Attachment VI Existing Conditions Summary — Hayward City Council, June 2, 2026

Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Hayward
High Injury Network Safety Plan:

A
Street, B Street, and Tennyson Road
Co
rridors
Existing
Conditions Summary
August
2025

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
able of C
ontents
Project
Introduction1
Back
ground Research3
Safet
y Analysis4
Adva
nced Data Analytics5
2 Exis
ting Conditions2

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Project Introduction
3 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Project Background
The
City of Hayward (City) adopted its first
Loc
al Road Safety Plan (LRSP) in 2023 and
is look
ing to address safety concerns on its
streets.

This study is phase one of the City’s
ef
fort to improve safety conditions on its
High
Injury Network (HIN). The HIN
co
mprises just 14%
of City streets while
ac
counting for over 75% of serious and
deadly
crashes in the City. The
study is
federa
lly funded through the Safe Streets
and
Roads for All (SS4A) gra
nt pro
gram and
will
include identification and evaluation of
sa
fety countermeasures, conceptual plans,
and
cost estimates for each of the study
cor
ridors.

A
Map of the City’s High Injury N
etwork
4 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
A
Street and B Street
Project Extents
Projec
t Extents Include:
• A
Street from
Hesperian
Boulev
ard to Watkins
S
treet/Lucky Driveway.
• B Street from
Martin Luther
King
Drive to Watkins
St
reet/Lucky Driveway.
5 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Road
Project Extents
6 Projec
t Extents Include:
• T
ennyson Road from
Hes
perian Boulevard
to
Mission Boulevard.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Project
Timeline
7 2025 Feb
May Jun Jul Aug Sep Nov
Pr
oject Start
Feb
R
ound 1 Outreach
M
ay - J
uly
A
nalysis &
Con
cept Development
2026 Jan
Feb Mar Jun Jul Sep Nov
R
ound 2 Outreach
J
an - F
eb
Refin
e Design
A
lternatives
R
ound 3 Outreach
J
un - J
ul
Fin
alize Design
A
lternatives
C
ity Council Approval
N
ov

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Project Outcomes
and Objec
tives
• Projec
t goals include:
• The
development, analysis, and
des
ign of community supported
pro
ject alternatives to improve
sa
fety on each of the study
co
rridors.
• The
completion of Roadway
Safety
Audits (RSAs) for each
st
udy corridor.
• Fi
nal design concepts, which will
in
clude cost estimates and
impl
ementation plans.
8 Projec
t team during Tennyson Road RSA

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Existing
Conditions
9 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
A
St and B St
Land Us
e
10 W
est of Meekland Avenue,
A
Street primarily
consists
of
general commercial or
mixed-us
e commercial/high
de
nsity residential land
us
es. Between Meekland
A
venue and Grand Street, A
Str
eet and B Street
pr
imarily consists of medium
de
nsity residential. East of
Gr
and Street the land use is
pr
imarily central city-r
etail
an
d office commercial

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
A
Street and B Street
Exi
sting Conditions
11 A
Street prim
arily has
two through lanes in each
dire
ction. Segments immediately east of I-880
hav
e three through lanes in each direction. T
he
c
orridor has a 30 MPH speed limit west of Grand
St
reet and a 25 MPH speed limit east of Grand
St
reet.

B
Street prim
arily has one through lane in either
dire
ction. There is a second westbound lane from
W
atkins Street to the BART/UPRR railroad
c
rossing.

B Street has a 25 MPH speed limit for
t
he entirety of the corridor.
1 2
3 4
1 2

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
12 1 A
Street between Hesperian Blvd
and I-880
interchange (~92 ft
RO
W)
2 A
Street between I-880
Interch
ange and Hathaway Ave
(~1

13.5 ft ROW)
A
Street Cross-sections
*Cr
oss sections face westbound

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
13 3 A
Street between Hathaway
A
venue and Meek
land A
venue
(~79
feet ROW)
4 A
Street between Meek
land
A
venue and Watkins Street (~113
feet
ROW)
A
Street Cross-sections
Cont.
*Cr
oss sections face westbound

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
14 1 B S
treet between Hesperian Boulevard
and Gr
and Street (~79’ ROW)
B Street Cross-sections
*Cr
oss sections face westbound
2 B S
treet between Hesperian Boulevard
and Gr
and Street (~81’ ROW)

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
A
Street and B Street
Exi
sting Conditions
15 A
Street primar
ily includes bicycle lanes (Class II), with gaps,
de
signated as a bicycle route (Class III), at the I-88
0 underpass and east
of
Montgomery Avenue. The gap at the I-88
0 interchange is expected to
be
upgraded to bicycle lanes (Class II) as a part of the ongoing I-880 I
nterchange Improvements project. A Street has no sidewalk gaps, but si
dewalks become narrow underneath the I-880
bridge and east of the
U
PRR railroad tracks on the south side of the street. A Street has three un
controlled crossings; each located at a three-l
eg T-i
ntersection. Of the
t
hree midblock crossings, one has a Rectangular Rapid-Fl ashing
B
eacon (RRFB). Most of the corridor’s intersections are signalized with a f
ew side street stop-con
trolled intersections.

B
Street ha
s bicycle lanes (Class II) from Martin Luther King Drive to G
rand Street. The bicycle lanes pick up again for a short segment be
tween the BART/UPRR crossing and Montgomery Avenue. B Street ha
s no sidewalk gaps, but the
existing sidewalks west of the Alice Street
are
less than 5’ in some areas. O
ther than the signalized intersections at
G
rand Street and Watkins Street, B Street has exclusively all-w ay stop
con
trolled intersections.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Road
Land Us
e
16 T
ennyson Road’s pr
imary
land
uses are retail and
of
fice commercial
c
oncentrated between Ruus
R
oad and the UPRR
R
ailroad tracks, sustainable
mix
ed-use
on the eastern
en
d of the corridor, and low
to
medium density
r
esidential for the remainder
of
the corridor.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Road
Ex
isting Conditions Cont.
17 T
ennyson Road has
two through lanes in each
direc
tion. T
he corridor has a 35 MPH speed limit
w
est of Ruus Road, and a 25 MPH speed limit
bet
ween Ruus Road and Mission Boulevard.

R
oughly 1/3 inc
ludes a curb lane where parking is
prohibit
ed. This curb lane currently prov
ides no
f
unctional use for roadway users and represents an
opportun
ity for improved non-m
otorized facilities or
ot
her safety improvements.
1 2
3 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
18 1 T
ennyson Road between Hesperian
Boul
evard and I-880
Interchange (~109 feet
RO
W)
2 T
ennyson Road between I-880
Interchange
and Lei
dig Court (~110 feet ROW)
T
ennyson Road Cross-sec
tions
*Cr
oss sections face westbound

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
19 3 T
ennyson Road between Leidig Court and
Mi
ssion Boulevard (~103 feet ROW)
T
ennyson Road Cross-sections
(Cont.)
*Cr
oss sections face westbound

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Road
Exi
sting Conditions
20 T
ennyson Road primarily
includes
bicy
cle lanes (Class II)
w
ith gaps,
designated as a bicycle route (Class III), at
the I-
880
overpass and eastbound east of Dixon Street. Tennyson
Road
has a missing sidewalk connection on the south side of
the
corridor just east of I-880
and narrow sidewalks on
v
arious areas of the corridor including between Sleepy
Hollow
Avenue S and Caloraga Avenue, over I-880,
and just
w
est of Tyrell Avenue on the north side
of the street. T
here
are
two uncontrolled crossings on the corridor, one of which has
an RRFB (Baldwin Street). The corridor includes a
combination
of side-street
stop-controlled
intersections and
signalized
intersections.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Site V
isits
• T
wo project team site visits were
co
nducted, one for the A & B Street
study
area and one for the Tennyson
Road
study area.
• The
A & B Streets site visit occurred in
the
afternoon of March 24th,
2025.
• The
Tennyson Road site visit occurred
in
the morning of April 1st,
2025.

Bik
er rides on the sidewalk on West A Street
21 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
A
Street: Key Findings
22 • Th
ose rolling on the corridor (bike, scooter, and
s
kateboard users) often used the sidewalks
i
nstead of bike facilities. Those that did use the
bi
ke facilities often rode in the opposing direction
of
the bike lane.
• Pede
strian crossings at the I-880
interchange felt
unc
omfortable due to low visibility at the off-
ra
mps.
• Pede
strians were observed crossing A Street
outs
ide of crosswalks, specifically near Walnut
Street
and east of Hesperian Boulevard.
• Large
eastbound left-turn
queuing was observed
at
Santa Clara Street/ Hathaway Avenue that
back
ed up to I-880.
• The
eastern portion of the corridor has many
driv
eways.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
B Street: Key Findi
ngs
• Ther
e are narrow sidewalks on the
wes
tern end of the corridor near
Ca
nnery Park.
• Park
ing on B Street Near Cannery
Park
was underutilized in the early
aft
ernoon hours.
• B
Street east of Grand Street is
miss
ing bicycle facilities.
• Pedes
trian scale lighting is missing
from
the majority of the north side of
the
corridor.
23 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Road: Key Findings
24 • Microm
obility users use narrow sidewalks
and
crosswalks, creating
bicycle/pe
destrian conflicts.
• Several
crosswalks were obstructed with
me
dian noses.
• Sidew
alk gaps and obstructions exist
thr
oughout the corridor.
• High
vehicle speeds were observed west
of Patr
ick Avenue.
• Ma
ny of the three-leg T-inter
sections
allow
permissive left turning movements
w
hile the pedestrians are given a walk
signal.
• Long
stretches of Tennyson Road have
eight-foot-w
ide curb-ad
jacent roadway
space
with “No Parking” signage.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Backgroun
d
Research
25 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Bic
ycle & Pedestrian
Master Plan 202
0 • Overar
ching goals include safety,
co
mplete streets, access & mobility, and
funding
& implementation.
• The
study identifies portions of A Street, B
St
reet, and Tennyson Road as priority
co
rridors for safety improvements.
• The
plan also outlines infrastructure
rec
ommendations for pedestrian
improvements
and future bicycle network.
26 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Bic
ycle & Pedestrian
Master Plan 202
0 Recommendations
• A
Street
• Cl
ass IV Se
parated Bikeway between
Sky
west Drive and 4th Stree
t
• B Stree
t
• Cl
ass II Bicy
cle Lane between Grand
Stree
t and Watkins Street
• Cl
ass III Bicy
cle Boulevard between
W
atkins Street and Foothill Boulevard
• T
ennyson Road
• Cl
ass IIB Bu
ffered Bicycle Lane
be
tween Industrial Boulevard and
He
sperian Boulevard
• Cl
ass IV Se
parated Bikeway between
He
sperian Boulevard and Mission
Bo
ulevard
27 C
ity of Hayward BPMP - Bic
ycle and Pedestrian Bicycle Facilities Map

