Concerns are growing for businesses off of Broadway in Burlingame because of city plans to slow down traffic and ease bicycle access on California Drive.
When the city first proposed the project, the businesses were concerned about parking along California Drive in front of the stores, and now it is about unprotected left turn lanes. John Kevranian, Broadway Business Improvement District president, said if the plan prevents vehicles from making an unprotected left turn into the businesses’ driveways, the businesses will be severely impacted.
“We are trying to compromise with the city,” Kevranian said. “We are willing to give up the parking spots on California Drive, for the cyclists safety, but we want customers to be able to easily access the businesses’ driveways.”
The businesses on the west side of California Drive south of Broadway will need to turn into the residential areas to access the driveways if the city proceeds with its plan, Kevranian added.
The city received lots of emails from both concerned and supportive community members, said City Manager Lisa Goldman, and it’s looking to see ways to alleviate those concerns.
Maverick Jack’s owner Michael Mallie said his primary worry is customers traveling south won’t be able to make a left turn into the restaurant’s parking lot.
Mallie has been a business owner in the city for seven years and he said he doesn’t want to prevent progress, but said he hopes to be included in a conversation so there can be a solution that works for all parties.
“We are talking about a one block section and road striping. We can definitely work together to find a solution that works for everyone,” Mallie said.
However, Public Works Director Syed Murtuza said the issue for the city is California Drive has county-identified safety concerns.
“In between Carmelita and Broadway, there is not enough room to provide a center left turn lane, bike lanes and maintain vehicle lanes. However, the small section between Broadway and Carmelita calls for a double yellow stripe, which prohibits left turns in the midblock; this was done to prevent potential collisions related to unprotected left turns,” Murtuza said.
Those who want to go to Maverick Jack’s will still be able to make a U-turn at Carmelita Avenue, he said. Vehicles will still be able to turn left at the Broadway and Carmelita Avenue intersections, he added.
Recommended for you
“This feature prioritizes safety over convenience, that being said, the city’s traffic engineering staff is looking into the feasibility to allow left turns in the midblock while maintaining safety, however, it is important to note this is a tradeoff,” Murtuza said.
Charlie Mannina, who owns the property on 1145 California Drive with Aria Spa and Kumon Learning Center, said it is very sad this project had very little transparency.
“To get things done, you need to get people in the middle, the left lane is an extreme imposition. The thing that concerns me is I have a parking lot and they are going to want to use it like a public lot when it is not,” Mannina said.
However, Goldman said the city did reach out but it’s clear some people didn’t know about the project.
“We will do our best to find additional ways to reach people for all of our projects going forward,” Goldman said.
Mannina questioned why the city couldn’t put the bike lane next to the metered parking spaces like north of Broadway.
However, Murtuza said that the city will restore those west-side parking spaces on California Drive after the completion of the Broadway Grade Separation project to raise the rail tracks above the road.
The project is part of the city’s California Drive Bicycle Facility Project, set to be completed in October, and will create a continuous bike lane through the city from Murchison Drive to Peninsula Avenue. The current phase is a 0.8-mile stretch of California Drive between Broadway and Oak Grove Avenue. In March, the project sparked concerns from a number of nearby business owners who claimed the city took away around a dozen parking spots in front of their businesses for the bike lane, without notification. The city claimed it sent out notices via the U.S. Postal Service.
The bike lanes will be protected by bollards — reflective vertical posts — creating space between the vehicles and the cyclists answering requests from the community for dedicated bike lanes, Murtuza previously said.
The city’s plan is to continue to monitor the improvements. It will make modifications if deemed necessary for safety purposes.
Good luck to businesses in Burlingame but if North Central San Mateo’s road diet was any indication, you’ll eventually be out of luck. One has to wonder whether Burlingame needs to use roadwork grant money before they lose it. Unfortunately for those businesses, they’ll have to deal with it, whether they like it or not. Make your voice heard the next time candidates, incumbent or otherwise, want your vote - assuming you haven’t sold your business or left the area.
