|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
What should be done about speeding on dangerous highway sections? Should we be using “Education” and “Enforcement” as tools (e.g., warning signs or speed limits)? Or should we be using the tool of “Engineering” to make the street less inviting to speeding in the first place?
Last week, Josh Becker (CA Senate), Marc Berman (CA Assembly) and Ray Mueller (SMC Board of Supervisors) seemed to suggest a third option. The goal appears to be to utilize “Engineering” as a means to enable drivers to maintain a speed of 70 mph. While Caltrans might find a solution to prevent a wet roadway during the dry season, during the rainy season, we would still see spinouts. So, essentially, the speed problem wouldn’t be fixed, just delayed.
Let’s look at how Santa Clara County is fixing the same problem along the dangerous Hwy 17 corridor. They reduce speed limits to 55 mph, 45 mph, even 35 mph on these most dangerous sections all year long. These would be a fairly simple, fast and sufficient method to provide more safety on Hwy 92 as well. This kind of solution would not require public outcry; it would simply require a little more professional thinking by Caltrans.
What we really wanted to explore, however, is the question of whether the articles about ‘public outcry’ were real. Or is this just a publicity stunt to make the county look more decisive? Lawmakers are fixing the problems no one was asking about – your-tax-dollars-at-work-kind-of-stuff.
We want to explore what real ‘public outcry’ usually looks like.
Menlo Park – Parking Removal project
California lawmakers have created rules and regulations that force cities and counties to build and provide more housing of various levels of affordability. Menlo Park is working on different plans and projects. One plan is about replacing the old Sunset Magazine ranch house with the highest high rise in the county. The local school district is working on workforce housing. Some residents suggest considering green space around City Hall. Currently, the city seems to be focusing on transforming several downtown parking lots into apartment buildings and parking garages. And going after free parking or adding housing will always create an almost religious war in this metropolitan area.
So, of course, for all these projects, you have various groups claiming to be pro-business, pro-housing, anti-homeless, pro-homeless, pro-free-parking, pro-paid-parking, pro-off-street-parking, anti-garage-parking, anti-growth, pro-teacher, etc. There have already been, and will continue to be, more articles in local and regional newspapers. There will be more townhalls, lots of additional council meetings, and, of course, more posts and discussions on social media as well. There will be various petition signing and outreach activities being conducted. Save Downtown Menlo Park wants to introduce a ballot initiative that would require voter approval before housing can be built on these parking lots. There is and will be more ‘public outcry’ going in all kinds of directions.
Will there be housing, or will there be free parking in the end? What is more important to the residents might not be what is more important to the city or the council. In the end, each council member will be pretending to listen to the ‘public outcry’ closest to their own heart.
San Mateo – North Central Bike Lane Removal project
Incidentally, this project also addressed the question of free parking versus quality of life. The North Central neighborhood was recently harmed twice by car-centric San Mateo politicians. First, this Equity Focus Area (EFA) was hit and harmed by the latest and greatest highway expansion project, then the council doubled down by infamously sabotaging Safe-Routes-To-School along Humboldt Street.
Projects and actions like these led North Central to be designated as an Equity Focus Area (EFA) and Community of Concern (CoC) in the first place. And in the rare cases these areas do get a little TLC, that is typically referred to as Transportation Equity.
Transportation Equity means ‘If children in affluent neighborhoods deserve nice parks and bike lanes, then children in poor neighborhoods deserve them as well.‘
Even in the buzzword days of livability, healthspan, sustainability, equity, to create these bike lanes still required a lot of hard advocacy work in this extremely blue state and county:
- Several people had to get injured while walking or biking
- It required the input and support of advocacy groups and many volunteers (Move San Mateo, Strive San Mateo, SVBC).
- Multiple rounds of studies, outreach, endorsements, petitions and signature collections had to happen.
- Along the way, bike lanes like these have been endorsed and voted on by thousands of county residents supporting various measures (e.g., A + W).
- Several council meetings spanning several years were required to provide this simple livability and quality-of-life project.
- Several community meetings and meetings with bike and pedestrian groups were required to secure the grants.
And yes, doing good projects always requires them to find extra grants. The process is much easier when your council is working on bad projects, like removing bike lanes and safety. That process looks quite different. You still need the right kind of ‘public outcry’, but you basically have to take what you can get or create it yourselves:
- In this case the council listened to fringe groups like San Mateo Heritage Alliance or Ethics San Mateo.
- These groups are not necessarily friends of YIMBY politicians nor connected to the neighborhood, but you can’t be too picky if you are going after Safe-Routes-To-School projects.
- Morals and ethics must be off the table when you go against small children on bicycles, but you can invent other “equity” reasons for doing that.
- Fake equity reasons allow a council to ignore safety concerns and real public outcry.
- And when removing ethics and professionalism from the equation, the council can easily violate some 15-20 city plans and even blow up established funding.
But then again, for bad projects, city managers never seem to have any problems using the General Fund or blowing up the budget anyway.
In the case of this Bike Lane Removal project, Nicole Fernandez and the council members did not care too much about the bigger and better ‘public outcry’ – the end result seemed fixed from the start.
Conclusion
Politicians don’t like being bullied, but they are willing to pretend being bullied when it serves their purpose. However, they are rarely swayed by public outcry.
A San Mateo newspaper wrote a story about how dangerous North Central has been for people on foot and bike, and council member Nicole Fernandez (D2) was all in.
“Thank you to @smdj for highlighting the fact that North Central is the most dangerous neighborhoods in @cityofsanmateo for pedestrians and bicyclists. We must do better and create safer streets for our residents.” Nicole Fernandez (D2)
But then she turns around and finds the ‘public outcry’ of car collectors and corporate interest groups more worthy of her vote. The “doing better” mantra didn’t even survive one council meeting. Despite a majority of San Mateo and Foster City PTO parents sending letters supporting these bike lanes, Nicole Fernandez is siding with speeders, asking – no requesting – to have their Private Car Storage returned to them. But that is not enough, because of “Equity,” the storage of BMWs, Audis, Teslas on our public streets must be kept free. And Nicole Fernandez listened only to the ‘public outcry’ she wanted to listen to and ignored the other kind.
San Mateo Democrats, such as Nicole Fernandez or her mentor, Senator Josh Becker, always find some reason to prioritize speeding for cars over people’s safety and financial well-being. And promoting more car violence for Equity Focus Areas along the way is not a hindrance. So when Josh Becker, Marc Berman, Ray Mueller are acting focused, fast and decisive for the benefit of safety, it is worth becoming curious.
More Information
- HMB Review: Leadership needed for highway safety on Hwy 1
- Press Release by three lawmakers
- RWCPulse: Three Lawmakers answer to ‘Public Outcry’
- Strive San Mateo
- Move San Mateo
- San Mateo Heritage Alliance
- Ethics San Mateo
- Bike lane modification has cyclists concerned
Editor’s Note: The views and opinions expressed in all blog posts are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Redwood City Pulse or its staff.
