh corridors because they're not necessarily that safe.

The uh the other thing is, as you know, as a community, uh, by the way, these statements are not personal for me, or I'm not making a value or ideological statement here, but there's an increasing uh uh awareness by the community that we need to reduce our carbon footprint, uh which means we need to encourage active transportation systems like bike lanes, uh e-bikes are becoming more increasing, uh, and sidewalks so that we can have a lot more pedestrian activities.

These things are uh, you know, the direction that we've gotten from the board as well as the broader community engagement.

Uh so some of the debate that you hear from the various side of advocacies, uh, you know, those are advocacy, so we actually like to rely on the data.

The reason I'm saying let's give us some time to study is it also gives the businesses some more time to see what action can they take.

So when you say time to study, you I think said six months.

No, no, six months was what the Mac suggested we need to go back to them because they thought we can actually go in and talk to each businesses and and do these things.

I think if the county or your your committee decide that the county should do that, uh I will step uh, you know, my bounds here and say maybe economic development uh department might be the best body to kind of talk with businesses and see if they can collaborate.

And I think Nate, as you know, uh you've sponsored and advanced the shared parking, for example, at the Castro Valley Marketplace.

Those kind of strategies go a long way in promoting businesses having adequate parking spaces.

Uh the specific plan, I will really encourage I heard Ken uh speaking earlier, Gary Doom that they need to look at a way of promoting parking availability at central business locations so that they can be shared by various businesses.

Otherwise, you know, from my point of view, Castro Valley Boulevard with 21,000 cars on it, makes sense to separate pedestrians and bikes from that level of volume of traffic for safety reasons.

And I can tell you that if you are to decide to remove uh this bike lane anywhere, I personally would not agree or recommend that, but the county will be at enormous liability of any incident after that kind of decision because that 21,000 high volume, high accident volume roadway to reduce the safety measures that's provided by these bikes, uh bike lane, is uh it does not make uh proper policy, at least from public works point of view.

Uh so have we had accidents here?

What what have the accident counts been?

I think the study by the Berkeley group shows that when we have not done the actual accident study, but that's what we would like to do over time.

Recorded accidents on this street.

We don't have the data for that.

Right now, we have the study done by the Berkeley group that did the entire Bay Area, and high uh Castro Valley is designated as high accident corridor.

And the gentleman that shared that data for you indicates that, but my preference is let's do we get it from THP.

Uh there is accident data.

Let's do, you know, this thing has been here for less than uh a year or so.

Let's see how this thing is working.

Is it really supporting or adversely affecting businesses?

If we give ourselves you know a year or two and incrementally evaluate the uh the number of bikes that are utilizing this, and also listen through various venues what the businesses are experiencing, we might be able to come up collectively with a better solution than reduce the safety value provided by this measure.

What would you say would be the nexus between an activity and an analysis like this versus the um we've talked about the need for an unincorporated services department?

Uh this has been something Supervisor Marley has been asking for probably since the day he got elected.

But um, as well as the the MAC.

I mean, again, they are an advisory body, most synonymous to a city council that I can think of.

Are you suggesting that we do the analysis of how many accidents have happened here that we do the analysis with the business owners through economic development, maybe and working with the business owners to truly understand what they can do with increased parking and that then we come back and make a decision on whether to keep or revert back?

Yes, I I totally I totally agree.

I think the businesses, uh for example, I can tell you, just as an engineer that 300 plus parking space in front of uh uh Ride 8 can be restructured in such a way where you have compact parking, this parking, and you could add literally add for that kind of ratio at least 10 to 15 percent additional spaces.

Now, that's the kind of thing that businesses, uh business owners can make business decisions and and make that action.

And I totally support.

I think the specific plan is a critical element in terms of other policy documents as to how the downtown area should be developing.

And and I don't think we need to just you know rely on advocacy positions only.

So as we go move forward with a specific plan, uh, you know, let there be a community decision.

As you know, there are some jurisdictions throughout California where they literally restrict cars, and you have uh, you know, you go to Pasadena and some areas, you see that it's entirely accessible by bikes and pedestrians.

So there's all kind of ways that people as a community can decide.

But the uh the uh the other question you mentioned about uh unincorporated office, I don't see that uh related to this kind of activities, and then that's something that Supervisor Miley has uh now advanced.

Uh but personally I see those kind of things as more of additional bureaucracies than uh added value to uh so before us today is this agenda item where the committee voted to recommend to the TMP, modify existing signing and striping to support shared use of parking and bike lanes.

That's what they're asking us to do.

That's what we're being considered.

I can't say that without knowing if the law that was referenced earlier is prevents us from doing that.

So I would suggest that we need a legal opinion on that before we would do that.

Um I'll revert to my wise colleague whose district this resides in, but I would say that um indeed we have a balance between bicyclists and parking and traffic, and so um we have to get to the bottom of this somehow.

Supervisor Miley, your your thoughts?

Yeah.

Yes, I appreciate the questions because many of your questions were things that I was trying to understand.

So, uh Public Works of County Council hasn't had a chance to review uh the law relative to shared use, I think it would be important for us to know that.

Um safety on Castro Valley Boulevard, as well as uh the need for adequate parking uh for the commercial activities along the boulevard.

So that specific plan and a parking study needs to be uh completed, needs to get to us.

Um I'm I'm hesitant at the moment to take any action uh because you know public works the director has been pretty um insistent that um we need to do further analysis of this, and uh if we were to do anything that um it could possibly jeopardize safety on the boulevard that would produce liability uh for the county, and that kind of puts us on notice, and even though we don't have a specific study from public works, we um there is that context of the study uh that was done by this um uh is it was it the university?

Yeah, Berkeley.

Okay.

So there's just um too many variables that produce some discomfort, at least for me at the moment, to make any changes.

We don't know the information on the law, we don't have enough information in terms of of what's occurred here.

We have the issue of safety, um, at least from the Berkeley study, which I'm not familiar with, but as public works has pointed out, it does put in the context that um this area, Castro Valley Boulevard, um, is one of the high injury areas.

Um, but that once again that's from that study.

We don't have our own study.

Um, and then I do think it's important.

I know the director of the community development agency is listening.

I do think it's important that um her economic development department go out and do some uh canving and talk to the business community along Castor Valley Boulevard so we can get some hard data relative to whether or not um you know there's been impacts from the uh diminution of parking um on the boulevard and put that in the context of what Public Works is planning.

So we're looking at you know, there are a number of variables we're looking at here, some of which we don't have the information for, some of which we were clearly on record hearing that we could produce a safety issue, and that really causes me some consternation.

Um because we're on notice, we're clearly on notice and we don't have our own study, but we do have this Berkeley study.

So I I would think at the moment we have to um give deference to our public works agency and their uh understanding of this and bring this back at some future time with more information.

I'm not sure uh from the public works perspective.

Um it said what I was hearing is um six months is not the time frame, it's more like a year or something.

So I think like you touched on the specific plan, some of the canvassing of the businesses and maybe talking to the businesses and getting some of those data, and then we also do another count as to how the bicycle is behaving.

So I'm I'm looking uh a year to two years uh to have any reasonable decision-making data.

