San Carlos City Council
November 24, 2025

Report on Compliance and Other Matters
As part of obtaining reasonable assurance about whether the City’s financial statements are free from material misstatement, we performed tests of its compliance with ce rtain provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements, noncompliance with which could have a direct and material effect on the financial statement. However, providing an opinion on complianc e with those provisions was not an objective of our audit, and accordingly, we do not express such an opinio n. The results of our tests disclosed no instances of noncompliance or other matters that are required to be reported under Government Auditing Standards.

Purpose of this Report

The purpose of this report is solely to describe the sc ope of our testing of internal control and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control or on compliance. This report is an integral pa rt of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the City’s internal control and compliance. Accordingly, this communication is not suitable for any other purpose.

Badawi & Associates, CPAs
Emeryville, California
November 5, 2025
174

8.g
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 247

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 24, 2025
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of a Products and/or Services Agreement with Crayon (Formerly SoftwareOne) for the Renewal of the Annual Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Agreement Until the Microsoft Applications Are Replaced.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommend that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the execution of a products and/or services agreement for the renewal of the annual Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Agreement under the County of Riverside cooperative purchasing program with any authorized vendor, including SoftwareOne, Inc. and Crayon Group, until the Microsoft applications are replaced, and to add or adjust licenses as needed during the agreement term.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

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

The Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Agreement (“EA”) has been budgeted since 2006 and any annual increases will be covered by the Information Technology Division’s budget.

Costs for the upcoming three-year term, covering December 1, 2025 through November 30, 2028, are $83,552.60 per year, for a total of $250,657.80. Any future increases will continue to be funded within the division’s approved budget.

BACKGROUND:

The City of San Carlos has historically participated in the County of Riverside’s Microsoft Enterprise Agreement for all Microsoft licensing. This cooperative purchasing program provides participating agencies with standardized government pricing and streamlined license management for Microsoft products.

In 2018, the City Council approved Resolution 2018-006, authorizing the City Manager to sign an addendum with SoftwareOne, Inc. for renewals under the County of Riverside’s Microsoft Enterprise Agreement. The City has continued to renew its Microsoft licensing under that authorization since 2018.

On July 2, 2025, SoftwareOne acquired Crayon, and the two companies are merging under the SoftwareOne name. During this transition, SoftwareOne has moved the City’s renewal process to Crayon, which is the active reseller under the Riverside Microsoft Enterprise Agreement until the merger and renaming are complete.

8.h
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 248

This item is returning to the City Council because the 2018 authorization referenced SoftwareOne, while the current renewal quote was issued under Crayon, now owned by SoftwareOne. Staff is seeking Council confirmation that this change may be treated as a continuation under SoftwareOne’s ownership and that no additional Council action will be required for future renewals.

ANALYSIS:

The Microsoft Enterprise Agreement provides licensing for the City’s core software and cloud services, including Microsoft 365 (Word, Excel, Outlook, Teams, OneDrive), Windows 10/11 Enterprise, and server products such as Windows Server, SQL Server, Active Directory, and Exchange Online. These applications support essential City systems including Munis (financials), Accela (permitting), and Lucity (public works asset management), all of which rely on Microsoft’s infrastructure.

The agreement also provides the required client access licenses (CALs) for staff computers and devices, along with access to ongoing software updates, technical support, and training resources through Microsoft’s Government Community Cloud (GCC). This ensures the City remains current, secure, and compliant with modern technology and cybersecurity standards.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the execution of a products and/or services agreement with Crayon (formerly SoftwareOne) for the renewal of the annual Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Agreement until the Microsoft applications are replaced; 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

2. Renewal Quote

8.h
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 249

RESOLUTION NO. 2025 – ____

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

AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A PRODUCTS AND/OR SERVICES AGREEMENT

WITH CRAYON (FORMERLY SOFTWAREONE) FOR THE RENEWAL OF THE

ANNUAL MICROSOFT CORPORATION ENTERPRISE AGREEMENT UNTIL THE MICROSOFT APPLICATIONS ARE REPLACED.

WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos utilizes Microsoft software and cloud services to support its day-to-day operations, including desktop productivity applications, server infrastructure, database management, cybersecurity, and communication platforms; and WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos participates in the County of Riverside’s Microsoft Enterprise Agreement, a cooperative purchasing program that allows participating municipalities to obtain Microsoft software licensing and support through authorized resellers; and
WHEREAS, in 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2018-006, authorizing the City Manager to execute addenda with SoftwareOne, Inc. for annual renewals under the County of Riverside’s Microsoft Enterprise Agreement; and
WHEREAS, Crayon is now the active reseller under the County of Riverside’s Microsoft Enterprise Agreement, and on July 2, 2025, SoftwareOne acquired Crayon, with both companies in the process of merging under the SoftwareOne name; and WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes the City Manager to add or adjust Microsoft licenses as needed during the agreement term, provided sufficient funding is available within the Information Technology Division’s budget; and
WHEREAS, the City Council authorizes the City Manager to execute all necessary documents and agreements with any vendor authorized under the County of Riverside’s Microsoft Enterprise Agreement, including SoftwareOne, Inc., Crayon, or any successor entity, to ensure continuity of Microsoft licensing and support services; and WHEREAS, the three-year renewal for the Microsoft Enterprise Agreement, effective December 1, 2025 through November 30, 2028, totals $250,657.80 and is included in the Information Technology Division’s operating budget.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby authorizes the execution of a products and/or services agreement with Crayon for the renewal of the annual Microsoft Corporation Enterprise Agreement until the Microsoft applications are replaced.
* * * * *
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 24th day of November 2024, by the following vote:

8.h
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 250

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

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

8.h
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 251

Enrollment Number TBD
Customer Name City of San Carlos
Quote Date: 11/10/2025
Coverage Start: 12/1/2025
Coverage End: 11/30/2028
$12.00
Part Number Description Months
Remaining Qty Annual Net Unit
Price Extended Total
Enterprise Products
AAD-34704 M365 G3 Unified FUSL GCC Sub Per User 12 128 $387.57 $49,608.96 Additional Products
8ZZ-00001 M365 G5 Security GCC Sub Per User 12 128 $129.19 $16,536.32 GLN-00001 Defender O365 P2 GCC Sub Per User 12 0 $45.76 $0.00 7KB-00001 Defender Endpoint P2 GCC Sub Per User 12 0 $54.07 $0.00 MQN-00001 Entra ID P2 Gov Sub Per User 12 0 $82.33 $0.00 MQM-00001 Entra ID P1 Gov Sub Per User 12 30 $54.93 $1,647.90 3NS-00003 Exchange Online P2 GCC Sub Per User 12 30 $73.16 $2,194.80 7E7-00001 Planner & Project P3 FSA GCC Renewal Sub Per User 12 2 $233.42 $466.84 NYH-00001 Teams AC with Dial Out US/CA GCC Sub Add-on 12 128 $0.00 $0.00 VA1-00001 Teams Rooms Pro GCC Sub Per Device 12 1 $430.64 $430.64 HWT-00001 Visio P1 GCC Sub Per User 12 2 $45.76 $91.52
$70,976.98
Description Part Number Purchase Period Qty Customer Price Extended Total Enterprise Products
Additional Products
9GS-00735 CIS Suite Datacenter Core ALng LSA 2L w/o WinSvr Added At Signing 8 $253.20 $2,025.60 9GS-00135 CIS Suite Datacenter Core ALng SA 2L 1 Yr(s) Remaining 30 $184.24 $5,527.20 359-00961 SQL CAL ALng SA User CAL 1 Yr(s) Remaining 40 $37.80 $1,512.00 359-00960 SQL CAL ALng LSA User CAL Added At Signing 0 $88.29 $0.00 810-04760 SQL Server Enterprise ALng SA 1 Yr(s) Remaining 1 $1,556.04 $1,556.04 228-04433 SQL Server Standard ALng SA 1 Yr(s) Remaining 2 $162.59 $325.18 9EA-00278 Win Server DC Core ALng SA 2L 1 Yr(s) Remaining 8 $139.47 $1,115.76 9EM-00270 Win Server Standard Core ALng SA 2L 1 Yr(s) Remaining 24 $21.41 $513.84 $12,575.62
$83,552.60
$250,657.80
Standard Pricing Terms
** Pricing Expires in 30 days from date of quote **
** All items included in this RFQ are new, unused, not refurbished, with original manufacturer warranty.** ** Enterprise Agreements are direct billings from Microsoft. Please make out purchase orders to Microsoft Corporation** ** Pass-Through Warranty and Other Rights.**
As a reseller, end-user warranties and liabilities (with respect to any third party software products provided by Crayon Software Experts) shall be provided as a pass-through from the manufacturer of such products.

All software products are subject to the license agreement of the applicable software supplier, as provided with the software packaging or in the software at time of shipment

1. Pricing and availability on quotes subject to change without notice.

2. Crayon Software Experts reserves the right to correct errors on quotes where applicable.

3. Applicable Taxes and Delivery are Extra and will be calculated and posted on final invoice.

4. Errors & Omissions Excluded.

5. Changes to a quote are subject to written acceptance by Crayon Software Experts.

6. Please see our website for return details: http://www.crayon.com/en-us/about-us/return-policy/ Quote Details
Coverage Period: 12/01/25 - 11/30/26
Months Remaining 12
1 Year Total:
3 Year Total:
# Crayon Group - Internal Only

8.h
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 252

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 24, 2025
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of Professional Service Agreements with Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP for On-Call Legal Services Related to Economic Development and Housing, Each with an Initial Term of Three Years (with the Option to Extend for Two Additional Years) and an Annual Not-to-Exceed Amount of $200,000.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommend that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the execution of professional service agreements with Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP for on-call legal services related to economic development and housing, each with an initial term of three years (with the option to extend for two additional years) and an annual not-to- exceed amount of $200,000.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

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

The proposed agreements for professional services would not commit the City of San Carlos to any fiscal obligations. The purpose of this action is to pre-qualify a select group of firms that can provide specialized legal services on an as-needed basis. The agreements include no retainer and no guarantee of work. When professional services are needed, staff will request a proposal from one or more of the firms, selecting the best firm based on cost, timeliness, and approach.

To fund work under these contracts, there are several sources of Council-approved funds. The appropriated fiscal year 2025-26 budget includes $357,900 for economic development professional services and $41,600 for housing professional services. Certain attorney fees related to specific development projects may also be charged directly to developer deposit accounts.

BACKGROUND:

Since 2015, the City has retained outside legal counsel to provide specialized guidance on economic development and housing-related matters. Outside counsel assist with below market rate housing transactions, development agreements, purchase and sale documents, real property negotiation, affordable housing regulatory agreements, and loan and financing instruments. The City last issued a request for qualifications (RFQ) for legal services related to economic development and housing in 2022. As a result of that RFQ evaluation process, the City entered into on-call agreements with Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP and Goldfarb & Lipman LLP. Those agreements expired on October 31, 2025.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 253

On September 10, 2025, the City issued an RFQ soliciting responses from firms qualified to provide on-call legal services related to economic development and housing (Attachment 2). The City received five responses. Staff reviewed and evaluated each submittal for completeness, professional qualifications/technical expertise, experience and track record conducting similar work for similar cities, proposed compensation rates, responsiveness to the RFQ, and understanding of/ability and intent to perform the work. Based on this evaluation, staff recommend contracting with the two highest-rated firms.

ANALYSIS:

The intent in selecting two firms for on-call legal services is to allow the City flexibility when selecting which firm to use for particular services. These firms are considered full-service, with varying levels of experience on the Peninsula, and in the areas of expertise that staff anticipate needing over the next three years. (See Attachment 3 for Statements of Qualifications for both firms; please note that work samples have been removed.)

Goldfarb & Lipman LLP
Goldfarb & Lipman (“Goldfarb”) is a full-service, Oakland-based firm with expertise in affordable housing, land use, community economic development, and eminent domain. Since 2017, Goldfarb has been responsible for updating the Association of Bay Area Governments on new housing-related laws passed through the state legislature and preparing technical guidance to assist local jurisdictions with compliance. Goldfarb has provided legal expertise for several housing developments in San Carlos including Cherry Street Commons and 1240 El Camino Real. The firm also assisted in revising the City’s inclusionary housing requirements.

Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
Burke, Williams & Sorensen (“Burke”) is headquartered in Los Angeles with a local office operating out of San Francisco. The firm has expertise in real estate, affordable housing, economic development, and eminent domain. Under previous on-call legal service contracts, Burke assisted San Carlos in negotiating and preparing development agreements for such major projects as Palo Alto Medical Center, 789 Old County Road, Indigo Hotel (501 Industrial Road), 642 Quarry Road, and Alexandria Center for Life Sciences. Burke also assisted with entitlements for two housing development projects and litigation related to eminent domain, inverse condemnation, and quiet title.

Contract Structure
The proposed agreements for professional services have a term beginning upon execution and running through the fiscal year ending on June 30, 2028. The agreements would be renewable for an additional two years at the City Manager’s option. Each of the contracts would include an annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the execution of professional service agreements with Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP for on-call legal services related to economic development and housing, each with an initial term of three years (with the option to extend for two additional years) and an annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000; or

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 254

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

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

1. Resolution

2. RRQ for on-call legal services related to economic development and housing

3. Statements of Qualifications from Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and Burke, Williams & Sorensen

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 255

RESOLUTION NO. 2025 – ____

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

AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF PROFESSIONAL SERVICE AGREEMENTS WITH

GOLDFARB & LIPMAN LLP AND BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP FOR ON-CALL

LEGAL SERVICES RELATED TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING, EACH

WITH AN INITIAL TERM OF THREE YEARS (WITH THE OPTION TO EXTEND FOR TWO ADDITIONAL YEARS) AND AN ANNUAL NOT-TO-EXCEED AMOUNT OF $200,000.

WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos occasionally requires specialized legal assistance related to economic development and housing; and

WHEREAS, existing contracts for on-call legal services related to economic development and housing expired on October 31, 2025; and

WHEREAS, the Community Development Department issued a request for qualifications (RFQ) on September 10, 2025 and received five responses from qualified law firms; and WHEREAS, staff reviewed the five responses for qualifications, experience, and cost and recommend entering into contracts with Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP to provide on-call specialized legal services on economic development and housing matters; and

WHEREAS, based on the recently adopted fiscal year 2025-26 budget and anticipated services needed in the coming years, staff recommend that the annual contract amounts for Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP have an annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000 each.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby authorizes the execution of professional service agreements with Goldfarb & Lipman LLP and Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP for on-call legal services related to economic development and housing, each with an initial term of three years (with the option to extend for two additional years) and an annual not-to-exceed amount of $200,000.
* * * * *
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 24th day of November 2025, by the following vote:

AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 256

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

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 257

REQUEST FOR
QUALIFICATIONS:

On-Call Legal Services Related to Economic Development
and Housing

Issue Date: September 10, 2025

Submittals Due: October 3, 2025

City Hall
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA
cityofsancarlos.org

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 258

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
2 | Page

BACKGROUND

The City of San Carlos (City) is located on the San Francisco Peninsula in San Mateo County and incorporated in 1925 as a General Law city. It is approximately 25 miles south of San Francisco and 26 miles north of San Jose. The city is about 6 square miles and has a population of slightly more than 30,000. Highway 101 runs through the eastern portion of the city, near an assortment of industrial and commercial uses, including a small airport and a small neighborhood of single- family homes. The west side of town extends into the Santa Cruz Mountains and is largely single- family residential with the exception of the El Camino Real and Laurel Street corridors and the City’s downtown. The city has high property values (median single-family home transacting at $2.4 million in 2021) and a high household income (median of $169,640).

Over 1. 7 million square feet of high- tech research and development space is likely to be developed in the next few years on the City’s east side. Major employers include Natera, Pacific Gas & Electric, The Home Depot, Recology, Check Point Software Tech, Delta Star, Natera, Joby Aero, Atreca, and Thought Stream. Major retailers include Home Depot, Best Buy, REI, T.J. Maxx, Ross, PetSmart, and Trader Joe’s. Collectively, building construction and materials businesses (cabinetry, flooring, tiling, etc.) represents the largest commercial segment. Several hotel properties with high average daily rates and occupancy contribute to the tax base significantly.

Downtown San Carlos, located along Laurel Street from San Carlos Avenue to Arroyo Avenue, is the heart of the community and is a compact, walkable cluster of primarily one- story retail buildings with small storefronts. It has become an increasingly popular destination for restaurants and unique small shops.

Highways 101 and 280, and State Highway 82 (El Camino Real) move vehicle traffic from the north and south to the primary access points in San Carlos. Several major east-west spines move traffic into the commercial and residential areas. Traffic capacity at several major intersections in the commercial sector nearest the freeway is becoming increasingly constrained. San Carlos is also home to an airport operated by the County of San Mateo. San Carlos is also served by Caltrain, which operates a commuter trai n that stops at the historic San Carlos Depot near Downtown. Freight trains operate on the rails overnight.

The City is governed by a five-member City Council, with members selecting a Mayor for a one- year term, and an appointed City Manager. There is great emphasis on public participation in local government and the citizenry is quite active as well. Support and guidance for economic development comes from both a City Council subcommittee and a seven- member Economic Development Advisory Commission. The City Council also recently established a Housing Subcommittee.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 259

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
3 | Page

The City has now turned its focus on proactive measures to expand its economic base and increase revenues. The 2021-2024 Economic Development Plan prioritized areas such as sustaining downtown vibrancy, improving mobility, and expanding housing and childcare access.

Earlier this year, the City Council adopted the 2025-2028 Economic Development Plan, which was developed with input from the Economic Development Advisory Commission, City staff, and consultants. The Plan includes the following strategic priorities:

1. Sustain the Unique Character of Downtown

2. Nurture Placemaking and Beautification

3. Support Enhanced Connectivity and Mobility

4. Foster Growth in the Business Community

5. Proactively Plan for Future Growth

This plan takes a geographically focused approach with targeted strategies for:

• Downtown
• South Laurel (SOLA)
• East Side Area
• Industrial Arts District

The 2025-2028 Plan was approved by City Council on March 24, 2025 and is available here.

The City had the support of its Redevelopment Agency from 1986 until it was dissolved by the State in 2012. The Agency funded major public improvement projects, affordable housing and economic development. The City has assumed the role of Successor Agency and has retained several properties and financial assets of the former Low and Moderate Housing Fund.

Additionally, the City has a Below Market Rate Housing Ordinance that requires all residential developments of seven or more dwelling units to include least fifteen percent (15%) of the total units as below market rate units restricted for rent or sale by moderate-, low-, and very low-income households.

CONSULTING SERVICES NEEDED

The City of San Carlos is seeking proposals from qualified firms or individuals to provide on- call specialized legal services on economic development and housing matters. The City is interested in entering into contracts with several qualified firms to utilize, on an as -needed basis, based on expertise, availability and cost. The City is anticipating a three-year initial contract term plus two optional one-year contract extensions. Potential scope of services may include, but is not limited to:

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 260

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
4 | Page

Real Estate
Consultant's services will include providing assistance with real property transactions concerning disposition and/or development of City lands, including evaluation and advice regarding deal structure and terms, the negotiation and preparation of Development Agreements, Disposition and Development Agreements, Purchase and Sale Agreements, Surplus Land Act disposition, and Ground Leases, and related services as requested by the City.

Housing and Land Use
Consultant's services will include the review and drafting of affordable housing agreements, including developer agreements, resale restriction agreements, regulatory agreements, loan and financing documents and related documents; the provision of advice regarding compliance with state and federal law and regulations; review and drafting of updates to City housing policies and ordinances; the review and negotiation of lender and investor documents, assistance with escrow and closing, general assistance to Economic and Community Development Department staff, and related services as requested by the City.

Eminent Domain
Consultant's services will include provision of advice and representation of the City in connection with potential eminent domain actions as requested by the City.

SUBMITTAL OF QUALIFICATIONS

Submittal Content
To be deemed complete, submittals must include all of the following:
• Company profile and qualifications including a summary of representative services or projects managed and specifically staffed by the individuals likely to be assigned. • Identification of the project manager and senior level staff likely to be assigned to this project. Include the qualifications and relevant experience for the identified team members.
• Complete contact information for three recent clients for whom similar services described in this RFQ have been performed.
• Proposed compensation rates.
• Excerpts of relevant sample work.

Submittal Location and Deadlines

Interested parties should email their proposals by 5:00 p.m. PST, Friday, October 3, 2025 to:

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 261

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
5 | Page

City of San Carlos
Andrew Douglass
[email protected]

Additional Information

The City assumes no responsibility for delays caused by delivery service. Postmarking by the due date will not substitute for actual receipt. All costs incurred during submittal preparation or in any way associated with the Consultant’s preparations, submission, presentation, or oral interview shall be the sole responsibility of the Consultant.

If awarded a contract, the consultant shall maintain insurance coverage, including worker’s compensation, reflecting the minimum amounts and conditions specified by the City. Consultants are liable for all errors or omissions contained in their proposals.

If you have any questions concerning this request for qualifications, please contact Andrew Douglass via email at [email protected] or phone at 650-802-4167.

SELECTION PROCESS

Evaluation Criteria

In accordance with the Municipal Code, consultant selection shall be on the basis of demonstrated competence and on the professional qualifications necessary for the satisfactory performance of the services required and on fair and reasonable price. Evaluation considerations will include the following:

• Responsiveness of the proposal to the submittal requirements listed above • Clear indication of understanding of the work to be performed and demonstration of intent and ability to perform the work
• Professional qualifications and technical expertise
• Experience and track record conducting similar work for similar cities • Proposed compensation rates
• Completeness of submittal

It is the City’s intention to contract with a highly qualified bench of consultants. Your firm is not required to have expertise in both economic development and housing, but must have substantial experience in at least one of these two areas.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 262

CITY OF SAN CARLOS
Request for Qualifications
6 | Page

Should you have any questions concerning the project, please contact Andrew Douglass at [email protected] or phone at 650-802-4167.

The question cut-off date will be September 24, 2025, by 5 p.m.

Non-Obligation

The City retains sole discretion to evaluate submittals and may make an award to the consultant(s) the City deems to be most responsive to the request for qualifications. Receipt of submittals in response to its request for qualifications does not obligate the City in any way to engage any consultant and the City reserves the right to reject any or all submittals, wholly or in part, at any time, without penalty. The City shall retain the right to abandon the request for qualifications and selection process at any time prior to the actual execution of a contract with a consultant, and the City shall bear no financial or other responsibility in the event of such abandonment. The City reserves the right to negotiate all final terms and conditions of any agreements entered into.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 263

Agreement for Professional Services 1 Revised 09/04/2025

AGREEMENT FOR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

This Agreement is made and entered into as of __________________ by and between the City of San Carlos hereinafter called "CITY" and ____________________ hereinafter called "CONSULTANT".

RECITALS

This Agreement is entered into with reference to the following facts and circumstances:

A. That CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT to render certain professional services in the CITY;

B. That CONSULTANT is qualified to provide such services to the CITY and;

THEREFORE, the CITY has elected to engage the services of CONSULTANT upon the terms and conditions as hereinafter set forth.

