San Mateo meeting on safer streets

Jan 15, 2025
Jan 15, 2025 Updated Jan 17, 2025
13

Editor,

On Monday, Feb. 3, the San Mateo City Council will hold a study session on whether to remove street safety improvements next to San Mateo High and College Park Elementary schools.

(13) comments

joebob91 Jan 16, 2025 9:22pm

Note the City has changed the meeting time to 7p, same date.

Terence Y Jan 15, 2025 9:17am

Thanks for your letter, Mr. Swire. I notice you claim “in the second year” that collisions decreased by 36%. Did collisions decrease in the first year? Is this second year percentage reported only because it fits your narrative? Or is this decrease due to traffic decreasing in the area because folks are driving in other areas looking for places to park? Regardless, we shouldn’t have used limited taxpayer dollars and staff resources in the first place because of the city wanting to make use of a “use it or lose it” federal grant. And let’s not forget the ongoing use of limited taxpayer dollars and staff resources to address their self-inflicted wound by forcing bike lanes on North Central residents.

easygerd Jan 15, 2025 10:20am

It often takes 3-5 years to see considerable changes in traffic and traffic pattern after changes like on Humboldt. North Central is an area with more car violence and more households without cars. It is imperative for Mayor Newsom and Deputy Mayor Lorraine to protect children from low-income households from car violence on their way to school. That is what good people would do of course.

However, a vote on stealing bike lanes from low-income kids and giving the space to private car storage would tell us a lot about the character and mettle of the new council members Danielle Cwirko-Godycki and Nicole Fernandez as well.

There are plenty of ways the city could keep the bike lanes and use car storage to slow down traffic in the driving lanes as well. Win - Win - Win. However that would require professionalism and city planner skills at city hall.

But stealing bike lanes from low-income children, that just requires putting all ethics aside. Let's see how they decide.

Terence Y Jan 16, 2025 3:54pm

eGerd, TBot here – aren’t all children considered low-income? They’re usually busy in school or doing homework (I’m assuming homework is still assigned) and it’s doubtful they’re also holding down a full-time job. Regardless, you claim these bike lanes protect children from car violence but there are many streets near schools without bike lanes. How do their “low-income” kids’ accident rates compare to those with bike lanes?

I appreciate you trying to include ethics in your argument but we have Democrats who have no issues with aiding and abetting criminal invaders in our areas. And we have Democrats who have no issues with no-bail releases of arrestees. And we have Newsom who released thousands of prisoners back into the wild before their time. Not only has ethics been cast aside for many in our area but I get the feeling ethics isn’t in the vocabulary of most politicians in California.

Not So Common Jan 16, 2025 4:39pm

Terrence, Hunter, Nancy, Joe, Hirono, Schiff etc are all ultra rich children who rode the government gravy train and they all will all be protected by Joe’s “pardon” tricycle lane.

easygerd Jan 16, 2025 7:22pm

I make it very easy for you TBot:

Every week some 110 children are killed in driveways and parking lots and often by people the are related to. You would think these people cared enough to take the time to make sure there are no children around their supersized cars when they are starting to drive.

Now imagine the morning rush around every school, when people that hardly care about the health of their own children (the most air polluted space in traffic is the backseat of a car, where children sit) are in charge of the health of kids they don't know?

Whenever you see a town with schools that have no bike lanes, you know two things:

- the city manager does not care about the quality of life of his residents and should be fired

- the school district superintendent does not care about health and education of his children and should be fired

The very fact that America requires "Crossing Guards" shows that these traffic engineers have absolutely no clue what they are doing.

Terence Y Jan 17, 2025 9:03am

eGerd, TBot here – you haven't made it easy at all. A few things… First, you still have no supporting evidence of your allegation that bike lanes protect children from car violence. Second, your allegation of 110 children being killed in driveways and parking lots per week didn't sound right and per a quick check it is 110 children being injured. There’s a major difference between being injured and death. Third, I believe you’re going to be sorely disappointed when you find out (if you can) how many towns have schools without bike lanes.

As for people being fired, when you have Democrats burning money on a train-to-nowhere, Democrats burning money supporting criminal invaders, Newsom giving criminals over $30 billion in taxpayer funds, it’s no wonder there’s no money for bike lanes. Not only do these Democrats not care about the quality of life of residents,or bike lanes, but I get the feeling they’re not too worried about being fired since they continue to easily pull the wool over the eyes of the folks who continue voting for them.

easygerd Jan 17, 2025 11:16am

Point 1. We good drivers we don't want to "share the road" with bicycles we want them in bike lanes. We good drivers also don't want speed humps or "traffic calming" - we don't really need it. Only bad drivers and people paid by the automobile industry (UN, WHO, ILG, San Mateo politicians) are saying they want bicycles mixed in with driving cars on "Slow Streets", "Bike Routes", and "Bicycle Boulevards". So why are you so eager to drive your car in the midst of small children?

Point 2. Are Democrats ethical? Former San Mateo Mayor Diane Papan, David Canepa and others created a "Ethics Framework and Action Plan" for their city and their county. That Framework specifically says that North Central needs more and better bike lanes. Case closed. End of that discussion.

The San Mateo City Council will now vote on the project and after that we know if Diane Papan and her County Democrats have been BS-ing us the whole time or if Diane Papan and David Canepa do really care and will stand up for these children in a low-income community.

