MAY 2021
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY MASTER PLAN
BUILDING EQUITABLE ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION IN ALAMEDA COUNTY
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS HAYWARD AREA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT MEGHAN TIERNAN MICHAEL WILLIAMS ALAMEDA COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS AGENCY & ALAMEDA COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT DANIEL WOLDESENBET HANK ACKERMAN CONSULTANT TEAM WALLACE ROBERTS & TODD, LLC CSW HTA
STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE ALISON ABBORS ALAMEDA COUNTY PLANNING DEBORAH COX ASSEMBLY MEMBER BILL QUIRK- DISTRICT 20 SUSIE HUFSTADER BIKE EAST BAY MO SHARMA CITY OF HAYWARD TONYA COVARRUBIAS EBRPD BRUCE KING FRIENDS OF SAN LORENZO CREEK MARK OAKMAN HARD - RANGER SUPERVISOR CHRIS (CJ) COSTANZO HARD - PARKS JIM WHEELER HARD - RECREATION BREANN GALA RCD HOUSING JOAQUIN NEWMAN REACH ASHLAND YOUTH CENTER CARMEN LOPEZ SAN LORENZO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT DIANA MARAVILLA SAN LORENZO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT KATHIE READY SAN LORENZO VILLAGE HOA MATT TURNER TRAILS ADVOCACY AT-LARGE GALE BLETH HAYWARD POLICE DEPARTMENT ERNESTO SARMIENTO DOWNTOWN STREETS TEAM - HAYWARD RACHEL PARAS ALAMEDA COUNTY PUBLIC HEALTH
ADDITIONAL THANKS MANY THANKS TO ALL OF THE STAKEHOLDERS WHO PARTICIPATED IN THE COMMUNITY DESIGN PROCESS THROUGH MULTIPLE ENGAGEMENT EVENTS. THANK YOU ALSO TO THE EDEN AREA AND CASTRO VALLEY MUNICIPAL ADVISORY COUNCILS.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
3
CONTENTS 01 INTRODUCTION 06 WHAT IS THE SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY? COMMUNITY DESIGN PROCESS
PLANNING CONTEXT
02 VISION & GOALS 16 03
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
04
BUILDING THE VISION
DESIGN ELEMENTS
FEEDBACK SUMMARY
22
56
05 CONCEPT PLANS 76
ATP GRANT CONCEPT PLANS
URBAN GREENING CONCEPT PLANS
1
INTRODUCTION
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
6
INTRODUCTION WHAT IS THE SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY MASTER PLAN?
regional open spaces will be established with this plan. The Creekway will cross through four school districts that serve over 50,000 students. It
Ac c e s s t o D is t r i c t - W id e P a r k s , i n c l u d i n g Pl a n n e d a n d P o t e n t i a l F u t u r e P a rk Si t e s Lake Chabot Cull Canyon Regional Recreation Area
Castro Valley
Ashland
Don Castro Regional Recreation Area
Five Canyons Open Space
Cherryland San Lorenzo Fairview Kenne th C . Aitke n S enior & F A I RM
TH S
ON T
Co mm unity Ce nter
DR
T
Ca str o V alley Co mm unity
V U 185
SE V EN H I LLS
RE D W O O D R D
14
RD
Ca str o V alley Co mm unity
Ce nter LA K
P ark
T RD A BO E CH
Bay Tre es
Ad obe Art C e nter
Ed end ale M iddle Sc hoo l
STR
A
C
P ark
ne
Sc h oo l
C r ee ks id e M i dd le S ch o ol
and G allery As hland C om munity C e nter
BAR T Li
C an yo n M i dd le
Ca str o V alley Sw im C enter C EN TER ST
E
BL V D
M eek Es ta te
nd Co mm unity
Ca str o V alley Cr eek P a rk
The ater
Sc hoo l
S
T.
HA RD Dis trict
BL V
D
Kenne dy P ark
Bret H arte P la y F ield
Hay wa rd P lu nge
E
W
A
Y
Sa n F elipe Co mm unity
Fiv e Ca nyon s
Su lp hur C re ek Na ture C e nter
P ark
EA S T AVE
O ffic e
Ea st Av e nue P ark
M em orial P ark
S T.
Pa r k
WI
N TO
N
AV
E
O
SA
C
R
H
NT
R
D
A
V
Sto neb rae Ele men tary Sc hoo l
HU
HE
RA
OO
MI
N R IA
D ER R HA RD
TW
S T.
N
S PE
D
SS
A
IO
B LV
E
N
V
B
D
LV D
Ce nter
W eek es P ark Co mm unity Ce nter
IN
M t. E de n P ark
DU
ALAMEDA COUNTY W eek es P ark
TEN N YS O N R D
Ten nyso n P ark
M iss ion H ills O f Ha yw ard
S T RI
A L B L VD
V U 238
Alde n E . O liv er Sp orts P a rk
travelled, therefore improving local air quality and
the full potential of the San Lorenzo Creek and the
area-wide public health outcomes.
new equitable active transportation pathway in the
The east-west connection established by the San
community.
Lorenzo Creekway will become a critical link in the active transportation network in the East Bay
The community has been advocating for a public
providing over 7 miles of new Class I and Class IV
access pathway along San Lorenzo Creek for many
bicycle and pedestrian paths. The Creekway will
years before this recent visioning effort began.
connect three major north-south regional trails
The purpose of this master plan is to document
including the San Francisco Bay Trail, the proposed
the community design process in an effort to
East Bay Greenway, and the Bay Area Ridge Trail,
inform grant applications and to guide future
El Ra nch o Ver de P a rk
linking the Bay to the hills with a Class I bicycle and
SAN LEANDRO
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
implementation efforts based on the vision and
pedestrian facility for the first time. The Creekway
goals outlined by the community.
also provides new safe connections between
Garin/ Dry Creek Pioneer Regional Parks
HAYWARD
communities on the north and south side of the The San Lorenzo Creekway has the potential
creek by providing new bicycle and pedestrian
to connect many of the communities in the
crossings.
sc o anci San Fr
unincorporated areas of San Lorenzo, Ashland, Cherryland, Castro Valley, Fairview, and the cities of
Eden Landing Ecological Reserve
Bay
HARD Boundary County Boundary City of Hayward Water
Conservation District (the County) to make use of
G olf C ours e
Ce nter
San Francisco Bay
to make a big impact in reducing vehicle-miles-
E
Hay wa rd Co mm unity
LA
880
A
G ard ens
AC
§ ¦ ¨
So uthg ate P ark So uthg ate Co mm unity
92
Sh oreline Interp retiv e
connect to over 30,000 jobs, and has the potential
the Alameda County Flood Control and Water
CK
C en t en n ia l
HAYWARD V U
Area Recreation and Park District (HARD) and
S O N
Sk yw es t G olf C ours e
JA
Ce nter
D
L L
Field s
Sa n L oren zo Co mm unity
L TH I
Boha nnon Athle toc
RD
V
P ark
O
OAKLAND Sa n L oren zo Co mm unity P a rk
O
Ja pan es e T. S A ard ens G
Ch il d ren' s Su nse t P ark / P ark a t Sw im C enter G iu lia ni Br e n kw i t z P la z a Su n se t
Brenkw itz High
M cC on agh y P ark
R
Sa n F elipe Hay wa rd A re a Co mm unity Se nior C e nter Ce nter
Dou glas M orris s on
Ce nter
E
FO
V T A
G
M P TO N R D HA Ch erryla
Ce nter
AN
O ld C ree k Dog P ark
P ark
Arr oyo Sw im
GR
BO C KM AN
over 25 schools within a mile of the Creekway, will
V O V A L LE Y B L D
§ ¦ ¨ 580
LEW E LLI N G
Hayward Shoreline Regional Park
will provide a safe route to school for students in
been developed in partnership with the Hayward
existing access roads along its banks to provide a
Figure 1-1: San Lorenzo Creekway Location SAN LEANDRO
The San Lorenzo Creekway Master Plan has
¯
San Leandro and Hayward. Critical new connections 0
2.5
5
10 Miles
between residential areas, to jobs, schools, transit, and of course important recreational access to
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
Figure 1-2 : San Lorenzo Creekway
7
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
8
Throughout the community design process, important conversations about public safety, bicycle and pedestrian safety, art, community identity in unincorporated areas, public health, ecology, and stewardship helped inform the ideas about the physical design of the Creekway, but didn’t stop there. The community acknowledged the importance of developing thoughtful partnerships with community groups to provide a sense of communal ownership of the shared spaces. Programming events that activate the Creekway with arts and education opportunties, in turn improve public safety. In addition to thoughtful design techniques that improve visibility, access, and clear wayfinding along the Creekway, a special public safety task force has been developed to connect HARD with all the major public safety agencies that operate along the Creekway to make sure those resources are in coordination as the plans for the Creekway are developed. In order to make this vision a reality, HARD and the County are working together to apply for various grant opportunities, including the Caltrans Active Transportation Program (ATP), Urban Greening grants, and others, and continue to look for partnership opportunities to expand future programming efforts. This master plan document will guide and inform the implementation of the Creekway if and when those grants are awarded, and as other funding becomes available. As designs continue to progress over time, HARD is commited to continuing community engagement throughout the process. Clockwise: Virtual Community Meetings, Youth Ambassadors, and outreach banners hung along the San Lorenzo Creek.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
9
THE VALUE OF THE COMMUNITY DESIGN PROCESS The overall approach to the San Lorenzo Creekway
The engagement of key stakeholders has been
Master Plan is tied to an integrated approach to
integral to the visioning process. Many thanks to
design and community engagement. The following
the San Lorenzo Creekway Stakeholder Committee
timelines shows how community events and design
who helped inform the development of the
milestones were planned to inform one another.
masterplan at several key milestones throughout
More details on the outcomes of the engagement
the project. Many thanks as well to the Youth
process are detailed in the Community Engagement
Ambassadors that worked closely with Bike East
chapter.
Bay and the team to support outreach efforts throughout the community.
Figure 1-3: San Lorenzo Creekway Planning Process
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
STAKEHOLDER MEETING 1 MARCH 31ST
POP-UP PRESENTATIONS ONGOING
STAKEHOLDER MEETING 2 JUNE 3RD
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY WORKSHOP 1 MAY 6TH
VIRTUAL COFFEE CHAT MAY 9TH
STAKEHOLDER MEETING 3 JULY 29TH
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY WORKSHOP 2 JUNE 23RD
ONLINE SURVEY UNTIL JULY 15TH
HARD BOARD MEETING
ATP GRANT DUE DATE SEPTEMBER 15TH
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER PLANNING EFFORTS The San Lorenzo Creekway Master Plan is one of HARD’s major trail initiatives and is identified in their overall HARD Trails and Open Space Master Plan which is being planned concurrently with this effort. As shown in Figure 1-5, the trail network within HARD’s juridiction emphasizes pathways that connect the community to key destinations like schools, jobs, and also local and regional recreation areas. HARD and its partners have recognized that this effort is an important opportunity to align the goals and actions of the many jurisdictions that have a role in shaping our communities. During the development of the Creekway planning effort, other bicycle and pedestrian planning efforts by Alameda County and the City of Hayward were coordinated to build a cohesive regional system. The system recommendations, trail standards, and other aspects of those plans have informed this one.