1. Services. The services to be performed by CONSULTANT under this Agreement shall include those services set forth in Exhibit A, which is, by this reference, incorporated herein and made a part hereof as though it were fully set forth herein.

Performance of the work specified in said Exhibit is hereby made an obligation of CONSULTANT under this Agreement, subject to any changes that may be made subsequently hereto upon the mutual written agreement of the said parties.

Where in conflict, the terms of this Agreement supersede and prevail over any terms set forth in Exhibit A.

2. Term; Termination. (a) The term of this Agreement shall commence upon the date hereinabove written and shall expire upon completion of performance of services hereunder by CONSULTANT. (b)
Notwithstanding the provisions of (a) above, CITY may terminate this Agreement without cause by giving written notice not less than ten (10) days prior to the effective date of termination, which date shall be included in said notice. In the event of such termination, CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for services rendere d, and reimburse CONSULTANT for costs and expenses incurred, to the date of termination, calculated in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 3. In ascertaining the services actually rendered to the date of termination, consideration shall be given both to completed work and work in process of completion.

Nothing herein contained shall be deemed a limitation upon the right of

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 264

Agreement for Professional Services 2 Revised 09/04/2025 CITY to terminate this Agreement for cause, or otherwise to exercise such rights or pursue such remedies as may accrue to CITY hereunder.

3. Compensation; Expenses; Payment . CITY shall compensate CONSULTANT for all services performed by CONSULTANT hereunder in an amount based upon CONSULTANT’s hourly rates during the time of the performance of said services. A copy of CONSULTANT’s hourly rates for which services hereunder shall be performed are set forth in CONSULTANT’s fee schedule marked Exhibit B hereof, attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein.

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the combined total of compensation and reimbursement of costs payable hereunder shall not exceed the sum of _____________________ ($________________) unless the performance of services and/or reimbursement of costs and expenses in excess of said amounts have been approved in advance of performing such services or incurring such costs and expenses by CITY’s City Manager (for contracts less than $75 ,000 or authorized by City Council action for contracts $75,000 or more by motion duly made and carried).

Compensation and reimbursement of costs and expenses hereunder shall be payable upon monthly billing therefor by CONSULTANT to CITY, which billing shall include an itemized statement, briefly describing by task and labor category or cost/expense items billed.

4. Additional Services . In the event CITY desires the performance of additional services not otherwise included within the services described in Exhibit A, such services shall be authorized in advance of the performance thereof by CITY’s City Manager (for contracts less than $75,000 or authorized by City Council action for contracts $ 75,000 or more by motion duly made and carried ). Such amendment to this Agreement shall include a description of the services to be performed thereunder, the maximum compensation and reimbursement of costs and expenses payable there for, the time of performance thereof, and such other matters as the parties deem appropriate for the accomplishment of such services. Any additional services causing the total contract price to exceed $75,000, shall require approval by the City Council. Except to the extent modified by written amendment, all other terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed incorporated in each such amendment.

5. Records. CONSULTANT shall keep and maintain accurate records of all time expended and costs and expenses incurred relating to services to be performed by CONSULTANT hereunder. Said records shall be available to CITY for review and copying during regular business hours at CONSULTANT’s place of business or as otherwise agreed upon by the parties.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 265

Agreement for Professional Services 3 Revised 09/04/2025

6. Authorization. This Agreement becomes effective when endorsed by both parties in the space provided below.

7. Reliance on Professional Skill of CONSULTANT. CONSULTANT represents that it has the necessary professional skills to perform the services required and the CITY shall rely on such skills of the CONSULTANT to do and perform the work. In performing services hereunder CONSULTANT shall adhere to the standards generally prevailing for the performance of expert consulting services similar to those to be performed by CONSULTANT hereunder. CONSULTANT acknowledges the importance to CITY of the skill, competency, ability to appropriately work with CITY staff and expertise of individual staff assigned to the project, and accordingly the individuals assigned to the Project must be acceptable to CITY.

8. Documents. All documents, plans, drawings, renderings, and other papers, or copies thereof, as finally rendered, prepared by CONSULTANT pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, shall, upon preparation and delivery to CITY, become the property of CITY.

9. Relationship of Parties . It is understood that the relationship of CONSULTANT to the CITY is that of an independent contractor and all persons working for or under the direction of CONSULTANT are its agents or employees and not agents or employees of the CITY.

10. Schedule. CONSULTANT shall adhere to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A; provided, that CITY shall grant reasonable extensions of time for the performance of such services occasioned by governmental reviews of CONSULTANT’s work product or other unavoidable delays; provided, further, that such unavoidable delay shall not include strikes, lockouts, work stoppages, or other labor disturbances conducted by, or on behalf of, CONSULTANT’s officers or employees.

CONSULTANT acknowledges the importance to CITY of CITY’s Project schedule and agrees to put forth its best professional efforts to perform its services under this Agreement in a manner consistent with that schedule.

11. Indemnity. CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless City, its officers, employees, agents and volunteers from and against all liability, loss, damage, expense, and cost (including, without limitation, reasonable legal counsel fees, expert fees and all other costs and fees of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with CONSULTANT’s negligence, recklessness, or willful misconduct in the performance of work hereunder, or its failure to comply with any of its obligations co ntained in this Agreement, except such loss or damage

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 266

Agreement for Professional Services 4 Revised 09/04/2025 caused by the active negligence or w illful misconduct of the City. It is expressly understood and agreed that the foregoing provisions are intended to be as broad and inclusive as is permitted by the law of the State of California and will survive termination of this Agreement. Nothing herein contained shall be construed to require CONSULTANT to indemnify CITY its officers, employees, agents and volunteers against any responsibility or liability in contravention of Section 2782 of the California Civil Code.

12. Insurance. CONSULTANT shall acquire and maintain Workers’ Compensation, employer’s liability, commercial general liability, owned and non -owned and hired automobile liability, and professional liability insurance cover ing risks relating to CONSULTANT’s services to be performed hereunder in form subject to the approval of the City Attorney and/or CITY’s Risk Manager. The minimum amounts of coverage corresponding to the aforesaid categories of insurance per insurable event, shall be as follows:

Insurance Category Minimum Limits

Workers’ Compensation statutory minimum

Employer’s Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease. CONSULTANT shall submit
to City a Waiver of Subrogation
endorsement in favor of City, its officers,
agents, employees, and volunteers.

Commercial General Liability $1,000,000 (to $5,000,000 depending on exposure) per occurrence for bodily
injury, personal injury, and property
damage, including without limitation,
blanket contractual liability and
coverage for explosion, collapse and
underground property damage hazards.

If a general aggregate limit applies,
either the general aggregate limit shall
apply separately to this project/location
or the general aggregate limit shall be
twice the required occurrence limit.

Coverage must be at least as broad as
Insurance Services Office form CG 00

01. Automobile Liability $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage (coverage

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 267

Agreement for Professional Services 5 Revised 09/04/2025 required to the extent applicable to
CONSULTANT’s vehicle usage in
performing services hereunder)

1Professional Liability $1,000,000 per claim and if a general aggregate limit applies, general
aggregate limit shall be twice the
required occurrence limit.

Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall furnish CITY with certificates and copies of information or declaration pages of the insurance required hereunder and, with respect to evidence of commercial general liability and automobile liability insurance coverage, original endorsements:

(a) Precluding cancellation or reduction in per occurrence limits before the expiration of thirty (30) days (10 days for nonpayment) after City shall have received written notification of cancellation in coverage or reduction in per occurrence limits by first class mail;

(b) CONSULTANT’s general liability policies shall be primary and non - contributory, and be endorsed using Insurance Services Office form CG 20 10 to provide that City and its officers, officials, employees, and agents shall be additional insured under such policies. An endorsement providing completed operations coverage for the additional insured, ISO form CG 20 37, is also required.

Claims Made Policies
If any of the required policies provide claims-made coverage:

1. The Retroactive Date must be shown, and must be before the date of the contract or the beginning of contract work.

2. Insurance must be maintained and evidence of insurance must be provided for at least five (5) years after completion of the contract of work.

3. If coverage is canceled or non -renewed, and not replaced with another claims-made policy form with a Retroactive Date prior to the contract effective date, the Consultant must purchase “extended reporting” coverage for a minimum of five (5) years after completion of contract work.

Verification of Coverage

1 Note: Professional liability insurance coverage is not required if the contractor/vendor/consultant is not providing a service regulated by the state. (Examples of service providers regulated by the state are insurance agents, professional engineers, doctors, certified public accountants, lawyers, etc.) Please check and initial the following if professional liability is NOT required for this agreement.  Recommended ______ [Project Manager]  Approved _______[Risk Manager]

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 268

Agreement for Professional Services 6 Revised 09/04/2025 Consultant shall furnish the CITY with original certificates and amendatory endorsements effecting coverage required by this clause. All certificates and endorsements are to be received and approved by the CITY before work commences. However, failure to obtain the required documents prior to the work beginning shall not waive the Consultant’s obligation to provide them. The CITY reserves the right to require complete, certified copies of all required insurance policies, including endorsements required by these specifications, at any time.

Waiver of Subrogation
Consultant hereby grants to CITY a waiver of any right to subrogation which any insurer of said Consultant may acquire against the CITY by virtue of the payment of any loss under such insurance. This provision applies regardless of whether or not the CITY has requested or received a waiver of subrogation endorsement from the insurer.

Acceptability of Insurers
Insurance is to be placed with insurers with a current A.M. Best’s rating of no less than A:VII, unless otherwise acceptable to the City.

Special Risks or Circumstances
CITY reserves the right to modify these requirements, including limits, based on the nature of the risk, prior experience, insurer, coverage, or other special circumstances.

Coverage
It is a requirement under this agreement that any available insurance proceeds broader than or in excess of the specified minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shall be made available to the Additional Insured and shall be (1) the minimum coverage and limits specified in this Agreement; or (2) the broader coverage and maximum limits of coverage of any insurance policy, whichever is greater.

Primary and Non-Contributory Coverage
The Additional Insured coverage under the Consultant’s policy shall be “primary and non-contributory” as will not seek contribution from the CITY insurance or self-insurance and shall be at least as broad as CG 20 01 04

12. Excess Insurance
The limits of insurance required in this agreement may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance. Any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain or be endorsed to contain a provision that such coverage shall also apply on a primary and noncontributory basis for the benefit of CITY before the CITY insurance or self -insurance shall be called upon to protect it as a named insured.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 269

Agreement for Professional Services 7 Revised 09/04/2025

13. Workers’ Compensation. CONSULTANT acknowledges and certifies awareness of the provisions of the Labor Code of the State of California which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers' compensation or to undertake self -insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and CONSULTANT certifies and agrees to compliance with such provisions before commencing the performance of the work of this agreement.

14. Subcontractors (If applicable). CONSULTANT agrees to include with all subcontractors in their subcontracts the same requirements and provisions of this agreement including the indemnity and Insurance requirements to the extent they apply to the scope of the Subcontractors’ work. Subcontractors hired by CONSULTANT agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under the Contract documents.

Subcontract shall agree to include these same provisions in any agreement with a sub -subcontractor. CONSULTANT shall require all subcontractors to provide a valid certificate of insurance and the required endorsements included in the agreement prior to commencement of any work and will provide proof of compliance to the CITY.

Subcontractor shall agree to be bound to CONSULTANT and CITY in the same manner and to the same extent as CONSULTANT is bound to CITY under the Contract Documents. Subcontractor shall further agree to include the same requirements and provisions of this agreement, including the indemnity and Insurance requirements, with a Sub -subcontractor to the extent they apply to the scope of the Sub -subcontractors’ work. A copy of the CITY Contract Document Indemnity and Insurance provisions shall be furnished to the subcontractor upon request.

15. Non-Discrimination. The CONSULTANT hereby assures that it will comply with Subchapter VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 USC Section 2000 (e)(17), to the end that CONSULTANT will not exclude any person from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subject to discrimination from any project, program, or activity supported by this Agreement, based on the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex, disability, age, or religion,. CONSULTANT shall comply with its EEO Certification (Form PW -7). In addition, CONSUTLANT will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The CONSULTANT will take affirmative action to insure that applicants are employed and the employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to the following: employment, advancement, demotion, transfer,

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 270

Agreement for Professional Services 8 Revised 09/04/2025 recruitment, or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation, and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The CONSULTANT shall at all times be in compliance with the requirements of the Federal Americans With Disabilities Act (Public Law 101 -336) which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability by public entities. The CONSULTANT agrees to post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment any notices provided by the CITY setting forth the provisions of this non-discrimination clause.

15. Notice. All notices required by this Agreement shall be given to the CITY and CONSULTANT in writing, by first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows:

CITY: City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
Attention: _________________

CONSULTANT: ____________________________
(Fill in CONSULTANT Name, Address, Phone
Number, and Project Manager for

CONSULTANT)

16. Non-Assignment. This Agreement is not assignable either in whole or in part.

17. Amendments. This Agreement may be amended or modified only by written agreement signed by both parties.

18. Business Registration. CONSULTANT agrees to comply with Chapter

5.04 of the Municipal Code and pay all fees required to be paid. By entering into this Agreement, CONSULTANT acknowledges and agrees they are conducting business with the City and will apply for and obtain a City Business registration certificate.

19. Validity. The invalidity in whole or in part of any provision of this Agreement shall not void or affect the validity of any other provision of this Agreement.

20. Governing Law . This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California and any suit or action initiated by either party shall be brought in the County of San Mateo, California. In the event of litigation between the parties hereto to enforce any provision of the Agreement, the

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 271

Agreement for Professional Services 9 Revised 09/04/2025 unsuccessful party will pay the reasonable attorney’s fees and expenses of litigation of the successful party.

21. Mediation. Should any dispute arise out of this Agreement , the parties shall meet in mediation and attempt to reach a resolution with the assistance of a mutually acceptable mediator. Neither party shall be permitted to file legal action without first meeting in mediation and making a good faith attempt to reach a mediated resolution. The costs of the mediator, if any, shall be paid equally by the parties. If a mediated settlement is reached neither party shall be deemed the prevailing party for purposes of the settlement and each party shall bear its own legal costs. If a party refuses or fails to participate in mediation in good faith prior to filing a lawsuit, then that party shall be barred from recovery of attorneys fees and costs of suit.

22. Conflict of Interest. CONSULTANT may serve other clients, but none who are active within the City of San Carlos or who conduct business that would place CONSULTANT in a "conflict of interest" as that term is defined in State law.

23. Entire Agreement . Each party acknowledges that this agreement, the exhibits hereto, and the documents incorporated by reference herein constitute the complete agreement and exclusive statement of the terms and conditions between the parties, which supersedes and merges all prior proposals, understandings and all other agreements, verbal and written, between the parties relating to the subject matter of this agreement. This agreement may not be modified or altered except by written instrument duly executed by both parties.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed on the date first above written by their respective officers duly authorized in that behalf.

CITY OF SAN CARLOS:

Dated: _______________ ______________________________ Nil Blackburn, Assistant City Manager

ATTEST:

Dated: _______________ ______________________________ Crystal Mui, City Clerk

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 272

Agreement for Professional Services 10 Revised 09/04/2025

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

Dated: _______________ ______________________________ Gregory J. Rubens, City Attorney

CONSULTANT/CONTRACTOR/VENDOR:

I acknowledge that I have full authority to execute this agreement on behalf of the Consultant/Contractor/Vendor, and have read, understand, and agree to comply with the provisions of this Agreement, including the Insurance and indemnity requirements set forth herein.

Dated: _______________ ______________________________

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 273

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 274

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 275

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 276

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 277

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 278

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 279

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 280

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 281

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 282

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 283

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 284

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 285

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 286

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 287

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 288

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 289

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 290

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 291

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 292

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 293

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 294

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 295

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 296

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 297

Proposal to Provide On-Call
Legal Services Related to
Economic Development and
Housing to the
City of San Carlos
Proposed Lead Attorney
Anna C. Shimko
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
1 California Street, Suite 3050
San Francisco, CA 94111
p: 415.655.8115
e: [email protected]
Submitted October 3, 2025

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 298

Direct No.: 415.655.8115
[email protected]
Los Angeles – Inland Empire – Marin County – Oakland – Orange County – Palm Desert – San Diego – San Francisco – Silicon Valley – Ventura County 1 California Street - Suite 3050
San Francisco, California 94111- 5432
voice 415.655.8100 - fax 415.655.8099
www.bwslaw.com
October 3, 2025
Via email to [email protected]

Andrew Douglass
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070

Re: Proposal to Provide On-Call Legal Services Related to Economic Development and Housing

Dear Mr. Douglass:

On behalf of Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP (“Burke”), I am pleased to submit this response to the Request for Qualifications issued by the City of San Carlos (“City”). Burke is extremely interested in providing real estate, housing and land use, and eminent domain legal services to the City, and our team of attorneys are well-positioned to meet the City’s needs in each of these areas.

Founded in 1927, Burke is a diverse, dynamic, and preeminent public law firm. For over 95 years, the representation of public agencies has been the cornerstone of Burke’s legal practice. The firm currently serves the legal needs of over 200 local governmental entities, including cities, counties, joint powers authorities, and water and school districts. At the same time, Burke represents many private landowners and developers in the real estate acquisition, entitlement and development process. Our knowledge of both private and public real estate negotiations and development allows our team to use its insights and expertise to assist the City in its endeavors.

As described in the attached materials, we propose that I serve as lead attorney. I would be assisted by a team selected to provide able legal representation tailored to the City’s specified needs, including Eric S. Phillips, Lisa N. Maxwell, Leila J. Moshref-Danesh, Nicholas J. Muscolino, and Meghan E. Nihan.

As you know, Burke and its attorneys have represented the City for many years . I have represented the City for more than 20 years on complex land use development projects, CEQA review and litigation, and real estate deals . Such work has included all entitlements and CEQA review, and negotiation of a Development Agreement with City -recovered opportunity costs associated with development by the Palo Alto Medical Center of a new hospital campus ; CEQA litigation concerning Highland Park; advice and counsel on the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan; and CEQA and entitlement work on two housing development projects. Recent and current work involves work with ing staff on several proposed development projects and developing

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 299

Andrew Douglass
October 3, 2025

community benefits proposals to negotiate with entities desiring to increase allowed density and uses on their lands. For example, with Leila Moshref-Danesh and Meghan Nihan, I worked on the recent CEQA review, entitlements and Development Agreement for the Alexandria Center for Life Science campus. Eric Phillips has represented the City of San Carlos in connection with the disposition of City -owned property for affordable housing development . Tasks included negotiating and drafting a non- binding term sheet with the developer, identifying Surplus Land Act, CEQA, and NEPA compliance options, negotiating and drafting a DDA for the City’s property, and preparing supporting City documents . Leila Moshref-Danesh has advised the City on land use and CEQA matters. Meghan Nihan has worked closely with City staff to draft and negotiate several Development Agreements, including for the proposed 789 Old County Road life science research and development project, the Alexandria Center for Life Science project, the 501 Industrial Road hotel project, the Sobrato life science research and development project, and the 642 Quarry Road research and development lab and office project.

Burke attorneys have also represented the City in litigation, including eminent domain, inverse condemnation, and quiet title matters. This includes the recent settlement of Zelnik v. City of San Carlos, which resulted in a $175,000 payment from the property owner to the City; the acquisition of 1232 Cherry Street for an affordable housing project; and several other pending potential eminent domain matters.

Our team very much enjoys working with the experienced, innovative, and highly-regarded City of San Carlos team, including Jeff Maltbie, Greg Rubens, Al Savay , and the Planning staff. We welcome the opportunity for further collaboration with the City.

Thank you for considering us. If you have any questions regarding this proposal, or if you would like additional information, please feel free to contact me at the number listed above. We look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP

Anna C. Shimko

ACS:tmw

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 300

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page i Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP .................................................................................... 1 About Burke .................................................................................................................... 2 QUALIFICATIONS ...................................................................................................................... 2 Real Estate ...................................................................................................................... 2 Representative Real Estate Matters ..................................................................... 2 Housing and Land Use .................................................................................................... 4 Representative Housing and Land Use Matters ................................................... 6 Eminent Domain .............................................................................................................. 7 Representative Eminent Domain Matters ............................................................. 8 PROPOSED TEAM ..................................................................................................................... 9 Anna C. Shimko, Project Manager ................................................................................. 10 Eric S. Phillips ............................................................................................................... 10 Lisa N. Maxwell ............................................................................................................. 11 Leila Moshref-Danesh ................................................................................................... 11 Nicholas J. Muscolino .................................................................................................... 11 Meghan E. Nihan ........................................................................................................... 12 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................... 12 RATES ...................................................................................................................................... 13 Hourly Rates.................................................................................................................. 13 Adjustments................................................................................................................... 13 Reimbursements ........................................................................................................... 13 Billing Format and Procedure ........................................................................................ 14 CONCLUSION .......................................................................................................................... 14 ATTACHMENT A – EXCERPTS OF WORK
ATTACHMENT B – RESUMES

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 301

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 1 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

BURKE, WILLIAMS & SORENSEN, LLP
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP is a California limited liability partnership. Burke is comprised of 30 owners under the leadership of a Management Committee and Managing Partner . Firm management includes owners who practice substantially or entirely in the area of municipal law, and the firm has a longstanding commitment to the needs of its municipal clients . Details of our firm are listed below.

Firm Name Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
Founded 1927
Point of Contact Anna C. Shimko
Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
1 California Street, Suite 3050
San Francisco, California 94111
Tel: 415.655.8115
Email: [email protected]
Number of Attorneys/Staff 184/90
Headquarters Office Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP
444 South Flower Street, 40th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel: 213.236.0600 | Fax: 213.236.2700
Additional Firm Offices
Inland Empire
1770 Iowa Avenue, Suite 240
Riverside, California 92507
Tel: 951.788.0100 | Fax: 951.788.5785
San Diego
501 West Broadway, Suite 1600
San Diego, California 92101
Tel: 619.814.5800 | Fax: 619.814.6799
Oakland
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1650
Oakland, California 94612
Tel: 510.273.8780 | Fax: 510.839.9104
Silicon Valley
60 South Market Street, Suite 1000
San Jose, California 95113
Tel: 408.606.6300 | Fax: 408.606.6333
Orange County
18300 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 650
Irvine, California 92612
Tel: 949.863.3363 | Fax: 949.863.3350
San Rafael
181 Third Street, Suite 200
San Rafael, California 94901
Tel: 415.755.2600 | Fax: 415.482.7542
Palm Desert
73-929 Larrea Street, Suite 4A
Palm Desert, California 92260
Tel: 760.776.5600 | Fax: 760.776.5602
Ventura County
2310 East Ponderosa Drive, Suite 25
Camarillo, California 93010
Tel: 805.987.3468 | Fax: 805.482.9834

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 302

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 2 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

About Burke
For over 95 years, the representation of public agencies has been the cornerstone of Burke’s legal practice. Burke provides public entities with a full range of legal, advisory, transactional, and litigation services organized into ten practice groups: Public Law; Labor and Employment Law; Construction Law; Litigation; Eminent Domain; Environmental, Land Use and Natural Resources; Real Estate and Business Law ; Insurance Coverage and Litigation; Intellectual Property; and Education Law. The firm’s 184 attorneys serve clients from ten offices throughout California. With regional offices in Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Marin County, Oakland, Orange County, Palm Desert, San Diego, San Francisco, Silicon Valley, and Ventura County, as well as modern modes of communication and travel, we can easily be where our clients need us to be, when they need us to be there.

