Commission reviews 35% design for Nineteenth Avenue–Fashion Island multimodal project as residents press for safer bike and pedestrian crossings

The San Mateo Sustainability and Infrastructure Commission on Aug. 13 reviewed a 35% design for the Nineteenth Avenue–Fashion Island Boulevard multimodal improvement project intended to reduce congestion, add protected bicycle facilities and improve pedestrian access on a corridor city staff said has a high number of collisions.

The commission heard the presentation from Bethany Lopez, senior engineer for the city’s public works department, who described the project’s goals as “to improve congestion relief, improve traffic flows” and to expand safe walking, bicycling and transit access while keeping parking where feasible.

The corridor analysis presented to commissioners and about 15 public speakers showed roughly 200 collisions from 2019–2024 across the corridor; Lopez said about 74 of those occurred at the Nineteenth Avenue–Delaware intersection and roughly 50 were concentrated at the Fashion Island/Norfolk area. Lopez also identified three pedestrian and three bicycle collisions in that period and noted a recent pedestrian fatality not in her dataset.

At 35% design the project proposes several main elements: a separated (physically protected) two‑way bikeway on the south side of Nineteenth Avenue for most of the corridor; a new raised median extending from the SR‑92 off‑ramp to reduce unsafe cut‑through movements at a busy gas‑station driveway near Delaware; a lane‑reallocation across the Seal Slough bridge (two eastbound lanes, one westbound) to rebalance vehicle hours of delay (VHD); protected intersection elements, truck aprons and signal upgrades including modern video detection that can differentiate bicycles and pedestrians from vehicles.

Lopez told the commission the lane reallocation is intended to address an eastbound peak that the team quantified as roughly 32 vehicle‑hours of delay in the afternoon peak, and that the design is iterative: traffic modeling and signal timing work will continue to refine the elements. She also said bridge structure constraints limit how much new concrete sidewalk can be added on the Seal Slough span, but staff plan a wider pedestrian path there than the existing roughly 2‑foot space.

Residents and community groups who spoke during an extended public‑comment period overwhelmingly supported the protected bike lanes and more pedestrian safety but raised concerns about traffic congestion, lighting, loss of some on‑street parking and whether traffic mitigation money promised by developers had been spent. Several parents and neighborhood residents described regular bicycle trips to school and near‑misses on the current facilities; one speaker, Annie Sy, urged the commission not to delay the project, calling it “long studied, community supported, predominantly grant funded, and much needed.”

Seema (chair, San Mateo Planning Commission) said public safety extends beyond crime and urged the city to act, noting recent pedestrian deaths along the corridor and stating, “The most important responsibility of the government is to keep its residents safe.”

Lopez outlined parking and right‑of‑way tradeoffs in the 35% plan: on one block with 37 existing spaces staff intend to retain 28; on another block with 27 spaces the design retains 15. She said staff are widening some curb lines to preserve parking where possible and are coordinating with SamTrans to preserve a bus layover space.

On funding, Lopez said the city has contributed roughly $500,000 so far and the project has about $8.5 million in identified grant funds; staff estimate the full project cost at about $25 million and said the city anticipates covering a modest local match (the team described a target of about $1.5 million total city contribution). Staff said they are pursuing additional regional highway grant funding that could cover roughly $15 million of the remaining gap. Federal grant rules and schedule milestones require an aggressive design schedule; staff said they are negotiating with grant agencies (MTC, CCAG) for a possible 4–6 month extension of federal deadlines so design can reach the next milestone without jeopardizing construction funds.

Commissioners and the public pressed staff for more granular traffic modeling and clearer descriptions of the mitigation measures that will address peak period congestion and cut‑through traffic coming from US‑101/92 and adjacent development. Several speakers and commissioners requested stronger engagement with East Side stakeholders, businesses and schools and asked staff to bring the 65% design and the traffic analysis to the next community meeting and to City Council. Staff confirmed the project is scheduled for a council study session in September and said they expect to present a 65% design and a fuller traffic analysis at the next community outreach meeting.

No formal actions or votes were taken by the commission at the Aug. 13 meeting; the session served as an informational review and public comment opportunity. The project remains under iterative design and subject to further changes based on the traffic analysis, structural constraints near Caltrans‑owned right‑of‑way and outcomes of pending grant awards.