Agenda packet — San Carlos City Council, October 9, 2023 (part 1 of 3)

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
October 09, 2023 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
Members of the public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the City Council as outlined below.

InPerson Participation:

Location. City Hall – 600 Elm Street, Council Chambers.

Masks are no longer required, but are still recommended by the California Department of Health. To maintain public health and safety, please do not attend in person if you are experiencing respiratory symptoms (e.g. cough, runny nose, and/or sore throat).

Provide Public Comment. To address the City Council on any item on the posted agenda, fill out a Request to Speak Form located in the back of the Council Chambers and submit it to the City Clerk; or, you may raise your hand when the Mayor calls for public comments.

Remote Participation :

Observe via:
Zoom. https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88256140939; or call 16699009128 and enter the Meeting ID #: 882 5614 0939
Meeting Webportal . www.cityofsancarlos.org/agenda Local TV. Comcast Channel 27 and AT&T Uverse Channel 99 Public comments may be submitted to the City Council via email to [email protected].

Should any Councilmember(s) need to participate in this meeting remotely, as authorized by Assembly Bill 2449, public comments will also be accepted remotely via Zoom (in addition to the ways outlined above). To provide public comment remotely, join the meeting via Zoom (see above access information), and during the public comment period for the agenda item you wish to address, use the “raise hand” feature. If joining Zoom by phone, press *9 to “raise hand”.

MAYOR: Adam Rak
COUNCIL: Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Sara McDowell, Pranita Venkatesh

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ASSEMBLY BILL 2449 TELECONFERENCE REQUESTS

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA

5. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION

6. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Recognizing October 2023 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

7. COUNCIL COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS
Council Communications and Announcements are brief items from members of the City Council regarding upcoming events in the community and correspondence that they have received. They are informational in nature and no action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

8. CONSENT CALENDAR
a. Motion to Waive Reading of All Ordinances.
b. Approve the September 11, 2023 City Council Special Meeting Minutes. c. Accept the Quarterly Reports from City Commissions and Boards. d. Adopt a Resolution Accepting the Installation of Sports Field Lighting at Burton and Highlands Parks Phase II, Project C1818 and Authorizing the Public Works Director to Issue and Record a Notice of Completion.
e. Adopt a Resolution Approving and Adopting a Comprehensive Master Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 202324 in Accordance with Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations Section 570.5 and the California Employees Retirement System ("CalPERS").
f. Adopt a Resolution Accepting the 2022 Traffic Calming Improvement Project C1807 and Authorizing the Public Works Director to Issue and Record a Notice of Completion.
g. Authorize the City Manager to Sign the Letter Prepared by Staff in Response to the 20222023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report "Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County."
h. Adopt a Resolution Approving an Adjustment of $110,000 for Fiscal Year 202223 and $110,000 for Fiscal Year 202324 to the Annual Not to Exceed Amount for Emergency Services for the OnCall Traffic Signal and Maintenance Agreement with CalWest Lighting and Signal Maintenance; and Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Agreement.
i. Approve Artwork for the Utility Box Mural Program, Phase III. j. Adopt a Resolution Appropriating $100,000 from the General Capital Fund (“Fund 25”) Unassigned Fund Balance to Construct and Install Wooden Planters over the Orange Water Wall Barriers on Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue.

9. PUBLIC HEARING
a. Consideration of the Below Actions for the Life Science/Research & Development Project at 841 Old Country Road (APNs 046133160, 046134050, 046134060, 046135010, 046135020, 046135030, 046135040, 046182100, 046182110, 046182150):
i. Adopt a Resolution Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; ii. Introduce an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map to Change the Zoning of the Site from IH – Heavy Industrial Zoning District to PD – Planned Development Zoning District and Approving the Associated Planned Development Plan; and
iii. Introduce an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with the Sobrato Family Foundation.

10. AGENDA SETTING
Items discussed in this Agenda Setting Section will be considered by the Council for placing on a future agenda. No action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

11. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the City Council on matters NOT on the posted agenda may do so.

Each speaker is limited to two minutes. If there are more than five individuals wishing to speak during public comment, the Mayor may choose to allow the first five speakers to speak during this time, and the balance of the Public Comment speakers will be called upon at the end of the Council Meeting.

If the item you are speaking on is not listed on the agenda, please be advised that the City Council may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed as allowed under the Brown Act (Government Code Section 54954.2). The City Council's general policy is to refer items to staff for attention, or have a matter placed on a future City Council agenda for a more comprehensive action or report and formal public discussion and input at that time.

12. ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection upon request.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act and Title VI, and as outlined in the City’s Reasonable Accommodations Policy, if you need special assistance or translation services to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (650) 8024222 or via email at [email protected]. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.

1 CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
October 09, 2023 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
Members of the public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the City Council as outlined below.

InPerson Participation:

Location. City Hall – 600 Elm Street, Council Chambers.

Remote Participation :

MAYOR: Adam Rak
COUNCIL: Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Sara McDowell, Pranita Venkatesh

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ASSEMBLY BILL 2449 TELECONFERENCE REQUESTS

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA

5. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION

6. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Recognizing October 2023 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

10. AGENDA SETTING
Items discussed in this Agenda Setting Section will be considered by the Council for placing on a future agenda. No action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

11. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the City Council on matters NOT on the posted agenda may do so.

12. ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection upon request.

2 CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
October 09, 2023 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
Members of the public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the City Council as outlined below.

InPerson Participation:

Location. City Hall – 600 Elm Street, Council Chambers.

Remote Participation :

MAYOR: Adam Rak
COUNCIL: Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Sara McDowell, Pranita Venkatesh

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ASSEMBLY BILL 2449 TELECONFERENCE REQUESTS

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA

5. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION

6. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Recognizing October 2023 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

10. AGENDA SETTING
Items discussed in this Agenda Setting Section will be considered by the Council for placing on a future agenda. No action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

11. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the City Council on matters NOT on the posted agenda may do so.

12. ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection upon request.

3 CITY OF SAN CARLOS
City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority
Regular Meeting
October 09, 2023 7:00 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
www.cityofsancarlos.org
AGENDA
Members of the public will have the option to observe the meeting and address the City Council as outlined below.

InPerson Participation:

Location. City Hall – 600 Elm Street, Council Chambers.

Remote Participation :

MAYOR: Adam Rak
COUNCIL: Ronald Collins, John Dugan, Sara McDowell, Pranita Venkatesh

1. CALL TO ORDER

2. ASSEMBLY BILL 2449 TELECONFERENCE REQUESTS

3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

4. CHANGES TO THE ORDER OF THE AGENDA

5. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION

6. PRESENTATIONS
a. Present a Proclamation Recognizing October 2023 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

10. AGENDA SETTING
Items discussed in this Agenda Setting Section will be considered by the Council for placing on a future agenda. No action will be taken on these items at this meeting.

11. PUBLIC COMMENT
Persons wishing to address the City Council on matters NOT on the posted agenda may do so.

12. ADJOURNMENT
Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection upon request.

4 San Carlos City Council/Successor Agency to the
Redevelopment Agency/Housing Authority Special Meeting
Collaboration Room, City Hall
600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
September 11, 2023 6:45 PM

MINUTES

ROLL CALL

City Council Present:

City Council Absent:

Adam Rak, Mayor
John Dugan, Vice Mayor
Pranita Venkatesh, Councilmember

Ronald Collins, Councilmember
Sara McDowell, Councilmember

Staff Present: Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
Rebecca Mendenhall, Administrative Services Director
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Angie Rodriquez, Human Resources Manager
Gregory Rubens, City Attorney

1. CALL TO ORDER

Mayor Rak called the meeting to order at 6:45 PM.

2. PUBLIC COMMENT

None.

3. CLOSED SESSION

a. Conference with Labor Negotiators Cue, Maltbie, Mendenhall, Rodriguez and Rubens- (Closed Session Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6). Management Group, Confidential Group, and the Local 829 American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (“AFSCME”).

4. REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION

None.

5. ADJOURNMENT

The meeting adjourned at 6:52 PM.

Crystal Mui
City Clerk

8.b
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 5

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 9, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Accept the Quarterly Reports from City Commissions and Boards.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council accept the quarterly reports from the City’s Commissions and Boards.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None for this action.

BACKGROUND:

Since 2020, the City Council receives quarterly reports from each Commission and Board with updates on activities from the preceding period along with its member attendance report.

ANALYSIS:

Attached are the Fiscal Year 2023-24 first quarter reports from the following Commissions and Boards covering July through September 2023:
- Downtown Advisory
- Economic Development Advisory
- Museum of San Carlos History
- Parks, Recreation and Culture
- Planning and Transportation
- Residential Design Review
- Youth Advisory
ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Accept the Quarterly Reports from City Commissions and Boards; or

2. Do not accept the Quarterly Reports from City Commissions and Boards; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 6

Respectfully submitted by:

Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Downtown Advisory FY2024 Q1 Report

2. Economic Development Advisory FY2024 Q1 Report

3. Museum FY2024 Q1 Report

4. Parks, Recreation and Culture FY2024 Q1 Report

5. Planning and Transportation FY2024 Q1 Report

6. Residential Design Review FY2024 Q1 Report

7. Youth Advisory FY2024 Q1 Report

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 7

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

Downtown Advisory Committee (“DTAC”)
Q1 Quarterly Reports
July 1, 2023 – September 30, 2023

Summary of Accomplishments

There were no meetings held in Q1 FY23/24.

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 8

CITY OF SAN CARLOS

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADVISORY COMMISSION (EDAC)

QUARTERLY REPORT, JULY-SEPTEMBER 2023

Commissioners
Sailesh Mehra (Chair)
Heather Liu (Vice-Chair)
Kelly Hickey, Anthony Kamm, Rajesh Krishnan, Madhura Kumar, Karen Molinari, Laura Kotee (alternate)

Advisory
Al Savay, Community Development Director
Adam Aronson, Economic Development & Housing Manager
Cristian Padilla, Economic Development Coordinator
Sajuti Haque, Sr. Management Analyst

Meetings Summary

In the last quarter (July-September 2023), the EDAC met on August 22nd to receive a presentation from staff member Megan Wooley-Ousdahl and the consultant team Perkins and Will on the Northeast Specific Plan.

The presentation emphasized economic and housing analysis. After the presentation, the commissioners asked questions and discussed key themes, including:
• Potential discussions with landowners for housing development • Engaging developers regarding the easement along Taylor Way • Implications of specific plan options on industrial zones • Pedestrian and bicycle connectivity
• Collaboration with neighboring cities
• The preservation of Production, Distribution, and Repair (PDR) spaces • Ways for life science developers to contribute to housing • Suggested active ground floor uses
• Concern about the displacement of small business owners in redevelopment areas • The park's location and the potential use of the 50-foot easement as park or open space

After the Northeast Specific Plan presentation, Cristian Padilla shared updates related to shop local campaigns that will be starting to assist small businesses during the Small Business Saturday campaign. The EDAC agreed to support the following projects to help support these efforts:
• Small Business Spotlight Program
• 101 Highway Digital Billboard Marketing Efforts
• Small Business Saturday Tote Bag Giveaway

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 9

Meeting Date
Sailesh Mehra
(Chair) Anthony Kamm Madhura Kumar Kelly Hickey
Heather Liu
(Vice-Chair) Rajesh Krishnan Karen Molinari
Laura Kotee
(Alternate)
7/25/2023 - C
8/22/2023 P P P E U P P N/A
9/26/2022 - C
Total Unexcused Absences 1st Quarter 0 0 0 0 1 - U 0 0 0 Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 0 0 0 1 - U 0 0 0
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Economic Development Advisory Commission Attendance Log Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 10

1 Museum of San Carlos History
1st Quarter Report to the San Carlos City Council
This report covers the time period from July 1 – September 30, 2023.

The Museum Board had two regularly scheduled meetings during this time period. The July 10 meeting was postposed to July 20, the September 11 meeting postponed to September 21, both due to Board members travel and inability to field a quorum. The meetings were held via Zoom and was attended by all Board members.

The 1st quarter is a busy creating and approving the Annual Budget, training new Board members (if applicable), a Villagers meeting and two Board meeting, and planning for our Fall Event the Ice Cream Social.

Attendance
• All three City representatives were present at the both 1st quarter meetings. • The Villagers, the Museum docent group, held an in person meeting at the Museum on July 6. Most Museum Board members attended that meeting as well.

Activities & More
 The Museum was open to the public every Saturday during this period from 1 to 4pm.  The number of weekly visitors continued to be high until school and fall sports began. We attribute this in part to good weather, summer vacation and marketing on NextDoor, FaceBook, the website and signs downtown.
 At the July meeting the Board voted in the 2023-2024 Slate of Officers and welcomed new Board member Andy Klein. Andy joins us as one of the City’s appointees. o President: Gayle Collins
o Vice President: John Durkin
o Treasurer: Trudy Somrak
o Secretary: Molly Barton
 During the month of July Docents removed the Eaton Hills 4-H, the Spanish History section of the Museum is now fully visible. There is one empty display case, Villagers are determining nest exhibit to display.  The Ice Cream Social was held on September 16. This event is free to the community and is intended as a community event to draw people to the Museum. We estimate over 50 people attended and, between donations, sales and opportunity drawings we covered the costs of the event. The theme was “peace, love, history & ice cream” and attendees were encouraged to wear tie dyed clothing. A great time was had by all!  The Museum Board and Villagers continue to preserve our oldest newspapers that are too fragile to be scanned into the online archives.
 The Board has applied for a Community Foundation grant to fund a continuation of Linda Garvey’s San Carlos Stories. This continuation of an oral history of San Carlos will cover the 1980’s to present and be formatted as videos, not a book.

The next report will be submitted at the end of the 2nd quarter, December 2023.

Respectfully Submitted by,
Molly Barton
MoSH Secretary
09/22/2023

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 11

Meeting Date Molly Barton Andy Klein John Durkin
7/20/2023 P P P
9/21/2023 P P P
Total Unexcused Absences
1st Quarter 0 0 0
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 0 0
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Museum of San Carlos History Attendance Report
Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) consecutive Regular Meetings, will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from (2) consecutive Regular Meetings will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 12

1 Resid
ential Design Review Committee (RDRC)
Q1 Quarterly Report
July 1, 2023 – September 30, 2023
S
ummary of Accomplishments
The RDRC h
eld three public hearings in the 1st quarter of FY 2023-2024 and took the following actions:

A. A
pprovals: Five (5) applications: two (2) new residences, one (1) addition and ADU, and two (2) additions.

Address Description Total square
footage of
residence (s.f.)
155 Wilshire Court Addition 3,802 s.f.
213 Hillcrest Road New Residence 3,540 s.f.
2133 Greenwood Avenue New Residence 3,101 s.f.
24 Oak Creek Lane Addition 4,356 s.f.
248 Molton Avenue Addition and ADU 3,133 s.f.

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 13

Meeting Date Ellen Garvey John Stewart Hae Young Datwani David Roof, Alternate 7/4/2023 - C C C C N/A
7/18/2023 - C C C C N/A
8/1/2023 P P E N/A
8/15/2023 - C C C C N/A
9/5/2023 P P P N/A
9/19/2023 P P P N/A
Total Unexcused Absences
1st Quarter 0 0 0 0
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 0 0 0
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Residential Design Review Committee
Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 14

Planning and Transportation Commission
Q1 Quarterly Reports
July 1, 2023 – September 30, 2023

Summary of Accomplishments

The Planning and Transportation Commission (PTC) held 3 meetings in the First quarter of FY 2023/2024 and addressed the following items:

August 21, 2023:

1. Appointment of officers
a. PTC Chair – Jim Iacoponi
b. PTC Vice Chair – Kristen Clements
c. RDRC Chair – Ellen Garvey
d. RDRC Chair (Alternate) – David Roof

2. 501 Industrial Road (APN 046-090-410) - Hotel Indigo Project – Public Comment Hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR)

September 5, 2023:

1. Proposed Amendments to San Carlos Municipal Code Section 18.23.210 Accessory Dwelling Units/Junior Accessory Dwelling Units and Sections 18.03 (Rules of Measurement), 18.12 (Hillside Overlay District), 18.29 (Design Review), and 18.40 (Use Classifications) - Approved

September 18, 2023:

1. 11 El Camino Real (APNs: 045-320-170; 045-320-220) – Public Hearing to Consider approving the Design Review, Below Market Rate Housing Plan, Transportation Demand Management Plan, Protected Tree Removal Permit, Dirt Haul and Grading Certificate and Vesting Tentative Map to Construct a 242- unit Residential Development in the MU -NB-120 Zoning District . - Approved

2. Northeast Area Specific Plan Study Session – Consideration of Draft Concepts and Land Use Options

3. Midblock Crossing Project on Industrial Road and Alameda de las Pulgas.

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 15

Meeting Date Janet Castaneda Kristen Clements Ellen Garvey Jim Iacaponi David Roof 7/3/2023 - C
7/17/2023 - C
8/7/2023 - C
8/21/2023 P P P P P
9/5/2023 P E P E P
9/18/2023 P P P P P
Total Unexcused Absences
1st Quarter 0 0 0 0 0
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 0 0 0 0
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum City of San Carlos
Planning and Transportation Commission Attendance Log
Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 16

A. A
pprovals: Five (5) applications: two (2) new residences, one (1) addition and ADU, and two (2) additions.

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 17

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 18

YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL (YAC): QUARTERLY REPORT

July 2023 – September 2023

July 2023:
• Summer break. No meeting was held.

August 2023:
• YAC resumed monthly meetings and began brainstorming their goals for the 2023-2024 school year.

• YAC members elected a new Chair, Vice-Chair, Public Relations, and Secretary.

September 2023:
• The Youth Advisory Council (YAC) attended the September 11, 2023, City Council meeting where one member was appointed for a one-year term ending in 2024, five members were appointed for a two-year term ending in 2025, and two members were appointed as alternates for a one- year term ending in 2024.

• YAC established their work plan for the 2023-2024 school year. The Council agreed on five main objectives for the 2023-2024 school year:

1) Educational opportunities for both Middle Schoolers and High Schoolers 2) establishing additional in-person athletics opportunities for youth 3) increasing and surveying community engagement
4) in-person events for the youth community
5) Increasing awareness of sustainability resources and projects

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 19

Meeting Date Dylan Karmin Hannah Delizo Sufiya Kaul
Samina
Ginwalla Annika Gupta Zuri Kadiwar Cecily Mock
Eva
McLinden Ellora Mehta
Ava
Stathacopoulos Connor Huh
Maya
Kacholiya
(Alternate)
Michael
Sandoval
(Alternate)
7/12/2023 - C (Summer Break)
8/30/2023 P P P P P P P E P P P P P
9/13/2023 P P P P P P P P P E P P P
Total Unexcused Absences
1st Quarter 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Unexcused Absences
This Fiscal Year 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
P = Present
U = Unexcused Absence
E = Excused Absence
QA = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner wasn't able to attend QP = Mtg canceled for lack of quorum, Commissioner would have been able to attend C = Mtg Canceled for any reason other than lack of quorum Members are expected to attend all regularly scheduled meetings and should make every effort to do so. Such attendance ensures a steady flow of communication and keeps everyone abreast of current topics under discussion. Unexcused absences from three (3) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk. For those Commissions that are scheduled to meet less than once a month, unexcused absences from two (2) Meetings within a Fiscal Year will result in that Commission member’s seat being declared vacant by the City Clerk.

City of San Carlos
Youth Advisory Council Attendance Log

8.c
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 20

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 9, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Accepting the Installation of Sports Field Lighting at Burton and Highlands Parks - Phase II, Project C1818 and Authorizing the Public Works Director to Issue and Record a Notice of Completion.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution accepting the Installation of Sports Field Lighting at Burton and Highlands Parks - Phase II, Project C1818 (“Project”) and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications or additional appropriations needed at this time.

The Project is funded by Project C1818 which had $200,000 approved in Fiscal Year (FY) 2021- 22 and $2.1 million approved in FY 2022-23 to cover the total Project costs, which included the addition of lighting to the batting cages as recommended by the City Council.

The City Council awarded a public projects agreement to Capitol Valley Electric, Inc. (“Contractor”) in the amount of $1,769,888, with contingencies in an amount not to exceed $353,977, for the installation of new sports lighting at Burton and Highlands Parks. The total cost to complete the Project is $1,866,451.45, which includes additional work and approved change orders. There is a sufficient budget to pay the remaining 5% retention of $92,606.85.

BACKGROUND:

In September 2021, the City Council approved a professional services agreement with Salas O’Brien to prepare the construction documents for the Project.

In December 2021, Salas O’Brien presented the 65% design submittal to the Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission (“Commission”) for comments and feedback. Commissioners recommended that the City Council consider adding lighting to the new Burton Park batting cages as part of the Project.

In January 2022, input from the Commission was presented to the City Council, along with the 65% design submittal. The City Council directed staff to add lighting to the Burton Park batting cages and to move forward with the design of the Project.

The City Engineer signed the final bid set construction documents on April 14, 2022. On May 9, 2022, staff presented the final bid set construction documents to City Council and the Project was

8.d
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 21

unanimously approved.

The Project was publicly advertised on May 12, 2022, and the City Clerk opened sealed bids on June 6, 2022. The City Council awarded the Project to Capitol Valley Electric, Inc. in the amount of $1,769,888.

ANALYSIS:

The Project began on August 15, 2022. The final inspection, testing, and commissioning was completed by the manufacturer on October 6, 2022 for the Stadium Field at Highlands Park, and August 29, 2023 for Flanagan Field at Burton Park.

Therefore, staff recommends that the Council accept the installation of sports field lighting at Burton and Highlands Parks – Phase II Project C1818, and authorize the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution accepting the Installation of Sports Field Lighting at Burton and Highlands Parks – Phase II Project C1818 and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Steven Machida, Public Works Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution

8.d
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 22

RESOLUTION NO. 2023 – ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

ACCEPTING THE INSTALLATION OF SPORTS FIELD LIGHTING AT BURTON AND HIGHLANDS PARKS – PHASE II, PROJECT C1818 AND AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO ISSUE AND RECORD A NOTICE OF COMPLETION.

WHEREAS, in September 2021, the City Council approved a professional services agreement with Salas O’Brien to prepare the construction documents for the installation of sports field lighting at Burton and Highlands Parks – Phase II, Project C1818 (“Project”); and WHEREAS, the City Engineer signed the final bid set construction documents on April 14, 2022; and
WHEREAS, on May 9, 2022, staff presented the final bid set construction documents to the City Council and the Project was unanimously approved; and WHEREAS, the Project was publicly advertised on May 12, 2022, and the City Clerk opened sealed bids on June 6, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City Council awarded the Project to Capitol Valley Electric, Inc. in the amount of $1,769,888; and
WHEREAS, the Project began on August 15, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the final inspection, testing, and commissioning was completed by the manufacturer on October 6, 2022 for the Stadium Field at Highlands Park, and August 29, 2023 for Flanagan Field at Burton Park; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends that the City Council accept the Project and authorize the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby accepts the Installation of Sports Field Lighting at Burton and Highlands Park – Phase II, Project C1818 and authorizes the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion. * * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 9th day of October 2023, by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:_______________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:_______________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:_______________________________________________

8.d
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 23

________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos

8.d
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 24

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 9, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Approving and Adopting a Comprehensive Master Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year 2023-24 in Accordance with Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations Section 570.5 and the California Employees Retirement System ("CalPERS").

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving and adopting a Comprehensive Master Salary Schedule for Fiscal Year (“FY”) 2023-24 in accordance with Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations Section 570.5 and the California Employees Retirement System.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact. All changes have been previously approved and incorporated into the Adopted Fiscal Year 2023-25 Operating Budget.

BACKGROUND:

The attached Resolution is being brought to the City Council for approval to meet the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (“CalPERS”) financial reporting requirements. The City of San Carlos belongs to CalPERS, an agency that manages pension and health benefits for more than two million California public employees, retirees, and their families. Overseen by a 13- member Board of Administration whose members are elected, appointed, or ex officio, CalPERS has provided retirement security for California's public employees for more than eight decades.

In April 2016, CalPERS conducted a standard agency audit of the City’s practices related to financial reporting for pension plans (Governmental Accounting Standards Board (“GASB”) Statement No. 67). As a result of that audit, CalPERS now requires that the City adopt a Resolution re-approving any previously approved individual employee groups’ salary schedules into a single Citywide schedule, in a format approved by CalPERS. Therefore, when there is a change to any of our employee groups’ salary schedules, the City Council must adopt a Resolution approving the Citywide schedule.

