To download a projected shapefile of this dataset, please click "Download Projected Shapefile: Existing and Proposed Bikeways" under "Attachments" below.

Bikeways are corridors designated for bicycle travel. This layer includes Oakland’s Proposed Bikeway Network, streets proposed for bicycle improvements in Oakland's Bicycle Plan, as well as existing bikeways.

Bikeways are defined by "class," each with specific characteristics (see Definition). The fields “Proposed Class” and “ExistingClass” show the proposed and current state of the network, based on these class definitions. For some existing bikeways, the proposed bikeway class is not the same as the existing class.

Designations reflect existing and proposed bikeways as of December 31, 2022. This dataset was last updated February 7, 2023. Data is typically updated twice per year, in January and July.

Class type (0, 0.0, 1, 1X, 2, 2.0, 2.3, 2.3A, 2.3B, 2B, 2B.0, 2B.2, 2B.3, 2B.3A, 3, 3.0, 3A, 3A.0, 3A.3, 3B, or 4, 4.2, 4.2B, and 4.3A) appears in the ProposedClass (ProposedCl) and ExistingClass (ExistingCl) fields.

If the Class doesn't include a decimal point, the bikeway is existing (or proposed) on both sides of a two-way street or on one side of a one-way street. A decimal point indicates that there is a different class on each side of a two-way street.

Class 1 = bike paths, paved rights-of-way that are completely separated from the street, and typically shared with pedestrians. (Class 1X denotes a path that is thought to be substandard, like the Posey Tube, due to width or other factors.)
Class 2 & variants = bike lanes, lanes striped on streets and designated specifically for bicyclists.
• Class 2 = bike lanes
• Class 2.0 = bike lanes one side of the street, no facility one side of street
• Class 2.3 = bike lanes one side of street, signage only bike route one side of street
• Class 2.3A = bike lanes one side of street, sharrows one side of collector or arterial street
• Class 2.3B = bike lanes one side of street, sharrows one side of local street
• Class 2B = buffered bike lanes
• Class 2B.0 = buffered bike lanes one side of street, no facility one side of street
• Class 2B.2 = buffered bike lanes one side of street, bike lanes one side of street
• Class 2B.3A = buffered bike lanes one side of the street, sharrows one side of street
Class 3 = bike routes, streets on which bicyclists share travel lanes with drivers and are designated by wayfinding signage only. Routes with sharrows are designated as Class 3A. (One-way facilities on two-way streets are designated as 3.0 or 3A.0, respectively.)
• Class 3B = neighborhood bike routes (AKA bike boulevards), bikeways on residential streets that prioritize through trips for bicyclists. Oakland’s Class 3B facilities are designated with pavement markings, traffic calming measures, and may have wayfinding signage.
Class 4 = parking protected bikeways, striped on streets, separated from moving traffic by striped buffers and/or vertical elements (delineators, planters, curb). Variants include 4.2B and 4.2 for separated bike lanes on one side and buffered or plain bike lanes on the other side.
Class 0 = no bikeway is proposed or existing, as applicable. (There are three sign-only segments that are currently existing, but not proposed.)
Class 0.0 = no bikeway is existing but the street is ridable in it's current condition.

Oakland Council Districts

The purpose of Oakland’s Equity Indicators Report is to develop a baseline quantitative framework that can be used by City staff and community members alike to better understand the impacts of race, measure inequities, and track changes in the disparities for different groups over time. This framework can then be used to guide and inform policies that address these disparities.

In Oakland and across the Bay Area, there are wide disparities in economic outcomes for different groups. Structural barriers in society result in some residents having more access than others to economic opportunities that build wealth and financial stability. This Theme not only includes the standard measures of economic well-being (e.g., unemployment, poverty) but it also evaluates racial and ethnic disparities in the quality of jobs, business development, and elements of financial health.

Education has long been an area of well-known disparities in outcomes across racial and ethnic groups, both in Oakland and throughout the country. Yet, education is also perhaps the single most powerful tool to rectify disparities in other Themes, such as Economy. This Theme includes measures that span from traditional measures of student attendance and achievement to measures of teachers, recognizing that teachers play a critical role in a child’s education.

The Oakland Equity Indicators framework is structured at four levels: Citywide, Theme, Topic, and Indicator. The Citywide framework consists of six Themes that cover broad areas of people’s lives: 1-Economy, 2-Education, 3-Public Health, 4-Housing, 5-Public Safety, and 6-Neighborhood and Civic Life. These Themes are not exhaustive, but were chosen based on areas of inequity in Oakland.

Public health relates to many of the other Themes in the Equity Indicators framework. Public health outcomes are tied to housing quality, environment, and neighborhood. Social determinants of health include poverty, employment, and educational attainment. The public health field has historically been dedicated to understanding and addressing racial and ethnic disparities in health outcomes, but the complexity of these issues contributes to the persistence of inequity.

Oakland has a long history of activism around issues of inequity and social justice. It is, therefore, not surprising that Oakland was chosen in 2017 to be among the first cohort of five cities to develop local Equity Indicators tools in partnership with the City University of New York’s Institute for State and Local Governance (CUNY ISLG) and with funding from the Rockefeller Foundation.

For a city to thrive, it is essential that neighborhoods are safe and accessible, and that residents have the opportunity to access city services and hold the city government accountable. Oakland residents face disparities based on where they live in the city, with majority non-White neighborhoods faring worse than majority White neighborhoods. Neighborhood differences rooted in historical segregation result in disparate outcomes for people of color, especially African American and Latino residents.

The Financial Health Topic includes three Indicators that consider economic security and stability through measures of banking, income, and poverty. The first Indicator measures disparities in the rate of access to healthy financial institutions in White and non-White zip codes. The second Indicator measures racial and ethnic disparities in median household income, while the third Indicator focuses on poverty.