Figure 1-4: Relationship between Planning Effor ts
10
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
Figure 1-5: HARD Trails + Open Space Master Plan
11
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
12
COMMUNITY HISTORY Figure 1-6: Timeline
Pre-1800s
Ohlone Time
Hayward Emerges
Flood and
Ohlone people live in
Hayward’s store
Development
the Bay Area for some
and hotel. Castro
1950 flood results in San
10,000 years before
plats town; Hayward
Lorenzo Creek channel.
Spanish arrive in late
incorporates and
Major suburban tract
1700s.
grows. Railroads arrive.
development. Historic
1870s-90s 1850s-60s
1950s-60s 1910s-20s
steelhead runs ended.
2010s-20s
American Settlers
Cherryland
Accessible City
California becomes
Meek subdivides
Today Hayward
an American state.
and Cherryland
is embracing its
Meek and Lewelling
develops. Canning
downtown and
establish orchards.
booms. San Mateo
to be a walkable,
Bridge built.
bikeable place.
San Lorenzo Creek in its natural channel, 1939 (Hayward Area Historical Society)
San Lorenzo Creek from Hazel Avenue, 2019. (Hayward Area Historical Society) The creek was channelized following the 1950 flood. From 1950 to 2020, urban and other development continue to intensify along and up to engineered channel easements and minimum creek setbacks.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
13
CONNECTIVITY CHALLENGES TODAY Today, there are many challenges to navigating the communities in the greater Hayward area, especially without relying on private cars. The creek itself acts as a barrier between neighborhoods, and many of the thoroughfares that do cross the creek are not bicycle and pedestrian friendly. The design of the San Lorenzo Creekway addresses these challenges by bridging and connecting the communities along and across the creek corridor and providing safe routes to school and other key destinations. Many of the Creekway alignment decisions near challenging street and railroad crossings were determined in consultation with the Alameda County Flood Control District, structural engineers, and bicycle and pedestrian safety advocates to determine the safest design possible given the constraints of existing structures and the desire to provide appropriate travel clearances for all users.
Existing conditions images from a team site walk in 2019.
2
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY VISION & GOALS
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
CREEKWAY VISION Figure 2-1: San Lorenzo Creekway Vision
16
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
17
VISION + GOALS
Benefit Communities in Need
Increase Walking and Biking
Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Increase Public Health The Creekway should
Prioritize Public Participation
The Creekway should
The Creekway should
The Creekway should advance
enhance public health,
The Creekway should
ensure that disadvantaged
increase the proportion
the active transportation efforts
through programs including,
be driven by a two-way
communities fully share in
of trips accomplished by
to achieve greenhouse gas
but not limited to, projects
public participation
the benefits of the program.
walking and biking in the
reduction goals as established
eligible for Safe Routes to
process involving inclusive
area, especially among
pursuant to SB375 and SB 391.
School Program funding
interaction and listening.
students.
Maintain Access to Flood Control Structures
Foster Community Identity
Maintain and Improve Public Safety
Improve Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety
Provide Access to Green Space and Promote Environmental Stewardship
The Creekway should help
The Creekway will seek to
The Creekway should reduce
ACFCD requires that access
to establish and foster a
increase public safety in this
the number, rate, or risk
The Creekway should provide
to the flood control channel
cohesive community identity
area by using a mixture of
of pedestrian and bicyclist
access to existing and proposed
is maintained.
for this area.
programs and design.
fatalities and injuries.
open and green space, and promote environmental stewardship and sustainable behavior.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
Ar tist renderings of the future vision for the San Lorenzo Creekway. The image above looks west along the natural embankment of the San Lorenzo Creek . On the right , the image illustrates the t ypical channelized creek condition with bicycle and pedestrian improvements.
18
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
19
3
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
22
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Public engagement has been a cornerstone for the San Lorenzo Creekway process. It has helped to build support and champions for the project throughout the area and has guided the design and programming recommendations. The project team has structured the engagement process so that it has informed the public of the project and its potential benefits, but also to gain a better understanding of the community need and desires. This input has directly been incorporated into the design. The project teams viewed significant public outreach and engagement as integral to the success of both the master plan and the grant application. Shortly after the kickoff of the San Lorenzo Creekway Project, Shelter-in-Place in California was enacted. This presented both challenges and opportunities to be creative with engagement. The project team quickly shifted to new, uncharted
Stakeholder Committee Member Susie Hufstader conducting a breakout room for Community Workshop #2
methods for engagement. Proposed engagement
have been outlined in the process section.
strategies and at monthly intervals of the
strategies shifted and additional activities have
To aid in outreach, the project team identified
process, the project team would run assess the
been added to fully reach the residents that will
four groups with differing travel pattersn to tailor
demographics of the survey respondents to see
be affected/stand to benefit from the San Lorenzo
engagement strategies around. These four groups
if our outreach efforts were effective. Strategies
Creekway.
were:
were added or shifted to get close to the actual
• Caregivers/parents
demographics of the area.
The engagement process included a variety of
• Students/youth
methods on the IAP2 spectrum of engagement,
• Seniors
This summary will outline the process, key
from informing the community to empowering
• Commuters
engagement activities, demographics of the survey
them to make key decisions about the design. The techniques and where they fall on the spectrum
and finally key findings from the outreach process These groups provided a lens for our engagement
that will be integrated into the design.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
938 1,194 377 21 3 2
23
SURVEYS TAKEN VIRTUAL SITE TOUR VIEWS ATTENDEES AT MEETINGS (TOTAL) STAKEHOLDERS COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS YOUTH/STUDENT AMBASSADORS
From top to bottom: Screen shot of the online survey hosted by Survey Monkey. Screen shots of Instagram post created by the Youth/Student Ambassadors
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
24
PROCESS Early on in the process the project team developed
Using these principles and organizing our activities
goals for public engagement that included:
on the IAP2 spectrum of public participation,
• Create a fun, culturally sensitive, inclusive
engagement began with a stakeholder committee
Stakeholder Committee
21
Pop-Up Presentations (7)
179
Community Meetings (3)
198
community engagement through a variety of
Online Survey Respondents
938
methods will be continued. To date our efforts have
Project Listserv Subscribers
259
included:
Virtual Site Tour Views
and engaging process that both celebrates
meeting on March 31st and culminated with the
the opportunity of the San Lorenzo Creekway
HARD Board Meeting in August. If the project is
while educating and eliciting feedback from the
successful in receiving grant funding, continued
community. • Design a public engagement process that captures the public perception of current and future for needs for the San Lorenzo Creekway. • Involve a wide range of ages, races, ethnicities
PEOPLE REACHED
ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITY
Stakeholder Committee Presentations/Meetings
1,194
Email Consults
42
Phone Consults
36 30
and hard-to-reach residents by providing
Our stakeholder committee has provided invaluable
multiple ways for the public to engage, including
insight into the community and key aspects
Direct Mailing Survey
a variety in location, type, and timing of events;
of design that needs to be included. They are
HARD Newsletter (3 email blasts)
and providing opportunities for engagement to
described more fully in the next section.
Social Media Followers (HARD)
happen within the context of a person’s everyday
29,165 4,240
Youth Ambassadors
activities.
2
Engagement Timeline MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
STAKEHOLDER MEETING 1 MARCH 31ST
POP-UP PRESENTATIONS ONGOING
STAKEHOLDER MEETING 2 JUNE 3RD
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY WORKSHOP 1 MAY 6TH
VIRTUAL COFFEE CHAT MAY 9TH
STAKEHOLDER MEETING 3 JULY 29TH
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY WORKSHOP 2 JUNE 23RD
ONLINE SURVEY UNTIL JULY 15TH
HARD BOARD MEETING
ATP GRANT DUE DATE SEPTEMBER 15TH
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
INFORM
25
CONSULT
WEBSITE
INVOLVE
COLLABORATE
SURVEY
FLYERS
SOCIAL MEDIA
BANNERS
LOCAL COUNCIL MEETINGS
PRESS RELEASES
PROJECT PHONE LINE
VIRTUAL SITE TOUR
PROJECT EMAIL ADDRESS
EMPOWER
STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS
YOUTH AMBASSADORS
POP UP EVENTS
EMAIL LIST SERVS Engagement activities by their location on the IAP2 Spectrum of Public Participation Youth Ambassadors
Local Council Meetings/ Pop-up Events
Print Materials
During the engagement process, it became clear
To meet people where they were, several
General and student focused flyers were created
that despite a large youth population, their voice
presentations were given at local council meetings
to place at pharmacies, grocery stores, and food
was not being heard. Partnering with the SLzUSD
and community events. The attendees were
distribution sites. Large vinyl banners were hung up
and Bike East Bay and funded through the Caltrans
then asked to provide recommendations/state
along the creek to alert community members. Press
Technical Assistance program, two students were
preferences. In some instances, the pop-up events
releases were advertised in local papers.
hired to assist with outreach and advise the design.
included follow up planning activities.
Community Workshops
Dedicated Phone/Email Communication
Because a physical site tour was not permitted,
Three virtual community workshops were conducted
Contact information was made available for direct
a virtual site tour was created. It doubled as
throughout the process. The findings from this are
communication. The phone line was listed and
educational materials for classroom exercises.
included in its own section.
dedicated to collect messages
Virtual Site Tour
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
26
As of March 19th due to California’s shelter-in-place order, the project team had to dramatically shift the methods by which we were going to elicit feedback. The online survey became the primary way we received feedback, with both digital and in-person promotion. All in person community meetings
PROPOSED ACTIVIT Y
ENGAGEMENT DURING COVID-19 IN-PERSON STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS (3)
ONLINE SURVEY
FLYERS
WALKING TOUR
IN-PERSON POP-UP EVENTS(4)
IN-PERSON COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS (2)
and events had to shift to be virtual, presenting some challenges but also resulting in increased representation from harder-to-reach groups such as
MARCH 19 TH
parents and youth. Overall, engagement during COVID-19 presented
FLYERS
and economic crisis, understandably, took much of the attention of the residents that we were trying to reach. As illustrated in the diagram to the right, for every proposed engagement activity, 2-3 additional activities needed to be conducted to get robust engagement. Additionally, the populations most affected by COVID-19 (Hispanic/Latinx, Black/ African American, and lower income workers) were the very groups that were exceptionally difficult to reach during this time period. While our approach was iterative, continually shifting to reach the
POST- SIP ACTIVIT Y
more challenges than benefits. The public health
VIRTUAL STAKEHOLDER MEETINGS (3)
CLASSROOM LESSONS PRESS RELEASES
EMAIL CAMPAIGNS VIA STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE
ONLINE SURVEY BANNERS
VIRTUAL SITE TOUR WEBSITE
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY GATHERINGS (7)
PROJECT WEBSITE
populations we needed to hear from, the overall
SOCIAL MEDIA OUTREACH
percentages illustrate some of the disparities of the public health crisis. PRINT SURVEY
HIRED YOUTH AMBASSADORS
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS (3)
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
27
Clockwise from the Left: Youth Ambassador’s Instagram Page, Community Engagement Workshop #1, Banner hung by the San Lorenzo Creek, Virtual Site Tour on Story Maps
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
28
STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE Intended to serve as ambassadors for the planning
STAKEHOLDER NAME
process and assist HARD and consultant team to
Alison Abbors
Alameda County Planning
better engage the community, the Stakeholder
Hank Ackerman
Alameda County Public Works- Flood Control District
Deborah Cox
Assemblymember Bill Quirk- District 20
elected officials, and civil servants. HARD worked to
Susie Hufstader
Bike East Bay
include those who are informal or formal community
Mo Sharma
City of Hayward
leaders, and members that had a good grasp on
Tonya Covarrubias
EBRPD
community events and resources that could be
Bruce King
Friends of San Lorenzo Creek
Mark Oakman
HARD – Ranger Supervisor
Chris (CJ) Costanzo
HARD - Parks
tools to engage the public. Three stakeholder
Jim Wheeler
HARD - Recreation
committee meetings were scheduled. These were
Breann Gala
RCD Housing
supplemented with multiple informal phone calls.
