Eureka City Council Approves $2.2M Bike Boulevard for C Street Despite Pushback
![[Bicyclist cartoonized from Cal Poly Humboldt image of a bicyclist ]](https://kymkemp.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/Bicicylist-cartoonized-from-HSU-bicyclist-image.png)
[Bicyclist cartoonized from Cal Poly Humboldt image of a bicyclist ]
With council approval of a $2.2 million construction project, Eureka’s C street will be turned into a “bicycle boulevard” with reduced vehicle traffic.
Funded through a state Active Transportation Program grant, the bid award was approved at a May 27 city council special meeting.
But the vote was close, as two council members have concerns about the project’s level of public engagement.
The Eureka-based R.A.O. Construction Company will build the boulevard, including installation of “median islands” at offset intersections, street planters and green bike lane street painting as seen on H and I streets.
Another notable feature is converting one-block segments of C Street from two-way to one-way traffic. It’s one of several traffic reduction mechanisms included in the project.
Bicycle-friendly planning has been afoot in Eureka for several years, with the C Street project one of many included in a Bicycle Master Plan.
“The push, the desire there was to really have facilities that would cater to lower level traffic stress, to individuals who really wanted to be able to use a facility without having to have as much vehicle traffic and interaction with vehicles throughout the corridor,” said City Engineer Jesse Willor. “And so that’s where the C Street Bike Boulevard came to be, really focusing on creating a facility that had those design features that would reduce traffic volumes on those streets.”
The idea is to discourage drivers from using C street as “a cut-through street to get from one side of town to another,” Willor continued, while allowing bicyclists to “be able to get across town without having to navigate as much traffic.”
He said the project is a “core component” of the city’s Bicycle Master Plan.
Councilmember Mario Fernandez asked about public meetings and was told there have been several virtual and in-person meetings – but none specific to C Street neighborhoods.
Asked why the boulevard project wasn’t picked for E or F streets, Willor said a boulevard approach would have too much impact on traffic flows on those streets while C Street’s levels of traffic are lower and more appropriate for the project.
Public outreach also concerned Councilmember Renee Contreras-DeLoach, who lives near C Street. She said older neighborhood residents would have benefited from being informed of the project in mail-oriented ways.
During a public comment period, a C Street homeowner said there’s been “lack of community engagement” and questioned “the logic behind selecting C Street.”
Two other commenters said they support the project, with one saying it will “create a nice quiet corridor” for both cyclists and residents.
Fernandez said he supports the project but made a motion to bump the bid award decision to June 17 to allow time for public outreach.
The motion didn’t get a second. Councilmember Leslie Castellano’s motion to approve the bid award did.
Contreras-DeLoach reiterated her outreach concerns and said she’d be voting against the award, describing the project as “nice and beautiful but not necessary.”
Castellano noted that the project itself previously gained council approval and delaying it would “bog down government process on something that we’ve all been in agreement with for years.”
The bid award was approved in a 3 to 2 vote, with Contreras-DeLoach and Fernandez voting against.
Also at the meeting, letters in support of housing-related state legislation were approved, with another split vote on one.
Support of Assembly Bill 609, which exempts housing projects in in-fill and other areas designated in municipal general plans from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review was unanimous.
Senate Bill 79 enables “transit-oriented zoning,” including for multi-family residential projects in areas with major transit stops, according to the city letter.
The letter was approved in a 3 to 2 vote, with Contreras-DeLoach and Councilmember Scott Bauer voting against.
Bauer had described the bill as “a monster of language” and has concerns about its non-localized development standards.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
What about emergency vehicles… police, fire and ambulances. How do they access residences along “bicycle boulevard”?
You should take notes from Limassol peru. A beautiful city designed by the Spanish. Really wide streets with park like pedestrian ateas.areas.. every one of your plans are a mess.
IMHO: GREEN PAINT ! PLANTERS in the Middle of the Street !
—
Eureka.. built on hills and gulches… townships with odd street angles, narrow mismatched streets. 11 months out of the year… fog, rain, wind, dark.
Part of the Newsom (and Cohorts) money scheme. Payback for the union ‘campaign’ donations.
—
Better ‘read’ the 512 page ‘Bicycle Plan’… City Council has all sorts of nefarious anti-citizen schemes in place.
Plan was adopted by a 5-0 vote. Original plan was released 5 days before the vote… and there was no public info or debate on the plan.
—
Read it (takes awhile)… and be prepared to ‘SMASH’ the City Council.
Limassol is in Cyprus, not Peru. Different continent (well…one of them an island nation actually). You mean Lima, Peru? Built nearly 500 years ago when most people walked or maybe rode a horse? It’s also the size if NYC and it’s not exactly what I’d call modern urban planning. It is not designed as some giant pretty park. It’s downtown streets are one giant spider web of roads. Limassol, Cyprus is the same for that matter. What city is purpose-built with really wide, checkerboard grid layout? Phoenix, AZ. Too bad Phoenix, with all it’s architecture and design is about the least bike-friendly city I’ve rode in. Might be the fact that many in-town streets are 45mph. Those ancient cities are bike friendly because the streets are 4 meters wide and barely accommodate a rickshaw, let alone vehicles at any speed.
