SAN MATEO
CITYWIDE COMPLETE
STREETS PLAN
Phase 3 Engagement Report
April 2024
Summary of Phase 3 Engagement
Summary of Survey Results
Key Comments by Priority Corridor
Themes by Modality
Overarching Highlights
Community Engagement Learnings
OUTLINE
SUMMARY OF PHASE 3
ENGAGEMENT
District 1 & 5 Community Workshop
(22 participants)
March 7, 2024
San Mateo City Hall
District 2 Community Workshop
(30 participants)
February 26, 2024
North Shoreview Montessori School
District 3 & 5 Community Workshop
(24 participants)
March 12, 2024
Fiesta Gardens Elementary School
Overview:
● Three (3) in-person community workshops representing five (5) council districts. ● Open house with cut sheets and maps of potential improvements for each priority corridor. ● Presentation of San Mateo Complete Streets Plan components and high need corridors per district. ● Interpretation provided in Spanish.
● Over 75+ residents attended in total.
● Representation from City Council and Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission at all meetings. ● Online survey open for one month with 153 respondents. 4 Priority Corridors
● 31st Avenue
● 3rd Avenue/J Hart Clinton Drive
● Alameda de Las Pulgas
● El Camino Real
● Fashion Island Boulevard
● Grant Street
● Hillsdale Boulevard
● Monte Diablo Avenue
● Norfolk Street
● Poplar Avenue
Top corridors identified in Phase 1 as high need and
confirmed by community in Phase 2:
• 153 participants
• 329 corridor-specific comments
• Online survey on City of San Mateo website
• Shared widely via City of San Mateo social media
• Open for one month (early March to early April)
• Offered in Spanish and English
SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESULTS
Respondent Overview
How respondents typically
get around San Mateo
*Note: Respondents were able to select
more than one response.
How respondents described
themselves
*Note: Respondents were able to
select more than one response.
• 84% live in San Mateo
• 29% retired
• 20% work in San Mateo
• 14% visit San Mateo often
• 90% Drive
• 73% Walk
• 35% Bike
• 17% Public Transit
Age
24 and under 1%
25-34 7%
25-44 20%
45-54 13%
55 or older 58%
Race/Ethnicity
Asian or Pacific Islander 13%
Black or African American 2%
Multiracial or Biracial 5%
White or Caucasian 81%
SUMMARY OF SURVEY RESULTS
Priority Corridor Number of Comments Percentage of Total Comments
El Camino Real 94 29%
Alameda de Las Pulgas 61 19%
Hillsdale Blvd 51 16%
31st Ave 29 9%
Monte Diablo Ave 22 7%
Norfolk St 19 6%
3rd Ave/J Hart Clinton Dr 18 6%
Grant St 17 5%
Poplar Ave 16 5%
Number of Comments by Priority Corridor
MAIN THEMES FROM SURVEY
• Mixed input on conversion of vehicular lane travel and/or parking for dedicated bus and/or bike lanes with appreciation for need for faster transit times and increased safety for bicyclists but concerns for impact on parking availability and traffic congestion. • General support for pedestrian and bicyclist safety improvements (such as protected lanes, crosswalks, speed bumps, and increased visibility) and efforts to slow down vehicular speeding, especially on large roadways. Some concern over curb extension impact on parking.
• General support for addition of traffic signals, traffic signal synchronization and protected turn lanes for vehicles.
• Support for better wayfinding and east-west connectivity for pedestrians and bicyclists, especially across Highway 101.
8 Key
Comments
by
Priority
Corridor
9 31st Avenue
• Safety Enhancements for Hillsdale High School Commuters:Some community members stressed biking safety, suggesting removing street parking to promote walking or biking for a safer environment near schools.
• Traffic Calming Measures and Speed Reduction: Concerns about high speeds near Delaware/31st prompt support for reducing the speed limit to 25 MPH for pedestrian and cyclist safety.
• Infrastructure Improvements for Cycling Safety: Suggestions were made to improve the 31st Ave underpass by narrowing its width and converting it into two lanes to better accommodate cyclists and pedestrians. Suggestions also included separated bike lanes, protected intersections, and reducing hazards at the roundabout. • Bicycle Infrastructure and Parking Impacts: Mixed input regarding the need of certain infrastructure improvements, such as the implementation of bike, with some calling to maintain existing parking spaces and improve parking enforcement.