Joaquin Newman
REACH Ashland Youth Center
The stakeholder committee were indispensable for
Carmen Lopez
San Lorenzo Unified School District
Diana Maravilla
San Lorenzo Unified School District
The stakeholder committee also helped to
Kathie Ready
San Lorenzo Village HOA
continually inform the public on the project and the
Matt Turner
Trails Advocacy At-Large
project team relied very heavily on their efforts to
Gale Bleth
Hayward Police Department
make sure the community was aware of the planning
Ernesto Sarmiento
Downtown Streets Team -Hayward Project Manager
Cindy Torres
Ashland Community Association
Wesley Lightfoot
HARD - Citizens Advisory Committee
Chris Gilstrap
PG&E
Kathy Ornellas
Trails Advocacy At-Large
Rachel Paras
Alameda County Public Health
Committee was an ever growing group that included community members, representatives from
tapped into to increase engagement in the planning process. Members also served as sounding board for messaging and help to define the most effective
creating an effective engagement plan.
efforts.
ORGANIZATION
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
29
EDEN ON THE MOVE - SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL Students in the Eden area (San Lorenzo, Ashland, Cherryland, and Hayward) frequently face challenges in getting to and from school safely. A history of fatal pedestrian collisions, lack of direct routes, lack of public space, interpersonal harassment, and overall community and school safety concerns deter parents from allowing their children to walk or bike to school. In response, the San Lorenzo Creekway will serve as an anchor for a new innovative and comprehensive Safe Routes to School program -- Eden on the Move. Eden on the Move is a collaboration between HARD, the Alameda County Public Health Department, San Lorenzo and Hayward Unified School Districts, REACH Ashland Youth Center, TransForm, Cycles of Change, and Bike East Bay, designed by students (including Diana and Lorenzo the youth ambassadors), school administrators, parents, county health staff, and other collaborators. It will include multiple years of programming at high-need schools along the Creekway to: 1. Increase biking and walking among students 2. Make the Creekway student-friendly through school-based and community-wide events 3. Create a student-run bike share porgram 4. Improve long-term safety and health through student-driven research and advocacy 5. Create youth employment opportunities Clockwise from the Top: Walking School Bus as part of Walk & Roll, Eden Walk and Roll Fest, Students and their Parent from Cherryland Elementary in a Walk to School Event
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
30
VIRTUAL COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS While the primary method for feedback was the online survey, the project team help three virtual workshops via zoom, during the engagement process. Closed captioning provided real time translation in Spanish (the second largest language preference in the study area) during each workshop. The first and second workshop was divided into three parts. The first sought to inform the public on the project and outline some key aspects of the design. The second part gathered a panel of experts from the following organizations to
PUBLIC SAFETY
ECOLOGY
members from the community and national experts
Public safety has been one of the most cited
Ecological concerns have been expressed in every
on trail planning. The panelists represented Bike
concerns about the Creekway, especially those
community workshop, with a strong desire to
East Bay, the City of Hayward, San Lorenzo Unified
who live adjacent to the current flood control
have more access to nature generally, and more
School District, and the Rails to Trails Conservancy.
channel. Consistent across community feedback
specifically native trees and plants. Some expressed
The final part included open comment/questions
was the need to address these concerns in the plan.
the desire to restore the creek to its original state,
from the public.
A consistent fear is that the Creekway would be
although many in the community understood the
unusable because of lack of oversight or lighting.
limitations for restoration. Incorporating indigenous
The second workshop was much more interactive.
Some people expressed a fear of crime on their
people and youth in the planning process through
While there was also an informative presentation,
properties. The public advocated for strong fencing
native plantings and interpretive signage was
members of the public were put into virtual break
that could protect property and privacy from those
stated.
out rooms and charged with tackling 5 particular
using the Creekway.
articulate how varied the benefits of a project like the Creekway would be. Panel members included
topics that had emerged as pertinent to this
When the creek is natural, the ecology break out
planning process from survey data, stakeholder
room cited a preference for creek setbacks as to
meetings, the previous workshop, and pop-ups.
maintain a restoration focused area. Finally, the public advocated for pollinator pathways.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
31
ACCESS TO DESTINATIONS
BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY
PUBLIC ART
Ensuring access to schools, parks, work and
The public expressed concern around speeding
There was not a consistent viewpoint of public
shopping through bridges and access points along
bicyclists, however there were mixed to neutral
art from the public, with some participants highly
the Creekway were all stated goals from the public.
preferences for completely separated bicycle
valuing the graffitti that is currently in place while
The San Francisco Bay Trail connection was a key
lanes or a mixed use path. Safe intersections were
other participants citing it as an “eye-sore.” While
destination identified by the public. Downtown
the most cited need, with some communicating
there was not a uniform response, some participants
Hayward BART, Amtrak, and AC transit bus stops
a preference for either above or below grade
communicated a preference for art to line all the
were also highly desired. Shopping areas along
intersections to avoid traffic alltogether. Protected
walls of the concrete channel. Participants did agree
the creek were also requested, including the
bicycle lanes and multi-use trails were the favored
that if public art were to be included in the project,
Greenhouse Marketplace and Creekside Center.
infrastructure of the participants.
there was consensus that the art should be done by local artists and youth to help create a sense of
Safe connections to schools were considered imperative to the project, with residents specifically requesting the KIPP King Bridge be reopened. A dedicated bike share program was proposed to aid in connecting to slightly further destinations.
community.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
32
SURVEY DEMOGRAPHICS As outlined in the previous sections, the project team conducted multiple methods of engagement.
The overall percentages indicate that our survey
However, given the difficulties of engagement
could have been more representative. However,
during COVID-19, much of our efforts were
because of the large number of respondents, we
funneled into getting larger turn out for the
have been able to disaggregate this data further
online survey. This enabled the project team to
and identify any discrepancies between the overall
understand priorities while also getting a sense of
figures (which tend to skew Non-Hispanic White and
who was providing the feedback. To ensure that
higher than average incomes) with those responses
we were hearing from all the diverse voices of the
that are more typical of residents living in this
community, the demographic information collected
area. When discrepancies exist, they have been
from the survey was invaluable. The project
highlighted.
team collected demographic information on the following:
All demographic data has been outlined in the following pages, as well as the effect of certain
• Age
activities. Generally, the majority or residents lived
• Gender
within a 1-mile buffer with high representation from
• Race/Ethnicity
the unincorporated areas near the creek.
75% of respondents live within 1-mile buffer of the Creekway
65% of respondents were women
• Home Location (nearest cross streets) CITY
• Income
% OF RESPONDENTS
• Employment Status
SAN LORENZO
28%
• Parental/Care Giving Status
CASTRO VALLEY
19%
HAYWARD
15%
analyzed the 2018 Census Estimates to understand
SAN LEANDRO
14%
if our results were representative of the population.
ASHLAND
10%
These figures were continually revisited to adjust
CHERRYLAND
8%
outreach efforts so that responses could better
FAIRVIEW
3%
9%
reflect the community.
OTHER
2%
of respondents had a disability
At the onset of the process, the project team
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
RACE & ETHNICIT Y The project area is racially diverse, with Hispanic/ Latinx populations making up 35% of the population. The next largest group is Asian or
33
60%
WHAT IS YOUR RACIAL OR ETHNIC IDENTITY? 51% 50%
Asian American with 26% followed by Non-Hispanic White. During early July, despite having over 700 surveys, the project team realized that our racial demographics were over representing the Non-
40%
Hispanic White population. 35%
To help rectify this situation the project team addressed the stakeholder committee again, urging them to expand their efforts beyond their typical
30%
social groups so that we could hear from the voices
26%
that represent this community. The suggestion of youth ambassadors was given and the project team worked with Bike East Bay and
23%
23%
20%
the San Lorenzo Unified School District to bring on
14%
two students to specifically to address our previous
12%
inadequate engagement efforts. 10%
While employing local youth offset some of the issues, it is evident that more work needs to be
3%
done to hear the diverse voices of this community. As such all metrics pertaining to design/ programming have been assessed race, age, and income. Any variance between groups has been highlighted as to not over represent one group.
1% 2%
0.4% 1%
0%
Hispanic
Non-Hispanic White
Black
2018 Census Estimates
American Indian
Asian
Survey Respondents
Pacific Islander
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
34
INCOME AND DISADVANTAGED COMMUNITIES Much like our issues with racial demographics, our survey tended to over represent those that made
WHICH OF THESE CATEGORIES BEST DESCRIBES YOUR INCOME LAST YEAR? 50%
over $100,000 per year. However, many respondents opted to either not say their income or skip the
46% 45%
question entirely. However, a large portion of our respondents live either within a Disadvantaged Communities (DAC) census tract or a MTC
40%
Community of Concern (COC) census tract, 39% and 46% respectively. As stated earlier, both income and
35%
DAC and COC have been disaggregated and where there is a discrepancy between the overall figure and the subset, this will be highlighted.
30%
26% 25%
25%
22% 20% 18%
15%
14% 12% 11%
10% 8% 6% 5%
5%
4% 3%
0%
0%
0%
0
$1 - $14,999
0%
$15,000 $29,999
$30,000 $49,999
2018 Census
$50,000 $74,999
$75,000 $99,999
Survey Respondents
Over $100,000 Prefer not to say
Skipped
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
35
39%
46%
Respondents live in DAC Census Tracts
Respondents live in COC Census Tracts
WHAT ARE THE CLOSEST CROSS STREETS TO YOUR HOME?
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
36
HOW OLD ARE YOU? 50%
47%
45% 40%
36%
35% 30%
30% 25%
27% 24%
20% 15%
13% 11%
10%
10% 5% 0%
Under 18
19-44 2018 Census Estimates
45-65
65+
Survey Results
STUDENTS/YOUTH
SENIORS
While the study area has very high percentages of
Seniors consistently represented around 10% of
youth, it was exceptionally difficult to access this
our surveys throughout the 3 month engagement
population. After several months of attempts to
process. Senior centers were provided with
increase the student and youth respondents, we
printed surveys if they did not wish to do the
took the advice of both community members and
online survey. A phone number was also establish
the stakeholder committee to hire two youth to
to collect feedback from those that were less
improve these statistics. While 11% is still far lower
comfortable with online activities. Seniors were
than the 24% of youth in the area, this is an increase
also well represented in community meetings.
from the 7% we had previously. An additional 97
Pop-up presentations were given for the United
youth took the survey during their time.
