The mayors of Oakland & San Francisco have challenged each other to a Battle for the Bay on Creek to Bay Day, Sept. 21.

3-Year Paving Plan Development Process

This page provides information on the development process of OakDOT's 3-Year Paving Plan.

Draft Final Map

Review the Map

On this page, you’ll find a summary of what OakDOT heard from Oaklanders about the paving plan proposal, what changes staff have recommended for the final plan, and the rationale for these changes.

Recap of Community Outreach

In February and March 2019, OakDOT made presentations about the paving plan proposal in community meetings across Oakland. These presentations included official City committees and commissions, including the Measure KK Oversight Committee, the Mayor’s Commission on Persons with Disabilities, and the Bicyclist and Pedestrian Advisory Commission. OakDOT also presented at the following eleven community meetings, two of which included simultaneous interpretation in Spanish and/or Cantonese:

  • -Redwood Heights Town Hall, March 13, 6:00PM, Redwood Heights Recreation Center
  • -Bella Vista NCPC, March 13, 7:15PM, Bella Vista Elementary School Auditorium
  • -Brookfield/Columbian Gardens NCPC, March 13, 6:00PM, Madison Park Academy
  • -Prescott NCPC, March 14, 6:30PM, Sullivan Community Center
  • -Chinatown NCPC, March 20. 4:00PM, Hotel Oakland
  • -Beat 33X/24X, March 20, 6:00PM, Eastmont Police Substation
  • -Golden Gate NCPC, March 20, 6:30PM, Charles Porter Golden Gate Recreation Center
  • -Fruitvale Unity, March 20, 6:30PM, Fruitvale San Antonio Senior Center
  • -Coliseum Melrose NCPC, March 21, 6:00PM, 81st Avenue Library
  • -Melrose-High Hopes NCPC, March 27, 7:00PM, Horace Mann School
  • -Beats 12Y/13XYZ, March 28, 7:00PM, Berkeley Tennis Club

The same information presented at community meetings was also provided through a digital “open house" with electronic versions of the presentation and maps on our website. OakDOT posted links to this digital open house on NextDoor and summarized the plan through a series of tweets on OakDOT's Twitter account to reach a wider range of Oaklanders.

At each meeting, OakDOT provided a short feedback survey. The same survey was available online. In total, OakDOT collected more than 300 responses. You can download a copy of these responses on the Paving Maps & Data page. The majority of responses reported feeling OakDOT's approach on this plan was fair. Many respondents cited the equity approach to prioritizing underserved areas of Oakland. Respondents also said it was good to not prioritize the “squeaky wheels." Respondents who felt the approach was fair were younger, more likely people of color, and more likely to have a household income less than $100,000.

Respondents who voiced concern with the plan approach often had a particular street they thought should have been in the plan. Others questioned the use of equity metrics to prioritize paving investment. Respondents who felt the approach was unfair were more likely to have household incomes greater than $100,000. The results also reflect who had access to the survey: residents of the zip code 94611 had an outsized voice in the survey, at nearly 30% of all respondents. These respondents represented half of all respondents who felt the plan approach was not fair.


Final Plan

OakDOT is committed to responsive, trustworthy government. With this in mind, OakDOT aimed to create a fair process for prioritizing streets for repaving that didn't depend on someone attending a meeting, calling their councilmember, or writing a petition. This is why the approach to the plan was to use objective citywide data to prioritize streets using equity factors, street condition, and traffic safety, and why the draft final plan does not include changes based on street-specific constituent complaints. That's simply not a fair way to prioritize citywide needs.

This map
represents our recommendations for the final plan. There are a few changes from the draft proposed map to this draft final version:

  • --Two segments of International Boulevard in the Fruitvale and East Oakland were removed because these segments have either been recently repaved or will be repaved soon through AC Transit’s East Bay BRT project.
  • --Bay Place was removed due to nearby capital streetscape project construction anticipated after 2021.
  • --Monterey Boulevard, Oakland Avenue, and Oakport Street were added because they were prioritized as part of the 2014 Five Year Prioritization Plan and have dedicated funding through an already-secured regional capital grant with construction anticipated in 2020.
  • --MacArthur Blvd between 73rd Avenue and 82nd Avenue was added because it was also part of the 2014 Plan, is part of Oakland’s high injury network, and has pedestrian safety improvements currently in design.
  • --Martin Luther King Way between 47th Street and the Berkeley border was added for preventative maintenance treatments because it was prioritized in the 2014 Plan and is part of Oakland’s high injury network.
  • --14th Street, High Street, and Bancroft Avenue segments were also streets prioritized in the 2014 Plan but not initially included in the proposed 3-Year Plan due to anticipated capital project coordination challenges. These segments have been added back due to updates to planned construction schedules which will have the streetscape construction work completed before 2021.
  • --The draft plan double-counted two streets in Central East Oakland. When this error was identified, additional budget was available for Central East Oakland local streets. A Street between 82nd Avenue and 98th Avenue was added to the draft final plan reflecting very low PCI and school proximity.
  • --18th St between Market and Brush was added because the segment was a previous Council Worst Street commitment and mistakenly omitted from the draft proposed plan.
  • --13th Avenue and various segments in the Panoramic Hill area were added because they are previous Council Worst Street Utility Cost-Share commitments that are in construction or nearing construction.