QUALIFICATIONS
Our experience is described below, including some of our recent projects. Some excerpts of our relevant work are included in Attachment A.

Real Estate
Burke attorneys regularly represent public agencies (as well as private development entities) throughout California in connection with land disposition and development transactions, including the sale of large blocks of previously undeveloped real estate s uch as former military base properties. Our real estate and disposition and development work includes advising public agency clients regarding compliance with the State Surplus Land Act (Government Code section 54220 et seq.), including evaluation of poten tial exemptions, and where exemptions are not available, preparation of notices of availability, negotiation with preferred housing sponsors, drafting declarations of restrictive covenants to comply with Government Code sections 54233 and 54233.5, and preparation and submittal to the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) of requests for compliance determination as desired. Burke attorneys have extensive experience drafting and negotiating exclusive negotiating agreements, letters of intent, sale disposition and lease disposition and development agreements, purchase and sale agreements, ground leases and leases for interim operation, management and security . In addition to our real property transactional expertise, Burke attorneys have a broad range of experience with all manner of real property development including entitlement, due diligence, title and survey review, asset m anagement, loan administration, property management and landlord/tenant matters, subdivision matters, statutory development agreements, allocation of environmental risks in acquisitions, sales, and leasing transactions, financings, formation of community facilities and assessment districts, and review and drafting of CC&Rs. Burke attorneys offer a broad range of knowledge and experience that enables us to effectively negotiate and document all aspects of complex real estate transactions, and to protect and enforce our clients’ interests in litigation when called upon.

Representative Real Estate Matters
 Currently representing the City of Santa Clara concerning all real estate and land use aspects of the public -private partnership between the City of Santa Clara and Related Companies for phased development of 240 acres of City-owned, former municipal landfill

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 303

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 3 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

property. We negotiated and drafted the Disposition and Development Agreement, the Development Agreement, and the form leases for Related to ground lease the land from the City in about 7 phases consisting of 9.1 million square feet of retail, entertainment, hotel, office, and residential uses. Our team advised on all aspects of the environmental impact report (“EIR”) for the project and successfully defended the EIR in court. We helped to craft the new General Plan designation and other General Plan amendm ents, and the new Master Community Plan (zoning document) to guide all future development with a balance of clear standards and flexibility to accommodate future market shifts, as well as the Infrastructure Master Plan to ensure fair and timely pairing of development with infrastructure. We continue to work on project implementation, including negotiating and drafting implementation agreements concerning landfill operation and maintenance, insurance levels, road construction and maintenance, CC&Rs, reimburs ement for extra police services, and funding of transportation improvements; removing title exceptions; and further discretionary approvals for the forthcoming initial phases of the project . In 2025, we helped prepare and secure approval of an Addendum to the EIR, changes to the Master Community Plan, and amendments to the DDA and Development Agreement to allow a new development scheme to jumpstart the project by devoting 80 acres to industrial use.
 Advised and c urrently advising the City of San Carlos with respect to development agreement negotiations and community benefits packages for private projects, including the Alexandria Center for Life Science, the development at 501 Industrial, the Sobrato life science research and development project, the 642 Quarry Road research and development lab and office project, and the proposed life science research and development project at 789 Old County Road. Our team assisted with CEQA review and entitlements as desired, negotiated and drafted the development agreements , and participated in public hearings.
 Currently represent the Richmond Housing Authority with respect to development and disposition matters to negotiate the transfer of Authority -owned land to private non-profit and for-profit affordable housing developers . Our team advised on issues of NEPA and CEQA compliance, negotiated term sheets and exclusive negotiating agreements, prepared development and disposition agreements and associated regulatory agreements govern future development and affordability obligations, and collaborated with staff on ongoing management issues during the construction and operation of Agency assets.  Represented the City of Stockton with disposition of 9.12 acres of surplus property adjacent to the City’s downtown waterfront for the development of a mixed- income residential housing, retail space, community/civic space, and parking development with over 300 units of housing (including senior housing and teacher housing). Issues involved Surplus Land Act compliance, NEPA and CEQA compliance, coordination with the Regional Water Board regarding soil remediation issues, fair housing compliance, and incorporation of public benefits, including open space and a waterfront promenade.  Represented the City of Foster City with disposition of a 15- acre surplus City -owned property to a developer for development of the Foster Square mixed- use project which includes 200 for -sale homes, 66 affordable housing units, 150 assisted living units and 30,000 square feet of neighborhood retail surrounding a privately owned and maintained,

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 304

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 4 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

publicly accessible plaza area . The sale transaction included provision of City -seller carryback financing, which was repaid in full prior to successful completion of the project.

Burke also represented the City of Foster City in connection with a master development agreement and various phase specific development agreements for the Foster City Pilgrim Triton mixed-use project which includes commercial office uses, neighborhood serving retail and 800+ residential units, including 60+ live/work units, and a large privately owned and maintained and publicly accessible plaza area. This multi -phased development required coordination among multiple property owners/developers.  Currently represent the City of Mountain View with respect to real estate transactional matters related to housing development on public land and financing of privately held housing development projects . Our team has represented the City on loan and grant agreements to disburse local, state, and federal funds to project developers, along with the associated security documents and regulatory agreements that ensure ongoing compliance. In addition, we have advised the City with the negotiation of reciprocal easements, access agreements, and other private real estate documents that facilitate infill redevelopment.
 Represented the City of Vallejo in connection with the negotiation and drafting of a disposition and development agreement for the sale of 125 acres of North Mare Island property to the Nimitz Group that was approved in April 2022.  Represented the City of Menlo Park in all CEQA review and entitlements, and negotiating complicated, multi -phase development agreement with Meta (formerly Facebook), for approximately 3 million square foot mixed -use project. The development is at the City’s bonus level of density, requiring that the applicant provide community amenities valued at half the amount of the increased value to the developer from the bonus level development.  Currently represent a non-profit development organization in negotiation with an East Bay city to develop a performing arts center. The transaction involves the negotiation and preparation of an option to ground lease and a ground lease with a purchase option.

Housing and Land Use
Burke’s housing and land use practice offers full service across a wide range of topics and issues.

A number of the matters discussed above involve housing and land use services . We are well versed working with jurisdictions to create documents to implement their housing programs, such as resale restrictions, affordable housing regulatory agreements, and financing and security instruments. In addition, Burke attorneys are well -versed in the ever-changing state and federal requirements governing the review and action on housing development project applications. We work with our clients to draft and update ordinances to reflect recent legal requirements, advise on CEQA and NEPA compliance informed by the latest legislative and case law developments, and help to oversee every aspect of a transaction – from entitlements to financing – to help our clients achieve their desired results.

Collectively, we have assisted in the development of thousands of units of housing in California , including projects financed with state and federal low-income housing tax credits, taxable and tax- exempt bond proceeds, project-based Section 8 and VASH vouchers, funding provided by HUD

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 305

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 5 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

and the California Department of Housing and Community Development, inclusionary in-lieu fee and local housing trust funds, low - and moderate-income housing set-aside funds, conventional loans, and other sources.

We regularly advise public agencies regarding compliance with federal and state requirements pertaining to housing development project approval and ongoing management , including prevailing wage requirements, Davis-Bacon, CEQA, NEPA, state and local land use and zoning laws, rent stabilization ordinances, density bonus law, the Surplus Lands Act, Article 34, state and federal relocation requirements, California and federal fair housing laws, and state statutes pertaining to agencies that have assumed the housing obligations and assets of former redevelopment agencies.

We represent public agencies in their roles as seller/ground lessor and as lender in connection with the review of developer limited partnership agreements, equity investor documents, and private and public agency construction and permanent loan documents, including the negotiation and drafting of subordination and inter-creditor agreements. We have negotiated and documented myriad public agency affordable housing loan transactions, including the preparation of predevelopment loan agreements, seller “carryback” loan documents, private and public agency construction and permanent loan documents, promissory notes, deeds of trust, affordable housing regulatory agreements for multi -family projects, and regulatory agreements/resale restriction agreements for affordable ownership projects.

When necessary, w e assist public agencies in the preparation of requests for qualifications/requests for proposals for financing and land disposition, the evaluation of development proposals, selection of developers, and the negotiation and drafting of exclusive negotiation agreements, predevelopment loan documents, ground leases, disposition, development and loan agreements . Our lawyers are well -versed in negotiating with HCD to identify creative and compliant housing development strategies.

We have worked on numerous multi-phased projects that include senior, multi-family rental, and single-family/townhome components. For many projects that will be developed over a period of time, we have negotiated statutory development agreements that provi de vested rights and developer commitments to provide public benefits.

We have assisted in the design and implementation of program guidelines, development agreements, and loan and regulatory agreements for rehabilitation loan, first -time homebuyer, density bonus, inclusionary housing, and other local affordable housing rental and homeownership programs. We also have advised jurisdictions on the creation and updating of other land use and housing related ordinances as necessary to comply with state requirements, including the State Density Bonus Law, ADU laws, SB 9, and other state streamlining programs.

To help our clients remain up-to-date on the latest legal developments, we often offer jurisdiction- specific trainings and presentations regarding state housing law.

When our clients wish to engage more directly in development activities, we assist in the formation of special purpose entities, including limited liability companies, that act as general partner in limited partnerships formed to develop and manage affordable housing projects. We have drafted operating agreements, bylaws, joint venture agreements, and memoranda of understanding

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 306

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 6 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

addressing the allocation of rights and responsibilities between co- general partners and join members in limited liability companies.

Representative Housing and Land Use Matters
 Currently representing jurisdictions, including the cities of Livermore, San Ramon, and Foster City, to conduct land use trainings to educate the City Council, Planning Commission, staff, and members of the public on annual legislative updates and the ever- changing requirements in state housing law.
 Represented the City of Napa in connection with its Housing Element Update and in the drafting of updated ordinances related to ADUs, State Density Bonus Law, and various by-right housing development projects in connection with Housing Element implementation. Currently representing the City of Napa and the Housing Authority of the City of Napa in connection with the financing of affordable housing projects financed with City and County funds, CDBG-DR and Serna farmworker, and Project Homekey financing provided by HCD, and tax credit and tax-exempt bond financing.  Currently representing the Santa Clara County Housing Authority on matters related to the management, operations, and financing of the Buena Vista Mobilehome Park, including leasing and tenant relocation matters.
 Currently representing the City of Petaluma in connection with the financing of affordable housing projects financed with City and County funds, CDBG -DR, Serna farmworker financing, and Project Homekey financing provided by HCD, and tax credit and tax-exempt bond financing.
 Currently representing the City of Morgan Hill in connection with the financing of affordable housing projects where the City is contributing funds, as well as advising the City’s housing department on the day -to-day management and operation of its affordable housing program and best practices related thereto.
 In addition to the real estate matters described above, c urrently representing the City of Mountain View in connection with the disposition/ground lease of several City -owned properties for development of affordable housing, the refinancing of CDBG and HOME - financed developments, and in connection with affordabl e housing policy, development and finance matters, including projects developed using a combination of City housing trust funds, HOME funds, CDBG funds, low -income housing tax credits, tax -exempt bonds, and other sources. We also represent Mountain View in connection with its review and action on complex housing development projects, including projects that have invoked the Builder’s Remedy, mixed- use development projects, and other projects eligible for state streamlining pro visions. We worked with the City to develop updates to its State Density Bonus Law ordinance and implementation guidelines and to draft is SB 9 implementation ordinance.
 Currently representing Renewal Enterprise District, a joint powers agency of the City of Santa Rosa and Sonoma County and its affiliated nonprofit, the RED Housing Fund, as general counsel, and in connection with operation of an affordable housing loan fund. Our

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 307

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 7 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

representation includes provision of advice regarding Brown Act, conflict of interest, governing board composition and operating procedures, public records act issues, preparation and review of agendas and board packets, negotiation and drafting of consulting contracts, and the preparation and negotiation of loan documents.  Currently representing YWCA Golden Gate Silicon Valley and YWCA Apartments, Inc., in connection with refinancing of public agency loans, and property management issues for a HUD Section 202 senior apartment project.
 Currently representing the City of Morgan Hill on affordable housing policy matters including density bonus and inclusionary housing, finance and transactional matters including disposition, development and loan transactions for multi -family acquisition, rehabilitation and new construction projects, and the administration of first -time homebuyer programs.

Eminent Domain
Burke is proud to have one of the largest Eminent Domain/Inverse Condemnation practice groups in California. These attorneys have substantial experience, both substantively and procedurally, and have represented public entities in acquiring virtually all types of properties, involving both full take and partial takes . Our Eminent Domain legal team, which consists of 15 attorneys throughout 7 offices, regularly helps public entities use eminent domain authority effectively and responsibly to build public projects. From project planning to public hearings, and from negotiation to trial and appeal, we help keep the process on track and minimize public entities’ financial risks.

We work with our public entity clients to negotiate resolution of cases efficiently and economically, and to use eminent domain only as a last resort. We understand our clients’ concern over potential negative public sentiment regarding eminent domain. When cases cannot be resolved through settlement efforts, we help educate our clients r egarding the process and have an outstanding record of success using the court process to achieve our clients’ objectives . This includes obtaining pre -condemnation rights of entry, obtaining pre -judgment orders for possession, resolving “right to take” objections by demur or bench trials, and resolving valuation issues through jury trials. Burke’s team has worked on property acquisitions governed by both State and Federal laws and rules applicable in condemnation proceedings.

Burke’s Eminent Domain attorneys have litigated eminent domain and/or inverse condemnation matters throughout the State, including in San Bernardino, Riverside, Los Angeles, Orange, San Diego, Ventura, San Benito, Mendocino, Monterey, Santa Cruz, Santa Clara, San Mateo, Alameda, El Dorado, Calaveras, and Placer Counties . If an eminent domain action is filed, our Eminent Domain team handles every aspect of the litigation, including the drafting of pleadings, undertaking discovery, obtaining prejudgment orders of possession and, where necessary, taking the matters through trial and appeal . We routinely and effectively use legal issues motions pursuant to Section 1260.040(a) of the Code of Civil Procedure to narrow the issues and drive eminent domain litigation towards settlement instead of trial. We also have substantial experience in preventing and, when necessary, successfully litigating right -to-take challenges . Burke regularly defends public agencies against inverse condemnation claims brought by property owners and businesses claiming damages stemming from, among other things, the construction of nearby public projects, the temporary/permanent re- routing of traffic and the expiration of temporary construction easements when the project is not yet complete.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 308

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 8 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

In addition to litigating eminent domain actions, Burke’s attorneys routinely draft transactional documents necessary for the acquisition of real and personal property, including purchase and sale agreements, possession and use agreements, rights of entry, land swaps, options, reversionary interests, deeds, leases, and other real estate transactional documents . The firm’s Eminent Domain attorneys are well -versed in assisting clients with issues arising under the Uniform Relocation Act and California’s Relocation Assistance Act, CEQA, and complicated land use issues. Burke’s attorneys have also provided advice and assisted with the disposition of excess/surplus remnant parcels at the end of a project.

Representative Eminent Domain Matters
Burke has significant and long-standing experience acquiring multiple properties for large public projects. Projects of note include:
 Over the last twenty -one years, has served and continues to serve as special property - acquisition lead counsel for 11 of Alameda Corridor -East Construction Authority’s (now subsumed within San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments) multi -million dollar railroad/railway grade separation projects located in San Gabriel Valley . Each of these projects used various forms of Federal, State and Local funding sources and was subject to audit . More information about the ACE Project may be found at https://www.theaceproject.org/. Each of these grade separations involved the acquisition of a multitude of diverse improved and unimproved properties, and affected a number of businesses.
 Currently representing Orange County Flood Control District to acquire flowage easements over 41 separate properties in furtherance of the Santa Ana River Mainstem Project between the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Counties of Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino to raise the potential inundation area of the Prado Dam . Affected properties included both improved and unimproved properties zoned for residential, commercial and industrial uses.
 Currently representing the City of Inglewood to acquire 10 private parcels out of 41 parcels that are needed for the Inglewood Basketball and Entertainment Center Project. The City has owned 31 of the parcels that sat vacant for decades. In fact, despite four decades of efforts, 25 acres (nearly 90% of the Project Site) sits vacant. We assisted the City with the negotiation and drafting of a disposition and development agreement and development agreement to ensure minimal roadblocks in case the City opted to utilize eminent domain to acquire said parcels. Despite numerous right to take challenges, the City obtained early prejudgment possession which allowed construction to start within six months of filing the various actions. The City also prevailed at the Right to Take Bench trial, has settled four of the matters, and we are now preparing for the Just Compensation jury trials.  Since 2019, has represented and continues to represent Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority in several multi -property acquisitions for transportation projects including the I -710 Sound Wall, Purple Line, Whittier/Santa Fe, Whittier/Painter, SR -91 Alondra and SR-91 Central Acaci street widenings.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 309

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 9 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

 Assisted the Council of San Benito County Governments (COG) with all aspects of the right of way process and acquisitions and condemnation for the Highway 25 Bypass Project and the Highway 25 Safety Project . A total of 44 property acquisitions were required for the Bypass Project. Two properties were acquired in their entirety as full fee takes, one business was relocated, one household was relocated, and one rental tenant was relocated. The remaining acquisitions were partial fee takes, public utility easements, and temporary construction easements . We assisted COG staff and consultants in preparing initial offers, staff reports, resolutions of necessity, an amendment to their joint powers agreement, in negotiating settlements, and in drafting purchase and sale agreements. We attended project meetings and assisted with coordination of all consultants and the project team which included Caltrans representatives, design personnel, utility representatives, and right of way consultants . Sixteen cases were filed.

Most involved complex legal and valuation issues relating to severance damages, highest and best use, development potential, dedication requirements, zones of value, and benefits. Thirty roadway easements and partial fee acquisitions were needed for the Highway 25 Safety Project, but we settled them all and only ended up filing two cases which ultimately settled in the early stages of litigation.  Represented BART and VTA in several multi-property acquisitions for the BART extension project from the City of Fremont to Downtown San Jose, as well as other BART expansions over the years . For Phase 1 of BART’s extension to Silicon Valley, the acquisitions for which we assisted ranged from full takes of multi -acre industrial parks containing numerous multitenant masonry buildings requiring complicated relocations of numerous business tenants, to complex acquisitions involving highest and best use and project influence issues. We drafted numerous purchase and sale agreements including one for a property valued at $26 million, drafted license agreements, and obtained orders for prejudgment possession. We also assisted with complicated relocation, valuation, goodwill, and “improvements to the realty,” issues.
 Other multi-property acquisition projects include those for Friant Water Authority on behalf of the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation ( 35+ acquisitions for the Kern Canal Middle Reach Widening Project); Los Angeles World Airports (Airport Noise Compatibility program), City of Rohnert Park (Wilfred Avenue/Golf Course Drive West Widening Project), City of Wildomar (I-15/Clinton Keith Interchange Project), City of Santa Clarita and Santa Clarita Redev. Agency (Golden Valley Road, various street -widening and redevelopment projects), City of Alhambra (Freemont Ave. street -widening project) and City of Banning (Sunset Electrical Substation and Water Tank Projects).

PROPOSED TEAM
We propose Anna C. Shimko to serve as lead attorney . We propose Anna, Eric S. Phillips, Lisa N. Maxwell, Leila J. Moshref-Danesh and Meghan E. Nihan for real estate, housing and land use matters, and Nicholas J. Muscolino for eminent domain. Resumes detailing our team’s experience are attached. We would tailor a team to efficiently address the City’s needs for each particular matter, and if appropriate, we would draw upon the expertise of additional Burke attorneys with expertise in applicable issues.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 310

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 10 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

Anna C. Shimko, Project Manager
Anna Shimko is Chair of Burke's Real Estate and Business Practice Group. She focuses her practice on all areas of land use, real estate development, and environmental law, representing both public agencies and private landowners and developers in administrative and court proceedings to bring projects to fruition . Anna has particular expertise in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

She works closely with project proponents, public agencies, and environmental consultants on preparing and defending CEQA and NEPA documents such as negative declarations, environmental impact reports (EIRs), and environmental impact statements (EISs), including for complex projects such as water rights t ransfers, multi -phased mixed- use projects and large campus master plans . Anna helps private clients through all stages of the land use approval process, obtaining entitlements to build or expand large shopping centers, stand- alone retail stores, mixed-use projects, hospitals, hotels and resorts, golf courses, residential developments, and quarries, among others. She also assists cities, counties, special districts, and state agencies in regulating land and development, negotiating real estate transactional documents and development agreements, and updating general plans, specific plans, and zoning codes . Anna represents clients in matters involving the Subdivision Map Act, annexation, historic resources, public-private partnership transactions and financing mechanisms, the Coastal Act, air quality regulations, water supply, climate change regulations, and transportation planning. Anna litigates land use, CEQA, and NEPA matters for public and private clients at trial court and appellate court levels, and serves as an expert witness throughout California in cases involving land use development issues.

Eric S. Phillips
Eric Phillips practices in the areas of land use, real estate, and CEQA compliance. Eric represents clients in all phases of the development process, including property acquisition and disposition, entitlement and administrative approvals, CEQA compliance, and project defense in litigation. He has particular experience with large, complex projects that raise challenging land use issues. For example, Eric has advised the City of Mountain View in connection with the preparation and implementation of the North Bayshore Precise Plan and the East Whisman Precise Plan, among others; served as special counsel to the City of Menlo Park in connection with the entitlement and CEQA review of major development projects throughout the City; represented the City of Cupertino in connection with the preparation of a Specific Plan and EIR in connection with the planned redevelopment of the former Vallco Shopping Center; represented the Port of Oakland in connection with the EIR for redevelopment of Howard Terminal in the City of Oakland; successfully defended the City of Livermore’s approval of a development project in reliance on the City’s Downtown Specific Plan and associated EIR, resulting in the published Court of Appeal decision, Save Livermore Downtown vs. City of Livermore; and worked with the City of Redwood City to create policies related to public infrastructure financing, labor incentives for downtown redevelopment efforts, prepare HOME loan documents, and other efforts.

In addition, before Eric was a lawyer, he worked as an urban planning consultant and was involved in the preparation of numerous specific plans, precise plans, and development projects throughout California. He continues to remain involved in land use planning activities and currently serves on the Board of Directors for the California Chapter of the American Planning Association as a Policy and Legislation Technical Advisor after many years of acting as the organization’s

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 311

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 11 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

Vice President for Policy and Legislation. Eric is a frequent presenter at conferences and professional organizations throughout the state on California’s oft-changing land use regulations, with a particular focus on new housing laws.