Okay.

Well, I would like to suggest that this come back to us for a status report, hopefully, with much more information in about a year, Mr.

Chair, uh, so we understand this.

Uh, both the law of the the economic development uh civic development uh department doing their canvassing um the the issue of the of the the safety.

Uh I would like to get more information in the Berkeley study, then the public works does its own study.

Also, the other thing that causes me consternation is, and the director's right.

We we do have um, you know, we've approved the pedestrian bike master plan.

That's in place, and it's hard to want to um go against a plan that we've approved in the past.

Maybe conditions have changed, uh, and we're gonna be looking at a new bike pedestrian master plan, uh, prospectively, and new information might need to be taken into context of that, uh, which would be important as well.

So that's another piece that's just causing me some concern.

So I think if we bring this back uh in about a year for an update, I think it would be it would be helpful.

Um, you know, as much as I hate to uh go against uh the max uh advice and recommendation, um, because typically we support the Mac.

I you know, I'd say nine out of ten times we support what the Mac is uh suggesting, but in this case, I think until we have more information, I just don't feel comfortable that we can um direct that these bike lanes either be uh removed or that there be shared, because quite frankly, before coming to the meeting, I thought shared would be an appropriate option, but after hearing everything, I I just can't I can't get there.

Uh well, then we'll agree to bring this back in a year.

Um I would say that uh I'm I am supportive of the Castro Valley Max recommendation, but for the legal risk of there being a law that prevents us from doing that, and so I would like to understand that it won't take a year to figure that out.

I think maybe you can report back to the Castor Valley Mac, but the results of that looking into, we should be able to get to that pretty quick.

They also would be hard pressed to recommend that if it's against the law, I would think.

I'm concerned that we're having a master plan developed that calls for something that doesn't have the data behind it.

It was reported, this plan was put in place, and we didn't even know that 50 out of 21,000 people is what it affects.

I don't know in what reality that led to the master plan.

But if we're gonna redo it, I would hope that the master plan be developed with the full knowledge that less than one half whatever the percentage is affecting this, and that everyone in Castor Valley weighs in on the master plan.

It's not a master plan for 50 people, it's a master plan for 65,000 people.

Granted, I bet 21,000 people on that road, a lot of them are cutting through Castor Valley.

Probably don't live in Castor Valley either, they're cutting through, but the point being that it has to work for everyone.

I'm also super sensitive to the safety of this.

Maybe that road shouldn't be 35, maybe it should be less.

Slower speeds are safe for people, no matter what the speed is, no if you're having anybody park anywhere near a bike lane or on any street, the possibility exists of getting doored.

And good friends have might have been doored going 30 miles an hour on a bike and damn near killed because somebody opens their car door and a bike lane goes through it.

The only safety precaution is defensive activities, defensive driving.

We are not going to, and by the way, the even in a even with a bike lane, you open your car door, it's in the middle, it's in the bike lane.

So I don't like biking on high speed with cars, period.

It's just not safe.

Um, so and anyway, I think everybody has to weigh in, and we have to make a decision on what's best for everybody.

And so my last point is you mentioned carbon footprints.

So let's just do the science.

How much carbon reduction is achieved with 50 less cars per day on Casser Valley Boulevard?

I think it's uh going to be a similar ratio, probably to how many users there are 50 out of 21,000.

It's gonna be pretty small.

But if you're gonna claim that, back it with the data of what it's gonna actually achieve.

I think we would get much better by having everybody drive an electric vehicle, or um, some other ways of reducing greenhouse gas emissions than claiming more and more and more and more and more people are gonna start riding a bicycle.

Although I am intrigued by e-bikes.

Just to clarify, those numbers are not mine.

I'm not claiming the carbon footprint reduction by the bikes on, but you have uh, you know, environmental justice document that your board approved, you have uh climate action program that your board approved.

So I think these are legitimate questions.

I think, yeah, I'm a very strong believer in a data-driven decision, and that's why uh we need to look at the data.

But I think if I hear you correctly, I think what you're telling me is we need to collect these disparate data specific plan.

Uh, we come back out again, start next month with another climate action.

I mean, uh, uh Black Peter Master Plan, which I would encourage, and we will go.

We have, in fact, most of our the expense uh for the the program is for community outreach.

Almost 50%, 60% of the expense is going to be because we're gonna be going out there extensively to get community feedback.

That's the time when people need to state their priorities.

You know, this is this is not uh a scientific, but it's a matter of priority.

Are we valuing bike safety and bike action or or active transportation versus parking?

And the specific plan in my judgment is going to be a very critical element because Castro Valley, I'm strongly convinced Castro Valley needs a centralized parking uh structure arrangement.

There's no question in my mind because you go to Hayward, you go, you know, I live in Hayward, I work in Hayward.

There's two, three different parking locations I can go and I go to a restaurant or do go to visit City Hall.

These things need to be incorporated in the decision making process because uh uh on-street parking are so minimal that that they are almost insignificant in making decisions for somebody who's gonna be in business or not.

So uh so I would say uh so that we have all this data together, I would say we should we can come back, give you an update in about a year uh what how things are.

We should get some good idea from the the new master plan.

We should be able to get some ideas from maybe economic development group uh having some discussions with the businesses, and we will do additional evaluation of uh safety study since the implementation of the bike lane so that you have some uh real data to make a decision.

So a year uh, you know, I I think it's too short, but I think it's uh it's something that at least we can give you a status update on.

So if that's your recommendation, uh Supervisor Man, any last words?

I know you turned the mic on.

Yeah, no, I think the agency director hit the nail on the head, um, he expressed everything that I'm thinking uh, because I do think that specific plan is extremely important.

I do think probably a central, I mean that a park a parking study needs to be part of that specific plan.

I'm a little frustrated.

Not completed myself, quite frankly.

Um, but I do think that's really really important, and I think we need all the data that's been associated with accidents with the merchants.

Uh, some speakers want to have we don't have any data relative to how this has impacted the merchants, and I would like for the economic decision development department to help us out with that as well.

Um in the the master plan but uh the bike pedestrian master plan, uh, is that the one that Paul Keener worked on?

That was done back then, yeah.

Okay, uh Paul uh his team, but we come back to your board for approval uh I think in a uh couple of weeks.

Okay, but I'm just saying the one we've been doing.

Yeah, yeah, because as I said, you know, some of us knew Paul very well he passed away but Paul was very very um dialed into you know uh community engagement through public works and I think he did an excellent job reaching out to all the sectors of the community and cool including the schools um so um that's why it's hard for me to want to go against the the bike master plan of which we approved back in 2019 because I you know I just know what he did uh to get us to that point to get that approved uh with all the outreach associated with it so uh as I said I'm I'm I'm sorry I can't support uh the Mac's recommendation at the moment um but I just think we need to get more information in front of us and once again um I just can't put the county at jeopardy uh relative to um someone getting um injured as a result of an action we took against the recommendation of the public works director as well around share rows or anything else at the moment so that's kind of where I am thank you Mr.

Chair.