Only a socialist would complain about bike lanes around businesses. Any real capitalist knows that more bikes bring more business, while cars only bring more pollution, danger, and most importantly more cost:
And only a car-socialist would keep complaining about providing Safe-Routes-To-School in a low-income neighborhood, so the people with too many cars don't have to walk around the corner.
Our taxes are meant to pay for "Transportation" - not so rich people can store their cars everywhere.
Easy, easygerd, you seem to forget what cars also bring, and most important, customers who patronize businesses. Also, what makes you think a 10 year old article on how bicycles bring more business still holds true today? You may as well roll back the years to when only bikes, but no cars, were around, to support your assertion… BTW, thanks for the personal attack, although you may want to brush up on socialism and capitalism to be more effective. But if you’re serious, how about we try an experiment should this road diet come to pass? You sign a legal agreement to make shopkeepers whole should revenues fail to increase from cyclist traffic. If revenues increase, then in what’s likely a rare moment for you (IMO), someone will say you were right. What say you, easygerd? Happy National Ice Cream Cake Day!
A 10 year old article is perfect for this as the knowledge has been tested since the 80s and 90s all over European (and American) cities.
First of all better facilities for people on foot or on bike do never prevent customers with cars to patronize any businesses. In fact bike lanes just give even more customers a chance to come there. So a business should regard this as a business opportunity.
There are plenty of articles, studies, research papers out there. Google might help finding them.
If a business can't make it in an environment with more people around, let capitalism take care of it. If they can't take advantage of a (still very unique) business opportunity of having bike lanes nearby, there are plenty of empty stores in car centric downtowns all across America to choose from. They could even save on rent there. And other businesses with better business brains will take over.
PS.: you can't call "socialist" a "personal attack" and then ask for a bailout for hypothetically failing businesses. You can see how that can be confusing?
Easy, easygerd, you seem to forget what cars also bring, and most important, customers who patronize businesses. Again, what makes you think… Wait a second, my previous comment still holds. So in addition to the personal attack, now you’re attempting to put words into my mouth to justify your “socialist” crack? I notice you haven’t taken me up on my offer… Unwilling to put your money where your mouth is? Happy National Tapioca Day! Perhaps folks can bike over to Burlingame and partake.
How do you write a whole article about bike lanes on California Ave. without noting there are already two bike lanes 20 yards to the east on Carolan Ave that are exactly parallel???
You use statistics like a fish uses a bicycle. If any of the other streets were as underutilized as the Carolan bike lanes, we would all be getting around a lot easier and faster. Want more useless factoids? A car can carry 5-10 bags of groceries, a bike can carry 1/2 a bag. Get it?
And as long as the Bay Area doesn't have a solid bike lane network all bike lanes might look underused to the untrained eye. But bikes are also smaller, move easier through traffic backups and are often overlooked - is there a traffic count to know if they really are underused?
But then again, do those bike lanes currently lead anywhere? What the "zero" on all these other street would tell us is that there isn't much of a network there.
5-10 grocery bags btw. is easy with a cargo bike. I have done it even with a regular bike.
Most cars will have a hard time beating these guys:
To this trained eye (spending several hours a day on Burlingame and San Mateo streets on foot, two wheels and four) they are underutilized by a lot. They contributed "zero emissions" for sure in the month of January as they pedalled near zero miles. Your website is ridiculous and you must mean 5-10 bags of chips.
So we found the solution. 40:2 means Burlingame is lacking a solid network of bike lanes. Once that is built we can re-visit those statistics. Apparently they can only go up from here.
The interesting factors here are the council members, some even show aspirations for higher office in San Mateo County.
Donna Colson: "her areas of expertise: affordable housing, green energy and sustainability, fiscal responsibility, pension management and economic development. "
Ricardo Ortiz: "believes in embracing a dynamic, environmentally sensitive future that respects our past and in doing our part to solve regional problems without compromising our small-town charm."