The most current salary schedule was approved by the City Council on June 27, 2022. Since that time, updates to the pay schedules for FY 2023-24 were approved individually by the City Council as follows:
•AFSCME. The pay schedule reflects the pay increases effective July 3, 2023, as approved by the City Council on September 11, 2023 when Resolution 2023-111 was adopted. •Management. The pay schedule reflects the pay increases effective July 3, 2023, as

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 25

approved by the City Council on September 11, 2023 when Resolution 2023-112 was adopted.
•Confidential. The pay schedule reflects the pay increases effective July 3, 2023, as approved by the City Council on September 11, 2023 when Resolution 2023-113 was adopted.
•City Attorney. The City Attorney received a cost of living adjustment effective July 31, 2023, commensurate with that provided to the Management Employee Group as per his employment agreement and approved by the City Council on June 26, 2023 (Resolution 2023-088).
•City Manager. The City Manager received a pay increase and cost of living adjustment on March 13, 2023, commensurate with that provided to the Management Employee Group as per his employment agreement and approved by the City Council on September 25, 2023 (Resolution 2023-119).
•Teamsters. The pay schedule reflects the pay increases effective September 11, 2023, as approved by the City Council on August 28, 2023 when Resolution 2023-105 was adopted.

ANALYSIS:

The Government Code and California Code of Regulations (“CCR”) requirement 570.5 states that the City of San Carlos must maintain a single, duly approved and adopted pay schedule that identifies the positions for every employee classification. Previously, the City Council approved and adopted salary schedules by individual employee groups. Based on this new interpretation, each time there is a modification, the Council must approve and adopt one new salary schedule in its entirety.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution approving and adopting a Comprehensive Master Salary Schedule for FY 2023-24 in accordance with Title 2 of the California Code of Regulations Section 570.5 and the California Employees Retirement System (“CalPERS”); or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Rebecca Mendenhall, Administrative Services Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution
Exhibit A to Resolution - Master Salary Schedule FY 2023-2024

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 26

RESOLUTION NO. 2023 – ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

APPROVING AND ADOPTING A COMPREHENSIVE MASTER SALARY SCHEDULE FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 2 OF THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS SECTION 570.5 AND THE CALIFORNIA EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM ("CALPERS").

WHEREAS, on August 28, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution 2023-105 adopting a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of San Carlos and the Teamsters Local 856 Unit; and
WHEREAS, on September 11, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution 2023-111 adopting a Memorandum of Understanding between the City of San Carlos and the AFSCME Local 829 Unit; and
WHEREAS, on September 11, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution 2023-112 adopting a Salary and Benefit Resolution for the Management employee group; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution 2023-113 adopting a Salary and Benefit Resolution for the Confidential employee group; and WHEREAS, the City Attorney received a cost-of-living adjustment commensurate with that provided to the Management Employee Group as approved by the City Council on June 26, 2023 (Resolution 2023-088); and
WHEREAS, the City Manager received a salary increase and cost of living adjustment commensurate with that provided to the Management Employee Group as approved by the City Council on September 25, 2023 (Resolution 2023-119); and WHEREAS, the salary schedule proposed for adoption was previously approved by the City Council using its practice of adopting a salary schedule for each employee group; and WHEREAS, based on CalPERS interpretation, each time there is a modification to the salary schedule for one employee group, the Council must approve and adopt a new salary schedule in its entirety.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby approves the salary schedules attached hereto as Exhibit A for Fiscal Year 2023-24. * * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 9th day of October 2023, by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:___________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:___________________________________________

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 27

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:___________________________________________ ________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A: Fiscal Year 2023-24 Salary Schedule

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 28

City of San Carlos
Salary Schedule Fiscal
Year 2023-2024
(Updated 10/09/2023)

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 29

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
Elected Officials
Effective 12/10/2018
Classification Title Monthly Annually
City Council Members $560.00 $6,720.00
Classification Title Monthly Annually
City Treasurer $560.00 $6,720.00

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 30

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
City Manager
Effective 3/13/2023
Classification Title Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually
City Manager $191.8269 $15,346.15 $33,250.00 $399,000
(By Employment Agreement)

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 31

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
City Attorney
Effective 7/31/2023
Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually City Attorney $151.4423 $12,115.38 $26,250.00 $315,000
(By Employment Agreement)

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 32

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
Management Group (Unrepresented)
Effective 7/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Administrative Services Director Step 1 $101.3978 $8,111.83 $17,576 $210,907 Step 2 $106.4770 $8,518.16 $18,456 $221,472
Step 3 $111.8095 $8,944.76 $19,380 $232,564
Step 4 $117.3950 $9,391.60 $20,348 $244,182
Step 5 $123.2751 $9,862.01 $21,368 $256,412
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Assistant City Manager Step 1 $108.1150 $8,649.20 $18,740 $224,879 Step 2 $113.5285 $9,082.28 $19,678 $236,139
Step 3 $119.2094 $9,536.76 $20,663 $247,956
Step 4 $125.1575 $10,012.60 $21,694 $260,328
Step 5 $131.4209 $10,513.67 $22,780 $273,355
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Assistant Community Development Director Step 1 $86.3647 $6,909.17 $14,970 $179,638 Step 2 $90.6807 $7,254.45 $15,718 $188,616
Step 3 $95.2181 $7,617.45 $16,504 $198,054
Step 4 $99.9772 $7,998.17 $17,329 $207,953
Step 5 $104.9767 $8,398.13 $18,196 $218,351
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Assistant Building Official Step 1 $67.5493 $5,403.95 $11,709 $140,503 Step 2 $70.9295 $5,674.36 $12,294 $147,533
Step 3 $74.4732 $5,957.86 $12,909 $154,904
Step 4 $78.1988 $6,255.90 $13,554 $162,653
Step 5 $82.1060 $6,568.48 $14,232 $170,781
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Building Official Step 1 $76.1969 $6,095.76 $13,207 $158,490 Step 2 $80.0065 $6,400.52 $13,868 $166,414
Step 3 $83.9993 $6,719.94 $14,560 $174,718
Step 4 $88.2095 $7,056.76 $15,290 $183,476
Step 5 $92.6165 $7,409.32 $16,054 $192,642
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt City Clerk/Director of Community Relations Step 1 $69.3921 $5,551.37 $12,028 $144,336 Step 2 $72.8623 $5,828.99 $12,629 $151,554
Step 3 $76.5170 $6,121.36 $13,263 $159,155
Step 4 $80.3289 $6,426.31 $13,924 $167,084
Step 5 $84.3457 $6,747.66 $14,620 $175,439
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt City Engineer Step 1 $87.7863 $7,022.90 $15,216 $182,595 Step 2 $92.1766 $7,374.13 $15,977 $191,727
Step 3 $96.7917 $7,743.33 $16,777 $201,327
Step 4 $101.6250 $8,130.00 $17,615 $211,380
Step 5 $106.7096 $8,536.77 $18,496 $221,956

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 33

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
Management Group (Unrepresented)
Effective 7/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Communications Manager Step 1 $63.6671 $5,093.37 $11,036 $132,428 Step 2 $66.8524 $5,348.19 $11,588 $139,053
Step 3 $70.1950 $5,615.60 $12,167 $146,006
Step 4 $73.7013 $5,896.11 $12,775 $153,299
Step 5 $77.3901 $6,191.21 $13,414 $160,971
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Community Development Director Step 1 $102.5297 $8,202.37 $17,772 $213,262 Step 2 $107.6604 $8,612.83 $18,661 $223,934
Step 3 $113.0456 $9,043.64 $19,595 $235,135
Step 4 $118.6852 $9,494.82 $20,572 $246,865
Step 5 $124.6286 $9,970.28 $21,602 $259,227
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Economic Development & Housing Manager Step 1 $73.7106 $5,896.85 $12,777 $153,318 Step 2 $77.3962 $6,191.70 $13,415 $160,984
Step 3 $81.2557 $6,500.46 $14,084 $169,012
Step 4 $85.3292 $6,826.33 $14,790 $177,485
Step 5 $89.5833 $7,166.66 $15,528 $186,333
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Economic Development Coordinator Step 1 $57.9025 $4,632.20 $10,036 $120,437 Step 2 $60.7893 $4,863.14 $10,537 $126,442
Step 3 $63.8248 $5,105.98 $11,063 $132,756
Step 4 $67.0158 $5,361.26 $11,616 $139,393
Step 5 $70.3749 $5,629.99 $12,198 $146,380
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Financial Services Manager Step 1 $77.6784 $6,214.28 $13,464 $161,571 Step 2 $81.5637 $6,525.10 $14,138 $169,653
Step 3 $85.6412 $6,851.30 $14,844 $178,134
Step 4 $89.9177 $7,193.41 $15,586 $187,029
Step 5 $94.4260 $7,554.08 $16,367 $196,406
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Human Resources Manager Step 1 $77.1292 $6,170.34 $13,369 $160,429 Step 2 $80.9837 $6,478.69 $14,037 $168,446
Step 3 $85.0247 $6,801.97 $14,738 $176,851
Step 4 $89.2718 $7,141.74 $15,474 $185,685
Step 5 $93.7454 $7,499.63 $16,249 $194,990
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Information Technology Manager Step 1 $75.5023 $6,040.18 $13,087 $157,045 Step 2 $79.2755 $6,342.04 $13,741 $164,893
Step 3 $83.2282 $6,658.26 $14,426 $173,115
Step 4 $87.4007 $6,992.06 $15,149 $181,794
Step 5 $91.7660 $7,341.28 $15,906 $190,873

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 34

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
Management Group (Unrepresented)
Effective 7/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Parks & Recreation Director Step 1 $98.7366 $7,898.93 $17,114 $205,372 Step 2 $103.6704 $8,293.64 $17,970 $215,635
Step 3 $108.8559 $8,708.47 $18,868 $226,420
Step 4 $114.2865 $9,142.92 $19,810 $237,716
Step 5 $120.0085 $9,600.68 $20,801 $249,618
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Planning Manager Step 1 $77.7526 $6,220.21 $13,477 $161,725 Step 2 $81.5933 $6,527.47 $14,143 $169,714
Step 3 $85.6254 $6,850.03 $14,842 $178,101
Step 4 $89.8556 $7,188.45 $15,575 $186,900
Step 5 $94.3036 $7,544.29 $16,346 $196,151
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Principal Engineer Step 1 $75.0263 $6,002.11 $13,005 $156,055 Step 2 $78.7732 $6,301.85 $13,654 $163,848
Step 3 $82.7134 $6,617.07 $14,337 $172,044
Step 4 $86.8535 $6,948.28 $15,055 $180,655
Step 5 $91.2001 $7,296.01 $15,808 $189,696
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Principal Planner Step 1 $70.4708 $5,637.66 $12,215 $146,579 Step 2 $73.9887 $5,919.09 $12,825 $153,896
Step 3 $77.6984 $6,215.87 $13,468 $161,613
Step 4 $81.5857 $6,526.86 $14,142 $169,698
Step 5 $85.6722 $6,853.78 $14,850 $178,198
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Public Works Director Step 1 $106.3576 $8,508.60 $18,435 $221,224 Step 2 $111.6837 $8,934.69 $19,359 $232,302
Step 3 $117.2672 $9,381.38 $20,326 $243,916
Step 4 $123.1279 $9,850.23 $21,342 $256,106
Step 5 $129.2857 $10,342.85 $22,410 $268,914
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Public Works Superintendent Step 1 $73.8984 $5,911.87 $12,809 $153,709 Step 2 $77.5914 $6,207.31 $13,449 $161,390
Step 3 $81.4681 $6,517.44 $14,121 $169,454
Step 4 $85.5414 $6,843.31 $14,827 $177,926
Step 5 $89.8181 $7,185.45 $15,568 $186,822
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Recreation Manager Step 1 $67.5939 $5,407.51 $11,716 $140,595 Step 2 $70.9711 $5,677.69 $12,302 $147,620
Step 3 $74.5188 $5,961.50 $12,917 $154,999
Step 4 $78.2490 $6,259.92 $13,563 $162,758
Step 5 $82.1618 $6,572.94 $14,241 $170,897

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 35

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
Management Group (Unrepresented)
Effective 7/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Senior Accountant Step 1 $58.6205 $4,689.64 $10,161 $121,931 Step 2 $61.5550 $4,924.40 $10,670 $128,034
Step 3 $64.6327 $5,170.62 $11,203 $134,436
Step 4 $67.8539 $5,428.32 $11,761 $141,136
Step 5 $71.2511 $5,700.09 $12,350 $148,202
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Senior Building Inspector Step 1 $57.2846 $4,582.77 $9,929 $119,152 Step 2 $60.1488 $4,811.90 $10,426 $125,109
Step 3 $63.1562 $5,052.49 $10,947 $131,365
Step 4 $66.3140 $5,305.12 $11,494 $137,933
Step 5 $69.6298 $5,570.38 $12,069 $144,830
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Senior Engineer Step 1 $75.0263 $6,002.11 $13,005 $156,055 Step 2 $78.7732 $6,301.85 $13,654 $163,848
Step 3 $82.7134 $6,617.07 $14,337 $172,044
Step 4 $86.8535 $6,948.28 $15,055 $180,655
Step 5 $91.2001 $7,296.01 $15,808 $189,696
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Senior Management Analyst Step 1 $58.7529 $4,700.23 $10,184 $122,206 Step 2 $61.6878 $4,935.02 $10,693 $128,311
Step 3 $64.7719 $5,181.75 $11,227 $134,726
Step 4 $68.0187 $5,441.49 $11,790 $141,479
Step 5 $71.4077 $5,712.62 $12,377 $148,528
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Senior Planner Step 1 $59.9651 $4,797.21 $10,394 $124,728 Step 2 $62.9561 $5,036.49 $10,912 $130,949
Step 3 $66.1119 $5,288.95 $11,459 $137,513
Step 4 $69.4125 $5,553.00 $12,032 $144,378
Step 5 $72.8845 $5,830.76 $12,633 $151,600
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Senior Sustainability Analyst Step 1 $57.5330 $4,602.64 $9,972 $119,669 Step 2 $60.4070 $4,832.56 $10,471 $125,647
Step 3 $63.4269 $5,074.16 $10,994 $131,928
Step 4 $66.6063 $5,328.50 $11,545 $138,541
Step 5 $69.9250 $5,594.00 $12,120 $145,444
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Senior Traffic Engineer Step 1 $75.0263 $6,002.11 $13,005 $156,055 Step 2 $78.7731 $6,301.85 $13,654 $163,848
Step 3 $82.7134 $6,617.07 $14,337 $172,044
Step 4 $86.8535 $6,948.28 $15,055 $180,655
Step 5 $91.2001 $7,296.01 $15,808 $189,696

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 36

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
Confidential Unit
Effective 7/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Accountant Step 1 $47.1240 $3,769.92 $8,168 $98,018 Step 2 $49.4802 $3,958.41 $8,577 $102,919
Step 3 $51.9542 $4,156.34 $9,005 $108,065
Step 4 $54.5519 $4,364.15 $9,456 $113,468
Step 5 $57.2795 $4,582.36 $9,928 $119,141
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Administrative Assistant Step 1 $38.4492 $3,075.93 $6,665 $79,974 Step 2 $40.3727 $3,229.82 $6,998 $83,975
Step 3 $42.3964 $3,391.71 $7,349 $88,184
Step 4 $44.5090 $3,560.72 $7,715 $92,579
Step 5 $46.7439 $3,739.51 $8,102 $97,227
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Deputy City Clerk Step 1 $44.5174 $3,561.40 $7,716 $92,596 Step 2 $46.7434 $3,739.47 $8,102 $97,226
Step 3 $49.0805 $3,926.44 $8,507 $102,087
Step 4 $51.5345 $4,122.76 $8,933 $107,192
Step 5 $54.1112 $4,328.90 $9,379 $112,551
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Executive Assistant Step 1 $45.2253 $3,618.02 $7,839 $94,069 Step 2 $47.4904 $3,799.23 $8,232 $98,780
Step 3 $49.8675 $3,989.40 $8,644 $103,724
Step 4 $52.3566 $4,188.53 $9,075 $108,902
Step 5 $54.9872 $4,398.98 $9,531 $114,373
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Human Resources Management Analyst Step 1 $51.5881 $4,127.05 $8,942 $107,303 Step 2 $54.1854 $4,334.83 $9,392 $112,706
Step 3 $56.8865 $4,550.92 $9,860 $118,324
Step 4 $59.7370 $4,778.96 $10,354 $124,253
Step 5 $62.7175 $5,017.40 $10,871 $130,452
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Legal Secretary Step 1 $42.9216 $3,433.73 $7,440 $89,277 Step 2 $45.0678 $3,605.42 $7,812 $93,741
Step 3 $47.3211 $3,785.69 $8,202 $98,428
Step 4 $49.6871 $3,974.97 $8,612 $103,349
Step 5 $52.1715 $4,173.72 $9,043 $108,517

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 37

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
Confidential Unit
Effective 7/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Management Analyst Step 1 $49.7885 $3,983.08 $8,630 $103,560 Step 2 $52.2869 $4,182.95 $9,063 $108,757
Step 3 $54.8871 $4,390.97 $9,514 $114,165
Step 4 $57.6456 $4,611.65 $9,992 $119,903
Step 5 $60.5172 $4,841.37 $10,490 $125,876

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 38

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
Teamsters
Effective 9/11/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Maintenance Worker Step 1 $36.0520 $2,884.16 $6,249.01 $74,988 Step 2 $37.8545 $3,028.36 $6,561.45 $78,737
Step 3 $39.7472 $3,179.78 $6,889.52 $82,674
Step 4 $41.7344 $3,338.76 $7,233.97 $86,808
Step 5 $43.8215 $3,505.72 $7,595.72 $91,149
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Senior Maintenance Worker Step 1 $43.1600 $3,452.80 $7,481.06 $89,773 Step 2 $45.3178 $3,625.42 $7,855.08 $94,261
Step 3 $47.5837 $3,806.70 $8,247.85 $98,974
Step 4 $49.9629 $3,997.03 $8,660.24 $103,923
Step 5 $52.4614 $4,196.91 $9,093.31 $109,120
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Senior Mechanic Step 1 $43.7448 $3,499.58 $7,582.43 $90,989 Step 2 $45.9320 $3,674.56 $7,961.55 $95,539
Step 3 $48.2286 $3,858.29 $8,359.63 $100,316
Step 4 $50.6400 $4,051.20 $8,777.61 $105,331
Step 5 $53.1720 $4,253.76 $9,216.49 $110,598

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 39

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
AFSCME
Effective 07/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Accounting Technician I Step 1 30.4973 $2,439.78 $5,286.19 $63,434 Step 2 32.0232 $2,561.86 $5,550.69 $66,608
Step 3 33.6437 $2,691.50 $5,831.58 $69,979
Step 4 35.3047 $2,824.37 $6,119.48 $73,434
Step 5 37.0680 $2,965.44 $6,425.12 $77,101
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Accounting Technician II Step 1 35.0654 $2,805.23 $6,077.99 $72,936 Step 2 36.8159 $2,945.28 $6,381.43 $76,577
Step 3 38.6603 $3,092.82 $6,701.12 $80,413
Step 4 40.5906 $3,247.25 $7,035.71 $84,429
Step 5 42.6225 $3,409.80 $7,387.89 $88,655
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Administrative Clerk Step 1 28.2353 $2,258.83 $4,894.13 $58,730 Step 2 29.6427 $2,371.41 $5,138.06 $61,657
Step 3 31.1252 $2,490.01 $5,395.03 $64,740
Step 4 32.6829 $2,614.63 $5,665.04 $67,980
Step 5 34.3159 $2,745.27 $5,948.09 $71,377
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Assistant Planner Step 1 48.1788 $3,854.31 $8,351.00 $100,212 Step 2 50.5880 $4,047.04 $8,768.58 $105,223
Step 3 53.1185 $4,249.48 $9,207.20 $110,486
Step 4 55.7705 $4,461.64 $9,666.89 $116,003
Step 5 58.5596 $4,684.76 $10,150.32 $121,804
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Associate Engineer Step 1 61.5949 $4,927.59 $10,676.45 $128,117 Step 2 64.6702 $5,173.62 $11,209.51 $134,514
Step 3 67.9101 $5,432.81 $11,771.08 $141,253
Step 4 71.2995 $5,703.96 $12,358.58 $148,303
Step 5 74.8686 $5,989.49 $12,977.23 $155,727
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Associate Planner Step 1 53.7556 $4,300.45 $9,317.63 $111,812 Step 2 56.4390 $4,515.12 $9,782.76 $117,393
Step 3 59.2621 $4,740.97 $10,272.10 $123,265
Step 4 62.2249 $4,977.99 $10,785.65 $129,428
Step 5 65.3349 $5,226.79 $11,324.72 $135,897

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 40

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
AFSCME
Effective 07/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Building Inspector I Step 1 45.4714 $3,637.71 $7,881.71 $94,580 Step 2 47.7447 $3,819.58 $8,275.75 $99,309
Step 3 50.1294 $4,010.35 $8,689.09 $104,269
Step 4 52.6339 $4,210.72 $9,123.22 $109,479
Step 5 55.2660 $4,421.28 $9,579.44 $114,953
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Building Inspector II Step 1 50.4815 $4,038.52 $8,750.13 $105,002 Step 2 53.0068 $4,240.55 $9,187.85 $110,254
Step 3 55.6588 $4,452.70 $9,647.52 $115,770
Step 4 58.4373 $4,674.99 $10,129.14 $121,550
Step 5 61.3585 $4,908.68 $10,635.47 $127,626
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Civil Engineering Assistant Step 1 50.8187 $4,065.49 $8,808.57 $105,703 Step 2 53.3595 $4,268.76 $9,248.99 $110,988
Step 3 56.0279 $4,482.24 $9,711.51 $116,538
Step 4 58.8239 $4,705.91 $10,196.14 $122,354
Step 5 61.7711 $4,941.69 $10,706.98 $128,484
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Civil Engineering Technician Step 1 42.8829 $3,430.63 $7,433.04 $89,196 Step 2 45.0168 $3,601.34 $7,802.91 $93,635
Step 3 47.2733 $3,781.86 $8,194.03 $98,328
Step 4 49.6328 $3,970.62 $8,603.02 $103,236
Step 5 52.1161 $4,169.28 $9,033.45 $108,401
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Communications Coordinator Step 1 35.8131 $2,865.05 $6,207.60 $74,491 Step 2 37.6012 $3,008.10 $6,517.55 $78,211
Step 3 39.4861 $3,158.89 $6,844.26 $82,131
Step 4 41.4603 $3,316.82 $7,186.45 $86,237
Step 5 43.5314 $3,482.51 $7,545.45 $90,545
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Cook Step 1 32.8546 $2,628.37 $5,694.80 $68,338 Step 2 34.4985 $2,759.88 $5,979.73 $71,757
Step 3 36.2300 $2,898.40 $6,279.86 $75,358
Step 4 38.0382 $3,043.05 $6,593.28 $79,119
Step 5 39.9340 $3,194.72 $6,921.90 $83,063

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 41

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
AFSCME
Effective 07/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Facility Attendant Step 1 19.9221 $1,593.77 $3,453.16 $41,438 Step 2 20.9181 $1,673.45 $3,625.80 $43,510
Step 3 21.9640 $1,757.12 $3,807.09 $45,685
Step 4 23.0623 $1,844.98 $3,997.47 $47,970
Step 5 24.2154 $1,937.23 $4,197.34 $50,368
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Fire Prevention Officer Step 1 63.9412 $5,115.30 $11,083.14 $132,998 Step 2 67.1406 $5,371.25 $11,637.70 $139,652
Step 3 70.5094 $5,640.75 $12,221.63 $146,660
Step 4 74.0288 $5,922.30 $12,831.66 $153,980
Step 5 77.7270 $6,218.16 $13,472.68 $161,672
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Permit Technician Step 1 36.8329 $2,946.63 $6,384.36 $76,612 Step 2 38.6744 $3,093.95 $6,703.57 $80,443
Step 3 40.6081 $3,248.65 $7,038.74 $84,465
Step 4 42.6386 $3,411.09 $7,390.70 $88,688
Step 5 44.7705 $3,581.64 $7,760.23 $93,123
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Public Works Assistant Superintendent Step 1 54.8276 $4,386.21 $9,503.45 $114,041 Step 2 57.5691 $4,605.53 $9,978.64 $119,744
Step 3 60.4475 $4,835.80 $10,477.56 $125,731
Step 4 63.4699 $5,077.59 $11,001.45 $132,017
Step 5 66.6433 $5,331.46 $11,551.51 $138,618
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Public Works Inspector Step 1 50.6460 $4,051.68 $8,778.64 $105,344 Step 2 53.1807 $4,254.45 $9,217.98 $110,616
Step 3 55.8381 $4,467.05 $9,678.60 $116,143
Step 4 58.6261 $4,690.09 $10,161.86 $121,942
Step 5 61.5600 $4,924.80 $10,670.41 $128,045
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Recreation Coordinator Step 1 38.1748 $3,053.99 $6,616.97 $79,404 Step 2 40.0809 $3,206.47 $6,947.36 $83,368
Step 3 42.0901 $3,367.21 $7,295.62 $87,547
Step 4 44.1945 $3,535.56 $7,660.38 $91,925
Step 5 46.4022 $3,712.18 $8,043.06 $96,517