Thank you Supervisor Biley Daniel don't go too far item two informational item you again report on unincorporated county bicycle and pedestrian advisory committee so Mr Mr Chair so since this is an action item so the action we're taking is to have public works along with the civic and economic development agency give a sta a status report on Castro Valley Boulevard bike lanes etcetera at some point uh in about a year from now.

Could we have that run through the map and then come to us oh sure sure you got it yeah we can do that thank you all right no problem so committees advisory committee so uh you're up so I I believe this was requested I was told it was requested by your committee last time you heard about uh the commission of creation and and uh wanted to understand how the current unincorporated uh county bicycle master plan advisory committee works uh uh in twenty sixteen uh I think Ned recalled that we had a castor valley bull uh castor valley bike BPAC uh that only focused on Castro Valley but then there was a desire to expand that uh into the Eden area but once we adapted the master plan in twenty nineteen uh uh Supervisor Haggerty at the time I recall wanted to incorporate uh East County into the into the pool so we came up with what we now call the unincorporated county B PAC uh the purpose of the BPAC is basically to be an advisory body to public works agency on bicycle and pedestrian planning programs and projects within the entire Alameda County unincorporated communities uh and uh the committee provided somewhat of a structured community-based input uh to support the implementation of the county uh bike master plan uh we outlined the responsibility of the BPAC uh to be for them to participate in schedule scheduled meetings uh convened by public works advising public works on implementation of the master plan uh acting uh the liaison between unincorporated communities and uh uh and the county staff uh uh you know consolidating communicating uh to uh the public works agency uh what they hear what uh feedback we get from the community and so on and it's listed in my report as you can see one of it being that you know we want them to promote walking biking other viable transportation uh and recreational uh option uh the committees serve as the advisory capacity uh uh and final project decisions are uh with the appropriate county in this case public works and the board of Supervisors uh we established a meeting procedure that they would be following, and it's meeting scheduled is just generally it follows uh all of the Brown Act requirements of posting but within seventy two hours uh meetings are basically quarterly, usually from six to seven thirty uh since uh COVID uh we had been doing it a hundred percent remote.

Now we are doing three of them.

Remote one will be in person to make sure that people get to know each other in person, which we have done last year.

Agenda is generally developed in a way that we present the various projects that we are developing.

At each meeting, there is an opportunity for members to suggest what agenda items should be included for future meetings.

And whenever there is a consensus, we incorporate those quorums and various protocols are, you know, conduct of meetings were established under Robert's rule and all those things.

And the one thing that you know occasionally is raised is about the composition of the committee.

And one of the decisions that was made was, you know, we were gonna have a committee that had a lot of stakeholders, residents of the unincorporated area, uh park districts, uh school districts, representative from school district transit agencies, BART and AC Transit, representatives of seniors, and and some business interests.

Uh so with that in mind uh we I know through the help of Supervisor Miley's office, we sent to school districts letters inviting people to join the the BPAC, and we had almost all of the schools uh volunteering somebody, uh transit AC Transit has somebody else, BART has so uh, and we have various uh folks uh that represent the senior, uh one individual that was uh an engineer, a transportation engineer, as well as a business person in Livermore that was participating.

So we had this uh interesting group of people that was very informative and advising because uh as you know, active transportation is not just bicycle and pedestrian only, but the use of transit, the the integration of those things was important.

I think it worked extremely well.

Uh the various entities brought in their perspective into the meetings.

Uh we always knew where AC Transit uh stood.

We knew hard.

In fact, I think AC Transit and uh Hard and the individual from Livermore probably are the most attendees that attended most of the meetings because one of the challenges we faced over time was uh most people over time kind of uh you know the membership dwindled, attendance was uh in some cases rare.

So uh but overall I think we've had between six to seven people that consistently attended this meeting.

And uh the current membership, I've listed them out here as you can see, uh, and and those people have been actively advising or at least commenting into uh to the committee to the agency as to what they think of the implementation approach to uh uh uh to the B from the BPAC to the agency.

So uh there has been, you know, some folks who uh think that the committee should have an oversight role rather than an adverse advisory role, but we I think as an advisory are actually more effective because uh a lot of the decisions, technical decisions are done by the engineers and by the public works agency staff.

Uh these uh these committees supposed to be advisory in a sense that are we following the master plan, are there anything else that you know the community is saying that they need uh any kind of issue that they can bring up to the to the uh to the BPAC, and it's been working very well.

Uh I think uh we've presented most of the project that we have implemented to to the committee to see if they have any uh feedback or comments uh that they would like to provide.

Uh unfortunately uh you don't see a lot of uh public attendance.

Uh I would say typically there's only one individual that I recall attending these meetings, and and has a tendency to uh uh have issues with uh some of the membership uh you know composition.

But uh from our perspective, I think uh having these stakeholder-based, including the the step Barton and Transit as well as hard, which generate a lot of a lot of pedestrians, bicyclists to their facilities that the next us between BART and bike lanes.

You heard it today, even in the discussion, those things are critical, and having those folks in this advisory capacity has been extremely helpful.

So uh we believe it's working very well.

Uh, however, uh I know there has been some discussion as to uh having a commission uh and uh something I guess uh I leave to you, but I'd be happy to answer any question you may have, but that's uh history and the current situation of the current.

Thank you, January.

We'll go to questions from Supervisor Miley first before we go to public comment.

Any questions or comments before we go to public comment?

Yeah, thanks, Mr.

Chair.

Yeah, uh, if you recall, we asked for this report because uh my office finally was able to bring to the committee a report on the creation of a bike pedvisory commission, um, because we had committed, when I say we, my office had committed to uh pursuing a commission almost immediately after this advisory committee was created, we just said give the committee an opportunity to function uh before we move into the direction of create of trying to create a commission.

We were delayed in moving ahead with the um a report and the development of a commission due to the pandemic, um, but eventually my office was able to do all the necessary legwork due diligence around uh developing a report to bring to the uh this committee.

You know, it went to all the MACs, etc.

about a commission.

Uh the reason we thought a commission would be appropriate is because, as the directors pointing out, there's been controversy between whether or not a committee advisory to public works is sufficiently uh serving the interests of the public, and that a commission would report directly to the Board of Supervisors, once again, advisory like all commissions are advisory uh to the board.

Only the um the planning commission and the BCA are decision-making bodies, the rest are all advisory uh to the board of supervisors.

So it there's been a long history, and I think you even uh have heard some of it.

You know, we had to deal with Somerset bike lanes on Somerset.

Um they mentioned higher today again today.

Uh, they've, you know, we're here looking at Cash Valley Boulevard.

So all this controversy around you know, bike lanes, and once again, bike lanes are not just the only thing, as the rector pointed out, we're interested in uh pedestrian safety, which is in transit, which you know, now we got scooters, we got e-bikes, we got all these different modes of uh transportation.

So understanding the history around the creation of a committee, a bike bed committee I think is important because as pointed out in the report here.

Initially, Castro Valley had a bike pad committee, but once we did the pedestrian master plan and approved that, uh, folks didn't want to just restrict uh a bike pad committee to just Castro Valley.

Let's include the entire unincorporated area.

At that point, the entire urban unincorporated area.

But as was pointed out, Supervisor Hagerty thought it would be important that all of the unincorporated area, urban and uh rural, be part of a bike ped committee, advisory to public works, advisory to public works, not to the board of Supervisors to public works.

