Agenda packet, special meeting — San Mateo City Council, May 1, 2023

CITY OF SAN MATEO
City Council Special Meeting
May 1, 2023
5:30 PM
City Hall Conference Room C
Entrance is on O’Farrell Street

COUNCIL MEMBERS
Amourence Lee, Mayor
Lisa Diaz Nash, Deputy Mayor
Rich Hedges
Adam Loraine
Rob Newsom Jr.

AGENDA
THIS MEETING CAN BE ATTENDED IN PERSON OR REMOTE BY JOINING ZOOM – SEE CODES BELOW.

PUBLIC COMMENTS WILL BE ACCEPTED BOTH IN PERSON AND REMOTEL Y.

SEE END OF AGENDA FOR OPTIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING.

To join via Zoom – click here:

May 1, 2023
To join via telephone: (408) 638-0968
Webinar ID: 873 2270 9860 Passcode: 178514

CALL TO ORDER
Roll Call

STUDY SESSION
The public will have an opportunity to comment during the consideration of these items.

1. Solid Waste Rate Setting Introduction and Overview
Receive information on the Solid Waste Program and annual rate setting process and provide general feedback.

CEQA: This study session for solid waste rate setting is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is a government fiscal activity which does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4).)

2. US-101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange Improvements – Project Update Receive an update and provide feedback on the US-101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange project.

CEQA: This update is not a project subject to CEQA, because it can be seen with certainty that it will not cause a physical change in the environment. (Public Resources Code Section 21065.)

ADJOURNMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- AGENDAS:

Agendas and material are posted on the City’s website on the Friday preceding each Council Meeting and can be viewed on the City's website at
www.cityofsanmateo.org
. Any supplemental material distributed to the Council after the posting of the agenda will be made part of the official record.

WATCHING A MEETING ON TV:

City Council meetings are broadcast live on Comcast/channel 27, Wave/channel 26, or AT&T/channel 99.

For transmission problems during the broadcast, please call (650) 522-7099. For all other broadcast comments, call (650) 522-7040, Monday-Friday, 8 a.m. - 5 p.m.

WATCHING A MEETING ON A COMPUTER:

There are three ways to stream.
1) Public Meeting Portal
www.cityofsanmateo.org/publicmeetings
2) City YouTube channel and stream it on YouTube:
http://youtube.com/CityofSanMateo

1 of 27

3) Watch TV live stream:
https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/193/Channel-San-Mateo-Live-Stream

PUBLIC COMMENTS/REQUEST TO SPEAK
Prior to the Meeting
Send comments to:
[email protected]
until 4 p.m. the day of the meeting.

During the meeting
By Zoom:

Click the link at the top of the agenda and you’ll be added to the meeting. All attendees are muted by default. When the item of interest is open for consideration, select the “Raise Your Hand” icon and you will be called on at the appropriate time.

By telephone:

Call (408) 638-0968 and enter the conference ID found at the top of the meeting agenda. When the item of interest is open for consideration, select *9 to raise your hand. When called upon, press *6 to unmute, state your name and provide your comments.

In Person:

At the meeting complete a “Request to Speak” form, submit a request at the speaker kiosk or scan the QR code.

ACCESSIBILITY:

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, those with disabilities requiring special accommodations to participate in this meeting may contact the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 522-7040 or [email protected]
. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will
enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

2 of 27

CITY OF SAN MATEO
4 0
4 9

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 1 Section Name: STUDY SESSION Account Number: 10-4651 File ID: 23-7299 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Public Works Department
MEETING DATE: May 01, 2023
SUBJECT:

Solid Waste Rate Setting Introduction and Overview
RECOMMENDATION:

Receive information on the Solid Waste Program and annual rate setting process and provide general feedback.

BACKGROUND:

The City’s Solid Waste Program (Program) includes waste diversion efforts related to solid waste, recycling, and composting services; litter and illegal dumping abatement; and ensures compliance with all county, regional, state, and federal regulations. Program services are available to all residents and commercial customers in the City and support the City’s sustainability goals, regulatory compliance mandates, and Council goals such as litter abatement. The Program is funded through solid waste rates set by Council to sufficiently cover the cost of these services and other City fees such as the franchise, landfill closure, street sweeping, and trash capture capital improvement fees.