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 42

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
AFSCME
Effective 07/3/2023
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Recreation Supervisor Step 1 50.7262 $4,058.09 $8,792.54 $105,510 Step 2 53.2581 $4,260.65 $9,231.40 $110,777
Step 3 55.9244 $4,473.95 $9,693.57 $116,323
Step 4 58.7177 $4,697.41 $10,177.73 $122,133
Step 5 61.6530 $4,932.24 $10,686.52 $128,238
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Senior Administrative Clerk Step 1 33.9868 $2,718.95 $5,891.05 $70,693 Step 2 35.6828 $2,854.62 $6,185.02 $74,220
Step 3 37.4707 $2,997.66 $6,494.92 $77,939
Step 4 39.3431 $3,147.45 $6,819.47 $81,834
Step 5 41.3075 $3,304.60 $7,159.97 $85,920
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Senior Facility Attendant Step 1 28.8261 $2,306.09 $4,996.53 $59,958 Step 2 30.2674 $2,421.39 $5,246.35 $62,956
Step 3 31.7808 $2,542.47 $5,508.68 $66,104
Step 4 33.3698 $2,669.59 $5,784.10 $69,409
Step 5 35.0384 $2,803.07 $6,073.32 $72,880
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Exempt Senior Systems Analyst Step 1 60.8222 $4,865.77 $10,542.51 $126,510 Step 2 63.8636 $5,109.09 $11,069.69 $132,836
Step 3 67.0567 $5,364.53 $11,623.16 $139,478
Step 4 70.4098 $5,632.78 $12,204.36 $146,452
Step 5 73.9302 $5,914.41 $12,814.56 $153,775
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly Bi-Weekly Monthly Annually Non-Exempt Systems Analyst Step 1 53.0074 $4,240.59 $9,187.94 $110,255 Step 2 55.6597 $4,452.78 $9,647.68 $115,772
Step 3 58.4455 $4,675.64 $10,130.55 $121,567
Step 4 61.3645 $4,909.16 $10,636.52 $127,638
Step 5 64.4328 $5,154.63 $11,168.36 $134,020

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 43

City of San Carlos – Pay Rates and Ranges
Part-Time Employee Group
Effective 01/03/2022
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly
Non-Exempt Cook Step 1 $29.9800
Step 2 $31.4800
Step 3 $33.0600
Step 4 $34.7100
Step 5 $36.4400
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly
Non-Exempt Facility Attendant Step 1 $17.8800
Step 2 $18.7800
Step 3 $19.7200
Step 4 $20.7000
Step 5 $21.7400
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly
Non-Exempt Intern Step 1 $20.0000
Step 2 $21.0000
Step 3 $22.0500
Step 4 $23.1500
Step 5 $24.3100
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly
Non-Exempt Program Coordinator Step 1 $24.4200
Step 2 $25.6400
Step 3 $26.9300
Step 4 $28.2700
Step 5 $29.6900
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly
Non-Exempt Recreation Leader I Step 1 $17.3600
Step 2 $18.2200
FLSA Classification Title Step Hourly
Non-Exempt Recreation Leader II Step 1 $19.1400
Step 2 $20.0900
Step 3 $21.1000
Step 4 $22.1500
Step 5 $23.2600

8.e
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 44

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 9, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Accepting the 2022 Traffic Calming Improvement Project C1807 and Authorizing the Public Works Director to Issue and Record a Notice of Completion.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution accepting the 2022 Traffic Calming Improvement Project C1807 (“Project”) and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact and no additional appropriation is needed at this time.

In September 2022, the City Council awarded a public projects agreement to GradeTech, Inc. (“Contractor”) in the amount of $592,206.50. The Project was funded from C1807, which is multi- year and funds design and construction for all traffic calming improvements.

The Contractor was able to complete the Project for $590,614.76, including all additional work and contract change orders. The remaining $1,591.74 that was not spent has been returned to the Project budget.

BACKGROUND:

In 2018, the City Council approved a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP). The objective of the NTMP is to balance the needs of all users by providing an efficient and safe multi- modal street network. The NTMP recommended traffic controls in accordance with guidance provided by the City’s General Plan, City policies, lessons learned from other jurisdictions, practices published by the transportation industry, and community input regarding traffic concerns.

In the NTMP, traffic calming measures are categorized as Level 1 or Level 2 depending on the complexity of the improvement. Level 1 measures focus on easily implementable and relatively low-cost features such as enhancing the visibility of crosswalks, striping narrow lanes, providing speed limit signs, installing high visibility crosswalks, providing additional informational signs, and installing new regulatory signs. Level 2 measures represent a combination of Level 1 measures plus vertical or horizontal deflections such as speed humps, speed bumps, speed cushions, speed tables, pedestrian refuges or islands, median diverters, chicanes, or barriers.

8.f
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 45

Staff identified two existing crosswalk locations for Level 2 improvements: the intersection of San Carlos Avenue and Prospect Street and the intersection of San Carlos Avenue and Kenton Avenue.

Staff recommends the following improvements at the existing crossings on San Carlos Avenue at Prospect Street:
•Installation of new overhang rectangular rapid flashing beacon at the existing crossings; •Curb extensions and bulb-outs;
•Reconstruction of existing curb ramps;
•Removal and replacement of traffic striping and pavement; •Paint existing curb red; and
•Advanced warning signage for the new crossing.

Improvements at the intersection of Kenton Avenue at San Carlos Avenue will include:
•A new mid-block crossing on San Carlos Avenue at Kenton Avenue; •Rectangular rapid flashing beacons at the new crossing; •Construction or reconstruction of curb ramps;
•Removal and replacement of traffic striping and pavement; •Paint existing curb red; and
•Advanced warning signage for the new crossing.

In February 2021, staff presented the proposed improvements to the Transportation and Circulation Commission (“Commission”) for input and feedback. The Commission provided comments and advised staff to move forward with preparing construction documents.

In August 2021, staff retained Bellecci & Associates, Inc. (“Bellecci”) to prepare the final bid set construction documents.

In September 2021, staff returned to the Commission with the conceptual design of the proposed improvements for final input and feedback before finalizing the construction documents. The Commission provided comments for staff and Bellecci to consider before finalizing the final bid set construction documents. Bellecci incorporated the feasible comments and prepared the final bid set construction documents.

The City Engineer signed the final bid set construction documents on June 14, 2022, which were approved by the City Council on June 27, 2022.

The Project was publicly advertised on July 1, 2022, and sealed bids were opened by the City Clerk on July 26, 2022. The City Council awarded the Project to GradeTech, Inc. at its meeting on August 22, 2022. The Contractor began the Project on October 31, 2022.

ANALYSIS:

The Project was completed on August 15, 2023, in accordance with the approved final bid set construction documents.

Therefore, staff recommends accepting the 2022 Traffic Calming Improvement Project C1807 and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.

8.f
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 46

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution accepting the 2022 Traffic Calming Improvement Project C1807 and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Steven Machida, Public Works Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution

8.f
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 47

RESOLUTION NO. 2023 – ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS ACCEPTING THE 2022 TRAFFIC CALMING IMPROVEMENT PROJECT C1807 AND

AUTHORIZING THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR TO ISSUE AND RECORD A NOTICE OF COMPLETION.

WHEREAS, in 2018, the City Council approved a Neighborhood Traffic Management Program (NTMP) with the objective of balancing the needs of all users by providing an efficient and safe multi-modal street network; and
WHEREAS, the NTMP recommended traffic controls in accordance with guidance provided by the City’s General Plan, City policies, lessons learned from other jurisdictions, practices published by the transportation industry, and community input regarding traffic concerns; and
WHEREAS, in the NTMP, traffic calming measures are categorized as Level 1 or Level 2 depending on the complexity of the improvement; and
WHEREAS, Level 1 measures focus on easily implementable and relatively low cost features such as enhancing the visibility of crosswalks, striping narrow lanes, providing speed limit signs, installing high visibility crosswalks, providing additional informational signs, and installing new regulatory signs; and
WHEREAS, Level 2 measures represent a combination of Level 1 measures plus vertical or horizontal deflections such as speed humps, speed bumps, speed cushions, speed tables, pedestrian refuges or islands, median diverters, chicanes, or barriers; and WHEREAS, staff has identified two existing crosswalk locations for Level 2 improvements: the intersection of San Carlos Avenue and Prospect Street and the intersection of San Carlos Avenue and Kenton Avenue for the 2022 Traffic Calming Improvement Project (“Project”); and WHEREAS, staff issued a task order for engineering and design services to Bellecci & Associates, Inc. in May 2021; and
WHEREAS, the City Engineer signed the final bid set construction documents on June 14, 2022, which were approved by City Council on June 27, 2022; and WHEREAS, the Project was publicly advertised on July 1, 2022, and sealed bids were opened by the City Clerk on July 26, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City Council awarded the Project to GradeTech, Inc. in the amount of $592,206.50 at its meeting on August 22, 2022; and
WHEREAS, the Contractor began the Project on October 31, 2022; and WHEREAS, the Project was completed on August 15, 2023, in accordance with the approved final bid set construction documents; and

8.f
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 48

WHEREAS, the total cost to complete the Project is $590,614.76 which will includes all additional work and contract change orders; and
WHEREAS, the remaining $1,591.74 that was not spent was returned to the Project budget; and
WHEREAS, staff recommends accepting the Project and authorizing the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby accepts the 2022 Traffic Calming Improvement Project C1807 and authorizes the Public Works Director to issue and record a Notice of Completion.
* * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 9th day of October 2023, by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:___________________________________________ NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:___________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:___________________________________________ ________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos

8.f
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 49

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 9, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Authorize the City Manager to Sign the Letter Prepared by Staff in Response to the 2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report "Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County."
RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council authorize the City Manager to sign a letter (Attachment 1) prepared by staff in response to the San Mateo County 2022-2023 Civil Grand Jury’s (“Grand Jury”) Report entitled “Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County" (“Report”) (Attachment 2) per the letter received from the Superior Court (Attachment 3).

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There are no fiscal implications associated with this action.

BACKGROUND:

On June 10, 2023, the 2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury issued a report titled “Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County.” The City of San Carlos is required to submit comments on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters over which it has some decision-making authority within 90 days. The City’s response to the report (Attachment 1) is due to the Honorable Nancy L. Fineman no later than October 10, 2023.

ANALYSIS:

The Grand Jury made nine findings and seven recommendations in its Report. While staff has collaborated with the County of San Mateo Sheriff’s Department on developing a collaborative and consistent approach to responding to this Report, there are responses unique to San Carlos.

The City’s responses below address each finding and the seven recommendations that the Grand Jury requested.

I. RESPONSE TO FINDINGS
Finding 1. Bicycle policy and the approach to ensuring/improving bicycle safety is not consistent across San Mateo County due, at least in part, to:
a. Topography
b. Urban vs. suburban environments
c. Types of bicyclists (commuter, recreational)
d. Varying levels of enforcement of bicycle laws
e. Differing knowledge of bicycle laws and safe practices

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 50

Response: The City of San Carlos agrees with this finding and would participate in any countywide effort to increase regional consistency in bicycle policy and approach to improving bicycle safety.

Finding 2. Bicycle ridership as an alternative means of transportation (e.g., commuting to work, school, or transit hubs, running errands) is not increasing due, at least in part, to perceived safety issues.

Response: The City of San Carlos agrees with this finding that safety issues, both real and perceived, are an obstacle for potential bike riders, especially commuters.

Finding 3. Bicycle accidents and incidents (such as near misses) are underreported, if reported at all.

Response: The San Carlos Bureau of the Sherriff’s Department gets dispatched to most bicycle incidents, both crashes and near misses.

Finding 4. Only bicycle accidents or incidents that trigger a 911 call are consistently logged in the State (SWITRS) database and law enforcement agencies do not log bicycle accident data consistently.

Response: The City of San Carlos agrees with this finding. We have heard from our resident bicyclists that minor crashes are not reported to law enforcement, and we have no credible way of recording or tracking them. We still use SWITRS for any decision making or analysis, as it is the only credible record-keeping system.

Finding 5. The amount of enforcement of laws, as they pertain to bicyclists and how motorists and bicyclists interact, is inconsistent due to other priorities (e.g., criminal enforcement and general automobile traffic) and the requirement that a citation can generally only be written if the violation is witnessed by an officer.

Response: It is the law that the violations must be witnessed by a law enforcement officer before citations can be issued. The Sheriff’s Department enforces laws equally regardless of whether the violators are vehicles or bicycles, when present at the time of the violation to witness it.

Finding 6. There is no official metric in San Mateo County and its cities to evaluate how safe it is to ride a bicycle.

Response: The City of San Carlos agrees with this finding, the only tangible measure we have is the bicycle level of traffic stress, but it is not consistently used countywide.

Finding 7. Bicycle safety education, for the bicyclist, pedestrians, and motorists, is not consistently offered across San Mateo County.

Response: The City of San Carlos agrees with this finding. We do not have any uniform educational materials across the county. It would be great if such materials were available for use.

Finding 8. Communication between various entities with responsibility for bicycle safety, including Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committees (BPACs), Law Enforcement, City Transportation Planning, and Public Works departments, is not formalized, resulting in inefficiencies, and missed

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 51

opportunities (e.g., funding for improvements, shared bike safety education, or improving signage).

Response: The City of San Carlos agrees with this finding. There is no formal communication set between various responsible parties.

Finding 9. City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans or Active Transportation Plans have not been adopted/created by all SMC cities.

Response: The City of San Carlos agrees with this finding. Although San Carlos has recently adopted a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, not every city has one.

II.RESPONSE TO RECOMMENDATIONS
Recommendation 1. By December 2023, all law enforcement agencies and the County Sheriff should submit bicycle related data to SWITRS monthly, and regularly post and update their websites with all reported bicycle accident data.

Response: The Sheriff’s Office is already submitting bicycle collision data to SWITRS in compliance with their reporting requirements and will post and update bicycle collision data in our transparency portal by the end of December 2023. The data will be updated cyclically.

Recommendation 2. By December 2023, all law enforcement agencies should begin sending warning letters to motorists for violations of the 3 ft. law.

Response: The Sheriff’s Office has implemented an online process for reporting 3 ft. violation complaints and has been sending warning notices since May of 2023.

Recommendation 3. By June 3, 2024, all law enforcement agencies should provide a means for citizens to report bicycle-related incidents that are not currently reported to law enforcement, similar to the SMC Sheriff’s Department Online Crime Reporting portal.

Response: As indicated above, the Sheriff’s Office has successfully implemented this using an existing reporting portal and will collaborate with other San Mateo County law enforcement agencies to assist them in creating their own reporting mechanisms upon request.

Recommendation 4. By June 3, 2024, each city, town, and unincorporated SMC should offer a bike safety education program for riders and motorists about the laws and safety facts related to bicycles on the road.

Response: The Sheriff’s Office has created an educational bike safety brochure that has already been published and shared publicly and will be updated as needed to reflect changes in the law or new safety information. The Sheriff’s Office will collaborate with members of the bicycling community to produce a series of short bicycle safety educational videos that will be shared publicly, with at least the first video in the series to be shared by June 3, 2024.

Recommendation 5. By June 3, 2024, each city, town, and unincorporated SMC should update or generate a new Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (or Active Transportation Plan) if their current plan is older than five years; consistent with the 2021 C/CAG San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 52

Response: The City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan is only three years old and was adopted in June of 2020.

Recommendation 6. By June 3, 2024, each city, town, and the county should apply (or reapply) online to generate the Bicycle Friendly Community Report Card.

Response: The City of San Carlos has a bronze certification from Bicycle Friendly America in 2016, and we plan to apply again for the year 2024 re-certification. The deadline for this application is June 25, 2024.

Recommendation 7. By February 1, 2024, the County should meet with cities within the County that are willing to participate, to consider establishing a regional effort that integrates the cities’ bicycle plans and to discuss how the cities and County could work together to apply for grant opportunities as a region.

Response: The City of San Carlos is happy to attend the event as set by the County.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Authorize the City Manager to sign the letter prepared by staff in response to the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury’s Report entitled “Bike Safety in San Mateo County:

Making Bicycling Safer in the County”; or

2. Do not authorize the City Manager to sign the proposed response letter; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Steven Machida, Public Works Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Proposed Letter Responding to Grand Jury Report

2. Grand Jury Bike Safety in San Mateo County Report 7.10.23

3. SMC Superior Court Letter 7.10.23

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 53

September 25, 2023
Honorable Nancy L. Fineman
Judge of the Superior Court
c/o Bianca Fasuescu
Hall of Justice
400 County Center; 2nd Floor
Redwood City, CA 94063-1655
Subject: Response of the City of San Carlos to the San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury Report “Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County.” Dear Judge Fineman,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the report titled, “Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County.” Please find our response to the findings and recommendations of the report below.

I. Response to Findings
Finding 1. Bicycle policy and the approach to ensuring/improving bicycle safety is not consistent across San Mateo County due, at least in part, to:
a. Topography
b. Urban vs. suburban environments
c. Types of bicyclists (commuter, recreational)
d. Varying levels of enforcement of bicycle laws
e. Differing knowledge of bicycle laws and safe practices.

Response: City of San Carlos agrees with this finding and would participate in any countywide effort to increase regional consistency in bicycle policy and approach to improving bicycle safety
Finding 2. Bicycle ridership as an alternative means of transportation (e.g., commuting to work, school, or transit hubs, running errands) is not increasing due, at least in part, to perceived safety issues.

Response: City of San Carlos agrees with this finding, safety issues real and perceived are an obstacle for potential bike riders, especially commuters Finding 3. Bicycle accidents and incidents (such as near misses) are underreported, if reported at all.

Response: The San Carlos bureau of Sheriff’s Department gets dispatched to most bicycle incidents, both crashes and near misses.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 54

Response: City of San Carlos agrees with this finding, we have heard from our resident bicyclists that minor crashes are not reported to law enforcement and we have no credible way of recording or tracking them. We still use SWITRS for any decision making or analysis as it is the only credible record-keeping system.

Finding 6. There is no official metric in San Mateo County and its cities to evaluate how safe it is to ride a bicycle.

Response: City of San Carlos agrees with this finding, the only tangible measure we have is the bicycle level of traffic stress, but it is not consistently used countywide.

Finding 7. Bicycle safety education, for the bicyclist, pedestrians and motorists, is not consistently offered across San Mateo County.

Response: City of San Carlos agrees with this finding, we do not have any uniform educational materials across the county. It would be great if such material was available for us to use.

Response: City of San Carlos agrees with this finding, there is no formal communication set between various responsible parties.

Finding 9. City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans or Active Transportation Plans, have not been adopted/created by all SMC cities.

Response: City of San Carlos agrees with this finding. Although San Carlos has recently adopted a Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, not every city has one.

II. Response to Recommendations
Recommendation 1. By December 2023, all law enforcement agencies and the County Sheriff should submit bicycle related data to SWITRS monthly, and regularly post and update their websites with all reported bicycle accident data.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 55

Recommendation 2. By December 2023, all law enforcement agencies should begin sending warning letters to motorists for violations of the 3 ft. law.

Response: The Sheriff’s Office has implemented an online process for reporting 3 ft. violation complaints and has been sending warning notices since May of 2023.

Response: City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan is only 3 years old and was adopted in June of 2020.

Recommendation 6. By June 3, 2024, each city, town, and the county should apply (or reapply) online to generate the Bicycle Friendly Community Report Card.

Response: City of San Carlos has a bronze certification from the Bicycle Friedly America in 2016, we plan to apply again for the year 2024 re-certification, the deadline for this application is June 25, 2024.

Response: City of San Carlos is happy to attend the event as set by the County.

Respectfully submitted,
___________________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 56

Bike Safety in San Mateo County
Making Bicycling Safer in the County

Release Date: July 10, 2023
2022-23 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 57

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 1

“Biking is one of the few activities that checks all the boxes at once — it’s active, practical, social, sustainable, stress-relieving, fun, and is a great family activity. Biking has the unique ability to elevate the mundane — it turns errands into adventures. More people on bikes keeps our streets safer, our air cleaner and our communities better connected.” Sonia Elkes, 2021 Bike Champion of the Year for San Mateo County Bay Area Bike to Work Website

“I often drive up Alpine Road near the Stanford golf course and I believe I would have a head-on crash with oncoming cars if I left a 3-foot margin between my car and the thoughtless bikers who ride out partially in the road. What is the best advice for that situation?” Comment on Bicyclists Can Now Report 3’ Rule Violations Online in The Almanac 5/12/2023.

“On the afternoon of Monday, April 10, bicyclist Lester Legarda was fatally struck by a driver on Cañada Road, a rural route popular among walkers, equestrians, and bicyclists. Details of the crash scene suggest that the collision speed was high. One solution to prevent future tragedies along Cañada is tantalizingly simple — reduce the 50-mph speed limit. Sure, drivers will likely continue to exceed the speed limit. But just like the paint on the road that defines where drivers are supposed to drive, posted speed limits set expectations for acceptable driver behavior.” Reduce the speed limit on Canada Road San Mateo Daily Journal 04/20/23.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 58

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 2

Bike Safety in San Mateo County: Making Bicycling Safer in the County

ISSUE
As bicycle riding has become an ever more meaningful form of transportation, especially with the popularization of eBikes, the demand by County residents for safe micro-mobility solutions has soared. Are San Mateo County and its municipalities positioned to respond to safety concerns and meet those demands?

SUMMARY
Whether for commuting or recreational purposes, residents in every jurisdiction of San Mateo County (SMC), as well as from the surrounding Bay Area counties, use bicycles. Because bicycles are widely available, for some the only mode of getting to and from work and jobs, and ridden in every jurisdiction, bicycle safety has become an increasingly important issue for SMC and its cities and towns. Without greater focus on bike safety, the number of riders will remain low, because people will avoid bicycling when they don’t feel safe. The benefits of increasing bicycle riding are important to all residents of San Mateo County: reducing motor vehicles, healthy lifestyle and an inexpensive form of transportation. Accordingly, San Mateo County, and its cities and towns have a responsibility to make it safe for drivers and pedestrians, as well as bicyclists.

Due to differences in terrain, population density, and existing infrastructure, the 20 different municipalities and the unincorporated portions of the County have differing bicycle safety needs and requirements. Some cities are very hilly, making commuting to work, school, or transit stations nearly impossible. Others are more urban and accommodate many more commuting bicyclists. The County also has some areas that are primarily recreational biking destinations and areas that accommodate both commuting bicyclists and recreational bicyclists. As a result, each community also assigns a different level of importance to bicycle safety relative to other issues, such as crime, motor vehicle safety and public works improvement projects. And education and enforcement about bicycle laws varies from one jurisdiction to another.

Despite the differences among the jurisdictions, there are several commonalities. One is that cities and law enforcement do not consistently maintain records about bicycle near misses, accidents, or complaints; data is neither broadly available nor consistently maintained. Another commonality is that government entities focused on bicycling and/or improving bicycle safety do not communicate and collaborate with each other often enough, if at all. This makes it difficult to get accurate information on the number and severity of incidents and gauge how safe it is to bicycle in San Mateo County. Without data, and communication among the municipalities, San Mateo County and its cities and towns lose out on available state and local funding to improve bicycle safety through physical improvement projects.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 59

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 3

To improve bicycle safety and thereby increase ridership, San Mateo County and its cities and towns need to:

1. Create effective ways to educate bicycle riders and motorists about bicycle rules of the road to enhance predictability.

2. Develop consistent communications among government organizations responsible for bike safety (e.g., between law enforcement and public works).

3. Conduct enforcement details in each jurisdiction to ensure enforcement leads to education.

4. Collect accurate data about accidents and incidents that is crucial to supporting and justifying grant applications and funding from State and local agencies for physical improvements to infrastructure for bicyclists (e.g., connectivity of bicycle routes from one city to another), needed signage, and other engineering improvements.

BACKGROUND
Why is bike safety an important topic?
Statistically, the safer a person feels riding a bike, the more likely they will use it as regular transportation; both as a commuter and a recreational user.

