The Burlingame Voice

Close the Avenue? Not So Fast

I was hoping this idea of closing Burlingame Ave. to all cars would quietly disappear as things slowly re-open and people get used to mingling a bit.  But the City has apparently asked merchants for their opinions so it's an active idea and we have a Guest Perspective in today's Daily Journal that espouses the closure.  The author comes from a great B'game family and has done a stint on the Planning Commission, but he might have benefited from serving on Traffic, Safety and Parking instead.  I'm sort of glad he broached the topic.  Here's bit of that piece

With summer weather approaching and business attendance at an all-time low, now is an incredible, once-in-a-generation time to experiment with what  Burlingame Avenue could be like if it were more pedestrian-oriented, and less vehicle-dependent.

The city needs to take strong actions to make sure the heart of its downtown, its restaurants and bars, are positioned as well as possible to succeed in a prolonged sure-to-be-tough environment. The best way the city can do this, in my opinion, is to allow them to operate at normal capacity (while adhering to strict distancing guidelines), through the expansion of temporary seating zones. Of course, the only way to accomplish this would be to follow the example set by Oakland and numerous other cities, and close Burlingame Avenue to cars.

There's an old debate tactic called the Straw Man argument that says you refute an argument that your opponent hasn't actually made.  A corollary to that is to refute one argument and omit the others.  That's what is going on in this piece:

Now, the obvious contrarian opinion is that there won’t be enough parking (a particularly Burlingame classic!). Well, my response would be: Good! Let’s finally put our environmental policy and action where our mouths are and create paths for people to safely travel, and park, via bicycle.

Allow me to note some better arguments against a full closure.  First, there are many other businesses on the Avenue besides restaurants.  All of them rely on out-of-towners and B'gamers who live far away and won't walk or bike to their stores.  Convenient parking may be over rated by some store owners, but it's not a non-issue.  Some of them sell (or would like to sell) more product than one can easily carry for blocks.  Second, what about the disabled customers?  We have handicap spaces for a reason and it's a good one.  No "TSPoon" commissioner would ever think of taking them all out, but a full closure does exactly that.  Third, it seems unfair to advantage some restaurants at the expense of others not on the Avenue.  Should Park & Howard, Narin, Coconut Bay, Stella Osteria, Il Fornaio, et al just figure it out themselves?  I don't think so.  How about Broadway?  I won't play Straw Man and suggest we close all of downtown, but fair would be fair.  Fourth, police and fire access is still required and required fast.  How do you do that with tables and diners in the street?  Lastly, the realpolitik of the City's situation is a major budget problem as noted here.  We are definitely better off than many cities, but with the hotel tax and sales taxes taking a major hit, the revenue from the meters should not be ignored.  As the City seems intent on giving away money, perhaps taking some in would be wise.

So what to do?  Doing nothing is anathema to government.  We've seen that across the board during the corona crisis.  Here's a middle position that might work for restaurants all over town.  The space in front of the restaurant can become a parklet.  I broached the idea eight years ago here.  As you can read from 2012 it got no attention--not one comment, but now might be the time.  Parklets are big in EssEff and a few sprouted in San Mateo.  One space (10' x 20' if memory serves) could hold 2 four tops.  Turned twice a night, that would be 16 more diners.  Added to sidewalk dining, it would help.  Closing the whole street is unfair, may be unsafe and likely costly.

El Camino Flooding: Where's Roto-Rooter?

Here's one more water-related post to follow the last two on sea-levels and drinking water.  We had two nice, moderately heavy storms over the weekend and into Monday.  We needed the rain everywhere except on El Camino.  Bad flooding in a dozen spots on our main thoroughfare has been a known issue for decades.  I just don't get why Caltrans won't do something simple to fix the known hot spots.  Yes, we have a multi-hundreds of millions of dollars upgrade in the works, but with the massive state shortfall from COVID-19 I'll bet roads drop down the priority list.

In the meantime, why can't Caltrans just get into some of the drains and clear them out?  We know the drains drain--just not fast enough.  I don't want to put it back on the city's Public Works who have already stepped up on ECR maintenance beyond their remit, but it might have to come to that.  "All plumbing is local" to paraphrase Tip O'Neill.  Here's the recurring flood at the end of my street.  There's a drain right there.  The drain on the other corner drains well enough if I keep it clear, which I do.  The flooded one drains after about a day--there had been no rain for more than 12 hours when I took this photo.  Where's Roto-Rooter?