Solid waste rates are set each year by Council and adjusted as required to generate enough revenue to cover the cost of the provided services and previous shortfalls. Costs include collection and disposal services provided by Recology San Mateo County (Recology), disposal and processing fees by South Bay Recycling, LLC, our share of costs of the South Bayside Waste Management Authority (SBWMA) and Rethink Waste, and the City fees mentioned above. While the courts have not ruled that Proposition 218 applies to solid waste collection rates from a franchise hauler, in an abundance of caution, the City has historically followed the “majority protest” proceedings set forth in Proposition 218.

In 2006, to improve its waste diversion rate mandated by AB 939, the City adopted a progressive solid waste rate structure to encourage recycling and, some years later, composting. This rate structure, known as “Pay as You Throw” (the more waste you generate, the greater the per-gallon cost) is widely used throughout the state and country and was very successful in improving recycling rates. State laws, AB1826 for recycling and SB1383 for organics, now mandate residential and commercial subscription for garbage, recycling, and organics.

Eighty percent of our residents now have a 32-or 20-gallon garbage can, which reduced their monthly costs. However, the progressive rate structure has resulted in the single-family residential and roll-off rates not covering their cost of service, while commercial and multi- family rates do cover their cost of service.

In 2021, Council directed staff to phase in a multi-year cost-of-service implementation plan to bring all rates into alignment with their actual cost-of-service and fund increases necessary to pay for the costs of collection, processing, the Program, street sweeping, and other City fees. We have now completed two years of this multi-year plan.

The City’s rate consultants, HF&H Consultants (HF&H), developed this multi-year plan as they specialize in calculating and

3 of 27

CITY OF SAN MATEO
4 0
4 9
establishing solid waste rate structure recommendations and provide similar services to the SBWMA, other SBWMA member agencies, and other jurisdictions throughout California. Each year, HF&H evaluates the appropriate revenue requirement for each customer class (e.g., single-family residential, commercial) to determine whether the current rate structure aligns with the cost-of-service for each customer class and service levels (e.g., 20-gallon service, 32-gallon service), within each class. This evaluation has two goals: (1) ensuring the customer classes are generating enough revenue to meet their costs and (2) ensuring each customer within the class pays for the services they receive.

The Solid Waste Reserve Fund was authorized to be used in 2020 to forego rate increases because of the pandemic. It was used again in 2021 and 2022 to help phase in the cost-of-service implementation plan and reduce required rate increases to customers.

The 2023 rate plan, adopted in November 2022 and currently in effect, uses the same reserves to offset the full effect of the phased in implementation plan while maintaining a healthy reserve fund balance, but does draw it down substantially.

Future rate increases will be necessary to cover the full cost of City services and increased costs from Recology, South Bay Recycling, and the SBWMA.

Later this summer, staff will present the 2024 Proposed Solid Waste Rates to City Council, which will include the forthcoming compensation application from Recology, the 2024 disposal expense projection from the South Bay Waste Management Authority, and discussion of the reserve fund in more detail. Tonight, staff are available to answer any questions about the Solid Waste Program, solid waste rates, the cost-of-service implementation plan, and the appropriate level of reserves.

Staff proposes to continue evaluation and implementation of the cost-of-service model as previously directed. We request general feedback on our proposed direction.

BUDGET IMPACT:

There is no impact to the budget at this time.

ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This study session for solid waste rate setting is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is a government fiscal activity which does not involve any commitment to any specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4).)

NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.

ATTACHMENTS
None

STAFF CONTACT
Jack Johnson, Waste Management Supervisor
[email protected]
650-522-7346

4 of 27

CITY OF SAN MATEO
4 1
2 3

CITY OF SAN MATEO
Agenda Report
City Hall
330 W. 20th Avenue
San Mateo CA 94403
www.cityofsanmateo.org
Agenda Number: 2 Section Name: STUDY SESSION Account Number: 10-4661 File ID: 23-7414 TO: City Council
FROM: Drew Corbett, City Manager
PREPARED BY: Public Works Department
MEETING DATE: May 01, 2023
SUBJECT:

US-101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange Improvements – Project Update RECOMMENDATION:

Receive an update and provide feedback on the US-101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange project.

BACKGROUND:

The US-101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange Improvements project (Project) proposes to relocate the southbound US-101 on- and off-ramps from E. Poplar Avenue to Peninsula Avenue, creating a full northbound and southbound access interchange at Peninsula Avenue and Airport Boulevard. The Project would address safety issues at intersections along E.