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
2023 Loc
al Roadway Safety Plan
• Cra
shes were analyzed from 2017-2021.
• T
he study used crash data to identify a High
Inju
ry Network (HIN):
• 9 in
tersections within the study area were
id
entified as high injury network
in
tersections.
• A
Street, B Street, and Tennyson Road
be
tween Pompano and Ruus Road were
ra
nked Tier 1 priority roadway segments
• T
ennyson Road between Hesperian
Bo
ulevard and Mission Boulevard was
ran
ked Tier 2 priority roadway segment
• T
he study also identified a set of
cou
ntermeasures and strategies to address
sa
fety challenges in the City.

C
ity of Hayward - H
igh Injury Network Map
28 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
2023 Loc
al Roadway Safety Plan
Cont.

High
Injury Network Intersections
29 R
ank L
ocation L
ocation Type
1 T
ennyson Rd & Baldwin St U
nsignalized
3 T
ennyson Rd & Calaroga Ave Signaliz
ed
4 A
St & Victory Dr Sig
nalized
8 A
St & Foothill Blvd Signaliz
ed
9 T
ennyson Rd & Huntwood Ave Signaliz
ed
11 A
St & Western Blvd Signaliz
ed
13 CA-185
& B St Signaliz
ed
15 A
St & Montgomery St Sig
nalized
16 T
ennyson Rd & 12 St/Dixon St Signaliz
ed
17 A
St & Hesperian Blvd Signaliz
ed
20 T
ennyson Rd & Ruus Rd Signaliz
ed

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
2023 Loc
al Roadway Safety Plan
Location-Speci
fic Recommendations
T
ennyson & Baldwin
Un
signalized Intersection
T
ennyson & Calaroga
Si
gnalized Intersection
30 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Reco
mmendations to Improve Pedestrian and Bicycle
Safe
ty of the City of Hayward: Tennyson Road Corridor
2018
• A
Community Pedestrian and Bicycle
Saf
ety Training (CPBST) workshop
identif
ied pedestrian and bike priorities
and
improvements.
• At
tendees included representatives from
trans
it agencies, organizations,
bus
inesses, and community members.
31 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Iden
tified Issues
• Narrow
and obstructed sidewalks
• High
vehicle speeds
• Uns
afe crossings
• Inadequate
bike lanes
Co
mmunity Priorities and
Re
commendations
• Enha
nce pedestrian and bicyclist
sa
fety
• Improve
access to schools and
co
mmunity centers
• Addre
ss infrastructure deficiencies
• Repa
ir sidewalks
• Creat
e continuous and protected
bi
ke lanes
• Implement
traffic calming measures
Reco
mmendations to Improve Pedestrian and Bicycle
Safe
ty of the City of Hayward: Tennyson Road Corridor
2018
32 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Thrives Vision Plan
• The
study was a collabor
ation between
co
mmunity members, City staff, and the
Ch
abot College Student Initiative Center.
• It
included the development of a Vision
Plan
focused on highlighting stories,
his
tories, assets, and aspirations of
co
mmunities along Tennyson Road.
33 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Safety
Analysis
34 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
SWITRS Da
ta and Locations
35 A
Street B
Street Te
nnyson Road
B
ike-Involved Collisions 5 5 9
P
edestrian-Involved
Colli
sions 16 3 28
Au
to-Only Collisions 98 27 1
94 0
50 1
00 1
50 2
00 2
50 Chart
Title
St
udy Period: 2019-2024
(6 years)
• A
Street Total Collisions: 119
• B
Street Total Collisions: 35
• T
ennyson Road Total Collisions: 231
Stud
y Area Wide Collisions by Mode

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
38 5 crashes
on
A/B Streets and
T
ennyson Road since
2019
31 seve
re injuries or
fat
alities
sin
ce 2019
46 % of severe injury or
fat
al crashes
in
volved someone
wa
lking or biking
36 Key
Analysis Findings

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
V
ulnerable Road User Injuries
37 Corr
idor Fatality Se
vere Injury
A
St 2 3
B St 0 0
T
ennyson Rd 1 4
T
otal 3 7
Pe
destrian Collisions
Bicy
cle Collisions
Corr
idor Fatality Se
vere Injury
A
St 0 1
B S
t 0 1
T
ennyson Rd 0 1
T
otal 0 3

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
V
ulnerable Road User
Sev
er and Fatal Collisions
38 L
ocation Sev
erity V
ulnerable Road
U
ser C
rash Cause
A
St and Walnut St Sev
ere Pedest
rian Pedest
rian Violation
A
St and Princeton St* F
atal /
Severe Pedest
rian Pedest
rian Violation
A
St and Princeton St F
atal Pedest
rian Pedest
rian Violation
A
St and Western Blvd Sev
ere Bic
yclist
W
rong Side of the
R
oad
A
St and Montgomery Ave Sev
ere Pedest
rian Pedest
rian ROW
B
St and Western Blvd Sev
ere Bic
yclist
T
raffic Signals and
Signs
T
ennyson and Hesperian Blvd Sev
ere Pedest
rian U
nsafe Speed
T
ennyson and Patrick Ave Sev
ere Bic
yclist
W
rong Side of the
R
oad
T
ennyson and Ruus Rd Sev
ere Pedest
rian Pedest
rian Violation
T
ennyson and Ruus Rd Sev
ere Pedest
rian Pedest
rian Violation
T
ennyson and Baldwin St F
atal Pedest
rian Pedest
rian ROW
T
ennyson and Baldwin St Sev
ere Pedest
rian Pedest
rian Violation
*T
his collision occurring at Princeton Street resulted in both a fatality and severe injury.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
A
Street and B Street
Colli
sion Analysis
2 7
19 56
0 10
20 30
40 50
60 Fa
tal Injuries Se
vere Injuries M
inor or Visible
In
juries
Com
plaints of
Pa
in
A
Street Injuries
0 2
7 9
0 2
4 6
8 10
Fa
tal Injuries Se
vere Injuries M
inor or Visible
In
juries
Com
plaints of
Pa
in
B
Street Injuries
39 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
A
Street and B Street
Colli
sion Analysis
40 • The
collision hotspot near A
Street and
P
rinceton Street had eight crashes, half of which
res
ulted in either a fatality or severe injury.

B
ased on the collision data, six of the eight
c
rashes (including all four of the c
rashes that
res
ulted in a sever or fatal injury) oc
curred at
ni
ght.
• In
2019, A
Street had s
ix severe or fatal
c
ollisions. Si
nce then, there have only been tw
o
s
evere or
fatal collisions on the corridor.
• B S
treet had one
severe or fatal collision in
20 19 and has only had one since.