Lisa N. Maxwell
Lisa has over thirty years of experience in real estate, including development, public/private partnerships, construction, asset management, purchase and sale, leasing, workouts, commercial contracts, and common interest law. Lisa represents and advises private clients and public agencies on complex real estate transactional and leasing matters. She routinely negotiates and prepares transactional documents including, exclusive negotiation agreements, term sheets, disposition and development agreements, leas e disposition and development agreements, purchase and sale agreements, surplus lands dispositions, leases (ground, retail, office and industrial), licenses, easements, telecommunication agreements, cost sharing agreements and covenants, conditions and restrictions, while also handling ancillary matters such as title review, due diligence, and closings.

Lisa’s prior legal experiences include serving as an assistant city attorney specializing in real estate matters in both Alameda and Oakland, as well as serving as general counsel at a public homebuilder and also at a private equity real estate investment firm.

Leila Moshref-Danesh
Leila provides special counsel services to a number of local agencies throughout California, and has 9 years of experience. With a background in local government, Leila is able to lend years of on-the-ground experience to both private clients and public agencies. Leila regularly advises public agencies on CEQA and land use, including major development projects. For example, Leila has advised the City of Menlo Park on several large, mixed- use projects, and has worked on a number of Housing Elements.

Leila is a member of the California Special Districts Association Legal Advisory Working Group, and chairs Burke’s Pro Bono/Civic Engagement Committee. Leila earned her J.D. from the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law and her B.A., summa c um laude in Political Science from the University of California, Los Angeles.

Nicholas J. Muscolino
Nicholas Muscolino specializes in public law litigation . He has successfully represented public entities in trial and appellate courts throughout California in disputes concerning inverse condemnation, preemption, eminent domain, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Housing Accountability Act (HA A), homeless issues, water rights, flood and storm water diversions, public nuisance, negligence, quiet title, breach of contract, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), t he Fair Housing Act, the Fair Employment and Housing Act, the First Amendment, Section 1983, preemption, local land use and zoning, and general plan consistency.

Much of Nicholas’ practice focuses on eminent domain and inverse condemnation litigation. For example, Nicholas is lead acquisition counsel in a number of multi -parcel property acquisitions

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 312

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 12 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

for San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission. Nicholas has also defended public agencies from inverse condemnation claims based on damage caused by flood waters, interference with access, drainage pipes, and sewer lines.

Meghan E. Nihan
Meghan Nihan practices in the areas of real estate and land use . Meghan assists cities in preparing and negotiating development agreements and disposition and development agreements. She also assists public agency clients and private landowners in negotiating and preparing purchase agreements, deeds, ground leases, leases, subleases, licenses, and easements. At a previous firm, Meghan also advised public agency staff regarding the property acquisition and eminent domain process during the planning phase of public transportation projects.

Meghan has prepared and negotiated development agreements for several developments in Silicon Valley, including office projects, a hotel project, and a multi -use office, residential, and retail project. Meghan has also assisted in the preparation and negotiation of disposition and development agreements for an art center in Santa Cruz County, a mixed- use project in the Central Valley, and a mixed-use project in the San Francisco Bay Area.

REFERENCES
We are proud of our service record with our clients . We encourage you to contact the existing client references listed below about the merits of Burke, its personnel, and its services.

Client Name and Address Contact | Tel | Email
City of Santa Clara
1500 Warburton Avenue
Santa Clara, CA 95050
Elizabeth Klotz, Assistant City Manager
408.615.2232
[email protected]
City of Mountain View
500 Castro Street, 3rd Floor
Mountain View, CA 94041
Celena H. Chen, Senior Assistant City Attorney
650.903.6303
[email protected]
Radium Presents, Inc.
1201 Sherman St.

Alameda, CA 94501
Keith McCoy
510.541.7800
[email protected]

Scott Ward
415.690.6351
[email protected]

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 313

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 13 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos

RATES
We believe that the rates quoted below are reasonable and competitive . These ae the rates we currently charge the City of San Carlos.

Hourly Rates
Staffing Hourly Rate
Senior Partners $525
Junior Partners $460
Senior Associates $395
Junior Associates $345
Paralegals $195

Adjustments
The rates for legal services quoted in this proposal will remain in effect for the first year of the contract, until January, 2027. At that point and annually thereafter, rates would be adjusted based upon the CPI for the San Francisco Bay Area.

Reimbursements
We routinely charge our clients for our direct out -of-pocket expenses and costs incurred in performing the services. These costs and expenses commonly include such items as reproduction of documents, facsimile, mileage reimbursement for travel at the IRS approved rate, and other costs reasonably and necessarily incurred in performing services for the City. We do not charge a service fee or overhead for cost reimbursement items . We also do not charge for computer or word processing time. Reimbursement amounts may be adjusted annually.

Expense Rate
In-house reproduction charges
black and white 20¢ per page
color $1 per page
Mileage 70¢ per mile (or current IRS rate)
Facsimile $1 per page
All other costs reasonably and
necessarily incurred in performing
services for the City

at cost

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 314

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development Page 14 Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
Billing Format and Procedure
Bills are sent out each month invoicing charges for the prior month . Fees for our services are charged in increments of 1/10th of an hour . The bills provide a specific description of the work performed by all attorneys, the time actually spent on the work item, and the billing rate of the attorney. These bills also contain itemized descriptions of any out -of-pocket expenses incurred during the prior month.

CONCLUSION
Burke has the experience, dedication, and resources to serve the City’s needs ethically, efficiently, and cost-effectively. We will be happy to provide you with any additional information you require about our firm and welcome the opportunity to meet face -to-face to discuss Burke’s capabilities and readiness to represent the City of San Carlos. We appreciate your consideration of our proposal.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 315

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development
Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
ATTACHMENT A – EXCERPTS OF WORK

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 316

Proposal to Provide On-Call Economic Development
Legal Services to the City of San Carlos
ATTACHMENT B – RESUMES

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 317

PRACTICE GROUPS
Environmental, Land Use, and Natural
Resources
Real Estate and Business

EDUCATION
J.D., Cornell Law School, 1986
B.A., Urban Studies, University of
California, Davis, 1983

ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California

AFFILIATIONS
American College of Real Estate Lawyers
(ACREL), Land Use and Environment
Committee, current Co-Chair (3-year term)
ACREL, Land Use and Environment
Committee, prior Vice-Chair (3-year term)
ACREL, Land Use and Environment
Committee, prior Secretary/Librarian
Harbor Equity Group, Waldo Point Harbor,
President, April 2015 – present
Marin Montessori School, Board of
Trustees, 2023-present
Marin Montessori School, School Campus
Planning Committee, 2015-present
San Francisco Planning and Urban
Research Association, Advisory Council
and Board of Directors, 2003-2014
California Building Industry Association /
California Business Properties
Association, CEQA Reform Task Force,
1992-2015
Treasure Island / Yerba Buena Island
Citizens Advisory Board, 2001-2004
San Francisco Juvenile Probation
Commission, 1996-2000
Anna C. Shimko
Partner
Pronouns: she, her, hers
San Francisco [email protected]
1 California Street, Suite 3050 415.655.8115 D
San Francisco, California 94111 415.655.8100 T
Anna Shimko is Chair of Burke's Real Estate and Business Practice Group.

She focuses her practice on all areas of land use, real estate development, and environmental law, representing both public agencies and private landowners and developers in administrative and court proceedings to bring projects to fruition.

Anna has particular expertise in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). She works closely with project proponents, public agencies, and environmental consultants on preparing and defending CEQA and NEPA documents such as negative declarations, environmental impact reports (EIRs), and environmental impact statements (EISs), including for complex projects such as water rights transfers, multi-phased mixed-use projects and large campus master plans.

Anna helps private clients through all stages of the land use approval process, obtaining entitlements to build or expand large shopping centers, stand-alone retail stores, mixed- use projects, hospitals, hotels and resorts, golf courses, residential developments, and quarries, among others. She also assists cities, counties, special districts, and state agencies in regulating land and development, negotiating real estate transactional documents and development agreements, and updating general plans, specif ic plans, and zoning codes. Anna represents clients in matters involving the Subdivision Map Act, annexation, historic resources, public -private partnership transactions and financing mechanisms, the Coastal Act, air quality regulations, water supply, climate change regulations, transportation planning, eminent domain, and inverse condemnation.

Anna litigates land use, CEQA, and NEPA matters for public and private clients at trial court and appellate court levels, and serves as an expert witness throughout California in cases involving land use development issues.

RESULTS
Private Developers
 Represented a well -known Bay Area computer animation studio i n securing development agreement and zoning for a four -phase headquarters project.
 Defended in court the EIR and entitlements for a 20,000- acre residential development and open space preserve in the Carmel Valley.  Represented one of California’s largest grocery store chains and a large nationwide home improvement store in numerous projects throughout the state to build new stores or expand existing venues.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 318

Anna C. Shimko

City of Davis Ad Hoc Committee to Update
the Housing Element, 1982
Associated Students of UC Davis, Vice
President, 1981

 Represented residential developer in obtaining local and coastal permits, including through several lawsuits and global settlement of Coastal Act, wetland, subdivision, traffic, and inverse condemnation issues.  Assisted prominent football team in drafting ballot measure and seeking permits for new stadium and shopping mall.
 Represent Native American tribe with environmental review under state compact for new casino, as well as with CEQA and NEPA documents for federal and state permits related to highway improvements, management contract and other permits, and with associated litigation.  Secured major use permit amendments for renovation of Napa Valley resort on National Register of Historic Places.
 Defended in court EIR and general plan consistency findings for shopping center in Monterey County involving water supply, traffic impact, and hazardous materials issues.  Assisted private developer with transit-oriented development grant funding and entitlements from and agreements with public agencies for housing project near rapid transit station.  Represented national developer in obtaining development agreement and all permits for phased shopping center, residential, and hotel project on redevelopment lands.
 Defended CEQA review and height variance at trial court and Court of Appeal for demolition of unreinforced masonry building and construction of new research laboratory.  Worked with a Bay Area developer on an EIR, development agreement and permits for a mixed- use, phased redevelopment of commercial uses on port lands.
 Represented a national hotel chain in its renovation of a high-end San Francisco hotel.

Public Agencies
 Represent the City of Los Angeles defending land use and CEQA litigation concerning City approval of development projects at the trial and appellate court levels.  Represented City of Albany in preparing an EIR for a waterfront development master plan, and later negotiated and defended in court a development agreement and gaming ordinance for a card room facility at a live horse racing venue on the waterfront.
 Assisted the University of California at San Francisco with preparing EIRs (and defending associated litigation) for its acquisition of the Mount Zion Hospital and development of a biomedical research facility and administrative research space at the Laurel Heights campus.
 Represent City of Santa Clara with ground leases, development agreements, EIRs and entitlements for private development of entertainment, office, retail, and residential uses on city land adjacent to Levi’s Stadium.  For City of San Carlos, prepared development agreement with Palo Alto Medical Foundation for hospital and medical office project, and assisted with EIR, general plan amendments and all permits.  Represented City of Orinda with a specific plan and EIR for mixed-use development of the Gateway Valley.  Worked with consulting firms to advise the California Public Utilities Commission in environmental review for the sale of fossil-fueled and hydroelectric power plants and siting new transmission lines and substations throughout the state, for replacement facilities at nuclear power plants, and for desalination plant to supply water to Monterey Peninsula.
 Assisted Zone 7 Water Agency with an EIR for a water supply, transfer, and storage program.  Defended CEQA review of City of San Carlos decision to replace grass with turf on City play fields.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 319

Anna C. Shimko

INSIGHTS
Presentations
“CEQA Update,” CLE California Land Use Conference, 2024 “Avoiding Speed Bumps at the Intersection of Land Use and Real Estate Law,” 37th Annual Real Property Law Section Retreat, Hyatt Regency Embarcadero, April 21, 2018
“CEQA: An Update,” California Water Law Conference, San Francisco, CA, November 13, 2017 “California Environmental Quality Act: Key Developments Affecting Water Projects,” Annual California Water Law Conference, San Francisco, November 2016
“Current Developments in CEQA Law and Practice,” The Administrative and Public Environmental Law Conference, June 2015
Speaker, “Current Issues in Land Use Regulation and Development,” California Environmental Quality Act Update Cases Late 2011 to Present, California Continuing Education of the Bar, September 2012 “Aetna Springs Resort,” California Building Industry Association Select Conference on Industry Litigation, April 2012 “Hydraulic Fracturing: Permitting and Environmental Reviews,” The Seminar Group, November 2011 “Americans with Disabilities Act Primer,” 2011 for insurance company “Cumulative Impacts,” Climate Change, Cumulative Impacts and Compliance: 6th Annual National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) CLE International Conference, January 2010 “Coming Soon to Your State or Federal Government: the Climate Change Regulation Experience in California,” ICSC U.S. Shopping Center Law Conference, October 2009
“The Benefits of Development Agreements,” League of California Cities Planners Institute, March 2009 “Land Use in Northern California,” Law Seminars International, March 2009 “AB 32 Session Climate Change: Science, Law & Policy,” California Business Properties Association, Fall 2008 “The Changing Climate of California Real Property Law,” California Continuing Education of the Bar, Fall 2008 “Green Building Conference,” CLE International, February 2008 “The Challenges of Urban Development: Trends and Legal Issues for Real Property Practitioners,” California Continuing Education of the Bar, Fall 2007
“Land Use Regulation and Development,” California Continuing Education of the Bar, Fall 2006 “Regulatory Takings Conference,” CLE International, 2003 “2002 Spring CEQA Workshop Series,” Association of Environmental Professionals, 2002 “Regulatory Takings Conference,” CLE International, 2002 “CEQA: What Is It and How Does It Impact Telecommunications Projects?,” Federal Communications Bar Association, Northern Chapter, 2002

RECOGNITIONS
American College of Real Estate Lawyers (ACREL), Elected Member since 2017 Lambda Alpha International (global land economics society), Elected Member

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 320

Anna C. Shimko

California’s Top 50 Development Lawyers, Daily Journal, 2014 Top 50 Women Attorneys in Northern California, Super Lawyers Magazine, 2004-2005 Super Lawyers, Northern California, 2004 – present
Best Lawyers in America (Land Use and Zoning), 2012 – present

AFFILIATIONS
ACREL, Land Use and Environment Committee, current Co-Chair (3-year term) ACREL, Land Use and Environment Committee, previous Vice-Chair (3-year term) ACREL, Land Use and Environment Committee, previous Secretary/Librarian Harbor Equity Group, Waldo Point Harbor, President, April 2015 – present Marin Montessori School, Board of Trustees Member, 2023 – present Marin Montessori School, Campus Planning Committee, 2015 – present San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association, Advisory Council and Board of Directors, 2003- 2014 California Building Industry Association/California Business Properties Association, CEQA Reform Task Force, 1992-2015
Treasure Island/Yerba Buena Island Citizens Advisory Board, 2001-2004 San Francisco Juvenile Probation Commission, 1996-2000
City of Davis Ad Hoc Committee to Update the Housing Element, 1982 Associated Students of University of California Davis, Vice President, 1981

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 321

PRACTICE GROUPS
Environmental, Land Use, and Natural
Resources
Public
Real Estate and Business

EDUCATION
J.D., University of California, Berkeley
School of Law, 2012
B.S., Urban and Regional Studies, Cornell
University, 2002

ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California
United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit
United States District Court for the
Southern District of California

AFFILIATIONS
California Chapter of the American
Planning Association, Vice President of
Policy and Legislation

Eric S. Phillips
Partner
Pronouns: he, him, his
San Francisco [email protected]
1 California Street, Suite 3050 415.655.8114 D
San Francisco, California 94111 415.655.8100 T

Eric Phillips practices in the areas of land use, real estate, and CEQA compliance. Eric represents clients in all phases of the development process, including property acquisition, entitlement and administrative approvals, CEQA compliance, compliance with state housing laws, and negotiating real estate disputes. Eric has particular experience with State Density Bonus Law, the Housing Accountability Act, SB 35, and Housing Element Law.

Eric assists private clients to successfully obtain subdivision maps, density bonuses, development agreements, and other land use approvals. He also has served as special counsel to numerous public agencies and provides advice on writing ordinances and legislative findings related to zoning, subdivisions, inclusionary housing programs, rent control and tenant protection measures, and impact fees. In both roles, Eric has worked with various clients to negotiate and close purchase and sale agreements, draft loan agreements, create below -market-rate rental and for -sale programs, perform property diligence, craft residential preference programs, and work with technical consultants to prepare Draft and Final EIRs.

INSIGHTS
Presentations
“Got Sites? Preparing for Sixth Cycle Housing Elements,” California Chapter of the American Planning Association, September 2019
“2019 California Legislative Update,” California Chapter of the American Planning Association, September 2019
“Housing Legislation Frenzy Continues,” Bay Area Planning Directors Association, May 2019
“Nuts and Bolts of Project Approvals,” Housing California, April 2019 “Legislative Update and RHNA Reform,” Sacramento Area Council of Governments, April 2019
“Resurgence of Rent Control and Tenant Protection Law in California,” San Diego Housing Federation, October 2018
“Getting to Yes – Leveraging State Law to Secure Project Approvals,” Southern California Association of Non Profit Housing, October 2018

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 322

PRACTICE GROUPS
Real Estate and Business
Public Law

EDUCATION
J.D., Santa Clara University, 1991
B.S., James Madison University, 1985

ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California

AFFILIATIONS
Community Learning Center Schools, Past
President/Board Member
Alameda Point Collaborative, Board
Member
Lisa N. Maxwell
Partner
Oakland [email protected]
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1650 510.903.8821 D
Oakland, California 94612 510.273.8780 T

Pronouns: she, her, hers
Lisa Maxwell is a member of Burke’s Real Estate and Business Law practice and Public Law Practice, which allows her to combine and leverage her experience representing private clients with her experience representing public agencies.

Lisa has extensive experience in real estate including, development, public/private partnerships, construction, asset management, purchase and sale, leasing, workouts, commercial contracts and common interest law. Lisa represents and advises private clients and public agencies on complex real estate transactional and leasing matters. She routinely negotiates and prepares transactional documents including, exclusive negotiation agreements, term sheets, disposition and development agreements, lease disposition and development agreements, purchase and sale agreements, leases (ground, retail, office and industrial), licenses, easements, telecommunication agreements, cost sharing agreements and covenants, conditions and restrictions, while also handling ancillary matters such as title review, due diligence and closings. Lisa regularly advises on Surplus Land Act issues.

Prior to joining Burke, Lisa served as the Community Development Director for the City of Alameda, and as an Assistant City Attorney for the Cities of Alameda and Oakland. As Alameda’s Community Development Director, Lisa oversaw the continued development of Alameda Point, a former Naval Air Station, while also managing the City’s real estate leasing program, economic development division, public art program, affordable housing programs, and homelessness and social service programs. Lisa led the team that obtained grants from the State and the County of Alameda, which allowed for the construction of a transitional supportive housing community in Alameda.

Lisa’s 30 years of legal experience have included serving as California general counsel for a public homebuilder, as well as in- house counsel for a real estate private equity firm.

Lisa currently serves on the Board of Directors of Alameda Point Collaborative, a non-profit serving the unhoused.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 323

PRACTICE GROUPS
Environmental, Land Use, and Natural
Resources
Public
Real Estate and Business

EDUCATION
J.D., UCLA School of Law
B.A., summa cum laude, Political Science,
University of California, Los Angeles

ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California

AFFILIATIONS
Riverside County Bar Association
California Special Districts Association
Legal Advisory Working Group
Leila Moshref-Danesh
Partner
Inland Empire [email protected]
1770 Iowa Avenue, Suite 240 951.801.6626 D
Riverside, California 92507 951.788.0100 T

Leila is an accomplished environmental and land use attorney. With a background in local government, Leila is able to lend years of on- the-ground, real world experience to her clients navigating the ins and outs of local laws and regulations. Leila’s particular expertise is in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) with special focus on Environmental Impact Reports (EIRs) – from consultant selection to document preparation and review, to AB 52 consultation, and all the way through certification and project approval.

Leila also practices land use law, advising both private and public clients throughout the entitlement process, and has drafted a number of local ordinances
Recently, Leila provided environmental and land use advice for two large- scale development projects, including a Southern Cali
fornia hospital
expansion and multi -use office, residential, and retail development in Silicon Valley
Leila is currently a member of the California Special Districts Association Legal Advisory Working Group, and chairs Burke’s Pro Bono/Civic Engagement Committee.

INSIGHTS
Presentations
“Infrastructure and the Law Case Study: The Seven Oaks Dam, ” Presentation to Visiting Delegation from Can Tho, Vietnam, March 2019.

Publications
UCLA School of Law International Justice Clinic & Aids -Free World, Safety Denied: Victim and Witness Protection in Sexual Violence Cases, May 2011.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 324

PRACTICE GROUPS
Eminent Domain and Inverse
Condemnation
Litigation
Public
Real Estate and Business

EDUCATION
J.D., Order of the Coif, University of
California, Davis School of Law, 2009
B.A., magna cum laude, Political Science
and Business Economics, University of
California, Santa Barbara, 2006

ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California
United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit
United States District Court for the Central
District of California
United States District Court for the
Northern District of California

AFFILIATIONS
Contra Costa County Bar Association
Bay Area City Attorneys Association
League of California Cities

Nicholas J. Muscolino
Partner
Pronouns: he, him, his
Oakland [email protected]
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1650 510.903.8818 D
Oakland, California 94612 510.273.8780 T

Nick Muscolino is a partner in the firm’s Oakland office. Nick specializes in the legal and procedural defenses available to public entities under California law. He has successfully represented public entities in trial and appellate courts throughout California in disputes concerning inverse condemnation, preemption, eminent domain, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), water rights, flood and storm water diversions, public nuisance, negligence, quiet title, breach of contract, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act (RLUIPA), the Fair Housing Act, the Fair Employment and Housing Act, the First Amendment, Section 1983, preemption, redevelopment dissolution, local land use and zoning, and general plan consistency.

Nick also provides advisory services to cities and other public entities. He has served as a deputy or assistant city attorney to several cities. In that capacity, he advises on the Brown Act, the Public Records Act, CEQA, litigation, mobilehome issues, civil rights issues, affordable housing, and other areas of general municipal law. Nick drafts the staff reports, resolutions, ordinances, and agreements (e.g., purchase and sale, joint powers, loan, disposition and development), that public agencies need to serve the public.

He also provides opinion letters on the legality of various housing preferences under state and federal law, and other land use and zoning-related issues.

Nick graduated Order of the Coif from the University of California, Davis in 2009, where he served as an Executive Editor of the Journal of Environmental Law and Policy. After law school, Nick served as a law clerk to the Honorable Justice Morgan Christen of the Alaska Supreme Court (now of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals) in Anchorage before entering private practice at a large law firm in San Francisco.

Nick works closely with clients to understand their goals and to determine how to achieve their desired outcomes in the most cost -
effective and timely
manner.