Fifty-three percent of Americans worry about being hit by a motor vehicle when riding a bicycle; 47% say they would be more likely to ride a bike if pathways were physically separated from motor vehicles.1
However, bicycle accident statistics, though better than in 1998, averaged 231 fatalities and injuries over the last ten years. The average was 203 fatalities the last three years, but the drop includes the pandemic shutdown and more people working from home. The source of the recent data is the California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System (SWITRS2) database, managed by the California Highway Patrol. All law enforcement agencies are required to submit accident data to the database on a regular basis.

A 2002-2003 SMC Civil Grand Jury titled, Bike Safety in San Mateo County3, questioned whether San Mateo County and the cities adequately consider and support safe bicycle travel? At that time, it was estimated that 46% of Americans bicycle for pleasure and 300,000 County residents bicycle at least occasionally. Commuting by bicycle was less than 1% in the County.

That year’s Grand Jury found that bicycle infrastructure for safe travel needed improvement, but funding was an issue. It also found that communication and planning between the county and the cities on bicycle projects and safety could be improved. And that throughout SMC, bicycle safety was not a high priority. The primary recommendation of the report was the county, and all cities should develop a long-term strategic bicycle and safety plan.

1 People for Bikes: https://www.peopleforbikes.org/news/building-for-tomorrow 2 https://iswitrs.chp.ca.gov/Reports/jsp/logout.do
3 https://www.sanmateocourt.org/court_divisions/grand_jury/2002reports.php?page=02SMC -Bicycle.html

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 60

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 4

A few things have changed since then.

Over the years, the focus of cities and the county on improving bike and pedestrian forms of transportation has increased:
● Bicycle maps and routes are now generally available online. ● The City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) updated their San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan in 20114 and 20215. ● California enacted Assembly Bill 1358, California Complete Streets Act of 20086, requiring all cities and counties to include complete streets policies as part of any substantial revision to the circulation element of their general plans; and cities and the County have adopted these complete streets policies, noting these policies in their Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans, or Active Transportation Plans. ● SMC and most of its municipalities have created and consistently upgraded their Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans.
● Unincorporated San Mateo County has created an Active Transportation Plan7 (Active Transportation is a term often used to cover walking, bicycling, and other motorized devices as a primary mode of transportation).
● C/CAG, Unincorporated SMC and some cities have created Bike and Pedestrian Advisory Committees to address active transportation improvements, safety issues, and other citizen related requests.

Meanwhile, the number of bicyclists in San Mateo County has not increased since 2002, according to the California Household Travel Survey, which is regularly used for data on the number of bicyclists in a community, but is restricted to commuting.

The 2002 and 2012 surveys showed only 1% of SMC’s population rides bicycles as a form of transportation. Looking at the various municipalities’ Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans, and the surveys and counts discussed in the plans, bicycle commute ridership still hovers at approximately 1% within SMC.

It is important to note that the number of people in SMC using bicycles in lieu of a car has not increased in 20 years. This is in contrast to the estimated number of recreational bicyclists (46%) in SMC, who also use streets and bicycle paths and expect a safe ride8.

4 https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/CBPP_Main-Report__Sept2011_FINAL.pdf 5https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/6_A1_San-Mateo-County-Comprehensive-Bicycle-and- Pedestrian-Plan-Update-Final-Plan.pdf
6 http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/07-08/bill/asm/ab_1351-1400/ab_1358_bill_20080930_chaptered.pdf 7https://www.smcsustainability.org/livable-communities/active-transportation/unincorporated-smc-active- transportation-plan/
8https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/6_A1_San-Mateo-County-Comprehensive-Bicycle-and- Pedestrian-Plan-Update-Final-Plan.pdf

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 61

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 5

However, even with roadway and signage improvements over the past 20 years, there is much San Mateo cities and the county can do to improve bicycle safety.

DISCUSSION
The merits of bicycle riding may seem self-evident, but a wide range of research reveals often surprising benefits to local economies, personal health, the environment, traffic congestion, and pedestrian safety that are unique to bicycle friendly communities.

Health Benefits
Bicycle riding contributes to both physical and mental health. Regular exercise such as cycling can help prevent heart issues9 such as stroke, heart attack, high blood pressure, and may also help prevent and manage type 2 diabetes.10 Riding a bicycle is good for cognitive health and emotional well-being and can ease feelings of stress, depression, or anxiety.11

All in all, bicycling for only 30 minutes a day reduces a person’s chances of diabetes, dementia, depression, colon cancer, cardiovascular disease, anxiety and high blood pressure by 40 percent or more.12

The World Health Organization has found that “If every adult EU citizen walked or cycled for 15 extra minutes per day, we’d have 100,000 fewer people dying prematurely, each year.”13 Environmental Benefits
Among the most obvious benefits of cycling is its benign effects on the environment. A solo driver in an average car releases about 1.1 pounds of CO2 per mile.14 A standard compact to midsize car that travels 12,000 miles will emit 11,000 pounds of CO2.15 The average car produces about 1.3 billion cubic yards of polluted air over the course of its lifespan plus worn tire particles, brake wear, and the emissions from other materials in the car also contribute to air pollution.16 Recent research in Europe found that traveling by bicycle instead of by car once a day decreases your transportation carbon footprint by 67%.17

9 https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/wellness-and-prevention/exercise-and-the-heart 10 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4942105/ 11https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/minding-the-body/201505/bicycling-can-sharpen-your-thinking-and-improve-your- mood
12 https://www.exerciseismedicine.org/assets/page_documents/EIMFactSheet_2014.pdf 13 https://ecf.com/news-and-events/news/walking-and-cycling-reduce-congestion 14 https://www.sharetheroad.ca/what-are-the-environmental-traffic-congestion-benefits-of-cycling--s16223 15 https://www.treehugger.com/cars-are-causing-air-pollution-we-breathe-new-study-finds-4856825 16 https://www.scholaradvisor.com/essay-examples-for-college/bicycle-helps-reduce-air-pollution/ 17 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920921000687

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 62

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 6

Traffic
As active transportation choices like walking and bicycling gain attention and popularity, researchers are beginning to investigate the role these travel modes can play in reducing traffic congestion.18 Studies show that measures taken to promote bicycling and walking have a positive effect on congestion.

Research in Washington, DC identified a causal effect of the presence of a bike-share station on traffic congestion. The result is a 2-to-3% reduction in traffic congestion that can be attributed to the bike-share station within the sample.19
Economic Benefits
Among the more surprising findings is the positive economic impact from an increase in bicycle usage but studies show that the bicycle-related economy creates jobs, economic activity, and cost savings.20
Bicycle trails and facilities have a positive, statistically significant impact on home values; a 2006 study in Minneapolis found that the median home values rose $510 for every quarter mile they were located closer to an off-street bikeway.21
Indianapolis’ Cultural Trail, an 8-mile network of separated bike and pedestrian lanes, has reinvigorated a number of struggling business districts and sparked a whopping $1 billion in increased property values.22
And in an era when streets and sidewalks across the county are in various states of disrepair, bicycle projects can significantly reduce the cost of maintaining and expanding our transportation systems.23 Even protected bicycle lanes are “dirt cheap to build compared to road projects,” says Gabe Klein, a partner at Fontinalis, a venture capitalist firm founded by Ford Motor Co. Chairman Bill Ford. Cities everywhere need to be more efficient about the money they spend to move people. "We need to get more use from the streets we already have.” Research indicates that investments in cycling infrastructure generate more jobs per dollar spent than investments in road-only infrastructure; cycling projects create a total of 11.4 local jobs for each $1 million spent while road-only projects create 9.6 jobs per $1 million.24

18 https://kawarthanow.com/2019/01/17/reduce-traffic-congestion-bikes-can-do-that 19 https://www.resources.org/archives/commentary-does-bicycle-infrastructure-reduce-traffic-congestion/ 20 https://railyards.com/blog/7-benefits-of-bike-friendly-communities 21 https://smartcity.press/bicycle-infrastructure-in-smart-city/ 22 https://indyculturaltrail.org/2015/07/23/economic-impact-figures-released/ 23https://www.aarp.org/livable-communities/getting-around/info-2016/why-bicycling-infrastructure-is-good-for-people-who- dont-ride-bikes.html
24 https://www.sharetheroad.ca/what-are-the-environmental-traffic-congestion-benefits-of-cycling--s16223

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 63

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 7

Bicycle friendly communities are important to millennial job seekers and functional bicycle infrastructures help companies attract talent. “States and cities are competing for the most mobile generation ever and so the job creators and the innovators are really pushing for these amenities.”25
Safety
The most comprehensive study of bicycle and road safety to date finds that building safe facilities for cyclists is one of the biggest factors in road safety for everyone. Bicycling infrastructure -- specifically, separated and protected bike lanes -- leads to fewer fatalities and better road-safety outcomes for all road users.26
Davis, CA was the first city to gain “platinum” status by the League of American Bicyclists and is often referred to as the “bicycle capital of America.” From 1996 to 2007, Davis only had nine fatal road crashes. Despite having the largest percentage of bike commuters in the United States, none of these accidents involved a bicyclist. With a fatal crash rate of less than 1.5 per 100,000 residents, far fewer people are killed on Davis’ roads than in the U.S. as a whole, which averaged

14.5 fatalities per 100,000 residents.

Portland, OR, another platinum bicycling city, saw a nearly 50% decrease in road fatalities as it increased its bicycle mode share from 1.2% in 1990 to 5.8% in 2000. Bike friendly communities are safer for all road users, no matter what type of transportation is being used.

Social Benefits
Finally, bicycle riding as an alternative to car travel is associated with a number of social benefits, including increased social interaction, social networks, and social capital.27 A bicycle rider has a completely different relationship with their environment than those who are cocooned in their cars.

When communities invest in bicycle infrastructure, everyone benefits. Overall, bicycle commuters are healthier and bicycle-friendly streets are safer for everyone on the road. Bicycle friendly communities reap economic benefits including more retail activity and increased home values. The evidence is clear: bicycling brings big benefits to communities who embrace it.

Status Today
Twenty years after the first San Mateo Grand Jury report, significant gaps remain in jurisdictions’ approach to bicycle safety:

25 https://railyards.com/blog/7-benefits-of-bike-friendly-communities

26 https://www.cnu.org/sites/default/files/marshallw_cnu18.pdf 27 https://www.peoplepoweredmovement.org/benefits-of-biking-walking/

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 64

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 8

● San Mateo County and its municipalities’ characteristics make it difficult to create a consistent approach to bicycle safety.
● The use of bicycle safety education as a tool to increase safety for bicyclists and motorists is underutilized Countywide.
● Communication and coordinated planning across city lines is the exception, rather than the norm. Reporting of bicycle-related incidents is inconsistent throughout the county. ● Enforcement of bicycle laws, for motorists and bicyclists, is inconsistent and not prioritized.

Bicycle Safety in San Mateo County Cities
Each city and town in San Mateo County is unique and has a different relationship with bicycle use and safety. These variations include:
● Topography
● Objectives and priorities re bicycles and ridership ● Safety Perception
● Infrastructure
● Impact of eBikes
● Role of enforcement in bicycle safety.

For example:

Woodside and Portola Valley: Woodside and Portola Valley are hill communities with narrow roads. Woodside has a very active Circulation Committee which keeps a close eye on large bicycling events in the community and Portola Valley is focused on managing bicyclists on the weekend. But in both cases, the communities concentrate on ensuring quality of life for residents. They both see mostly recreational bicyclists.

Woodside has invested as much as $1 million to ensure a “safe route to school” for the children. However, the communities don’t make a strong effort to track riders or accidents. In both communities the Sheriff’s Office, which is their policing arm, enforces rules at some problem locations, but not regularly.

Hillsborough: Hillsborough is a relatively insular community by nature of its location and topography. It has no commercial districts and is, to a large degree, rather hilly. The view on bicyclists is very much a neighborhood view: meaning the expectation is that if there are problems with bicyclists they are brought up by members of the neighborhoods.

The primary focus on any kind of organized bicycling safety activity is efforts to teach children bicycle safety and safe routes to school at the beginning of the school year.

Belmont: Until quite recently, the City has been completely focused on ensuring that the community is comfortable for single family dwellings. However, areas close to El Camino Real are more commercial and have denser housing. The community now has both recreational and commuting bicyclists using the roads. While Belmont does have a bicycle master plan and holds an annual bike safety program for children and teenagers,

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 65

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 9

more needs to be done. The City needs to obtain funding from external Federal, State and County sources to do more.

Half Moon Bay: Possibly more than any other community in San Mateo County, Half Moon Bay has a sophisticated, complex relationship with bicyclists. On the one hand, Half Moon Bay attracts many visitors -- both vacationers and visitors from other Bay Area communities; and on the other hand, it has a robust population of residents who use their bicycles to get to work, school, and stores. Moreover, while Half Moon Bay has many surface streets, it is dominated by Highways 1 and 92 which have many challenging safety issues. As a result, the community has a bicycle master plan that focuses on bicycle safety and traffic planning. Despite this very proactive approach, the City deals with sometimes devastating safety issues. However, it appears that concern for bicycle safety is shared by many of the participants in the community.

San Mateo: The City of San Mateo updated its bicycle master plan in 2020. As a result, the City has focused on a variety of contemporaneous issues. These include working to develop a roadway network which could accommodate both bicycles and other types of active transportation. The City believes that it still skews toward recreational bicycling but is finding that more people want to use bicycles as a way of getting around. The master plan covers some education issues such as safe routes to school and safe bicycling for seniors. The plan does not talk about safety per se but addresses it from the vantage point of education. Though the City is focused on these matters it still recognizes that there's more education to be done about the rules of the road for bicyclists.

Unincorporated San Mateo County: Large areas of San Mateo County are small towns, private land, and open space, bisected, primarily, by two lane roads and highways. To address bicycle safety in these areas, the county created the Unincorporated San Mateo County Bicycle and Pedestrian Committee. Though there is no explicit Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, they do contribute to the SMC Active Transportation plan. The Committee makes recommendations regarding bicycle and pedestrian related grants, but expressed frustration with money not being shared equitably. Additionally, the Committee inputs bicyclist’s feedback. They are concerned with the number of incidents between motorists and bicyclists that are not addressed by law enforcement. The Committee has been working with the County Sheriff to address the problem.

These are just a few examples of San Mateo County and its municipalities' approach to bicycle safety. But because the communities are so diverse, thinking about bicycle safety needs to be broad-minded.

Bicycle Safety Education in SMC: Not just for cyclists
Since bicycle safety is crucial to encouraging bicycle usage, it follows that bicycle safety education is an essential component of the bicycle safety equation.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 66

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 10

According to the US Department of Transportation: “Educating people about safe bicycling and walking, enforcing laws that make it easier and safer for people to bicycle and walk, and encouraging people to bicycle and walk, may help increase walking and bicycling activity, especially when combined with infrastructure improvements.”28 Moreover, as noted on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Bicycle Safety web page, “A large percentage of crashes can be avoided if motorists and cyclists follow the rules of the road and watch out for each other.”29

In San Mateo County, much of the focus on bicycle safety and bicycle safety education is focused on ensuring safe routes to schools for children. Several communities, as detailed below, have much more comprehensive approaches to bicycle safety education in their Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans. Here are some examples:
● Burlingame (Excerpt from the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan) Policy 11: Educate people walking, bicycling, and driving, and the general public about roadway safety and the benefits of bicycling and walking.

11.1: Support the continuation and expansion of bicycle safety education programs such as those taught by Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition and the San Mateo County Office of Education.

Policy 12: Encourage Burlingame public schools to participate in the Safe Routes to School program organized by the San Mateo County Office of Education.

● Brisbane’s Master Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan examples:

“Policy 4.A.5: Provide support for programs that educate drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians about their rights and responsibilities, as well as traffic education and safety programs for adults and youth.”

“Programs support bicycling and walking by providing encouragement to those considering bicycling and walking, education for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians about safe and appropriate sharing of streets and roads, and enforcement of traffic laws that help ensure the safety of vulnerable road users.”

● County Sheriff:

The San Mateo County Sheriff’s office publishes a pamphlet, Bicycle Safety30, on the California Vehicle Code sections related to bicycle safety. One City, Woodside, references this document, which could be used by all cities, schools and police

28 https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike/ped_focus/docs/fhwasa17050.pdf 29 https://www.nhtsa.gov/road-safety/bicycle-safety
30 https://www.woodsidetown.org/sites/default/files/fileattachments/community/page/33495/bicycle_safety.pdf

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 67

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 11

departments to improve bicycle safety education. However, the document is not available on the SMC Sheriff website.
● City of San Mateo:

San Mateo has some support for bicycle use and safety on its City website. The pages are listed in the table below.

EXISTING
Support Program Description Webpage
Bicycle Webpage There is brief text about bike
routes and using a bike with
public transport on the City’s
webpage
http://www/cityofsanmateo.org/
2125/Parking-and-
Transportation
Bicycle Education
Events
The city’s Public Works
Department hosts an annual
bike rodeo
http://www.cityofsanmateo.org/
3736/Bike-Rodeo

Moving to Excellent Bike Safety Education in all SMC Cities

Overall, the approach to bicycle safety education in SMC communities is inconsistent. Several of the master plans recognize that bicycle safety education is about teaching motorists and cyclists of all ages about the guidelines for bicycle safety. Other communities either don’t focus much on education or are focused exclusively on “Safe Routes to School”.

Nonetheless, there are a handful of programs identified in the table below that creatively address bicycle safety, which San Mateo County and its municipalities should consider adopting.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 68

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 12

RECOMMENDED FOR ALL SMC CITIES
Support Program Description Webpage
Establish child and
adult education
programs
Identify and implement
education programs for
children and adults that build
bicyclists’ confidence, done
in coordination with the Parks
and Recreation Department,
Police or Local Schools.
https://www.portlandoregon.go
v/transportation/article/565224

http://www/cityofsanmateo.org/
2125/Parking-and-
Transportation

Establish Safe
Routes to School
Funding
Establish a stable funding
source for Safe Routes to
School programming
https://www.metro.net/projects/
sr_ts/fund-your-program

Implement and
promote
demonstration
projects
Implement short-term, high-
visibility bicycle
demonstration or ‘pop-up’
projects to serve as models
that can be applied throughout
the city. Market bicycle
safety.
https://transportation.bellevuew
a.gov/UserFiles/Servers/Server
_4779004/File/Transportation/P
ublications/PBII_Demo%20Bik
eway%20Brochure_20180205.
pdf

Provide safety
education program
for users of all
modes
Provide safety education
programs or communications
campaigns for people driving,
bicycling, walking, and using
micro mobility devices that
encourage safe travel
behaviors.
http://www.pedbikeinfo.org/

Create a robust
bicycling webpage
Develop and maintain a
content rich mobility
webpage(s) on the
County/City website and
communicate how to reach
city destinations by bike, on
foot or on micro-mobility
devices. Include information
on these transportation
options.
https://www.metro.net/riding/g
o-bike

http://www/cityofsanmateo.org/
2125/Parking-and-
Transportation

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 69

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 13

Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plans and Advisory Committees: Planning Across the County The 2002 SMC Grand Jury Report recommended that all municipalities create Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans. As a best practice, the municipalities were encouraged to form Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committees.

To date, almost all San Mateo County jurisdictions or cities have Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans, or Active Transportation Plans. Most, if not all of these plans, align with recommendations from the 2011 C/CAG’s San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan. The 2021 update of C/CAG’s plan enhances and adds to the 2011 C/CAG San Mateo County plan, but most of the cities and towns have not updated their plans to be consistent with the 2021 plan. (See Appendix D for a complete list of San Mateo County’s Bicycle & Pedestrian Master Plans.)
The cities’ bicycle and pedestrian master plans help each city by identifying strategies to improve bicycle and pedestrian safety. The plans recommend improvements for roadway connectivity for bicyclists and pedestrians, within each city as well as with neighboring cities.

Numerous plans reference the Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition and the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) as organizations that have certified instructors for bicycle safety education. At least several of the plans also discuss the LAB Bicycle Friendly Community Report Card to which five SMC cities and San Mateo County belong. The plans list potential State and Federal funding for projects that improve safety and roadway connectivity and make clear the importance of annually evaluating and tracking progress against objectives.

However, in SMC, County committees and municipalities do not always work together to generate consistent plans that meet C/CAG’s goal for a Countywide bicycle backbone. Though C/CAG does have an advisory committee which includes representatives from municipalities, it does not have control over what individual municipalities decide to do regarding grant applications, infrastructure projects for better bicycle and pedestrian safety and education initiatives. If the municipalities endeavored to work together to prioritize projects and programs that are consistent with C/CAG’s priorities, it would benefit all of San Mateo County, especially with respect to providing north-south connectivity between municipalities.

Metrics: If you don’t measure it, you can’t improve it.

One important measure of bicycle safety is arriving safely at a destination. This is usually reflected in the negative; that is, the number of fatalities and injuries during a calendar year versus the number of successful bicycle trips.

In San Mateo County, the cities and county rely heavily on data supplied to the California Highway Patrol (CHP) to state the number of fatalities and injuries. The CHP then maintains a database, SWITRS (California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System), which is accessible

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 70

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 14

to the public. And, UC Berkeley maintains a website, TIMS31 (Transportation Injury Mapping System), which can further refine the raw data from SWITRS.

However, relying on this data to evaluate Bicycle Safety is problematic.

Law enforcement agencies in the County submit their bicycle accident data to SWITRS based on incidents that result in fatality or injury. However, there are bicycle accidents resulting in injury which don’t make it into SWITRS because law enforcement is not called. Some examples are bicyclists being forced off the road by motor vehicles, collision near misses and, of course, bicyclist error. Consequently, the actual number of bicycle accidents is underreported and, more importantly, the list of accident locations is not complete. Cyclists that have an incident that does not involve either the police or the fire department do not have a consistent means to log their experience. That data goes unreported. And this goes both ways; there is no means for a motorist to complain about bicycle riders’ unsafe behavior.

Countywide there is no uniform metric to measure Bicycle Safety. Without such a measure, it’s impossible to assess progress while building infrastructure, enforcing laws, and educating everyone in safety principles.

An obvious metric is bicycle accidents as recorded by SWTRS and online reports, but there is another metric which evaluates the complex equation that results in safe bicycling: Bicycle Friendly America Certification32.

The League of American Cyclists is a national organization dedicated to creating “safer roads, stronger communities and a Bicycle Friendly America for everyone.” This is a grassroots organization dedicated since 1880 to protecting the right to safe and enjoyable bicycling. A valuable achievement of this organization is establishing the Bicycle Friendly America (BFA) certification for cities and counties. This consists of a very detailed application33 that a city or county official fills out to get a comprehensive rating of bicycle safety. BFA defines bicycle safety using 5 E’s:
● Equity and Accessibility: A bicycle-friendly America for everyone ● Engineering: Creating safe and creative places to ride and park ● Education: Giving people of all ages and abilities the skills and confidence to ride ● Encouragement: Creating a strong bike culture that welcomes and celebrates bicycling ● Evaluation and Planning: Planning for bicycling as a safe and viable transportation option [Note that Enforcement, a common element in the 5 E’s of safety, is not included in the BFA definition.]

31https://tims.berkeley.edu/summary.php?showArea=city&expandTables=false&injury=3&yearRange=3&showMap =crashes
32 https://bikeleague.org/bfa/
33 https://bicyclefriendly.secure-platform.com/a/organizations/main/home

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 71

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 15

The application covers the BFA 5 E’s and investigates what it calls the 10 building blocks of a Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC). Finally, the rating includes steps to reaching the next level of excellence. Oakland in 2022, for example, received a GOLD rating Report Card34 having been BRONZE in 2010 and SILVER in 2014. The following cities and SMC have received the following ratings:
● Menlo Park35: GOLD: 2017
● Redwood City36: BRONZE: 2016
● San Carlos37: BRONZE: 2016
● San Mateo38: BRONZE: 2016
● South San Francisco39: BRONZE: 2018
● San Mateo County40: BRONZE: 2016
The BFC Report Card is a valuable metric that all cities and the County should make use of. If SMC cities develop the information necessary to answer objective and comprehensive questions about bicycle safety, each jurisdiction would have a consistent metric that can be used to measure bicycle safety progress across the County.

Law Enforcement and Bicycle Safety
Laws regarding the operation of bicycles are in the California Vehicle Code (CVC), but in general, bicycles are governed by the same rules of the road as motor vehicles.

SMC law enforcement organizations are concerned that there is currently no way for them to track bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle accidents, from near misses to actual contact, that did not require police involvement. And, even if an incident or infraction is reported, an officer may or may not go out to speak with the complainant.

