Design Moves Forward

Supporters and opponents of the Richmond Street redesign filled the council chamber Tuesday night.

After hearing 42 speakers who were allowed one minute each, all City Council members except William Ktsanes endorsed current city transportation policy and called for moving ahead with a controversial plan to redesign Richmond Street.

Mayor Criticizes “Privileged” People

Mayor Carolyn Wysinger also pushed back at residents of Richmond Street who opposed the project because they will lose street parking. She said many of the people who spoke at City Council meetings or contacted her were privileged people who “appropriated the language of the oppressed.”

“When you’re accustomed to privilege, equality or equity feels like oppression,” she said.

“Parking on the street is a privilege,” Wysinger said. “I’ve never had the privilege of living in a house and worrying about parking in front of the house, and now as a renter here in El Cerrito I find myself in the same position. Those elders that I grew up with -- they always had to walk around the corner with their groceries. They had to walk through gangs. They had to walk through drug deals. They did not have a nice pristine Richmond Street to walk around.”

Details of Plan

The $11 million Richmond Street Complete Streets plan calls for repaving and traffic calming measures on Richmond Street from Fairmount Avenue to Hill Street.

The controversial aspect has been removing street parking and adding chicane bike lanes along with the other traffic calming and pedestrian safety measures.

The bike lanes will only be added in the eight blocks of Richmond north of Moeser Lane.

In December 2024 the city stated that the plan with bike lanes would require removing about half the street parking from these blocks. In June 2025, the city posted new plans showing that two-thirds of all street spaces would be removed, including 81% of parking in one block. Data from a June 25 Open House confirmed that 160 out of 241spaces (two-thirds of street parking) will be removed north of Moeser Lane, and 23 spaces will be removed south of Moeser.

42 Public Comments

Most of the 42 speakers during public comment talked about loss of parking and the addition of bike lanes.

Opponents of the plan said they had no opportunity to have their input heard now that revised plans show that two-thirds of parking is being removed. One speaker said residents might prefer parking to be removed only on one side of the street in order to keep half the parking. Opponents also cited data showing only one injury accident on the eight-block stretch of Richmond Street and none involving bicycles in the past decade. And they objected to disabled parking spaces being placed around the corner from on side streets.

Proponents said the city needs to make Richmond Street safer for bicyclists, and bicycling in the city will increase only if a safer bike network is built. They said a more extensive bike lane system is needed to support the city’s goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from cars. One proponent said the bike lane is needed for e-bikes that can travel 15 to 20 miles per hour – too fast for the nearby Ohlone Greenway.

Ktsanes Moves to Consider Alternatives

After the public comments, council member Ktsanes made a motion to ask city staff to look into alternatives to the current design.

“In meetings, letters and public comments to the City Council and city staff, proponents and opponents of the proposed changes to Richmond Street have raised many valid concerns and important unanswered questions,” Ktsanes said.

“Recognizing that none of us actually own or are legally entitled to street parking in front of our homes, removing two-thirds of the parking with the expectation that some residents will only find parking on side streets is undeniably a major, potentially disruptive change.”

“Given how contentious and divisive this issue has become, I am making a four-part motion directing city staff to evaluate and report to the City Council alternatives to be considered alongside the current proposal. My hope is that we find an agreeable compromise,” Ktsanes said.

His motion proposed that city staff look into (1) alternatives that would limit the loss of parking to the extent possible, (2) alternatives that would limit the loss of parking to 50%, and (3) alternatives that would consider the East Side Bicycle Boulevard plan described in the city’s Active Transportation Plan. He asked that a public hearing then be held to discuss all the options along with the current design.

No Support for Motion

There was no second for Ktsanes’ motion.

Council discussion followed.

Rebecca Saltzman

Council member Rebecca Saltzman first addressed concerns that she might have a conflict of interest on the matter because she works for Bike East Bay. She consulted the city attorney and was told that, because she has no financial stake in the decision, she has no need to recuse herself.

Saltzman said around 90% of the emails she has received since joining the council in late December have been about Richmond Street.

“It is a big change and it will have a big impact,” she said. “We need a safe network for people to bike and walk and take transit. We should not wait for collisions to happen to make our streets safer. I see Richmond Street as the start of our really robust bike network.”

Lisa Motoyama

Council member Lisa Motoyama said that the goal of having a greener sustainable city is supported by the city’s Active Transportation Plan approved in 2016, and so is the use of “best practices” for projects. Although that plan shows Richmond Street as a shared bike-lane facility, Motoyama said, “We wouldn’t want to use best practice from 2016.”

As the city works towards the goal of a greener city, Motoyama said, most residents will experience some loss – but the city as a whole will gain.

As a personal example, Motoyama said that from her home she has a “sliver” of a view of the Golden Gate bridge. But when a 6-story affordable housing is built on the corner of Richmond Street and Central Avenue, she will lose that view. Even so, she supports the housing project.

“In totality we have made these goals,” Motoyama said. “I support the (transportation) policy as it stands.”

Critics in the Audience

“If there was a better plan that saved more parking on the street our public works director would have thought of that,” Motoyama added.

Laughter and some coughs could be heard from the audience.

“Yvetteh Ortiz is one of the smartest people in this city,” Motoyama said. “We all as a city (council) voted on the strategic plan and climate plan. I am supportive of keeping what we have.”

(Council members Ktsanes and Saltzman were not on the council when the plans were approved.)

Gabe Quinto

Council member Gabe Quinto was on the council in 2016.

“I’m very proud of the work we did then,” Quinto said.

Quinto said he supports improving safety on Richmond Street to make it safer for families who want to ride bikes.

Quinto said when he was a child in El Cerrito, he rode his bike all over town. He said he did get hit by a car once, but continued to ride. The new generation of families moving to El Cerrito should be able to enjoy the same access to bicycling that seniors had when they were young, Quinto said.

“It’s a tough decision to make but I stick to what I voted for in 2016,” Quinto said.

He added that he would like staff to look at what could be done to eliminate no more than 50 percent of parking.

Later in the meeting, Ktsanes asked whether looking at alternatives to the project design as Quinto suggested was still possible.

City Manager Karen Pinkos said no, because the council made it clear they want the project to move forward without any further look at alternatives.

Mayor Wysinger spoke for several minutes. Her statement, which she called “incendiary,” is quoted at length in a separate post on Livable El Cerrito. The video can also be viewed on the city's website.

Appeal Process and Fees

After the council endorsed moving forward with the design as is, the council talked about the city’s appeals process, including fees.

Only residents who will have the street in front of their homes declared a No Parking zone can appeal. The first level of appeal is to the city manager, and there is no fee. Applicants must state clear reasons.

The next level of appeal would be to the City Council. The current fee is $632, but that is scheduled to go up to $1,115 on July 21.

Ktsanes moved that the fee for appeals related to the Richmond Street project be kept at $632, and that residents be allowed to appeal as a group.

No one seconded his motion, but a motion by Motoyama to keep the fee at $632 was approved on a 3-2 vote, with Saltzman and Wysinger voting no.

Wysinger said, “Ask all the thousands of black and brown men who are in jail and can’t get out because of the amount of bail. Then you’ll get my answer to that.”

Saltzman said the council unanimously approved the fee change to take effect in July. She also said that, given the council’s comments on Tuesday night, it was unlikely that the council would overrule the city manager on any Richmond Street appeal.

Said Pinkos: “We will be continuing forward as the design is laid out.”