Key comments from community feedback
10 3rd Avenue
J. Hart Clinton Drive
• Traffic Management and Safety Improvements: Community members voiced concerns on traffic flow, safety, and cut-through traffic, supporting speed bumps, lane adjustments, and synchronized traffic lights. Concerns were raised about the proximity of the 101 S exit ramp to the traffic light at 3rd Avenue and Norfolk, highlighting safety risks. • Public Transportation and Bus Stop Amenities: Many community members sought improved public transportation and made suggestions for enhancing bus stop amenities, including seating, pedestrian-scale lighting and waste cans. • Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure Enhancement: Many community members supported better pedestrian and cyclist infrastructure, including pathway maintenance and enhanced park/trail access. Suggestions for future improvements were made, including better access to the bridge over 101 and a new trail crossing at Newbridge Ave.
Key comments from community feedback
11 Alameda De Las Pulgas
● Safety Enhancements for School Children: Many community members called for installation of bulb outs, stop signs, improved crosswalks with flashing lights, and the presence of crossing guards at various intersections along the corridor, especially near schools like Baywood, Aragon, Carey, Hillsdale, and Abbott. ● Traffic Calming Improvements: Many community members agreed with recommended traffic calming measures like stop signs and signals on various intersections, reduced speed limits, separated bike lanes, and narrowing Alameda to one car lane each way for safety and cyclist accommodation. ● Bike Infrastructure Improvements: General support for increased bike connectivity and safety improvements such as protected bike lanes and intersections with some concerns around impact on vehicular traffic if lanes are reduced. ● Traffic Impacts: Some concerns regarding potential for increased traffic congestion with reduction of roadway to one lane in each direction, particularly during school pick-up and drop-off hours and commute rush hour.
Key comments from community feedback
12 El Camino Real
• Traffic Flow and Safety Measures: Community members called for measures like left turn restrictions, parking restrictions at intersections, and protected medians to improve safety for both drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians.
• Pedestrian Safety and Infrastructure Upgrades: Community members agreed with recommendations regarding pedestrian safety and called for the need for crosswalk upgrades (including widening), bulb outs to reduce crosswalk time, and protected intersections along the corridor to maximize visibility. • Bike Infrastructure: Some community members called for an elevating of biking as a modal priority on the corridor, citing the need for safer connectivity to businesses along the corridor.
• Bus Infrastructure Improvements: Mixed input from the community on dedicated bus lanes, with many appreciating the faster travel speeds and convenience with some expressing concern on impact on traffic congestion and small businesses with removal of parking.
Key comments from community feedback
13 Grant Street
● Traffic Safety and Management: Some community members voiced concerns over speeding, traffic flow, and safety hazards, prompting calls for lower speed limits, traffic calming measures, and enforcement. Other residents opposed the installation of speed humps and the reduction of driving lanes, citing potential negative impacts on traffic flow and vehicle damage.
● Bicycle and Pedestrian Infrastructure: Community members called for improved bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, including better connectivity such as opening green fences for access and creating direct pathways.
● Parking Management and Future Planning: Suggestions were made for parking management, noting its impact on street parking, and raising considerations and questions about future development impacts on traffic and planning. ● Mixed Opinions on Bike Lanes: Mixed opinions regarding the implementation of bike lanes on Grant Street. While some residents supported dedicated bike lanes for safety and accessibility, others voiced concerns about the potential traffic congestion and the removal of vehicle lanes.
Key comments from community feedback
14 Hillsdale Boulevard
• Intersection Improvements Near Schools: A number of requests were made for right- turn lanes and improved traffic signal visibility at specific intersections, particularly for school drop-off areas, to improve traffic flow and safety. • Pedestrian Safety and Infrastructure Enhancements: Some residents called for better pedestrian infrastructure, including wider sidewalks to accommodate strollers, and calls for enhanced visibility and safety measures at crosswalks and intersections to ensure pedestrian safety.