Seniors of Oakland and Alameda County to increase awareness and engagement in this group.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
37
YOUTH AMBASSADORS
LISTS OF SCHOOLS AND CLUBS SUPPORTING OUTREACH • San Lorenzo High School • Arroyo High School • Kipp King Collegiate High School • Key Club • Druids • Latinos Unidos Club • San Lorenzo ASB
YOUTH AMBASSADOR METHODS On July 1st, two youth ambassadors from the
repost the survey. Not only on the Creekway page
Shopping Center, Lake Chabot, San Leandro Park,
community began their outreach efforts. The
but our personal Instagrams to get people to take
Meekland park, and the Ashland Reach Center.
following are their engagement methods in their
the survey. We were able to get ahold of some
Next, we put flyers in Downtown Hayward, the
words.
friends and clubs from Arroyo and San Lorenzo High
Japanese garden, and Downtown San Leandro.
School to post about the Creekway Project on their
We also were able to pass flyers out to homes that
The main method that we Ambassadors used for
Instagram stories and help promote the survey. Not
were near the Creekway. During the time of the
outreach and for the public to take the survey was
only were we able to post on Instagram but also
survey, we were able to go to many places that were
social media. We created an Instagram named
utilize our personal Snapchats to directly send the
very popular and where many people go. Sadly,
“slz_Creekway_ambassadors” that contains
survey to individuals. Social media played a big role
COVID-19 limited us to the number of people we
information that is both in English and Spanish. On
in boosting the number of people that took the
could talk to and eliminated direct interactions with
our Instagram, you can find information about the
survey and allowed information about the project to
the public. We weren’t able to get a hold of any
project, project goals, background information,
be accessible.
small businesses or cafes to spread flyers. We could
and frequently asked questions. It is user friendly
not utilize locations like libraries or community
and simple enough to provide information. On the
Another tactic that we used to attract more
centers. We were unable to use schools to directly
page, we also posted the link to the survey for the
people to take the survey was going to parks or
inform youth. However, we still were able to use
project. It sent up a way to directly provide further
locations alongside the creek. Additionally, we went
social media and flyers to help get our message
information and updates for individuals interested
to places with heavy foot traffic to put flyers up. The
across.
in the project. From there we would constantly
first week we were able to go to the Castro Valley
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
38
YOUTH AMBASSADOR BIOS “Since the path is closed, instead of my walk being a quick ten minute one, it takes me around half an hour to walk to school. ”
LORENZO GONZALEZ, ARROYO HS ‘21 The Creekway Project is an amazing idea and is
and workout, I usually have to run on the streets like
something that I’ve wanted to happen for a while.
Lewelling in order to get to the Marina. Lewelling
Ever since I was young, I remember dropping off
is a very dangerous route to take and I have had
my older brother at KIPP. I remember going to the
many close experiences to where I would almost
bridge and seeing him walk over to go to school
get into accidents. With the Creekway being open, I
and seeing many other people take the same path
would have safe and quick access to the Marina and
as well. It was an easy and effective way to get to
to school. I believe the community would benefit
and from the KIPP school. Now that I go to Arroyo
from this project since it gives everyone a place that
High School, I sometimes walk to school. Since the
could get people places quicker and also a place to
path is closed, instead of my walk being a quick
just enjoy.
ten minute one, it takes me around half an hour to walk to school. Not only would the Creekway be beneficial for highschoolers who live on the opposite side of the path, but it would make it a lot safer for people to exercise. Since I love to run
From Left to Right: Lorenzo Gonzalez, Lorenzo presenting the Youth Ambassador’s work to a San Lorenzo Creekway Stakeholder Committee Meeting Opposite Page: Diana Venegas, Instagram Story Posts from the San Lorenzo Creekway Ambassador’s Account
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
39
“The greatest factor for why the project is dear to me is how this project can bring together the community”
DIANA VENEGAS, SAN LORENZO HS ‘20
School Clubs and students can aid in the project from many high schools such as Arroyo, San
One of the multiple reasons why the San Lorenzo
piece of mind when sending off their children to
Lorenzo, and Kipp. There are community service
Creekway is so important to me is the potential
walk to school. Another reason that the Creekway
clubs that can aid in maintenance for the project.
impact the project has on my community. In so
Project is important to me is how environmentally
Not just maintenance, any event, or aspect where
many aspects the San Lorenzo Creekway project
it provides the possibility to reestablish native
service is needed they can aid. Druids at San
can touch mine and other’s day to day. From simply
species and be informative. It would allow nature
Lorenzo High School have a nursery with native
transportation perspective, the project can aid in
to be shared with my community. It would allow for
plants of California and they could provide the
facilitating and forming an easy route for people
a versatile trail to be just a walk away for families
plants for the creek way. Reach in Ashland can bring
to go to school, work, etc. It can be a safe way for
and create opportunities to learn more about native
members of the community and aid with public art.
students, adults, and families alike to get around. I
plants or animals. Also by providing a walking or
Those are just a few examples, not to mention bike
know various people who walk to and from school.
biking trail, it can help lower CO2 emissions and
projects or other internships involving the youth
There is always a risk when walking on the streets
push people to walk instead of driving.
that can be provided from the Creekway Project. In
whether it be because of cars, unsafe crosswalks,
so many realms the project can tie various groups
catcalling, and other dangers. Establishing a direct
Finally, for me, the greatest factor for why the
from the community from young to old. When the
route that eliminates those dangers would be
project is dear to me is how this project can bring
project is done it would leave a lasting impact on
beneficial to the community. It would give parents
together the community in so many aspects. High
the community.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
IMPACT OF YOUTH AMBASSADORS AGE
40
60% RACE/ETHNICITY OVER TIME
54%
The youth ambassadors significantly influenced more youth and student participation of the survey. Prior to their hiring, our lowest represented age
51%
50%
group was the under-18 category with only 7% despite census data indicating that nearly 1/4 of the population in this area was under-18. Furthermore, the 40-65 age group was over represented. 45% of
42%
40%
our respondents were in this age group compared with only 27% of the population. During the period that the youth ambassadors were conducting their outreach, these demographics shifted to 23% under
32%
30%
18 and 35% 40-65. All other age groups remained consistent. The youth ambassadors increased youth representation from 7% to 11%.
23%
20%
19%
RACE/ETHNICITY 15% 14% 13%
The unincorporated areas of Alameda County and Hayward are very ethnically diverse areas, with a Non-Hispanic white population as a minority at 23%. However, during the survey, the project
10%
7%
team noticed that our survey responses were
6% 6% 3%
disproportionately white. To address this, the youth ambassadors were charged reaching out to culturally specific groups to increase representation. Their efforts resulted in a 4% increase in Hispanic representation and 1% increase in Black representation. It also reduced the Non-Hispanic white representation to 51%.
0%
4%
3% 1%
1% 1% 1%
American Indian or Alaska Native
Another race Asian or Asian American
April-June
Black or African American
Hispanic or Latino
Youth Ambassador
2%
2%
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander
Total
White or Caucasian
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
41
AGE AND RESPONSE RATES OVER TIME
AGE OVER TIME
April-June
Youth Ambassadors
11% 7%
11%
10% 11%
23%
12%
12% 35%
14%
26%
45%
Total
41%
26%
26%
100 Under 18
18-30
30-40
40-65
90
Under 18
18-30
30-40
40-65
Over 65
Under 18
SURVEY LAUNCH
60
40 30 20 10 0
30-40
40-65
Over 65
YOUTH AMBASSADORS
2 ND COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
50
18-30
1 ST COMMUNITY WORKSHOP
80 70
Over 65
NEWSLETTER
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
42
HIGH POTENTIAL FOR MODAL SHIFT This area of Alameda County has a high
WHAT WOULD MOST ENCOURAGE YOU TO WALK OR BIKE MORE OFTEN?
dependence on driving. The current commute mode share for walking and biking is under 1% for the census tractsin the study area. Survey responses were similar, with 12% and 3% of people walking
Access to more destinations (parks, shops)
64%
Safer street crossings
61%
constrast, 46% of respondents drive everyday.
Better bike lanes
61%
Respondents also identified what would encourage
Wider sidewalks
and biking to get somewhere respectively. In
46%
them to walk or bike more often. Access to destinations, safer street crossings, and better bike lanes were the highest ranked motivations. Furthermore, from the qualitative section of the survey, it is evident that many people feel as though they have to drive because of the limited options
Slower traffic
39%
More street crossings
26%
Access to a bicycle
15% 0%
10%
for walking and biking in their neighborhood.
From Left to Right: Bike HAWK Beacon from Tucson, Protected Bicycle Lane in San Francisco, Ohlone Greenway in Richmond
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
43
“I would love to have access to more protected biking in the unincorporated areas! Whether using it to run errands or just for activity/exercise, a pathway/route like this would be phenomenal!” - Castro Valley Parent Age 35
HOW OFTEN DO YOU TYPICALLY...? 90%
85%
80%
70%
61% 60%
50%
57% 49% 46% 44%
42% 40%
35%34% 30%
20%
30%
29%
28% 25%
23%
19% 16% 13%
12%
11%
9%
10%
5%
4%
5%
3%
3%
1%
5% 6%
0%
Walk/jog for exercise
Walk to get somewhere
Bike for exercise
Every day
Bike to get somewhere
Multiple times a week
Use scooters
1-2 times a month
Use public transit Never
Drive
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
44
DESIGN FEATURES Ensuring safe crossings ranked very highly on both
WHAT WOULD BE YOUR BIGGEST MOTIVATION TO USE THE TRAIL?
what would encourage respondents to bike or walk more and the most important design features with 90% of respondents saying safe crossings are very important. This was also reiterated in the community workshops. 84% of respondents voiced
Complete separation from cars
29%
Connect with nature
29%
a desire for more trees and plantings. Tied for Improve health
third most cited design feature were Lighting/Safe
17%
Sightlines and Wayfind. Improve the environment
13%
Plazas and outdoor classrooms were the most likely to either have neutral sentiments or negative
Help save money
sentiments, with 18%-19% of respondents expressing no interest in these features.
9%
Convient way to get to school
4%
0%
From Left to Right: Trail Exercising, Opportunities for plantings, Trail Wayfinding
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
45
“Very often the San Lorenzo Creek is an obstacle to cycling because there are not that many roads crossing over it, so I have to figure out some work around. With the Creekway project, I would be able to just ride along the Creek to the next crossing. It would also make the Creek a destination for me, because it would be a new route to explore.”
HOW IMPORTANT ARE THE FOLLOWING POTENTIAL FEATURES TO THE DESIGN OF THE FUTURE SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY?
- San Leandro Resident Age 45 100%
90%
90% 84%
83%
83% 80%
70%
61% 60%
59% 57%
55% 50%
49%
50%
56%
46% 44% 41%
40%
40%
38% 35% 32%
30% 25%
23% 20%
18%
19% 16% 13%
13% 10% 6%
13% 7%
7%
6%
5%
13%
4%
4%
4%
3%
0%
Outdoor Classrooms
Plazas
Water fountains
Public Art
Separation between Biking and Walking
Bridges
Very Important
Interpretive Signage
Neutral
Seating
Not Interested
Lighting/ Safe Sightlines
Wayfinding
Trees/Planting
Safe Crossings
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
46
TOP DESTINATIONS As mentioned previously, access to more
The second most popular category was shops
destinations was the largest motivator for modal
and shopping centers, with the Greenhouse
shift with 64% of respondents citing its importance.
Marketplace and Downtown Hayward as the most
We asked respondents to list out all potential
popular.
