Editor,
Dana Sahae’s guest perspective column in the Oct. 31 issue of the Daily Journal was a well-written, thoughtful piece and she asks the right questions that need to be addressed by the San Mateo City Council.
Editor,
Dana Sahae’s guest perspective column in the Oct. 31 issue of the Daily Journal was a well-written, thoughtful piece and she asks the right questions that need to be addressed by the San Mateo City Council.
Overbuilding a two-block by two-block piece of real estate into 4 million square feet of construction, be it parking structures, lobbies, or other “nonwork” areas that potentially includes multiple 10-story towers because it will be next to transit is, mildly, an obscene project. Anyone who drives around San Mateo has witnessed that this state mandate of cities achieving a “housing goal” that’s numbers had no rhyme or reason and with zero public discussion or vote lives with the gridlock we currently experience. I witness on a daily basis empty commuter trains and buses in both north and southbound direction. To suggest we need housing and jobs adjacent to transit is fodder. Simply put, if you build it, they aren’t coming. Today’s commuters are using ride-hailing, not public transit. To school, to work, to the airport, to play.
The general public has not bought into, or will they in the future, a system that takes three times as long to go from point A to point B be it free or free some more.
Regarding the title of my rant, Strange bedfellows, how letter writer and almost next door neighbor Rick Bonilla, who thinks as close to being a socialist as one can, align himself with the poster boy of capitalism, David Bohannon and his venture capitalist friends at Northwood Investors is interesting. Must be the union jobs, right Rick?
Lastly, is the title name of “Hillsdale Reimagined” also the same person as “Fixin’ San Mateo?” Or were they a collaboration?
Bob Wackerman
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!
Only subscribers can view and post comments on articles.
Already a subscriber? Login Here
Sorry, an error occurred.
Already Subscribed!
Cancel anytime
Thank you .
Your account has been registered, and you are now logged in.
Check your email for details.
Submitting this form below will send a message to your email with a link to change your password.
An email message containing instructions on how to reset your password has been sent to the email address listed on your account.
No promotional rates found.
Secure & Encrypted
Thank you.
Your gift purchase was successful! Your purchase was successful, and you are now logged in.
| Rate: | |
| Begins: | |
| Transaction ID: |
A receipt was sent to your email.
(1) comment
Thanks for your letter, Mr. Wackerman, and your strange bedfellows observation. Do you really think the city cares what neighbors think? I see it as the San Mateo City Council being willing to get into bed with anyone as long as they’re able to increase the amount of money paid to the government – to continue paying ever increasing salaries, pensions, and benefits. To me, it’s all about the money. Money for union jobs, money for ever-increasing union workers, money for city infrastructure and slush funds, etc.
Today’s related article, “San Mateo City Council weighs in on Hillsdale redevelopment” highlights that the project is estimated to generate an addition $1.2 million to $2.2 million if the project moves forward. The article also highlights Adam Loraine’s stance as he essentially sweeps away concerns about traffic, environment and city infrastructure, “Deputy Mayor Adam Loraine said the concerns were valid, however, he also said the project is in line with the city’s long-term vision.” “I also ask for some open mindedness for the change that a project like this could bring to our city, remembering that this is a project that will be coming in the present but largely into our future and serving future needs,” Loraine said. Maybe it’s just me but it sure sounds like a done deal as far as Loraine is concerned. Loraine asks for open mindedness but is this as long as you agree with his version of mindedness? Time for environmental impact lawsuits? Other lawsuits? Other locations? Bridgepointe has plenty of land...
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.