And then as I pointed out, I made a commitment at some point.

We we try to elevate that to a commission.

We also hesitated, as I pointed out, moving ahead with a commission, because we were also trying to get the board through the county administrator's office to decide of all the hundreds of commissions and boards that we have.

Which ones are obsolete, which ones need to be um reconstituted, which ones need to be consolidated.

You know, we've had that report, and you know, I tried to uh get action on that and move that along when I was president, but we just didn't uh uh quite accomplish that because you know the the level of work that's coming at us, and we didn't definitely didn't accomplish it during the pandemic.

So there's been a number of reasons why we delayed on the commission.

So now this reports today just to provide better illumination around the difference between the committee and its effectiveness and the ultimate commission that I'm hoping the board will decide uh to authorize at some point.

And the director's quite correct.

We wanted to have a composition on the committee that was more broad based than just residents or businesses from that incorporated area.

We want to have the school district, we want to have AC Transit, we want to have BART, we wanted to have the rec uh recreation districts all having a role to play.

But once again, these folks who are on this body were not appointed by me.

I gave input to the director, but ultimately it was the director's decision to decide who was gonna, and the one correction I would make here is Shanita Chu is not a cheerlead resident.

She's actually the representative for the senior uh community.

There was also a question about Livermore resident, and they live in the city limits of Livermore versus unincorporated Livermore.

I guess not being seen as legitimate representation of unincorporated residents, which is living in the city of Livermore.

I don't know that I make that narrow of a distinction, but some people do.

We got an email about it.

Person from Livermore, they live in Livermore or in unincorporated.

Yeah, they live he he lives in Livermore.

Uh he is uh chosen uh first as a business person, second, he is a transportation engineer with uh extensive regional experience on bike land, pedestrian and various designs.

So uh in fact, does business even with a county uh engineering-wise, so he's uh the decision to put him in is similar to uh the park representative or the uh hard representative does not live in the unincorporated area, so so uh and that issue was raised by just like I say by one individual and and at the end of the day, uh the the body is an advisory body, not an oversight body.

Okay, let's get a public comment.

Um if you're online, raise your hand if you're in person, please fellow speakers.

I'll ask the clerk to call public speakers.

Kelly approved.

Daniel, thank you.

I mean, that's there are two people who asked about uh the uh who should be on the committee.

I I said I remember saying that it should be people from all over the county, not just the unincorporated area.

So this guy from Livermore by my standards from the city of Livermore would be fine with me.

And anybody uh from all over the county who's uh qualified should be appointed to this committee.

This committee, what we've just heard, what you read on the paper only talks about a committee.

We have uh this unwritten, unwritten history, the unwritten facts laid out perfectly by Supervisor Nate Miley about a committee versus a commission, and how you there we're on the road to bring a commission, and then all of a sudden there was this uproar that we don't we got too many commissions, we got to cut this down.

It's just like a city and county of San Francisco.

They've got uh 1200 met people on their commissions, and the Alameda County almost the same.

People saying we're wasting resources, wasting our government resources on too many people, too many commissions.

And of course, when it comes to bicycles and pedestrians, that's wrong.

Um, the Berkeley study that we all rely on so much.

That Berkeley study, I dug deep.

I went all the way into Castor Valley, all the way to Proctor Road, and there's a mother, a woman walking down the street on Proctor Road in early in 2023, who with her young child, like a seven-year-old boy, and that woman is dead because she was walking down the road on Proctor Road and got run over.

And she's not on the Berkeley report.

And I have the utmost respect for Berkeley, but their data coming from law enforcement is wrong and incomplete.

And uh when we talk about how we got to have bike lanes everywhere, we gotta be very careful.

We've got to have parking and bike by balance.

I think we need to balance just like Dublin Boulevard.

Dublin Boulevard has 90% no parking, has bike lanes in all the new areas.

Dublin Boulevard should be our example for what to do on Castor Valley Boulevard.

And um, please think about the bike issues.

This is one week ago.

Think about this.

You see this?

You see this?

This is about your bike ped recreational trail giveaway.

This is the Mercury News.

What you you created this, guys.

You're welcome.

Kelly, did you say you support a guy that lives in Livermore?

Yeah.

Second time.

Brian Foster, you have two minutes.

Thank you.

Uh, Supervisors Halbert and Miley.

Uh, I, you know, what whether you choose to make a bike committee or commission, uh, that's certainly your choice.

I would only suggest uh two things.

First of all, and again, they've I've said this in the past that we had, or we have had a situation where I believe that the bike and pedestrian users have been over highly overly represented, I'm sorry, highly overly represented within the public works department, and that gets us into problems like we have now.

Uh at the same time, we haven't really fully used the max, in my opinion, to vet all these issues before public works makes changes to our community.

And I think that that's perhaps a lost opportunity.

It's your choice to make.

Um, my recommendation was to expand the function of the MAX and have issues flow through them before they get to you.

In other words, to have public works vet their projects through the local MAX before they get to you, including bike pad.

Um the other point is is that again, I mentioned before that the other people, the vast vast, the a majority of people are not in the room where it happens to you know, coin the Hamilton phrase.

Uh, you you have uh I think we all know this, a highly mobilized bike community from throughout the county, and we're talking about changing bike and pedestrian issues within unincorporated areas, and we don't have people predominantly from the unincorporated areas, and certainly we're missing all of the commuters and the parkers and those who are just motorists.

They're not there.

So we're designing things, and people find out later after the fact that their way of life has also been changed, impeded, restricted.

Um, and then they complain.

I would suggest you democra democratize the process and include a role, at least partially at least for those of us who live here and those of us who use our vehicles, including mothers who need to get and fathers who need to get their kids to school, parents who who go shopping.

Right now there's nowhere for them to speak.

Thank you.

And Devini, you have two minutes.

Unmute your microphone.

Ken Carboni, you have two minutes.

Unmute your microphone.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Oh, okay.

Thanks.

All right.

I wasn't really uh this is good timing for having this item on the agenda here.

Um I just got a couple of comments here, real quick, and that is, you know, unfortunately, this BPAC plan that seems like that's coming our way uh in the very near future here, um, is going to be done before again the Castor Valley specific plan.

So basically the community input where the community feels certain things need to be, where our downtown business districts are, where pedestrian areas should be and not.

Um so I think that's again another very unfair um it's not fair to the majority of the community.

Uh secondly, I'd like to ask Daniel how to get on this BPAC committee, how and where is this information?

I'm very interested in knowing how to get on this existing uh BPAC before the plan moves forward, or at least an opportunity to comment on it.

So that's all I have.

Thank you.

Dan Devini.

Unmute your microphone, Bruce, you have two minutes.

Uh hello, Bruce Doogie here.

I'm a VPAC uh member, and um the main issue I have is having to do with the agenda.

So I've um sent numerous agenda items, and they rarely get accepted.

And just recently I sent uh one having to do with a new uh law that's uh a with ADA requirements on um on pedestrian ramps, and uh that was kind of uh push back.

They actually have responded, which is not always the case, but they want to um bury it in the uh overall bike ped plan.