Poplar Avenue in the immediate vicinity of several schools and substantially improve traffic congestion in the surrounding area, which indirectly helps reduce cut-through traffic through the neighborhoods. As shown in Attachment 1, two alternatives for the southbound on- and off-ramps at Peninsula Avenue have been evaluated: a tight diamond interchange and a spread diamond interchange. It is important to note that each of the alternatives requires the full or partial acquisition of private properties along N. Amphlett Blvd. for the right-of-way (ROW) needed to construct the interchange.

The Project was first identified in San Mateo County Transportation Authority’s (SMCTA) Measure A Expenditure Plan in 1988, indicating that issues from these ramps have been prevalent for several decades. Given that issues with the non- standard ramps at E. Poplar Avenue are primarily impacting city streets rather than creating freeway-related congestion or safety, it has been the responsibility of the City (rather than Caltrans) to sponsor a project to address these issues. In 2012, Council directed staff to pursue the Project. In 2015, staff developed the Project Initiation document, which identified the two alternatives (i.e., tight and spread diamond options) to evaluate in the Project Approval and Environmental Document (PA/ED) phase. The PA/ED effort was awarded a $2.5 million grant from SMCTA and was kicked off in early 2016. As an interim measure, however, the Poplar Avenue Safety Improvements project – a short-term improvement effort to help address safety issues identified at the Poplar Ave./Amphlett Blvd. intersection - was completed in 2017.

Given that Peninsula Ave. crosses jurisdictional boundaries with the City of Burlingame, cut-through traffic was raised as a Project concern by Burlingame residents and their City Council. As a result, a preliminary analysis to determine the Project’s effect on traffic in the broader community was conducted. Findings from the analysis were presented to San Mateo City Council in February 2020 and indicated substantial vehicle travel time savings for motorists traveling on El Camino Real, Peninsula Avenue, and Poplar Avenue as a result of the Project, ranging from two minutes to 10 minutes under the near-term conditions, and three minutes to 33 minutes in the long term. The analysis also identified minor delays along the 3rd and 4th Avenue intersections at Humboldt of less than a minute during the morning and afternoon peak hours as a result of redirected traffic to these areas. Staff also presented preliminary cost estimates for the two Project alternatives. At that time, construction costs were estimated at $42 million. In addition, the cost for the utility relocation work and ROW acquisition for the tight diamond alternative was estimated at $57 million and $71 million for the spread diamond option. Council directed staff to continue to pursue the Project.

5 of 27

CITY OF SAN MATEO
4 1
2 3
Council adopted a resolution in November 2021 for staff to pursue additional funds from SMCTA from their Measure A Highway Program grant. In December 2021, SMCTA awarded $1.4 million to complete PA/ED, $4.2 million to fund the full Project design, and $400,000 to begin the administrative portion of the ROW acquisition process. Matching funds were also required from the City in the amounts of $600,000 for PA/ED, $500,000 for design, and $100,000 for ROW Administration phases, of which the $600,000 for PA/ED has already been invoiced from the City.

The Project anticipated requiring an Environmental Impact Report (EIR)/Environmental Assessment (EA). A Notice of Preparation of a Draft EIR for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review was submitted to the State on April 7, 2021. The initial project scoping process, which informs the community about the Project’s environmental documentation as well as solicits feedback about the various studies that should be included in the environmental analysis, was open for approximately 45 days starting on April 7, 2021, and closed on May 24, 2021. The EIR/EA determines environmental impacts for several key areas including transportation, community, air quality, construction, and noise impacts as the results of the Project’s implementation. The Project is not anticipated to result in any significant impacts to the environment.

In late 2022, staff received updated Project cost estimates for both alternatives, indicating a significant increase in ROW acquisition costs (Table 1). An uncommon element of both Project alternatives is the high ROW costs compared to the construction costs, with the ROW cost being 80% greater than the construction cost in the tight diamond alternative and 170% greater than the construction costs in the spread diamond alternative. As shown in Attachment 2, the tight diamond and spread diamond alternatives require full or partial acquisition of 29 and 34 properties, respectively. The determination of full or partial acquisitions is based on how substantially existing structures will be impacted and if portions of those impacted structures can be rebuilt rather than fully removed. Where full building removal is necessary, a full acquisition was recommended, and where either no structure is impacted or where a portion of the structure can be rebuilt, a partial acquisition was recommended. For the tight diamond alternative, 15 partial acquisitions and 14 full acquisitions were identified. For the spread diamond alternative, 19 partial acquisitions and 15 full acquisitions were identified.

