The San Mateo City Council has agreed to start the process of removing the bike lanes on Humboldt Street from Second Avenue to Indian Avenue, which would bring back about 100 parking spaces.
With a host of bike and pedestrian projects in the works, San Mateo commissioners and staff hope to avoid another community-dividing project.
During a July 9 meeting, Sustainability & Infrastructure commissioners discussed numerous projects in the pipeline, ranging from improvements to the Third Avenue and Norfolk Street intersection to enhanced road markings on Peninsula Avenue.
But some of the projects are receiving more pushback than others, and in light of a highly-controversial bike lane project in the North Central neighborhood, the need for better outreach seems to be top-of-mind for city leaders.
As part of a $1.5 million federal grant, bike lanes along Humboldt Street and Poplar Avenue were installed in the area, removing about 200 parking spaces, and the initiative caused an uproar in the neighborhood. Earlier this year, just a couple years after their installation, the City Council voted to start the process of removing some of the lanes to reinstate about 100 parking spaces. Not only has the move angered some community members, including cyclists and bike advocates, but it likely means the city will have to repay much of the grant. Opponents of the bike lanes have said that neighborhood residents voiced their disapproval prior to the implementation, but the city pushed ahead anyway.
Among the future projects, Public Works Director Matt Fabry said a Class IV bike lane project — which are lanes that are separated and thus more protected from vehicles — on Delaware Street as well as one on 19th Avenue and Fashion Island Boulevard are also raising concerns among some community members.
“We’re fully built out and we’ve got limited right of way and so we’re facing trade-offs on these types of projects … in terms of potentially removing a lane of travel or removing parking,” Fabry said. “We are getting definite pushback on some of those projects with regard to some of the tradeoffs.”
The upcoming Delaware Street project, for instance, will upgrade the bike lanes between 19th Avenue and Pacific Boulevard and improve pedestrian crossings. Both northbound and southbound lanes will receive more protected bike lanes with better delineation, but South Delaware Street will go from two lanes of traffic down to one lane from Bermuda Drive to Saratoga Drive, with dedicated turn lanes opening up after Saratoga Drive.
Recommended for you
While the project has received support from many cyclists and pedestrians, nearby residents and even the CEO of the San Mateo County Event Center had previously voiced concerns, mostly related to congestion concerns and emergency vehicle access.
Another project in the works would construct Class IV separated bike lanes and pedestrian improvements on 19th Avenue and Fashion Island Boulevard.
“We are starting to hear rumblings of concern about the Fashion Island and 19th Avenue project,” Fabry said, noting there will be a community meeting on Tuesday, July 15, which he said will hopefully result in helpful feedback.
“There are concerns about the congestion piece of it so we definitely want to make sure that people have an opportunity to hear the aspects of the project that we think will improve the congestion aspect of it, so that hopefully may alleviate some of their concerns,” he said.
Commissioner Sigalle Michael said she is optimistic that the city can stave off another controversy similar to the Humboldt bike lanes.
“The impression we get is that it seems like lessons have been learned from Humboldt, and it seems like the outreach is much more robust,” Michael said.
Let's make on thing clear from the beginning: Streets are made for Transportation and not Private Car Storage. Why are we paying for these "Squatters" with too many cars?
The municipal code allows everyone to have 2-4 garage and driveway spots for their own cars. So this isn't about poor people, this is about a very small percentage of people with 3,4 and more cars and a bunch of collectors. And of course "corporate interest". This is about a city manager who doesn't enforce municipal code in this neighborhood, which is always to the detriment of honest people.
"After disastrous North Central project" -
First of all: who came up with that clickbait header?
Secondly: the "uproar" did not come from Humboldt Street residents. It came from a small coalition of MAGA and YIMBY "influencers" colluding to promote self-interest. The uproar comes from people living in rich neighborhoods. Once these neighborhoods got a permit system to reduce on-street private car storage, they moved their excess inventory to a neighborhood where municipal codes have not been enforced and car collectors can thrive.
Here is what's really going on:
The City of San Mateo and the county have ca. 20-30 plans since the 1970s putting bike lanes into the North Central and similar neighborhoods. These areas are called Equity Focus Areas and council members have been promising for over 50 years to bring Transportation Equity to these low-income areas. And Alexander von Humboldt - the first environmentalist - approved of the plan and three men voted to finally put these 30 plans into reality - against 2 women, Diane Papan and Amo Lee. Shaming all female politicians in the process.