RESULTS
 Nick represented a northern California transit district in litigation involving (1) affirmative claims against a property owner for nuisance, negligence, and injunctive relief arising out of the property owner’s construction of improvements that damage the district’s infrastructure during storm events; and (2) defending against claims for inverse condemnation, negligence, and breach of contract. Nick successfully defeated a muti - million dollar inverse condemnation claim via motion for summary adjudication.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 325

Nicholas J. Muscolino

 Nick defended a city in a federal lawsuit alleging that a resolution and ordinance affecting rail -related development violated the Dormant Commerce Clause and is preempted by the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act, the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, and the Shipping Act.  Nick defended a northern California sanitary district in litigation alleging that the district had overcharged customers for sanitary sewer fees. After three rounds of demurrers, the court sustained the district’s demurrer with prejudice.
 Nick defended a northern California city against a petition for writ of mandate alleging that the city’s approval of a project violated CEQA and the Planning and Zoning Law. Nick defeated the petition on the merits and persuaded the trial court to award the City nearly $70,000 in costs to prepare the administrative record.  Nick defended a northern California city in a lawsuit alleging more than $10 million in damages for the city’s alleged taking of private water rights without just compensation. Nick defeated the breach of contract claims at the pleadings stage by successfully asserting the Government claims Act. He then defeated the remaining inverse condemnation claims via motion for summary judgment.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 326

PRACTICE GROUPS
Real Estate and Business

EDUCATION
J.D., University of California, Los Angeles
School of Law, 2013
B.A., University of California, Los Angeles,
2010

ADMISSIONS
State Bar of California
United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit
United States District Court for the Central
District of California

AFFILIATIONS
Orange County Bar Association
St. Thomas More Society of Orange
County
Orange County Women Lawyers
Association

Meghan E. Nihan
Senior Associate
Orange County [email protected]
18300 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 650 949.265.3404 D
Irvine, California 92612 949.863.3363 T

Meghan Nihan’s practice focus es on real estate transactional matters and public/private partnership development matters. She has experience with purchase, sale, easement, license, and lease transactions; government purchases of property in lieu of condemnation; ancillary matters such as title review and due diligence; and advising clients on property management landlord/tenant issues.

Meghan was previously an associate in the Corporate and Real Estate practice groups of two Southern California law firms. She was also an associate in the Eminent Domain practice group of a law firm based in Orange County for five years, where she advised s taff during t he planning phase of a public transportation project, drafted and negotiated purchase and sale agreements , and handled all aspects of eminent domain litigation if a voluntary purchase transaction was not consummated.

During law school, Meghan completed environmental coursework. Early in her career, she worked as a Legal Fellow at Orange County Coastkeeper, whose mission is to protect the region’s water resources. Meghan’s work there included bringing lawsuits to enforce the Clean Water Act and reviewing and drafting comments regarding local policies or Environmental Impact Reports.

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 327

w w w . b w s l a w . c o m
8 0 0 . 3 3 3 . 4 2 9 7

8.i
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 328

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 24, 2025
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of a Five-Year Professional Services Agreement with the County of San Mateo for Code Enforcement Services in an Amount Not to Exceed
$1,255,181.34.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommend that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the execution of five-year progressional services agreement with the County of San Mateo for code enforcement services for the period of December 15, 2025 through June 30, 2030, in an amount not to exceed $1,255,181.34.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no additional fiscal impact associated with this item. There are sufficient funds available in the fiscal year (FY) 2025-26 Adopted Budget and additional years will be budgeted accordingly.

The projected annual costs for the County Code Enforcement Agreement over the next five years is listed below. The annual costs include constant staffing, the use of a San Mateo County-issued vehicle, City of San Carlos uniform, training, and proper certifications and licenses.

Terms Fiscal Year Hourly Rate Total
Year 1 (12/15/25-6/30/26) FY 25-26 $110.33 $125,339.18
Year 2 FY 26-27 $119.43 $248,423.89
Year 3 FY 27-28 $129.55 $269,466.10
Year 4 FY 28-29 $140.82 $292,901.44
Year 5 FY 29-30 $153.39 $319,050.73
Total Contract Amount $1,255,181.34
BACKGROUND:

Since 2011, the City of San Carlos has benefited from a shared agreement for code enforcement services with San Mateo County. What started out as a part-time position has grown to a full-time position over the last 14 years as demand for code enforcement services increased, and the City made efforts to improve response time and resolution of complaints. The intent of this Resolution is to authorize the City Manager to execute a renewal of the prior Agreement for Code Enforcement Services after coordination with the County of San Mateo Board of Supervisors.

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 329

ANALYSIS:

The Code Enforcement Officer addresses routine complaints such as weeds, unmaintained property, and other blight throughout the city. Resources such as San Mateo County Health, San Mateo County Vector Control, the Sheriff’s Office, and other agencies are coordinated by the Code Enforcement Officer to assist with resolving code enforcement concerns for the City of San Carlos. Effective utilization of outside resources is critical to resolve concerns in a timely manner.

The Code Enforcement Officer has a work cubicle within the San Carlos Building Division and, on average, oversees approximately 220 active cases per year for the City. Since 2011, when the City first began shared services for Code Enforcement with San Mateo County, response time to complaints have decreased, and the City’s ability to effectively bring resolution to blight-related property conditions has improved significantly with a shared services agreement with San Mateo County.

A proficient code enforcement program is important because it protects public health and safety, prevents criminal activity by maintaining well-kept properties, preserves property values, and fosters a stable and attractive community. This is achieved by ensuring residents and businesses adhere to established regulations, ultimately promoting economic growth and an improved quality of life for everyone.

In addition to oversight provided by the San Carlos Building Official, the staff of the San Mateo County Code Compliance Section has a dedicated Code Compliance Manager and is committed to working cooperatively with residents, property owners, and other interested parties to prevent and resolve land-use and building violations in a fair and efficient manner. In cases where voluntary compliance cannot be achieved, the Code Enforcement Officer may issue citations, levy fines, and use its authority to abate the problem.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the execution of a five-year professional services agreement with the County of San Mateo for code enforcement services in an amount not to exceed $1,255,181.34; or

2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or

3. Provide staff with alternative direction.

Respectfully submitted by:

Robert Lord, Assistant Building Official;
Chris Valley, Building Official; and
Al Savay, Community Development Director

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 330

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

1. Resolution

2. Proposed Agreement

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 331

RESOLUTION NO. 2025 – ____

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

AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A FIVE-YEAR PROFESSIONAL SERVICES

AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $1,255,181.34.

WHEREAS, code enforcement is vital to the preservation of public health and safety; and WHEREAS, by reducing blight in the community through enforcement of City codes and regulations, property values are maintained and public safety and health is improved – all which benefit the entire community; and
WHEREAS, code enforcement services have been successfully provided to the City of San Carlos in the past by the County of San Mateo; and
WHEREAS, the agreement for code enforcement services allows for consistent staffing and all overhead, including uniform and vehicle, associated with the Code Enforcement Officer position; and
WHEREAS, the new agreement between the County of San Mateo and the City of San Carlos will be from December 15, 2025 to June 30, 2030.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby authorizes the execution of a five-year professional services agreement with the County of San Mateo for code enforcement services in an amount not to exceed $1,255,181,34. * * * * *
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 24th day of November 2025, by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 332

Agreement No. 2638000C00130

AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO AND CITY OF SAN CARLOS This Agreement is entered into this Monday, December 15, 2025, by and between the County of San Mateo, a political subdivision of the state of California, hereinafter called “County,” and City of San Carlos, hereinafter called “City.”
* * *
Whereas, it is necessary and desirable that County perform work/services for City of San Carlos for the purpose of providing zoning code enforcement services within the City through the San Mateo County Planning and Building Department ("Planning Department"), as set forth herein; and
Now, therefore, it is agreed by the parties to this Agreement as follows:

1. Exhibits and Attachments
The following exhibits and attachments are attached to this Agreement and incorporated into this Agreement by this reference:

Exhibit A—Services
Exhibit B—Payments and Rates

2. Services to be performed by County
a. In consideration of the payments set forth in this Agreement and in Exhibit B, County shall provide code enforcement services within the City in accordance with the terms, conditions, and specifications set forth in this Agreement and in Exhibit A. b. The City may request any additional services not set forth in Exhibit A in the field of zoning code enforcement, building code enforcement, building inspections, or related fields within the expertise of the Planning Department to provide, and the Planning Department may provide such services upon negotiation of rates for the additional services. Such additional services shall be reflected as amendments to Exhibit A.

3. Payments
In consideration of the services provided by County in accordance with all terms, conditions, and specifications set forth in this Agreement and in Exhibit A, City shall make payment to County based on the rates and in the manner specified in Exhibit B. In no event shall City’s total fiscal obligation under this Agreement exceed One Million Two Hundred Fifty-Five Thousand One Hundred Eighty One Dollars and Thirty-Four Cents ($1,255,181.34). In the event that the City makes any advance payments, County agrees to refund any amounts in excess of the amount owed by the City at the time of contract termination or expiration. County is not entitled to payment for work not performed as required by this Agreement.

4. Term

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 333

Subject to compliance with all terms and conditions, the term of this Agreement shall be from December 15, 2025 through June 30, 2030.

5. Termination
This Agreement may be terminated by County’s Director of Planning and Building, or their designee, and/or City, at any time without a requirement of good cause upon thirty (30) days’ advance written notice to the other party. Subject to availability of funding, County shall be entitled to receive payment for work/services provided prior to termination of the Agreement. Such payment shall be that prorated portion of the full payment determined by comparing the work/services actually completed to the work/services required by the Agreement.

6. Relationship of Parties
It is expressly understood that this is an agreement between two independent contractors and that no agency, employee, partnership, joint venture or other relationship is established by this Agreement. The intent by both County and City is to create an independent contractor relationship.

7. Hold Harmless
a. General Hold Harmless
City shall indemnify and save harmless County and its officers, agents, employees, and servants from all claims, suits, or actions of every name, kind, and description resulting from this Agreement, the performance of any work or services required of County under this Agreement, or payments made pursuant to this Agreement brought for, or on account of, any of the following:
(A) injuries to or death of any person, including City or its employees/officers/agents; (B) damage to any property of any kind whatsoever and to whomsoever belonging; (C) any sanctions, penalties, or claims of damages resulting from City’s failure to comply, if applicable, with the requirements set forth in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) and all Federal regulations promulgated thereunder, as amended; or (D) any other loss or cost, including but not limited to that caused by the concurrent active or passive negligence of County and/or its officers, agents, employees, or servants. However, City’s duty to indemnify and save harmless under this Section shall not apply to injuries or damage for which County has been found in a court of competent jurisdiction to be solely liable by reason of its own negligence or willful misconduct.

The duty of City to indemnify and save harmless as set forth by this Section shall include the duty to defend as set forth in Section 2778 of the California Civil Code.

8. Assignability and Subcontracting
County shall not assign this Agreement or any portion of it to a third party or subcontract with a third party to provide services required by County under this Agreement without the prior written consent of City.

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 334

9. Insurance
a. General Requirements
City shall advise County of any insurance coverage requirements, and County shall provide evidence of appropriate coverage to City upon request. b. Workers’ Compensation and Employer’s Liability Insurance Each party to this Agreement shall have in effect during the entire term of this Agreement workers’ compensation and employer’s liability insurance providing full statutory coverage. In signing this Agreement, each party certifies, as required by Section 1861 of the California Labor Code, that (a) it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code, which require every employer to be insured against liability for workers’ compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of the Labor Code, and (b) it will comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of work under this Agreement. c. Liability Insurance
County shall be self-insured during the term of this Agreement under such bodily injury liability and property damage liability insurance as shall reasonably protect County and all of its employees/officers/agents while performing work covered by this Agreement from any and all claims for damages for bodily injury, including accidental death, as well as any and all claims for property damage which may arise from County’s operations under this Agreement, whether such operations be by County, any subcontractor, anyone directly or indirectly employed by either of them, or an agent of either of them.

10. Retention of Records; Right to Monitor and Audit
(a) Each party shall maintain all required records relating to services provided under this Agreement for three (3) years after City makes final payment and all other pending matters are closed, and such records shall be subject to the examination and/or audit by the other party, a Federal grantor agency, and the State of California. (b) Each party agrees upon reasonable notice to provide to the other party, to any Federal or State department having monitoring or review authority, and/or to any of their respective audit agencies access to and the right to examine all records and documents necessary to determine compliance with relevant Federal, State, and local statutes, rules, and regulations, to determine compliance with this Agreement, and to evaluate the quality, appropriateness, and timeliness of services performed.

11. Merger Clause; Amendments
This Agreement, including the Exhibits and Attachments attached to this Agreement and incorporated by reference, constitutes the sole Agreement of the parties to this Agreement and correctly states the rights, duties, and obligations of each party as of this document’s date. In

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 335

the event that any term, condition, provision, requirement, or specification set forth in the body of this Agreement conflicts with or is inconsistent with any term, condition, provision, requirement, or specification in any Exhibit and/or Attachment to this Agreement, the provisions of the body of the Agreement shall prevail. Any prior agreement, promises, negotiations, or representations between the parties not expressly stated in this document are not binding. All subsequent modifications or amendments shall be in writing and signed by the parties.

12. Controlling Law; Venue
The validity of this Agreement and of its terms, the rights and duties of the parties under this Agreement, the interpretation of this Agreement, the performance of this Agreement, and any other dispute of any nature arising out of this Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California without regard to its choice of law or conflict of law rules. Any dispute arising out of this Agreement shall be venued either in the San Mateo County Superior Court or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.

13. Notices
Any notice, request, demand, or other communication required or permitted under this Agreement shall be deemed to be properly given when both: (1) transmitted via email to the email address listed below; and (2) sent to the physical address listed below by either being deposited in the United States mail, postage prepaid, or deposited for overnight delivery, charges prepaid, with an established overnight courier that provides a tracking number showing confirmation of receipt.

In the case of County, to:

Name/Title: Tim Sullivan/Code Compliance Manager
Address: 455 County Center, 2nd Floor, Redwood City, CA, 94063 Telephone: 650-363-7821
Email: [email protected]
In the case of City, to:

Name/Title: Christopher Valley/Building Official
Address: 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070
Telephone: 650-802-4262
Email: [email protected]

14. Electronic Signature
Both County and City wish to permit this Agreement and future documents relating to this Agreement to be digitally signed in accordance with California law and County’s Electronic Signature Administrative Memo. Any party to this Agreement may revoke such agreement to permit electronic signatures at any time in relation to all future documents by providing notice pursuant to this Agreement.

SIGNATURE PAGE TO FOLLOW

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 336

In witness of and in agreement with this Agreement’s terms, the parties, by their duly authorized representatives, affix their respective signatures:

For CITY: City of San Carlos

____________________________
Signature
_______________
Date
___________________________
Name, Title (please print)

COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

By:

President, Board of Supervisors, San Mateo County

Date:

ATTEST:

By:

Clerk of Said Board

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 337

Exhibit A
In consideration of the payments set forth in Exhibit B, County shall provide the City with the following services described below:

1. CODE ENFORCEMENT SERVICES
a. The County agrees to provide code enforcement services within the corporate limits of the City through the San Mateo County Planning and Building Department ("Planning Department") as set forth in this Agreement ("Services"). The services shall be provided by a full -time (40 hours/week) Code Compliance Officer employed by the County and supervised by a Senior Code Compliance Officer and/or the Code Compliance Program Manager of the Planning and Building Department.
b. The County shall respond to complaints forwarded by the San Carlos Building Official ("Building Official") regarding violations of the San Carlos Municipal and Zoning Code involving weeds, over-grown shrubbery, blighted vacant homes, and illegal signs. c. The County shall inspect the sites that are the subject of the complaints forwarded by the Building Official within seventy-two (72) hours of receiving the complaint unless lawful access cannot be obtained, extenuating circumstances exist, or the Building Official agrees to an alternative timeframe.
d. If the County determines that no Municipal or Zoning Code violation exists, the County will inform the Building Official of the basis of this determination, and where possible, refer the complaining party to other departments, agencies, or services that may be able to provide assistance.
e. In instances where County investigations confirm the presence of a Municipal or Zoning Code violation, the County shall develop and implement a strategy for abating the violation in coordination with the Building Official.
f. Except as otherwise specifically set forth in this Agreement, the Services shall only encompass duties and functions of the type coming within the jurisdiction of and customarily rendered by the Planning Department under the County Charter, the statues of the State of California, and under the City municipal codes.

2. ADMINISTRATION OF PERSONNEL
a. The rendering of the services by the Planning Department, the standards of performance, the discipline of personnel, and other matters incident to the performance of such services and the control of personnel so employed shall remain with the County. b. All City employees who work in conjunction with the Planning Department pursuant to this Agreement shall remain employees of the City and shall not have any claim or right to employment, civil service protection, salary, or benefits or claims of any kind from the County based on this Agreement.
c. All County employees who work in conjunction with the City pursuant to this Agreement shall remain employees of the County and shall not have any claim or right to employment, civil service protection, salary, or benefits or claims of any kind from the City based on this Agreement.

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 338

3. CITY OBLIGATIONS
a. The City will provide a work station and computer. In all instances where special supplies, stationery, notices, forms, and the like must be issued in the name of City, the same shall be supplied by City at its own cost and expense.

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 339

Exhibit B
In consideration of the services provided by County described in Exhibit A and subject to the terms of the Agreement, City shall pay County based on the following fee schedule and terms:

1. CHARGES FOR SERVICES
a. City shall pay County for Services described in this Agreement as calculated below.

2. INVOICING/BILLING
a. On a quarterly basis, the Planning Department shall submit to City an invoice for services rendered during the preceding quarter.
b. Payments and questions regarding invoicing shall be directed to the Planning Department.

3. PAYMENTS
a. The County shall charge an hourly rate of $110.33 for Fiscal Year 2025/26, $119.43 for Fiscal Year 2026/27, $129.55 for Fiscal Year 2027/28, $140.82 for Fiscal Year 2028/29, $153.39 for Fiscal Year 2029/30, for all services rendered pursuant to this Agreement. The Fiscal Year is from July 1 to June 30. The hourly rate includes County vehicle usage. b. Charges will not exceed the indicated totals below.
c. City payments shall be due to the County within 30 days of the date of the invoice.

Terms
Fiscal
Year Hourly Rate Total
Year 1* (12/15/25-06/30/26) FY 25-26 $110.33 $125,339.18 Year 2 FY 26-27 $119.43 $248,423.89
Year 3 FY 27-28 $129.55 $269,466.10
Year 4 FY 28-29 $140.82 $292,901.44
Year 5 FY 29-30 $153.39 $319,050.73
Total Contract Amount $1,255,181.34
*Partial Fiscal Year

8.j
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 340

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 24, 2025
ITEM TITLE: Adopt a Resolution Authorizing the Execution of an Amendment to the Professional Services Contract with Teri Black and Company, LLC for Interim City Manager Recruitment Services in the Amount of $9,400 with a 10% Contingency for a Total Amended Not-to-Exceed Professional Services Contract Amount of $54,400.

RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommend that the City Council adopt a Resolution authorizing the execution of an amendment to the professional services agreement with Teri Black & Company, LLC to include services related to the identification and placement of an interim City Manager during the ongoing recruitment process for a permanent City Manager and the authorization of a 10% contingency for a total amended not-to-exceed professional services contract amount of $54,400.

FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

There is no fiscal impact and no additional appropriation is needed at this time. Sufficient funds are available in the Human Resources Division budget to cover this amendment.

The original contract amount was $40,000. An interim contract amendment in the amount of $9,400 was subsequently requested to cover additional services related to the interim City Manager placement. This brings the revised contract subtotal to $49,400. A 10% contingency of $5,000 is included to accommodate any unforeseen needs or scope adjustments. Therefore, the total not-to-exceed amount for the contract is $54,400.

BACKGROUND:

On October 28, 2025, the City entered into an agreement with Teri Black & Company, LLC to conduct an executive recruitment for the position of City Manager. The firm was selected based on its extensive experience in public sector executive searches and its familiarity with the unique needs of local government leadership.

As the recruitment process progresses, it has become evident that the City would benefit from the support of an experienced interim City Manager to ensure continuity of operations and leadership during the transition period.

ANALYSIS:

Teri Black & Company, LLC has indicated its ability to assist the City in identifying and securing a qualified interim City Manager. This service would include:

8.k
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 341

Assessing the City’s interim leadership needs
Recommending qualified interim candidates
Coordinating interviews and selection logistics
Supporting onboarding and transition planning
The proposed amendment would expand the scope of services under the existing agreement to include these interim placement services. The firm’s familiarity with the City’s organizational culture and leadership needs positions it well to provide this additional support efficiently and effectively.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the execution of an amendment to the professional services contract with Teri Black and Company, LLC for Interim City Manager recruitment services in the amount of $9,400 with a 10% contingency for a total amended not-to- exceed contract amount of $54,400; 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

2. TBC Quote for Services

8.k
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 342

RESOLUTION NO. 2025 – ____

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

AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES CONTRACT WITH TERI BLACK AND COMPANY, LLC FOR INTERIM CITY MANAGER RECRUITMENT SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,400 WITH A 10% CONTINGENCY FOR A TOTAL AMENDED NOT-TO-EXCEED
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT AMOUNT OF $54,400.

WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos previously entered into an agreement with Teri Black & Company, LLC to provide executive recruitment services for the position of City Manager; and WHEREAS, the City has determined that it is in the best interest of the organization to secure the services of an interim City Manager during the recruitment and transition period; and WHEREAS, Teri Black & Company, LLC has the expertise and capacity to assist the City in identifying and placing a qualified interim City Manager; and WHEREAS, the proposed amendment to the agreement will expand the scope of services to include services related to the identification and placement of an interim City Manager and ensure placement of interim leadership and continuity of leadership for the City.

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the San Carlos City Council hereby authorizes the execution of an amendment to the professional services agreement with Teri Black and Company, LLC for interim City Manager recruitment services in the amount of $9,400 with a 10% contingency for a total amended not-to-exceed professional services contract amount of $54,000.
* * * * *
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 24th day of November 2025, by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

8.k
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 343

City of San Carlos
Recruitment Price Quote
Interim City Manager
November 2025

SCOPE OF WORK
The scope of work presented represents an Interim City Manager Recruitment that includes the following services:
Reach out to potential candidates to secure interest
Collect submission materials from candidates
Coordinate candidate interviews with City Council
Prepare interview materials
Facilitate Council interviews
Negotiate Interim City Manager Employment Agreement
Conduct Reference checks
Conduct Background check

PROPOSED RECRUITMENT MILESTONES
Activities Completed by
Initial call/Zoom with Client November TBC conducts personal outreach December
Review applicants with City Council or Council Subcommittee December Finalist interviews in-person with City Council December Negotiations complete; background & reference check late Dec,/early Jan.

PROFESSIONAL FEES
The professional fee for this assignment is $6,750 for the Scope of Work articulated in this quote.

Services include conference calls/Zoom meetings to gather stakeholder feedback on the candidate profile, brief the client on the recruitment results, facilitate a day of panel interviews, assist the Client with selection deliberations, and conduct background and reference checks.

REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES (NOT TO EXCEED)
Shipping & FedEx $ 300
Background & records checks $ 550
Consultant Travel (mileage/airfare, lodging$1,800
ground transportation, parking)
________________
Project expenses (NTE) $2,650

8.k
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 344

City of San Carlos
Recruitment Quote – November 2025

LEAD CONSULTANT/PRIMARY CONTACT
Senior Recruiter Suzanne Mason and Teri Black will co-lead this project and will be actively supported by members of the TBC support team.