Now as members of MTC, David Canepa and Gina Papan are currently accused by Mercury News of taking money away from transit projects to feed into a slush fund so they can finance more car projects. Davina Hurt - as a member of Gavin Newsom's CA Air pollution Board - did sign of on the 101 Air Pollution Express Lanes.

So "are Democrats ethical"? I would give that a "highly questionable" for San Mateo County Democrats.

3. The biggest burn of money is actually on car-centric projects around here. Here are just some of the biggest county boondoggles of the last few years:

- ca. $600M were spent on 101 Expansion to benefit cars, so rich people can pay a little more and keep speeding and polluting.

- ca. $200M were spent on 25th Ave Grade Separation, because people in cars can't be expected to wait 3 min till that gate goes back up.

- how much was grade separation on Hillsdale Blvd. or 28th or 31th?

- $500M for Woodside Interchange in RWC

- $600M for grade separation in Burlingame

- $2B for 6 grade separations in RWC

- $120M for "Ferry Service" to get a few giants fans to the games, because riding Caltrain would be so beneath them.

- should we include the Oakland Bay Bridge and it's $6B price tag here as well?

None of these projects increase health and happiness in the County. The two most corrupt local industries these days are around Building Developments and Road Infrastructure projects - so that is where the money goes.

4. High Speed Rail: The HSR proves one thing without the shadow of a doubt. America can't do good projects anymore. Public Servants are basically incapable these days of being professionals and creating professional projects. And politicians don't hold them accountable but participate in the grift.

Connie Weiss Jan 15, 2025 9:04am

The funds used to install the Humboldt bike lanes were from a grant that had clear wording that funds were to be used to benefit North Central residents. A majority of residents were very vocal at City Council meetings and in City outreach that they DID NOT want to have the bike lanes if it meant the loss of parking. The City Council at that time ignored residents and approved the expenditure. Luckily, none of them are on Council today, so for all San Mateans, I hope this Council rights the wrong inflicted on North Central residents almost 3 years ago, and return the 200 parking places that were removed for these little used bike lanes.

easygerd Jan 15, 2025 10:29am

This neighborhood has more car free households than others in San Mateo. Per municipal code every lot here must have 2-4 parking spots already. Poor people don't have too many cars, it's rich people with a gym or a man cave in their garages that want to subsidized here.

Driveways always seem empty here, but the street is full - which tells us people block the space in front of their house so nobody else can use it.

This is about entitlement in a passive aggressive neighborhood with lots of car-violence. A permit system and a little enforcement and these people would clean out their garages and start using their driveways again. As god and the municipal code intendent.

Connie Weiss Jan 15, 2025 4:37pm

It would be hugely beneficial if you took the time to really get to know residents of North Central before you make sweeping statements about them. I have firsthand knowledge of seniors who struggle with going to appointments or events because their mobility is limited and they aren’t able to park their cars in front of their homes. I know of landscapers, painters, construction workers, home cleaning services who have had their vehicles broken into because they aren’t able to park them where they can be monitored from their homes. I know of young families who struggle to bring home groceries with their small children. And there are more… this is why residents said NO to removing parking almost 3 years ago. They have struggled every day. As a City, we should all be horrified their voices were ignored while the lobbying of folks from richer neighborhoods wanting bike lanes for their recreational purposes prevailed and misused these funds. We need to fix this and do better as a city respecting resident needs and voices.

easygerd Jan 16, 2025 7:45pm

I believe you forgot to mention the guy with his 8 cars and none is parked in the garage. And the poor owner of a $120,000 cybertruck or that Porsch.

Connie, you are giving us the sob stories found in the Ford Foundations secret lobbying playbook on how to suck more car subsidies out of local governments. I believe you are quoting pages 156-185. And just like the Ford Foundation you are conveniently leaving out the old disabled lady that can't drive, the family that can't afford a car, how about these low-income children that need to get to school and be healthy and safe?

Our streets are made for Transportation and not subsidized car storage. Transportation Equity is NOT about people with cars. If you can afford a car, you can also afford a cheaper car and pay for your parking. It's as simple as that. Pedestrians are always asked to schlepp their groceries an extra 5 min to get to a safer crossing, why MUST people with cars always block the spot right in front of their house with the car they never use?

San Mateo County has strict rules about Equity Focus Areas, which North Central is one of them:

- Zero-Vehicle Households (15% threshold)

- Low-Income (28% threshold)

- People with a Disability (12% threshold)

- Seniors 75 Years and Over (8% threshold)

- Single Parent Families (18% threshold)

- Rent-Burdened Households (14% threshold)

So these are the real numbers.

There is enough space to keep 3 car lanes. This could be one for driving, two for parking or two for driving and one for parking. Parked cars can also be used to slow down traffic, win - win - win.

But Transportation Equity requires that the bike lanes stay, so the old lady in the wheelchair and that old guy on his walker can safely navigate the street as well.

Esalinger Jan 15, 2025 8:11am

Thank you Mike! It is disgraceful that San Mateo would even consider removing a bike lane! We need more safe bike routes. It is time to prioritize cyclists lives and safety, and help people to leave their cars at home. If it is safe, more students will ride bikes to schools in this neighborhood.

Let’s tell the City Council to set their priorities on safety. And as you report Mike, the data tells us it is safer since the bike lane was created!

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

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!