Peter Stevenson: "top issues for him are finding creative solutions to affordability, environmental issues and looking to improve the city’s carbon footprint and sustainable mobility."
Michael Brownrigg: financial expertise; provide clean water in India, tire recycling in US, productive farming, ...
Emily Beach: couldn't deliver bike lanes on ECR, saying they will come to California Drive instead, where they make more sense because of the business district there.
Bike lanes help with affordability, sustainability, fiscal responsibility, economic development, environmental future, small-town charm, carbon footprint, etc. It looks like all 5 council members should be on board and able to push this through. Every other decision would look rather weak and pointless at this point.
Even worse, Burlingame received $1.6M in Measure A funding to put bike lanes on California Drive already. Emily Beach sits on the Board of SMCTA that hands out that funding specifically for bike projects. If the city of Burlingame now would go back from providing bike lanes on California Drive it would look like council members embezzled San Mateo County bicycle funds with Emily Beaches' help. Not a good look for somebody who wants to represent the whole county.
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!
(12) comments
Good luck to businesses in Burlingame but if North Central San Mateo’s road diet was any indication, you’ll eventually be out of luck. One has to wonder whether Burlingame needs to use roadwork grant money before they lose it. Unfortunately for those businesses, they’ll have to deal with it, whether they like it or not. Make your voice heard the next time candidates, incumbent or otherwise, want your vote - assuming you haven’t sold your business or left the area.
When did you become a socialist?
Only a socialist would complain about bike lanes around businesses. Any real capitalist knows that more bikes bring more business, while cars only bring more pollution, danger, and most importantly more cost:
https://momentummag.com/how-bicycles-bring-business/
And only a car-socialist would keep complaining about providing Safe-Routes-To-School in a low-income neighborhood, so the people with too many cars don't have to walk around the corner.
Our taxes are meant to pay for "Transportation" - not so rich people can store their cars everywhere.
Easy, easygerd, you seem to forget what cars also bring, and most important, customers who patronize businesses. Also, what makes you think a 10 year old article on how bicycles bring more business still holds true today? You may as well roll back the years to when only bikes, but no cars, were around, to support your assertion… BTW, thanks for the personal attack, although you may want to brush up on socialism and capitalism to be more effective. But if you’re serious, how about we try an experiment should this road diet come to pass? You sign a legal agreement to make shopkeepers whole should revenues fail to increase from cyclist traffic. If revenues increase, then in what’s likely a rare moment for you (IMO), someone will say you were right. What say you, easygerd? Happy National Ice Cream Cake Day!
Happy cake day to you as well.
A 10 year old article is perfect for this as the knowledge has been tested since the 80s and 90s all over European (and American) cities.
First of all better facilities for people on foot or on bike do never prevent customers with cars to patronize any businesses. In fact bike lanes just give even more customers a chance to come there. So a business should regard this as a business opportunity.
There are plenty of articles, studies, research papers out there. Google might help finding them.
e.g. "Why Businesses Want Bike Riding Customers"
https://momentummag.com/why-businesses-want-bike-riding-customers/
1. People on bikes make more unplanned stops
2. Tourist spending is increasingly being spent in bike-friendly areas
3. People on bikes will travel farther for non-essential errands
4. Bike infrastructure brings more business than car infrastructure
5. People on bikes shop more often.
6. People on bikes just spend more money. It’s that simple.
Even AARP picked up on this:
"10 Ways Bicycle-Friendly Streets Are Good for People Who Don't Ride Bikes"
https://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/getting-around/info-2016/why-bicycling-infrastructure-is-good-for-people-who-dont-ride-bikes.html
If a business can't make it in an environment with more people around, let capitalism take care of it. If they can't take advantage of a (still very unique) business opportunity of having bike lanes nearby, there are plenty of empty stores in car centric downtowns all across America to choose from. They could even save on rent there. And other businesses with better business brains will take over.