By driving on them.
”one of several traffic reduction mechanisms”
”discourage drivers”
so the anti auto agenda keeps its momentum. On H and I streets i have never seen a bike rider yet. NOT one. But lots of traffic backup. The failed city council will let homeless camp and shit wherever they please, but the traffic must be stopped.
They’re there. But nowhere near what the city was advertising. You just can’t make people ride bikes if they don’t want to. And when you do, people move. Our weather isn’t conducive for riding except a few months out of the year for an average, able bodied person. It’s also very limiting in what you can get done in the day if all you have is a bike, and if you have a disability or mobility issues, forget it. Even a bus is damn difficult for some persons.
Me? I ride J St. Always have. I don’t feel any bit safer having a private lane on H/I, in fact I see more people now getting pinched out, or about to at the intersections with the changes than without. Moreso, people that wait until the last second to not enter the bike lane where legal, rather just swoop all the way from the lane and treat the bike lane like a curb. I see that every day, with or without bikes present. So I stay on J st. if going through the middle of town, because it was never intended as a main arterial and safer for bikes, but that’s just my opinion.
H and I streets green renovation is / was a colossal waste of money. We ride bikes to town but not on H or I st. Just asking to be dead. J st. already had bike lanes in both directions which are rarely used maybe our good city and county administrators and employees should be required to bike to work, rain or shine, before anymore money is wasted on bad ideas. They get grant money to build these idiotic schemes but ongoing maintenance falls on the city/county. In a few years our fearless leaders will be claiming poverty once again and because of their incompetence/unwillingness to do their jobs( balance a budget) they will want to hit us up yet again for increased taxation. I am curious to see what they will do when taxes reach 100%…. finally have to do their jobs…..
It’s crazy how leftists think everybody rides a bike all the time, has one in the garage, or has the ability to ride a bike.
They don’t even give a shit about elderly or disabled people who can’t. They don’t give a shit about people who live in the hills who actually need their vehicles.
All they care about is their precious CO2 reductions.
Just wait till all the plants die and they can’t breathe just like their buddy George.
I’d ride my bike a lot more often, but even on sides streets, there would be some asshole making it dangerous for me. We’d both be on sides streets to avoid 101, but they’d “forget” that the side street wasn’t 101. So I drive to the store instead for that gallon of milk.
Your last sentence is…disgusting.
This is Humboldt. The delusion this place is a liberal sanctuary is dead. Hateful bigots roam this place.
I mostly avoid riding in Eureka; do the H and I street bike lanes actually go anywhere? Do they link up with any other bike infrastructure? It’s a common issue that cities will install random, disconnected bike lanes and then get upset when riders don’t flock to them.
Not everyone can or wants to ride a bike, but lots of people can, and lots of people want to. A good, safe bicycle network would encourage more people to ride, which would get more cars off the street and those who want to or have to drive, would have less crowded, dangerous streets. How is this a bad thing?
Except in the rainy season…..nobody rides bikes in the rain….or wind….or snow…or….if you’re carrying a load….dream on.
When I was commuting to Eureka from Arcata through the safety corridor, I did take the bus when it was raining. My temp limit was around 32F. Colder than that and I took my bike on the bus and rode home, when it was warmer. 20mph was my limit for a headwind. I always brought lunch and a change of clothes and whatever else I wanted to transport. I miss those days. Darn you COVID, darn you to heck!
I’m a weather weenie, but I know people who ride in the rain, the wind, and the snow. Are you suggesting that because not everyone rides a bike every day we shouldn’t paint bike lanes? Because people often don’t walk or drive in the rain, wind, and snow, but we still have sidewalks and streets.
Kids don’t ride bikes anymore. Not with all the danger out there nowadays. Those days are over. Only a few adults benefit. Not worth it .
This is typical of the airhead ECC. They approve BS like this, all the while refusing to do anything about the most destructive force in Eureka, the homeless population. Yes, it’s just another prime example of how incompetent this brainless group is. They just keep funding the idiocy projects, leaving no funding for what is really important. I’m more thankful every day I don’t live in Eureka. I don’t shop in Eureka for this and many other reasons.
If you are going to do the kindergarten approach used on other streets around town with all the crayon work you need to do a training course to explain how to use it . I often see folks driving in the bike lanes. Watched a woman drive 3 blocks on I in the bike lane . People driving are not smart enough to decipher your Coloring book work.
And the majority of the crackhead zombies who do most of the bike riding don’t use them or obey traffic laws.