MOST CITED DESTINATIONS BY TYPE 10% 6%
27%
specific destinations. These were organized into 6 types: schools, community centers, parks, work,
Schools and Transit tied, with San Lorenzo High
transit, and shops. Over 150 destinations were
School, Arroyo High School and Hayward BART all
identified from the community.
being popular destinations. It is unsurprising that
11%
our results for access to schools heavily skews to Access to parks and open space was the most
high schools that are immediately adjacent to the
important kind of destination according to the
site as our youth ambassadors have connections
survey with 36% of respondents listing at least one
at these schools. However, connections to other
park. The SF Bay Trail and Meek Park were the two
schools will also be prioritized.
10% 36%
most popular. Community Centers included San Lorenzo Community Center and Hayward Senior Center.
School
Work
Community Center
Transit
Parks
Shops
COMMUNITY STATED CREEKWAY DESTINATIONS SCHOOLS
COMMUNITY CENTERS
PARKS
WORK
TRANSIT
SHOPS
1. San Lorenzo High School
1. San Lorenzo Community Center
1. SF Bay Trail
1. Hesperian Blvd
1. Hayward BART
2. Arroyo High School
2. Hayward Senior Center
2. Meek Park
2. Mission Blvd
3. Don Castro
3. Work from Home
2. AC Transit Bus Stations (various)
1. The Greenhouse Marketplace
4. Cull Canyon
4. San Lorenzo High School
3. Bay Fair BART
3. Creekside Center
4. Castro Valley BART
4. Hesperian Blvd
5. Downtown Hayward
5. Amtrak
5. Castro Valley Blvd
3. Grant Elementary 4. Del Rey Elementary 5. KIPP King Collegiate High School
3. St. John’s Church 4. REACH Ashland Youth Center 5. Cherryland Community Center
5. Carlos Bee Park
2. Downtown Hayward
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
47
DO YOU GO TO DESTINATIONS NEAR THE SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY? TOP DESTINATIONS
Destinations correspond with those numbered on the previous page (26).
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
48
ENTRANCES Of all respondents, the Hesperian Boulevard was the most cited entrance to the Creekway with 28%
TOP ENTRANCES (TOTAL)
% OF RESPONDENTS
TOP ENTRANCES (DAC ONLY)
% OF DAC RESPONDENTS
D. HESPERIAN BLVD
28%
E. MEEKLAND AVE.
39%
A. SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL
22%
D. HESPERIAN BLVD
37%
C. WASHINGTON AVE
22%
F. MEEK PARK
33%
the highest proportion of respondents’ homes were
E. MEEKLAND AVE.
22%
C. WASHINGTON AVE
27%
in San Lorenzo, this would be expected. When
F. MEEK PARK
20%
G. HAMPTON RD
23%
filtering for DAC residents, this balance shifts, with fewer respondents citing the San Francisco Bay Trail
B. KIPP KING COLLEGIATE HIGH SCHOOL
19%
B. KIPP KING COLLEGIATE HIGH SCHOOL
23%
as a key entrance. The entrances that are between
N. REDWOOD RD.
16%
A. SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL
19%
Cherryland and Ashland, including Meek Park,
G. HAMPTON RD
15%
H. MISSION BLVD
15%
Meekland Ave, and Hampton Rd are all popular
M. A ST.
14%
M. A ST.
7%
O. CENTER ST.
13%
I. GROVE WAY
7%
Q. CULL CANYON
13%
K. FOOTHILL BLVD.
7%
H. MISSION BLVD
13%
N. REDWOOD RD.
6%
P. DON CASTRO REGIONAL REC AREA
13%
P. DON CASTRO REGIONAL REC AREA
6%
I. GROVE WAY
12%
Q. CULL CANYON
5%
K. FOOTHILL BLVD.
11%
L. 2ND ST.
3%
L. 2ND ST.
10%
O. CENTER ST.
2%
J. HAZEL AVE
4%
J. HAZEL AVE
2%
of respondents including it as an entrance they would use. The San Francisco Bay Trail, Washington Ave, and Meekland Ave all tied for second. Since
entrances.
“There are very few safe ways to connect from the inland hills to the shoreline. This should be one of many biking/walking paths through the bay area. My partner and I would definitely use this path to bike into San Lorenzo and Hayward. ” - San Leandro Resident Age 33
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
49
WHERE WOULD YOU MOST LIKELY ENTER THE CREEKWAY? 1. HESPERIAN BLVD
3. MEEK PARK
2. SF BAY TRAIL
2. MEEKLAND AVE 2. WASHINGTON AVE
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
50
PROGRAMMING Public safety was the largest concern around programming with 80% of respondents said that volunteer crews cleaning up and maintaining safety were very important to this project. 44% of respondents said that park ambassadors on bikes were very important, however an equal amount of respondents were neutral to this recommendation. 60% of respondents said that nature walks were very important. Of all the other programming options, the majority of respondents were neutral to the options. No programming options were strongly opposed by respondents, with cultural performances and mural artwork have15% and 16% opposition, respectively.
Clockwise from Top: Nature Walk Potential near the Bay Trail, Bike Ambassadors in Chicago, Ohlone Greenway Clean-Up Day Poster, Ohlone Greenway Volunteer Clean-up Crew
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
51
“Area that is safe with plenty of lighting and creek rangers. ” HOW IMPORTANT ARE THE FOLLOWING POTENTIAL ACTIVITIES TO THE FUTURE SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY?
- Hayward Parent Age 45
90%
80%
80%
70%
60%
60%
55%
54% 50%
48% 44%
45% 42%
40% 34% 31% 29%
30%
20% 17%
15% 11%
16%
10%
10% 6% 4% 0%
Volunteer crews to help keep the path clean and safe
Nature walks
Park ambassadors on bikes
Very Important
Chaperone-led walking groups for children going to school
Neutral
Not interested
Mural arts events
Cultural performing arts events
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
52
KEY CONCLUSIONS
did not support the idea of the Creekway.
“I grew up in the Cherryland/Ashland community and think it’s time that we get the same level of green and healthy community features that places like San Lorenzo and Castro Valley have always had. I think it’s fine to have more opportunities for low-income, households of color to have access to a network of community centers and healthy food options/produce at affordable options. The creek way can connect these things together. It’s time. Thank you.”
While overall support was strong, there was more
Hayward Resident, Age 33
The main conclusion from the survey was that there
DO YOU SUPPORT THE CREEKWAY?*
is overwhelming support for this kind of facility in this area. At the end of the survey, an open-ended response was included to share their “vision” for the Creekway. Those that opposed it used this to
10%
voice this opinion. Those that strongly supported it gave insight into their reasoning. The graph to
10%
the left is taken from any respondent that included an open ended response. 80% of those that did strongly supported the idea of the Creekway. 10% had some support but with reservations
80%
predominantly around public safety. And just 10%
nuance to the key design features that should be included. Public Safety, access to key destinations, safe crossings, trees/planting, a shared use
Support
path, and wayfinding were all takeways from the
Support with Reservations
workshops and the survey.
Does not Support Many respondents offered to volunteer to help make this project a reality, and many expressed a resounding need for more public spaces that were not dedicated to cars. Residents stated that this has become increasingly evident during the pandemic, and that need is particularly acute in the unincorporated areas of Alameda County.
*N=440. While the survey received 938 responses, the vision question was optional.
“I would love to see something like this happen. It would be amazing. ” - San Lorenzo Resident Age 23
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
53
PUBLIC SAFETY
ACCESS TO KEY DESTINATIONS
TREES/PLANTING
SHARED USE PATH
WAYFINDING/ SIGNAGE
LIGHTING
A public safety strategy
Connecting to key
Connections to nature
While there was less
Robust wayfinding for
Lack of lighting
must be incorporated
destinations along
and open space was
of a consensus in the
nearby destinations was
specifically was raised
early on in all aspects
the Creekway was a
a priority for much
survey data around
seen as both necessary
often as a safety
of the planning and
consistent theme.
of the community,
seperation of bicycle
and an opportunity for
concern multiple
design of the Creekway.
Access to more
even when there was
and pedestrians, the
education and increase
times. Because the
This would include
destiantions was the
a recognition of the
community workshop
in community identity.
trail is meant to be
community strategies
largest motivator for
limited possibilities of
and stakeholder groups
Particularly, there was a
use all year round as a
beyond enforcement
using the Creekway,
adding additional green
made it clear that a
desire for incorporation
transportation option,
but also environmental
meaning that without
space. Planting should
shared use path would
indigenous narratives.
adequate lighting will
design strategies
good connections to
be places wherever it is
be the preferred facility
including well designed
local destinations, the
feasible.
type
fencing and well placed
Creekway will be less
areas for lingering
usable.
be required.
4
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY BUILDING THE VISION
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
56
BUILDING A VISION FOR THE CREEKWAY The San Lorenzo Creekway Master Plan has been built through an extensive community visioning process. As a complement to the findings and design guidance developed in the previous community engagement chapter, this chapter compiles many of the high-level conceptual designs that have been informed by that process. The following topics are summarized in this chapter: - San Lorenzo Creekway Plan - Typical Cross-sections - Detailed Creekway sections - Creekway Entrances Plan - Detailed entrances and safe crossings plans - Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety - Public Art - Public Safety - Ecology & History - Connections to Key Destinations - Ideas & Inspiration
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY PLAN Figure 4-1: San Lorenzo Creekway Plan
57
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
58
TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS Figure 4-2 : San Lorenzo Creekway Cross Section - Concrete Channel
The majority of the length of San Lorenzo Creek is channelized. The Creekway inhabits the flood control access road areas adjacent to the channel wall.
Figure 4-3: San Lorenzo Creekway Cross Section - Embankment
The San Lorenzo Creek has a wider cross section closer to the Bay. In this case, the Creekway inhabits the flood control access road areas at the top of the earthen embankment.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
59
DETAILED CREEKWAY SECTION Figure 4-4: Typical Shared Use Path Components
The main components of the shared use path include a typical 12’ pathway, a safety railing along the edge of the creek channel wall, and a privacy fence along on the outer edge of the flood control property.