Respectfully submitted:

Teri Black
President
Teri Black & Co., LLC
Date: November 12, 2025 25500 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 1158 Torrance, CA 90505
Tel 424.296.3111
EIN #13-4346458

8.k
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 345

CITY COUNCIL

STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: November 24, 2025
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving the Addendum to the City of San Carlos 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report; Adopting a Resolution Amending the San Carlos General Plan Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; Introducing an Ordinance Amending the San Carlos Zoning Map and Municipal Code, Title 18 - Zoning Ordinance, to Codify the Downtown Specific Plan; and Introducing an Ordinance Adopting the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Planning and Transportation Commission recommends the City Council:

1. Adopt a Resolution approving the addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and

2. Adopt a Resolution amending the San Carlos General Plan Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; and

3. Introduce an Ordinance amending the San Carlos Zoning Map and Municipal Code, Title 18 - Zoning Ordinance, to codify the Downtown Specific Plan; and

4. Introduce an Ordinance adopting the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan.

FISCAL IMPLICATONS:

There are no fiscal impacts associated with adopting the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan.

Funding to prepare the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan is set aside in Fund C2105 – Downtown Planning Initiative, which has been previously appropriated by the City Council.

SUMMARY:

The City Council is required by the San Carlos Municipal Code and California Government Code to hold a public hearing for consideration of amendments to the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance (San Carlos Municipal Code Sections 18.34.060 and 18.45.060).

The San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan project includes several interrelated documents:
The proposed Public Draft Downtown Specific Plan; and
Associated amendments to the City of San Carlos General Plan Land Use Element, Land Use Map, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; and

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 346

Associated amendments to San Carlos Municipal Code, Title, 18, Zoning Ordinance, and Zoning Map; and
Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report The purpose of this regularly scheduled and duly noticed meeting of the City Council, on November 24, 2025, is to conduct a Public Hearing on the Downtown Specific Plan.

On November 3, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission, at a regularly scheduled and duly noticed public hearing, adopted four (4) resolutions recommending that the City Council adopt the Downtown Specific Plan and associated amendments to the City of San Carlos General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Land Use and Zoning Maps, and approve an Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (Attachment 8). At their November 3, 2025 meeting, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommended several modifications to the Draft Downtown Specific Plan; those recommendations are presented in Attachment 9 for the City Council’s consideration.

On November 13, 2025, the City Council, at a duly noticed special meeting, received a presentation from the Community Development Director. The study session, held at the Council’s request, focused on strategies to support downtown economic prosperity, including the ideal business mix, the role of formula businesses, and opportunities to incentivize ground-floor retail, office, and commercial uses within mixed-use developments.

During the session, the Council reviewed the minor amendments to land use regulations proposed in Chapter 3 of the Draft Downtown Specific Plan and noted Action LU-6A, which calls for further evaluation of the City’s Formula Business Ordinance and potential adjustments to reduce constraints. The Council discussed the possibility of amending the ordinance in the future, including a range of possible amendments such as changing the current threshold of 15 or more, to 50 or more.

Following its discussion of strategies to encourage ground-floor commercial activation at its November 13 meeting, the Council directed staff to develop additional policy options and action items for consideration at the November 24, 2025 public hearing on the Downtown Specific Plan.

These potential amendments are included in Attachment 10 and include adding an action item to create regulatory incentives to encourage ground floor commercial uses and modifications to land use regulations that signal to the marketplace the City’s strong desire for ground floor commercial uses along El Camino Real.

BACKGROUND:

Approximately four years ago in 2021, the City Council advanced the idea of creating a new plan for downtown San Carlos. It had been 12 years since a vision statement and accompanying policies for the downtown were established in the 2009 General Plan. In addition, the 2020 pandemic gave rise to new expectations for downtown, including its management and operations.

Around the same time, other efforts were at play, including creation of a brand-new Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan (approved in 2020) and a new Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan (adopted in 2021). Together, with the closure of the 700 block of Laurel Street to pedestrian-only access, new ideas and a robust discussion about Laurel Street began to emerge. Thus, it became the ideal time to address the future downtown Laurel Street and its surroundings. For these

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 347

reasons, in 2021 the City Council established the following goal in its 2021 Strategic Plan, which has since been reaffirmed every year since:
“The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future.”
The Downtown Specific Plan project was initiated in March 2022.

In the summer of 2023, just over a year later, the project scope was expanded to include preparation of a Downtown Streetscape Master Plan in response to City Council’s desire to accelerate the transformation of downtown streets. While community engagement for the Downtown Specific Plan continued, the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan was fast-tracked and ultimately adopted by the City Council on April 28, 2025.

The purpose of this meeting is to consider adoption of the Draft Downtown Specific Plan (Exhibit A to Ordinance 2) as well as other associated amendments and addenda as described above.

The Downtown Specific Plan area (Figure 1) is framed by Holly Street to the north and Greenwood Avenue to the south, with El Camino Real to the east and Walnut Street to the west.

Figure 1. Downtown Specific Plan Area
ANALYSIS AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION – DRAFT DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN:

The proposed Downtown Specific Plan is organized into eleven chapters, which are preceded by an Executive Summary and introductory sections explaining the document’s organization and use. Brief descriptions of each chapter are provided below, along with key highlights and notable features.

Chapter 1 – Introduction
The Downtown Specific Plan begins with the purpose and objective of the Plan, its authority and scope, its relationship to the San Carlos General Plan and to San Carlos’ Zoning Ordinance. It also shares how the Plan was prepared, how it complies with the California Environmental Quality

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 348

Act, and its relationship to other City of San Carlos plans and regulatory documents. The chapter concludes with an overview of the Plan’s location, demographic profile, and broader context, followed by a detailed account of the community engagement efforts.

Chapter 2 – Vision, Principles, and Framework for Urban Design and Policy Through a multi-pronged civic engagement strategy, including input from the City Council appointed Downtown Advisory Committee (DTAC), a strong and shared vision for San Carlos’ downtown emerged. This chapter presents this vision and introduces four guiding principles that shaped and support the goals, policies, actions and development standards contained in the Downtown Specific Plan. These guiding principles are embodied in an overall urban design framework for the Downtown Specific Plan.

These principles include:
Equity and Resilience – ensures that downtown continues to serve the diverse needs of the community through its offerings, as well as equitable mobility for all users, all while preparing for the realities of a changing climate.
Placemaking and Identity – recognizes and celebrates the Downtown Core as the “living room” of San Carlos and prioritizes this area as a Pedestrian Priority Zone. In addition, three other sub-districts include the San Carlos Civic Center (though not in the Plan area, its proximity to downtown influenced the Plan), Mid-Laurel, and SoLa (South Laurel). Each district, the Downtown Core, Civic Center, Mid-Laurel, and SoLa, offers unique placemaking opportunities that help establish a distinct identity for each area. Downtown Vibrancy – This framework establishes priorities for fostering urban vitality, designating the Downtown Core as the focal point of economic activity with the highest levels of pedestrian movement, public life, and community interaction. Such vibrancy is achieved through programmable public spaces and active ground-floor uses. Mobility and Connectivity – A fully developed network of downtown streets that balance all the various modes of mobility (pedestrian, bicycle, transit, vehicle, etc.). Each street is rebalanced with its appropriate emphasis.

Chapter 3 – Land Use and Urban Design
To guide future development, this chapter provides direction on land use and the character of development by establishing policies, actions, and standards for new construction. This chapter includes the Downtown Specific Plan’s Land Use and Zoning Maps. Land use designations and zoning districts are drawn from the City’s current distribution of land use designations and zoning districts and their respective intensities. In addition, the Plan’s development projections to the year 2045 (which were included in the 2045 General Plan Reset project) include new office and commercial square footage, increases in restaurant square footage, hotel space, and just over 1,500 new residential uses.

Policies have been developed to guide decision making and action over the next 20 years and call for a land use framework to create the pedestrian-oriented and vibrant mixed-use district that is envisioned for the downtown. Policies further encourage the City to review and adapt its zoning ordinance over time to reflect changing market conditions, ensuring that downtown San Carlos remains economically vibrant and fiscally stable.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 349

The downtown character, underscored by the unique experience of each subdistrict, from the downtown core to SoLa (Laurel Street, south of Arroyo Ave.) are also celebrated through policy to guide future change over the coming years.

Land Use Regulations have been carried over from San Carlos Municipal Code Section 18.05.020 but have been slightly modified to ensure land uses respond to the desired mix-of-uses to serve both current and future residents, workers, and visitors. Attachments 5 and 6 present a detailed list of minor amendments to land use regulations.

Development standards for new construction are consistent with the existing standards set for the in San Carlos Municipal Code Section 18.05.030, and consistent with the recently adopted San Carlos Objective Design Standards for Mixed-Use zoning districts.

Chapter 4 – Prosperity and Economic Development
Implementing the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, with its placemaking initiatives, will cultivate a vibrant and attractive environment for businesses, community members, and visitors making it one of the city’s most significant economic development strategies. This chapter describes downtown as a key asset to attract and retain talent for major employers. With increased foot traffic and patronage in the downtown, this will drive higher restaurant and retail sales, strengthening city revenues and supporting long-term fiscal health.

This chapter includes policies that aim to ensure that zoning allows for a mix of uses and is in alignment with retail tenant demand and space requirements. In addition, policies and actions direct San Carlos to take a business-friendly approach and help businesses start, operate, and grow. This includes providing space for pop-ups to encourage small business start-ups. Policies also point to coordinated wayfinding, branding and marketing strategies, and supporting community events and activities to attract residents, visitors and businesses.

A key initiative is to explore the formation of a Business Improvement District (BID) for downtown to engage business owners to establish a governance and funding structure that supports operations, programming, and long-term vitality of the downtown. Regular retail-audits and checklists that promote active street level uses are also emphasized. Finally, the plan explores the creation of a vibrant entertainment zone in downtown, designed to bring energy, nightlife, and new experiences to the heart of the San Carlos.

Chapter 5 – Mobility and Connectivity
Mobility improvements are essential to achieving a walkable, connected downtown. To carry out the guiding principle related to mobility and connectivity, this chapter presents an overall goal to establish a multimodal transportation framework that emphasizes safety, accessibility, and connectivity to create a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly, and equitable downtown consistent with the adopted Downtown Streetscape Master Plan.

The primary focus is the enhancement of walking, bicycling, and transit infrastructure for a more balanced street network in the downtown informed by traffic data, community input, and direction from the Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan and Pedestrian and Bicycle Master Plan.

Key policies furthering this framework include:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 350

Prioritize the pedestrian experience through the development of the 700 block of Laurel Street as a pedestrian-only plaza as well as the corresponding street character of other streets in the Downtown core including significant pedestrian improvements to the 600 and 800 blocks of Laurel Street and the 1100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue. Incorporate protected bicycle lanes with vertical buffers and green striping along primary corridors including San Carlos Avenue, El Camino Real, Brittan Avenue, Arroyo Avenue, and Laurel Street.
Incorporate infrastructure compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ensuring equitable access.
Improve street designs with wider sidewalks, high visibility crosswalks, and narrow lanes consistent with the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan.
Enhance the function of alleys within the overall Downtown circulation network.

In addition, this chapter includes standards aligned with policies summarized above for specific elements such as crosswalks, bicycle lanes, intersection treatments, traffic calming measures, and pick-up/drop-off zones to direct future development projects and capital projects as funding allows.

Chapter 6 – Parking and Transportation Demand Management Recognizing that a well-managed parking system supports Downtown vitality by promoting access for all while complementing walkability, transit access, and public space, this chapter establishes a goal to implement parking management strategies that adapt to evolving state and federal laws and reduce car dependency through complementary transportation demand management (TDM) strategies. The recommended parking management strategies were shaped by a comprehensive parking study that clarified parking supply and usage patterns. While the parking study concludes the on-street parking supply appears sufficient to meet future demands, this chapter introduces strategies that aim to optimize parking use, encourage turnover, and improve availability for all users recognizing that minimum parking requirements are removed consistent with Assembly Bill 2097. Key strategies include:
Require unbundled parking for market-rate residential and commercial development leases to enhance affordability and provide tenants an option to avoid unnecessary parking costs.
New non-residential developments are required to share private parking during non- business hours to maximize off-peak usage.
New developments shall comply with TDM requirements in the Municipal Code, which is in the process of being refined through the ongoing Citywide TDM and Parking Reform project.
Include the Downtown in any future Transportation Management Association (TMA), supporting coordinated mobility strategies and shared transportation services.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 351

Allow flexible use of curb space to accommodate a variety of future needs including time- limited parking, bicycle parking, temporary event space, etc. Improve alley parking and access by organizing loading and parking functions that would reduce street congestion and improve pedestrian safety.

In addition, this chapter identifies opportunities to collaborate with other agencies to optimize or possibly expand parking supply. If the SamTrans site is redeveloped, the existing parking garage could provide additional public parking, while a new bicycle parking facility at the San Carlos Caltrain Station would strengthen first- and last-mile connectivity and reduce vehicle reliance.

Chapter 7 – Public Realm
This chapter describes how public sidewalks and plazas will be better designed and utilized to strengthen Downtown as the community's central gathering place. As the heart of (and gateway to) Downtown, public realm improvements are primarily focused on the pedestrian-only plaza along the 700 block of Laurel Street (designated by City Council as Centennial Plaza) as well as the 600 and 800 blocks of Laurel Street and the 1100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue.

Throughout these core areas of downtown, street trees will provide a green canopy of shade, benches, seatwalls, and moveable tables and chairs will encourage visitors to stop and relax, and wider sidewalks will provide more space for social interaction and special events. New public realm amenities will include bicycle racks, drinking fountains, and "smart" light poles integrated with charging outlets, Wi-Fi, and ambient music speakers. Two pavilion structures with permanent performance stages will be constructed within the Downtown core--one near the center of Centennial Plaza and the other in the future plaza at the 600 block of Laurel Street.

One of the most significant changes will be the widening of the sidewalks along the first few blocks of San Carlos Avenue and the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street from the current 9.5 feet to a future 20 feet. Beyond adding space for pedestrians, these sidewalk enhancements will nearly double the permitted outdoor dining and retail display zone in front of Downtown businesses. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, restaurants and retail businesses were able to apply for encroachment permits to place tables, chairs, or retail displays within the area between the building face and the first red brick line running the length of Laurel Street. Outside of Laurel Street, outdoor dining and retail display need to maintain a clearance of at least four feet for sidewalk traffic. Downtown streetscape enhancements will expand the outdoor dining and retail display zone to nine feet along the 700 block of Laurel, eight feet along the 600 and 800 blocks of Laurel and the 1100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue, and at least five feet along El Camino Real. Outdoor dining and retail display areas outside the Downtown core will still need to provide the minimum four-foot-wide sidewalk clearance.

Chapter 7 describes existing design standards, operational requirements, and permitting procedures for outdoor dining and retail display within the public right-of-way. These existing provisions will remain in effect until Downtown streetscape enhancements are completed. The chapter also outlines the design standards, operational requirements, and permitting procedures that will go into effect for outdoor dining and retail display areas within the public right-of-way after the Downtown streetscape enhancements (and related sidewalk expansions) are complete. The intent for the future standards is to provide for a safe, cohesive, and high-quality public realm.

Consistent with existing practice, no permanent attachments will be allowed in the public right-of- way and enclosed structures will continue to be prohibited. By the time the Downtown streetscape enhancements are completed, the COVID-19-era "parklets" will also have been retired.

Notable modifications to the standards for outdoor dining and retail display include:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 352

Permitting patterned awnings (currently, awnings may only be a solid color), Limiting umbrellas to the City of San Carlos color palette, Limiting the height of barrier elements to four feet,
Prohibiting wrought iron, rope, jersey, or crowd barriers as well as platforms and floor coverings,
Allowing transparent retractable windscreens during inclement weather, and Matching the allowable area for retail display to the allowable area for outdoor dining.

Public realm plans also allow for a five-foot-wide "tree strip" zone adjacent to the curb/parallel parking. The standards will require setbacks from certain street features such as fire hydrants and manholes, meaning not every business may be able to utilize the tree strip to the same degree as an adjacent business.

Chapter 8 – Public Art
This chapter highlights the tremendous opportunity for public art to shape a welcoming and vibrant downtown. Artistic expressions may appear on walls, crosswalks, entry plazas, and other urban surfaces, or as individual sculptures that together create a cohesive and meaningful streetscape experience.

The Plan introduces a thematic approach to public art that draws inspiration from San Carlos’ cultural and ecological identity. Policies encourage the integration of public art throughout downtown, the preservation of existing works (such as the Balancing Act sculpture in Harrington Park), the promotion of rotating installations, and collaboration with local artists while also welcoming contributions from national and international talent.

The process for selecting public art aligns with the City’s existing Public Arts Master Plan, and a key policy calls for developing sustainable funding mechanisms to support future installations.

The chapter concludes with recommended locations for public art throughout the downtown area.

Chapter 9 – Sustainability and Resiliency
Promoting green infrastructure, sustainable mobility, clean energy, energy efficiency, and climate change mitigation and adaptation strategies can prepare San Carlos’ downtown for future challenges. This chapter presents policy that calls for integration of resilient infrastructure and climate-responsive strategies. In addition, sustainable mobility and clean energy are also elevated as policy with actions that call for electric charging facilities and active transportation infrastructure. The Plan also recognizes the City’s existing Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan and its call for sustainable practices, incentive programs, and education campaigns.

A significant feature of the Plan calls for street redesigns to incorporate rain gardens, tree pits, and permeable tree strips.

Chapter 10 – Infrastructure and Utilities
This chapter outlines necessary infrastructure and utility improvements in the Plan area. Key policies call for investing in modern infrastructure and innovative technologies, with call to action

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 353

for upgrading water and sewer systems to meet growing demands. Policies also support smart technology for street lighting, electric vehicle charging stations, public Wi-Fi connectivity, and smart waste management. Policies were developed to ensure coordinating and partnering with utility providers, such as CalWater, to align and implement infrastructure upgrades.

Chapter 11 – Administration and Implementation
Turning vision into reality requires the resources and structures to make them happen. This chapter outlines the administrative framework and funding strategies necessary to implement the Downtown Specific Plan’s goals and public improvements.

The chapter opens with an overview of the regulatory framework for permits and entitlements, referencing the City’s Design Review, Compliance Review, Planning Authorities, and Common Procedures provisions within Title 18 (Zoning Ordinance) of the San Carlos Municipal Code.

To implement the public realm improvements, a strategic phasing plan is presented in the Plan.

A total of 13 different segments were identified and designed to minimize disruptions while ensuring continuous community access. The Plan clarifies that the precise sequencing of the streetscape improvements will ultimately be decided by the San Carlos City Council and based upon funding availability.

A major focus of this chapter is how to fund the downtown transformation. Achieving the downtown vision will take time and teamwork from the City, property owners, businesses, community members, and developers. While financing and maintaining improvements can be challenging, the results will create lasting value for the entire community.

This section presents policies to guide decision making to support a diversified funding approach, one that includes public-private partnerships, developer impact fees, grants, and other financing strategies. The shared principles affirm that costs should be distributed equitably, City resources should be maximized, and investments should yield lasting community value. Although funding strategies center on one-time capital improvements, the City retains responsibility for ongoing operations and maintenance expenses. This chapter concludes with a summary of funding sources and twelve (12) actions the City can take to execute the financing strategy.

Downtown Specific Plan Appendices
Seven (7) appendices were developed to support preparation of the Downtown Specific Plan.

These appendices provide additional detail, research on best practices and recommended strategies, existing and future conditions, and technical analyses.

1. Downtown Streetscape Master Plan (Appendix A to Exhibit A of Ordinance 2)

2. Downtown Parking Management Plan (Appendix B to Exhibit A of Ordinance 2)

3. Draft Prosperity Plan (Appendix C to Exhibit A of Ordinance 2)

4. Traffic Operations Study (Appendix D to Exhibit A of Ordinance 2)

5. Infrastructure Memo (Appendix E to Exhibit A of Ordinance 2)

6. Draft Fiscal Impact Analysis (Appendix F to Exhibit A of Ordinance 2)

7. Civic Engagement (Appendix G to Exhibit A of Ordinance 2)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 354

RELATED GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENTS
The City of San Carlos’ General Plan Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element are proposed for amendments to achieve consistency with the proposed Downtown Specific Plan.

Land Use Map (Exhibit A to Resolution 2 – Land Use Map) Land uses within the proposed Downtown Specific Plan remain consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map, except for the SamTrans site at 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN 050-072-380), which is proposed to change from Mixed-Use, 75-100 DUs/Acre to Mixed-Use, 90-120 DUs/Acre.

Figure 2. 1250 San Carlos Avenue, Proposed General Plan Land Use Map Amendment

Land Use Element
Amendments primarily address the redefinition of the “Downtown Area.” The updated boundaries established by the proposed Downtown Specific Plan are incorporated into the General Plan, accompanied by policy revisions to ensure consistency with the Plan’s new vision and goals. The amendments also reference and emphasize the Downtown Specific Plan and the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan. For a detailed list of amendments, refer to Exhibit B to Resolution 2.

Circulation and Scenic Highways Element
Reference to the Downtown Specific Plan, Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, and San Carlos’ Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan are incorporated into this Element’s section on Streets and Sidewalk Standards and several policies. See Exhibit B to Resolution 2.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 355

Reasons, Findings, and Relationship of the Amendment to the Downtown Specific Plan (SCMC Section 18.34.060, B)
Amendments to the General Plan Land Use Map and Land Use and Circulation Elements are necessary to establish consistency between the proposed Downtown Specific Plan’s vision, goals, policies, and actions and the San Carlos General Plan. The Downtown Specific Plan, when adopted, will serve as an extension of the San Carlos General Plan, but provide more localized goals, policies, and actions for the Downtown over the next 20 years. Amendments are minor in nature and apply to existing text and policies within the General Plan Land Use and Circulations Elements. The proposed General Plan Land Use amendment for 1250 San Carlos Avenue, currently home to the SamTrans headquarters, opens the door to additional housing opportunities while honoring the site’s existing development footprint. This approach supports the City’s commitment to creating more housing and vibrant community spaces in areas close to services and public transit. This modification was presented to the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council on June 16, 2025, and June 23, 2025, respectively, and was recommended for inclusion in the Downtown Specific Plan.

How the proposed amendment complies with the purposes of this chapter (SCMC Section

18.34.050, A)
San Carlos Municipal Code, Title 18, Zoning Ordinance, Section 18.34.010 (Purpose) establishes procedures for making changes to the General Plan as provided for in State law when there are compelling reasons to do so. These circumstances include, but are not limited to, changes in State or Federal law and problems and opportunities that were unanticipated at the time of plan adoption or the last amendment.

Changes to the General Plan (adopted in 2009 and amendment since) originate from the City Council’s call to action in 2021, which set into place a new strategic objective: “The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future.” This set into motion the creation of a new Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, which embody a bold new vision for downtown San Carlos that will be implemented over the next 20 years. Accordingly, minor updates to the General Plan to reflect and respond to this new vision are necessary.