Other than the initial report, there is no single repository in SMC to store and retrieve information regarding bicycle-related citations or enforcement of bicycle law so it can be used in the future.

And perhaps most importantly, the enforcement of laws, regarding motorists and bicyclists, is inconsistent due to competing priorities and the requirement that a citation requires an incident be witnessed by an officer.

34 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2022_ReportCard_Oakland_CA.pdf 35 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2017_ReportCard_Menlo_Park_CA.pdf 36 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Spring_2016_ReportCard_Redwood_City_CA.pdf 37 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2016_ReportCard_San_Carlos_CA.pdf 38 https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2016_ReportCard_San_Mateo_CA.pdf 39https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Fall_2018_ReportCard_South_San_Francisco_CA.p df
40https://bikeleague.org/sites/default/files/bfareportcards/BFC_Spring_2016_ReportCard_San_Mateo_County_CA.p df

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 72

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 16

Conflicting Priorities
Law enforcement prioritizes assets based on the needs of the community, as well as their operating budget, when it comes to providing services. While public and political prioritization of bicycle safety issues may come up from time to time, calls for service are always prioritized.

This results in minimal officer resources dedicated to bicycle safety.

Police forces will:
● Focus resources or staff on bicycle safety, if there is an uptick in accidents at a particular location, citizen requests/calls, or requests from a jurisdiction’s public works or traffic departments to focus on certain locations; or
● Provide teams to schools and special events for bicycle safety education ● Much less often, assign their police officers to bicycle safety duty exclusively (some police departments do have officers that patrol on bicycles).

In addition, law enforcement agencies do not always enforce eBike laws, but this is mostly due to the popularity of eBikes being ahead of law enforcement policies.

Because of these conflicting priorities, and limited staff, enforcement of bicycle laws pertaining to motorists as well as bicyclists appears to be underreported.

Policing Bicycles and eBikes
Law enforcement departments in the county are very aware of the importance of bicycle safety.

Common sense says people generally want the streets to be safe for motor vehicles which translates to most officer resources going to motor vehicle enforcement.

It’s possible that safer bicycle riding could lead to fewer cars and free up police resources for more pressing issues.

The New 3’ Law for Motorists and Bicycles
In January 2023, California amended the California Vehicle Code (CVC). The new law (AB. 1909) requires all motorists to give a bicyclist three feet of clearance when passing on the left- hand side of the bicyclist or (depending on the width of the road) reduce speed appropriately, when passing. (See CVC: 21750 (b) (c) (d)). This is particularly crucial on narrow two-lane roads where there are many reports of bicyclists being forced off the road or hit by motor vehicles.

Hampering the situation is the requirement that a citation can only be written if the incident is witnessed by the officer. With the advent of helmet-worn cameras, cyclists have attempted to record these incidents with the hope that the recording can be used as “visual evidence”. But this evidence, post incident, cannot be used to issue a citation.

The San Mateo County Sheriff’s Department recently announced it will allow the public to submit these incidents on the Sheriff’s website.41 These reports have since resulted in the

41https://www.almanacnews.com/news/2023/05/12/bicyclists-can-now-report-3-foot-rule-violations-online-in-san- mateo-county

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 73

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 17

department sending a violation letter to the offending motorist; this is not a citation. However, only incidents that occur in unincorporated San Mateo County, Woodside, Portola Valley, San Carlos, Half Moon Bay, and Millbrae can use this online resource.

Citations vs. Reprimands for Education Purposes:

It is at the officer’s discretion, when addressing a law infraction, to issue a citation or give a reprimand. One advantage of a reprimand is that it creates an opportunity to educate. With officers focusing on education, these brief encounters, cumulatively, can do a lot to improve bicycle safety, for bicyclists and motorists. But only if these reprimand stops are recorded officially can an accurate picture of bicycle safety be established.

FINDINGS
F1. Bicycle policy and the approach to ensuring/improving bicycle safety is not consistent across San Mateo County due, at least in part, to:
a. Topography
b. Urban vs. suburban environments
c. Types of bicyclists (commuter, recreational)
d. Varying levels of enforcement of bicycle laws
e. Differing knowledge of bicycle laws and safe practices.

F2. Bicycle ridership as an alternative means of transportation (e.g., commuting to work, school, or transit hubs, running errands) is not increasing due, at least in part, to perceived safety issues.

F3. Bicycle accidents and incidents (such as near misses) are underreported, if reported at all.

F4. Only bicycle accidents or incidents that trigger a 911 call are consistently logged in the State (SWITRS) database and law enforcement agencies do not log bicycle accident data consistently.

F5. The amount of enforcement of laws, as they pertain to bicyclists and how motorists and bicyclists interact, is inconsistent due to other priorities (e.g., criminal enforcement and general automobile traffic) and the requirement that a citation can generally only be written if the violation is witnessed by an officer.

F6. There is no official metric in San Mateo County and its cities to evaluate how safe it is to ride a bicycle.

F7. Bicycle safety education, for the bicyclist, pedestrians and motorists, is not consistently offered across San Mateo County.

F8. Communication between various entities with responsibility for bicycle safety, including Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committees (BPACs), Law Enforcement, City Transportation Planning, and Public Works departments, is not formalized, resulting in inefficiencies, and missed opportunities (e.g., funding for improvements, shared bike safety education, or improving signage).

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 74

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 18

F9. City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans or Active Transportation Plans, have not been adopted/created by all SMC cities.

RECOMMENDATIONS
R1. By December 2023, all law enforcement agencies and the County Sheriff should submit bicycle related data to SWITRS monthly, and regularly post and update their websites with all reported bicycle accident data.

R2. By December 2023, all law enforcement agencies should begin sending warning letters to motorists for violations of the 3 ft. law.

R3. By June 3, 2024, all law enforcement agencies should provide a means for citizens to report bicycle-related incidents that are not currently reported to law enforcement, similar to the SMC Sheriff’s Department Online Crime Reporting portal.

R4. By June 3, 2024 each city, town, and unincorporated SMC should offer a bike safety education program for riders and motorists about the laws and safety facts related to bicycles on the road.

R5. By June 3, 2024, each city, town, and unincorporated SMC should update or generate a new Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (or Active Transportation Plan) if their current plan is older than five years; consistent with the 2021 C/CAG San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan.

R6. By June 3, 2024, each city, town, and the county should apply (or reapply) online to generate the Bicycle Friendly Community Report Card.

R7. By February 1, 2024, the County should meet with cities within the County that are willing to participate, to consider establishing a regional effort that integrates the cities’ bicycle plans and to discuss how the cities and County could work together to apply for grant opportunities as a region.

REQUEST FOR RESPONSES
Pursuant to Penal Code Section 933.05, the Civil Grand Jury requests responses from the San Mateo County Board of Supervisors, County Sheriff and all 20 cities and towns’ governing bodies for each Finding and Recommendation.

The governing bodies should be aware that their comments or responses must be conducted subject to the Brown Act's notice, agenda, and open meeting requirements.

RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS
California Penal Code Section 933.05, provides (emphasis added):
(a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following:

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 75

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 19

(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding; in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons, therefore.
(b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefore.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 76

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 20

METHODOLOGY
The Grand Jury used a variety of tools to obtain information regarding bicycle riding and safety in San Mateo County:
● Documents: The Bike and Pedestrian Master Plans that cities use to explain approaches to planning, prioritizing projects, and re-engineering their communities to make riding and walking easier and safer. These documents came with a variety of titles:
o Bike and Pedestrian Master Plans
o Active Transportation Plans
o Micro-Mobility Plans
o Transportation Plans
● Internet: Almost all the historical and current information (including the availability of documents) regarding bicycle safety came from internet searches. Information from those searches was verified.
● Survey: The Grand Jury sent a survey in December 2022 using Google Forms to understand whether the cities believe eBikes were an issue in their communities. The results helped in defining the broader issue of bicycle safety. o The survey questions and results are in Appendix A.
o Participants: The survey was sent to all the cities in SMC and, specifically, the City Managers. Many chose to have the chief of police of their city fill out the survey. Two cities did not respond to the survey.
● Interviews: The survey helped the Grand Jury develop a list of individuals for interviews. The questions for the interview came as a result of the investigation’s pivot to the state of bicycle safety in San Mateo County as a general topic. o Participants:
▪ Cities: Belmont, Daly City, Half Moon Bay, Hillsborough, Pacifica, Portola Valley, San Mateo, Woodside
▪ Unincorporated San Mateo County
▪ Police Departments: Burlingame, Foster City, Hillsborough, Redwood City, South San Francisco
▪ Sheriff of SMC
▪ BPACs: CCAG, Unincorporated SMC
▪ CyclistVideoEvidence.com: Craig Davis

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 77

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 21

GLOSSARY
3 ft. Rule – Motorists must yield at least 3 feet between their vehicle and a bicyclist on all roadways. This rule was amended by State legislation through Assembly Bill 1909, approved by the Governor in 2022, and commencing January 2024. Additionally, this bill requires a vehicle that is passing or overtaking a vehicle to move over to an adjacent lane of traffic, as specified, if one is available, before passing or overtaking the bicycle.

Active Transportation - A means of getting around that is powered by human energy, primarily walking and bicycling.

BFA – Bike Friendly America. A program sponsored by the League of American Bicyclists to evaluate communities with respect to their support for bicycling. As of December 2022, 501 communities are certified.

BFC – Bike Friendly Community. A Bike Friendly Awards Report Card that is given to a community that applies for a ranking (i.e., Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum).

BPAC – Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee
CATSIP – California Active Transportation Safety Information Pages. An online resource for improving pedestrian and bicycle safety in California. This site is administered by UC Berkeley Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (SafeTREC)42. Funding for this program was provided by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety43, through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

C/CAG – City County Association of Governments of San Mateo County Bicycle Roadways
● Bike paths (Class I): also termed shared-use or multi-use paths, are paved rights-of-way for exclusive use by bicyclists, pedestrians and those using non-motorized modes of travel. They are physically separated from vehicular traffic and can be constructed in roadway rights-of-way or exclusive rights-of-way. Bike paths provide critical connections in the city where roadways are absent or are not conducive to bicycle travel. ● Bike lanes (Class II): are defined by pavement striping and signage used to allocate a portion of a roadway for exclusive or preferential bicycle travel. Bike lanes are one-way facilities on either side of a roadway. Whenever possible, bike lanes should be enhanced with treatments that improve safety and connectivity by addressing site-specific issues, such as additional warning or wayfinding signage.
● Bike routes (Class III): provide shared use with motor vehicle traffic within the same travel lane. Designated by signs, bike routes provide continuity to other bike facilities or designate preferred routes through corridors with high demand. Whenever possible, bike

42 http://safetrec.berkeley.edu/
43 http://www.ots.ca.gov/

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 78

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 22

routes should be enhanced with treatments that improve safety and connectivity, such as the use of "Sharrows" or shared lane markings to delineate the road as a shared-use facility.
● Cycle tracks (Class IV): Also referred to as protected bikeways, are exclusive bike facilities that combine the user experience of a separated path with the on-street infrastructure of a conventional bike lane. A cycle track is physically separated from motor traffic and distinct from the sidewalk. The separation may be in the form of posts, parked cars or a combination of both.
eBike – motorized bicycle that comes in three different classes:
● Class I: Bicycle equipped with a motor that aids only when pedaling and ceases when 20 mph is reached.
● Class II: Same capability as a Class 1 eBike with a throttle-actuated motor. No pedaling required when operated with the throttle.
● Class III: Bicycle equipped with a motor that aids only when pedaling and ceases when 28 mph is reached.

GJ – Grand Jury
MTC – Metropolitan Transportation Commission is the transportation planning, financing, and coordinating agency for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Area.

SHARROW – Sharrows are pavement markings that have been installed on city streets to provide guidance for both bicyclists and vehicles on roadways when sharing the road.

SMC ATP: San Mateo County Active Transportation Plan is a comprehensive framework to guide the development of active transportation projects and programs for walking, bicycling, and other forms of human powered movement for people of all ages and abilities throughout unincorporated County communities.

SWITRS – California Statewide Integrated Traffic Records System.

TIMS – Transportation Injury Mapping System developed by the Safe Transportation Research & Education Center at the University of California, Berkeley.

TR-INST Form – Notice to Appear form used by law enforcement for law infractions.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 79

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 23

APPENDIX A: Bicycle Safety Best Practices
Bicycle Education Best Practices
There are two excellent examples of California communities that are investing in Bike Safety education: Davis and San Diego.

San Diego Bike Coalition:

This is an excellent reference tool to see all the kinds of bicycle safety education that can be offered and the resources that can be used to teach those courses. Again, the classes range from those for a variety of ages of bicyclists, basic bicycling, bicycle friendly motorist safety, and others.
https://sdbikecoalition.org/our-work/education/

Davis, California:

The City of Davis, CA, which is one of the leading bicycle communities in the US, has several pages of information about bike safety education on its website. https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/public-works-engineering-and-transportation/bike- pedestrian-program
Two Cities Committed to Bicycling: Portland, Oregon and Davis, California Portland and Davis have become famous for their commitment to supporting bicycling, not only as recreational, but also as a true commuter alternative to motor vehicles and public transportation. Both have received the Platinum rating for a Bicycle Friendly Community from The League of American Bicyclists, while being quite different communities.

Portland is a large city of 622,000 residents with similar topography to the linked San Mateo County cities along El Camino Real: hilly and flat lands, urban centers, urban neighborhoods, suburbia, and major freeways. Portland advertises itself as “Bicycle Friendly” and claimed the highest percentage of bike commuters in US large cities in 2019 at 6% (Portland does annual bike ride census counts). Portland started investing in bicycle infrastructure with the acceptance of the 1973 Portland Bike Plan and the formation of a Bicycle Advisory Committee within the City Transportation Department. Since then, it has created:

● 385 miles of bikeways
● 36 miles of protected bike lanes
● A pedestrian and bicycle only bridge over the Willamette River and protected bike lanes on other bridges
● Intersections with bicycle specific traffic signals

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 80

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 24

● Bicycle boxes44 at intersections to raise the visibility for motorists turning right ● A Safe Routes for Schools serving 100 schools
● 6500 bike racks to meet increased demand for safe stow of bicycles ● 3 bicycle plans over 40 years that establish policy, goals and a bikeway network ● $60 M spent to 2008 on bicycle infrastructure (one mile of installed freeway costs $60M)

Portland’s safety record is very good for a large city: 4.3% of all traffic injury accidents from 2015-2019 are bicycle related. In comparison, San Francisco’s number is 14% for the same period. Portland also does better than San Mateo County (8%) and a representative city, Redwood City (10%).

Davis in California is a small city between San Francisco and Sacramento with a population of 66,800. It has earned a nationwide reputation for supporting bicycles in its community (there is a bicycle on the city logo). The topography of Davis could not be flatter and more conducive to bicycle riding. The current statistics indicate that 20% of Davis’s population commutes on bicycles. In 1967, Davis was the first community in the US to develop dedicated bicycle lanes (a total of 4!). The origins of this project were a couple that had visited the Netherlands, often cited as the most bicycle friendly nation in the world. They were so impressed with the bicycle infrastructure that they started a grassroots movement in Davis to promote safe bicycle riding.

The group had to overcome CA law that did not support bike lanes on city streets, but once the law was revised, Davis proceeded to create bicycle infrastructure throughout the City:
● 63 miles of pathways
● 102 miles of bike lanes
● 75% of roads have a posted speed limit of 25 mph
● Of the 169 miles in the road network, 140 miles of roads are posted at 25 mph or less., 21 miles of roads are posted at between 25 mph and 35 mph, and 8 miles of roads posted over 35 mph
● 1 mile of bicycle boulevards
● 1 mile of cycle track
● 4 miles of buffered bike lanes
● 4,300 bike racks within the City and over 2,000 bike racks downtown ● 25 grade separated crossings. Four overpasses and 21 underpass crossings. Grade- separated crossings are used to move people on bikes and pedestrians over and under barriers like railroad tracks, busy roads, and the freeway.

Davis’s bicycle accidents with injury (and fatalities) are high for a city of its size. However, the number of total accidents with injury is also very low compared to cities of comparable size. For

44 https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/intersection-treatments/bike-boxes/

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 81

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 25

example: in 2019 there were 60 bicycle accidents with injury and 221 total vehicle injury accidents resulting in 27% of all vehicular accidents involving a bicycle. Redwood City’s number is 4.8%, but their number of bicycle commuters is less than 1%. If you look at the percentage of accidents with respect to the biking population for 2019, Davis’s percentage is .4% and Redwood City’s percentage is 2.4%. Davis’s safety statistics are very good, given the number of bicycle riders.

Both Portland and Davis are renowned environments for bicycle riders because they committed early to bicycle infrastructure and consistently improved it over the years. The city government and the school systems actively support bicycle education. Both cities conduct counts to determine bicycle use. They are both advocates of the Vision Zero policy to reduce accidents and fatalities. They use the Bicycle Friendly Community evaluation process to assess their progress towards their bicycle plans and goals.

Disclosure: Portland, beginning in 2020, noted a decline in bicycle commuter percentages.

Thinking it was an aberration of the pandemic shutdown, it continued to do annual bike counts.

As of 2022, its percentage had gone down to 3.1%. The current theory of why there has been a decline is assumed to be the increase of work from home. Regardless, Portland continues to make improvements to its bicycle infrastructure and safety.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 82

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 26

APPENDIX B: San Mateo County Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan List

Jurisdiction Year Name of Report Link to Report
Atherton Jul 2014 Town of Atherton Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan
https://www.ci.atherton.ca.us/Docume
ntCenter/View/1381/Atherton-
BPMP_Proposed-Final-July-
2014?bidId=

Belmont Nov 2016 City of Belmont
Comprehensive Pedestrian &
Bicycle Plan
https://www.belmont.gov/home/show
publisheddocument/14951/636179086
799900000

Brisbane Feb 2017 Brisbane Pedestrian and
Bicycle Master Plan
https://www.brisbaneca.org/sites/defa
ult/files/fileattachments/public_works/
page/149/bikepedmasterplanappendic
es.pdf

Burlingame Dec 2020 City of Burlingame Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan
https://www.burlingame.org/business
_detail_T54_R154.php

Colma Feb 2021 Colma El Camino Real
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Improvement Plan
https://www.colma.ca.gov/documents/
ecr-improvement-plan/

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 83

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 27

Jurisdiction Year Name of Report Link to Report
Daly City Feb 2020 Walk Bike Daly City; City of
Daly City Pedestrian and
Bicycle Master Plan 2020
https://dalycity.org/1106/Daly-City-
Pedestrian-and-Bicycle-Master-

East Palo Alto Oct 2017 2017 East Palo Alto Bicycle
Transportation Plan
https://www.cityofepa.org/sites/defaul
t/files/fileattachments/planning/page/2
801/reso_4905_adopting_2017_bicycl
e_transportation_plan.pdf

Half Moon Bay Sep 2019 City of Half Moon Bay
Bicycle and Pedestrian
Master Plan
https://www.half-moon-
bay.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/224
3/Bicycle-and-Pedestrian-Master-
Plan-Final?bidId=

Menlo Park Nov 2020 City of Menlo Park
Transportation Master Plan
https://beta.menlopark.org/Governme
nt/Departments/Public-
Works/Transportation-
Division/Bicycling

Millbrae 2021/2022 City of Millbrae Active
Transportation Plan
https://www.ci.millbrae.ca.us/home/sh
owpublisheddocument/25807/637787
902014030000

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 84

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 28

Jurisdiction Year Name of Report Link to Report
Pacifica Feb 2020 City of Pacifica Bicycle &
Pedestrian Master Plan
https://www.cityofpacifica.org/depart
ments/public-
works/engineering/bicycle-pedestrian-
master-plan

Redwood City July 2018 Redwood City Moves, A
Comprehensive Assessment
of Transportation with
Redwood City

San Bruno Jul 2016 City of San Bruno Walk 'n
Bike Plan
https://sanbruno.ca.gov/DocumentCen
ter/View/1733/Adopted-San-Bruno-
Walk-n-Bike-Plan-PDF

San Carlos Jun 2020 City of San Carlos Bicycle
and Pedestrian Master Plan
Final
https://www.cityofsancarlos.org/home
/showpublisheddocument/8139/63815
5282314370000

San Mateo Apr 2020 San Mateo Bicycle Master
Plan April 2020 Final
https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/Docu
mentCenter/View/85445/2020-Bike-
Master-Plan_Final_Updated-
62021?bidId=

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 85

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 29

Jurisdiction Year Name of Report Link to Report
South San
Francisco
Mar 2022 Active South City: South San
Francisco's Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan Draft
https://activesouthcity.com/wp-
content/uploads/2022/03/SSF-
ActiveSouthCity_PublicDraft_31Mar
ch2022_plan_only.pdf

San Mateo
County
2021

2021 C/CAG San Mateo
County Comprehensive
Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan
https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-
content/uploads/2021/06/San-Mateo-
County-Comprehensive-Bicycle-and-
Pedestrian-Plan-Update-Final-
Plan.pdf

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 86

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 30

APPENDIX C: Survey Questions and Results

This is a summary of the responses:

1. Cities and law enforcement do not track bicycle and eBike accident statistics separately; in fact, most respondents did not track eBike specific data at all (94%).

2. Complaints on Class I Bicycle Roadways include speeding and not yielding to pedestrians.

3. Complaints on Class II and III Bicycle Roadways include speeding, improper signaling, mixed use of bikes/eBikes and violation of the 3 ft. Rule.

4. Of 361 citations issued, only 11 were specifically for eBikes. It is impossible to know if there were more eBikes in violation as there is no requirement to ID the type of bicycle when filling out the form.

5. Class 3 eBikes are more powerful machines and have specific laws regarding usage. Only 50% of the respondents were enforcing the Class 3 eBike laws.

6. Complaints and incidents regarding bicycles (from riders or others) come mostly through police reports, but also from input to City Halls, Redwood City’s “app”, city planning, parks and recreation.

7. 1/3 respondents said there has been an increase in complaints regarding bicycles in the last three years (speeding, underage use, reckless behavior, vehicular code).

8. 2/3 of respondents said there had not been an increase in complaints regarding eBikes and 25% said they didn’t know.

9. Civilian bicycle complaints are generally not available to the public (over 50% of respondents).

10. 44% of respondents said they don’t provide bicycle safety education.

11. Enforcement of bicycle-related law is done where appropriate, with discretionary authority. Effort is made to educate at the time of the infraction. Additional enforcement is budget driven.

12. Future planning for the regulation of bicycles and eBikes varies greatly in the responses (see Question II-16 in Appendix A).

List of responses to questions (on the next page):

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 87

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 31

Number of bicycle accidents in 2022? 212
Number of bicycle accidents in 2020 to the end of 2021? 307

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 88

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 32

How many Bicycle citations were issued in the last year? 361 How many eBike Citations were issued in the last year? 0 [Comments: this information is not tracked]

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 89

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 33

If you are enforcing bicycle/eBike law, how is it accomplished? ● Nothing too specific. Enforcement during routine patrol if violations are witnessed. The PD has done a few details and targeted patrols in our downtown area specifically looking for bicycle violations (riding on sidewalks, helmet violations, reckless behavior, etc.). ● The Police Department enforces all laws as appropriate and with necessary and legal discretionary authority.
● Education and Enforcement
● All officers are trained to enforce Vehicle Code and Municipal Code law on bicycles and eBikes.
● On view and by complaint.
● On view and calls for service which result in Education or Enforcement. ● Traffic enforcement resulting in citations and/or verbal warnings/ education to the public. ● Through proactive patrols, directed enforcement and calls for service. ● Most bicycle stops are made for violations occurring on roadways, not on trails or sidewalks. Most bike stops result in education and not citations as evidenced by our low citation numbers.
● Primarily through education and warnings.
● We have not enforced the Bicycle/eBike law because we have not received any comments to date that have triggered the Police Department to enforce.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 90

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 34

● By Sheriff patrol.
● We can’t enforce much because of limitations in light of funding and staffing needs

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 91

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 35

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 92

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 36

Does your city/town have any future plans regarding the regulation of bicycles and eBikes? ● Not at this time.
● Yes. Additional and improved bike lanes.
● Policies in the newly adopted General Plan supporting alternative modes of transportation, including bikes.
● Awaiting the results of the County-wide eBike pilot to determine best practices to implement.
● Not at this time.
● Not at this time. There have not been complaints/concerns regarding eBikes. ● Not at this time.
● Not that I am aware of.
● No, unless we start receiving complaints.
● Yes, The City of South San Francisco's Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. ● No
● As the Town begins to understand various micro-mobility issues going forward, eBikes being part of that growth pattern, we will plan to prepare plans and outreach material to help educate the bike populations on eBike protocols and safety. ● With the growing development, more bike facilities are being provided for the general public. Public outreach and programs to help educate both current/new users are currently

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 93

2022-2023 San Mateo County Civil Grand Jury 37

being implemented citywide. Buildout of Bike & Pedestrian master plan is underway.