• Bicycle Infrastructure: Support for improved bicycle infrastructure, such as protected bike lanes on Saratoga Avenue, and requests for additional safety measures like crossing guards to facilitate safe passage for children walking to and from school. Community feedback on protected bike lanes along Hillsdale Blvd was mixed due to traffic congestion and safety concerns. Suggestions include a dedicated bike crossing over the 101 and exploring alternative routes.
• Traffic Flow and Intersection Safety: Concerns were raised over congestion and safety issues from proposed changes like roundabouts and lane modifications. Residents called for improved traffic flow and synchronized signals at intersections like Saratoga/Hillsdale, Edison/Hillsdale, and Hillsdale/Alameda.
Key comments from community feedback
15 Monte Diablo Avenue
• Bicycle Infrastructure and Connectivity: Some residents advocated for better bicycle infrastructure, including a bike boulevard and wayfinding signage to the Monte Diablo bike bridge, to improve connectivity to the Bay Trail.
• Traffic Calming Measures: Concerns were voiced about speeding along Monte Diablo Avenue and surrounding streets, prompting calls for speed bumps and speed humps to slow down traffic, particularly near residential areas and school zones.
• Pedestrian Safety and Lighting: Many community members supported pedestrian-scale lighting for improved safety and called for red curbing and signage to address speeding issues on Cypress Street, enhancing overall safety conditions for pedestrians and cyclists. • Balancing Parking Needs and Bike Infrastructure: A number of residents expressed concerns about proposed bike lanes affecting parking. Suggestions include non-parking zones or parking permits to balance both needs.
• Improving Intersection Visibility and Safety: Concerns over visibility at intersections like Monte Diablo and Kingston call for better signage and infrastructure. Suggestions include wider sidewalks and solutions for obstructed views from parked cars.
Key comments from community feedback
16 Norfolk Street
• Bicycle Infrastructure: Some community members called for bicycling to be a modal priority, with requests for separated bike lanes and improvements to current bike infrastructure, including extended bike lane networks southward along Norfolk Street.
Other members of the community had concerns on bike lane installation and its impact on parking and traffic.
• Pedestrian Safety and Maintenance: Community members emphasized the importance of enhancing pedestrian safety at intersections and school zones, urging for improved crosswalks and infrastructure maintenance, including creek trail resurfacing. • Parking and Traffic Management: A number of community members highlighted traffic congestion and parking issues, suggesting solutions such as permit parking and improved traffic flow strategies. Additionally, concerns were raised about traffic congestion during peak hours, particularly due to vehicles using Norfolk Street as a pass- through route.
Key comments from community feedback
17 Poplar Avenue
• Bicycle Infrastructure and Safety: Residents suggested adding measures like curb extensions and painted bulb outs to enhance safety and visibility. Additionally, a portion of the community supported protected bike lanes and additional measures to prevent parking in bike lanes, citing safety concerns at intersections like Ellsworth and Delaware. • Pedestrian Amenities and Wayfinding: Community members supported improvements such as pedestrian-scale lighting and wayfinding signage, highlighting concerns about visibility and maintenance.
• Traffic Management: Residents identified issues with traffic congestion and illegal parking, proposing solutions like eliminating parking on narrow sections and implementing parking permit programs. Moreover, suggestions were made for traffic calming measures like lane dividers to address speeding issues along Poplar Avenue, particularly during commute and school times.
• Curb Extensions: Mixed feelings regarding infrastructure curb extensions, with some residents opposing this potential change and advocating for preserving parking spots.
Key comments from community feedback
18 Themes by
Modality
19 Pedestrian Network
• Crossing Large Corridors: Concerns raised over
pedestrians crossing large corridors such as
Alameda de las Pulgas and El Camino Real and
support for safer pedestrian infrastructure and
increasing driver awareness.
• Considerations for Children: Identification of need
for safer corridor crossings and protected
intersections for children on their way to and from
school, which could include addition of crossing
guards and flashing beacons.
• Visibility: Support for more pedestrian and driver
visibility at crosswalks, especially near large
community hubs such as shopping centers and
schools.