Colli
sion
Hot
spot

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
A
Street
Intersection Colli
sions by Type
41 I
ntersection H
ead On Si
deswipe R
ear End B
roadside H
it Object Ov
erturned V
ehicle/Pedestrian Oth
er T
otal
A
St and Hesperian Blvd 3 1 1 5 1 3 14
A
St and Royal Ave 1 1 2 4
A
St and Victory Dr 1 1 2
A
St and Garden Ave 1 1 2
A
St and S Garden Ave 2 5 2 1 2 12
A
St and I-880
On Ramp 2 1 3
A
St and I-880
Overpass 1 1 1 3
A
St and Happyland Ave 1 1 2
A
St and Hathaway Ave 2 3 5 4 4 18
A
St and Walnut St 1 1
A
St and Princeton St 1 1 1 2 5
A
St and Filbert St 1 1 2
A
St and Myrtle St 2 2
A
St and Flagg St 1 1 1 3
A
St and Western Blvd 2 2 2 3 2 1 12
A
St and Montgomery St 1 3 1 5
T
otal 7 20 15 15 14 2 14 3 90

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
B Street
Intersection Colli
sions by Type
42 I
ntersection H
ead On Si
deswipe R
ear End B
roadside H
it Object Ov
erturned V
ehicle/Pedestrian Oth
er T
otal
B S
t and Meekland Ave 1 1 2
B S
t and Walnut St 1 1 1 3
B S
t and Filbert St 1 1
B S
t and Alice St 2 2
B St
and Western Blvd 1 1 2 2 2 8
B S
t and Montgomery St 1 1 1 2 5
B S
t and Watkins St 2 1 2 5
T
otal 1 5 4 4 5 0 3 4 26

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
A
and B Street Collision Types
43 8%
23%
18%
17%
14%
3%
14%
3% 3%
14%
20%
26%
17%
9%
1 1%
A
Street B Stre
et • A
Street’s most f
requent type of
col
lision was sideswipe, followed
by
rear end and broadside
col
lisions.
• B Str
eet’s mo
st frequent type of
col
lision was broadside, followed
by
rear end collisions and hit
ob
jects.
• 4 o
f the 6 hit objects on B
Str
eet o
ccurred between
Gran
d Street and Montgomery
A
venue.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
10%
22%
1 1%
27%
7%
1 1%
12%
A
Street Top Collision Causes
44 A
Street
• T
he two highest crash violation categories on A
Stre
et w
ere improper turning maneuvers (27)
foll
owed by unsafe speeds (22). The next highest
cate
gory, traffic signals and signs, had 12 crashes.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
14%
28%
7%17%
17%
10%
7%
B Street
Top Collision Causes
45 B Stre
et • T
he highest crash violation categories on B
Street w
ere unsafe speeds (8) followed by
ped
estrian ROW and traffic signals/signs (5
each).

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Road
Colli
sion Analysis
2 18
40 110
0 20
40 60
80 1
00 1
20 Fa
tal Injuries Se
vere Injuries M
inor or Visible
In
juries
Com
plaints of Pain
T
ennyson Road Injuries
46 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Road
Colli
sion Analysis
47 • The
collision hotspot near the “downtown”
area
of T
ennyson Road be
tween Ruus
Ro
ad and Huntwood Avenue (boxed in red
to
the left) had 56 crashes, over half of
w
hich occurred at night. This area also saw
hi
gh levels of collisions involving unsafe
s
peeds and alcohol/drug related driving.
• T
ennyson Road c
onsistently had between
tw
o and six severe or fatal collisions each
y
ear between 2019 and 2023. 2024 was
the
only year during the study period with
few
er than two severe or fatal collisions.

Colli
sion
Hot
spot

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Road
Intersection Colli
sions by Type
48 I
ntersection H
ead On S
ideswipe R
ear End B
roadside H
it Object O
verturned V
ehicle/Pedestrian O
ther T
otal
T
ennyson Rd and Hesperian Blvd 3 7 8 7 1 1 27
T
ennyson Rd and Calaroga Ave 6 4 1 1 1 1 14
T
ennyson Rd and I-88
0 Overpass 1 1
T
ennyson Rd and Patrick Ave 1 2 11 5 1 20
T
ennyson Rd and Pompano Ave 1 2 3 1 1 8
T
ennyson Rd and Tampa Ave 1 5 5 1 1 4 17
T
ennyson Rd and Dickens Ave 2 1 3
T
ennyson Rd and Tyrell Ave 1 1 1 1 1 5
T
ennyson Rd and Haldane Ct 1 1
T
ennyson Rd and Harvey Ave 1 1 2
T
ennyson Rd and Ruus Rd 1 2 5 3 6 1 1 19
T
ennyson Rd and Andrea St 2 2
T
ennyson Rd and Baldwin St 1 3 4
T
ennyson Rd and Manon Ave 1 1
T
ennyson Rd and Huntwood Ave 4 1 6 6 2 1 1 21
T
ennyson Rd and Leidig Ct 1 2 3
T
ennyson Rd and Beatron Way 3 2 1 1 2 9
T
ennyson Rd and Pacific St 1 1 5 1 8
T
ennyson Rd and E 12th St 1 6 2 1 1 1 12
T
ennyson Rd and Mission Blvd 3 3 8 4 4 2 24
T
otal 13 20 55 54 28 5 21 5 201

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
T
ennyson Road Collision Types
49 6%
13%
25%
25%
14%
2%
13%
2%
T
ennyson Rd
• T
ennyson Road’s most f
requent types
of col
lision were broadside and rear
en
d, followed by hit object, pedestrian
an
d sideswipe collisions.
• T
here were hit object collisions
spa
ced throughout the corridor on
T
ennyson Road; ho
wever,
ho
tspots with seven or more of
the
se collisions were observed at
Ru
us Road and Hesperian
Bo
ulevard.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
7%
19%
27%
1 1%
9%
9%
18%
T
ennyson Road Top Collision Causes
50 T
ennyson Rd
• T
he three highest crash violation
cate
gories on T
ennyson Road w
ere
un
safe speeds (51) driving while under
the
influence (35), and traffic
sig
ns/signals (34). The next highest
cate
gory, improper turning, had 21
crash
es.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Advance
d Data
Analytics
51 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Data Collecti
on
• Confl
ict data by post-enc
roachment time (PET), modes involved, and movement type (including video recordi
ngs, and vehicle volumes)
• Red-l
ight running counts
• Bi
cycle and pedestrian path of travel data
• Al
l data was collected for one weekday and one weekend at 9 intersections across the study area • A
Street and Hesperian Boulevard
• A
Street and Victory Drive
• A
Street and Western Boulevard/Grant Street
• A
Street and Montgomery Street
• T
ennyson Road and Calaroga Avenue
• T
ennyson Road and Ruus Road
• T
ennyson Road and Baldwin Street
• T
ennyson Road and Huntwood Avenue
• T
ennyson Road and 12th St
reet/Dixon Avenue
• Addi
tional details broken down by intersection as well as an in-depth methodology are provided in A
ppendix A
52 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Analy
sis Categories and Terms
• An
alysis Categories
• V
ehicle-V
ehicle Conflicts and Red-Light
Running Analysis
• V
ulnerable Road User (VRU) Conflict Analysis
• V
ideo Observations
• Bicycle and
Pedestrian Path of Travel
• T
erms
• P
ost Encroachment Time (PET) is def
ined as the time between one road user
cr
ossing a certain point in space and the second road user crossing that same point.

A
lower PET indicates a higher risk.
• High Risk: events
with a PET less than 1.5 seconds
• Moderat
e Risk: events
with a PET between 1.5 and 3 seconds
• Moderate
risk events generally pose more significant threats to VRUs than to vehicles 53 ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
V
ehicle-V
ehicle Conflict Findings
• No
intersection was found to have more
than
one high-ris
k conflict between
vehicles
.
• W
estern Blvd/Grand St & A St was found
to
have the highest total number of
vehicle-vehicle
conflicts, which were
pr
imarily related to northbound left-turn
movement
s.
• Addit
ionally, as seen in the table to the
righ
t, Western Blvd/Grand St & A St had
the
highest rate of red-light
running
oc
currences.
54 Int
ersection W
eekday W
eekend
A
verage for all 8 signalized intersections 1
.95 2
.15
Hes
perian Blvd and West A St 1.
23 0
.42
V
ictory Dr and West A St 3
.29 4
.37
W
estern Blvd/Grand St and A St 5
.47 4
.83
M
ontgomery Ave and A St 3
.40 2
.94
Cal
aroga Ave and Tennyson Rd 0
.73 1
.28
Ru
us Rd and Tennyson Rd 1
.03 0
.86
Hu
ntwood Ave and Tennyson Rd 0
.94 1
.22
E
12th S
treet/Dixon Street and Tennyson Road 0
.91 2.8
4 Re
d Light Runs per 1,000 Vehicles

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
VRU Conflict
Findings
• Signif
icantly higher pedestrian activity was observed
t
han bicycle activity.
• M
ore conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians
w
ere observed, though there was often a higher
c
onflict rate at
intersections with bicyclists.
• VR
U conflicts were predominantly from right turning
v
ehicles
• H
esperian Blvd & West A St had the highest number of
high-ris
k conflicts between bicyclists/pedestrians and
v
ehicles.
• Ov
er the weekend period alone there were 13
high-ris
k pedestrian conflicts with vehicles.
• T
he intersection at Huntwood Avenue and Tennyson
R
oad showed a broad distribution of vehicle-VR
U
c
onflicts for multiple movements in multiple legs of the int
ersection.
• T
his intersection may consequently be a good
c
andidate for a protected intersection.
55 I
ntersection W
eekday W
eekend
P
edestrian Bic
yclist P
edestrian Bic
yclist
Hesperi
an Blvd and
W
est A St 8.99 14.63 9.88 18.80
Vic
tory Dr and West A
St 3
.44 1
.85 1
.60 6
.12
W
estern Blvd/Grand St
and
A St 6.14 17.50 7.77 14.41
M
ontgomery Ave and
A
St 5.56 7.46 4.37 4.46
Cala
roga Ave and
T
ennyson Rd 9.48 3.85 9.92 4.61
Ruus Rd
and
T
ennyson Rd 7.43 7.05 10.87 5.71
Baldw
in St and
T
ennyson Rd 4.71 4.50 2.95 7.28
Huntw
ood Ave and
T
ennyson Rd 6.09 8.46 5.41 9.80
E
12th Street/Dixon
S
treet and Tennyson
Road

10.63 15.85 4.73 4.7
Co
nflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Bik
e and Pedestrian Findings
• The
bicycle and pedestrian path of travel analysis revealed that, at most intersections, pede
strians typically cross via the crosswalk while paths of travel of bicyclists were more varied.
56 W
eekday bicycle path of travel at 12th/D
ixon & Tennyson Road W
eekend pedestrian paths of travel, Ruus Rd & Tennyson Rd

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Bik
e and Pedestrian Findings Cont.
• At
some intersections bikers appear to be comfortable making left turns, whereas at other inters
ections there are relatively few observed left turns. One of such streets where few left turning
movements were observed is the intersection at Hesperian Boulevard and A Street. 57 W
eekday bicycle path of travel at 12th/D
ixon & Tennyson Road W
eekday bicycle path of travel at Hesperian Blvd & West A St.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Appendix
A –
Advanced D
ata
Analytics
Analysis
Methodology

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 1
To: Byr
on Tang, Ci
ty of Hayward, CA
Ada
m Dankberg, Kimley-Ho
rn
F
rom: Ke
lly Dunn, Alta Planning + Design
Da
te: Aug
ust 12, 2025
Re
: Advan
ced Ana
lytics Methodology and Findings (Task 2)
I
ntroduction
Thi
s memo provides details on Alta’s methodology and findings for Task 2: Advanced Analytics. This task involved ac
cessing data from video analytics at ni
ne intersections along two High Injury Network corridors: Tennyson Road and A St
reet/West A Street. Th
e data d
etects behavior by pedestrians and bicyclists, collectively referred to as Vulnerable Roa
d Users (VRUs), as
well as motor vehicles.

