San Mateo scopes Peninsula Avenue ramp plan

At its May 1 special meeting on how to best move forward with the project, the council picked an option that calls for adding new alternatives that need fewer right-of-way acquisitions and could use San Mateo County Transportation Authority Measure A grant funding for financing, although the option would take an extra one to three years, according to city staff.

The council agreed to try moving forward with added alternatives at the urging of Mayor Amourence Lee to get the project moving as soon as possible. She noted business owners needed more clarity and assurance and for city staff to provide as much information and clarity upfront to residents when available.

“Option two has an expedited timeline,” Lee said, arguing there was no time to waste. “It leverages the environmental studies and the analysis that we’ve already done, and there is funding for the design.”

Public comments expressed broad support for moving the project forward to protect the community and to give clarity to the many business and property owners in limbo. Kevin Simpson, who lives on South Humboldt Street, said at the May 1 meeting he wants to see the project continue for every kid that walks or lives near the area.

“For the love of God, do not start over, do not stop,” Simpson said. “We need to fix this disastrous, antiquated, horrible mess that we have.”

Some noted their property values are lower, and they have trouble selling their property because they are threatened by eminent domain. People living in the area also worry about being forced to move to more expensive locations for their homes and businesses. However, Gino Caccia with Caccia Plumbing at 917 N. Amphlett Blvd. pushed for the project to keep going instead of trying to push the reset button.

“All the money and studies we have done, you light that on fire,” Caccia said. “You have spent a ton of money.”

The council also considered three other options, including continuing with the current project as is but without SMCTA grant funding previously available. City staff said the funding was unavailable because of the projected increase in project costs. The other options include restarting the project from scratch, which would last four to six years, or identifying other ways to fix congestion without getting rid of the intersection.

Councilmember Rich Hedges initially advocated for restarting the project but agreed to either adding alternatives or restarting. He remained pessimistic about option two working out given the project’s challenges.

“It’s just frustrating to me to see that we need to do this and not understanding how we are ever going to get it done,” Hedges said.

There are two options for the current design, a spread diamond interchange or a tight diamond interchange alternative. The tight diamond interchange would have closer-spaced ramp intersections and minimizes the need to acquire private property. The tight diamond requires acquiring 29 parcels, with 15 being partial acquisitions and 14 full. The spread diamond requires 34 properties, 19 partial and 15 full. A partial acquisition might be acquiring some landscape in a private property area or a portion of a structure. The properties are primarily businesses, with one residential parcel, the Bayview Apartments. Project costs show that the tight diamond alternative would cost $169 million and $227 million for the spread diamond alternative. For the tight diamond alternative, the design costs are $18 million, right-of-way costs are $97 million, and $54 million for construction. The spread alternative calls for $20 million for design, $151 million for right-of-way acquisitions and $56 million for construction. The city of San Mateo is responsible for moving the project forward and obtaining funding. The three primary partners in the project are San Mateo, the project sponsor, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, the funding partner, and Caltrans, responsible for reviewing the environmental process and approving the project.