Figure 4-5: Typical Shared Use Path Components in Amenit y Zones
In areas where there are entrances or other areas with additional width available, these areas have been labelled on the concept plans as Amenity Zones. This section shows how seating might be incorporated along the outside edge of the pathway.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
60
CREEKWAY ENTRANCES Figure 4-6: San Lorenzo Creekway Key Entrances
The design of the San Lorenzo Creekway emphasizes the importance for
the Creekway show how some of the major barriers and challenges are being
increased safety and accessibility in areas that have historically been major
addressed, and what the opportunities are for improvement. More detailed
barriers for the community. The following examples of major entrances along
layouts are in the concept plans chapter of this document.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
61
ENTRANCES & SAFE CROSSINGS Figure 4-7: Meekland Ave Entrance
The Meekland Ave entrances have been designed to navigate the major barrier presented by the bridge structure, as shown in the existing photo above. In this case, the access ramps down to the main elevation of the Creekway will be designed to maintain accessibility and safety. The Amenity Zones adjacent to the main pathway offer opportunites for lighting, seating, planting, and signage.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
62
Figure 4-8: Washington Ave Entrances
The Washington Ave entrances are navigating a bridge structure barrier similar to Meekland, as shown in the existing photo above. Similarly in this case, the access ramps down to the main elevation of the Creekway will be designed to maintain accessibility and safety. A new at-grade crossing is proposed using a lighted pedestrian and bicycle beacon at the crosswalk. This areas is also a transition for the Creekway where the path goes from being on both sides of the creek to the north side only, you can see a new pedestrian bridge that will serve to connect the communities on both sides of the creek. The Amenity Zones adjacent to the main pathway offer opportunites for lighting, seating, planting, and signage.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
63
Figure 4-9: San Lorenzo High School Entrance
The design of the San Lorenzo High School entrance requires a new bicycle and pedestrian crossing over the creek and an undercrossing at the Union Pacific Railroad as shown. The railway bridge structure is shown in the existing photo above. The undercrossing structures and clearances needed are detailed in the concept plan chapter.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
64
Figure 4-10: Hesperian Blvd Entrance
The Hesperian Blvd entrance and crossing navigates major high-traffic thoroughfares and interstate off-ramps to connect the pathway through the community. In this case, the crossing at Hesperian Blvd is at-grade, at an existing intersection. The pathway would divert away from the creek’s edge through a low-traffic residential area along Albion Ave before reconnecting down to the typical creek-side condition. The designs are detailed in the concept plan chapter. In this case, an opportunity for an expanded Amenity Zone exists along the creekside near Embers Way on County property, as shown.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
65
BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY Bike and pedestrian safety was of the utmost importance to the design process for the San Lorenzo Creekway. By prioritizing infrastructure that is safe, low-stress and separated wherever possible, the Creekway can maximize the potential for modal shift. The goal for the Creekway was to create a bicycle and walking facility that even the most risk averse populations would feel comfortable using and minimize all potential conflicts. Multi-use paths constitute the majority of the Creekway, however, where that is not feasible protected bicycle lanes and bike boulevards have
Protected Bike Lanes, Sacramento, CA
Multi-use Path, Ohlone Greenway
Bike Boulevards, Berkeley, CA
Intersections, Fremont , CA
been introduced. Intersections are often the most dangerous along bike and pedestrian facilities. Special attention was paid to intersection with both physical improvements (protected intersections and traffic calming) and temporal improvements (signal strategies). Low Stress Facilities: •
Protected Bike Lanes
•
Multi-use Path
•
Bike Boulevards
Intersections •
Protected intersections
•
Signal strategies
•
Traffic calming
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
66
PUBLIC ART
Ar t and signage locations along the trail
Murals
Plazas and Gathering Spaces at major entrances
PUBLIC ART
PUBLIC SAFET Y
As a new public space throughout these communities, the San Lorenzo
A robust public safety approach that thinks beyond enforcement will be vital
Creekway provides multiple opportunities to integrate public art along the
to the success of the Creekway. To achieve this, HARD and the flood control
corridor. This can take the form of signage or installations, murals, or public
district will employ a number of tactics. The approach will prioritize community
plazas and gathering spaces at key nodes along the Creekway. The public art
based solutions coupled with designs that lend themselves to public safety. The
can serve dual purposes by establishing an identity for the Creekway itself and
intent is to create a Creekway where all feel welcome and safe. Maintenance,
also bringing to light the community identity of these unincorporated areas.
programming, and ambassadors are all methods of ensuring adequate
Public art can also serve as a draw to invite community members to explore
oversight of the space. Open sightlines, usability, and creating spaces that are
various destinations along the full extent of the Creekway.
defensible are all design responses for addressing public safety.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
67
PUBLIC SAFETY
Open sightlines and entrance lighting
Usabilit y
Ambassadors or Patrol
Defensible Space
Programming
Maintenance
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
68
ECOLOGY AND STEWARDSHIP
Native planting oppor tunit y at entrances
Planting along the top of the embankments
Interpretive Signage oppor tunities focused on Riparian Ecology
There are several opportunities to introduce more ecologically beneficial
amenities comply with City and County ordinances to provide sufficient setback
systems throughout the Creekway, including plantings and shade trees at
from the creek and conservation easement areas.
entrances and where flood control clearances allow along the Creekway. The areas outside of the county flood control zones offer additional opportunities
The Creekway also provides opportunities to increase education about the
for trees and planting areas in the Upper San Lorenzo Creek areas.
ecosystems that exist along the creek. The Creekway will expand and promote
The specific location of trees and planting opportunities will be encouraged
the stewardship of the creek by bringing people in closer contact with the
and defined in detail in the next phases of design development. In addition,
ecosystem and by acknowledging our resposibility to maintain and protect our
final designs for the creek will ensure the design of the trail alignments and
natural resources.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
69
CONNECTIONS TO KEY DESTINATIONS
Connection to Schools
Connection to Trails, Parks, and Open Space
The Creekway must connect to key destinations that are nearby, including schools, work, retail, and open spaces. This ensures that the Creekway serves multiple purposes beyond simply recreation for these communities.
Connection to Downtown Hayward
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
CREEKWAY AMENITY ZONES Figure 4-11: Creekway Amenit y Zones Map
70
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
AMENIT Y ZONES
71
Figure 4-12 : Creekway Elements
In addition to the key entrances and access points along the San Lorenzo Creekway, there are several opportunity areas where important features like seating, lighting, shade trees where possible, trash receptacles and signage will be designed to create a welcoming and safe place. To be
5
attractive, comfortable, safe, inspiring, and easy to
3
use, the Creekway needs more than just the trail itself. It needs furnishings: places to sit, places to
4
park a bike, and shaded places to gather. It needs barriers and fences and lighting in certain areas. It needs signs to announce trail entrances, to direct
7 2
people toward destinations, and to give the trails a clear identity. And it needs art to add beauty and meaning.
1
The important characteristics of these trail elements are summarized in the following pages. The concept plans indicate where various amenity zones will be located along the Creekway. The specific locations will be determined in the next phases of design
6
development.
1.Seating with Creek View
5. Wayfinding and Interpretive Signage
2. Hand Railing
6. Ground Wayfinding
3. Privacy Fencing
7. Public Art - Mural
4. Pedestrian Bridge
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
72
IDEAS & INSPIRATION FOR THE CREEKWAY
Paving
Seating
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
Lighting
Way finding
73
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
Hand-railing
Fencing
74
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
Shade Structure
Furnishing
75
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
76
PARTNERSHIPS
REACH outdoor classroom Source: reachashland.org/
HARD’s service area includes many overlapping
EDUCATION
jurisdictions and active community-based
The Creekway will provide new settings for HARD’s
organizations. At each stage, HARD will implement,
recreation programming. We look forward to
maintain, and manage or open space and trail
sharing the trails as educational spaces with schools
system with a little help from our friends.
and youth organziations like REACH, too.
TRAIL PLANNING + DEVELOPMENT
ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION
Agency and community partners have been part of
ecological restoration along their routes. Ecological
the master planning process, with representatives
stewardship over time will require ongoing
from the City of Hayward, Alameda County, and
partnership with community-based groups like
community and advocacy groups on the Steering
Friends of San Lorenzo Creek.
Committee.
Creating new trails can go hand in hand with
SOCIAL SERVICES
The system’s development will rely on our
In some places, trail development may take place
government partners as well as developers.
in areas where people experiencing homelessness
MAINTENANCE + SAFET Y HARD will have primary responsibility for
camp. And throughout the trail system, it will be critical to make sure all members of the community feel safe on trails.
maintaining the Creekway. We will share that
Downtown Streets Team Source: www.streetsteam.org/hayward
responsibility with Alameda County Flood Control
HARD’s rangers will coordinate with the City of
District where trails use ACFCD access roads.
Hayward, the Alameda County Sheriff’s Office,
Developers will maintain certain trail segments,
the Alameda County Social Services Agency, Bay
based on development agreements. And we look
Area Community Services, and others to ensure
forward to partnering with the Downtown Streets
public safety and support people in need. These
Team as well as local volunteers to help keep our
partnerships have begun during the planning
trails clean and safe.
process.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
Table 4-13: Par tnerships
77
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
78
ACTIONS HARD will proceed to lay the groundwork for the San Lorenzo Creekway, including the following.
AGENCY COLLABORATION IN PLANNING
segments and crossings. • Railroads. HARD will need to coordinate with railroad owners for safe pedestrian and bike crossings along the San Lorenzo Creekway. • PG&E. PG&E’s utility corridor has already
HARD will continue to engage each of our key
allowed HARD to create park space and walking
agency partners in understanding and working
paths. We will seek to continue our arrangement,
together to realize the trail system vision.
and expand to the east and west.
Specifically: • Alameda County Flood Control District owns and manages access roads along San Lorenzo Creek as well as other channels where we envision creating trails. • Alameda County Public Works is responsible for streets in unincorporated areas in our service area, and for implementing the Alameda County Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. Those improvements will be a foundation for some of our trails, including the eastern segments of San Lorenzo Creekway. • Hayward Public Works is responsible for streets within city limits, and for implementing the City of Hayward Bike and Pedestrian Master Plan. • Hayward Area Shoreline Planning Agency is planning to implement improvements to protect infrastructure, recreation and other facilities from flooding while helping adapt to sea level rise. • Caltrans has jurisdiction over freeways and major arterials for which we will need to coordinate trail
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
79
FUNDING SOURCES AND PROJECT IDENTIFICATION
PUBLIC ART AND CULTURE STRATEGY
As of this writing, HARD has applied for grant
HARD will create a strategy to infuse the trail
funding for the San Lorenzo Creekway through
system with art and cultural representation. This
Caltrans’ Active Transportation Program (ATP), and
will involve collaboration with historians, biologists,
the California Natural Resource Agency’s Urban
local artists, tribal representatives, community and
Greening program. We will continue to research and
youth groups and others.
monitor funding sources and define projects that can be competitive for grants.
DEVELOPER AND EASEMENT AGREEMENTS
OPEN SPACE AND ECOLOGICAL RESTORATION STRATEGY HARD will define standards for open space along trail corridors, including plant palettes, ecological
HARD will develop a standard agreement for trail
restoration needs and opportunities for partnering
easements through private property created as
with community volunteers.
part of future development. This agreement will maintenance and management, with clear roles for
TRAIL MAINTENANCE AND MANAGEMENT PLAN
each party. This agreement can serve as a template
HARD will define how trails will be maintained
to be modified to suit circumstances at each site.
and managed, including maintenance schedules,
establish terms for trail design, construction,
WAYFINDING SIGNAGE PROGRAM HARD will create a wayfinding signage program for the Creekway, including branding for the system, identification of sign types, and specifications for where signs will be placed.
hours of operation, ranger patrols, and roles and responsibilities as they apply to HARD and our partners. The public safety team created during the trail planning process will be leveraged.
5
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLANS
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
82
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLANS vision relies on the coordination and partnership
URBAN GREENING GRANT APPLICATION CONCEPT PLANS
of multiple agencies and community groups in the
The upper third of the San Lorenzo Creekway was
area. Funding for the construction on the Creekway
submitted to an Urban Greening grant program run
will largely be based on a collection of grant
by the California Natural resources Agency in July
seeking efforts.
2020. Unfortunately, that grant was not successful in
The implementation of the San Lorenzo Creekway
ATP GRANT APPLICATION CONCEPT PLANS In September 2020, the lower two-thirds of the
that round of funding. The designs for the ‘Upper San Lorenzo Creekway’ as it was called are included in this chapter, and other grant opportunties will continue to be explored.
