Alameda council hears sharp divide over McCartney Road restriping; staff to return with engagement plan

Alameda’s City Council on Tuesday confronted months of neighborhood rancor over the recent restriping of a four‑block stretch of McCartney Road, but declined to halt work already nearly complete and instead asked staff to return with a plan to improve public engagement.

The council heard technical explanations and emotional testimony in a meeting that lasted into the night. City Engineer Scott Wikstrom told council the project converted a mid‑block section from two lanes in each direction to a single lane each way, narrowed lane widths and added buffered bike lanes and pedestrian treatments to reduce conflicts. He said traffic modeling showed only modest delays — roughly four to five seconds at peak for key turning movements — and that reducing the number of lane approaches at the Island Drive intersection simplified driver decisions and should improve safety. "Reducing the number of approaches simplifies those interactions, and we believe it should actually increase the efficiency of that intersection," Wikstrom said.

Many Bay Farm residents and homeowners' association representatives pushed back. Speakers argued the city had not given sufficient advance notice to affected residents and that some neighborhood groups formally opposed the lane reductions. William Pye, representing multiple Harbor Bay Isle homeowners associations, urged the council to hear the matter publicly before the striping was implemented, saying the association’s resolution opposing the changes had not been answered. "We need an open debate here and that's why the city council needs to have its open discussion to allow final input," he said.

Countering those calls, several parents, students and pedestrian‑safety advocates urged the council not to pause a project they said is already slowing speeds and making crossings safer. A ninth‑grade student who described a near‑miss at a school crossing asked the council for "stronger measures to ensure cars slow down in school zones." Community groups that promoted Vision Zero and the city’s Active Transportation Plan also urged the council to let staff finish work to avoid leaving roads unstriped and creating new safety risks.

Council members debated three main questions: whether staff had the legal authority to implement this type of restriping without explicit, project‑level council approval; whether outreach reached the appropriate residents and stakeholders; and whether stopping mid‑project would create a safety hazard. Public Works Director Erin Smith said staff had presented the project to the Transportation Commission, attended neighborhood and PTSA meetings and issued news notices, but acknowledged outreach could have been broader. "We could have done more," she told the council.

A motion by the referral’s sponsor to require additional code and policy changes and to pause the project failed to garner the votes needed to halt striping while staff returns with recommendations. The mayor and several colleagues said the striping was largely complete and that stopping now would be hazardous.

Instead, the council accepted staff and interim management commitments to return at a later date with a staff report and recommended process changes that clarify when traffic reconfigurations should be treated as routine staff actions versus items that require explicit council review. Interim City Manager Adam Pollitzer told the council staff will "come back with an outline of a process" and proposals for improved notice, outreach and legal review.

What happens next: staff will draft a return report outlining a sharper public‑engagement protocol for paving and restriping projects, and a legal review of thresholds for when council input is required. The on‑the‑ground striping on McCartney will remain in place while staff brings that follow‑up to the council.