Budget Busting Interchange Expansions on Track Despite State Funding Cuts

An expanded partial cloverleaf interchange at El Camino Real and Highway 92 (bottom) will allow more car traffic during rush hours compated to today's full cloverleaf (top) Image: Caltrans
An expanded partial cloverleaf interchange at El Camino Real and Highway 92 (bottom) will allow more car traffic during rush hours compared to today’s full cloverleaf (top) Image: Caltrans

Desperate to keep expanding San Mateo County’s highways for more auto traffic, the Transportation Authority (SMCTA)’s Board of Directors voted last week to advance $16.3 million in local highway funds to avoid delaying the construction of two major interchange reconstruction projects.

County highway planners were counting on this year’s State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to contribute $10.4 million to rebuild the Willow Road and Highway 101 interchange, and $5.9 million to rebuild the El Camino Real and Highway 92 interchange. But lower gasoline sales taxes and revenues forced California to postpone awarding $754 million in transportation projects statewide. Rather than wait, SMCTA opted to fill the funding gap with its own surplus Measure A Highway Program funds, to be repaid by the STIP in future years.

“The advancement of funds through this process will fully fund these two projects and allow them to begin construction in late summer or early fall [of this year],” reported SMCTA Director Joe Hurley at last Thursday’s Board meeting.

Both interchange reconstruction projects are full cloverleaf to partial cloverleaf conversions, which replace free-flowing on ramps and off ramps with signalized intersections on both sides of the highway. The updated designs accommodate more rush hour auto traffic on widened ramps and reduce the hazards posed by free-flowing auto traffic to people walking or bicycling.

El Camino Real facing north at one of two new signalized intersections on either side of a reconstructed Highway 92 interchange in San Mateo. Image: Caltrans
El Camino Real facing north at one of two new signalized intersections on either side of a reconstructed Highway 92 interchange in San Mateo. Image: Caltrans

“These two [interchanges] are extremely dangerous,” said SMCTA Board member and San Mateo County Supervisor Carole Groom. “The state has a very healthy [budget] surplus. I’m very disappointed at the state of California’s decisions and it falls to us to solve a problem where our residents are at great risk.”

The new Willow Road/Highway 101 interchange, located in both Menlo Park and East Palo Alto, will include eight-foot wide bike paths and 10-foot wide sidewalks separated from auto traffic by a concrete barrier, as well as standard six-foot bike lanes integrated into auto traffic. Caltrans officials reported in 2013 that $42 million would be needed to build the partial cloverleaf design chosen. Two years later project costs had ballooned to $65 million. Final costs now total $76 million [PDF].

Caltrans made much less of an effort to follow Complete Streets principles when designing the new partial cloverleaf for El Camino Real/Highway 92 in San Mateo. Initial designs included four-foot wide bike lanes – the narrowest legally allowed in California – and only approaching the two new intersections on either side of Highway 92.

“Ideally, Caltrans would include a bicycle pocket lane with green dashed blocks in conflict zones through the entire interchange area in both directions,” wrote the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition (SVBC) in a February 2014 letter [PDF]. “Caltrains allowed the County of San Mateo to adopt a similar design on Alpine Road on the Caltrans right of way in the vicinity of Highway 280.”

Caltrans found space to squeeze in five-foot standard bike lanes and eight-foot wide sidewalks in the final design. The bike lanes will be the first installed on El Camino Real in San Mateo County. The interchange will cost $22 million.

If construction on both interchanges begins later this year as expected, the new El Camino Real & Highway 92 interchange will be finished by 2018 and the Willow Road & Highway 101 interchange by 2019.

  • JustJake

    Considering data on traffic levels, this seems appropriate and will result in a net gain for all users. Could use objective reporting without the anti-car slam/spin.

  • RichLL

    To be fair the article cites benefits of this work for other classes of road user:

    “reduce the hazards posed by free-flowing auto traffic to people walking or bicycling”

    “will include eight-foot wide bike paths and 10-foot wide sidewalks separated from auto traffic by a concrete barrier, as well as standard six-foot bike lanes integrated into auto traffic”

    So everyone gets something for what is not a lot of money in the big picture.