I drive in the bike lanes all the time. Faster, no enforcement and I can plead ignorance….not hard in this country.
Sounds like a neat project.
Of course there will be the usual whining from the same people who complain about everything.
Glad the City Council went ahead and approved this.
Not really. Hardly anyone complains about everything. There is a division between people who complain about not spending money on everything they think is a problem- usually those who do not pay taxes and love the idea that government should force everyone to conform to their ideas of what society should be- and people who resent the government constantly pushing them around and, even worse taking, their money to do it.
On here, the spenders of other people’s money who bemoan anyone objecting to authoritarianism of government seem to outnumber those who object to it by about 4 to 1. Maybe you just missing noticing those who complain about society failing to create a socialist paradise are mostly the ones objecting to everything..
But, but, but the buses. Everyone should be made to ride a bus but me because the bus stop is to far away. I demand big momma bureaucrats put a bus stop in front of my domicile. I don’t pay taxes but that is what the dummies who do should be funding. I want buses and windmills and bike lanes and no cars but I choose to live in an area where having a car is necessary. Oh well, I suppose I could move to a big city with buses going by every 5 minutes but forget that. I demand the same here, now! And windmills, I want to see dead birds and beached whales. My buddy owns a sushi restaurant and we want whale and seal sashimi! Now!
Pardon? I pay taxes and I ride the bus and ride a bike. Driving a car here is necessary because we chose to make it that way; we can make different choices. And no one’s being binary; it’s not “drive everywhere” or “get rid of all the cars”. Cars are good for long trips, feet and bicycles are good for short trips.
Yeah the MAGA trash are unhappy. They will always be unhappy. They will complain about everything.
And there is 90% of the whining on here. Trump and MAGA. Like the drone of mosquitoes in the swamp.
Sad there’s no vaccination for chronic TDS.
And this is being paid for by bicycle licenses and taxes?? You idiots are really amazing. Everything is about bicycle riders which don’t use those streets and don’t obey the traffic laws regarding bikes
No, it’s usually grants from elsewhere but often gas taxes and others pay for those grants initially. This isn’t a cheap reworking either and will definitely embolden the case for making cyclists pay their “fair share” or what motorists feel are appropriate (especially when you have eBikes that can go 30mph). That day will come when people reach a critical mass of people that don’t want to see expensive re-dos of city streets without the users paying for them.
Newsflash: Almost all bike riders also drive cars, so yes, the bike riders are helping pay for the project.
You couldn’t pay me to ride a bike because of all the idiot drivers but I’m all for trails and bike lanes that make it safer for bike riders — but yes, they should obey the traffic laws.
Except if you are a walker, then bike riders are a bane of existence, barreling along without a shred of care for others.
Your concern for pedestrians bothered by bikes is legitimate. I recently watched a 4-hour bike ride on YouTube. Prowalk Tours did a video in Vancouver, British Columbia.
Vancouver widened their existing bike lanes to create a walking/running path separate from the bike path. One fifteen-minute section of the video I counted over 1,000 cyclists of all ages including families with small kids. The numbers of pedestrians was similar.
And, for about 80% of the 45-mile trip in-and-around Vancouver the pathways were also separated from vehicle traffic. The video was filmed this April. No wonder Vancouver is considered one of the most livable cities in the world.
Anyone interested in what city pathways could look like should check out Prowalk Tours and search the Vancouver video. My favorite Prowalk video is a walking tour of Rome. The Trevi fountain is worth the watch.
Vancouver. This is Eureka. There are neighborhoods in that city, replete with 30 story buildings that have more people than our entire city. Our needs are not similar. At all. You won’t get 1,000 cyclists on any street unless it was some large event. Not even the Kinetics folks get that many cyclists on the Plaza, of all places. Build what we need for us, not what some glammed up big city video does.
Those big tired electric bikes newsom is sooo enthused about go screaming along at 30 mph on sidewalks….another brilliant idea brought to you by big government (sic).
That would be choice of the idiot riding the bike; Newsom had nothing to do with that.
newsom is directly responsible w 2k rebates. No one would buy them otherwise.
How they choose to ride their bike is up to them.
By that logic we should be licensing and taxing pedestrians too; think of how much infrastructure they use, with sidewalks and crosswalks; dangit, they should pay for that!
I support anything that will slow traffic even a little in Eureka and and will also encourage bicyclist’s. The speeding in neighborhoods is really scary. I was passed in front of Washington School, in a 15 mile zone while school was in session. In the last few months I have also witnessed school busses with flashing red lights being passed on Walnut street in Cutten. In my opinion this is the epitome of bad driving and total disregard for the lives of others.
Problem is this will create more speeding for those running late who would have used C Street and now use an alternative route making them more tardy. I haven’t seen a total of 10 bikes using the bike lanes on H and I Street since they were implemented. I wish more people would ride bikes, but not sure this is the way to encourage. How many on the City Council ride their bikes to work?