Alt
a conducted t
he an
alysis us
ing fo
ur t
ypes of da
ta from video analytics:
• Con
flicts between motor vehicles or motor vehicles and VR
Us,
including tabular summaries and raw video footage
• Re
d light running events by motor vehicles
• Pa
th of travel d
iagrams for bikes and pedestrians
• T
otal counts of bikes, pedestrians, and vehicles through the intersection Thi
s analysis was conducted at nine intersections:
• H
esperian Blvd and West A St
• Vic
tory Dr and W A St
• Wes
tern Blvd and A St
• Mo
ntgomery Ave and A St
• Calaro
ga Ave and Tennyson Rd
• Ru
us Rd and Tennyson Rd
• Bald
win St and Tennyson Rd1
• H
untwood Ave and Tennyson Rd
• 12th St/
Dixon St and Tennyson Rd
Co
nflicts o
ffer a different perspective on safety issues faced by drivers and VRUs. Alta’s analysis details the o
ccurrences of these co
nflicts by v
ehicle turning type, time of day, and more. While crash data can shed light on cras
hes that have already occurred, co
nflict da
ta highlights potentially risky conditions that affect real and perceived s
afety for all road users, while video footage allows for a deeper understanding of driver behavior. Taking action 1 Bald
win and Tennyson is an unsignalized intersection,
so re
d light running data was not collected there.

MEMORANDM

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 2
ba
sed on these findings may help prevent crashes and improve perceived safety for future road users, though, a s we
wil
l explain, the extent to which co
nflicts ca
n be used to predict future crashes is unclear.

Meth
odology
Da
ta Sources
Kim
ley-Horn
provided Alta staff with raw data in
Excel format fr
om Quality Counts, a vendor supplying video analytics
da
ta from traffic cameras at intersections. The data contained the following da ta points for co
nflict ev
ents for bo
th
wee
kend and weekday observations at t
he nine intersections.2 A co
nflict e
vent is defined as any encounter between a
ve
hicle and another vehicle or VRU with a Post Encroachment Time of three seconds o r less. P
ost Encroachment Time
(
PET) is defined as the time between one road user crossing a certain point in space and the second road user cro
ssing that same point. A lower PET indicates a higher risk. The raw data contained the following information:

C
onflicts
• Cou
nts of con
flicts b
y Post-E
ncroachment Time (PET) and modes involved (vehicle-v
ehicle, vehicle-p
edestrian, and
v
ehicle-b
ike)
• Cou
nts of all con
flicts b
y movement type of each vehicle or vulnerable road user (such as northbound left or e
astbound right)
• PE
T, time of day, pedestrian and vehicle movement type of each vehicle-p edestrian con
flict o
ccurrence
• PE
T, time of day, bicyclist, an
d vehicle movement type of each vehicle-b
icyclist con
flict o
ccurrence
• PE
T, time of day, and vehicle movement type of each vehicle-v ehicle con
flict o
ccurrence
• Lin
ks to videos of con
flict o
ccurrences
• Image
s of bicycle and pedestrian tra
jectories at each intersection
V
olumes
• Cou
nt of vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle volumes by movement and time of day in 5 -m inute increments
• Cou
nt of peak-h
our volumes by mode and direction of travel or turning movement • Re
d Light Counts
• Mo
vement type, time of day, and seconds into red phase of red light running occurrences .

Data was collected from
a
minimum of two cameras at each intersection in order to capture all approaches.

W
hile the data that Alta obtained cl
assified VRUs as either bicyclists or pedestrians, Alta noted that us ers of scooters
an
d other micromobility were generally in
cluded among bicyclists.
2 E
ach intersection was studied either on March 20 & 22, 2025, or April 3 & 5, 2025. E ach pair of dates comprised a
T
hursday and a Saturday.

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 3
Da
ta Cleaning
Alt
a applied the following steps to clean the data:
• E
xtracted e
very individual table f
rom Excel and imported into R Studio f
or further analysis
• Re
moved red light running events where any special circumstances were noted, such as an ambulance or a traffic
o
fficer waving s
omeone into the intersection.
• Categorized
time stamps into time bins of night (midnight – 6 a
m), morning (6 – 10 a
m), midday (10 am – 3 p
m),
afterno
on (3 – 7 p
m), and evening (7 pm – m
idnight)
• Su
mmarized data into formats that could be used to create tables and charts .

A
ssumptions
• Alta
classified events with a PET of between 1.5 and 3 seconds as “moderate risk” and less than 1.5 seconds as “
high risk.” This was based on a review of a sample of videos provided by Quality Counts , with the threshold
ap
plied to both vehicle-V
RU conflicts and vehicle-v
ehicle conflicts.
• In
man
y vehicle-v
ehicle “moderate risk” events,
a left-tu
rning vehicle waited for a through vehicle to pass before tu
rning left in a controlled manner less than three seconds later. Alta assumes that this is not a high -ris k situation
b
ut kept the m
oderate risk d
ata in the analysis because, in
most cases, no or few high-ris
k conflicts occurred
b
etween vehicles.

M
etrics Calculated
Alt
a calculated the following met
rics for each of the nine intersections studied:

V
ehicle-V
ehicle Metrics
• To
tal vehicles is th
e total number of vehicles recorded passing through that intersection during the 24 -h our study
p
eriod for either the weekday or weekend d
ay re
ported.
• To
tal conflicts is th
e total number of encounters between two
vehicles with a PET of less than 3 seconds
• To
tal red light running events cou
nts th
e number of e
vents where a vehicle entered the intersection during the re
d-lig
ht phase (e
xcluded at non-s
ignalized intersections).
• To
tal high-r
isk conflicts is th
e total number of encounters between two vehicles with a PET of less than 1.5 s
econds.
• Co
nflicts per 1,000 vehicles is
the total conflicts divided by total vehicles, multiplied by 1,000.

B
icycle & Pedestrian Metrics
Thes
e metrics were calculated separately for bicyclists and pedestrians at each intersection:
• To
tal counts re
ports the to
tal number of pedestrians or cyclists recorded at that intersection during the study p
eriod.
• H
igh-r
isk conflicts with vehicles is
the total number of encounters between a pedestrian or cyclist and a vehicle w
ith a PET of less than 1.5 seconds.
• To
tal co
nflicts with vehicles i
s the total number of encounters between a p
edestrian or cyclist an
d a vehicle w
ith a
PE
T of less than 3 s
econds.
• Co
nflicts per 100 bikes/pedestrians is
the total conflicts with vehicles divided by the total counts for that VRU m
ode,
multiplied by 100. W
e used 100, rather than 1000, because the incidence rate involving VRUs was much h
igher than that involving only vehicles.

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 4
Find
ings
Ove
rall Trends from the Data
V
ehicle-V
ehicle C
onflicts
The
vehicle-ve
hicle conflict analysis analyzed conflicts between two motor vehicles, s hown in T
able 1. Th
e analysis
fou
nd that no in
tersection had m
ore than one hi
gh-r
isk conflict be
tween vehicles o
n either a weekend or weekday.

W
hen comparing intersections, Western Boulevard/
Grand Str
eet &
A Str
eet ha
d the highest t
otal nu
mber of ve
hicle-
ve
hicle co
nflicts, which were primarily concentrated in northbound left turn movements. T wo intersections on
Te
nnyson Road, Baldwin Str
eet an
d Huntwood A
ve, also saw much higher numbers of vehicle-v
ehicle conflicts than
t
he other study intersections. Both of these intersections also had conflicts concentrated around left turn m
ovements.