  • KJ

    There are no crosswalks to cross El Camino in the pictures, even though there are two shopping centers/multiple office buildings just north AND south of this cloverleaf (i.e. right next to 92) !!

  • murphstahoe

    Those hippies need to get a car

  • Bernard Finucane

    These intersections a very poorly designed. They should put roundabouts in instead, in they are insisting on increasing capacity, which seems like a dumb idea.

    A lot of the paved area is designed for car storage because the traffic lights stop the traffic.The only advantage of traffic lights is they reduce conflicts caused by allowing vehicles to cross the intersection in various directions.

    A roundabout reduces the conflict potential by routing all vehicles into the same circular motion, and eliminates the need for car storage by maintaining traffic flow.

    The huge square for uncontrolled traffic movement shown in the last picture is _obviously_ a bad idea.

  • Mike Jones

    This interchange has no place on a local commercial street like El Camino. It divides the retail areas south from the downtown, and uses up too much space for such a valuable bit of real estate. El Camino is at the heart of the county’s Sustainable Communities Strategy, Much better to remove it completely and sell the land, there are better ways to get cars onto El Camino.

  • robo94117

    This expensive “improvements” should be weighed against spending the same amount on other projects, such as El Camino BRT, Transit company improvements, etc. for cost/benefit/GHG reduction.
    Peninsula counties are constantly “improving” interchanges to facilitate traffic flow. The funds spent on these expensive highway construction projects will often go much further when used for downscaled on-the-ground improvements to streets and transit facilities.

  • Jolenebcampbell

    <<fb. ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★::::::!il126r:….,…….

  • David

    While I’m no fan of cloverleaf interchanges, this project makes only slight safety improvements without providing any meaningful non-auto changes. Pedestrians and bicyclists will have to fight to cross even more lanes of traffic, and there is no way for pedestrians to cross El Camino Real. Also, there are no apparent design considerations that would speed buses through the area.

    A double roundabout would address capacity issues while making this area much more approachable for pedestrians and bicyclists, plus through delay for buses would likely be reduced. Shame on Caltrans and SMCTA for this antiquated redesign. It’s 2016, not 1996.

  • I was thinking the exact same thing. A roundabout solution would likely have the exact same benefits and would fit within the area too.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

us-101-92-flyover-ramp-from-fashion-island-blvd-580x406

San Mateo’s Highway 101/92 Interchange Eyed for Expansion

|
San Mateo County’s transportation agencies are forging ahead with environmental studies of new lanes, ramps, and overpasses to add to the already massive interchange at Highways 101 and 92 in the city of San Mateo. Building on four previous studies stretching back to 2001, a new $500,000 study completed in June analyzed 25 different traffic […]

Pedestrian Safety Still Starved for Funding in San Mateo County

|
On March 3, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SMCTA) awarded $4.9 million to ten pedestrian and bicycle safety projects – $1 million less than the agency awarded two years ago. Agency staff had revised up the amount of funding for this year’s Pedestrian and Bicycle Program to $5.7 million in February, but explained in the Board’s […]

San Mateo County TA Rejects Ped Safety Projects But Not Highway Expansions

|
With $125 million to lavish on it’s Highway Program this year, the San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) has decided to spend $108 million on highway expansion projects while denying funds for major pedestrian and bicycle safety improvements [PDF]. On October 1, the TA Board approved $11 million to reconstruct the Holly/101 Interchange in San Carlos as a partial cloverleaf to accommodate higher traffic […]

San Mateo County Bike/Ped Safety Projects Starved for Funding

|
Despite growing demand for better walking and biking infrastructure in San Mateo County, active transportation grants from the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) cover only a fraction of the projects that cities want to build, leaving many residents without the sidewalks, bike lanes, and other basic ingredients they need to safely […]
STREETSBLOG USA

Putting TIGER Spending in Perspective

|
The House’s current transportation spending bill calls for reducing the share of federal spending that goes to TIGER, a grant program for sustainable transportation projects in cities, from $500 to $100 million. The budget, meanwhile, holds highway funding steady. TIGER is an enormously popular program. In its second year, it received close to 1,000 applications […]