Creekway project was submitted to the Caltrans Active Tranportation Program for over $23 million
Note:
dollars by HARD and the County. This application
Final designs for the creek will ensure the design of
includes construction costs for the capital
the trail alignments and amenities comply with City
improvements, but also include major funds for
and County ordinances to provide sufficient setback
safe routes to school programming efforts in
from the creek and conservation easement areas.
corrdination with Alameda County Public Health. The programming component for the ATP grant is not documented in this master plan.
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
83
Figure 1-2 : San Lorenzo Creekway
ATP GRANT SEGMENTS
URBAN GREENING SEGMENTS
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
84
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLANS ATP GRANT APPLICATION SEGMENTS
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
85
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
CONCEPT PLAN SET
CONSULTANTS
SHEET INDEX L0.0 COVER SHEET L0.1-1 KEY PLAN L0.1-2 KEY PLAN L0.2 GENERAL NOTES L1-1 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT A L1-2 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT A L1-3 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT A L1-4 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT A L1-5 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT A L1-6 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT A L1-7 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT A L1-8 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT A L1-9 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT B L1-10 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT B L1-11 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT B L1-12 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT B L1-13 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT C L1-14 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT C L1-15 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT C L1-16 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT C L1-17 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT C L1-18 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT C L1-19 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT C L1-20 CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN - SEGMENT C L2-1 CREEKWAY TYPICAL CROSS SECTIONS L2-2 UPRR BRIDGE UNDERCROSSING SECTION NEAR BAY TRAIL L2-3 UPRR BRIDGE UNDERCROSSING SECTION NEAR SAN LORENZO HIGH SCHOOL
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
ADD CONCEPT PL AN SHEETS
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Job No: Date:
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
N/A
Drawing Title:
COVER SHEET
Drawing No:
L0.0
RZ CB
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
86
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
SEGMENT A - BAY TRAIL TO WEST OF SAN LORENZO HIGH SCHOOL
SEGMENT B
HESPERIAN BLVD
LEWELLING AVE ALBION AVE
BLVD
L1-9 UP
HESPERIAN
Y
L1-7
L1-8
RR
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
IAN
ER
SP
HE
80
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
HI
G
HW
AY
VD
BL
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
I-8
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
AN
L1-2
GR
RR
UP
L1-1
E
V TA
WA
L1-2
N AVE
L1-3
INGTO
L1-3
WASH
L1-4
L1-6 L1-6
RS BE EM
L1-4
L1-5
ALBION AVE
L1-1 Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
Drawing Title:
KEY PLAN
Drawing No:
L0.1-1
RZ CB
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
87
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
SEGMENT C MISSION BLVD TO A & 4TH ST
SEGMENT B WEST OF SAN LORENZO HIGH SCHOOL TO MISSION BLVD
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
LEWELLING AVE
L1-10 L1-10
L1-11
L1-13
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY APPLICANT: HARD
L1-14
REDWOOD RD(HAYWARD AREA PARK AND
RECREATION DISTRICT)
AY
W
L
IL BL
L1-15
VD
L1-15
TH
RO
G
N 6TH ST
O
VE
FO
R
PR
U
E
AV
L1-14
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
VD
ND
BL
LA
N
O
SI
IS
M
EK
ME
L1-12 L1-11
L1-13
L1-16
E
L ZE
AV
L1-19
L1-20
HA
L1-17
L1-18
4T
H
A
ST
ST
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Job No: Date:
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
Drawing Title:
KEY PLAN
Drawing No:
L0.1-2
RZ CB
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
88
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
GENERAL NOTES
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 3
TOTAL BY SEGMENT
SEGMENT A
9
11
2
22
SEGMENT B
1
8
1
10
SEGMENT C
4
7
1
10
TOTAL BY TYPE
14
26
4
44 SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
NOTES: AMENITY ZONE TYPE1 AND 2 INCLUDE ENHANCED PAVING, BENCHES, TRASH RECEPTACLES, WAYFINDING SIGNAGE, AND LIGHTING. AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1 WILL HAVE 2 SHADE TREES
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
IN EACH AREA TO BE DESIGNED ALONG WITH THE OTHER ELEMENTS LISTED. AMENITY ZONE TYPE 3 INDICATE UNDERCROSSING IMPROVEMENTS WHICH FOCUS PRIMARILY ON LIGHTING
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Job No: Date: Scale:
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
8072.06 08/24/20
N/A
Drawn By: Checked By:
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
GENERAL NOTES
Drawing No:
L0.3
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
89
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
MATCH LINE 1
BAY TRAIL EXISTING PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
SAN LORENZO CREEK
EXISTING BAY TRAIL
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
N
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
12'-0"
BEGIN SEGMENT A
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1 SEE NOTE REMOVE THE GATE FROM THE EXISTING FENCE
SAN LORENZO CREEK
Key Plan Rev
Job No: Date:
Creekway (Class I Path)
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
EXISTING BAY TRAIL CONNECTOR TO HAYWARD REGIONAL SHORELINE PARKING LOT Opportunity Area
Date
12'-0"
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1 SEE NOTE REMOVE THE GATE FROM THE EXISTING FENCE
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
MATCH LINE 2
MATCH LINE 1
EXISTING BAY TRAIL
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
Drawing No:
Property Line
0
Checked By:
RZ CB
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT A
N
Proposed Creekway Fence
Drawn By:
AS SHOWN
Drawing Title:
40
80'
L1-1
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
90
CITY OF SAN LEANDRO PARCEL
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
12'-0"
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 3
Planning & Design
12'-0"
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
12'-0"
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
12'-0"
NE 3
Creekway (Class I Path)
Key Plan Rev
REMOVE THE EXISTING FENCE
Job No:
EXISTING GATE OPERATED BY KIPP HIGH SCHOOL
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Property Line
Checked By:
RZ CB
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT A Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Drawn By:
AS SHOWN
Drawing Title:
N
KIPP King Collegiate High School
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
MATCH LINE 4
MATCH LI
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE SAN LORENZO CREEK
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
EXISTING GATE
N
RAILROAD AVE
1 L2-2
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
Opportunity Area
CONSULTANTS
MATCH LINE 3
MATCH LINE 2
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 3
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
EXISTING RAILROAD BRIDGE
PROPOSED UPRR BRIDGE UNDERCROSSING
SAN LORENZO CREEK
WICKS BLVD
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
0
40
80'
L1-2
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
91
VINING DRIVE
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
12'-0"
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
CONSULTANTS
MATCH LINE 5
MATCH LINE 4
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
SAN LORENZO CREEK
12'-0"
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
N
MATCH LINE 6
VINING DRIVE PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
12'-0"
MATCH LINE 5
RENZO
SAN LO
CREEK
Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
ARROYO HIGH SCHOOL
Creekway (Class I Path)
Property Line
0
RZ CB
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT A Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Checked By:
Drawing Title:
N
Opportunity Area
Drawn By:
AS SHOWN
40
80'
L1-3
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
92
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
CONSULTANTS
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
" 12'-0
MATCH LINE 8
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
" 12'-0
NL
SA
EK
RE
OC
NZ
E OR
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
VIA BREGANI
N
SAN LOR
ENZO C
t
S er
REEK
ram
MATCH LINE 9
12
" '-0 12
"
'-0
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
MATCH LINE 8
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
ni
rega
Via B
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
MATCH LINE 8
K
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT A
N
Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
0
40
80'
L1-4
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
93
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AND 10' WIDE BICYCLE CROSSING
PEDESTRIAN HYBRID BEACON (PHB) PHB CALL BUTTON WITH ADVANCED DETECTION FOR BIKES 50'-0"
PHB CALL BUTTON WITH ADVANCED DETECTION FOR BIKES
RAMP FOLLOWS EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
12'-0"
6'-0"
50'-0"
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
O CREEK
SAN LORENZ
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
'-0 12 SA
N
LO
RE
NZ
O
CR
EE
K
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
Wi
llia
m
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
MATCH LINE 10
Ronconi Dr
INE 9
CH L
MAT
VIA BREGANI
AVE
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
WASHINGTON AVE
ENZO
LOR
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY.
"
12'-0"
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
Dr
Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
0 Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
40
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT A
80' N Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
L1-5
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
94
Planning & Design
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
PROPOSED FENCE GATE
SAN
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
LOR
ENZ
OC
MATCH LINE 11
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
REE
K
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
N
MATCH LINE 12
12'-0"
MATCH LINE 11
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
MATCH LINE 10
12'-0"
CONSULTANTS
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
SAN LORENZ
O CREEK
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
N
Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
Checked By:
RZ CB
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT A Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Drawn By:
AS SHOWN
Drawing Title:
Property Line
0
40
80'
L1-6
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
95
BIKE RAMP
MODIFY EXISTING SIGNAL TO INSTALL NORTH CROSSWALK AND PROTECTED WB RIGHT-TURNS 12' WIDE SHARED USE SIDEWALK
12'-0"
80
8'-0"
PROPOSED CLASS III BIKE SHARROWS
MATCH LINE 13
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
HI
G
HW
AY
EM
SAN
BE
RS
AY
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ADA RAMP
'-0
"
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
ENZ
LOR
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
EXISTING BIKELANE
12' WIDE SHARED USE SIDEWALK
FUTURE SIGNAGE WALL BUILT BY ACPWA
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
LVD
RIAN B
HESPE
PROPOSED STOP SIGN
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
EK
RE OC
ADA RAMP
W
12
2 INE 1 CH L
MAT
I-8
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
8' WIDE NEW SIDEWALK
ALBION AVE
SIDEWALK BARRIER
RAMP TO SIDEWALK
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING 10' WIDE BIDIRECTIONAL CYCLE CROSSING
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
Planning & Design
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
0
40
80'
Creekway (Class I Path)
Sidewalk + Class III bikeway (Sharrows)
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
Checked By:
RZ CB
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT A
N
Opportunity Area
Drawn By:
AS SHOWN
Drawing Title:
L1-7
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
96
Planning & Design
LEWELLING BLVD
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
BIKE RAMP PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
CONSULTANTS
VIA GRANADA
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2 RAMP TO STREET
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
8'-0"
PROPOSED CLASS III BIKE SHARROWS
8' WIDE NEW SIDEWALK
RAMP TO STREET AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
ENHANCE THE EXISTING GATE TO OPERABLE GATE FOR VEHICLE ACCESS
PROPOSED CLASS III BIKE SHARROWS
MATCH LINE 13
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
9'-11 3/8"
"
'-0
12
MATCH LINE 14
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
RAMP SLOPE
ADA RAMPS (TYP.) BIKE RAMP VIA GRANADA
SAN LORE
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
NZO CREE
K
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
VIA CORDOBA
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Job No: Date:
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
0 Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
Sidewalk + Class III bikeway (Sharrows)
40
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT A
80' N
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
Drawing No:
L1-8
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
97
Planning & Design
SAN LORENZO HIGH SCHOOL Un io
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
n ic cif Pa
CONSULTANTS
Ra
FUTURE SIDEWALKS AND CLASS IV BIKE LANES TO BE BUILT BY ACPWA
oa ilr d
LEWELLING BLVD AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
io n Ra d
oa
ilr
POTENTIAL EASEMENT ACQUIRED BY HARD
MATCH LINE 15
ic cif Pa
MATCH LINE 14
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
10'-0"
12'-0"
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 3
END SEGMENT A. BEGIN SEGMENT B
SAN LORENZO CREEK
1 L2-3
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
Un
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