Whether the proposed amendment will require amendment to other plans that the City Council has adopted (SCMC Section 18.34.050, A)
The proposed General Plan amendments do not necessitate amendments to other plans and regulatory documents previously adopted by the City Council. The Plan specifically includes a section that describes its relationship to other plans and documents (see Chapter 1, Introduction,

and Adaptation Plan, East Side Innovation District Vision Plan, San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, the recently adopted Objective Design Standards, and the Draft Northeast Area Specific Plan were all considered and served to inform the creation of the Downtown Specific Plan.

The only exception is the San Carlos’s Zoning Map and Ordinance, which will require amendments and are further discussed in this report.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 356

Environmental document prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (SCMC Section 18.34.050, A)
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Addendum to the previously certified EIR was prepared and is discussed in this report.

RELATED ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENTS
To adopt the Downtown Specific Plan, two amendments to Zoning are required:
1) Zoning Text Amendment
2) Zoning Map Amendment
Zoning Text Amendment
To incorporate the proposed Downtown Specific Plan into the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance, an amendment to the Ordinance is required, specifically, the creation of a new Chapter 18.14.1 titled “Downtown Specific Plan.”
Exhibit A to Ordinance 1 to this report presents this amendment as they would appear in Title 18, Zoning Ordinance, of the San Carlos Municipal Code (SCMC).

In making a determination, SCMC Section 18.35.080, A requires the following findings:

A. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Findings.

1. The ordinance amendment is consistent with the General Plan The San Carlos General Plan, as amended on May 27, 2025, recognized that the Downtown Specific Plan was underway and accounted for its buildout to the year 2045. Accordingly, with the impending adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan, the General Plan Land Use and Circulation and Scenic Highways Elements are proposed for further amendment to reference and refer to the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, including consistency with the vision, goals, policies, and implementation items within these two Plans. With these concurrent amendments, the intent it to attain policy consistency, which is necessary for implementation through the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.

2. The ordinance amendment is consistent with the purpose of this title to promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare.

The proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are designed to guide the downtown’s transformation and growth in a deliberate and coordinated manner. By aligning land use regulations and development standards with the vision and goals of the Downtown Specific Plan, these amendments help ensure that development and capital improvements occur predictably, efficiently, and in harmony with City priorities.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 357

Zoning Map Amendment
To reflect a Zoning District change from MU-DC-100 to MU-D-120 for the property located at 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN 050-072-380), otherwise known as the San Mateo County Transit District site, a Zoning Map amendment is required.

Figure 2. 1250 San Carlos Avenue, Proposed Zoning Map Amendment In making a determination, SCMC Section 18.35.080, B requires the following findings:

B. Zoning District Boundary Amendment Findings (Zoning Map Amendments)

1. The change in district boundaries is consistent with the General Plan.

To change the Zoning designation for 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN 050-072-380) from Mixed-Use Downtown Core, 100 units/acre (MU-DC-100) to Mixed-Use, Downtown, 120 units/acre would be consistent with the concurrent General Plan Land Use amendment for this site. In addition, this change is consistent with the City’s commitment to encourage, support, and facilitate the create of safe, inclusive, diverse, and affordable supply of housing for all income levels as set forth in the City’s adopted Housing Element, including Housing Element Policy HOU-2.1, which calls for well-designed multi-family housing and mixed-use projects in the downtown area and along San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real. In addition, Action HOU-3.9 promotes residential development on nonvacant sites by continuing to proactively outreach to property owners and support new housing efforts.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 358

2. The change in district boundaries is consistent with the purpose of this title to promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare.

The proposed amendments to the Zoning Map would change the property at 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN 050-072-380) from MU-DC-100 to MU-D-120. The current distribution of MU-D-120 is adjacent to and in proximity to the subject site and would not result in a development type inconsistent with the vision, goals, policies, and standards set forth in the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Downtown Specific Plan.

3. The change in district boundaries is necessary to achieve the balance of land uses desired by the City, consistent with the General Plan, and to increase the inventory of land within a given zoning district.

The subject site at 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN 050-072-380) is just over 1 acre in size (approximately 49,693 square feet). The current Zoning designation is MU-DC- 100, which allows for 86 to 114 housing units on the site at a maximum building height of 50 feet (notwithstanding provisions for additional height under SCMC 18.15.060 and through waivers/concessions from State Density Bonus law). If rezoned to MU- D-100, this would allow for an increase to 103 to 137 housing units at a maximum building height of 75 feet (again, notwithstanding provisions for additional height under SCMC 18.15.060 and through waivers/concessions from State Density Bonus law). This represents a 20% increase in the number of potential housing units. This change would is consistent with the City’s commitment to encourage, support, and facilitate the create of safe, inclusive, diverse, and affordable supply of housing for all income levels as set forth in the City’s adopted Housing Element, including Housing Element Policy HOU-2.1, which calls for well-designed multi-family housing and mixed-use projects in the downtown area and along San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real. Through the Downtown Specific Plan process, the site is ripe for redevelopment as a result of SamTrans moving its headquarters to the City of Millbrae. Accordingly, an opportunity to redevelop the site with ground floor commercial uses and housing above, the proposed zone change would allow more housing units in a location that is within San Carlos’ priority development area, adjacent to downtown and essential services, and in walking distance of public transit and Caltrain station.

REVIEW AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE ADDENDUM TO THE 2045 GENERAL PLAN RESET

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR)
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Addendum to the previously certified EIR was prepared (see Exhibit A to Resolution 1 - Addendum to 2045 General Plan Reset EIR).

Implementation of the proposed Downtown Specific Plan requires amendments to the 2045 General Plan Reset (adopted May 27, 2025), which was evaluated in the General Plan Reset EIR, to ensure consistency between the two plans. The anticipated buildout within the Downtown Specific Plan was analyzed under the General Plan Reset EIR. However, specifics of the Downtown Specific Plan, such as refinements to development standards, the proposed goals and policies, and the public realm improvements, were not discussed as they were not developed at the time the 2045 General Plan Reset project was adopted. Therefore, some modifications and

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 359

additions were deemed necessary to the General Plan Reset EIR but, no subsequent or supplemental EIR was required.

Impacts of the Downtown Specific Plan
The environmental conditions described in the General Plan Reset EIR (certified on May 27, 2025) are substantially the same as the current conditions in the Plan Area, city, and region.

Therefore, the setting in the General Plan Reset EIR has not changed and remains the same for the purposes of analyzing the Downtown Specific Plan project.

As presented in the Addendum, the Downtown Specific Plan would not result in new or more severe significant impacts than those found within the General Plan Reset EIR, including the significant impacts to air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, traffic, and wildfire. Similar to development facilitated by the 2045 General Plan Reset, the Downtown Specific Plan would result in less than significant impacts related to all other impact areas with adherence to State and local regulations as well as the City’s General Plan policies and Standard Conditions of Approvals; therefore, the Downtown Specific Plan would not result in a new or more severe significant impact or a new or more severe cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulative impact.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur, and no new mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Consistent with the findings of the 2045 General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the DTSP would have significant and unavoidable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, traffic, and wildfire, and less than significant impacts with respect to all other impact areas. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the 2045 General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the Downtown Specific Plan would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR.

Based on the analysis contained in the Addendum, the following determinations are applicable:
No further evaluation of environmental impacts is required for the Downtown Specific Plan. No subsequent EIR is required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. The Addendum is the appropriate level of environmental analysis and documentation for the Downtown Specific Plan pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(c), the City Council will consider the Addendum and 2045 General Plan Reset EIR prior to making a decision on the Downtown Specific Plan.

CIVIC ENGAGEMENT
From page 30 of the proposed Downtown Specific Plan:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 360

“The Downtown Specific Plan, launched by the City of San Carlos in early 2022, has been an inclusive and collaborative effort to shape a vibrant and livable Downtown. Informed by a series of workshops and online surveys, the City worked closely with the community, and the City Council appointed an 18-member Downtown Advisory Committee (DTAC) to develop a shared vision and guiding principles and provide input into the street and public space designs for the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan and the Downtown Specific Plan policies. The DTAC members represented business operators, property owners, older adults, community members with special needs, the City’s Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission, Youth Advisory Council, the San Mateo County Chamber of Commerce, and the community at-large. The Downtown Streetscape Master Plan and Downtown Specific Plan processes, occurring between June 2022 and November 2025, were grounded in ongoing community engagement that gathered diverse perspectives from residents, business owners, youth, and other stakeholders. This iterative process ensured the proposed streetscape improvements and planning strategies and policies truly reflect the aspirations and needs of the San Carlos community.”
A comprehensive list of community wide and DTAC activities is provided below. For a detailed account of all community and DTAC input received, refer to Appendix G to Exhibit A of Ordinance 2 - Civic Engagement).

Community Wide Input

1. Stakeholders Focus Group Interviews: August 2022

2. Online Survey 1: August 2022 – January 2023

3. Community Workshop: August 2022

4. Community Workshop: February 2023

5. Coffee and Comments Open House: March 2023

6. Online Survey 2: March 2023 – April 2023

7. Downtown Business Stakeholder Meeting: May 2023

8. Ideation Workshops: December 7 and 9, 2023

9. Online Survey 3: December 2023 – January 2024

10. Economic Development Advisory Commission Meeting: January 2024

11. Parks, Recreation, and Culture Commission Meeting: February 2024

12. Youth Advisory Council: March 2024

13. Downtown Business Stakeholder Meeting: August 2024

14. All Commissions Joint Meeting: September 2024

15. Online Survey 4: August 2024

16. Downtown Business Meeting: August 7, 2025
Downtown Advisory Committee (DTAC) Input
To assist with development of the Downtown Specific Plan, a Council-appointed committee representing multiple interests of the study area was formed on May 25, 2022. The DTAC was responsible for reviewing information, providing feedback on topics, soliciting the participation of the community at large, and working to represent specific interests of the community. The DTAC met a total of 11 times.

1. DTAC Meeting 1: June 22, 2022 (Introduction, Orientation, Project Overview)

2. DTAC Meeting 2: July 13, 2022 (Presentation by Al Savay, Social and Meet and Greet)

3. DTAC Meeting 3: September 13, 2022 (Existing Conditions and Market Analysis)

4. DTAC Meeting 4: January 25, 2023 (Urban Design and Placemaking Concepts)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 361

5. DTAC Meeting 5: June 20, 2023 (Project Update, Business Community Feedback, Work in Progress)

6. DTAC Meeting 6: November 14, 2023 (Introduction to Streetscape Master Plan process)

7. DTAC Meeting 7: March 19, 2024 (Vision, Guiding Principles, Design Concepts)

8. DTAC Meeting 8: September 3, 2024 (Refined Street Designs, Traffic, Circulation, and Parking)

9. DTAC Meeting 9: March 26, 2025 (Policy and Standards Discussion)

10. DTAC Meeting 10: April 15, 2025 (Parking and Transportation Demand Management)

11. DTAC Meeting 11: June 3, 2025 (Policies and Standards) In addition to the above, multiple study sessions were held with the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council where the public was invited to participate and make comments.

1. Project Updates to Planning and Transportation Commission: April 17, 2024

2. Project Updates to City Council: April 24, 2023

3. Planning and Transportation Commission: May 20, 2024 (DTAC-endorsed street designs)

4. City Council: June 10, 2024 (DTAC-endorsed street designs)

5. City Council Endorsement of Street Redesigns: September 23, 2024

6. Planning and Transportation Commission: April 7, 2025 (Downtown Streetscape Master Plan recommendation)

7. City Council: April 28, 2025 (Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Adoption

8. Planning and Transportation Commission Study Session: June 16, 2025 (Downtown Specific Plan)

9. City Council Study Session: June 23, 2025 (Downtown Specific Plan)

10. City Council Study Session: August 25, 2025 (Downtown Specific Plan) The Public Draft Downtown Specific Plan was released on October 14, 2025, and additional opportunity for the public to participate and share comments was provided at the Planning and Transportation Commission public hearing on November 3, 2025, and again, at tonight’s City Council public hearing of November 24, 2025.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Since the Public Draft Downtown Specific Plan was released on October 14, 2025, the city received several comments. These comments include:

On Harrington Park
Opposed to removing mature trees for restroom installation. Concern over loss of greenery, shade, and the park’s inviting atmosphere. Disapproval of proposed “concrete-heavy,” “sterile,” or “ugly” designs. Desire to preserve Harrington Park’s character and environmental value. Lack of public notice or engagement before finalizing plans. Assurance that memorial bricks will remain preserved and in their original layout.

On Laurel Street and Downtown Changes
Frustration with extended street closures, loss of parking, and lingering COVID-era configurations.
Skepticism about the necessity of beautification projects (murals, fountains, etc.). Fears of overdevelopment and losing “small-town” charm.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 362

Will there be grass or turf areas for children to play within the downtown plan.

Business Related Concerns
Business owners support parklet removal but request city financial support during construction.
Questions about timeline and farmers market relocation. Recommend eliminating the Formula Business Ordinance
San Mateo County Transportation Authority (SamTrans) Site Through the Downtown Specific Plan process, City staff learned that the San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) headquarters, located at 1250 San Carlos Avenue, is anticipated to relocate to the City of Millbrae in 2026. The property at 1250 San Carlos Avenue, which is just over one acre in size, represents a prime opportunity for future redevelopment and serves as a prominent gateway site to downtown San Carlos. The SamTrans property consists of two parcels:
the office building at 1250 San Carlos Avenue and a parking garage located at 532 Laurel Street.

In anticipation of SamTrans’ relocation and the potential for redevelopment, City staff evaluated and proposed a change to the site’s zoning designation from Mixed-Use Downtown Core (MU- DC-100), which allows a maximum of 100 dwelling units per acre and up to four stories or 50 feet in height, to Mixed-Use Downtown (MU-D-120), which permits up to 120 dwelling units per acre and allows six stories or 75 feet in height.

Staff’s recommendation to apply a higher-intensity zoning designation would align the site with the existing zoning of the adjacent SamTrans parking garage (see Table 1 below). Furthermore, this change supports the City’s ongoing commitment to fostering a safe, inclusive, and diverse housing supply across all income levels, as outlined in the adopted Housing Element. Specifically, it advances Policy HOU-2.1, which promotes well-designed multi-family and mixed-use projects in the downtown area and along San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real.

Table 1. San Mateo County Transit District Site Data
Address/APN/Sq. Ft. Current Zoning Designation Recommended Zoning Designation
1250 San Carlos Avenue
050-072-380
49,693 sq. ft.

MU-DC-100
Minimum density: 75 units
Maximum density: 100 units
Maximum stories: 4
Maximum building height: 50
ft.

MU-D-120
532 Laurel Street
APN 050-072-370
29,900
MU-D-120
Minimum density: 90 units
Maximum density: 120 units
Maximum stories: 6
Maximum building height: 75
ft.

MU-D-120 (no change)
Both the City Council and Planning and Transportation Commission supported staff’s proposal at previous study sessions held on June 16, 2025, and June 23, 2025, respectively.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 363

In August 2025, SamTrans staff met with San Carlos city staff to discuss potential redevelopment of the site. Based on their evaluation, SamTrans indicated that a minimum density of 60 units would be most feasible under current economic conditions.

City staff supports collaborating with SamTrans on a potential shared parking agreement, advancing a transit-oriented development, delivering on-site affordable housing, and activating ground-floor uses at this prominent gateway to downtown San Carlos. However, SamTrans’s request for a minimum density below the site’s current zoning requirement (MU-DC-100, which requires at least 75 units per acre) is inconsistent with City policies and objectives. Granting an exception would represent a unique consideration and could set an inequitable precedent relative to other development sites.

On November 14, 2025, a letter from SamTrans was received (included in Attachment 7) with a request to maintain the site’s current zoning designation of MU-DC-100.

For a detailed account of public comments received since the Public Draft Downtown Specific Plan was released on October 14, 2025, please see Attachment 7 - Public Comments.

PUBLIC NOTICE
A public notice for the City Council public hearing of November 24, 2025, was prepared and mailed on November 13, 2025, to all property owners and sites within the Downtown Specific Plan, and to property owners and sites within 300 feet of the Downtown Specific Plan boundaries.

In addition, the public notice was published in the local newspaper on November 13, 2025 (see Attachment 12). Announcement of the City Council hearing of November 24, 2025, was also made using multiple channels, such as direct email, on the project website www.sancarlosdowntownplan.com, through the City’s social media platforms, Adult Community Center newsletter, and the San Carlos School District E-newsletter, City Council newsletter, on A-Fame signs in the downtown core and by in-person outreach to downtown business operators.

RECOMMENDATION
The Planning and Transportation Commission recommend the City Council:

1. Adopt a Resolution to approve the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and

2. Adopt a Resolution to amend the San Carlos General Plan Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; and

3. Introduce an Ordinance to amend the San Carlos Zoning Map and Municipal Code, Title 18, Zoning Ordinance to codify the Downtown Specific Plan; and

4. Introduce an Ordinance to adopt the Downtown Specific Plan.

NEXT STEPS
If the City Council adopts the two resolutions and introduces the two ordinances as recommended by the Planning and Transportation Commission, staff will return the ordinances to the Council for

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 364

a second reading on December 8, 2025. Following the second reading, the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan will take effect on January 7, 2026.

ALTERNATIVES:

The alternatives available to the City Council include:

1. Adopt a Resolution approving the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report (EIR); adopt a Resolution amending the San Carlos General Plan Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; introduce an Ordinance amending the San Carlos Zoning Map and Municipal Code, Title 18-Zoning Ordinance to codify the Downtown Specific Plan; and introduce an Ordinance adopting the Downtown Specific Plan.

2. Do not adopt the two Resolutions and do not introduce the 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
ATTACHMENT(S):

1. Resolution 1 – Approve Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset EIR Exhibit A to Resolution 1 - Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report

2. Resolution 2 – Amend the San Carlos General Plan Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element
Exhibit A to Resolution 2 – San Carlos General Plan Land Use Map Amendment Exhibit B to Resolution 2 – San Carlos General Plan Amendments

3. Ordinance 1 - Amend the San Carlos Zoning Map and Municipal Code Exhibit A to the Ordinance 1 – Title, 18, Zoning Ordinance Amendment Exhibit B to the Ordinance 1 – Zoning Map Amendments (Site and Citywide)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 365

4. Ordinance 2 - Adopt the Downtown Specific Plan
Exhibit A to the Ordinance 2 – Public Draft Downtown Specific Plan, Oct 14, 2025 Appendix A – Downtown Streetscape Master Plan
Appendix B – Downtown Parking Management Plan
Appendix C – Draft Prosperity Plan
Appendix D – Traffic Operations Study
Appendix E – Infrastructure Memo
Appendix F – Draft Fiscal Impact Analysis
Appendix G – Civic Engagement

5. Amendments to Land Use Regulations – Mixed Use (with Track Changes)

6. Amendments to Land Use Regulations – Parks (with Track Changes)

7. Public Comments Since October 14, 2025

8. Resolutions Passed by the Planning and Transportation Commission, November 3, 2025

9. Planning and Transportation Commission Recommendations, November 3, 2025

10. Recommended Amendments to Downtown Specific Plan

11. Minor Corrections to the Public Draft Downtown Specific Plan

12. Public Hearing Notice Affidavit

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 366

3 1
6 3
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-____

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS APPROVING THE ADDENDUM TO THE 2045 GENERAL PLAN RESET
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos has made the planning for the future of its downtown one of its top strategic objectives since 2021, beginning with the adoption of its 2021 Strategic Plan and reaffirmed during its City Council Retreat on January 21, 2022, and again on January 27, 2023, January 18, 2024, and February 6, 2025; and WHEREAS, in August 2023 the City Council of the City of San Carlos approved a professional services agreement with WRT for consulting services to prepare a Downtown Specific Plan, Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, and an Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report, in response to the City Council’s Strategic Objective to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future; and
WHEREAS, between August 2022 through August 2025, hundreds of participants attended 37 different civic engagement events and opportunities inclusive of surveys, workshops, open houses, and study sessions with the City Council appointed Downtown Advisory Committee, Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks Recreation and Culture Commission, Youth Advisory Council, Planning and Transportation Commission, and City Council; and
WHEREAS, the anticipated buildout of the Downtown Specific Plan was analyzed in the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report, which was certified by the City Council on May 27, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Specific Plan project includes these interrelated documents: the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan; associated amendments to the City of San Carlos’ Land Use Map, and Land Use and Circulation and Scenic Highways Elements; associated amendments to the City of San Carlos Zoning Ordinance to codify the Downtown Specific Plan and amend the San Carlos Zoning Map; and the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report; and
WHEREAS, as provided in Government Code Sections 65352 – 65352.5, the City of San Carlos referred the Specific Plan to all California Native American tribes on the contact list provided by the Native American Heritage Commission and to other entities listed, and no Native American Tribes requested consultation; and
WHEREAS, a pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, an Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared for the proposed City of San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan project;
WHEREAS, the environmental conditions described in the General Plan Reset EIR (certified on May 27, 2025) are substantially the same as the current conditions in the Downtown Specific Plan area, city, and region. Therefore, the cumulative setting in the General Plan Reset EIR has not changed and remains the same for the purposes of analyzing the

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 367

3 1
6 3
Downtown Specific Plan project; and
WHEREAS, the Downtown Specific Plan would not result in new or more severe impacts than those found within the 2045 General Plan Reset EIR, including the significant cumulative impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, traffic and wildfire. Similar to development facilitated by the 2045 General Plan Reset, the Downtown Specific Plan would result in less than significant cumulative impacts related to all other impact areas with adherence to State and local regulations as well as the City’s General Plan policies and Standard Conditions of Approvals; therefore, the Downtown Specific Plan would not make a new or more severe cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulative impact; and WHEREAS, no new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to cumulative impacts, and no mitigation measures are required; and WHEREAS, on November 3, 2025, the City of San Carlos Planning and Transportation Commission held a duly noticed public hearing and adopted a resolution recommending that the City Council approve the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan EIR for the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, on November 24, 2025, the City of San Carlos City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Planning Commission’s recommendation to approve the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan EIR for the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Carlos that:

1. The above recitals and findings are hereby incorporated by this reference and are hereby approved.

2. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum has been prepared which studied the potential environmental impacts of changes to the project and determined that the Downtown Specific Plan would not result in new or more severe significant environmental impacts not studied and disclosed in the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report and that only minor changes or additions are required. As such, the proposed Downtown Specific Plan and action to amend the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, and General Plan to implement the Downtown Specific Plan would not result in significant impacts, substantial changes, new information of substantial importance, circumstances or conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, and a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR is not required. Development pursuant to the proposed Downtown would be subject to all previously required mitigation measures from the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report, as applicable. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) adopted for the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report would continue to be applicable to the proposed Downtown Specific Plan.

3. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164(d), the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report have been considered.

4. Environmental Effects Found Not to be Significant:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 368

3 1
6 3
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to cumulative impacts, and no new mitigation measures are required.