T
able 1:

Vehicle-v
ehicle conflicts by d
ay type a
nd by risk level
I
ntersection W
eekday W
eekend M
oderate Risk Hi
gh Risk
He
sperian Blvd and West A St 8 7 15 0
Vic
tory Dr and West A St 0 1 1 0
W
estern Blvd/Grand St and A St 75 83 157 1
Mo
ntgomery Ave and A St 1 4 5 0
Cal
aroga Ave and T
ennyson Rd 9 1 10 0
Ruus
Rd and Tennyson Rd 3 4 6 1
Bal
dwin St and Tennyson Rd 17 24 40 1
Hunt
wood Ave and Tennyson Rd 56 44 99 11
E 1
2th S
t/Dixon St and Tennyson Rd 0 3 3 0
Red
Light Running
W
estern Boulevard/
Grand Str
eet &
A Str
eet ha
d the highest rate of red light running, with 5.47 r
uns per 1,000
ve
hicles during a weekday, and 4.83 on a w
eekend (Tab
le 2). The
second-hi
ghest rate was at Vic
tory Driv
e &
Wes
t A
Str
eet, wi
th 3
.29 runs per 1,000 vehicles during a weekday, and 4.37 on a weekend.

As demonstrated here, so
me
in
tersections had higher red light running rates on weekdays, while others had higher rates on weekends. Th e
pre
dominant time period for red light running at each intersection is also shown he re as well as in the infographic.

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 5
T
able 2.

Red Light Runs per 1
,000 Vehicles
I
ntersection
T
otal Events Per
1,000 Vehicles Pr
edominant Time
Peri
od W
eekday W
eekend W
eekday W
eekend
All
9 intersections 484 477 1.95 2.15 M
idday
He
sperian Blvd and West A St 55 16 1.23 0.42 A
fternoon
Vic
tory Dr and West A St 88 122 3.29 4.37 M
idday
W
estern Blvd/Grand St and A
St 156 123 5.47 4.83 M
idday & Afternoon
Mo
ntgomery Ave and A St 72 55 3.40 2.94 M
idday & Afternoon
Cal
aroga Ave and Tennyson
Rd 29 39 0.73 1.28 M
orning, Midday & Evening
Ruus
Rd and Tennyson Rd 33 26 1.03 0.86 M
idday & Evening
Hunt
wood Ave and Tennyson
Rd 31 37 0.94 1.22 E
vening
E 1
2th S
t/Dixon St and
Te
nnyson Rd 20 59 0.91 2.84 M
idday
T
able 2 s
hows that in
tersections also differed in the time of day when red light running occurred most fr equently (not
ad
justing for volumes). Alo
ng Tennyson Road, incidents occurred more in the evening ( 7 pm – m
idnight) and
s
ometimes midday (
10 am – 3
pm), w
hereas along West A St
reet they tended more toward the midday and afternoon
(3
pm – 7
pm). Mo
rnings (6 am – 1
0 am) were not the predominant time at any intersection, despite bei ng o
ne of the
peak c
ommute times. This suggests that expo
sure alone does not account for increases in red light running.

The info
graphic also shows red light runs by ve
hicle t
urning movement. Acro
ss the study area, most red light runs
wer
e by vehicles traveling straight t
hrough the intersection, and
prim
arily along either Tennyson Road or West A
Str
eet r
ather than the cross-s
treet. F
or example, at Calaroga Avenu
e &
Tennyson Road, al
most all red light runs were
eas
tbound or westbound through traffic, traveling along Tennyson Road. Th ere were two notable exceptions: At
Hunt
wood Av
enue an
d Tennyson Roa
d t
here were s
everal red lig
ht runs by left-t
urning vehicles turning northbound,
eas
tbound, and s
outhbound, and
the number of straight red light runs was lower here than for many other in
tersections. Mean
while, at Hesperian Boulevard &
West A Street, t
here were about as many westbound left red
li
ght runs as there were southbound straight r
ed light runs.

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 6
V
ulnerable Road User C
onflict Analysis
The Vul
nerable Road User (VRU) conflict analysis analyzed al
l moderate and high-r
isk co
nflicts between a VRU and a
m
otor vehicle. T
able 3 s
ummarizes rates of all conflicts by mode and intersection, n ormalized by bicycle and
pedes
trian volume. Ac
ross intersections, there were significantly more pedestrians than bicyclists counted, and t he
t
otal number of co
nflicts with vehicles was
higher am
ong pedes
trians than bicyclists. Howe
ver, du
e to lower volumes,
t
here were often higher co
nflict ra
tes am
ong bicyclists t
han pedestrians. The hig
hest r
ate o
f conflicts per volume for
bi
cyclists was at Hesperian Boulevard
& West A Street on weekends, with a rate of 18.8 conflicts per 100 bicycles. For pedes
trians, it was a rate of 10.87 conflicts per 100 pedestrians at Tennyson Road & Russ Road. This intersection also ha
d the highest numbers of conflicts when not normalizi
ng for volumes.

T
able 4 and T
able 5 s
ummarize t
he p
edestrian and bicycle conflicts by vehicle movement type across the nine in
tersections, co
mbining the weekday and weekend counts. W
hile co
nflicts with right-t
urning vehicles were t
he most
co
mmon type o
verall, al
most al
l conflicts at Baldwin S
treet & T
ennyson Roa
d w
ere with vehicles g
oing straight,
partly
beca
use this is a 3-leg
ged intersection with fewer turning movements. L
eft-t
urn conflicts were very prevalent at
Hunt
wood Av
enue &
Tennyson Roa
d. U-Tu
rn and unknown turning movements have been excluded from these t
ables.

T
able 3: A
ll Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians
I
ntersection
W
eekday W
eekend
Ped
estrian B
icyclist Ped
estrian B
icyclist
He
sperian Blvd and West A St 8.99 14.63 9.88 18.80
Vic
tory Dr and West A St 3.44 1.85 1.60 6.12
W
estern Blvd/Grand St and A St 6.14 17.50 7.77 14.41
Mo
ntgomery Ave and A St 5.56 7.46 4.37 4.46
Cal
aroga Ave and Tennyson Rd 9.48 3.85 9.92 4.61
Ruus
Rd and Tennyson Rd 7.43 7.05 10.87 5.71
Bal
dwin St and Tennyson Rd 4.71 4.50 2.95 7.28
Hunt
wood Ave and Tennyson Rd 6.09 8.46 5.41 9.80
E 1
2th S
t/Dixon St and Tennyson Rd 10.63 15.85 4.73 4.70

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 7
T
able 4: A
ll Pe
destrian C
onflicts by Vehicle Turning Movements (
Both o
bserved days)
I
ntersection
V
ehicle Turning Movement
N
orthbound E
astbound S
outhbound W
estbound
L
eft T
hru R
ight L
eft T
hru R
ight L
eft T
hru R
ight L
eft T
hru R
ight To
tal
He
sperian Blvd and West A St 4 4 42 -- 1 5 7 1 4 7 -- 40 1 15 Vic
tory Dr and West A St 1 -- 10 -- 11 1 -- -- -- 3 4 1 31 W
estern Blvd/Grand St and A St 11 4 11 1 1 14 -- 2 8 -- -- 6 58 Mo
ntgomery Ave and A St -- 3 2 7 6 4 -- 3 17 3 9 2 56
Cal
aroga Ave and T
ennyson Rd -- 1 25 1 -- -- 2 -- 1 1 1 5 37
Ruus
Rd and Tennyson Rd 1 -- 25 -- 17 32 -- -- -- 5 16 -- 96 Bal
dwin St and Tennyson Rd -- -- -- 2 37 -- 2 -- -- -- 36 3 80 Hunt
wood Ave and Tennyson Rd 19 2 14 17 6 4 5 1 20 5 7 1 1
01 E
12th
St/
Dixon St an
d Tennyson Rd 1 1 -- -- 4 14 -- -- 5 -- 4 3 32
T
otal 37 15 1
29 28 83 74 16 7 55 24 77 61 6
06 N
ote: U-tu
rns and unknown turning movements have been excluded from this table.

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 8
T
able 5: A
ll Bic
ycle Conflicts by Vehicle Turning Movements (
Both observed days)
I
ntersection
V
ehicle Turning Movement
N
orthbound E
astbound S
outhbound W
estbound
L
eft T
hru R
ight L
eft T
hru R
ight L
eft T
hru R
ight L
eft T
hru R
ight To
tal
He
sperian Blvd and West A St 1 2 18 -- -- 2 8 2 1 3 1 10 48 Vic
tory Dr and West A St 1 1 -- 2 1 -- -- -- 2 -- -- 7
W
estern Blvd/Grand St and A St 2 4 12 2 1 -- -- 3 2 2 1 1 18 Mo
ntgomery Ave and A St -- 4 -- 3 3 1 2 6 -- 3 2 24
Cal
aroga Ave and T
ennyson Rd -- -- 2 -- -- 1 1 -- -- 2 2 4 12
Ruus
Rd and Tennyson Rd 5 -- 6 -- 4 9 -- -- -- -- 2 -- 26
Bal
dwin St and Tennyson Rd -- -- 1 11 -- -- -- -- -- -- 19 3 34 Hunt
wood Ave and Tennyson Rd 9 2 5 3 4 8 4 1 17 1 3 7 64
E
12th
St/
Dixon St and T
ennyson Rd 1 3 -- 2 1 3 1 -- 2 -- 3 16
T
otal 19 15 45 21 15 25 14 8 26 12 31 30 2
49 N
ote: U-tu
rns and unknown turning movements have been excluded from this table.

