Albany presents detailed design for Cleveland Avenue pavement and two‑way separated bikeway; construction targeted for 2026

City of Albany public‑works staff presented detailed draft designs Sept. 25 for the Cleveland Avenue pavement rehabilitation project that will include an 8‑foot, two‑way separated bikeway on the west side of the street and associated curb ramps, storm‑drain work and signage. The commission and project consultant focused discussion on safe crossings at cross streets, drainage for a major overland flow channel and maintaining vehicle lane widths to meet emergency‑access needs.

The project was initiated through the city’s annual street rehabilitation program and covers Cleveland Avenue from the IAD overpass by the SAHA housing development north of Washington Avenue down to Buchanan Street and the Buchanan Bikeway spur. Lisonbee Carrillo, CIP program manager for the City of Albany Public Works Department, said the city has programmed the work so paving and bikeway elements can be delivered together and that staff will “return this coming summer for recommendation to council,” with advertisement and construction targeted for 2026.

The Cleveland Avenue design follows the Transportation Commission’s 2021 recommendation for a two‑way separated bikeway on the west side of the street. Justin (staff member) reviewed earlier planning and noted the bikeway would continue a Pier/Pierce Street path connection where previously constructed segments join at Cleveland. Emma Schonthal, the consultant leading the project design, described the recommended typical cross section: an 8‑foot bikeway, a 2‑foot buffer, two 10‑foot travel lanes and a 7‑foot parking lane on the east side. Schonthal said, “I would actually suggest... a 6‑foot wide turn box” at some intersections to give cyclists and turning vehicles room and to provide additional traffic calming.

Staff said the project estimate is about $1.5 million overall, with roughly $515,000 awarded by the Alameda County Transportation Commission to fund bikeway construction components and a separate $300,000 Metropolitan Transportation Commission grant for the Pierce–Cleveland Lightway connection. Carrillo clarified that the annual pavement program pays for paving and ADA curb ramps while grant funds specifically supplement bikeway construction; the two scopes are tracked in separate CIP projects but will be bid together so one contractor can perform both scopes.

Design and safety details discussed included stormwater: the bikeway sits within a major overland flow channel draining part of Albany Hill, so staff propose extending storm drainage from the Cleveland–Buchanan intersection and using inlet‑style boxes (rather than standard grates) so the bikeway remains clear of utility grates. The consultant recommended a lighting review; staff identified two crossing locations (north of Washington and at the Saha/Verona Hill crossing) that need closer evaluation.

Commissioners and staff debated intersection configurations and traffic calming. Commenters proposed curb extensions and raised islands at the Saha crossing, a raised island at the Buchanan spur to clarify that the main vehicle movement is under the overcrossing, and turn boxes or swept buffers at side‑street entries so cyclists do not have to make tight right‑angles into traffic. Emma Schonthal said some vertical elements (bollards) will likely still be needed to discourage vehicles from entering the cycle track at crossings and recommended directional markings and bike symbols to clarify intended movements.

Staff emphasized coordination needs: fire‑department access will be required for any median or island treatments; Caltrans and other right‑of‑way owners will be involved where the path crosses non‑city property; and the project team will “workshop” crossing treatments with commission input over the next month. Several commissioners also raised railroad safety adjacent to the corridor and asked staff to coordinate with relevant owners about fencing and separation between the cycle track and the railroad right‑of‑way.

No formal action was taken Sept. 25; the commission provided comments on the draft plans and staff will collect those comments, iterate the design and return with a recommendation package next summer. Staff said the intended schedule is to bring a recommendation to council in summer 2026 with construction following that advertisement.