Frequently Asked Questions

Why isn't my street on the list?
Sadly, we can’t get to every street that needs to be repaved in just three years and inevitably there are streets in your neighborhood that we won’t get to this time around. But just because we aren't fully repaving your street just yet doesn't mean we can't complete maintenance work in the meantime. Please use Oak311 to report potholes and areas of street deterioration.

The street next to my street is getting repaved, why can’t you pave my street too?

Across Oakland, any street prioritized for repaving is quite possibly next to one (or two or three!) streets that should be repaved as well. The proposed plan did seek to prioritize “neighbors” along same-named streets if the additional segments were also in very poor condition and were near schools, but this wasn’t always possible. Again, just because we aren't fully repaving your street just yet doesn't mean we can't complete maintenance work in the meantime. Please use Oak311 to report potholes and areas of street deterioration.

How was my street’s pavement condition index (PCI) calculated?
All 830+ miles of streets in Oakland are divided into “paving segments.” Paving segments are segments of streets that are relatively uniform in pavement structure (i.e. asphalt versus concrete), age, traffic volume, and type of traffic (i.e. trucks, buses, and/or autos). For each paving segment, a pavement rating is created. The pavement rating is conducted based on what are called “inspection units.” An inspection unit is just a smaller segment of the paving segment. The distress found in the inspection unit is used to calculate the PCI for the inspection unit rated. The PCI values of the inspection units in the section are then used to represent the condition of the entire section. For each inspection unit, a pavement condition rater personally visits the area. They record the severity and quantity of each distress type present in each inspection unit. Then, using all the inspection units for the paving segment, a composite rating index is calculated to create the Pavement Condition Index (PCI).

What is the City’s plan for utility coordination?

One of the perennial challenges to a pavement management program is the work that needs to take place underground. Some work is known in advance, such as pipeline replacements by utility companies, street excavations necessary for developing land, or sewer improvements through the City’s capital program. Other cuts are difficult to predict or contain, such as underground emergencies or private sewer lateral improvements. The Department of Transportation maintains coordination with utility companies on two levels: a monthly coordination meeting to identify near-term permits and conflicts with projects, and a quarterly meeting to establish a 12-month look-ahead for capital project coordination. In addition to individual project notification, these coordination meetings are part of a best-practice approach to ensure timely coordination and project sequencing to reduce subsequent cuts to newly repaved streets.

How was the decision made to prioritize based on equity?
The draft final plan prioritizes local streets based on a combination of street condition and equity factors. This follows two pieces of legislation and the Oakland Department of Race & Equity's Oakland Equity Indicators report. The 2016 Infrastructure Bond Ordinance established the following evaluation framework for projects funded by the bond: a) how the projects address social and geographic equity and provide greater benefit to underserved populations and in geographic areas of greatest need; b) how the projects address improvements to the City's existing core capital assets; c) how the projects maintain or decrease the City's existing operations and maintenance costs; and d) how the projects address improvements to energy consumption, resiliency and mobility. Then in 2018, the City Council adopted a Capital Improvement Program Prioritization Process, which established nine factors that would be used to prioritize the City of Oakland’s Capital Improvement Program. The areas receiving the most scoring weight included equity, health and safety, existing conditions, and economy.

Findings from the Oakland Department of Race & Equity’s Oakland Equity Indicators Project demonstrate broad disparity in services, resources, outcomes, and opportunities among underserved Oaklanders. Based on this, staff reviewed recent demographic data from the U.S. Census American Community Survey (ACS) to identify underserved populations. The definition of underserved populations is a population and/or community that have experienced historic or current disparities, reflected in the Oakland Equity Indicators report and consistent with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission equity analyses. This definition includes people of color, low-income households, people with disabilities, households with severe rent burden, people with limited English proficiency, and youth/seniors. These data points were used to help prioritize repaving based on underserved populations.

Was there any consideration for the bike network, pedestrian volumes, and AC Transit routes in choosing which streets to repave?

Approximately 10 street miles proposed in this plan have existing bikeways and are recommended for upgrades in Let’s Bike Oakland (the draft citywide bike plan), such as from standard bike lanes to buffered bike lanes or to protected bike lanes. Another 25 miles of this paving plan overlaps with recommended new bikeways in the draft bike plan. Together, these 35 miles account for approximately 34% of the paving plan, and 13.5% of the total project mileage recommendations in the draft bike plan.

The proposed plan also identifies approximately 30 miles of paving on streets with existing AC Transit bus service. With appropriate coordination and input from AC Transit, the Department of Transportation can incorporate routine improvements to bus stops along paving corridors, including adjusted red curbs and sidewalk repairs at bus stops to meet current safety and accessibility standards. The 30 miles of transit streets also offer the opportunity to coordinate with AC Transit on more significant changes to bus service, including bus stop optimization and transit priority elements, such as queue jump lanes. As with more significant bikeway improvements, these elements may warrant additional community outreach, to be determined on a project-by-project basis.

Were other requests like speed bumps, traffic calming measures, sidewalk repairs considered in prioritization?
While not part of the prioritization process, these improvements can generally be incorporated into paving projects. In fact, it's partly why the program prioritized repaving near schools: this offers a chance to coordinate implementation of Safe Routes to School safety improvements with repaving.