• Maintenance: Comments around need for
maintenance, repaving, and widening of pedestrian
sidewalks and bulb outs at certain areas, particularly
for individuals with strollers and those with
disability.
General themes from community feedback
20 Bicycle Network
• Balancing Bicycle Infrastructure with Other
Modalities: Affirmation for need of safer and more
bicycle infrastructure with careful attention to
trade-offs with removal of parking and
automobile travel lanes.
• Wayfinding: General support for wayfinding to
various bike bridges, the Bay Trail, and other
community hubs such as downtown, Central
Park, and Caltrain Stations.
• Protected Bike Lanes: General support for
protected, separated bike lanes to ensure cyclist
safety from moving automobile traffic.
• Highway Crossings: Affirmation of need to
improve bike connectivity and infrastructure
across large corridors and highways, including I-
101.
General themes from community feedback
21 Transit Network
• Bus Stops: Concerns over existing bus
stops that impede traffic flow, including at
Norfolk and Kehoe.
• Dedicated Bus Lanes: Support for
repurposing of travel lanes on El Camino
Real for other purposes, including bus
travel, to increase bus reliability, with some
concerns over impact on parking and
traffic congestion.
• Connectivity: Requests for more service
and frequency in certain areas of San
Mateo.
• Bus Stop Amenities: Support for
improving bus stop experience, with more
seating, waste receptacles, and shelters.
General themes from community feedback
22 Auto Network
• Speeding and Traffic Calming: Recognition of high-speed traffic on various corridors, with support for speed cushions, signage and signals/stop signs on specific neighborhood streets.
• Cut-Through Traffic: Comments regarding need to reduce cut- through traffic in neighborhoods.
• Enforcement: Many comments received regarding rampant running of red lights and stop signs and need of more
enforcement.
• Parking Removal: Mixed input on parking removal, with some support for removal of parking on large corridors such as El Camino Real and narrow streets due to safety and access concerns, and other concerns in neighborhoods where
residents and small businesses are dependent on on-street parking.
• Residential Parking Permits: General interest in residential parking programs to allow easier parking for residents of neighborhoods.
• Congestion: General concerns over potential impact of dedicated bus and bike lanes on traffic congestion.
General themes from community feedback
23 Other General Comments
• Community Engagement and Placemaking:
Discussions about public space use and community
vibrancy. Considerations on how transportation
projects affect public spaces.
• Active Transportation and Health: Recognition of
promotion of walking, cycling, and health. Calls for
better infrastructure to support these modes.
• Inclusive Transportation Planning: Comments on
addressing disparities in transportation access,
including more outreach to the ADA community
and identification of equitable transportation
improvements.
• AB 413 Impacts: Questions regarding AB 413,
parking restrictions, and future
enforcement/implementation.
General themes from workshop community
feedback
24 OVERARCHING HIGHLIGHTS
Traffic Calming: General support for improvements
aimed at reducing vehicular speed, including speed
cushions, traffic signals, stop signs, and signage.
Safety: General support for improvements aimed at
improving safety for pedestrians and bicyclists, such as lighting and addition of new signals/stop signs,
especially for children at intersections/crossing.
Traffic and Parking Impacts: Some concerns on
impact of transportation improvements on parking
availability and traffic congestion, with interest in
residential parking programs.
Bicycle Infrastructure: General support for increased
connectivity and safer bike lanes for bicyclists, while reducing impact on/trade-offs with other modalities.
Connectivity and Wayfinding: Support for wayfinding
and improving pedestrian and bicyclist crossings over
highways and large corridors to key community hubs.
What worked well:
● Leveraged connections with community
leadership to organize three (3) community
workshops oriented toward potential
improvements in each respective council district.
● Provided Spanish-interpretation at all community
workshop engagement events.
● Input on potential solutions and trade-offs for all
priority corridors gathered at all workshops.
● Council and Sustainability and Infrastructure
Commission representation at all workshops.
25 COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT LEARNINGS
Considerations for future engagement:
● Ensure there is targeted outreach to the ADA
community and seniors in future engagement
efforts.
● Boost outreach to Spanish speaking
communities.
● Consider the addition of childcare services
during meeting for families with children.