Table 1. Project Cost Estimate (shown in MILLIONS)
Tight Diamond
Alternative
Spread Diamond
Alternative
Design, ROW Administration, Construction
Management
$18 $20
Right-of-Way Acquisition $97 $151
Construction $54 $56
TOTAL $169 $227
In the most recent traffic analysis, it was identified that the Project would provide significant travel time savings in the Project area if it were constructed. In the Project’s opening year of 2029, there would be a travel time savings of approximately 131,000 hours per year for motorists on city streets. With future growth projected in the City, these travel time savings increase to 1.4 million hours per year by 2048. Similar findings were identified in the preliminary traffic analysis discussed with Council in 2020. The maps of this congestion, shown in Attachment 3, demonstrate gridlocked conditions along Delaware, Humboldt, and N. Bayshore in the north-south direction, and along Poplar and Peninsula in the east-west direction. These images further demonstrate that the Project’s implementation will alleviate much of this gridlock. It is also expected that existing and future traffic in the vicinity of schools along E. Poplar Avenue will be redirected to Peninsula Avenue, and some to 3rd and 4th Avenues with implementation of the Project.

While the Project would provide substantial benefits in vehicle travel time savings and safety improvements, identifying sources of funding to implement either alternative will be very challenging. Grant funding may be available for the construction costs, although not for the ROW acquisition. Revenue sources would therefore need to be identified for the purchase of the land needed for the interchange. As such, staff is seeking direction from Council on the potential next steps for the Project. These options are outlined below:

6 of 27

CITY OF SAN MATEO
4 1
2 3

1. Continue with the current Project.
•Immediate Next Steps – Complete the environmental documentation and select a preferred alternative of the two that have been studied. Due to the substantial amount and cost of ROW needed, SMCTA has shared that they are unable to hold Measure A Highway Program grant funds previously allocated for the design phase of the Project. As such, should there be a desire to move forward with the Project’s current alternatives, funding would need to be sought from other sources. A funding plan would be needed to determine the feasibility of funding the Project, including the design, ROW acquisition, and construction phases. If funding is identified, pursue ROW acquisitions and begin the design of the preferred alternative. i. Timeline

1. One year to finalize the environmental documentation and develop a funding plan.

2. Two years to complete the design.

3. Two to three years for the ROW acquisition process.

4. Uncertain – funding allocation for the Project.
•Private Property Impacts – Following funding identification, move forward with property acquisitions of full and partial acquisitions affecting 29 to 34 parcels (depending on which alternative is selected).

2. Add new alternatives to the Project’s current analysis effort that would require less right-of-way acquisition and may produce similar congestion benefits. This option would build off the efforts completed thus far. •Immediate Next Steps – Identify new alternatives and complete the documentation required to formally add them to the current Project. The SMCTA has indicated an openness to discuss the re-allocation of design grant funds from the existing Project to evaluate other options. oTimeline – One to three years to identify alternative designs to include in the current analysis. •Private Property Impacts – This could substantially reduce the number of parcels needed to construct the Project.

3. Restart the process to identify a Project that will require less right-of-way acquisition that may produce similar congestion benefits.
•Immediate Next Steps – End the current Project and identify funding to start a new project that will identify a new set of alternatives. The SMCTA has indicated an openness to discuss the re-allocation of design grant funds from the existing Project to evaluate other options. oTimeline – Four to six years to complete the initial project documentation and environmental analysis.
•Private Property Impacts – This could substantially reduce the number of parcels needed to construct the Project.

4. Determine if congestion and safety can be addressed, either in the short- or long-term, without having to complete an interchange project. Pause or end the current Project and conduct a traffic study to identify local, shorter-term, lower cost improvements that can help address congestion in the interim. •Immediate Next Steps – Complete a traffic study to determine if and how substantially improvements on the City’s streets could improve congestion and safety in both the short-term and long-term. oTimeline – One year to complete analysis.
•Private Property Impacts – Likely no impact to private property as any proposed improvements will occur in within the City right-of-way.

Following completion of a PA/ED document, the design phase is expected to take approximately two years. Depending on the ROW acquisition needs for the Project, ROW acquisition can range between one to five years. Following the completion of the design phase and acquisition of all necessary ROW, construction is expected to take approximately one year.

BUDGET IMPACT:

There is no budget impact for receiving an update on US-101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange Improvements project.

7 of 27

CITY OF SAN MATEO
4 1
2 3
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION:

This update is not a project subject to CEQA, because it can be seen with certainty that it will not cause a physical change in the environment. (Public Resources Code Section 21065.)