The info
graphics further break down these numbers by high-r
isk and total conflicts. The hig
hest number of high-r
isk
co
nflicts between bicyclists/pedestrians and vehicles ag
ain o
ccurred at Hesperian Boulevard & West A S
tr
eet. Thi
s
in
cludes 13 hi
gh-r
isk pedestrian conflicts with vehicles over the weekend al one, whi
ch is much higher than o
ther
in
tersections and hi
gher than any weekday count. W
hile at least part of this is attributable to higher volumes of pedes
trians at this location, several other intersections
had higher pedestrian volumes on weekends, but none had m
ore than four high-r
isk conflicts. S
ome intersections such as E 12th Str
eet/Di
xon S
treet an
d Tennyson Road had
s
tark differences between weekend and weekday rates, wit h higher rates on weekdays, whi
le others such as Calaroga
Av
enue &
Tennyson Road had little variation by day.

Obse
rvations from Videos
Alt
a reviewed a selection of video footage for dif
ferent conflict types. Most moderate r
isk conflicts between vehicles,
as
noted above, o
nly appeared to happen in a controlled manner where a left-t urning vehicle turned before or after a
t
hrough vehicle passed.

Hig
h risk conflicts w
ere more complicated. A
t most intersections, the number of high-r
isk conflicts between vehicles
an
d VRUs exceeded the number of high-r
isk conflicts between vehicles. In
many cases, a ve
hicle turned just after a
pedes
trian crossed, leaving very little buffer in time or space. In other cases, a vehicle turned in front of a pedestrian,
ev
en causing the pedestrian to s
tep back in fe
ar of being hit. S
everal o
ther ca
ses involved pedestrians or cyclists
ap
pearing to enter the intersection agains
t the signal.

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 9
The A
lta team conducted in-dept
h video review for the two intersections with the highest VRU conflicts:

Hesperian
Boulevard &
West A Street, and Huntwood Avenue & Tennyson Road.

He
sperian B
lvd &
West A St
Alt
a r
eviewed r
aw video footage for all
high-r
isk VRU conflicts at this intersection o
n both the weekday and weekend
co
unts, whic
h included 18 pedestrian and 5 bicycle conflicts. The
most common scenario (s
even during the day, o
ne
at
night), was a ve
hicle making a r
ight t
urn t
hat pa
ssed the conflict point just after a pedestrian in
the crosswalk. Thi
s
t
ypically occurred with vehicles making a northbound right onto Hesperian Boulevard o r a westbound right onto West
A St
reet. Thes
e types of conflicts can feel intimidating to pedestrians e ven if the driver is in control because there is
t
ypically very little space between the pedes
trian and vehicle, and t
he pedestrian often cannot verify that the driver
s
ees them. A
representative example o
f this conflict type ca
n be seen at timestamp 0:18.

Ano
ther two co
nflicts with right-t
urning vehicles o
ccurred with people on bikes rather than pedestrians. In o ne case,
t
he person on the bike was
c
rossing in the marked bicycle area an
d in the other, they were at the crosswalk.

F
ive co
nflicts occurred when a VRU ap
peared to be traveling ag
ainst a signal, either pedestrians crossing without a
s
ignal (4)
or a p
erson on a (likely motorized) bicycle doing wheelies and running a red light ( 1). In
these cases, vehicles
pa
ssed both in front and behind the VRU and di
d not seem to regard the VRU’s presence.

Hu
ntwood Av
enue &
Tennyson Ro
ad
Alt
a al
so r
eviewed r
aw video footage for all
high-r
isk VRU conflicts at Huntwood Av
enue &
Tennyson Roa
d,
which
in
cluded s
ix pedestrian and five bicycle conflicts. S
ituations at this intersection were much more varied. In thr ee
in
stances, a left turning vehicle pa
ssed t
he conflict point just after a pedestrian in t
he crosswalk. In
t
hese ca
ses, the
ve
hicle waited in the intersection for the pedestrian but left very little room between them. In other cases, turning
t
raffic turned just before a pedestrian who was already in the crosswalk.

S
everal of the bike conflicts i
nvolved what appeared to be a cyclist traveling against the signal o r misunderstanding
ho
w to use the bike lane.

In one instance, a c
yclist wai
ting in t
he bike lane o
n Huntwood Avenue crossed in
front of
t
hrough traffic o
n their left o
nce the light turned green t
o make a wes
tbound le
ft turn onto T
ennyson,
which put
t
hem at risk of being hit by through traffic.

Ot
her in
cidents appear to s
tem from the inevitable conflict between drivers with permitted left turns at the same t
ime that a pedestrian or bicyclist has a crosswalk signal. In one near miss, a bicyclist entered the crosswalk while a ve
hicle was in
the process of executing a left turn.

Thi
s intersection appeared much darker on camera at night than Hesperian Boulevard & W est A S
treet, ma
king it
di
fficult at times to discern what was happening. If
this is reflective of actual ni
ghttime visibility here, in
terventions for
g
reater vis
ibility at this intersection should be co
nsidered at night.

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 10
B
icycle & Pedestrian Path of Travel
The bic
ycle and pedestrian p
ath of travel analysis r
eviewed diagrams showing the actual paths of travel of VRUs t
hrough the intersections. F
igure 1 s
hows the bicycle path of travel at Hesperian Boulevard & W est A Str
eet, lo
oking
s
outheast, as
traffic moves along Hesperian Boulevard. T
he blue lines represent trajectories between a starting point (
green dot) and end point (red dot)3. The ana
lysis revealed that a
t most intersections, pedes
trians t
ypically cro
ss via
t
he crosswalk, paths of travel of bicyclists we
re much more varied. The
diagram shows that while some southbound
bi
cyclists use the crosswalk o
r green bike la
ne, ma
ny also use the travel lane. This is po
ssibly beca
use t
here is no
s
outhbound bike facility s
outh of t
he intersection. On
the westbo
und route, however, more cyclists appear to be
us
ing the bike facilities because they can continue w
estbound in
the bike la
ne past the intersection. Mo
re consistent
in
frastructure may lead to more consistent choices about which facility to use. 3 A
s shown in the diagram, o
ccasionally trajectories are mistakenly shown as starting or ending in the middle of the s treet or are
too
s
hort to represent an actual path of travel. T
he data provider, QualityCounts, s
tates that these are either false hits that g
ot e
xcluded from
fin
al data, or they represent trajectories that got interrupted and g ot rec
onnected b
efore exporting final data.

F
igure 1: We
ekday bicycle path of travel at Hesperian Blvd & West A St ( looking southeast).

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 11
In
addition, a number of bicycle travel paths can be seen through the intersection that do not appear to be valid t
urning movements. These types of movements are less predictable for drivers and can contribute to conflicts as well.

F
inally, it is notable that there do not appear to be many bi cyclists at
H
esperian Blvd
& W
est A Str
eet m
aking left
t
urns co
mpared with 12th Str
eet/Di
xon Str
eet &
Tennyson Road, shown below in F
igure 2. It
could be that fewer
peo
ple at Hesperian Boulevard &
A Str
eet des
ire to make left turns or that t
hey prefer to cross via the crosswalk there
beca
use it does not feel safe to turn left in traffic.

F
or pedestrians, certain pa
ths of travel were detected that would have placed a pedestrian in an unsafe position in t
he middle of the intersection, such as t
he weekend paths of travel at Ruus Roa
d &
Tennyson Roa
d s
hown in F
igure 3.

W
hile some of these may in
dicate a pedestrian cutting a corner or other unsafe behavior, others could have been m
isclassifications of bicyclists or scooter users m
aking valid left turns.

F
igure 2: W
eekday bicycle path of travel at 12th/D
ixon & Tennyson Road
F
igure 3: We
ekend pedestrian paths of travel, Ruus Rd & Tennyson Rd

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 12
Li
mitations
The abi
lity to automatically detect co
nflicts ba
sed on PET is a powerful tool to improve real and perceived safety.

Howe
ver, there are limitations when applying co
nflict da
ta to improving safety in Hayward.

A st
udy of co
nflicts in
Reno, Nevada, ac
knowledged that PET alone does not reveal how a VRU would have perceived t
he risk to themselves during the event (
Kelley et al., 2
024). A
VRU may feel co
mpletely safe and be taking a
calculat
ed risk to cro
ss against a signal just after a vehicle has passed, for example. Ho wever, this could still indicate
r
isk for a less-vig
ilant pedestrian. Co
nversely, events detected f
rom traffic cameras m
ay miss situations where a VRU
fe
els at risk despite the event being over the PE
T threshold o
r situations where no actual conflict is detected, such as a cl
ose pass event. The
re are other factors that could impact how a VRU feels during an event, but that cannot be ev
aluated at scale using this data alone.

These include:
• Wh
ether the vehicle turned in front of or behind the VRU
• Wh
ether the vehicle is waiting very close to the crosswalk or inching forward as they wait for the VRU • T
he size of the vehicle
• Wh
ether the VRU makes eye contact with the vehicle
• H
ow close the vehicle is to the pedestrian while waiting for them to cros s
• Ve
hicle speed b
efore crossing the path of travel an
d whether they b
raked or not to avoid hitting the VRU
In
addition, while co
nflicts in
dicate areas of concern for roadway users, there is limited evidence on how much they co
rrelate with crash rates in
Hayward b
ecause co
nflict da
ta is not available for every intersection in the city, although
pre
vious research elsewhere has suggested a s
trong correlation (
Kelley et al.,
2024). Where co
nflicts do
not correlate
s
trongly with crash rates, it may indicate an intersection that VRUs avoid because it does not feel safe. Addressing per
ceived safety risks in these areas can encourage more biking and walking trips.