Alameda de Las Pulgas and Ralston 4 designs are underway. Creation of a transportation master plan is also underway. Parks & Recreation Department is developing a Master Plan that also includes implementation of eBikes policies on open space trails. ● Yes
● Nothing specific regulatory changes planned at this time. ● City is currently drafting ordinance language to address the increasing number of electric mobility devices that are present on trails and paths. Many conversations have occurred at BPAC and council (among other committees and commissions) and will continue in 2024.

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 94

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 95

8.g
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 96

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 9, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Annual On-Call Traffic Signal and Maintenance Agreement with Cal-West Lighting and Signal Maintenance, Inc. in the Amount of $110,000 for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 and $110,000 for FY 2023-24 to Include Emergency Service and Repair Work.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an Amendment to the Annual On-Call Traffic Signal and Maintenance Agreement with Cal-West Lighting and Signal Maintenance, Inc. (“Cal-West”) in the amount of $110,000 for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 and $110,000 for FY 2023-24 to include emergency service and repair work.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact and no additional appropriation is necessary. The Public Works Street Maintenance operating budget contains sufficient funds to cover the additional funding included in this request.

BACKGROUND:

This item is being brought to the City Council because the action exceeds the authority of the City Manager.

Under Chapter 3.12 Purchasing of City Supplies and Services, any contracts (including amendments) less than $75,000 can be approved by the City Manager under his signing authority but those greater than $75,000 must be approved by City Council.

Under Chapter 3.12.180 in an emergency requiring the immediate preservation of the public peace, health and/or safety, the City Manager or Administrative Services Director may purchase supplies or services up to seventy-five thousand dollars without complying with the purchasing procedures set forth in Sections 3.12.150 and 3.12.160. Where emergency conditions exist and the amount(s) in question exceeds seventy-five thousand dollars, then the City Manager or the City Manager’s designee shall have the authority to purchase supplies or services in excess of seventy-five thousand dollars without complying with the provisions of Section 3.12.170.

Following such an emergency, a written statement of the circumstances of such emergency, a description of the supplies or services purchased, and the prices thereof shall be submitted to the City Council for ratification.

8.h
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 97

On May 24, 2021, the City Council approved an agreement with Cal-West to provide street light, traffic signal, and lighted crosswalk maintenance services for three years with an option for three one-year extensions.

The original contract not-to-exceed annual limit of $35,820 in FY 2022-23 and $37,611 in FY 2023-24 was based on Cal-West’s preventative maintenance hourly rates. The contract contained language allowing Cal-West to perform supplementary emergency and extra work in addition to routine preventative maintenance. However, the total original contract not-to-exceed annual amounts only covered the basic maintenance and did not include the cost of the additional emergency and extra work specified in each contract.

ANALYSIS:

The requested adjustment of $110,000 for FY 2022-23 will allow a proper accounting of emergency work performed in the last fiscal year, and the adjustment of $110,000 for FY 2023- 24 will provide funding for various upcoming emergency and extra maintenance services needed to successfully maintain street lights, traffic signals, and lighted crosswalks throughout the city.

The emergency and extra repair work performed includes the following:

Emergency/Extra Repair Work Amount
Downed street light poles $ 41,017.53
Damaged or malfunctioning traffic signals $ 28,119.03 USA dig alert services $ 20,220.00
Damaged street lights $ 15,138.48
TOTAL $ 104,495.04
ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to execute an Amendment to the Annual On-Call Traffic Signal and Maintenance Agreement with Cal-West in the amount of approving an adjustment of $110,000 for FY 2022-23 and $110,000 for FY 2023-24 to include emergency service and repair work; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Steven Machida, Public Works Director

8.h
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 98

Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution

8.h
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 99

RESOLUTION NO. 2023 – ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE AN AMENDMENT TO THE ANNUAL

ON-CALL TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH CAL-WEST LIGHTING AND SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $110,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23 AND $110,000 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2023-24 TO INCLUDE EMERGENCY SERVICE AND REPAIR WORK.

WHEREAS, on May 24, 2021 the City Council approved an agreement with Cal-West Lighting and Signal Maintenance, Inc. (“Cal-West”) to provide street light, traffic signal, and lighted crosswalk maintenance services for three years with an option for three one-year extensions; and WHEREAS, the agreement provides annual not-to-exceed amounts that were based on Cal-West’s preventative maintenance hourly rates; and
WHEREAS, the contract allowed Cal-West to perform supplementary emergency and extra work in addition to routine preventative maintenance; and WHEREAS, the agreement’s annual amount did not include the emergency and extra work described in the contract; and
WHEREAS, under Chapter 3.12 Purchasing of City Supplies and Services, any contracts (including amendments) less than $75,000 can be approved by the City Manager under his signing authority but those greater than $75,000 must be approved by City Council; and WHEREAS, the emergency and extra repair work performed includes the following:
downed street light poles, damaged or malfunctioning traffic signals, USA dig alert services, and damaged street lights; and
WHEREAS, the Public Works Street Maintenance operating budget contains sufficient funds to cover the additional funding requested; and
WHEREAS, the requested adjustment of $110,000 for Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 will allow a proper accounting of emergency work performed in the last fiscal year; and WHEREAS, an adjustment of $110,000 for FY 2023-24 will provide funding for various upcoming emergency and extra maintenance services needed to successfully maintain street lights, traffic signals, and lighted crosswalks throughout the city.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council authorizes the City Manager to execute an amendment to the annual on-call traffic signal and maintenance agreement with Cal-West Lighting and Signal Maintenance, Inc. in the amount of $110,000 for FY 2022-23 and $110,000 for FY 2023-24 to include emergency service and repair work. * * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 9th day of October 2023, by the following vote:

8.h
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 100

8.h
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 101

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 9, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Approve Artwork for Utility Box Mural Project, Phase III.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council approve artwork for the five utility boxes that are included in the 2023 Utility Box Mural Program as recommended by the Public Art Task Force.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact and no additional appropriation is needed at this time.

The City Council appropriated funding for public art in the operating budget in Fiscal Year 2022-

23. The budget is sufficient to cover the cost of the artists’ stipends.

BACKGROUND:

In 2016, the Parks & Recreation Department implemented the first phase of the Utility Box Mural Program. During this initial phase, 19 boxes were painted around town, one in partnership with the City of Redwood City. Many positive comments were sent to staff and the program was well received. Following the success of the first phase, the City Council approved additional funding to carry out Phase II of the Utility Box Mural Program in 2018.

Recently, staff opened the “Call for Local Artists” on July 14, 2023, with the artwork submission deadline of September 1, 2023. The Public Art Task Force (“Task Force”), which consists of Councilmember John Dugan, Parks & Recreation Commissioner Cecile Lee, San Carlos resident Kelly Bravo, and Recreation Manager Tyler Muela, met and reviewed all artwork proposals on September 8, 2023. The Task Force recommends the top five artist proposals for Phase III. When making the selections, the Task Force considered the artistic excellence, innovation, and originality of each piece. The Task Force also considered the following criteria:
Does the artist have the experience to complete the project within the established time frame?
Does the art meet the goals of the project?
Does the art transform the area?
Does the art relate to the area where the utility box is located? Does the art show the City’s unique characteristics, historic heritage, or a key activity?

8.i
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 102

ANALYSIS:

Five utility box mural design proposals were submitted from five different artists. Of the artwork selected, the majority (80%) are from San Carlos residents, and two of the artists were also selected to complete utility boxes in Phase II of the program.

Due to the timing of the “Call for Local Artists”, we did not receive any student submissions for the student utility box at the corner of San Carlos Avenue and Club Drive. Staff decided to extend the submission timeline for student artists to submit applications and proposals by Friday, March 1, 2024. The new timeline will allow for design planning during the school year and to complete the painted box before next summer.

If approved, all selected artists will sign an artist agreement with the City. Staff will work with artists to complete utility box artwork by the end of the calendar year, pending possible weather delays.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Approve Artwork for Utility Box Mural Project, Phase III; or

2. Do not approve the artwork; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Amy Newby, Parks & Recreation Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Utility Box Mural Selections

8.i
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 103

Attachment 1-San Carlos Utility Box Mural Project – Phase III Proposed Art Installation
Utility Box – Laurel Street & Arroyo Avenue
Artist: Beth Grant - Escape to Edgewood

8.i
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 104

Attachment 1-San Carlos Utility Box Mural Project – Phase III Proposed Art Installation
Utility Box – Holly Street & Laurel Street
Artist: Jessica Yu – Mix - Sunset

8.i
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 105

Attachment 1-San Carlos Utility Box Mural Project – Phase III Proposed Art Installation
Utility Box – San Carlos Avenue & Alameda de las Pulgas Artist: Doitshā Lexington – The Suns of San Carlos

8.i
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 106

Attachment 1-San Carlos Utility Box Mural Project – Phase III Proposed Art Installation
Utility Box – San Carlos Avenue & Phelps Road
Artist: Alicia Ledwith – SCSD Pride

8.i
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 107

Attachment 1-San Carlos Utility Box Mural Project – Phase III Proposed Art Installation
Utility Box – Industrial Road & E. San Carlos Avenue
Artist: Nancy Simenc – Slow Down

8.i
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 108

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 9, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Appropriating $100,000 from the General Capital Fund (“Fund 25”) Unassigned Fund Balance to Construct and Install Wooden Planters over the Orange Water Wall Barriers on Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution appropriating $100,000 from the General Capital Fund (“Fund 25”) Unassigned Fund Balance to construct and install wooden planters over the orange water wall barriers on Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

Staff requests an appropriation of $100,000 from Fund 25 in Fiscal Year 2023-24 to construct and install the wooden planters. There are sufficient funds available to cover this request.

BACKGROUND:

When the City Council decided to move forward with the transformation of the 700 block of Laurel Street into a walking plaza, they also requested that staff develop ideas to “soften” the look of the orange water wall barriers. While effective at directing traffic, the bright orange color and reflective strips detracted from the aesthetics of the area.

To transform the orange barriers, wooden planter covers with flowerpots on top were constructed to fit perfectly over the water wall barriers. A water wicking system was devised that pulls water stored in the barriers up into the pots for continuous watering, thereby reducing the need for daily watering by the maintenance staff. During this process, the idea to repurpose old cement garbage receptacles into planters was also formulated. With a new coat of paint and the same water- wicking system as the planters, the garbage receptacles were brought back to life.

Credit for this creative solution goes to Public Works Superintendent Lou Duran and his team, who were able to beautify the downtown while maintaining public safety precautions.

ANALYSIS:

Staff piloted the wooden planters on the 700 block of Laurel Street to ensure that they met the expectations of the City Council and the public, while still being effective at directing traffic and withstanding outdoor weather. The pilot was implemented during the restart of the Downtown Farmers’ Market in April 2023. It is now five months into the pilot and the planters are working well. Staff is confident that the remaining water walls on Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue may be fitted with the wooden planters to complete the look created on the 700 block.

8.j
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 109

There are 125 remaining water walls that could be fitted with the wooden planters. The cost for the materials, plants, and watering system is $800 per water wall for a total of $100,000.

If the City Council wishes to add wooden planters on the 125 remaining water walls on Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue, staff requests an appropriation of $100,000 from Fund 25 to construct and install these planters.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution Appropriating $100,000 from the General Capital Fund (Fund 25) Unassigned Fund Balance to construct and install wooden planters over the orange water wall barriers on Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Steven Machida, Public Works Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution

8.j
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 110

RESOLUTION NO. 2023 – ____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS APPORPRIATING $100,000 FROM THE GENERAL CAPITAL FUND (FUND 25)

UNASSIGNED FUND BALANCE TO CONSTRUCT AND INSTALL WOODEN PLANTERS

OVER THE ORANGE WATER WALL BARRIERS ON LAUREL STREET AND SAN CARLOS AVENUE.

WHEREAS, the City Council approved transforming the 700 block of Laurel Street into a walking plaza and requested that staff develop ideas to “soften” the look of the orange water wall barriers; and
WHEREAS, the orange water wall barriers are effective at directing traffic, but the bright orange color and reflective strips detract from the aesthetics of the area; and WHEREAS, Public Works Superintendent Lou Duran and his team created a plan to construct wooden planter covers to fit perfectly over the water wall barriers with flowerpots on top; and
WHEREAS, a water wicking system was devised to pull the water stored in the barriers up into the pots for continuous watering thereby reducing the need for daily watering by the maintenance staff; and
WHEREAS, staff also formulated the idea to repurpose old cement garbage receptacles into planters; and
WHEREAS, staff piloted the wooden planters on the 700 block of Laurel Street to ensure they met the expectations of the City Council and the public while still being effective at directing traffic and holding up in outdoor weather; and
WHEREAS, staff is confident the remaining 125 water walls can be fitted with the wooden planters to complete the look created on the 700 block; and WHEREAS, the cost for the materials, plants, and watering system is $800/water wall for a total of $100,000; and
WHEREAS, staff is requesting an appropriation of $100,000 from the General Capital Fund (Fund 25) Unassigned Balance to construct and install the planters.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby approves appropriating $100,000 from the General Capital Fund (Fund 25) Unassigned Balance to construct and install wooden planters over the orange water wall barriers on Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue.
* * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 9th day of October 2023, by the following vote:

8.j
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 111

8.j
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 112

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 9, 2023
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Actions for the Life Science/Research & Development Project at 841 Old Country Road (APNs 046-133-160, 046-134-050, 046-134-060, 046-135-010, 046-135-020, 046-135-030, 046-135-040, 046-182-100, 046-182-110, 046-182-150): Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; Introduce an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map to Change the Zoning of the Site from IH – Heavy Industrial Zoning District to PD – Planned Development Zoning District and Approving the Associated Planned Development Plan; and Introduce an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with the Sobrato Family Foundation.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Planning and Transportation Commission and staff recommend that the City Council:

1. Adopt a Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and

2. Introduce an Ordinance Amending the Zoning Map to change the site from IH – Heavy Industrial Zoning District to PD - Planned Development Zoning District and Approving the associated Planned Development Plan; and

3. Introduce an Ordinance approving a Development Agreement with The Sobrato Family Foundation.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

The Applicant has paid the appropriate application fees and provided deposit funds to pay for expenses related to the environmental review and other reports and analyses associated with the proposed project at 841 Old County Road (“Project”). The Project will be required to pay building permit fees and City impact fees. City impact fees total over $12.9 million and include commercial linkage (affordable housing), childcare, sewer, and traffic fees. The proposed development agreement includes community benefits, which are outlined in the analysis section below and valued at $7.6 million.

The proposed development will also benefit the City with increased property tax, increased sales tax revenue, and the creation of new jobs. The estimated increased revenue to the City is $13.6 million over 20 years.

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 113

BACKGROUND:

Reference the August 28, 2023 City Council staff report (Attachment 8) for a complete project background, analysis, project description, environmental review, analysis, and public outreach. This staff report provides an update on revised community benefits only.

The City Council, at its August 28, 2023 meeting, conducted the public hearing and continued the item to a date uncertain. Councilmembers requested that the developer expand its community benefits offer. In response to councilmember comments, the developer submitted revised community benefits in addition to the original community benefits, as outlined in their letter dated September 19, 2023 (Attachment 4).

Project Description.

Revised Courtyard Plan: The developer has revised the design of the courtyard in response to the council’s comments and to provide for full public access. The result is a more open courtyard, especially when viewed from Old County Road. The space includes a lawn area with seating, games that will be available to tenants and the public, raised planters with built-in seating areas, quiet work areas with plantings, a deck with a BBQ, and picnic tables.

Revised Courtyard Plan

Revised Parking: The on-site parking includes below-grade secure parking and 46 parking spaces on the surface behind the building. The developer has designated four surface parking spaces for

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 114

café visitors. As a community benefit, the developer offers all surface parking spaces available to the public on nights and weekends. This includes public access to two EV charging spaces.

Community Benefits: In response to the council’s comments, the developer has revised their community benefit offer to include the following:

Revised Community Benefits.

•Full public access to entire courtyard. The developer’s previous proposal was to provide public access to the 5,000 square feet front plaza area, with a gate restricting the 12,000 square feet central plaza area to tenants. Based on the council’s comments, the developer has revised the offer to provide full public access to the entire 17,000 square feet landscaped courtyard. The owner requests the ability to close the central courtyard up to two times a month (up to 24 hours each time) for private tenant usage. The tenant will be required to post a notice at the site 48 hours prior to closing to notify the public. •Community organization use of courtyard for private events. The developer also offers that local non-profit and community organizations may reserve the central courtyard and front plaza for private events up to six times per year. There would be no cost to utilize the space, but the owner may charge a cleaning fee.
•Revised courtyard design. The developer has revised the design of the central courtyard space in response to the council’s comments, including adding a central turf area with chairs, providing landscape screening from the rear drop-off area, and adding games for tenant and public use. Hedges and seating areas have also been designed to provide quiet working spaces for tenants and the public. The developer has provided revised graphics showing the openness of the redesigned courtyard space (Attachment 5). •Public parking and EV charging. The developer offers the entire surface parking area with 46 parking spaces for public use on weekday nights from 6:00 p.m. until 11:00 p.m. and on weekends from 7:00 a.m. until 11:00 p.m. This includes two EV charging stalls.

The developer requests a community benefit credit of $690,000 for the value of the public parking. The credit recognizes the additional cost to the developer for maintenance, insurance and security associated with public access to the parking spaces.

Original Community Benefits.

•Restaurant/Café (1,500 square feet) with adjacent patio area with outdoor seating (credit of $555,000).
•Green energy efficiency and sustainability fund payment of $500,000. •Community improvement and recreation fund payment of $3,000,000. •Downtown improvements fund payment of $2,796,000.
•Construction of new discovery path along Bransten Road (credit of $148,400). •Public parking (credit of $690,000)

The original community benefits are valued at $7,000,000. The developer requests a credit of $690,000 for the value of the public parking for a total community benefit value of $7,690,000.

The development agreement (Exhibit B of Ordinance 2) includes the revised community benefits together with the original community benefits.

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 115

The original community benefits offered by the developer includes the bike and pedestrian path along Bransten Road and a community serving café with patio space. The community benefits also include monetary contributions to the City’s Downtown Improvement Fund, Community Improvement & Recreation Fund and Green Energy Sustainability Fund, totaling $6,296,600 in monetary contributions to the City.

841 Old County Road Community Benefits:

Downtown Improvement Funds $2,796,600
Community Improvement & Recreation Fund $3,000,000
Green Energy Sustainability $500,000
Café (credit) $555,000
Bike/Pedestrian path (credit) $148,400
Community Benefits $7,000,000
Public Parking (credit) $690,000
Revised Community Benefits $7,690,000

The community benefits are included in the development agreement. The developer is requesting a 10-year term on the development agreement, vesting City laws, and impact fee provisions.

Construction of the off-site improvements and payment of the community benefits contribution is required prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project.

The development will also be required to pay City impact fees. The final fee amount will be determined at building permit submittal. Impact fees are required to be paid at building permit issuance. Based on the proposed plans, the fees are estimated as follows:

Commercial Linkage fee (for affordable housing) $6,634,785.00 Sewer fees (connection and capacity) $2,893,081.89
Traffic impact fee $1,829,614.58
Child Care impact fee $1,621,543.00
Total City impact fees
$12,979,024.47

Environmental Review.

Reference the August 28, 2023 City Council staff report (Attachment 8) for a complete environmental review discussion. This staff report provides an update on revised community benefits only.

ANALYSIS:

Reference the August 28, 2023 City Council staff report (Attachment 8) for complete analysis and findings for approval discussion. This staff report provides an update on revised community benefits and resulting revisions to the Development Agreement only.

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 116

Development Agreement: The development agreement has been revised to reflect the revised community benefits.

To approve a development agreement, the City Council is required to find that the development agreement is consistent with the General Plan. These findings are included as Exhibit A to the Development Agreement Ordinance. The Planning and Transportation Commission is the recommending body on development agreements. As outlined in Exhibit A, the Project and the contributions of community benefits are consistent with the General Plan, as well as the guiding principles of the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan.

Public Outreach.

Reference the August 28, 2023 City Council staff report (Attachment 8) for a complete public outreach discussion. This staff report provides information on revised community benefits only.

The required public notice for this hearing was mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the sites and published in the newspaper on September 28, 2023.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Take the following actions for the Life Science/Research & Development Project at 841 Old County Road:
i. Adopt a Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; ii. Introduce an Ordinance amending the Zoning Map to change from IH - Heavy Industrial Zoning District to PD - Planned Development Zoning District and approving the associated Planned Development Plan; and
iii. Introduce an Ordinance approving a Development Agreement with the Sobrato Family Foundation; or

2. Do not adopt the proposed Resolution nor introduce the proposed two Ordinances; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Al Savay, Community Development Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 117

ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
a. Exhibit A: MND
b. Exhibit B: MMRP
c. Exhibit C: Response to Comments

2. Ordinance rezoning the site to Planned Development (PD) Zoning District and approving the associated Planned Development Plan
a. Exhibit A: Zoning Map and Plan of Development
b. Exhibit B: Planned Development Plan
c. Exhibit C: Findings

3. Ordinance approving the Development Agreement
a. Exhibit A: Findings
b. Exhibit B: Development Agreement

4. Revised Community Benefit Offer Letter

5. Renderings of Courtyard

6. Code Compliance Certificate for the Design Review, Transportation Demand Management and Transportation Demand Management Plan

7. Public Hearing Notice

8. August 28, 2023 City Council Staff Report

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 118

RESOLUTION NO. 2023- ___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS

ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ASSOCIATED MITIGATION

MONITORNING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE
841 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT.

WHEREAS, the Sobrato Family Foundation proposes to develop a two new life science/research and development buildings totaling 339,170 square feet ("Project") on an approximately 3.41 acre site at 841 Old County Road (Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 046-133-160, 046-134-050, 046-134-060, 046-135-010, 046-135-020, 046-135-030, 046-135-040, 046-182- 100, 046-182-110, 046-182-150t); and
WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos ("City") determined that the Project requires review pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Section 15070, the City as the lead agency under CEQA, hired Lamphier Gregory, ("Consultant") to prepare an Initial Study to determine if the Project may have a significant effect on the environment and concluded that there is no substantial evidence that the Project may cause a significant effect on the environment, and prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration ("MND"); and
WHEREAS, the City requested that California Water Service Mid-Peninsula District prepare a water supply assessment pursuant to California Water Code Section 10910 and the Water District approved the water supply assessment on October 26, 2022, and the water supply assessment was included in the MND; and
WHEREAS, the prepared MND included an assessment of potential environmental effects and a description of mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant environmental effects to a less than significant level; and
WHEREAS, the City issued a Notice of Intent regarding the MND seeking public comment and agency review and comment for the period of January 23, 2023 through February 21, 2023 on the prepared MND pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072 and 15073; and WHEREAS, the C/CAG Board of Directors, acting as the Airport Land Use Commission, determined that the Project is consistent with the applicable airport/land use policies and criteria contained in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Carlos Airport and the Project will not result in a safety hazard; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution PTC2023-11, adopted on June 7, 2023, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommends the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, the City mailed a public hearing notice for the project on September 28, 2023 to property owners and occupants within a 300-foot radius of the project site, published the public hearing notice on September 28, 2023 and made reference to the fact that an MND was available for public review per Section 15073 of the CEQA Guidelines; and

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 119

WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a public hearing on October 9, 2023 and reviewed all evidence presented both orally and in writing and considered in light of public comments and testimony the information in the MND, for adequacy, completeness and compliance with CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, CEQA requires that the lead agency approving a project adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for changes to the project to ensure compliance during project implementation.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council makes the following to certify the MND:

1. The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the 841 Old County Road Project MND, including Errata and Response to Comments and other information in the record and the mitigation measures incorporated into the Project would avoid or substantially lessen all of the significant environmental effects as identified in the MND to a less than significant level; and

2. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program accurately reflects the mitigation measures contained in the 841 Old County Road Project MND.

IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby:

1. Adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibits A) together with the Errata providing minor revisions and clarifications; and

2. Adopts, and imposes as conditions of the Project approval the mitigation measures set forth in, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit B).

