19th Avenue/Fashion Island project finalizing design: San Mateo is putting finishing touches on design of major bike lane and congestion improvement project
A major infrastructure project along 19th Avenue/Fashion Island Boulevard in San Mateo is close to finishing its final design, with commissioners voicing support for the project before it goes to the council.
The city has highlighted the corridor, between Pacific and Mariners Island boulevards, as a high priority for pedestrian, cycling and congestion improvements. According to a previous staff report, there have been about 200 collisions between 2019 and 2024 along the road, six of which have involved either pedestrians or cyclists.
The planned project is a comprehensive road and bike lane effort along 19th Avenue, which turns into Fashion Island Boulevard. The corridor also intersects with highway on- and off-ramps, including Highway 101 and State Route 92.
Many residents have hoped the city would make improvements to the road, as there is one lane in each direction, and it’s one of the only entrances into Foster City, leading to high congestion during peak commute hours.
The project would implement Class IV bike lanes — which are separated and thus more protected from vehicles — and extend them to Pacific Boulevard. There would be a two-lane bike lane on western portion of the corridor.
“One of the unique components of this is that we switched from a typical one-way bike facility on either side of the road … to what’s called a two-way facility where they both lie on the same side,” Senior Engineer Bethany Lopez said during a recent Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission meeting.
A more traditional set-up, one lane on each side, would be implemented on the eastern portion of the road.
Recommended for you
To improve traffic congestion, the project proposes changes to the often-congested Fashion Island Boulevard and Norfolk Street intersection by lengthening the left turn lane — which would turn into a lane for left turns and through traffic — by about 550 feet. There would also be traffic signal modifications and a reconfiguration of lanes on the Seal Slough bridge, creating two eastbound lanes and one westbound lane. Currently, the configuration comprises one eastbound lane and two westbound.
There would also be a new median that separates out State Route 92 off-ramp traffic to eliminate a high-collision point at the ARCO gas station driveway.
“[The median] restricts the movements coming in and out of the gas station to interfere with that off-ramp traffic and vice versa. The off-ramp traffic can no longer make that turn into the gas station from this location,” Lopez said.
Other changes include pedestrian improvements, such as new curb ramps, and a new pedestrian walkway on the south side of the Seal Slough Bridge.
Commissioners were overall supportive of the project, with the City Council reviewing the item later this month.
“In my view, this is a high-quality, safety-driven corridor reconstruction project that uses modern multimodal designs and delivers real and necessary safety benefits at the same time,” Commissioner Rich Kranz said during the meeting.
The project is expected to cost about $28 million, with most funds coming from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, about $3 million from Regional Measure 3 funding and about $500,000 directly from San Mateo.
The City has over $300M in capital projects, while this is a nice to have. It is puzzling how this is getting done before all the other things. Would prefer a more realistic project that cost half as much and use the other half to address some of the $300M. This is great example of government waste when the City is given grant funding they spend all of it not because it is needed, but because it is available. Does not teach fiscal prudence and responsibility.
This is the location where Mark Kremer died while walking a year or so ago. Making the street safer is not a "nice to have."
I believe that 2% ($500K) of the cost is coming from the City and the rest from grants. It would be "government waste" not to pursue this project now at such a low cost.
Perhaps you should have attended the meetings for the project, where public feedback was strong and universally positive.
San Mateo has almost no safe east/west cycling corridors. Every inch for cars, nothing for other modes. And this route is just terrifying. People are injured and killed on streets like this. This project isn't perfect, if anything it needs even better cycling infrastructure, but it is good. It is great. It is absolutely needed.
The city is getting almost every penny for this critical project from grants. Why would anyone turn away free money to build something this critical?
Can't wait for these improvements. My parents will be able to safely walk to the grocery store (no longer driving) and I can visit them by bicycle in the comings from Hayward Park Caltrain after work.
As long as these projects don’t force lane diets onto drivers, they can go for it. But as Mr. Morgan noted, shouldn’t these capital projects focus on getting the most bang for the buck instead of catering to a subset of bike riders who consist mostly of recreational bike riders? As for the staff report of about 200 collisions in the past six years, how many drivers have gone through that corridor in the past six years? One million drivers, 10 million, 100 million? How about reporting a percentage to see if it really is an issue before wasting money on ill-conceived plans that may increase traffic and idle times.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(6) comments
The City has over $300M in capital projects, while this is a nice to have. It is puzzling how this is getting done before all the other things. Would prefer a more realistic project that cost half as much and use the other half to address some of the $300M. This is great example of government waste when the City is given grant funding they spend all of it not because it is needed, but because it is available. Does not teach fiscal prudence and responsibility.
This is the location where Mark Kremer died while walking a year or so ago. Making the street safer is not a "nice to have."
I believe that 2% ($500K) of the cost is coming from the City and the rest from grants. It would be "government waste" not to pursue this project now at such a low cost.
Perhaps you should have attended the meetings for the project, where public feedback was strong and universally positive.
100% Joe! Well said.
San Mateo has almost no safe east/west cycling corridors. Every inch for cars, nothing for other modes. And this route is just terrifying. People are injured and killed on streets like this. This project isn't perfect, if anything it needs even better cycling infrastructure, but it is good. It is great. It is absolutely needed.
The city is getting almost every penny for this critical project from grants. Why would anyone turn away free money to build something this critical?
Can't wait for these improvements. My parents will be able to safely walk to the grocery store (no longer driving) and I can visit them by bicycle in the comings from Hayward Park Caltrain after work.
As long as these projects don’t force lane diets onto drivers, they can go for it. But as Mr. Morgan noted, shouldn’t these capital projects focus on getting the most bang for the buck instead of catering to a subset of bike riders who consist mostly of recreational bike riders? As for the staff report of about 200 collisions in the past six years, how many drivers have gone through that corridor in the past six years? One million drivers, 10 million, 100 million? How about reporting a percentage to see if it really is an issue before wasting money on ill-conceived plans that may increase traffic and idle times.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.