And then the other thing is uh the commute hour bike lanes on Somerset is another thing I requested, and they've never even um uh gotten back on that one, um, which is different from uh what we're talking about on um Castro Valley Boulevard.

Um I also want to say Dan Leary is, you know, you get you guys just hired him to work with public work, so it's a uh conflict of interest to have him.

Uh he also like you say doesn't live in unincorporated.

Um yeah, why don't we just have some other engineer besides Dan and join this the thing?

So it doesn't make sense to have uh Dan uh on the committee.

Um I also want to address this idea of like 21,000 cars versus 50 uh bicycles.

Um, the trade-off is not between that, because the the you know, like uh parking and move removal of parking doesn't affect 21,000 uh drivers.

It only the trade-off is between uh 50 cyclists and a few people who um park in in the parking spots.

So so this idea of 21,000 versus 50 uh is is kind of insane.

Um and we also have a lot of equity issues.

ADA is uh there's hardly anybody you see in a wheelchair, and uh yet we we accommodate those people.

Um so this idea that um, you know, uh 50 cyclists is is minuscule and shouldn't be considered um is also uh not is a little bit illogical, uh, especially compared to things like the ADA.

So please do the commission.

Thank you.

Larry Goslin, you have two minutes.

Uh thank you very much.

I'm a rancher in uh eastern Alameda County.

The agricultural advisory committee has been working on trails issues with a fairly comprehensive plan that uh spans the county and extends into adjacent counties.

Uh, that being said, we don't have uh I should say I'm not speaking for the Ag Advisory Committee, but I don't necessarily have particular issue uh with the um uh subject of Castro Valley or the makeup of this commission, but I do believe the Ag Advisory Committee would like to be introduced to the commission, receive a report, and see if our trail's work can integrate with the work that's been done by the bicycle commission.

Thank you very much.

Hi there.

Uh back, long-time resident of Castro Valley here.

Um I actually have grave concerns about the Castro Valley Mac and their ability to adequately represent the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, and the trails and and uh other areas of Castro Valley.

Castro Valley Mac, as it has said been said before, is not representative of the community.

Um it does not care about the needs of our community except for a certain select business members.

Many of them have attempted to run for public office and actually were rejected by the citizens of Castro Valley.

Um, but because they're appointed by Supervisor Miley and not accountable to the um to the residents of Castro Valley, um, it's it's not a great situation.

I've watched for years the Castro Valley Mac repeatedly proved that it does not care about our safety, and it makes me angry to actually hear them, you know, uh say, oh yeah, well, we, you know, people can just get out of the road and stop riding, um, you know, riding their bicycles.

Some people actually don't have cars.

30% of the Castro Valley residents do not drive.

And so, you know, they don't the Castro Valley Mac um not caring about the safety of its citizens is one of the main reasons we need a bicycle pedestrian commission to specifically address the needs of this very vulnerable uh, you know, the population have watched public works whittle down what the BPAC addresses in Castro Valley.

No wonder there's uh barely any attendance.

Uh the commission needs to be able to control their own agenda.

They need to be able to engage with public works on a more equal footing, and that's why I strongly recommend that this become a commission.

Thank you.

Nicholas Bes.

Uh hi everybody.

So I have to apologize.

I'm working at the same time here and I may have missed some things.

So I would like to reiterate some points and just uh share my feelings about uh BPAC, Castro Valley Mac, those sorts of things.

So I I uh strongly encourage the BPAC.

I think if it's going to happen, though, there is a substantial portion of the population that is missing, and that again is young families commuters.

So some statistics, less than 17% of Castro Valley right now is uh over the age of 65.

However, when I attended the MAC meeting, I noticed that uh if I were to join, for example, I would have brought the average age seemingly under social security age.

And I think that that is reflected in the way that the Castor Valley Mac votes and the way that these meetings are structured.

It is, as I mentioned, 9:30 a.m.

on a Monday morning, and we're two hours deep, and I've gotten to speak twice, and I'm very fortunate to be able to do that and work on the side.

However, most people in Castor Valley are not that way.

Uh another statistic is that roughly 33,000 Castro Valley residents work.

Uh the bulk of those people do commute.

And so if, and I hope that this uh the Board of Supervisors does vote for the the BPAC, uh, it should be structured in such a way that those voices get heard even if they cannot attend in person or on Zoom or in such a way.

To be honest, I've lived in Castro Valley for five years.

I didn't even know that the CV MAC existed until two weeks ago.

And I think that that community outreach is uh doing a disservice to the community, and it makes me feel not uh quite excluded from the uh the community as well.

So thank you.

John Spangler.

Thank you very much.

Uh my wife and I lived in Alameda for more than 25 years.

And during that time, I along with many other people spearheaded the development of a transportation commission to parallel the work of the planning board, both of which organizations reported directly to the city council.

Um what that did was relieve the planning board in the city of Alameda of all of the transportation issues and allowed the people very interested and skilled in dealing with it to deal with transportation issues separately.

What I see here, especially in Castor Valley, is a similar issue, and as previous speakers who live in Castor Valley can attest, the Castor Valley map does not take into account a large number of its current residents, perhaps up to 30 percent, and that as to me as an observer from outside is extremely disturbing from a small D democratic process and representative process.

I do believe the BPAC in Castor Valley needs to be able to set its own agenda and have that autonomy, it should not be subject to what the city county staff wants to put on an agenda, and there should definitely be um self-rule on a BPAC or commission.

And if the residents who ride in Castor Valley support a commission, I support them.

Thank you very much, Roy, you have two minutes.

Yeah, thank you.

Um I'm actually in a bot station, so there may be a lot of noise here.

Um I wanted to make a couple of comments on the unincorporated BPAC.

It only met twice last year, with no explanation given as to why the other meet the two of the meetings were canceled.

It's not for the want of there being content.

In fact, the whole discussion around Castro Valley uh bike claims on Castro Valley Boulevard has never been brought to the BPAC.

That would have been a good agenda item for last December, but that meeting was canceled.

Um the membership of the uh current UB PAC has really dwindled.

Um it is not only uh residents of the unincorporated area.

There's actually one person on the committee that lives in the city of Livermore and previously served on the Little More Planning Commission that really is not eligible to be on that committee, and the inclusion of uh BAT and AC Transit and H representatives really present the problem because they are actually implemented infrastructure, they kind of also be providing oversight on that infrastructure as well.

So I would really ask the supervisors to bring this item back as an action item so that they can give better direction to public works on the organization staffing and running of this BPAC to make it more effective.

Thank you.

Dan DeVini, you have two minutes.

Good morning, supervisors, and uh thank you, Tisa, for your uh patience there.

Third time's a charm.

Uh it seems like it's not only us boomers that are having problems with this interface today.

Uh so maybe the uh the public will get more used to this new format.

Uh at any rate, I sit on the Castor Valley uh Mac.

Uh this morning I'm speaking in my personal capacity uh about some of the things that have come up today.

The committee that we're talking about uh right now met twice last year.

The last speaker just said that that's not a serious committee.

It's up to them to meet more often.

I think this committee needs to have much greater outreach to the public, and they need to engage in all aspects of of what the bike lane ramifications are.