Shame also on this combination of MAGA and YIMBY politicians on the current council (Mayor Rob Newsom, Vice Mayor Adam Loraine, Lisa Diaz Nash, Danielle Cwirko-Godycki, Nicole Fernandez). No real Democrat would ever vote against sustainable, high-density, cheap, healthy transportation for children going to school. Only San Mateo Democrats would - shame on them too.
easygerd - I actually agree with you on this one. Most of our streets are narrow, we do not have sidewalks and yet cars are parked everywhere. If one buys a car or cars, one should have parking space for it on his or her property. Overnight parking on the street should be highly restrictive. For example, I see school children struggle walking to school on Cipriani in Belmont. Surprising that we have not seen any fatalities. Cars everywhere and the garages are full of junk.
It's ironic that some of the most virulent defenders of on free on street car storage are those on the right that frequently criticize the government paying for what individuals can do for themselves.
Thanks for your comment, joebob91, but the good old US of A is not Japan. That being said, perhaps we should adopt some of Japan’s policies, such as for crime and punishment. Doesn’t Japan have a 99% conviction rate and doesn’t Japan have the death penalty for at least a dozen capital crimes?
It’s ironic you and eGerd demonize “MAGA” and “those on the right” when those on the left control most, if not all, Bay Area counties now and in the past. If you think your problem is with “MAGA” or “those on the right” you’re arguments hold no sway because “those on the right” aren’t in a position to make a difference. Your problem is with those on left and if you can’t convince them your concerns are valid… A potential solution. How about you or your fellow kindred spirit eGerd entertain a run for elected position where you can make the differences you and eGerd would like to see? But aren’t parking requirements formalized in municipal and state codes? If so, you may need to seek higher elected office. Good luck. If you have common sense solutions that benefit the masses, I’d vote for you.
Thank you Dirk, this is also a huge safety hazard for Emergency Vehicles. Most residential streets are 28ft wide and still allow parking on both sides. This takes away 16ft for parking and leaves only 12 ft or driving. Emergency Response Vehicles are often 8.5ft wide, so now they have to slow down quite a bit to make it through those narrow streets and hopefully no other car is blocking or double parking.
If we want to see competent leadership on this topic, we don't even have to go to Japan. We have that right here in San Mateo County and since 1963 already:
A system like Menlo Parks forces people to take responsibility for their own property and the streets are free and clean for all deliveries, tree trimmers, moving trucks, garbage pickup, etc.
And for the occasional overnight guest or visitor you can use one of your permits - and $2 per night doesn't make it an "equity issue" either.
Road diets and bike lanes save lives. We have had three pedestrian deaths in a few months in San Mateo. The DJ also reported on a lawsuit related to a garbage truck that killed a teacher biking in Atherton - the cost of this will ultimately fall on taxpayers.
Here we go again…So is there a federal use-it-or-lose-it grant associated with any of these new lane-diet projects? If so, residents should know that money may need to be spent in the future to reverse any changes, as in North Central. Good luck to the City but don’t think that these lane diets will decrease the amount of overall traffic – drivers may find another route or will be happy to idle in traffic. As usual, it’s tough (unsafe, too) to lug 10 bags of groceries or a case of water while riding a bike. The winners? Union labor working in installing and uninstalling bike lanes.
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!
(7) comments
Let's make on thing clear from the beginning: Streets are made for Transportation and not Private Car Storage. Why are we paying for these "Squatters" with too many cars?
The municipal code allows everyone to have 2-4 garage and driveway spots for their own cars. So this isn't about poor people, this is about a very small percentage of people with 3,4 and more cars and a bunch of collectors. And of course "corporate interest". This is about a city manager who doesn't enforce municipal code in this neighborhood, which is always to the detriment of honest people.
"After disastrous North Central project" -
First of all: who came up with that clickbait header?
Secondly: the "uproar" did not come from Humboldt Street residents. It came from a small coalition of MAGA and YIMBY "influencers" colluding to promote self-interest. The uproar comes from people living in rich neighborhoods. Once these neighborhoods got a permit system to reduce on-street private car storage, they moved their excess inventory to a neighborhood where municipal codes have not been enforced and car collectors can thrive.