It
is also unclear to what extent these events involve drivers disobeying the law. The California Driver Handbook, S
ection 7 says that drivers must reduce their speed or stop to allow the pedestrian to safely finish crossing, but does no
t specify if this me
ans that a vehicle cannot enter an intersection at all while a pedestrian is crossing or how long t
hey should wait (California DMV, n.d.). Even if such guidance existed, PET would not be a perfect measure of co
mpliance. The
data also does not indicate if a
right-t
urning vehicle had a red or green light.

F
inally, this data does not distinguish between instances where a VRU may have crossed the intersection against a s
ignal. A review of a sample of videos revealed that while most VRUs appeared to be crossing with a signal, there wer
e several co
nflict e
vents wher
e a pedestrian appeared to cross against the signal, as well as some instances w
here
bi
cyclists or s
cooter us
ers (who may have been detected as bicyclists here) r
an red li
ghts.

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 13
Conclusio
n
The ad
vanced video analytics in this memo will supplement crash data, field observations, and public input in the deve
lopment of countermeasures and concept designs for A Street, B Street, and Tennyson Road.

Thi
s supplemental analysis is critical to creating streets that are not only functionally safe, but also feel safe to all t
ypes of roadway users. Ne
ar-m
iss collisions can be a major cause of stress for people walking or biking along a street an
d can have a deterrent effect on people choosing to walk or bike in the future. Furthermore, documenting near- m
iss collisions and red-li
ght running allows for
predictive analysis of where serious and fatal collisions may be more li
kely to occur in the future due to high-r
isk behaviors.

Ke
y takeaways from this analysis include:
• T
he majority of vehicle-VRU
conflicts were from drivers making right-tu
rning movements in conflict with a
cros
swalk user. This could be mitigated by “No-Rig
ht-on-Re
d” designations at intersections or the introduction of Lead
ing Pedestrian Intervals (LPIs) at
signals.
• Some
intersections also showed high numbers of vehicle-V
RU conflicts where drivers were making left turns. This cou
ld be mitigated by eliminating permissive lefts during signal phases and installing d edicated left turn signal
p
hases separate from crosswalk walk phases. Hesperian Blvd at A Street, Western/Grand at A Street, and H
untwood Avenue at Tennyson Road all showed higher counts of vehicle -VR U left turn conflicts.
• H
untwood Avenue at Tennyson Road was the one intersection that showed a broad distribution of vehicle -VR U
con
flicts for multiple vehicle movements in multiple legs of the intersection. A protected intersection should be con
sidered for this intersection, cre
ating greater separation between vehicles and VRUs at the intersection and im
proving sight-lines
and visibility for people walking or biking.
• In
tersections varied substantially in red light running, even when normalized for volumes. Western Blvd/Grand Stree
t at A Street led with 5.5 red light running incidents per 1,000 vehicles. Ris ks from red-lig
ht running could be
m
itigated by th
e in
troduction of all-w
ay red phases at intersections an
d/or exploring automated red-l
ight running
e
nforcement.
• Bald
win Street at Tennyson Road, the one unsignalized in
tersection, showed a high count of vehicle-VRU
conflicts
f
or through movements – d
rivers failing to yield to bicyclists or pedestrians at the crosswalk. Additional measures s
hould be considered for this unsignalized crossing to improve VRU visibility and e ncourage yielding by drivers.
• Pa
th of travel analysis showed a high percentage of bicyclists using the sidewalk, which may contribute to higher ra
tes of VRU-v
ehicle conflicts at intersections in the project area. The implementation of more robust and s
eparated bike network infrastructure
may help encourage people riding bicycles to not use the sidewalk and b
ecome more visible and expected for drivers at intersections. Rais ed cycle paths may also be worth exploring.
• On
Western/Grand and A Street and other intersections along A Street/West A Street, the most red light runs o
ccurred in the midday and afternoon. Along Tennyson Road, the most red light runs occurred in the midday and e
vening.
• H
esperian Blvd & West A Street had both the highest rate and th e h
ighest number of VRU-v
ehicle conflicts, both
m
oderate and high risk. Rates were highest on the weekend. • T
here was not a clear trend as to what day of the week most VRU-v ehicle conflicts occurred. At some, conflicts
w
ere higher on weekdays and at others there was little difference. • Re
search on pedestrian safety at night s
uggests that while lighting is a necessary factor, lighting alone is not s
ufficient to improve safety (S
anders, 2023). T
o be effective, lighting should p
rovide high contrast and illuminate
th
e front of a person crossing, not the side or back. Other important strategies to pair with lighting include lowe r
s
peeds to decrease stopping distance
.

ATTACHMENT VI
A
lta Planning + Design, Inc. H
ayward, CA High Injury Network Safety Plan 14
Refere
nces
Cal
ifornia Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). (n.d.). Laws and rules of the road: Right-of-way.

California Driver
Hand
book. ht
tps://www.dmv.ca.gov/portal/handbook/california-dri
ver-ha
ndbook/laws-and-r
ules-of-t
he-
r
oad/#rightofway
Ke
lley, S., Peiffer, C., Guan, F., Xu, H., Okorocha, J., Dunn, K., & Cardillo, C. (2024). A g eographic assessment of near-
m
iss events involving vehicles and vulnerable road users in Reno and Sparks, Nevada ( Unpublished manuscript).

U
niversity of Nevada, Reno.

S
anders,
R. (2023, Jun
e 28)
. NC
HRP 17-9
7: Strategies to Improve Safety at Night. P
resentation at TRB Safety
P
erformance Mid-Ye
ar Meeting. Available at h
ttps://trbacs20.org/wp-
co
ntent/uploads/2023/06/2023MidyearWed_07_Sanders_NCHRP17-9 7_Update_Sanders_20230626.pdf.

ATTACHMENT VI
Hay
ward Police Department Year-End
Report
Appendix B –
Advanced D
ata
Analytics
Analysis
Sheets

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Hesperian Blvd & West A St
VEHICLE-VEHICLE CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025 Notes

1. A high‑risk conflict is any situation with a post‑encroachment time (PET) < 1.5 seconds, with PET representing the gap between the first road user passing the conflict point and the second crossing the same point.

2. Some redlight running events had notes indicating that the event occurred but it was done because someone was waved into the intersection, or it was an emergency vehicle. These records were excluded from analysis.

Indicators Weekday Weekend
Total Vehicles 44,594 37,969
Total Conflicts 8 7
High Risk Conflicts 0 0
Conflicts per 1,000 vehicles 0.18 0.18
Total Red Light Running
Events
55 16
Red Light Runs per 1,000
Vehicles

1.23 0.42
Of the eight signalized intersections studied, the average red light running rate was 1.95 events per 1,000 vehicles on weekdays and 2.15 events per 1,000 vehicles on
weekends.

RED LIGHT RUNS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By Vehicle Movement

VEHICLE CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Hesperian Blvd & West A St
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025

LOOKING SOUTHEAST
Indicators
Weekday Weekend
Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist
Total Counts 601 164 678 133
High Risk Conflicts with Vehicles 4 3 13 2
Total Conflicts with Vehicles 54 24 67 25
Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians 8.99 14.63 9.88 18.80  High Risk – Bicycle
 High Risk – Pedestrian
 Moderate Risk – Bicycle
 Moderate Risk – Pedestrian
16831001 - Hesperian Blvd & W A St
3/20/25

BIKE PED
16831002 - Hesperian Blvd & W A St
3/22/25

BIKE PED

WEEKDAYWEEKEND
Notes:

BIKE/PED CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day
By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Victory Dr & W A St
VEHICLE-VEHICLE CONFLICT ANALYSIS / APRIL 3 & 5, 2025
Notes

Indicators Weekday Weekend
Total Vehicles 26,728 27,943
Total Conflicts 0 1
High Risk Conflicts 0 0
Conflicts per 1,000 vehicles 0 0.04
Total Red Light Running
Events
88 122
Red Light Runs per 1,000
Vehicles

3.29 4.37
Of the eight signalized intersections studied, the average red light running rate was 1.95 events per 1,000 vehicles on weekdays and 2.15 events per 1,000 vehicles on
weekends.

RED LIGHT RUNS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By Vehicle Movement

VEHICLE CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Victory Dr & W A St
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT ANALYSIS / APRIL 3 & 5, 2025

LOOKING NORTHWEST
Indicators
Weekday Weekend
Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist
Total Counts 523 182 1,371 98
High Risk Conflicts with Vehicles 0 0 1 0
Total Conflicts with Vehicles 18 3 22 6
Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians 3.44 1.85 1.60 6.12 16831003 - Victory Dr & W A St
4/3/25

BIKE PED

16831004 - Victory Dr & W A St
4/5/25

BIKE PED

WEEKDAYWEEKEND
Notes:

A high‑risk conflict is any situation with a post‑encroachment time (PET) < 1.5 seconds, with PET representing the gap between the first road user passing the conflict point and the second crossing the same point.  High Risk – Bicycle
 High Risk – Pedestrian
 Moderate Risk – Bicycle
 Moderate Risk – Pedestrian

BIKE/PED CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day
By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Western Blvd/Grand St & A St
VEHICLE-VEHICLE CONFLICT ANALYSIS / APRIL 3 & 5, 2025
Notes

Indicators Weekday Weekend
Total Vehicles 28,538 25,467
Total Conflicts 75 83
High Risk Conflicts 1 0
Conflicts per 1,000 vehicles 2.63 3.26
Total Red Light Running
Events
156 123
Red Light Runs per 1,000
Vehicles

5.47 4.83
Of the eight signalized intersections studied, the average red light running rate was 1.95 events per 1,000 vehicles on weekdays and 2.15 events per 1,000 vehicles on
weekends.