Caltrans to the Rescue on ECR

Out of the blue, when we were least expecting it, Caltrans has ridden to the rescue of a substantial part of El Camino Real.  And the folks in town are all excited.  At the city council candidates' forum three weeks ago, I asked the question "what can be done for a short-term fix of El Camino as we await the multi-tens of millions of dollar Big Fix being worked on by the Task Force?"  It was question #4 of the evening and drew murmurs from the small crowd assembled.

Mayor Colson went first and noted that even though it is a state highway, our Public Works crews jump in and fill potholes on occasion, but otherwise we have a commitment from Caltrans on the Big Fix.  Emily Beach echoed that.  Mike Dunham noted there is no perfect answer, but his long term vision would be for more public transit by introducing dedicated bus lanes.  Not quite sure how one does that on a four-lane road, but we'll leave that for later.

In the meantime, let's luxuriate in the 15 sections of fresh asphalt that have been laid down in the right southbound lane--some of them quite lengthy.  Reading between the lines of the answer to my question three weeks ago, no one saw this coming.  Could there be more in the works--maybe on the northbound side?  Only the Shadow knows.

Floppy Signs Multiply

It seems like the yellow floppy Yield to Pedestrians in Crosswalk signs are multiplying like rabbits around town.  Also known as "Ped pop-up" signs or "In-Street Ped warning" signs, they were originally designed for mid-block crossings. Gradually they’ve been expanded to be used even at intersections and sometimes even on both sides of the same intersection.  One intrepid Voice reader notes  

Most cities have already figured out they don’t work and are knocked down a lot (see photo below on California Ave.). They are a maintenance nightmare as we’ve seen, and in the worst case, they actually impede a regular car driver from safely completing a left turn from a side street.  This makes the driver navigate the turn slowly and be more exposed to getting broadsided by a car on the major street.  It’s our city continuing to throw money down the drain in the hopes of virtue signaling that it cares about pedestrian safety.

I have also seen drivers slow to a crawl when there is no pedestrian anywhere near the crosswalk-- so-called "traffic calming" gone awry.  Let's hope the city is evaluating the cost-benefit of these signs.

 

 

Hoover: When an Island Isn't.

I happened to drive past the nicely upgraded Hoover School recently.  As the elementary kids start thinking about returning to class, pedestrian (and vehicle) safety will be on people's minds.  Hoover has a bit of a past in this regard which you can read about here from two and a half years ago.

What caught my eye as year 3 is about to start at Hoover were the tire tracks on the roundabout island right in front.  It seems odd to me that there would be an island that is so easy to drive over.  What's the point really?  Does it engender some false sense of security?  Is it a challenge for thrill-seekers?  Or is it just a poor design?  Seems like if you are going to put in an island, it should really be an island instead of a little sand bar.

Broadway Overpass: A Long Way Away

One of the common questions I hear in town is "When are they going to fix the rest of Broadway?" meaning now that the bridge has been replaced, what about the rail crossing?  My standard response is "There isn't nearly enough money socked away to even start".  That is the bottom line of a piece in today's Daily Journal recapping the discussion at Council on Monday.  Here are my favorite tidbits, but do click through here to get all of the bits.

No decision was made at the meeting, as the issue was only discussed following a presentation from the county Transportation Authority, which allocates Measure A sales tax revenue for transit projects. The project is currently largely unfunded, and is expected to be completed by 2026, according to available financing.  Examining the rising cost of construction, Transportation Authority officials anticipate the price will jump by about 35% over the life of the project, amounting to about $40 million more than the proposed current cost by 2026.

Although it is apparently considered the most-needed project in all of Northern California.  Here's another gem

In a separate presentation, a Caltrain official said future service at Broadway will sap stops from the Burlingame station as well, as the proximity of the two stations will result in one train stop at either station every 30 minutes.

You mean like a real train service?  Discussion of Mike Brownrigg's idea of not having a station at all at B'way (ostensibly to shorten the Giant Wall Dividing The City) raised the other council members' hackles.  With massive residential development at the Anson apartments on Carolan and Facebook coming along with whatever goes in on the State Lands Commission property (see the next post below), one would think we would want more train service at B'way.  Anyway you look at it, there's not enough money floating around to do much of anything for years.

