All Things Considered
The Richmond Street Complete Streets Improvement Project
When implemented as proposed
is severely flawed.
It discriminates against certain demographics, such as older and disabled residents, ignoring their right to age in place.
It is NOT safe.
It is NOT green.
It devalues property values.
It is, despite appearances, NOT safer for bicyclists.
It is based on faulty financing.
It is based on flawed and misleading research.
In 2016, the City adopted an Active Transportation Plan and a Complete Streets Policy, which call for creating a safe, comfortable, and convenient transportation network that serves users of all modes and all abilities, which included The East Side Bicycle Boulevard - Blake Street, Norvell Street, Schmidt Lane, Richmond Street and accessible, safe and comfortable path of travel for pedestrians on Richmond/Elm Street through sidewalk reconstruction and repair. It did not include removal of parking in favor of Class II bike lanes. Those were late 2024 additions to the original plan.
The City Council did NOT sufficiently educate itself and Richmond Street residents about the true and measurable trade-offs associated with this project. The claimed safety benefits for bicyclists (0.3% of traffic) are speculative at best, grossly overstated and supported by the personal agenda of the mostly non-local bike lobby, not by the City’s taxpayers. The negative impacts of lost street parking have NOT been adequately addressed.
The City Council failed to provide good opportunities for Richmond Street residents to air their views and discuss their concerns. The City Council’s reliance on surveys that manipulate and skew results, and three-minute comments at City Council meetings is a poor substitute for democracy.
This situation questions the quality of City Council decision making. It weakens our community’s confidence in its city leadership.
It is a key City Council responsibility to represent its taxpayers. Since when does a City Council overrule 90% of its residents in favor of a small minority of 0.3%? This is an overreach of government. Imposing undue and unnecessary burdens on residents hinders their ability to thrive. It raises questions about democratic accountability, and it erodes the democratic foundations upon which governance is built.
It has been more than eight years since the original plan was adopted, so it makes sense to review its relevance. We now know that most of the recently updated designs are highly controversial, both within the Richmond Street community and in current trends. The project when finished reduces safety for bicyclists, motorists, pedestrians and residents. In the hope of improving—but not achieving—safety for a very small group of users, increasing risk to all the others seems to be a high price to pay.
El Cerrito received an $8 million federal grant for this project. The grant reads:
“Richmond Street Complete Streets Improvements — This project component will improve Richmond Street to provide safe and accessible pedestrian connections between El Cerrito’s walkable residential neighborhoods to both the del Norte and Plaza BART Stations and the City’s San Pablo Avenue PDA (recognized as such regionally, across the 9-County San Francisco Bay Area). The improvements will provide safe access for all modes of travel by rehabilitating the pavement; and installing enhanced traffic signing, green pavement markings and signs to enhance the existing shared-lane bike facility (which complements the low-stress Ohlone Greenway, just 1-3 blocks West); and implementing safety upgrades at the Elm/Key/Hill Streets traffic signal. Upgrades to the vehicle signal loop detection to enhance bike detection at the four signalized intersections within the project component limits are proposed as part of the separate countywide CCTA Smart Signals project.”
The grant does not mention separate bike lanes, let alone bike lanes in lieu of parking. Separate bike lanes are not a qualification requirement to receive the grant.
Seasoned and expert bicyclists, like Jan Heine and Frank Lehnerz have spoken out against bike lanes as the cure for all, both because of the negative environmental impact of construction and the fact that they don’t make bicycling inherently safer. Heine and Lehnerz are proponents of education and bike boulevards on quiet streets, which unlike Richmond Street, display minimal traffic volumes, less frequent intersections with roads and driveways, and far less complexity.
“Complete Streets” describes a comprehensive, integrated transportation network with infrastructure and design that is supposed to accommodate safe and convenient travel along and across streets for all users, including people walking, people bicycling, persons with disabilities, people driving motor vehicles, movers of commercial goods, users and operators of public transportation, emergency responders, seniors, youth, and families and residents who live along the street—and not to favor those designs insisted on by a small group of cyclists at the cost of all others.
In addition to failing to achieve its stated goal of safe streets, the City runs a risk of legal liability, if it continues to ignore the obvious adverse consequences of the proposed project when implemented.
Upholding ethical standards and promoting transparency in governmental actions are essential for maintaining public confidence that the City’s authority is exercised responsibly and in the best interests of our community as a whole.