Albany council directs staff to study parking impacts and two Solano Avenue alternatives as part of active transportation update

City transportation staff and consultants laid out draft goals and an existing‑conditions analysis on Feb. 18 as part of an update to Albany’s Active Transportation Plan (ATP), and the City Council directed staff to study parking impacts for two Solano Avenue alternatives before returning with more detailed cost and implementation information.

Justin Fried, the city’s transportation and sustainability manager, introduced the project’s first phase and asked the council what additional analysis it wanted before staff presented policy recommendations for Solano Avenue. “We’ve collected public comments for four weeks via the project website and at the first public open house,” Fried said, summarizing outreach and noting staff had received more than 700 public comments on existing conditions.

Consultant deputy project manager Jen Schreiber framed the ATP goals around four priorities — access and connectivity, safety and comfort, equity, and implementation and funding — telling the council the plan is intended to improve the walking, bicycling and rolling environment while aligning with the city’s general plan and climate goals. “Active transportation can have many benefits including benefits to the climate, to public health, equity, and to safety,” Schreiber said.

The council discussion focused on Solano Avenue, the city’s main commercial corridor. Staff reminded the council that an ADA settlement requires the city to upgrade curb ramps on Solano between Masonic and Tulare by December 2029, and that earlier studies — including the 2019 Solano Complete Streets effort — produced several design options. City staff said it is preparing parking and daylighting analyses and rough order‑of‑magnitude cost estimates and asked whether council wanted additional design alternatives studied before a policy decision.

Public comment at the meeting was extensive. Cyclists and pedestrian advocates urged protected, high‑comfort bicycle lanes and improved crosswalk lighting; parents and school‑area commenters pressed for safer school crossings. Local business owners, including Carly (owner, Flowerland on Solano Avenue), warned that aggressive removal of parking would harm deliveries and local commerce. “I am surprised … there really seems to be no addressing the importance of commerce on Solano Avenue,” Carly said, asking the council to consider loading zones, customer access and the role of parking in supporting storefronts.

After discussion, Councilmember Jordan moved that staff analyze parking impacts for the alternative that reorganizes parking to retain most existing spaces (the “Option 1” cross‑section from the 2019 memo), prepare a rough cost estimate for that alternative, and separately estimate the change in parking inventory that would result from the more ambitious “Option 5” cross‑section (a full two‑sided protected bikeway concept) without a full cost estimate. The motion passed; the clerk recorded the vote as unanimous among members present.

Staff said the parking inventory and daylighting analyses would take roughly two to three months and that those results and associated cost ranges would be returned to the council ahead of a formal policy decision. The council also discussed — without taking final action — the possibility of demonstration projects (a one‑day demonstration and a six‑to‑12‑month trial) for back‑in/angled parking and using temporary materials to test configurations before permanent construction.

Ending: Council directed staff to return with parking‑impact analysis, rough order‑of‑magnitude cost estimates for the reorganized‑parking cross‑section, and an inventory estimate for the full protected‑facility option; the city will also continue broader ATP work covering intersections, school zones and east‑west connectivity.