 

Another 9.4 Acres of B'game Bayfront

The State Lands Commission is out with another RFP for one of the last undeveloped bits of B'game Bayfront (about 1,000') that has been idle since the boundaries were settled in 1972.  All you moneybags can access the official State page here.  The Daily Journal has a piece on the history and possibilities for the parcel.  In it, Mayor Donna Colson notes

For her part, Colson said she is intrigued by the opportunity to keep a majority of the land open while occupying some of it with a boutique hotel which could bolster the city’s tourism industry.  “We still think there is enough capacity to handle a small, high-end boutique hotel that would have a restaurant and other amenities that would be nice for the public,” she said.

She noted the city’s current hotel room vacancy rate is extremely low, and that interest in the adjacent area will likely be sparked with construction of the new Facebook building which could accommodate roughly 3,500 workers.

We've watched this piece with some concern for a long time since "nature abhors a vacuum" and in this case the vacuum has been filled by trash as noted here.  The SLC noted

On November 26, 2001, following market exposure to 1,100  prospective developers, the Commission received only one proposal.  Since 1995, the site has remained unleased and has been intermittently maintained as needed. The Commission has expended most of the $200,000 in settlement money received from RTC to market the site, demolish derelict storage buildings, install fencing and concrete barricades, and remove trash, debris, and vegetative overgrowth.

Those days are probably coming to an end with the development pressure and profit potential of a parcel that large.  Getting to and from the lot hasn't gotten any easier and probably won't for a long time, but when has that ever stopped anything?

 

Cell antennae: 4G, 5G, Gee how many?

An issue that has been simmering in B'game and elsewhere for a long time is the number and placement of additional cell antennae around town.  The migration to 5G is starting to pick-up in the U.S. although we are probably still a couple of years from seeing much in town.  Yet coverage is still spotty in many places and the various providers are looking for ways to fill-in coverage which means more gear on poles or towers.  The Daily Post did a piece a couple weeks ago about a major tower management company, Crown Castle, seeking to add seven nodes in Palo Alto.  The article is instructive on the look of things to come

Crown Castle wanted to place an antenna on each of the small cell node light poles, with the associated mechanical equipment going in a green fake mailbox on the sidewalk nearby.  City planners didn't like the idea of fake mailboxes, which they said would clutter up sidewalks and are susceptible to damage.

The net result was approval to put all of the gear on top of the light pole in a green cylinder and their council upheld that decision 4-3.  The Telecom Act of 1996 and a subsequent FCC ruling really tie municipalities hands on cell growth, but the top-of-pole vs. "fake mailbox" vs. underground vault dispute is likely to continue.  Coming to a light pole near you soon.

Our Future with Facebook

During a lovely bike ride through B'game and over the Rosalie O'Mahony bike bridge then turning south towards what was once a popular drive-in movie site, I was faced with the same spider web of steel beams we have all seen from a distance.  Here's a view of our future.

And the Oscar for most asked question in town goes to "How are all of those people going to get to work?"

Bad Dieting Ideas

I can't link to the Wall Street Journal site behind the paywall, so I will just give you some highlights of a piece from today on the perils of "road diets".  They are becoming popular in the Bay Area including Menlo Park that just made one example permanent on Middlefield Rd. and, of course, our very own Carolan Ave. example.  I suppose you could add the roundabout as another example.  But.....

Los Angeles, like cities nationwide, is transforming its streets. In July 2017 the city installed a “road diet” on a 0.8-mile stretch of Venice Boulevard in Mar Vista, reducing four lanes to two and adding bike lanes separated from traffic by parking buffers. The project is part of Mayor Eric Garcetti’s Vision Zero initiative, which aims to eliminate traffic fatalities in the city by 2025. Launched in 2015, Vision Zero is the most radical transformation of how people move through Los Angeles since the dawn of the freeway era 75 years ago.

By almost any metric it’s been a disaster. Pedestrian deaths have nearly doubled, from 74 in 2015 to 135 in 2017, the last year for which data are available. After years of improvement, Los Angeles again has the world’s worst traffic, according to the transportation research firm Inrix. Miles of vehicles idling in gridlock have reduced air quality to 1980s levels.

Lane reductions, bike lanes, new meridians and other innovations designed to reduce vehicle speeds make it difficult for bulky ambulances and fire trucks to respond quickly to emergencies. 

Let's just file this under the Law of Unintended Consequences.  Here is our local example which is OK.  It gets a little confusing up at Broadway for both cyclists and drivers, but doesn't inhibit fire trucks and such.