NOTICE PROVIDED
All meeting noticing requirements were met.

ATTACHMENTS
Att 1 - Project Design Alternatives
Att 2 - Project Right-of-Way Acquisition Map
Att 3 - Traffic Queuing Diagrams

STAFF CONTACT
Bethany Lopez, Senior Engineer
[email protected]
(650) 522-7313

8 of 27

STO P
STOP

PRELIMINARY

FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
0ft 170 ft85 ft
US 101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange Project
STO P
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STO P
STOP

STOP STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
915920925930935940945
95 0
955
960
3467812346789123467891234
6 7
8 9
1 2
3 4
7 8
9 1
2 3
4 1
0 5
11 0
115
3 4
6 7
8 9
1 2
3 4
6 7
8 9
1 0
15 20
1 2
3 4
6 7 8 9
20 25
30 3232
1 2 3
4 6
7 8
9 1 2
STOP
STOP
STOP
STO P
TO SAN
FRAN
CISCO

TO SAN JOSE
Retaining Wall
Concrete Barrier
LEGEND:

Local Road Improvements
Sidewalk Improvements
Structure Improvements
Shoulder Improvements
Ramp Improvements
By Others
Sidewalk Improvements
City Limits
Caltrans R/W
Remove Existing Access
Don't use Pen Table
Plot Driver: Large Exhibit Boards - This Line Weights
Sound Wall on Ret Wall
STO P
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP

STOPSTOP
STOP
STOP
Spread Diamond Interchange
December 06 2022
N AM
PHLETT
Blvd
H
O
W
A
R
D
A
v
e
B
AY
S
W
A
TE
R
A
v
e

SAN MATEO CITY LIMIT

BURLINGAME CITY LIMIT
AIRPORT Blv d

SOCIETY & SPCA

PENINSULA HUMANE
AIRPORT Blv d
P
E
N
IN
S
U
L
A
A
v
e

WOODLAKE CONDOMINIUMS
N HUMBOLDT St

APARTMENTS

LAKEVIEW GARDEN

CENTRAL (CLOSED)

SUPERIOR COURT

SAN MATEO

HIGH SCHOOL

SAN MATEO
E
P
O
P
L
A
R
A
v
e
N IDAHO St

DMV OFFICE
N AMPHLETT Blvd
E
P
O
P
L
A
R
A
v
e
N BAYSHORE Blvd

ALLEYWAY UNDER OVERPASS
A
v
e
C
O
LL
E
G
E
S
t
S
T
A
TE

APARTMENTS

BAYVIEW
N IDAHO St
IN DIAN Ave

POPLAR CREEK GOLF COURSE
VICTORIA Rd

9 of 27

STO P

PRELIMINARY

FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
0ft 170 ft85 ft
US 101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange Project
STO P
STOP
STO P
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
C
O
N
C
915920925930935940945
950
955
960
965
3467812346789123467891234
6 7
8 9
1 2
3 4
7 8
9 1
2 3
4 1
0 5
11 0
115
3 4
6 7
8 9
1 2
3 4
6 7
8 9
20 25
30 3232
1 2 3 4 6 7
8 9 1 2
1 0
15 1
2 3
4 6 7 8 9
STO P
STOP
STOP
TO SAN
FRAN
CISCO

TO SAN JOSE
Don't use Pen Table
Plot Driver: Large Exhibit Boards - Thin Line Weights
Retaining Wall
Concrete Barrier
LEGEND:

Local Road Improvements
Sidewalk Improvements
Structure Improvements
Shoulder Improvements
Ramp Improvements
By Others
Sidewalk Improvements
City Limits
Caltrans R/W
Remove Existing Access
Sound Wall on Ret Wall
STOP
STO P
STO P
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
STOP
December 06 2022
Alternative 2 - Tight Diamond Interchange
STO P

SAN MATEO CITY LIMIT

BURLINGAME CITY LIMIT
B
A
Y
S
W
A
TE
R
A
v
e
E
P
O
P
L
A
R
A
v
e
N AM
PHLETT
Blvd
P
E
N
IN
S
U
L
A
A
v
e
E
P
O
P
L
A
R
A
v
e
A
v
e
C
O
LL
E
G
E

CENTRAL (CLOSED)