The Community Development Director is designated as the custodian of the documents and records of proceedings on which this decision is based. The Community Development Director's office is located at City Hall, 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, California. * * * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, certify that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting thereof held on the 9th day of October, 2023 by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 120

APPROVED:

MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibits:

A. 841 Old County Road Mitigated Negative Declaration
B. 841 Old County Road Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program C. 841 Old County Road Project IS/MND- Review and Discussion of Comments

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 121

EXHIBIT A
841 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Technical Attachments are available on the City’s website:
http://www.cityofsancarlos.org/Home?Components/FlexPlanningZoningProjects/PlanningZonin gProjects?1266164/407

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 122

ERRATA
for the
841 Old County Road Project
Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
State Clearinghouse Number: 2023010423

PURPOSE OF THIS ERRATA SHEET
This errata sheet is intended to be appended to the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the proposed 841 Old County Road Project (project), to provide minor revisions and clarifications requested by the City of San Carlos.

The revisions in this document are not “substantial revisions” that could trigger recirculation of the IS/MND or preparation of an environmental impact report under CEQA Guidelines sections 15073.5 and 15074.1. No new significant effects are identified, no new mitigation measures are added, the significance of identified impacts remains unchanged, and all impacts are either below significance levels or reduced to that level through application of identified mitigation.

REVISIONS TO THE IS/MND
The following are minor text changes, additions, or modifications made to the IS/MND.

A page number from the IS/MND and explanation of each revision is included in italics preceding each revision.

Existing and revised IS/MND text is indented. Deletions are noted by strikethrough; additions are underlined.
[placeholder]Page 2: are made
Development of the project would require the following approvals from the City of San Carlos: a Planned Development Rezoning, Planned Development Permit, Design Review Permit, Development Agreement, Lot Merger/Lot Line Adjustment (to be determined), Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate, and Transportation Demand Management Program.

Page 3 ends

The proposed project would involve the demolition of all existing buildings and site improvements and the construction of two new office / research and development (R&D) buildings: a 5-story, 193,852 square foot building, and a 4-story, 131,621 square foot building1 … 1 Consistent with “usable square footage” per San Carlos Municipal Code section 18.03.080 and environmental analysis conventions, operational usage of the site is quantified by gross floor area of the office/R&D space, which excludes parking areas and utility areas and that is what is reported here. The emissions and noise analyses also quantify construction

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 123

activities, which is instead based upon the gross square footage and factors in the parking garage structure, as specified in the attachments to this document.

Page 3 ends

the north and south buildings.

The proposed project would involve the demolition of all existing buildings and site improvements and the construction of two new office / research and development (R&D) buildings: a 5-story, 193,852 square foot building, and a 4-story, 131,621 square foot building1, with maximum heights of approximately 90 and 113 feet respectively, above a two-level underground parking structure. The buildings would be connected through the parking garage and a pedestrian bridge on the 3rd and 4th floors. Project site improvements would also include a courtyard between the buildings, sidewalks, landscaping, and lighting along Commercial Street and Old County Road.

Page 4 ends

The north south building and surrounding site construction is estimated to take 13 14 months. There may be a break in construction between completion of the north south building and initiation of construction of the south north building, but for purposes of this analysis, it was assumed construction would proceed without delay, which would result in the most conservative analysis.

The south north building and surrounding grounds are estimated to span approximately 14 13 months.

Page 14 ends

There are regulations and policies applicable to the project that would be considered uniformly applied development policies or standards pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183.3(f)(7), or “Standard Conditions”.

Page 33 ends

Emissions of air pollutants or TACs are subject to BAAQMD permitting requirements that would require the District BAAQMD to apply all applicable rules and regulations to limit or control these emissions. Regulation 2, Rule 1: General Requirements, and Regulation 2, Rule 5: New Source Review of Toxic Air Contaminants would apply to any potential emissions from these sources. The District’s BAAQMD’s risk policy is to not issue a permit to any source that would cause a cancer risk of greater than 10 chances per million.

Page 34 ends

As shown in Table 6, the cumulative source threshold for PM2.5 is exceeded for the maximally exposed individual due largely to proximity to the CEMEX facility, which represent 47% of the cumulative PM2.5 volumes. However, because the project-specific risk would not exceed the single source thresholds, contributing approximately 1.4% of the total cumulative PM2.5 level, per BAAQMD guidance, the project would not be considered to have a cumulatively considerable contribution to this impact. Per BAAQMD guidance, in cases where a cumulative risk threshold is exceeded, a project’s contribution would be considered cumulatively considerable if the project’s risk exceeds the single source threshold. As indicated above, the project-specific risk would not exceed the single source thresholds, representing only approximately 1.4% of the total cumulative

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 124

PM2.5 level. Therefore, the project would not be considered to have a cumulatively considerable contribution to this impact.

Page 36 ends

With implementation of mitigation measure Bio-1, which requires avoidance of nesting season during construction or a nesting survey and buffers from any nests as appropriate…

Page 52 ends

The GeoTracker database shows the property as a completed and closed leaking UST (LUST) cleanup site as of July 2012.

Page 53 ends

The proposed project includes a subterranean garage that would require removal of all soil within the bounds of the project site to a depth of approximately 25 feet, which would effectively remediate the environmental concerns associated with the on-site soil and groundwater contamination. This soil excavation process would allow for discovery and removal of all suspected or unknown subsurface features that could be contributing to off-site or downgradient contamination levels. These The contamination-affected materials would be managed properly and transported off site.

Page 53 ends

Haz-1.

Mitigation Measure
Haz-1: Adherence to Remediation Measures. The applicant shall work with RWQCB to re-activate the fuel leak case and prepare and implement an agency-approved remediation plan site-specific Site Mitigation Plan. The plan may include preparation of a Site Mitigation Plan shall provide procedures and protocols for excavation, waste classification, and transportation/disposal of the contaminated soil; design of an excavation dewatering treatment system to manage the residual contamination in groundwater and excavation water generated during remediation and grading activities; and potential off-site up-gradient considerations; evaluation and design, if needed, of a soil vapor barrier extension to the waterproofing system for some or all of the perimeter subterranean garage walls to mitigate chemically-affected soil vapor from migrating onto the project site; and further assessment of adjacent down-gradient properties, as required by the RWQCB, to evaluate conditions following completion of the on-site remediation and subgrade construction activities.

Page 54 ends

1 and the timing of mitigation measures Haz-1 and Haz-2.

Implementation of mitigation measures Haz-1 and Haz-2 would requirement implementation of a Remediation Plan Site Mitigation Plan in coordination with RWQCB prior to ground disturbance to address existing site contamination during construction activities and hazardous building material assessment and abatement prior to demolition of existing buildings, which would reduce the effects of hazardous materials from the soil or demolition to less than significant with mitigation.

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 125

Page 54 ends

Factoring in the height of the site, the highest rooftop elements would reach maximum heights of approximately 132 feet above mean sea level, which would be below the FAA height limits.14 14 The height of 132 feet above mean sea level differs from the official “building height”, which is measured from ground level (not sea level) as reported in the Project Description.

Page 56 ends

During construction, the City would require the project to develop and implement best management practices (BMPs) to control erosion associated with construction such as watering the exposed soil, and permanent features to treat stormwater runoff.

Page 61 ends

All construction on the project would be conducted within the allowable hours. The With compliance with standard City conditions related to construction activity and noise, the impacts from noise generated by construction of the project would be less than significant.

Page 73 ends

The Water Shortage Contingency Plans for all three Peninsula Districts were revised as part of the 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) update process and include detailed information about how drought risks are evaluated by Cal Water on an annual basis to determine the potential need for reductions.

Appendix A, Page 13: The following correction is hereby made to correct and error in the summary of the project’s land use type.

The proposed restaurant project land uses were entered into CalEEMod as described in Table 2.

Appendix A, Page 17: The following clarification is hereby made to the construction period assumptions made in the emissions modeling.

Emissions associated with vehicle travel depend on the year of analysis because emission control technology requirements are phased-in over time. Therefore, the earlier the year analyzed in the model, the higher the emission rates utilized by CalEEMod. The earliest full year of operation would be 2026 if construction begins in 2022.11
11 While this analysis was performed with an assumption of a construction start in 2022, with a later initiation of construction, impacts would be the same or lessened (due to increasing emissions controls) from those analyzed here.

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 126

INITIAL STUDY

AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
841 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT
PREPARED FOR:

City of San Carlos

PLANNING DIVISION
600 ELM STREET
SAN CARLOS, CA 94070
JANUARY 2023
Prepared By:

Lamphier-Gregory, Inc.
4100 Redwood Rd, STE 20A - #601
Oakland, CA 94619

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 127

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 128

TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
Introduction to this Document ................................................................................................................1 Public Review...........................................................................................................................................1 Project Information..................................................................................................................................2 Mitigated Negative Declaration.............................................................................................................14 Lead Agency Determination ...............................................................................................................21 Initial Study Checklist.............................................................................................................................22 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected.......................................................................................22 Evaluation of Environmental Effects ..................................................................................................22 Aesthetics.......................................................................................................................................23 Agricultural and Forest Resources.................................................................................................26 Air Quality ......................................................................................................................................27 Biological Resources ......................................................................................................................35 Cultural Resources.........................................................................................................................38 Energy ............................................................................................................................................40 Geology and Soils...........................................................................................................................43 Greenhouse Gas Emissions............................................................................................................46 Hazards and Hazardous Materials .................................................................................................51 Hydrology and Water Quality........................................................................................................56 Land Use and Planning...................................................................................................................59 Mineral Resources .........................................................................................................................60 Noise ..............................................................................................................................................61 Population and Housing.................................................................................................................64 Public Services ...............................................................................................................................65 Recreation......................................................................................................................................66 Transportation ...............................................................................................................................67 Tribal Cultural Resources...............................................................................................................71 Utilities and Service Systems .........................................................................................................72 Wildfire ..........................................................................................................................................75 Mandatory Findings of Significance...............................................................................................76 Document Preparers..............................................................................................................................78 Sources...................................................................................................................................................78 i

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 129

page
TABLES
Table 1: Applicable Standard Conditions ....................................................................................14 Table 2: Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures ....................................................................17 Table 3: Regional Air Pollutant Emissions for Construction........................................................29 Table 4: Regional Air Pollutant Emissions for Operational Period..............................................31 Table 5: Construction and Operation Risk (Unmitigated)...........................................................33 Table 6: Cumulative Community Risk (Unmitigated)..................................................................34 Table 7: Construction and Operational Energy Usage ................................................................41 Table 8: Greenhouse Gas Emissions............................................................................................49 Table 9: Project Vehicle Miles Traveled ......................................................................................70

FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Location...............................................................................................................6 Figure 2: Project Site and Existing Conditions................................................................................7 Figure 3: Site Plan...........................................................................................................................8 Figure 4: Grading and Drainage Plan..............................................................................................9 Figure 5: Utility Plan .....................................................................................................................10 Figure 6: Building Section.............................................................................................................11 Figure 7: Building Elevations ........................................................................................................12 Figure 8: Project renderings .........................................................................................................13

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Assessment Attachment B: Historical Assessment, Cultural Records Search, Sacred Lands Search Attachment C: Energy Calculations
Attachment D: Noise Assessment
Attachment E: CEQA Transportation Analysis
ii

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 130

INTRODUCTION TO THIS DOCUMENT
This document serves as the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the 841 Old County Road project (“project”). Full project application materials are available from the City of San Carlos Planning Division for review upon request.

Per CEQA Guidelines (Section 15070), a Mitigated Negative Declaration can be prepared to meet the requirements of CEQA review when the Initial Study identifies potentially significant environmental effects, but revisions in the project and/or incorporation of mitigation measures agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur and there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record that the project as revised may have significant effect on the environment.

This document is organized in three sections as follows:
 Introduction and Project Information. This section introduces the document and presents the project description including location, setting, and specifics of the lead agency and contacts.  Mitigated Negative Declaration. This section lists the impacts and mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study Checklist and proposes findings that would allow adoption of this document as the CEQA review document for the proposed project.  Initial Study Checklist. This section discusses the CEQA environmental topics and checklist questions and identifies the potential for impacts and proposed mitigation measures to avoid these impacts.

Full project application materials are available for review upon request from the Planning Division at City of San Carlos (see contact info below).

STANDARD CONDITIONS
There are regulations and policies applicable to the project that would be considered uniformly applied development policies or standards pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183.3(7), or “Standard Conditions”. These Standard Conditions are incorporated into a project regardless of the project’s environmental determination, and are therefore considered prior to determination of significance and are not considered mitigation under CEQA. Specifics of applicable Standard Conditions are presented in Table 1 (page 11) and discussed under the relevant topic areas throughout this document.

PUBLIC REVIEW
This Initial Study will be circulated for a 30‐day public review period. Comments may be submitted in writing by email or regular mail to the following address:

City of San Carlos
Planning Division
Lisa Costa Sanders, Principal Planner
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
Email: [email protected]
841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 1

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 131

PROJECT INFORMATION
All figures for the project information are included together on pages 6 through 13.

PROJECT ENTITLEMENTS
Development of the project would require the following approvals from the City of San Carlos: a Planned Development Rezoning, Planned Development Permit, Design Review Permit, Development Agreement, Lot Merger/Lot Line Adjustment (to be determined), Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate, and Transportation Demand Management Program.

Because the project is located in the San Carlos Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan area, the project would be subject to Airport Land Use Commission review and approval.

The project is required to comply with Municipal Regional Permit requirements related to stormwater pollution prevention.

LEAD AGENCY
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070

CONTACT PERSON
Lisa Costa Sanders, Principal Planner
City of San Carlos, Planning Division
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070‐3085
Telephone: 650.802.4207
Email: [email protected]

PROJECT SPONSOR
The Sobrato Organization
Contact: Jeffrey Sobrato
599 Castro Street, Mountain View, CA 94041
Phone: 1‐408‐691‐1125
Email: [email protected]

PROJECT LOCATION AND EXISTING USES
The 3.4‐acre project site (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 046‐133‐160, 046‐134‐050 and ‐060; 046‐135‐010, ‐ 020, ‐030, and ‐040; and 046‐182‐100, ‐110, and ‐150) is located in the City of San Carlos, California. The subject property consists of six legal land parcels with the addresses of 803, 821, 833, 841 and 851 Old County Road, and one legal land parcel that is an unaddressed former railroad spur. The project site is bounded by Bransten Road to the north, Old County Road to the west, Commercial Street to the south, and development and parking on the Commercial Street and Bransten Road parcels to the east. Figure 1 shows the project location and Figure 2 shows the project site and existing conditions.

Page 2 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 132

The project site has been developed with one‐ and two‐story buildings and associated asphalt paved roadways and parking area, landscaped areas and a paved yard for gravel, sand, and mulch storage in stacked block stalls. The property at 803, 821, and 833 Old County Road is currently occupied by San Carlos Garden Supply store, a garden supply store for hardscapes, gravel, sand and mulch and storage and sales. The property at 841 Old County Road is currently occupied by NPC Expert Tree Services, a tree pruning and service company. The property at 851 Old County Road is currently occupied by Peninsula Pet Resort, a pet (canine and feline), boarding, daycare, and grooming facility.

The project site is at an elevation of approximately 20 feet above mean sea level and is relatively flat, regionally sloping to the east‐northeast. The nearest surface water body is Pulgas Creek, located approximately ¼‐mile southwest of the project site. The depth to groundwater is approximately 4 feet below ground surface and the groundwater flow direction is generally to the north.

The site is impacted by contamination from historic and adjacent uses. The main contamination of concern is petroleum‐hydrocarbon in the soil and groundwater. Removal of impacted soil is proposed as part of the project as further discussed in Section 9: Hazards and Hazardous Materials.

GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION / ZONING
Planned Industrial / Heavy Industrial (IH)

SURROUNDING LAND USES
The project site is located adjacent to industrial uses to the north, office and commercial spaces to the east, and the proposed site of the Alexandria Center for Life Science project to the south. Road and elevated train corridors are adjacent to the project to the west, providing a buffer of at least 250 feet to the development on the far side of El Camino Real, which includes retail, hotel/motel, and mixed‐use residential development.

The closest residential uses to the project are located across the rail line and El Camino Real to the west, starting as close as about 500 feet from the project site. The Greater East San Carlos neighborhood has single family homes located as close as approximately 720 feet to the north of the project site.

The San Carlos Airport is located approximately 1,000 feet to the northeast of the project.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Overview and Building Massing
The proposed project would involve the demolition of all existing buildings and site improvements and the construction of two new office / research and development (R&D) buildings: a 5‐story, 193,852 square foot building, and a 4‐story, 131,621 square foot building, with maximum heights of approximately 90 and 113 feet respectively, above a two‐level underground parking structure. Project site improvements would also include a courtyard between the buildings, sidewalks, landscaping, and lighting along Commercial Street and Old County Road.

The applicant is targeting life science tenants. While specific tenants have not been identified at this time, this document assumes the highest potential impact in any given environmental topic area given the flexibility in the future mix of office and/or R&D. For example, peak hour trip generation would be highest for 100 percent office occupancy, so that assumption has been used for the analysis of transportation and all‐R&D occupancy or a mix of the two types of uses would have trips and related 841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 3

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 133

impacts within that analyzed. Emissions would be highest from 100 percent R&D occupancy so that assumption has been used for the emissions analyses and all‐office occupancy or a mix of the two types of uses would have emissions and related impacts within that analyzed.

The buildings would be setback approximately 11 feet at ground level along Old County Road, with the north building setback approximately 7 ‐ 8 feet along Bransten Road and the south building setback approximately 2 ½ feet along Commercial Street. The architectural design is intended to respect the San Carlos innovation and industrial character through the use of natural materials, including red brick masonry and terracotta. Upper‐level terraces would be incorporated to increase active outdoor spaces that can be used by the tenants.

The project would redevelop a site already provided with utilities and services. Utility connections would be made to lines in adjacent streets that are either already existing or will be upgraded through coordination with the nearby Alexandria Center for Life Science project.

Figure 3 shows site plan. Figure 4 shows the grading and drainage plan. Figure 5 shows the utility plan.

Figures 6, 7, and 8 show the building section, elevations, and renderings.

Access & Parking
The project site is accessible by automobile, train, and bus, and would include on‐site facilities for pedestrians and bikes.

Rail: The project site is located 0.46 miles south of the San Carlos Caltrain Station, a regional rail corridor that provides connectivity between San Francisco and San Jose, with limited service to Gilroy during commute hours.

Bus: The project site is located approximately 500 feet from the El Camino Real/Arroyo Avenue SamTrans bus stop, serviced by routes ECR, 397, and 398.

Automobile/Truck: Primary project site access is from Commercial Street and Bransten Road, with secondary entrances at the corners of Old County Road.

Bicycle and Pedestrian Access: Pedestrian and bicycle access is available from the Caltrain Station and downtown San Carlos. Changes are planned to provide improved continuous access to transit stations (see Transportation section for more details).

Structured parking would be provided in 2‐stories below grade, with approximately 745 parking spaces to serve the office/R&D tenants. In addition, there would be 55 long term/80 short term bicycle parking spaces.

Construction
Project construction activities are anticipated to span approximately 3 years. Demolition and abatement would run approximately 1.5 months, followed by 6 to 7 months for excavation and construction of the underground parking garage. The north building and surrounding site construction is estimated to take 13 months. There may be a break in construction between completion of the north building and initiation of construction of the south building, but for purposes of this analysis, it was assumed construction would proceed without delay, which would result in the most conservative analysis. The south building and surrounding grounds are estimated to span approximately 14 months.

Page 4 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 134

The project would involve removal of contaminated soil and excavation for subsurface parking extending to depths of up to about 25 feet below ground surface. An estimated 121,000 cubic yards of soil is expected to be exported from the project site. Construction dewatering would be necessary during excavation as further discussed in Section 7: Geology and Soils and Section 10: Hydrology and Water Quality.
841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 5

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 135

Figure 1: Project Location
Source: Cornerstone Earth Group, 2021

Page 6 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 136

Figure 2: Project Site and Existing Conditions
Source: Google Earth, modified to show site
841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 7

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 137

Figure 3: Site Plan
Source: Project Plan Set, dated January 11, 2023

Page 8 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 138

Figure 4: Grading and Drainage Plan
Source: Project Plan Set, dated January 11, 2023
841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 9

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 139

Figure 5: Utility Plan
Source: Project Plan Set, dated January 11, 2023

Page 10 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 140

Figure 6: Building Section
Source: Project Plan Set, dated January 11, 2023
841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 11

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 141

Figure 7: Building Elevations
Source: Project Plan Set, dated January 11, 2023

Page 12 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 142

Figure 8: Project Renderings
Source: Project Plan Set, dated January 11, 2023
841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 13

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 143

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION

PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION, AND SETTING
This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the 841 Old County Road project. See the Introduction and project Information section of this document for details of the project.

STANDARD CONDITIONS
There are regulations and policies applicable to the project that would be considered uniformly applied development policies or standards pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183.3(7), or “Standard Conditions”. These Standard Conditions are incorporated into a project regardless of the project’s environmental determination and are therefore considered prior to determination of significance and are not considered mitigation under CEQA. The Standard Conditions in Table 1 below would be applicable to the proposed project.

Table 1: Applicable Standard Conditions
Resource Area/Topic Standard Condition
Aesthetics Exterior Materials. Pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, the colors and materials of the structure and improvements shall be in substantial compliance with those presented and described within the application materials. Any changes determined to be significant as determined by the Community Development Director shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.

Aesthetics Exterior Lighting Plan. Pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, a final exterior lighting plan with specifications in conformance with the approved plans is subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to Building Permit issuance.

Aesthetics Signage. New signs are subject to compliance with San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.22. No signs have yet been approved as part of this project. Any signs that are visible from U.S. Highway 101 shall require approval by the Planning Commission.

Biological Resources Protection of Trees. Pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Sections

18.18.070 and 18.41.020, the project proponent shall obtain a permit to remove any tree(s) protected under the City’s Interim Protected Tree Ordinance, as determined by an arborist, and shall also prepare a tree protection plan that includes a map of the tree protection zone and is included in the construction drawings and bid package. Removed trees will be replaced in accordance with the ordinance at the discretion of the Community Development Director. If any removed trees are within the jurisdiction of California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and CDFW issues a Lake and Streambed Agreement for the project, the tree replacement ratios shall comply with CDFW requirements.

Cultural and Tribal
Cultural Resources
Protection of Human Remains. If human remains are unearthed during ground‐disturbing activities, Section 7050.5(b) and (c) of the California Health and Safety code will be implemented. Section 7050.5(b) and (c) states:

Page 14 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 144

Resource Area/Topic Standard Condition
(b) In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined, in accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code, that the remains are not subject to the provisions of Section 27492 of the Government Code or any other related provisions of law concerning investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of death, and the recommendations concerning treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. The coroner shall make his or her determination within two working days from the time the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, notifies the coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains.
(c) If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission. [In which case, section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code would apply.]
Hydrology/ Water
Quality
Stormwater Control Plan. A stormwater and drainage control plan shall be prepared and implemented in compliance with the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP), Provision C.3 of the County’s Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit and any other required provisions of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code. The plan shall specify best management practices for the control and prevention of stormwater pollution. The plan shall address both construction‐phase and post‐construction pollutant impacts from development.

Construction‐phase measures shall include: erosion control measures such as installing fiber rolls, silt fences, gravel bags, or other erosion control devices around and/or downslope of work areas and around storm drains prior to earthwork and before the onset of any anticipated storm events; monitoring and maintaining all erosion and sediment control devices; designating a location away from storm drains when refueling or maintaining equipment; scheduling grading and excavation during dry weather; and removing vegetation only when absolutely necessary.

Post‐construction drainage controls shall be specified to capture and treat stormwater onsite.

Geology and Soils Compliance with design‐level Geotechnical Investigation and Structural Design Plans. Consistent with plan check procedures for Building Permit consideration, proper foundation engineering and construction shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of a Registered Geotechnical Engineer and a Licensed Professional Engineer. The structural 841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 15

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 145

Resource Area/Topic Standard Condition
engineering design, with supporting Geotechnical Investigation, shall incorporate seismic parameters compliant with the California Building Code.

Noise Construction Noise. Construction Activities shall comply with the City’s noise ordinance (Chapter 9.30 of the San Carlo Municipal Code), which includes restriction of construction activities to the hours of 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on weekdays, and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Saturdays.

Transportation Transportation Demand Management (TDM). Pursuant to Chapter 18.25 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code and San Mateo County Congestion Management Program Land Use Implementation Policy (C/CAG TDM Policy), a Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be implemented for the life of the project as presented to and approved by the Planning Commission. The owner and/or future tenants shall be responsible for supplying Planning Staff with the contact information for the Designated TDM Contact person.