They need to engage with people that might not be advocates of bike lanes, including motorists and merchants and and pedestrians.

Um has to has to be more inclusive so that they have a more rounded recommendation uh other than just bike enthusiast feedback.

Um, on their master plan, it needs specificity.

Uh, there's been several references to a 2019 uh study.

Uh I've read that study.

Never does it show which parking is being eliminated, never does it show the trade offs of the other infrastructure for the implementation of bike lanes.

So I think their new master plan has to have specificity as to what their plans are and what what they want to do.

Uh if they just mention a class two bike lane and don't mention the fact that they're going to eliminate 35 parking spots in a commercial district.

I think that's a disservice to the master plan.

Um the last thing, and again, I'm speaking of my personal capacity.

Uh the MAC has been very misaligned today.

This member very much enthusiastically uh supports bike lanes where they make sense, not where they don't make sense.

Thank you.

We have no additional speakers for item two.

Very good, Supervisor Miley.

Well, first of all, let me thank all of the speakers, and let me just comment on some of the comments I've heard this morning.

First of all, we don't have a bike pad commission yet.

There's no commission.

We have a bike pad committee that's advisory to public works that public works basically uh is responsible for if we create a bike pad commission, the board of supervisors would appoint that commission, and my recommendation is that the three supervisors who represent the unincorporated area make those appointments.

I know this matters come before this committee, and we didn't make a decision on that.

It's coming back in the future, because I think one model that was suggested was the Fremont model, which is bigger than just or broader than just bike pet.

It encompasses other aspects of active transportation.

So I think that is worthy of exploration and it is coming back uh to this committee in the future.

I do think a bike head commission, an active transportation commission, whatever we want to call it, but a commission would be appropriate because it would be once again directly in alignment with all other commissions that we have that are advisory to the board of supervisors.

All of our boards and commissions have a department or agency that liaisons with them, whether it's the public health commission, human relations commission, um, the planning commission, they all have county agencies or departments that liaison with them, but ultimately uh they all are either advisory to the board of supervisors, or in the case of the planning commission, they're not just advisory, they're decision making bodies.

So I do think some type of commission that looks at this area of obligation and responsibility uh gets created I want to say that the reason I've said we have too many boards and commissions is because the board has made that assessment that we have duplicative boards and commissions we have boards and commissions that are obsolete we have boards and commissions that could be consolidated and we have new ones we want to bring on board so the committee on the county administrators office commissioned a study to look at all that and the board hasn't taken action on moving forward with consolidation reduction elimination and creating new uh commissions or boards as what would be the bike pet would be a new one uh we held up on that uh to give this study uh an opportunity for the board to act upon and I made a commitment at least two years ago that I wouldn't bring forth any new boards or commissions until we acted on the study that the county administrator had prepared for us but because it's taken so long for the board to act on it I decided tell my staff to move ahead with bringing a report to uh this body the transformation and um planning uh committee for the board of supervisors a report on the creation of a bike bed commission because as I pointed out I've made a commitment to do that at least five years ago but I do think a commission of some sort is appropriate and necessary and it doesn't have to be just restricted to bike bed it could be active transportation it could be something that mirrors what Fremont has in place.

The MAC the MAC is important once again it's advisory and we're talking about not just Castro Valley seems like everybody is fixated on Castro Valley we're talking about Ashland Cherryland Fairview Cash Valley and if we go to the um rural part of the county we're talking about Sonol unincorporated Pleasanton unincorporated Livermore so it's not you know it's not all about Castro Valley even though Castro Valley seems to be driving a lot of the agenda so the point is the MAC in Castro Valley and any of the BACs at least that I'm responsible for making appointments to that are uh once again confirmed by the Board of Supervisors we take um very careful consideration around appointments people have got to have knowledge they've got to have the ability to serve and in many instances people don't have the ability and the time to serve and I think one of the speakers or a couple of speakers pointed out um the fact that maybe working folks can't uh or don't have the time to serve on some of these boards and commissions because they are working but that's the point these boards and commissions and particularly the MAC it the Cash Valley Mac meets three times a month so they have some when I look at appointees I'm looking at people that have the time and the commitment and then I'm looking at folks who have expertise in certain areas of responsibility be it land use community engagement uh be it bike pedus but whatever it might be illegal whatever it might be so that we have a composite of people on the body that can provide the best input on these various matters and most things that come to the commissions particularly the MACs don't even get to the Board of Supervisors for an opinion because it's resolved at that level with the MACs.

So I just wanted to defend both the Cash Valley Mac and its composition because I'm constantly telling folks to apply, and if they have the time, and if I can appoint them because they have the expertise that we're I'm looking for, I'll make that appointment.

And also I'm looking for diversity.

And one reason we don't have as much diversity because a lot of times, once again, either folks have the time or they don't have the expertise.

But we do have on the Mac, we do have some diversity.

We're gonna have as much diversity as I would like, but we don't have it because once again, either people don't have the time or they don't have the expertise.

So, and if Cash Valley wants to incorporate and take control of its own destiny, do that.

Do that.

I think the board has welcomed that since I've been on the board of supervisors for 25 years.

Cash Valley can incorporate and have control of its own destiny.

So I just wanted to defend not just the Cash Valley MAC, but the whole content, the whole concept of all the MACs that we have in place at this point in time.

Um let me see here.

So I think I think I hit on some of the points that I wanted to hit on based on what I was hearing from some of the from some of the speakers.

Um the Cash Valley Mac, the appointment to a commission.

Um, does the commission just have to be a bike paid commission?

No, it could be broader than that.

Um right now, oh, right now we have a committee that uh public works basically has responsibility for.

If additional people want to join that uh committee, uh talk to the agency director.

I don't know why didn't meet four times a year, but it's supposed to be meeting four times a year.

I know my staff monitors uh the bike ped committee, but once again, we don't control that committee that goes to the public works agency.

Um, and then I try to explain the whole notion of why we have too many boards and commissions uh throughout the county, uh, and the fact that we need to look at consolidation and we need to look at eliminating obsolete ones before we bring on new ones, uh, because there's at least three or four new ones that we might need to bring on board uh as well.

And and then also the other thought, just once again, this is a good teachable moment for everyone.

Another thought is with the boards and commissions under state law, the prior state law, the boards and commissions couldn't do their work virtually.

I think county councils are going to be bringing to us under the new state law how boards and commissions can uh operate uh virtually, and that would allow for um you know the the membership of the board and commission to be um the ability to participate uh virtually as opposed to having to participate uh um in person, and I think that provides more flexibility, similar to what an elected body can do, uh, the board of supervisors or city council uh we can uh be uh virtual for certain meetings uh based on um whether it's an emergency or based on um the requirements uh that would allow for us to be remote at a particular time.

But those those on that flexibility wasn't available for boards and commissions in the past, but I think the new law allows for that level of flexibility, and that might uh provide additional ability for us, or at least for me to make appointments to be uh to boards and commissions of folks who can't be there in person but could participate uh virtually.

So I just wanted to put that out, and then once again, keep in mind when if with that new ability to uh participate virtually, the you know, the members.