SUPERIOR COURT

SAN MATEO

WOODLAKE CONDOMINIUMS
N IDAHO St
AIRPORT Blv d
AIRPORT Blv d
N IDAHO St

DMV OFFICE

SOCIETY & SPCA

PENINSULA HUMANE

POPLAR CREEK GOLF COURSE
N BAYSHORE Blvd

APARTMENTS

LAKEVIEW GARDEN
S
t
S
T
A
TE
N AMPHLETT Blvd

HIGH SCHOOL

SAN MATEO

APARTMENTS

BAYVIEW
N HUMBOLDT St
H
O
W
A
R
D
A
v
e
IN DIAN Ave

ALLEYWAY UNDER OVERPASS
VICTORIA Rd

10 of 27

STOP
STOP
STO P

PRELIMINARY

FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
US 101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange Project
LEGEND:

Property Line
1 2
3 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12
13 14
15 16
19 24 25
0ft 100 ft 200 ft
Scale : 1" = 100'
City Boundary
Full Acquisitions
Partial Acquisitions w/ Building Modification
Partial AcquisitionsCaltrans Right of Way
4 17 18
20 21 22 23 26 27
28 30 31 32 33 34 35
29 AA

TO SAN JOSE

TO SAN FRANCISCO
January 13, 2023
Alternative 1 - Spread Diamond Interchange
Right-of-Way Exhibit
PENINSULA Ave
AIRPORT Blvd
S
T
A
T
E
S
t
Alley
Parcel # APN (SqFt)
Parcel Size
Acquisition (SqFt)
Area of
1 029-311-010 1,784
2 029-311-020 4,300
3 029-311-030 7,003 164
4 8,033 100
5 029-311-050 1,266
6 029-311-060 1,784
7 029-311-070 7,796 270
8 029-314-010 5,139
9 029-314-020 2,034 565
10 029-314-030 2,335 619
Parcel # APN (SqFt)
Parcel Size
Acquisition (SqFt)
Area of
11 029-314-040 2,619 676
12 029-314-050 2,889 736
13 029-314-060 3,152 798
14 029-314-070 5,420
15 029-314-080 7,500
16 029-314-090 4,862
17 029-314-190 4,859
18 029-314-170 2,431
19 029-314-120 4,995
20 029-315-230 19,179
Parcel # APN (SqFt)
Parcel Size
Acquisition (SqFt)
Area of
21 029-315-010 5,445
22 029-315-020 5,655
23 029-315-030 2,883
24 029-315-240 8,764
25 029-315-250 5,878
26 029-315-080 2,937
27 029-315-090 11,748
28 033-023-260 76,230
29 30 033-024-010 4,988 275
Parcel # APN (SqFt)
Parcel Size
Acquisition (SqFt)
Area of
31 033-024-020 4,756
32 033-024-030 4,756
33 033-024-110 6,098
34 033-033-010 4,313
35 033-0033-020 4,313
029-311-120
/Peninsula
SW Humboldt
0 37
63 92
2,073
5,420
7,500
4,862
4,859
2,431
4,995
5,445
5,655
2,883
N/A
N IDAHO St
N BAYSHORE Blvd
N IDAHO St
N HUMBOLDT StN HUMBOLDT St
B
A
Y
S
W
A
T
E
R
A
ve
H
O
W
A
R
D
A
ve
20 50
124
136
185
1,021
76,230
11,748
2,937
5,878
8,764
19,179

11 of 27

STO P
STOP
STOP

PRELIMINARY

FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY
US 101/Peninsula Avenue Interchange Project
LEGEND:

TO SAN JOSE

TO SAN FRANCISCO
January 13, 2023
Alternative 2 - Tight Diamond Interchange
Right-of-Way Exhibit
PENINSULA Ave
AIRPORT Blvd
S
T
A
T
E
S
t
Alley
Parcel # APN (SqFt)
Parcel Size
Acquisition (SqFt)
Area of
1 029-311-010 1,784
2 029-311-020 4,300
3 029-311-030 7,003
4 8,033
5 029-311-050 1,266
6 029-311-060 1,784
7 029-311-070 7,796
8 029-314-010 5,139
9 029-314-020 2,034 206
10 029-314-030 2,335 237
Parcel # APN (SqFt)
Parcel Size
Acquisition (SqFt)
Area of
11 029-314-040 2,619 278
12 029-314-050 2,889 329
13 029-314-060 3,152 390
14 029-314-070 5,420
15 029-314-080 7,500
16 029-314-090 4,862
17 029-314-190 4,859
18 029-314-170 2,431
19 029-314-120 4,995
20 029-315-230 19,179
Parcel # APN (SqFt)
Parcel Size
Acquisition (SqFt)
Area of
21 029-315-010 5,445
22 029-315-020 5,655
23 029-315-030 2,883
24 029-315-240 8,764
25 029-315-250 5,878
26 029-315-080 2,937
27 029-315-090 11,748
28 033-023-260 76,230
29 30 033-024-010 4,988 275
Parcel # APN (SqFt)
Parcel Size
Acquisition (SqFt)
Area of
31 033-024-020 4,756
32 033-024-030 4,756
33 033-024-110 6,098
34 033-033-010 4,313
35 033-0033-020 4,313
029-311-120
/Peninsula
SW Humboldt
0 0
0 0
5,420
7,500
4,862
4,859
2,431
4,995
19,179
5,445
5,655
N/A
N IDAHO St
N BAYSHORE Blvd
N IDAHO St
N HUMBOLDT StN HUMBOLDT St
B
A
Y
S
W
A
T
E
R
A
ve
H
O
W
A
R
D
A
ve
0 0
19 853
8,764
5,878
2,937
11,748
15,851
1,021
185
136
124
50 20
2,883