PS.: you can't call "socialist" a "personal attack" and then ask for a bailout for hypothetically failing businesses. You can see how that can be confusing?
Easy, easygerd, you seem to forget what cars also bring, and most important, customers who patronize businesses. Again, what makes you think… Wait a second, my previous comment still holds. So in addition to the personal attack, now you’re attempting to put words into my mouth to justify your “socialist” crack? I notice you haven’t taken me up on my offer… Unwilling to put your money where your mouth is? Happy National Tapioca Day! Perhaps folks can bike over to Burlingame and partake.
How do you write a whole article about bike lanes on California Ave. without noting there are already two bike lanes 20 yards to the east on Carolan Ave that are exactly parallel???
Absolutely. And if we start counting, we should do it correctly from East to West:
SR-101: 10 car lanes, 0 bike lanes
Rollins Rd: 3 car lanes, 0 bike lanes
Carolan Ave: 4 car lanes, 2 bike lanes
California Ave: 6 car lanes, 0 bike lanes
El Camino Real: 4 car lanes, 2 tree lanes, 0 bike lanes
and let's not forget all the small parallel streets that have 4 lanes for cars and 0 bike lanes
That is easily some 30 lanes for cars vs 2 bike lanes on Carolan, which stop right before the school, where they would be needed the most.
You use statistics like a fish uses a bicycle. If any of the other streets were as underutilized as the Carolan bike lanes, we would all be getting around a lot easier and faster. Want more useless factoids? A car can carry 5-10 bags of groceries, a bike can carry 1/2 a bag. Get it?
And as long as the Bay Area doesn't have a solid bike lane network all bike lanes might look underused to the untrained eye. But bikes are also smaller, move easier through traffic backups and are often overlooked - is there a traffic count to know if they really are underused?
But then again, do those bike lanes currently lead anywhere? What the "zero" on all these other street would tell us is that there isn't much of a network there.
5-10 grocery bags btw. is easy with a cargo bike. I have done it even with a regular bike.
Most cars will have a hard time beating these guys:
https://mymodernmet.com/heavy-bicycle-loads-10-photos/
... and with far less pollution, noise, carbon emissions, and most importantly less cost.
To this trained eye (spending several hours a day on Burlingame and San Mateo streets on foot, two wheels and four) they are underutilized by a lot. They contributed "zero emissions" for sure in the month of January as they pedalled near zero miles. Your website is ridiculous and you must mean 5-10 bags of chips.
So we found the solution. 40:2 means Burlingame is lacking a solid network of bike lanes. Once that is built we can re-visit those statistics. Apparently they can only go up from here.
The interesting factors here are the council members, some even show aspirations for higher office in San Mateo County.
Donna Colson: "her areas of expertise: affordable housing, green energy and sustainability, fiscal responsibility, pension management and economic development. "
Ricardo Ortiz: "believes in embracing a dynamic, environmentally sensitive future that respects our past and in doing our part to solve regional problems without compromising our small-town charm."
Peter Stevenson: "top issues for him are finding creative solutions to affordability, environmental issues and looking to improve the city’s carbon footprint and sustainable mobility."
Michael Brownrigg: financial expertise; provide clean water in India, tire recycling in US, productive farming, ...
Emily Beach: couldn't deliver bike lanes on ECR, saying they will come to California Drive instead, where they make more sense because of the business district there.
Bike lanes help with affordability, sustainability, fiscal responsibility, economic development, environmental future, small-town charm, carbon footprint, etc. It looks like all 5 council members should be on board and able to push this through. Every other decision would look rather weak and pointless at this point.
Even worse, Burlingame received $1.6M in Measure A funding to put bike lanes on California Drive already. Emily Beach sits on the Board of SMCTA that hands out that funding specifically for bike projects. If the city of Burlingame now would go back from providing bike lanes on California Drive it would look like council members embezzled San Mateo County bicycle funds with Emily Beaches' help. Not a good look for somebody who wants to represent the whole county.
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.