I'm not talking about the public, I'm talking about the members to participate virtually in an official capacity.

We have to be able to ensure that we have the capability of that virtual option for those boards and commissions to have their members participating uh virtually, so that's another uh consideration, and all that's based on you know cost and things of that nature.

So I just wanted to take a moment to explain all this uh to the to the public, and so thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Supervisor Miley, I think since the day you were elected to this board, you have um done nothing more than admirably represent unincorporated Alameda County and the creation of the MACs and the way in which you appoint people to them and the way in which they provide input from the community into this board and and in into these committees that we have, the TMP committee and the planning committee, and uh all the way to our board uh has been remarkable.

And I'm disheartened to hear people disparage um uh the MACs.

I have great respect for those that put themselves forward to be on a MAC.

I look at the county functions that we provide are a bit bifurcated.

There are some things that we provide countywide, environmental health, uh health care for those uh without health insurance, um things like that, and municipal separate from municipal services that we provide where we act as the de facto city council because there is not one.

This uh is one that falls into that bucket that I believe should best be reporting into an office of unincorporated services, which I think should be um enacted.

You've been working on that for a long time.

Um I don't think that this should be a separate commission yet until we streamline the commissions, consolidate the commissions that we have.

So um I I think other improvements we might be able to make could be um that we direct the um public works to do their best to have four meetings a year.

Um, number one, number two, I would remind everybody that we all have open door policies.

Supervisor Miley, I know you meet with the community, I'll meet with the community.

Um nobody should feel that they don't have the ability to weigh in.

Um we have technology and emails and these meetings where the community can call in from the BART station if they want.

Um, as some do.

There's just not an argument in my mind to be made that the difference between a committee and a commission that reports to Daniel versus reports.

We have so many things to worry about that I can't contemplate without streamlining first the commissions that we have without consolidating where we have.

If we do get to that point, I would like it to be a transportation commission that sees everything like we have Alameda County Transportation Commission that the speaker spoke about the city of Alameda apparently has because then we can have representation from motorists, respectation from people that visit our business communities, the business communities themselves that rely on the transportation networks to be successful, the transportation network being our streets and roads and parking spaces.

Um, not going back to the space the comp the topic just before us, the first action item.

But it could be the case that we can find striping for as many on-street parking spaces that currently exist and re-stripe and find as many spaces as there that we take away and take away all the parking from the street and make it more like Dublin Boulevard where there's no parking but only um bike, but that would require the businesses to be part of the discussion and to have them understand that just as many parking spaces are being created somewhere nearby.

I think we still have the ADA issue because people maybe need to park and just get right out of their um ADA people in a wheelchair that are using a van, need to have a way to get to the businesses.

But anyway, maybe that could be solved, but not by a bike committee or commission, but rather a holistic commission that includes everybody.

So that's if we get to that point, it should be created holistically.

It should be, in my opinion, reporting to the Office of Unincorporated Services, who would then be responsible to our board.

Um and and maybe not.

Maybe they can just take care of some of this.

In a city's environment, there are that infrastructure.

You know, we again act with two hats, countywide for many important functions, and then unincorporated wide for municipal services.

We need to increase that infrastructure.

So it's a good informational piece.

It's not an action item, so we don't take action.

Those are my thoughts as it relates.

And I would say let's make a commitment to maybe offline, or maybe this committee.

Make recommendations for which commissions are streamlined.

Make recommendations for uh get that done.

You've tried to do it in two years you were board president.

Uh I've got a little bit of time left on this.

Maybe we can get it done this year.

Get that done and then bring this back.

That'd be fair.

Oh, yeah, that's that's definitely fine with me, Mr.

Chair.

And I hope that the public works director um gets the bike ped committee to meet four times a year.

And right now they, you know, there's seven members.

If there are others who are interested in considering becoming part of the committee, if they would just let you know or your agency know or let our officers know, we can um uh send their names to to you, and uh you can consider whether or not to uh have them join the uh committee.

And then I think as you pointed out, the meetings of the committee are open to the public to attend, and the meetings are uh virtual, and then you said there's one meeting that'll that'll be I guess hybrid, maybe hybrid, virtual, yeah.

So any it occurs to me that we can take the committee structure that we have in place already and expand it to be more of a holistic transportation-wide committee.

We I leave that to the discretion of the public works director because the committee currently reports to him, but consider how we may model a holistic input from the community.

You know, I would say the wisdom of Supervisor Miley.

The reason we, you know, I never would have agreed to a 13% committee, but his notion that we need to bring in all the stakeholders actually approaches to the thing that you're saying.

We're bringing Bart, we're bringing all the other folks.

So if and and Ken mentioned how can he join, he knows how to reach me, and he can.

So I think the committee, the way I think Nate and I together envisioned was it's broad enough to bring in various stakeholders to make decisions just beyond the bike paid.

And uh one of the biggest challenge we have, and some of the things you heard is there's an enormous advocacy role that the committee members want to play rather than the advisory role.

So that that has been a balancing act.

You know, we always kind of turn out to look like we're the bad guys, but you know, uh, you know, there's a conflict of interest here, this, there.

The whole issue is there is certain group people that want to really advocate an extreme manner, independent of all the other community interests.

And I think uh be I'll join Mr.

Miley there saying that the MAC has been one of the instrumental body for us to bring in these kind of issues to address community-based uh activities.

We have relied on the MAC, we have always appreciated their uh the platform, other community wide engagement platform, in addition to actual community meetings that we do on each project.

So, so uh more than happy to welcome anybody.

We had people, I think one of the Wente family members were a member of this BPAC, but I think she had a baby kind of dropped out, and a few other people that were part of the committee uh due to scheduling or something drop out, but other body, this body has stayed about six to seven people that are able to make decisions.

We'd be more than happy to expand.

I think my position is this body need to really be directed to focus on the bike paid master plan and the implementation of that master plan.

And that way we avoid these various conflicting advocacy positions in the decision making process.

But expanding it, adding people, anybody, the business community, anybody interested in in joining.

Let me know.

I'm available.

We can discuss uh and we can add uh, you know, we can go back to the thirteen person body.

Thank you, Daniel.

Um, I think we've exhausted this item as well.

We're I'll note that we're we're uh I mean, gonna lose quorum soon.

I I I've got meetings that I've got scheduled.

Um I'll and I'll just make an announcement that I think we're gonna have to continue the fourth item.

Um, but this third item maybe we can do quickly.

How much time do we think we need Albert?

I don't know.

Let's go to item three.

Sure.

Um just quickly on item three.

So we do have a um one thing I wanted to clarify on this on the item is that we are looking at a general plan amendment as well as a zoning code ordinance to be able to introduce uh these two new uses, battery energy storage systems as well as solar projects into the East County area plan and to our uh zoning ordinance.

Right now, there is no mention of solar projects or battery storage in our East County area plan, and so um to do that, we are we do have a draft amendment to the ECAP or East County area plan as well as a draft zoning ordinance, which um we will begin our roadshow on that um in the next 30 to 60 days or so and hopefully we'll wrap that up.

We do have to do a CQA document on that uh amendment.

So that's probably the part of it that will take a little longer um than that than the 30 to 60 days.