12 of 27

Hillsborough
San Mateo
22 21 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
8 6
7 4
5 3
2 1
11 10
9 19
29 28
27 26
25 23
30 TOARy Intersection
Study Intersection (For Local Circulation)
Burlingame
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
20 24
LEGENDUS 101/ PENINSULA AVENUE INTERCHANGE PROJECT
OPENING YEAR 2025 NO-BUILD
Preliminary Results - Subject to Change
No-Build 95th Percentile Queue
Queue results are based on the average of SimTraffic multi run simulation.

AM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY

13 of 27

Hillsborough
San Mateo
22 21 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
8 6
7 4
5 3
2 1
11 10
9 19
29 28
27 26
25 23
30 TOARy Intersection
Study Intersection (For Local Circulation)
Burlingame
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
20 24
LEGENDUS 101/ PENINSULA AVENUE INTERCHANGE PROJECT
OPENING YEAR 2025
Preliminary Results - Subject to Change
Build 95th Percentile Queue
Queue results are based on the average of SimTraffic multi run simulation.

BUILD AM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY

14 of 27

Hillsborough
San Mateo
22 21 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
8 6
7 4
5 3
2 1
11 10
9 19
29 28
27 26
25 23
30 TOARy Intersection
Study Intersection (For Local Circulation)
Burlingame
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
20 24
LEGEND
US 101/ PENINSULA AVENUE INTERCHANGE PROJECT
OPENING YEAR 2025 NO-BUILD
Preliminary Results - Subject to Change
No-Build 95th Percentile Queue
Queue results are based on the average of SimTraffic multi run simulation.

PM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY

15 of 27

Hillsborough
San Mateo
22 21 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
8 6
7 4
5 3
2 1
11 10
9 19
29 28
27 26
25 23
30 TOARy Intersection
Study Intersection (For Local Circulation)
Burlingame
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
20 24
LEGEND
US 101/ PENINSULA AVENUE INTERCHANGE PROJECT
OPENING YEAR 2025
Preliminary Results - Subject to Change
Build 95th Percentile Queue
Queue results are based on the average of SimTraffic multi run simulation.

BUILD PM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY

16 of 27

Hillsborough
San Mateo
22 21 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
8 6
7 4
5 3
2 1
11 10
9 19
29 28
27 26
25 23
30 TOARy Intersection
Study Intersection (For Local Circulation)
Burlingame
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
20 24
LEGENDUS 101/ PENINSULA AVENUE INTERCHANGE PROJECT
DESIGN Y EAR 2045 NO- BUIL D
Preliminary Results - Subject to Change
No-Build 95th Percentile Queue
Queue results are based on the average of SimTraffic multi run simulation.

AM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY

17 of 27

Hillsborough
San Mateo
22 21 18
17 16
15 14
13 12
8 6
7 4
5 3
2 1
11 10
9 19
29 28
27 26
25 23
30 TOARy Intersection
Study Intersection (For Local Circulation)
Burlingame
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
C a l i f o r n i a A v e
20 24
LEGENDUS 101/ PENINSULA AVENUE INTERCHANGE PROJECT
DESIGN Y EAR 2045 BUIL D
Preliminary Results - Subject to Change
Build 95th Percentile Queue
Queue results are based on the average of SimTraffic multi run simulation.

AM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY

18 of 27

COMPARISON
Preliminary Results - Subject to Change
No-Build 95th Percentile Queue
Queue results are based on the average of SimTraffic multi run simulation.