Here is what's really going on:
The City of San Mateo and the county have ca. 20-30 plans since the 1970s putting bike lanes into the North Central and similar neighborhoods. These areas are called Equity Focus Areas and council members have been promising for over 50 years to bring Transportation Equity to these low-income areas. And Alexander von Humboldt - the first environmentalist - approved of the plan and three men voted to finally put these 30 plans into reality - against 2 women, Diane Papan and Amo Lee. Shaming all female politicians in the process.
Shame also on this combination of MAGA and YIMBY politicians on the current council (Mayor Rob Newsom, Vice Mayor Adam Loraine, Lisa Diaz Nash, Danielle Cwirko-Godycki, Nicole Fernandez). No real Democrat would ever vote against sustainable, high-density, cheap, healthy transportation for children going to school. Only San Mateo Democrats would - shame on them too.
easygerd - I actually agree with you on this one. Most of our streets are narrow, we do not have sidewalks and yet cars are parked everywhere. If one buys a car or cars, one should have parking space for it on his or her property. Overnight parking on the street should be highly restrictive. For example, I see school children struggle walking to school on Cipriani in Belmont. Surprising that we have not seen any fatalities. Cars everywhere and the garages are full of junk.
Agreed. In Japan, you are not allowed to purchase a car if you can't prove that you have off street parking.
https://www.parkingreformatlas.org/parking-reform-cases-1/japan's-proof-of-parking-rule-(shako-shomeisho)
It's ironic that some of the most virulent defenders of on free on street car storage are those on the right that frequently criticize the government paying for what individuals can do for themselves.
Thanks for your comment, joebob91, but the good old US of A is not Japan. That being said, perhaps we should adopt some of Japan’s policies, such as for crime and punishment. Doesn’t Japan have a 99% conviction rate and doesn’t Japan have the death penalty for at least a dozen capital crimes?
It’s ironic you and eGerd demonize “MAGA” and “those on the right” when those on the left control most, if not all, Bay Area counties now and in the past. If you think your problem is with “MAGA” or “those on the right” you’re arguments hold no sway because “those on the right” aren’t in a position to make a difference. Your problem is with those on left and if you can’t convince them your concerns are valid… A potential solution. How about you or your fellow kindred spirit eGerd entertain a run for elected position where you can make the differences you and eGerd would like to see? But aren’t parking requirements formalized in municipal and state codes? If so, you may need to seek higher elected office. Good luck. If you have common sense solutions that benefit the masses, I’d vote for you.
Thank you Dirk, this is also a huge safety hazard for Emergency Vehicles. Most residential streets are 28ft wide and still allow parking on both sides. This takes away 16ft for parking and leaves only 12 ft or driving. Emergency Response Vehicles are often 8.5ft wide, so now they have to slow down quite a bit to make it through those narrow streets and hopefully no other car is blocking or double parking.
If we want to see competent leadership on this topic, we don't even have to go to Japan. We have that right here in San Mateo County and since 1963 already:
https://menlopark.gov/Government/Departments/Police/Parking-permits
A system like Menlo Parks forces people to take responsibility for their own property and the streets are free and clean for all deliveries, tree trimmers, moving trucks, garbage pickup, etc.
And for the occasional overnight guest or visitor you can use one of your permits - and $2 per night doesn't make it an "equity issue" either.
Road diets and bike lanes save lives. We have had three pedestrian deaths in a few months in San Mateo. The DJ also reported on a lawsuit related to a garbage truck that killed a teacher biking in Atherton - the cost of this will ultimately fall on taxpayers.
Yes, safer streets, please.
Here we go again…So is there a federal use-it-or-lose-it grant associated with any of these new lane-diet projects? If so, residents should know that money may need to be spent in the future to reverse any changes, as in North Central. Good luck to the City but don’t think that these lane diets will decrease the amount of overall traffic – drivers may find another route or will be happy to idle in traffic. As usual, it’s tough (unsafe, too) to lug 10 bags of groceries or a case of water while riding a bike. The winners? Union labor working in installing and uninstalling bike lanes.
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.