San Lorenzo Creekway Master Plan

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