PM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY

19 of 27

COMPARISON
Preliminary Results - Subject to Change
Build 95th Percentile Queue
Queue results are based on the average of SimTraffic multi run simulation.

PM PEAK HOUR QUEUE SUMMARY

20 of 27

THE FOLLOWING PUBLIC

COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED

FOLLOWING THE PUBLICATION

OF THE AGENDA PACKET

21 of 27

From: joanne bennett
To: Clerk
Subject: Peninsula Avenue Interchange Project
Date: Monday, May 1, 2023 10:16:48 AM
Dear City Clerk, Mayor Lee & Council Members,
I am writing this in response to tonight's meeting discussion on the Peninsula Avenue Southbound Ramps project.

Unfortunately of all days I cannot attend this meeting but will state my comments here.

I live in close
proximity to this project and have been involved and personally following this since 2006! There has been no updates from the city on the status of this project for almost two years until now.

Many of the residents
in this area that attended many workshops and meetings in years prior and voiced their concerns have since moved or passed but I am still here and we have many new young families that have made their home on our block, the 800 block of North Idaho.

Some of our concerns are whether we can really have a say in some of the issues we are concerned about which are as follows:

1. Circulation and cut-thru traffic - How can we prevent or ease any cut thru traffic that may occur as a result of this project?

If they
did it way back in 1946 why not in 2023?
Since then this area underneath the overpass has become a dumping ground for construction dirt and what have you.

If we truly are concerned about making our streets safer for pedestrians this would greatly make a difference in our neighborhood.

3. Trees and landscaping - we need these included as part of the project.

Being so close to the freeway
it is well known that trees help with pollutants.

4. Parking - We have already lost over 200 parking spaces with the bike lanes.

How many more spaces will we lose with this project?
If anyone has any additional additional questions feel free to contact me.

I would appreciate working with
our Public Works and our CIty on ways we can make this a better project with special consideration to our neighborhood surrounding this project.

Thank you,
Joanne Bennett

22 of 27

From: joanne bennett
To: Clerk
Subject: Re: Peninsula Avenue Interchange Project
Date: Monday, May 1, 2023 10:59:29 AM
Attachments: 20B11D15-F35E-401E-AFF2-CB46A27B3885.jpeg
0A90C73E-7256-46EF-A9DE-11BB709866CB.jpeg
93A0268A-3953-4AA1-BB4C-46F62DA89CA8.jpeg
Attached are prior photo of the original Peninsula overpass walkway done in 1946.

Remainder of photos are current conditions.

Thank you,
Joanne Bennett
On Monday, May 1, 2023 at 10:14:23 AM PDT, joanne bennett <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear City Clerk, Mayor Lee & Council Members,
I am writing this in response to tonight's meeting discussion on the Peninsula Avenue Southbound Ramps project.

Unfortunately of all days I cannot attend this meeting but will state my comments here. I live in close proximity to this project and have been involved and personally following this since 2006! There has been no updates from the city on the status of this project for almost two years until now. Many of the residents in this area that attended many workshops and meetings in years prior and voiced their concerns have since moved or passed but I am still here and we have many new young families that have made their home on our block, the 800 block of North Idaho.

Some of our concerns are whether we can really have a say in some of the issues we are concerned about which are as follows:

1. Circulation and cut-thru traffic - How can we prevent or ease any cut thru traffic that may occur as a result of this project?

2. Since Peninsula Avenue will become a busier street can we make it safer for pedestrians by making sure a concrete walkway is installed underneath the overpass as was done with the original overpass way back in 1946?
We requested this in 2007 when the current overpass was built but we were given a lame excuse. If they did it way back in 1946 why not in 2023?
Since then this area underneath the overpass has become a dumping ground for construction dirt and what have you.

If we truly are concerned about making our streets safer for pedestrians this would greatly make a difference in our neighborhood.

3. Trees and landscaping - we need these included as part of the project. Being so close to the freeway it is well known that trees help with pollutants.

4. Parking - We have already lost over 200 parking spaces with the bike lanes.

How many more spaces will we lose with this project?
If anyone has any additional additional questions feel free to contact me. I would appreciate working with our Public Works and our CIty on ways we can make this a better project with special consideration to our neighborhood surrounding this project.

23 of 27

Thank you,
Joanne Bennett

24 of 27

25 of 27

26 of 27

27 of 27

San Mateo City CouncilMay 1, 2023

San Mateo City Council
May 1, 2023