UPRR BRIDGE UNDERCROSSING EXISTING RAILROAD BRIDGE
VIA CORDOBA
Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
0 Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
40
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT B
80' N Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
L1-9
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
98
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
MATCH LINE 16
MATCH LINE 15 PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
N
PROPOSED STOP SIGN
MEEKLAND AVE
FUTURE BIKE LANES TO BE BUILT BY ACPWA
PROPOSED RAISED 12' WIDE CROSSING AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
MATCH LINE 16
ENHANCE THE EXISTING GATE TO OPERABLE GATE FOR VEHICLE ACCESS
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2 ENTRANCE RAMP
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
PROPOSED RAISED 12' WIDE CROSSING
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
MATCH LINE 17
ENTRANCE RAMP
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
PROPOSED STOP SIGN
Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT B
N Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
0
40
80'
L1-10
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
99
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
Un
ion
EXISTING ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS
Planning & Design
Pa
cif
ic
10'-0"
Ra
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
ilro
ad
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
CK
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
SA
NL
MA
OR
N
CONSULTANTS
MATCH LINE 18
MATCH LINE 17
WI AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
CT
EN
ZO
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CR
EE
K
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
MEEK PARK
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
H
C AT
M
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
N
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan
LI
Rev
NE
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
18
MATCH LINE 19
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
"
'-0
10
SAN
LORE
NZO
CRE
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
EK
Job No:
OLD CREEK DOG PARK OF CHERRYLAND
Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
Drawing Title:
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT B
N
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
RZ CB
0
40
80'
L1-11
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
100
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
BART
Union Pacific Railroad
"
1
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
EXISTING BART OVERPASS
0 0'-
PA
RA
LO W
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
DIS
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
EB
VE
LA
EL
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2 HA M PT
LVD
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
RD
PROPOSED 12' WIDE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
SAN
10'-0"
12'-
0"
ON
LOR
ENZ
HAMPTON RD RR GATE
OC
REE
K
FUTURE EAST BAY GREENWAY TO BE BUILT BY OTHERS
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
WESTERN BLVD
EXISTING RAILROAD PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
MATCH LINE 20
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
MATCH LINE 19 EXISTING RAILROAD BRIDGE
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
EXISTING GATE
HA
MP
TO
NR
D Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT B
Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
0
40
80'
N
L1-12
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
101
MATCH LINE 21 Planning & Design
VD
SE
I AD
BL
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
R
PA
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
K
EE
R
C
ZO
EN
R
LO
12'-
0"
N SA
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
TC
HL
INE
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
D
ON R AMPT
H
20
N
HARD PROPERTY MIS
SIO
NB
LVD
O TT
RD
A
M
12'-0"
CHERRYLAND PLACE DEVELOPMENT
X
EXISTING BIKE LANES
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
ADA RAMP FOR PEDESTRIANS
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
PR CH OPO ER SE RY D D LA ND RIVE W
AY
MISSION BLVD PLAZA IMPROVEMENT
BY
BIKE RAMP
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
MATCH LINE 21
PROTECT INTERSECTION, ENHANCED SIDEWALKS, AND CLASS IV PROTECTED BIKE LANES TO BE CONSTRUCTED BY ACPWA MISSION BLVD SAFE AND COMPLETE STREET FOR ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROJECT
RD TO N
STAIRS
MIS
MP
SIO
HA
15'-0"
END SEGMENT B. BEGIN SEGMENT C
LOR
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Job No: Date:
NB
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
MATCH LINE 22
ALL CREEKWAY AND ACCESS IMPROVEMENT TO BE BUILT BY THE CHERRYLAND PLACE DEVELOPMENT
SAN
EEK
CR ENZO
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
MA
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
LVD
Creekway (Class I Path)
Checked By:
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT C Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
N
Opportunity Area
Drawn By:
AS SHOWN
0
40
80'
L1-13
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
102
Planning & Design
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
RC
H
ST
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
12'-0"
SAN LORENZO CREEK
BI
MATCH LINE 23
MATCH LINE 22 SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
12'-0"
MATCH LINE 23
SAN L
MATCH LINE 24
PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
OREN
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
N
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
ZO CR
EEK
Job No:
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Creekway (Class I Path)
Checked By:
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT C Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
N
Opportunity Area
Drawn By:
AS SHOWN
0
40
80'
L1-14
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
103
MATCH LINE 25 Planning & Design
BIKE RAMP
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2 ACCESS RAMP FROM GROVE WAY TO CREEKWAY PROPOSED CREEK FENCE
LOR
ENZ
OC
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
ACCESS PATH REQUIRES EARTHWORK AND RETAINING WALL
REE
K
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
EXISTING GROVE WAY STREET BRIDGE
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 3
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SAN
0" 10'-
GROVE WAY
MATCH LINE 24
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
MISSION BLVD
N
CREEKWAY UNDERCROSSING BELOW GROVE WAY
PROPOSED CREEK FENCE
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
K LL
IM BA E
AV
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
M
SA
NL
AT
CH
LI
NE
RI
O
OR
EN
ZO
CR
VI
ST
A
EE
K
Job No:
25
Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Creekway (Class I Path)
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT C
N
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
MATCH LINE 26
Opportunity Area
ST
0
40
80'
L1-15
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
104
TO BE BUILT BY THE DEVELOPER
ST
Planning & Design
" 478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
BIKE RAMPS PROPOSED CREEKWAY FENCE
HAZEL AVE
PROPOSED CREEKWAY ENTRANCE FOR BICYCLES AND PEDESTRIANS. ACCESS GATE FOR AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY
STEEP SLOPE AREA
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
10'-0"
ENTRANCE RAMP
MATCH LINE 27
MATCH LINE 26
RIO VISTA
'-0 18
LINCOLN LANDING DEVELOPMENT
O CREEK
SAN LORENZ
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
PROPOSED 12' WIDE RAISED PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
N
MAIN ST
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Job No: Date:
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT C
Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
0
40
80'
L1-16
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
105
Planning & Design
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
HILL B
LVD
MATCH LINE 27
FOOT
EXISTING SIDEWALK 12' WIDE SHARED USE SIDEWALK EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL TO REMAIN
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
SHARED USE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENT TO BE BUILT BY THE DEVELOPER
PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENT
DR ENTER CITY C
10'-0"
LINCOLN LANDING DEVELOPMENT
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
ALL TRAIL AND ACCESS IMPROVEMENT TO BE BUILT BY THE LINCOLN LANDING DEVELOPMENT
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
LORE
NZO
21'-7
SAN
1/8"
STEEP SLOPE AREA
CRE
EK
MATCH LINE 26
MCKEEVER AV
SAN LORENZO CREEK CHANNEL WALL
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Job No: Date:
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
0
40
80'
N
Creekway (Class I Path)
Checked By:
RZ CB
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT C
E
Opportunity Area
Drawn By:
AS SHOWN
Drawing Title:
L1-17
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
106
MATCH LINE 28 Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
TY CI ER NT CE DR
RUBY MEADOWS DEVELOPMENT
12' WIDE SHARED USE SIDEWALK
EXISTING BIKE LANE
12
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
'-0
"
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
EXISTING PARK LAND
ADA RAMPS EXISTING TRAFFIC SIGNAL TO REMAIN
2N
12' WIDE SHARED USE SIDEWALK
D ST
SIDEWALK BARRIER
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
DR
M
PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE CROSSWALK IMPROVEMENT
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
NT
27
CE
NE
TY
LI
CI
CH
ER
AT
EXISTING PARK LAND Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT C
N
Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
0
40
80'
L1-18
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
107
MATCH LINE 30 Planning & Design
D ST N 3R
FUTURE FOOTHILL TRAIL TO BE BUILT BY OTHERS
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
CONSULTANTS
CR
E
T AV
EN ESC
EXISTING PARKING TO REMAIN
RUBY MEADOWS DEVELOPMENT
ALL TRAIL AND ACCESS IMPROVEMENT TO BE BUILT BY THE DEVELOPER
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
MATCH LINE 29
PROPOSED PEDESTRIAN AND BIKE CROSSING
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
PROPOSED 10' WIDE SHARED USE SIDEWALK
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN PATH
0"
10'EXISTING PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
PROPOSED CLASS III BIKE SHARROWS
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
CI TY
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 2
NT
CE ER DR
EXISTING PEDESTRIAN CROSSING
12' WIDE SHARED USE SIDEWALK 0"
Opportunity Area
Job No:
N
'-
12
Date:
Creekway (Class I Path)
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
MATCH LINE 28
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT C
Sidewalk + Class III bikeway (Sharrows)
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
0
40
80'
L1-19
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
108
Planning & Design
RU
RUBY MEADOWS DEVELOPMENT
BY
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
ST
RE
ET
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
A
ST
MATCH LINE 29
ALL TRAIL AND ACCESS IMPROVEMENT TO BE BUILT BY THE DEVELOPER
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
AMENITY ZONE TYPE 1
END SEGMENT C
FUTURE BIKE LANES TO BE BUILT BY ACPWA
Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
AW
AY
LN
RU
SS
A
EL
L
W
AY
CK
Key Plan
ST
RO
BIKE RAMP
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
N Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLAN SEGMENT C
Opportunity Area
Creekway (Class I Path)
Drawing No:
Proposed Creekway Fence
Property Line
0
40
80'
L1-20
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
109
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
TYPICAL 12' CREEKWAY CROSS SECTIONS
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Job No: Date:
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
TYPICAL CREEKWAY CROSS SECTIONS Drawing No:
TYPICAL 16' CREEKWAY CROSS SECTIONS
L2-1
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
110
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
CREEK CENTER LINE
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
8.5' CLR
RAILROAD BRIDGE STRUCTURE
2'
1
CANOPY SHEILD 12'
PROPOSED FENCE EXISTING GRADE
2'
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
UPRR BRIDGE UNDERCROSSING SECTION NEAR BAY TRAIL SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"
Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Scale:
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
RZ CB
Drawing Title:
UPRR BRIDGE UNDERCROSSING SECTION NEAR BAY TRAIL Drawing No:
L2-2
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
111
Planning & Design
478 Tehama Street, Suite 2B San Francisco, CA 94103
415.575.4722 fax 215.732.2551
CONSULTANTS
CREEK CENTER LINE
RAILROAD BRIDGE STRUCTURE
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY
CANOPY SHEILD PROPOSED FENCE 2'
10'
EXISTING GRADE
VARIES
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
8.5' CLR
APPLICANT: HARD (HAYWARD AREA PARK AND RECREATION DISTRICT)
APPLICANT: FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT
Key Plan Rev
Date
Description
08.24.2020
CONCEPT PLAN SET
CREEK CHANNEL WALL
1
UPRR BRIDGE UNDERCROSSING SECTION NEAR SAN LORENZO HIGH SCHOOL SCALE: 3/32" = 1'-0"
-
Job No: Date:
8072.06 08/24/20
Drawn By: Checked By:
AS SHOWN
Scale:
Drawing Title:
RZ CB
UPRR BRIDGE UNDERCROSSING SECTION NEAR SAN LORENZO HIGH SCHOOL
Drawing No:
L2-3
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
PROPERTY ANALYSIS Figure 5-1: Public Right-of-way Parcels in the ATP E x tent
112
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
113
This page is intentionally blank .
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
114
SAN LORENZO CREEKWAY CONCEPT PLANS URBAN GREENING GRANT APPLICATION SEGMENTS
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
115
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
116
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
117
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
118
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
119
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
120
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
121
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
122
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
123
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
124
WRT | S a n L o re n z o C re e k way Mast e r Plan
125