A report documenting the TDM activities undertaken and their results shall be submitted to the Community Development Director annually at the responsibility of the applicant. The Director may impose reasonable changes to assure the program’s objectives will be met. The owner and/or future tenants shall be responsible for ensuring that C/CAG TDM Policy requirements and monitoring and reporting are met.

As new more efficient and effective TDM measures become available to reduce vehicle trips, these measures may be included or substituted to maintain the trip reduction levels described in the Plan. Any such substitutions shall be to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Any changes determined to be substantive or inconsistent with the TDM Plan by the Community Development Director shall require review and approval by the Planning Commission.
[Note that if a Transportation Management Association (TMA) is established in San Carlos that can serve the project site, it is expected that the property owner shall participate in the TMA as fulfillment of TDM requirements. The level of financial contribution of the participants in the TMA shall be based on an equitable measure such as square footage (or similar metric) as agreed upon by the participants and the City.]

Page 16 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 146

POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS REQUIRING MITIGATION
The following is a list of potential project impacts and the mitigation measures recommended to reduce these impacts to a less than significant level. Refer to the Initial Study Checklist section of this document for a more detailed discussion.

Table 2: Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potential Impact Mitigation Measures
Air Quality, Construction Emissions: Construction of the project would result in emissions and fugitive dust. While the project emissions would be below threshold levels, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) considers dust generated by grading and construction activities to be a significant impact associated with project development if uncontrolled and recommends implementation of construction management practices to reduce construction‐related emissions and dust for all projects, regardless of comparison to their construction‐period thresholds.

Mitigation Measure
Air‐1: Basic Construction Management Practices. The project shall demonstrate proposed compliance with all applicable regulations and operating procedures prior to issuance of demolition, building or grading permits, including implementation of the following BAAQMD “Basic Construction Mitigation Measures”.

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off‐site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track‐out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

6. Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all access points.

7. All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.

8. Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 17

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 147

Biological Resources, Nesting Birds: Trees in the vicinity of the project site could host the nests of common birds that are protected under the federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the California Fish and Wildlife Code, so the following mitigation would be applicable to prevent a “take” of these species under these regulations related to disturbance during nesting.

Mitigation Measure
Bio‐1: Pre‐Construction Nesting Bird Survey. Initiation of construction activities during the avian nesting season (February 15 through September 15) shall be avoided to the extent feasible. If construction initiation during the nesting season cannot be avoided, pre‐construction surveys for nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and/or Fish and Game Code of California within 100 feet of a development site in the project area shall be conducted within 14 days prior to initiation of construction activities. If active nests are found, a 100‐foot buffer area shall be established around the nest in which no construction activity takes place. The buffer width may be modified upon recommendations of a qualified biologist regarding the appropriate buffer in consideration of species, stage of nesting, location of the nest, and type of construction activity based upon published protocols and/or guidelines from the U.S. or California Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS, CDFW) or through consultation with USFWS and/or CDFW.

The biologist may also determine that construction activities can be allowed within a buffer area with monitoring by the biologist to and stoppage of work in that area if adverse effects to the nests are observed. The buffer shall be maintained until after the nestlings have fledged and left the nest. These surveys would remain valid as long as construction activity is consistently occurring in a given area and would be completed again if there is a lapse in construction activities of more than 14 consecutive days during the nesting season.

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, Unknown Resources and Remains: There are no known cultural, tribal cultural, or paleontological resources at the site. However, given the moderate to high potential for unrecorded archeological resources and Native American resources and proposed disturbance of native soils which also have the potential to contain paleontological resources, mitigation measures Culture‐1, Culture‐2, and Culture‐3 shall be implemented to address the potential for unexpected discovery of such resources.

Mitigation Measures
Culture‐1: Further Site Assessment. Prior to ground disturbance, a qualified consultant shall conduct further archival and field study research to determine the appropriate locations for cultural or tribal cultural resource (historic/archaeological/paleontological/Native American) monitoring during removal of asphalt or concrete, fill, vegetation, or structures. Field study may include, but is not limited to, hand auger sampling, shovel test units, or geoarchaeological analyses as well as other common methods used to identify the presence of buried archaeological resources.

Culture‐2: Archaeological Sensitivity Training. In anticipation of discovery of unknown archaeological resources during construction, Archaeological Sensitivity Training shall be carried out by a qualified archaeologist for all personnel who will engage in ground disturbing activities on the site. The training shall be conducted at the start of construction and prior to ground disturbance.

Page 18 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 148

The training shall include suitable photographic materials showing the kinds of artifacts and evidence of prehistoric archaeological sites likely to be found in the area, as well as written and verbal descriptions for archaeological resources and signs of potential archaeological discovery. The training shall also include written materials describing what to do in the event of a discovery, or suspected discovery of archaeological resource.

Culture‐3: Protection of Accidentally Discovered Cultural Resources. In the event that any previously undiscovered cultural resource (historic/ archaeological/paleontological/Native American) are uncovered during ground disturbing activities, all such activity shall cease until these resources have been evaluated by a qualified consultant and specific measures can be implemented to protect these resources in coordination with the City and in accordance with sections 21083.2 and/or 21084.1 of the California Public Resources Code
Geology and Soils, Site Characteristics and Excavation: The San Francisco Bay Area is a seismically active region, and the project includes construction activities require substantial excavation and dewatering. To mitigate the potential for damage to structures or people, the following measure shall be implemented:

Mitigation Measure
Geo‐1: Excavation Monitoring. The construction contractor shall implement a monitoring program to monitor the effects of the construction on nearby improvements, including the monitoring of cracking and vertical movement of adjacent structures, nearby streets, sidewalks, parking and other improvements. This shall include the installation of inclinometers or other instrumentation as part of the shoring system to closely monitor lateral movement at locations considered by the geotechnical engineer to be critical areas. The monitoring program shall be active from the beginning of excavation until the framing of the subterranean structure is complete and dewatering ceases.

Hazardous Materials, Site Remediation: The site is impacted by contamination from historic and adjacent uses, mostly due to the historic use of the site as a commercial fueling facility. The main contamination of concern is total petroleum hydrocarbons in the soil and groundwater. Removal of impacted soil is proposed as part of project construction activities and would be performed per requirements of the regulatory agency, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, as outlined in Haz‐1.

Mitigation Measure
Haz‐1: Adherence to Remediation Measures. The applicant shall work with RWQCB to re‐activate the fuel leak case and prepare and implement an agency approved remediation plan. The plan may include preparation of a Site Mitigation Plan to provide procedures and protocols for excavation, waste classification, and transportation/disposal of the contaminated soil; design of an excavation dewatering treatment system to manage the residual contamination in groundwater and excavation water generated during remediation and grading activities and potential off‐site up‐gradient considerations; evaluation and design, if needed, of a soil vapor barrier extension to the waterproofing system for some or all of the perimeter subterranean garage walls to mitigate chemically‐affected soil vapor from 841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 19

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 149

migrating onto the project site; and further assessment of adjacent down‐ gradient properties, as required by the RWQCB, to evaluate conditions following completion of the on‐site remediation and subgrade construction activities.

Hazardous Materials, Hazardous Building Materials: Because of the age of the existing buildings, there is the possibility for hazardous material from asbestos‐containing materials and lead‐based paint that could be released during demolition activities if not appropriately abated.

Mitigation Measure
Haz‐2: Lead‐Based Paint and Asbestos Abatement. Prior to demolition, the applicant shall demonstrate that buildings have been assessed for asbestos‐ containing materials and lead‐based paint and that any suspected such materials have been abated by a licensed abatement contractor and disposed of according to all state and local regulations.

Noise and Vibration, Operational Noise: Because of the location of residences close to the project site, rooftop equipment has the potential to exceed noise ordinance levels and may need to be dampened.

Mitigation Measure
Noise‐1: Rooftop Mechanical Equipment Noise Assessment and Abatement.

The applicant shall conduct a detailed mechanical noise analysis once rooftop equipment has been selected. If any equipment exceeds 87 dBA at 5 feet, the applicant shall provide silencers, barriers, or other noise mitigation treatments to reduce expected noise levels from the mechanical equipment to within the noise ordinance limits.

Noise and Vibration, Construction Vibration: Because of the proximity of adjacent buildings, there is the possibility for vibrations from construction equipment to damage their structures if not appropriately managed.

Mitigation Measure
Noise‐2: Construction Vibration Reduction and Monitoring. Construction Vibration Reduction and Monitoring. Wherever feasible, operation of vibratory rollers shall be avoided within 20 feet of existing buildings and operation of other construction equipment such as large bulldozers or loaded trucks shall be avoided within 10 feet of existing structures on adjacent lots.

If vibratory rollers must operate within 20 feet of existing buildings or other major construction equipment must operate within 10 feet of existing buildings, then a vibration monitoring plan shall be prepared and implemented to monitor construction vibration at the nearest structures.

Page 20 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 150

LEAD AGENCY DETERMINATION
On the basis of this evaluation, it can be concluded that:


The proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures to reduce these impacts will be required of the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 

The proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

The proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
 Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. 841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 21

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 151

INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
Environmental factors that may be affected by the project are listed alphabetically below. Factors marked with an “X” () were determined to be potentially affected by the project, involving at least one impact that is a potentially significant impact as indicated by the Checklist on the following pages.

Unmarked factors () were determined to not be significantly affected by the project, based on discussion provided in the Checklist, including the application of mitigation measures.  Aesthetics  Agricultural/Forest Resources  Air Quality  Biological Resources
 Geology/Soils
 Cultural Resources  Energy
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions  Hazards/Hazardous Material  Mineral Resources Hydrology/Water Quality  Land Use/Planning  Noise  Population/Housing
 Transportation
 Wildfire
 Public Services
 Recreation  Tribal Cultural Resources
 Mandatory Findings of Significance Utilities/Service Systems There are no impacts that would remain significant with implementation of the identified mitigation measures.

EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
The Checklist portion of the Initial Study begins below, with explanations of each CEQA issue topic. Four outcomes are possible, as explained below.

1. A “no impact” response indicates that no action that would have an adverse effect on the environment would occur due to the project.

2. A “less than significant” response indicates that while there may be potential for an environmental impact, there are standard procedures or regulations in place, or other features of the project as proposed, which would limit the extent of this impact to a level of “less than significant.”

3. Responses that indicate that the impact of the project would be “less than significant with mitigation” indicate that mitigation measures, identified in the subsequent discussion, will be required as a condition of project approval in order to effectively reduce potential project‐ related environmental effects to a level of “less than significant.”

4. A “potentially significant impact” response indicates that further analysis is required to determine the extent of the potential impact and identify any appropriate mitigation. If any topics are indicated with a “potentially significant impact,” these topics would need to be analyzed in an Environmental Impact Report.

Page 22 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 152

1. AESTHETICS
Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?  
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from publicly accessible vantage points.) If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?

d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area?
Under CEQA Section 21099(d), “Aesthetic… impacts of a residential, mixed‐use residential, or employment center project on an infill site located within a transit priority area shall not be considered significant impacts on the environment.”
Accordingly, aesthetics is no longer considered in determining if a project has the potential to result in significant environmental effects for projects that meet all three of the following criteria:

1. The project is in a transit priority area. CEQA Section 21099(a)(7) defines a “transit priority area” as an area within one‐half mile of an existing or planned major transit stop. A “major transit stop” is defined in CEQA Section 21064.3 as a rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the a.m. and p.m. peak commute periods.

2. The project is on an infill site. CEQA Section 21099(a)(4) defines an “infill site” as either (1) a lot within an urban area that was previously developed; or (2) a vacant site where at least 75 percent of the site perimeter adjoins (or is separated by only an improved public right‐of‐way from) parcels that are developed with qualified urban uses.

3. The project is residential, mixed‐use residential, or an employment center. CEQA Section 21099(a)(1) defines an “employment center” as a project situated on property zoned for commercial uses with a floor area ratio of no less than 0.75 and located within a transit priority area.

The proposed project meets all three of the above criteria because the project (1) is in a transit priority area due to the location of the El Camino Real transit corridor (a major transit stop) and San Carlos 841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 23

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 153

Caltrain Station within 0.5 miles from the project site; (2) is on an infill site that has been previously developed and is fully adjoined by urban uses and public rights‐of‐way within San Carlos; and (3) is an employment center with a projected FAR of 2.19. Thus, this section does not consider aesthetics, including the aesthetic impacts of light and glare, in determining the significance of project impacts under CEQA.

Nevertheless, the City recognizes that the public and decision makers may be interested in information about the aesthetic effects of a proposed project; therefore, the information contained in this section related to aesthetics, light, and glare is provided solely for informational purposes and is not used to determine the significance of environmental impacts pursuant to CEQA. a) Scenic Vistas
The City has not officially designated any scenic vistas. However, San Carlos General Plan Land Use Element Policies LU‐8.19 and LU‐9.9 encourage development to minimize obstruction of scenic vistas from major public streets and open spaces, and design review pursuant to Sections 18.29.030 and 18.29.060 of the City’s Municipal Code requires new development to respect existing public scenic vistas.

The project site and immediately surrounding areas are generally flat and do not afford substantial long‐distance views across the site that could be considered scenic vistas. It is possible the project would change the character of some views from nearby commercial uses and could be visible in some mid‐range views from the Greater East San Carlos neighborhood and views from more distant hillside residences, but these views would not qualify as scenic vistas or otherwise protected views nor are these uses from which views would necessarily be protected.

While the project proposes buildings that would be taller than the one‐story buildings currently at the site and would be visible from more locations, the project would not substantially interfere with any public scenic vistas.

As noted above, this topic is being discussed as an informational item only because the CEQA Guidelines have determined this type of project would not have a significant impact in this regard.

This informational discussion agrees with the statutory conclusion that the project impact would not be significant.
b) Scenic Highways
There is no designated or eligible State Scenic Highway in the vicinity of the project nor is the project site adjacent to any scenic roadway identified in the City’s General Plan.1, 2 As noted above, this topic is being discussed as an informational item only because the CEQA Guidelines have determined this type of project would not have a significant impact in this regard.

This informational discussion agrees with the statutory conclusion that the project impact would not be significant.
1 California Department of Transportation, State Scenic Highway Mapping System, http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/scenic_hwy.htm 2 City of San Carlos, San Carlos 2030 General Plan, pp.92‐95.

Page 24 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 154

c) Visual Character
The project site is currently developed with industrial uses, is zoned and designated for commercial and industrial development, and is surrounded by other sites with industrial/commercial zoning and development.

While the project would increase the height of development at the site (from one‐ and two‐ story buildings to four‐ and five‐stories with rooftop projections), increased height would not of itself be considered necessarily negative or a substantial degradation under CEQA.

The project site, as well as the adjacent properties on the north, south, and east sides, are all marked by the City as redevelopment sites, and are being guided by the new East Side Innovation District Vision Plan. The design review process required by Section 18.116.130 of the Zoning Code requires architectural review for all new development in San Carlos prior to the issuance of a building permit. This review process ensures that all new development is aesthetically appropriate in scale and design, and that new buildings maintain the character of the surrounding district. Policy LU‐6.6 of the General Plan encourages new development on the East Side to feature high quality architecture that reinforces the character of the area. As detailed in Standard Condition: Exterior Materials, included in Table 1, any significant changes to colors or materials used on the exterior of the project from those included in the application materials must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Also as included in Table 1, Standard Condition: Signage, any proposed signage must comply with Municipal Code Chapter 18.22, along with approval by the Planning Commission if the signage is visible from U.S. Highway 101.

As noted above, this topic is being discussed as an informational item only because the CEQA Guidelines have determined this type of project would not have a significant impact in this regard.

This informational discussion agrees with the statutory conclusion that the project impact would not be significant. Additionally, the City would review the proposed design as part of the approval process, which can include considerations beyond those strictly environmental‐focused. d) Light and Glare
Sources of light and glare in the project vicinity include interior and exterior building lights and light from parking lots. Light and glare associated with vehicular traffic along major thoroughfares in the area also create sources of glare. The existing level and sources of light and glare are typical of those in a developed urban setting.

Redevelopment of the project site has the potential to create additional light or glare. The project application is required to include a lighting plan and photometric plan as detailed in Standard Condition: Exterior Lighting Plan, included in Table 1, that demonstrates that the project would meet the City’s standards that limit the amount of light that can spill over to other properties through the use of downcast lighting fixtures. With adherence to applicable regulations and policies, the project would have a less than significant impact on light and glare in San Carlos.

The project would result in development and lighting treatments typical of the existing commercial and industrial urban settings and consistent with lighting standards to minimize lighting on adjacent areas and would therefore not result in new sources of substantial adverse light or glare. As noted above, this topic is being discussed as an informational item only because the CEQA Guidelines have determined this type of project would not have a significant impact in this regard. This informational discussion agrees with the statutory conclusion that the project impact would not be significant. 841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 25

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 155

2. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY RESOURCES
In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non‐agricultural use?

b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract?
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?

d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non‐forest use? 

e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non‐ agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non‐forest use? a‐e) Agriculture and Forestry Resources
The project site is located in a developed urban area near a highway. No part of the site is zoned for or currently being used for agricultural or forestry purposes or is subject to the Williamson Act. 3 There would be no impact to agricultural and forestry resources as a result of this project. 3 City of San Carlos, San Carlos 2030 General Plan, p.111.

Page 26 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 156

3. AIR QUALITY
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? 

b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non‐attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard? c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?  d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of people?
This section utilizes information from the Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment prepared for this analysis by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. and dated May 6, 2022, included in full as Attachment A. a) Air Quality Plan
Projects within San Carlos are subject to the Bay Area Clean Air Plan, first adopted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) (in association with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and the Association of Bay Area Governments) in 1991 to meet state requirements and those of the Federal Clean Air Act. The plan is meant to demonstrate progress toward meeting the ozone standards, but also includes other elements related to particulate matter, toxic air contaminants, and greenhouse gases. The latest update to the plan, adopted in April 2017, is the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan.

BAAQMD recommends analyzing a project’s consistency with current air quality plan primary goals and control measures. The impact would be presumed significant if the project would conflict with or obstruct attainment of the primary goals or implementation of the control measures.

The primary goals of the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan are:
•
•
Attain all state and national air quality standards
Eliminate disparities among Bay Area communities in cancer health risk from toxic air contaminants
• Reduce Bay Area greenhouse gas emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 (This standard is addressed in Section 8: Greenhouse Gas Emissions.)
841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 27

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 157

The project would be required to comply with all applicable rules and regulations related to emissions and health risk and would not result in a new substantial source of emissions or toxic air contaminants (see items b‐d below) or otherwise conflict with the primary goals of the 2017 Clean Air Plan.

The project would be consistent with all rules and regulations related to construction activities and the proposed development would meet current standards of energy and water efficiency (Energy Control Measure EN1 and Water Control Measure WR2) and recycling and green waste requirements (Waste Management Control Measures WA3 and WA4) and does not conflict with applicable control measures aimed at improving access/connectivity for bicycles and pedestrians (Transportation Control Measure TR9) or any other control measures. The project is considered urban infill, would be located near employment centers, and would be located near transit with regional connections.

The project, therefore, would be consistent with the Clean Air Plan and have a less than significant impact in this regard.
b) Air Quality Standards/Criteria Pollutants
Ambient air quality standards have been established by state and federal environmental agencies for specific air pollutants most pervasive in urban environments. These pollutants are referred to as criteria air pollutants because the standards established for them were developed to meet specific health and welfare criteria set forth in the enabling legislation and include ozone precursors including nitrogen oxides and reactive organic gasses (NOx and ROG), carbon monoxide (CO), and suspended particulate matter (PM and PM ). The Bay Area is considered “attainment” for all of10 2.5 the national standards, with the exception of ozone. It is considered “nonattainment” for State standards for ozone and particulate matter.

Past, present, and future development projects contribute to the region’s adverse air quality impacts on a cumulative basis. By its very nature, air pollution is largely a cumulative impact. No single project is sufficient in size to, by itself, result in nonattainment of ambient air quality standards. Instead, a project’s individual emissions contribute to existing cumulatively significant adverse air quality impacts.4
BAAQMD updated their Guidelines for air quality analysis in coordination with adoption of new thresholds of significance on June 2, 2010.5 The most recent version of the Guidelines is dated May 2017.

Project‐related air quality impacts fall into two categories: short‐term impacts that would occur during construction of the project and long‐term impacts due to project operation. BAAQMD’s adopted thresholds are average daily emissions during construction or operation of 54 pounds per day or operational emissions of 10 tons per year of NOx, ROG or PM2.5 and 82 pounds per day or 15 tons per year of PM10.
4 5
BAAQMD, May 2017, California Environmental Quality Act Air Quality Guidelines, p. 2‐1.

Bay Area Air Quality Management District. June 2, 2010. News Release http://www.baaqmd.gov/~/media/Files/Communications%20and%20Outreach/Publications/News%20Releases/2010/ceqa _100602.ashx.

Page 28 ends

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 158

Construction and operational emissions for the project were modeled using the California Emissions Estimator Model (“CalEEMod”) version 2020.4.0. Project details were entered into the model including the proposed land uses, Transportation Demand Management Plan trip reductions, Peninsula Clean Energy carbon intensity factors, demolition/earthwork volumes, and construction schedule. Model defaults were otherwise used. The CARB EMission FACtors 2021 (EMFAC2021) model was used to predict emissions from construction traffic, which includes worker travel, vendor trucks, and haul trucks. The CalEEMod inputs and results and EMFAC inputs are included in Attachment A.

Construction Emissions
Construction of the project would involve demolition, excavation, site preparation, building erection, paving, and finishing and landscaping. Although these construction activities would be temporary, they would have the potential to cause both nuisance and health‐related air quality impacts.

BAAQMD’s adopted thresholds are average daily emissions during construction of 54 pounds per day of NOx, ROG or PM and 82 pounds per day of PM .2.5 10 The results from emissions modeling for construction are summarized in Table 3 (and included in full in Attachment A).

Table 3: Regional Air Pollutant Emissions for Construction Description ROG
14 NOx
16 PM101
<1
PM2.51
<1Average Daily Emissions (lbs/day)
BAAQMD Daily Thresholds (lbs/day) 54 54 82 54
Exceeds Threshold? No No No No
1 Applies to exhaust emissions only
Source: Illingworth & Rodkin 2021, Table 4 in Attachment A.

Construction‐period emissions levels are below BAAQMD thresholds presented in Table 3. However, BAAQMD considers dust generated by grading and construction activities to be a significant impact associated with project development if uncontrolled and recommends implementation of construction mitigation measures to reduce construction‐related emissions and dust for all projects, regardless of comparison to their construction‐period thresholds. These basic construction management practices are included in Mitigation Measure Air‐1, below and would further reduce construction‐period criteria pollutant impacts.

Mitigation Measure
Air‐1: Basic Construction Management Practices. The project applicant/owner/sponsor shall demonstrate proposed compliance with all applicable regulations and operating procedures prior to issuance of demolition, building or grading permits, including implementation of the following BAAQMD “Basic Construction Mitigation Measures”.

1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day. 841 Old County Road Project Initial Study/MND Page 29

9.a
October 09, 2023

Packet Pg. 159

2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off‐site shall be covered.

3. All visible mud or dirt track‐out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.

4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.

5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.

With implementation of Mitigation Measure Air‐1, the impact related to construction‐period criteria pollutant impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. Because construction‐period emissions would not exceed applicable significance thresholds, additional construction mitigation measures would not be required to mitigate impacts.

Operational Emissions
Emissions from operation of the project could cumulatively contribute to air pollutant levels in the region. These air pollutants include ROG and NOx that affect ozone levels (and to some degree – particulate levels), PM , and PM .10 2.5
BAAQMD’s adopted thresholds are emissions during operations of 54 pounds per day or 10 tons per year of NOx, ROG or PM and 82 pounds per day or 15 tons per year of PM . Emissions of air2.5 10 pollutants associated with the project were predicted using CalEEMod. This model predicts daily emissions associated with development projects by combining predicted daily traffic activity, including reductions for existing uses and the required Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan (see Section 17, Transportation and Attachment E), associated with the different land use types, with emission factors from the State’s mobile emission factor model (i.e., EMFAC2021).

Emissions associated with vehicle travel depend on the year of analysis because emission control technology requirements are phased‐in over time. Therefore, the earlier the year analyzed in the model, the higher the emission rates utilized by CalEEMod. The earliest full year of operation would be 2025 if construction begins in 2023. Other sources of operational emissions include two stand‐by

Page 30 ends

San Carlos City CouncilOctober 9, 2023

San Carlos City Council
October 9, 2023