RED LIGHT RUNS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By Vehicle Movement

VEHICLE CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Western Blvd/Grand St & A St
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT ANALYSIS / APRIL 3 & 5, 2025

LOOKING NORTH
Indicators
Weekday Weekend
Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist
Total Counts 456 80 386 111
High Risk Conflicts with Vehicles 1 1 2 1
Total Conflicts with Vehicles 28 14 30 16
Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians 6.14 17.50 7.77 14.41 16831005 - Western Blvd/Grand St & A St
4/3/2025
BIKE
PED

16831006 - Western Blvd/Grand St & A St
4/5/2025

BIKE PED

WEEKDAYWEEKEND
Notes:

BIKE/PED CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day
By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Montgomery Ave & A St
VEHICLE-VEHICLE CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025 Notes

Indicators Weekday Weekend
Total Vehicles 21,160 18,686
Total Conflicts 1 4
High Risk Conflicts 0 0
Conflicts per 1,000 vehicles 0.05 0.21
Total Red Light Running
Events
72 55
Red Light Runs per 1,000
Vehicles

3.40 2.94
Of the eight signalized intersections studied, the average red light running rate was 1.95 events per 1,000 vehicles on weekdays and 2.15 events per 1,000 vehicles on
weekends.

RED LIGHT RUNS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By Vehicle Movement

VEHICLE CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Montgomery Ave & A St
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025

LOOKING EAST
Indicators
Weekday Weekend
Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist
Total Counts 630 201 481 202
High Risk Conflicts with Vehicles 1 0 2 2
Total Conflicts with Vehicles 35 15 21 9
Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians 5.56 7.46 4.37 4.46  High Risk – Bicycle
 High Risk – Pedestrian
 Moderate Risk – Bicycle
 Moderate Risk – Pedestrian
16831007 - Montgomery Ave & A St
3/20/25

BIKE P
ED

16831008 - Montgomery Ave & A St
3/22/25

BIKE PED

WEEKDAYWEEKEND
Notes:

BIKE/PED CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day
By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Calaroga Ave & Tennyson Rd
VEHICLE-VEHICLE CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025 Notes

Indicators Weekday Weekend
Total Vehicles 39,623 30,412
Total Conflicts 9 1
High Risk Conflicts 0 0
Conflicts per 1,000 vehicles 0.23 0.03
Total Red Light Running
Events
29 39
Red Light Runs per 1,000
Vehicles

0.73 1.28
Of the eight signalized intersections studied, the average red light running rate was 1.95 events per 1,000 vehicles on weekdays and 2.15 events per 1,000 vehicles on
weekends.

RED LIGHT RUNS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By Vehicle Movement

VEHICLE CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Calaroga Ave & Tennyson Rd
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025

LOOKING NORTHEAST
Indicators
Weekday Weekend
Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist
Total Counts 306 130 121 152
High Risk Conflicts with Vehicles 2 0 1 2
Total Conflicts with Vehicles 29 5 12 7
Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians 9.48 3.85 9.92 4.61  High Risk – Bicycle
 High Risk – Pedestrian
 Moderate Risk – Bicycle
 Moderate Risk – Pedestrian
16831015 - Calaroga Ave & Tennyson Rd
3/20/25
BIKE
PED

16831016 - Calaroga Ave & Tennyson Rd
3/22/25

BIKE PED

WEEKDAYWEEKEND
Notes:

BIKE/PED CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day
By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Ruus Rd & Tennyson Rd
VEHICLE-VEHICLE CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025 Notes

Indicators Weekday Weekend
Total Vehicles 32,001 30,088
Total Conflicts 3 4
High Risk Conflicts 0 1
Conflicts per 1,000 vehicles 0.09 0.13
Total Red Light Running
Events
33 26
Red Light Runs per 1,000
Vehicles

1.03 0.86
Of the eight signalized intersections studied, the average red light running rate was 1.95 events per 1,000 vehicles on weekdays and 2.15 events per 1,000 vehicles on
weekends.

RED LIGHT RUNS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By Vehicle Movement

VEHICLE CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Ruus Rd & Tennyson Rd
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025

LOOKING EAST
Indicators
Weekday Weekend
Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist
Total Counts 579 227 497 175
High Risk Conflicts with Vehicles 1 2 4 1
Total Conflicts with Vehicles 43 16 54 10
Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians 7.43 7.05 10.87 5.71  High Risk – Bicycle
 High Risk – Pedestrian
 Moderate Risk – Bicycle
 Moderate Risk – Pedestrian
16831017 - Ruus Rd & Tennyson Rd
3/20/25

BIKE P
ED

16831018 - Ruus Rd & Tennyson Rd
3/22/25

BIKE PED

WEEKDAYWEEKEND
Notes:

BIKE/PED CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day
By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Baldwin St & Tennyson Rd
VEHICLE-VEHICLE CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025 Notes

Indicators Weekday Weekend
Total Vehicles 25,612 25,178
Total Conflicts 17 24
High Risk Conflicts 1 0
Conflicts per 1,000 vehicles 0.66 0.95
Total Red Light Running
Events
NA NA
Red Light Runs per 1,000
Vehicles
NA NA
Of the eight signalized intersections studied, the average red light running rate was 1.95 events per 1,000 vehicles on weekdays and 2.15 events per 1,000 vehicles on
weekends.

This location does not have a traffic signal so red light running data is not applicable.

RED LIGHT RUNS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By Vehicle Movement

VEHICLE CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Baldwin St & Tennyson Rd
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025

LOOKING EAST
Indicators
Weekday Weekend
Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist
Total Counts 1,061 289 1,085 316
High Risk Conflicts with Vehicles 2 0 3 2
Total Conflicts with Vehicles 50 13 32 23
Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians 4.71 4.50 2.95 7.28  High Risk – Bicycle
 High Risk – Pedestrian
 Moderate Risk – Bicycle
 Moderate Risk – Pedestrian
16831019 - Baldwin St & Tennyson Rd
3/20/25

BIKE P
ED

16831020 - Baldwin St & Tennyson Rd
3/22/25

BIKE PED

WEEKDAYWEEKEND
Notes:

BIKE/PED CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day
By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Huntwood Ave & Tennyson Rd
VEHICLE-VEHICLE CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025 Notes

Indicators Weekday Weekend
Total Vehicles 32,967 30,433
Total Conflicts 56 44
High Risk Conflicts 1 0
Conflicts per 1,000 vehicles 1.70 1.45
Total Red Light Running
Events
31 37
Red Light Runs per 1,000
Vehicles

0.94 1.22
Of the eight signalized intersections studied, the average red light running rate was 1.95 events per 1,000 vehicles on weekdays and 2.15 events per 1,000 vehicles on
weekends.

RED LIGHT RUNS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By Vehicle Movement

VEHICLE CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
Huntwood Ave & Tennyson Rd
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT ANALYSIS / MARCH 20 & 22, 2025

LOOKING SOUTHEAST
Indicators
Weekday Weekend
Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist
Total Counts 887 390 942 347
High Risk Conflicts with Vehicles 3 3 3 2
Total Conflicts with Vehicles 54 33 51 34
Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians 6.09 8.46 5.41 9.80  High Risk – Bicycle
 High Risk – Pedestrian
 Moderate Risk – Bicycle
 Moderate Risk – Pedestrian
16831021 - Huntwood Ave & Tennyson Rd
3/20/25
BIKE
PED

16831022 - Huntwood Ave & Tennyson Rd
3/22/25

BIKE PED

WEEKDAYWEEKEND
Notes:

BIKE/PED CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day
By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
12th St/Dixon St & Tennyson Rd
VEHICLE-VEHICLE CONFLICT ANALYSIS / APRIL 3 & 5, 2025
Notes

Indicators Weekday Weekend
Total Vehicles 21,899 20,767
Total Conflicts 0 3
High Risk Conflicts 0 0
Conflicts per 1,000 vehicles 0 0.14
Total Red Light Running
Events
20 59
Red Light Runs per 1,000
Vehicles

0.91 2.84
Of the eight signalized intersections studied, the average red light running rate was 1.95 events per 1,000 vehicles on weekdays and 2.15 events per 1,000 vehicles on
weekends.

RED LIGHT RUNS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By Vehicle Movement

VEHICLE CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI
High Injury Network Safety Plan | Advanced Analytics
12th St/Dixon St & Tennyson Rd
BICYCLE & PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT ANALYSIS / APRIL 3 & 5, 2025

LOOKING EAST
Indicators
Weekday Weekend
Pedestrian Bicyclist Pedestrian Bicyclist
Total Counts 254 82 338 149
High Risk Conflicts with Vehicles 3 1 0 0
Total Conflicts with Vehicles 27 13 16 7
Conflicts per 100 Bikes/Pedestrians 10.63 15.85 4.73 4.70  High Risk – Bicycle
 High Risk – Pedestrian
 Moderate Risk – Bicycle
 Moderate Risk – Pedestrian
16831023 - 12th St/Dixon St & Tennyson Rd
4/3/25

BIKE P
ED

16831024 - 12th St/Dixon St & Tennyson Rd
4/5/25

BIKE PED

WEEKDAYWEEKEND
Notes:

BIKE/PED CONFLICTS (ALL DAYS)
By Time of Day
By First Vehicle Movement

ATTACHMENT VI

Hayward City CouncilJune 2, 2026

Hayward City Council
June 2, 2026