101 interchange plan causes stir: Burlingame officials, residents voice concerns regarding Peninsula on-, off-ramp proposal

The initiative is brought by San Mateo city officials as a means of resolving the dangerous and congested Highway 101 access point at Poplar Avenue. But the alternative proposal to build ramps accessing the Peninsula overpass alarmed Burlingame residents who live near the city’s southern border.

“I’m against this as it will turn my area into nothing more than a traffic thoroughfare,” said resident Laura Hesselgren, who was one of the 14 speakers pleading with councilmembers to do what they could to block the project.

But as the Burlingame community raises opposition, questions remain regarding their power to influence a final decision.

“I do fear we don’t have a lot of control and I do fear this is being driven by a different city and a state agency that doesn’t put Burlingame first,” said Councilman Michael Brownrigg.

San Mateo officials have amended the configuration to reduce the threat of collisions at the Poplar Avenue access to southbound Highway 101, and now are in the midst of examining projects elsewhere potentially offering permanent congestion solutions.

Building ramps connecting to the Peninsula overpass have been identified as one of the most viable alternatives by San Mateo officials who expect to soon begin an environmental review process with an eye to ultimately starting construction in 2022.

Currently, two design alternatives include aligning southbound on- and off-ramps on the east side of Highway 101 along Amphlett Boulevard. Alternative 1 is estimated to cost $61.5 million and would have a smaller footprint by keeping the ramps tighter against the highway, therefore potentially requiring less right-of-way acquisition. However, that option may require Caltrans to provide exemptions to its design guidelines. Alternative 2 would involve spreading the ramps out a bit further from the highway, but would meet more of Caltrans’ standards and could potentially add capacity for more cars. That option also includes potentially widening the overpass bridge and could cost $76.4 million, according to city staff and consultants. Property acquisition may require eminent domain, but San Mateo officials have raised concerns regarding such a potentially invasive method of taking land.

As the project is brought by San Mateo, city officials in collaboration with county, state and federal transportation agencies will ultimately decide whether the initiative should move ahead.

But since the Peninsula overpass sits adjacent to the border of Burlingame, residents feel their quality of life and home values stand to be adversely affected by a steady steam of cars coming off the highway and into their neighborhood.

Burlingame Mayor Ann Keighran said the fears expressed by residents were well received by the council.

“There is a general consensus here of the traffic impacts on the neighborhood,” she said. “I think that is made perfectly clear here this evening.”

Burlingame councilmembers strongly encouraged San Mateo officials to consider the perspective of the Burlingame residents who worry about being subjected to an anticipated uptick in traffic.

Brad Underwood, director of Public Works for San Mateo, said the concerns were heard and suggested another series of outreach meetings in Burlingame may be in order to assure all opinions are addressed as the project advances.

But rather than pushing the ramps project ahead, Brownrigg instead advocated for San Mateo officials seriously considering shifting their attention to making the needed improvements at the Poplar Avenue interchange to accommodate anticipated future demand.

“In any complex project, there are alternatives being studied by engineers and there is a no-build option. It is meant to be a valuable part of any policy-maker’s tool kit,” he said.

While Gary Heap, San Mateo’s engineering manager leading the project for the city, said all alternatives remain on the table, Brownrigg said some believe a decision has already been made to pursue building the ramps.

Peter Aiello, who owns property near the proposed project site, echoed Brownrigg’s sentiment.

“It is terrible what they are trying to do and I recommend we do a no-build,” he said.

Burlingame resident Tim Smith said he felt San Mateo officials are giving more consideration to the ramps proposal than they would if the project territory were closer to the center of their city.

“Most of the problem this causes is in Burlingame,” he said. “This wouldn’t be looked at the same way it if wasn’t right on the border.”

austin@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 105