How about the people “running late” just maybe leave earlier? If you have to speed on city streets, you’re doing it wrong.
Don’t disagree that they should leave earlier, but people are people and free will overcomes logic.
So we should cater to them?
I don’t think it’s “free will overcoming logic” — more like selfishness and stupidity overcoming safety and consideration for others.
Maybe leave five minutes earlier? How often is running late used as an excuse for speeding?
The worst area for speeders is 7th Street from I to Myrtle. Is a freaking speedway. A traffic cop could park in a nearby parking lot and wait to catch offenders all day long.
I’ve suggested it to the EPD, but they could care less. I was told there aren’t enough officer to control our streets. Fire our Chief of Police and hire one that can do the job and coordinate the effort.
Your coordination requires money. That money comes from the city. If the city defunds your police, you aren’t going to hire anybody, regardless of who you let go.
Fire our worthless City Council that wastes all our tax money. They won’t defund the police.
Yeah let’s slow traffic in Humboldt more. We already have snails on the road, let’s make that worse so the old people can be happy
Old people have seen and survived everything. Why shouldn’t we try to make them happy?
45mph on Harris isn’t fast enough for you?
No respect.
Good. Screw cars.
I think I’ll go buy another one just out of spite.
Will that need a second mortgage or a third?
Maybe both. But I hear Tesla is having a fire sale on vehicles.
I’m converting my truck to burn coal….
If you’re bored and want to experience dangerous traffic, try to find a parking place at Costco.
😂
LMFA0, closing a street to reduce traffic. Is that like not arresting thieves to reduce crime rates?
If you legalize everything crime rate goes to zero. LE becomes superfluous and on paper life is good. Let’s give it a try.
That’s not what they’re doing; they’re discouraging non-residents from using C St. as a shortcut while giving people on bikes a safer route to get to Henderson Center. Did you read the article, or at least skim the plan?
C St. is really a dumb road to be using as a short cut anyway. E is better, or even Summer if saving 45 seconds is an issue. It’s narrow as it is and one of only a handful that make it all the way to 1st unbroken. As it is, when you do go down it, every intersection has you creeping into the lanes of the cross streets because everyone parks right up to the corners and you can’t see anything. Not to mention other things that restrict your view.
I was literally quoting the article.
“With council approval of a $2.2 million construction project, Eureka’s C street will be turned into a “bicycle boulevard” with reduced vehicle traffic.”
And your statment was a total contradiction. The point I was making is it wont reduce traffic, it will just reroute it and place an added burden on other streets. Just like not enforcing laws doesn’t reduce crime.
More BS and a huge waste of taxpayer money. Concentrate on fixing our dangerous roads. Remember this stupidity at election time.
Daniel, I have to take a bit of issue with the headline; as the mayor herself said, the plan was approved some time ago; this was about approving the construction bid.
You had better read about City Council… ‘approving the plan’.
5 days after release. No public input. They said… ‘oh, just a plan… a guideline’… NOPE.
Taxpayers careened by the Council. Duped by the SUPES.
—
Yee hah !
This really pisses me off. They can’t fix a road or hire more First Responders, but they can spend 2.8 million for a freaking bike trail. Our Council Sucks
Rember this come election time.
But that assumes that there will be a real alternative on offer.
Here’s a novel idea. Since the City Of Eureka apparently has money to spend for a bicycle lanes, before putting all of that money into a lame brain idea, maybe you should think about fixing the streets and the potholes in various locations across town?? To be honest, I don’t see many bicyclists in Eureka. At least not enough to warrant ripping up the streets and installing bicycle lanes that only a handful of people will use anyway. On a side note, I love how the powers that be make decisions without any input from the citizens and taxpayers who happen to be the ones who pay their wages.
The money was allocated through a “state Active Transportation Program grant” which probably said that this was what it needed to use the money for.
One of a number of huge negative effects that grant funding creates. It’s the sleaziest method of taking control away from locals. First the the State or Feds take money by regulation then trickle it back but only if under their control. Local government is caught in the cycle of greed over “free money” while not noticing every incremental drain on local money where they have the freedom to chose how it is spent.
As a home owner on C Street, no one has made an effort to contact me.
I have so many questions about the logistics and how this is going to impact people who own homes or live on C Street.
Ive only seen seven bikes in the last two years in the entire eureka area.
wouldn’t it be way less expensive, and less confusing to just lower the speed limit on that street. maybe add a couple of speed bumps. There’s very little traffic there already.
Since they put the bike lanes on H and I streets, I have seen maybe 2 people using them. I love on G St, so I am very familiar with the two. Nobody uses them. It’s a waste of money . Eureka High school is one block over. Students don’t ride bikes, yet alone bike lanes. Now they want to put one in a few blocks over? The good ol boys at work.
.