Uh we are still engaging with the industry.

There's two main uh projects that are kind of winding their way through our process.

One of them, I'm sorry, that are winding through a process.

One of them is at the California Energy Commission.

They're they've opted into that.

Um which one is that?

Uh that is the uh Veriti Potentia project.

It's the one that was recently sold um to a new buyer who I don't recall their name, but that they have been at the CEC uh for about a year or more, and the draft EIR is is just out now, and we're gonna comment on that document.

Uh the other one is the next era, and they are also um waiting, they're waiting for this process to to wrap up so that they can uh go through a local process as opposed to going to the state.

Uh we did I just talked to them last week and and they are going through a pre-application at the local level to at least begin to understand some of the issues and and concerns at the local level.

Did they provide language that was suitable to a neighboring county or a county in California that provided draft language of a county ordinance?

Yes, yeah, they provided a draft ordinance, and we've been able to look at that and and incorporate into the work that we're doing.

When will that process that you described be completed?

CEQA, Roadshow, and will it meet their timeline, or set another way?

How are you going to meet?

So our timeline is gonna for the secret document and the roadshow and all that, it's it's gonna be four to six months.

Will that meet their timeline?

So they are concerned about the timeline, and one way that we I just talked to them last week about this is that they're gonna submit their application first the pre-application so that they can start meeting with county staff, they can start meeting with all the other agencies and departments that have a concern that will lead to their application being submitted, their full application be submitted, but we can't process it.

At least that's been our our uh argument that our argument uh thus far is that we don't have a zoning or general plan framework to accept an application.

That's what we're trying to create.

Um, and so this is at least one way for them to be able to get a jump start on it, not have to wait for our whole process to don't we have the storage already in here through the intersect.

Intersect intersect is largely a solar project.

They did have some battery storage as you may recall.

Okay, well, there comes counsel.

I said something wrong.

Good morning or good afternoon at this point.

Melanie O'Brien, Deputy County Council.

Um, there's no microphone for me, so I had to interrupt Albert at the podium.

I just want to caution um the committee on getting into the details of specific projects because this was uh agendized as an informational item for just an update on the ordinance.

Um we didn't give the public proper notice that you'd be doing ordinance.

Well, I'm not just it for intersect.

It's the same kind of project.

I I'm just understanding update on battery energy storage ordinance.

I'm asking why do we need an ordinance?

I just am saying I'm caution you on getting into the details of specific projects and properties that aren't part of this agenda item today.

I'll hand it over to Director Lopez.

Well, the reason we need an ordinance is as you know, we got we were sued on on the intersect project.

We did prevail.

However, we still do not have a uh a zoning or general plan framework for a project, so we would run the risk again of being challenged on that.

I don't think so we could take that risk.

Uh well, it wouldn't necessarily be us, it would be the applicant that would take that risk.

And that would have they been provided that opportunity, yes.

They understand that there is a downside to that, and they could get caught up in some you know, long legal.

I mean, intersect, I think took two years or something like that to have that um wrap up or have that, you know, that whole process.

So, you know, they you know we've been working pretty closely with Next Era, they understand our constraints, and I think this idea of them at least getting into the process into their our system seems to be uh you know satisfactory to them at this point that they're satisfied that they're gonna be able to at least get input from the county before they're able to submit their full uh conditional use permit.

Do you think we can get it done in six months?

I think we can, yes.

Supervisor, before we go to public comment, any questions you have.

Um when you say one last question.

When you say a road show for the MAX, this is a largely East County thing.

Can we just advisory at this point is our roadshow and Sunol, probably.

Okay.

Let's have public comment if there is any.

Kelly Abreu.

Albert, thank you.

Monterey County, the moss landing fire, which was almost exactly a year ago, uh, has prompted calls for stricter regulations and safety protocols.

Um what people need to understand is that thing blew up.

Not because they had dangerous uh chemicals there.

There's dangerous, there's a dangerous chemicals in every Tesla on the road, and Fremont is full of Teslas.

Um, but it's not the end of the world usually if one car blows up or catches fire.

Um when you had uh there's a critical mass, which is a nuclear industry term.

Critical mass means when you have too much of the uh of the uh the material, the energy uh contained in too small of an area, then you get a runaway, they call it a runaway, and in nuclear business they call it a meltdown.

It just uh or in the ultimate, they call it a nuclear bomb.

It just explodes because that's how uh when you have too much energy and too little space.

Um so uh the industry knows about this.

They're uh adopting more modular designs and more advanced uh battery chemistries like uh L Lithium uh lithium iron far side LP.

The LFP is less prone to thermal runway.

Uh it's now 80 or 85% of the industry, all the new insulation, not all, but uh 80% of them are um LFP, they're safer.

Um but they're not safe, but they're safer.

And the idea is modular means you stick the stuff some distance away and you have enough um monitoring and control systems to detect temperature and voltage anomalies uh before they can uh escalate.

And if one does explode, it doesn't cascade and doesn't go into runaway and doesn't do uh an ex uh uh uh an explosion like a nuclear bomb and the whole thing goes up.

That's what happened in Moss Landing, and it shouldn't happen if you have got the right chemistries, the right control systems, and the right designs.

Thank you.

Very good.

I'll just um reiterate uh that we should have this come back to us at the six month mark.

Today is February, so sometime in August.

With that said, we'll move on to continuing item four, and the last item being public comment on items not on today's agenda but within the purview of this body.

Public speakers test Tessa, please.

Um Kelly Abreu for public comment.

Any hands raised online?

No online speakers for public comment.

Thank you.

That says San Jose Mercury News, one week ago.

And this is about your lovely giveaway of a hiking and biking trail in Fremont, where you actually voted to give away Fremont's right of way to uh hiking and biking trail.

The city of Fremont did not go along with your plan.

How and what kind of review process do you have when you say, oh, we're just gonna block off the city's right of way for hiking and biking trail.

What this this is why there's a this is why you're on the front page of the newspaper, because you gave away a hiking and biking uh out and back.

It's it's not called dead end in the uh in the hiking business.

You know, they call it out and back.

People were going out and back for a hundred years, for 50 years, for forever, and now you said, Oh, that's a private.

You know, um another let's just go back a little a minute.

Let's talk about Mission Boulevard.

Do you know Mission Boulevard?

It's named after uh North uh the the mission San Jose, San Jose in Fremont.

And do you know what kind of uh property ownership they have there?

I bet you I haven't looked at the no the property rights, but the lawyer could.

Your lawyer should have.

You know, they they have probably all the private owners own the road underneath, own the land underneath the road, and all you've got is uh a state highway that's built as a public right of way, because in the old days, uh 150 years ago, they didn't give up people didn't give up their their land ownership rights.

They gave a public right of way and asked the government to build a state highway there.

Same thing here.

Government doesn't own the land, government just has a right of way, and you gave away the city's right-of-way.

How this is embarrassing when you're on the front page of the newspaper giving away other people's right of way.

It's really embarrassing.

I have no other speakers for public comment.

Thank you all to members of the public who participated today.

Apologies, we'll have to continue item four, and with that we are adjourned.

Thank you.

Thank you.