5. Adoption
a. The City Council hereby approves the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report for the City of San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan (Exhibit A).
*****
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 24th day of November 2025, by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A - Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 369

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset
Final Environmental Impact Report
SCH #2024060037
prepared by
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, California 94070
Contact: Lisa Porras, Planning Manager
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
66 Franklin Street, Suite 303
Oakland, California 94607
October 2025

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 370

Table of Contents

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report i Table of Contents
1 Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 1 2 Background ..................................................................................................................................... 3

2.1 2045 General Plan Reset Project Description ..................................................................... 3 3 Project Description ......................................................................................................................... 6

3.1 Project Location and Existing Conditions ............................................................................ 6

3.2 Proposed Specific Plan Description ..................................................................................... 9

3.3 Proposed General Plan Text Amendments .......................................................................16

3.4 DTSP Buildout ....................................................................................................................16 4 Conclusion Regarding Preparation of an Addendum to the General Plan Reset EIR ...................18 5 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan ..............................................19

5.1 Aesthetics ..........................................................................................................................20

5.2 Air Quality .........................................................................................................................20

5.3 Biological Resources ..........................................................................................................23

5.4 Cultural Resources ............................................................................................................24

5.5 Energy ...............................................................................................................................26

5.6 Geology and Soils ..............................................................................................................27

5.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...............................................................................................29

5.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ....................................................................................31

5.9 Hydrology and Water Quality ...........................................................................................32

5.10 Land Use and Planning ......................................................................................................34

5.11 Noise .................................................................................................................................35

5.12 Parks and Recreation ........................................................................................................37

5.13 Population and Housing ....................................................................................................38

5.14 Public Services ...................................................................................................................39

5.15 Transportation ..................................................................................................................41

5.16 Tribal Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................43

5.17 Utilities and Service Systems ............................................................................................44

5.18 Wildfire..............................................................................................................................46 6 Cumulative Impacts ......................................................................................................................48

6.1 Cumulative Setting ............................................................................................................48

6.2 Impact Analysis .................................................................................................................50 7 Conclusion.....................................................................................................................................51 8 References and Preparers.............................................................................................................52

8.1 References ........................................................................................................................52

8.2 List of Preparers ................................................................................................................52

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 371

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

ii
Tables
Table 1 2045 General Plan Reset Buildout Projections ................................................................... 4 Table 2 2045 General Plan Reset Projected Net Change ................................................................. 5 Table 3 DTSP Buildout Assumptions ..............................................................................................17 Figures
Figure 1 Regional Location ................................................................................................................ 7 Figure 2 Plan Area Location .............................................................................................................. 8 Figure 3 Downtown Core Illustrative Plan ......................................................................................14 Appendices
Appendix A General Plan Text Amendments

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 372

Introduction

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 1 1 Introduction
This document is an Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse # 2024060037) (hereinafter referred to as the “General Plan Reset EIR”) which was prepared by the City of San Carlos. The General Plan Reset EIR was certified and the mitigation measures within it were adopted by the City of San Carlos (“City”) on Tuesday, May 27, 2025. Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15150, an addendum “may incorporate by reference all or portions of another document which is a matter of public record or is generally available to the public.” Accordingly, the environmental analysis and mitigation measures identified in the General Plan Reset EIR are incorporated by reference herein. Where the analysis in this Addendum relies upon the analysis of the General Plan Reset EIR it will be appropriately summarized and referenced. The General Plan Reset EIR is available for public review at:

City of San Carlos
Planning Division
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, California 94070
The document is also available on the City’s website:
https://www.cityofsancarlos.org/city_hall/departments_and_divisions/community_development/pl anning/plans_and_standards/general_plan_capacity_revision.php.

The proposed Downtown Specific Plan (hereafter referred to as “DTSP”) would involve changes to the approved 2045 General Plan Reset, which was analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR, in order to implement the DTSP in the Downtown Specific Plan Area (hereinafter referred to as “Plan Area”, as referred to in the DTSP). The anticipated buildout within the DTSP was analyzed under the General Plan Reset EIR. However, specifics of the DTSP, such as changes to development standards, the proposed DTSP goals and policies, and the public realm improvements, were not discussed.

Therefore, some modifications and additions are necessary to the General Plan Reset EIR but, as discussed in this Addendum, no subsequent or supplemental EIR is required.

Pursuant to Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines
1, a lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a
previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. Under Section 15162 (a), where an EIR has been certified for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for the project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole record, that substantial changes are proposed in the project, substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, or new information of substantial importance, any of which require major revisions of the previous EIR due to one or more new significant impacts not discussed in the previous EIR, or a substantially increase in the severity of previously identified significant impacts.

Regarding preparation of an addendum to an EIR, Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines states that:
 The lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred (Section 15164(a)).

1 The CEQA Guidelines are found at California Code of Regulation, Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 373

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

2  An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR (Section 15164(c)).
 The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR prior to making a decision on the project (Section 15164(d)).
 A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency’s findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence (Section 15164(e))
This Addendum has been prepared in accordance with CEQA (California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21000, et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines. It describes the changes the DTSP would have on the 2045 General Plan Reset and compares the impacts of those changes to the impacts identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. The analysis in this Addendum concludes that the DTSP does not require preparation of a subsequent EIR.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 374

Background

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 3 2 Background
This section provides an overview of the 2045 General Plan Reset and the analysis of the DTSP in the General Plan Reset EIR to provide context for this Addendum.

2.1 2045 General Plan Reset Project Description
The General Plan Reset was initiated by the City of San Carlos in 2023 to amend the buildout capacity of the 2030 General Plan. The 2030 General Plan was adopted in 2009 and included a horizon year of 2030. Six elements of the 2030 General Plan (housing, safety, land use, circulation and scenic highways, environmental management, and noise) were amended in 2023 under Resolution No. 2023-009.The 2045 General Plan Reset was more focused than a complete General Plan Update and did not include changes to General Plan land use designations or major policy changes; instead, the focus was on adjusting development projections, including new offices, restaurants, commercial uses and services, retail, industrial, and housing, and extending the planning horizon to 2045 (City of San Carlos 2025a2).

The 2045 General Plan Reset included the elements required by State law, organized into chapters as follows: 3) Land Use; 4) Housing; 5) Circulation and Scenic Highways; 6) Environmental Management; 7) Parks and Recreation; 8) Environmental Safety and Public Services; and 9) Noise. At the time of the 2045 General Plan Reset, it was understood that two specific plans were currently underway in the City of San Carlos. The anticipated amount of new residential and non-residential development facilitated by the specific plans was incorporated into the development projections for the 2045 General Plan Reset and was analyzed as part of the General Plan Reset EIR. 2045 General Plan Reset EIR
The General Plan Reset EIR evaluated potential environmental impacts associated with the projected development under the General Plan Reset through 2045. As a program-level environmental review document, the General Plan Reset EIR analyzed the broad policy direction of the 2045 General Plan Reset, rather than site-specific development projects. The General Plan Reset EIR included a comprehensive analysis of environmental impacts and found the following impacts to be less than significant without mitigation: aesthetics, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, noise, parks and recreation, population and housing, public services, tribal cultural resources, and utilities and service systems.

The General Plan Reset EIR found that significant and unavoidable impacts could occur in the following impact categories:
 Air Quality
 Wildfire

2 Where there are multiple references with the same author and same year, the references are differentiated by adding a letter after the author and year. In this case there are three sources with the City of San Carlos as the author and in the year 2025 so the in-text citations refer to the references as “City of San Carlos 2025a,” “City of San Carlos 2025b” and “City of San Carlos 2025c.” See the References section at the end of this document for the full citation.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 375

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

4  Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 Transportation
These impacts are discussed in Chapter 4 of the General Plan Reset EIR, Environmental Analysis.

General Plan Reset EIR Buildout Projections
The projected growth within the city and its sphere of influence (SOI) was analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR through 2045. Table 1 provides buildout data including the conditions of the city in 2024, the projected net change between 2024 and 2045, and the projected full buildout by 2045.

The total projected net change buildout includes several development components: ongoing development projects, anticipated buildout of both the DTSP and Northeast Area Specific Plan areas, development of sites identified in the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element Sites Inventory, the development of Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and housing units permitted under Senate Bill requirements, and estimated future housing development under future RHNA cycles.

Table 1 2045 General Plan Reset Buildout Projections
Existing Conditions
(2024)
Projected Net Charge
(2024-2045)
2045 General Plan Reset
(2045)
Category City SOI3 Total City SOI Total City SOI Total Housing Units 12,460 790 13,250 8,300 0 8,300 20,770 790 21,560 Population 28,890 1,940 30,830 15,620 0 15,620 44,510 1,940 46,450 Non-Residential
Square
Footage1
9,776,200 100,000 9,876,200 8,927,300 0 8,927,300 18,703,500 100,000 18,803,500 Jobs2 20,410 370 20,780 26,530 0 26,530 46,950 370 47,320 1 Non-residential square footage includes commercial, office, research and development (R&D), and industrial square footage and does not include public uses.
2 Job numbers include commercial, office, R&D, industrial, and other jobs, including public jobs. 3 Sphere of Influence (SOI)
Source: City of San Carlos 2025a, Table 3-1 of the 2045 General Plan Reset EIR According to the 2045 General Plan Reset, most new housing in San Carlos is anticipated on infill parcels near Downtown, along the El Camino Real corridor, Old County Road (between Holly Street and Terminal Avenue), and East San Carlos Avenue. These units would primarily consist of multifamily housing types such as apartments, townhomes, and condominiums. New detached homes are expected mainly as ADUs or as part of redevelopment within existing single-family neighborhoods. Commercial growth is projected to concentrate in the Downtown area, while office development is expected in both the Downtown and Northeast areas. Research, development, and industrial expansion will be limited to the east side of the city, including the Northeast Area.

Table 2 shows the net change in housing, population and jobs from the 2045 General Plan Reset.

This includes development projects that are already in the pipeline and anticipated under the DTSP and Northeast Area Specific Plan, which constitute a substantial amount of the projected development under the 2045 General Plan Reset.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 376

Background

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 5 Table 2 2045 General Plan Reset Projected Net Change
Category
Net Change
from Pipeline
Development
Projects
Net Change
from
Downtown
Specific Plan
Net Change
from Northeast
Area Specific
Plan
Additional
Net Change
Total
Projected
Net Change
(2024–2045)
Housing Units 242 1,565 1,890 4,603 8,300
Population 462 2,990 3,611 8,557 15,620
Non-Residential Square Footage 2,688,000 420,820 4,178,228 1,640,252 8,927,300 Jobs 8,525 908 12,990 4,107 26,530
Source: City of San Carlos 2025a, Table 3-2 of the2045 General Plan Reset EIR

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 377

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

6 3 Project Description

3.1 Project Location and Existing Conditions
The regional location of the Plan Area is shown on Figure 1 and the Plan Area boundary is shown on Figure 2. The project location encompasses approximately 67 acres in San Carlos’s downtown core, including the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street, and the 1100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue (City of San Carlos 2025b). As shown in Figure 2, the Plan Area is generally rectangular and centralized on Laurel Street, bordered by Holly Street to the northwest, Greenwood Avenue to the southeast, Walnut Street to the southwest and El Camino Real to the northeast.

Laurel Street serves as a central feature of the Plan Area, offering a pedestrian-oriented environment with a traditional grid pattern, pedestrian amenities, and landscaping elements. The centrally located Frank D. Harrington Park provides public gathering space within the Downtown core. Street widths are proportionate to surrounding building heights, enhancing the pedestrian experience. Service access is facilitated by an alley system between Laurel Street and El Camino Real, which reduces curb cuts along Laurel Street and allows rear access to businesses. The built environment consists of one- to two-story structures with traditional storefronts positioned at the sidewalk edge, creating a consistent street wall. These elements collectively establish Downtown as a distinctive community hub that contributes to San Carlos’s community character (City of San Carlos 2025a).

The Plan Area contains a diverse mix of land uses, including residences, offices, retail, restaurants, salons, parking, grocery stores, recreational areas and public streets. Northeastern of Laurel Street, the Plan Area is mainly comprised of commercial uses while the southwestern side is mostly occupied by residences with a few scattered commercial uses. The headquarters for the San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans), a public transit agency, is located in the Plan Area at 1250 San Carlos Avenue, though the City understands that SamTrans plans to relocate the headquarters.

The Plan Area currently includes approximately 557 residential units, 262,067 square feet of office space, 356,340 square feet of general commercial space, 154,891 square feet of restaurant uses, and 13,993 square feet of hotel space.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 378

Project Description

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 7 Figure 1 Regional Location

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 379

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

8 Figure 2 Plan Area Location

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 380

Project Description

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 9

3.2 Proposed Specific Plan Description
The proposed DTSP would provide a unified blueprint for the Plan Area, organizing the area into distinctive character districts and establishing a clear framework for how land uses, building forms, and public spaces should evolve.

The DTSP envisions balancing new mixed-use development, combining housing, retail, offices, and community amenities, with enhancements to the public realm, including plazas, pocket parks, street trees, and coordinated street-furnishings, all designed to reinforce a cohesive downtown identity.

Beyond land use and design, the plan aims to integrate placemaking, mobility, economic vitality, sustainability, and cultural programming into a unified, multi-pronged strategy. It describes a pedestrian-focused environment, with additional transit and bicycle connections and requires green infrastructure for stormwater management.

The following sections describe the DTSP components.

Specific Plan Components
The DTSP is organized to serve a broad audience, including prospective developers, City staff, elected officials, and community members. The structure of the plan is designed to guide both long- term visioning and near-term decision-making, with each chapter building upon the previous to provide a comprehensive and user-friendly framework for downtown development and improvements. The DTSP includes the following chapters:
 Executive Summary. The Executive Summary explains the purpose and context of the DTSP, emphasizing how the COVID-19 pandemic reshaped public expectations for downtown San Carlos. It describes the City’s strategic response to these changes, including the initiation of the Downtown Specific Plan and Streetscape Master Plan. The section outlines the planning process, community engagement efforts, and the shared vision for a walkable, vibrant, and inclusive downtown. It also highlights the anticipated growth in housing and employment, the need for flexible and resilient urban design, and the policy framework that will guide future development and investment over the next 20 years.
 Chapter 1: Introduction. This chapter describes the purpose and overall objective of the DTSP, outlines the relationship to other regulatory documents, and describes the civic engagement process. This chapter also describes the project setting on a regional and local level, identifies the Plan Area boundaries, outlines the existing land uses, and describes the existing character of the Plan Area.
 Chapter 2: Vision, Principles, Framework for Urban Design and Policy. This chapter presents the vision, guiding principles and urban design framework for private development and public space improvements within the Plan Area.
 Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design. This chapter establishes the physical urban form and urban design framework through associated goals, policies, actions, and development regulations of the Plan Area. This chapter also outlines the permitted and non-permitted uses for each of the land uses designations and includes the Land Use Map and Zoning Map, which govern the distribution and intensity of land uses within the Plan Area.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 381

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

10  Chapter 4: Prosperity and Economic Development. This chapter outlines strategies to support a thriving downtown economy. It focuses on strengthening local businesses, attracting new investment, fostering a diverse mix of commercial uses, and enhancing San Carlos’s position as a regional destination. Goals, policies, and action items aim to create a supportive environment for innovation, entrepreneurship, and inclusive economic growth.  Chapter 5: Mobility and Connectivity. This chapter presents a multimodal transportation approach that prioritizes safety, connectivity, and accessibility for all users. Goals, policies, and actions emphasize improvements to walking, biking, and transit infrastructure, and supports a balanced and multimodal street network while enhancing downtown circulation and access.  Chapter 6: Parking and Transportation Demand Management (TDM). This chapter addresses downtown parking needs while promoting more sustainable travel behavior. It introduces strategies to optimize existing parking resources, reduce demand through TDM programs, and support a mode shift toward transit, walking, and biking, all while maintaining convenient access for visitors and businesses. This chapter also includes standards and requirements for vehicle parking, loading, and bicycle parking.
 Chapter 7: Public Realm. This chapter sets forth goals, policies, and actions to establish a strong, well-designed public realm and create a socially vibrant and economically thriving downtown with multi-functional streets, generous sidewalks, inviting plazas, and accessible green spaces.

Together, these elements support community interaction, enhance walkability, and contribute to the overall appeal and success of Downtown San Carlos.  Chapter 8: Public Art. This chapter outlines a vision for integrating public art into the fabric of downtown. It encourages collaboration with artists, local organizations, and the community to create engaging, site-specific works that reflect San Carlos’s identity, activate public spaces, and contribute to a vibrant cultural landscape.
 Chapter 9: Sustainability and Resiliency. This chapter establishes goals, policies and actions to advance environmental sustainability and climate resilience. It promotes green infrastructure, energy efficiency, water conservation, and climate adaptation strategies that reduce environmental impacts while preparing the downtown for future challenges.  Chapter 10: Infrastructure and Utilities. This chapter provides a high-level summary of infrastructure improvements serving the Plan Area, including wet utilities, and solid waste disposal, and an approach for coordinating with utility providers during all future phases of streetscape reconstruction.
 Chapter 11: Administration and Implementation. This chapter describes the regulatory framework that will be utilized to implement the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan, and recommends development phasing, financing, and implementation responsibilities.

The following discussions include summaries of the chapters and DTSP components relevant for the environmental analysis.

Introduction (Chapter 1)
Chapter 1 introduces the purpose and objectives of the DTSP, explaining its role in guiding the long- term physical and economic evolution of downtown San Carlos. It outlines the relationship of the Plan to other regulatory documents such as the General Plan, Housing Element, and Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan, ensuring consistency with citywide goals. The chapter describes the Plan Area’s regional and local context, including boundaries, existing land uses, demographics, and character. It also details the authority and scope of the Specific Plan under California law, the

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 382

Project Description

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 11 preparation process, and compliance with CEQA. Finally, it highlights the extensive community engagement process, through workshops, surveys, and advisory committees, that shaped the vision and priorities for downtown’s future.

Vision, Principles, Framework for Urban Design and Policy (Chapter 2) Chapter 2 includes the vision statement for the Plan Area which developed based on input from the Downtown Advisory Committee, stakeholders, community members, and City decision makers through a civic engagement process. The vision statement states:

Downtown is the heart of San Carlos that provides a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly, safe, charming, futuristic, and accessible destination for the community and strongly expresses its unique culture and heritage. It is a place for celebration and gathering that offers diverse and authentic experiences through a draw of food, retail, services, art and music in a visually attractive environment for the growing community. Downtown is an inclusive place with easy access for all, opportunities for housing and businesses of all types, and inviting spaces for all users.

Downtown San Carlos is a sustainable district, with landscape that supports ecological and community health & well-being.

Based on this vision, Guiding Principles were developed in four areas: Placemaking & Identity, Mobility & Connectivity, and Downtown Vibrancy with an over-arching objective of promoting Equity & Resilience. In order to achieve the intent behind the Guiding Principles, an urban design framework was developed with three layers: Identity and Placemaking, Downtown Vibrancy, Equity and Resilience and Mobility and Connectivity.

Land Use and Urban Design (Chapter 3)
Chapter 3of the DTSP outlines the land use and urban design framework for the Plan Area, establishing policies, regulations, and development standards intended to guide future growth and development. The chapter defines a structure for a mixed-use, transit-oriented downtown that accommodates housing, employment, and community amenities while verifying compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods. It identifies key corridors and sub-areas within the Plan Area and provides direction on land use intensity, development character, and public realm design.

In addition to planning policies, the chapter includes land use regulations and site development standards, such as requirements for building form, frontage design, and permitted uses. It also establishes landscaping standards to support cohesive streetscapes and enhance the visual quality of the built environment. These elements are integrated with related components of the DTSP, including mobility, economic development, and infrastructure strategies.

The Land Use and Urban Design chapter does not include changes to the General Plan Land Use map for parcels within the DTSP area except for the 1.1-acre SamTrans-owned parcel (APN 050-072-380) at 1250 San Carlos Avenue that currently contains the SamTrans office headquarters. The SamTrans site has a General Plan land use designation of Mixed Use, 75-100 dwelling units per acre (du/ac).

The DTSP would include redesignating this site to Mixed Use, 90-120 du/ac to allow for 120 residential units per acre. This change in General Plan land use designation would allow more residential units on the site. Other than the change to the SamTrans parcel, the DTSP would maintain the current six General Plan land use designations for the Plan Area: Mixed Use 90-120, Mixed Use 75-100, Mixed Use 38-50; Mixed Use 30-40; Neighborhood Retail/Mixed Use 75-120, and Parks.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 383

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

12 The parcels within the Plan Area include the following seven zoning districts, which have also been maintained from the current Zoning designations: MU-D-120 (120 units/acre), MU-DC-100 (100 units/acre), Park, MU-N-40 (40 units/acre), MU-N-50 (50 units/acre), MU-SB-100 (100 units/acre), and MU-SB-120 (120 units/acre). The DTSP also does not include changes the zoning designations for parcels within the DTSP area except for the 1.1-acre SamTrans-owned parcel (APN 050-072-380) at 1250 San Carlos Avenue. The SamTrans site has a zoning designation of Mixed-Use Downtown Core with an allowed density of 100 units per acre (MU-DC-100). The DTSP would include a rezone of this site to MU-DC-120 to allow for 120 residential units per acre and increase the allowed height from four to six stories (up to 75 feet). This rezone would allow more residential units and allow a generally similar building height and massing as the existing building on the site.

The DTSP would include some land use regulatory changes to discontinue Automobile/Vehicle Sales and Leasing as an allowed use and an action item to modernize the definition of general personal services.

The Land Use and Urban Design chapter also provides development standards for each zone, including floor area ratio (FAR), density, height, and stepback. The DTSP would largely maintain existing development standards but would modify some development standards including:
 Adjust building stepback standards for upper stories for buildings facing San Carlos Avenue and Laurel Street.
 Increase height of ground floor uses (finished floor to finished ceiling height) from a minimum of 14 feet to a maximum of 16 feet.
 Allow awnings for outdoor dining areas to extend up to 9 feet (specifically 9 feet on the 700 block of Laurel; 8 feet on 600/800 Laurel Street and 1100/1200 San Carlos Avenue; 5 feet on El Camino Real) into the right-of-way instead of the currently allowed 3 feet.

Mobility and Connectivity (Chapter 5)
Chapter 6 of the DTSP outlines a multimodal transportation strategy designed to support a safe, accessible, and connected downtown. It focuses on expanding walkability, enhancing bicycle and public transit infrastructure, and managing vehicle circulation now and through the year 2045 through a flexible street network. The DTSP aligns with local and regional transportation initiatives to improve multi-modal options, safety, access, and mobility for all users.

A key emphasis of the chapter is creating an inclusive public realm that adheres to state and federal accessibility standards, verifying streets and public spaces accommodate people of all abilities. It also establishes consistency with California laws promoting sustainable and equitable transportation systems. The overall approach seeks to coordinate mobility improvements on local roads, and across transportation agencies and corridors, contributing to a resilient and adaptable downtown environment.

Parking and Transportation Demand Management (Chapter 6) Chapter 6 of the DTSP focuses on managing parking resources in a way that complements a more walkable, compact downtown form. It introduces policies and standards, including those consistent with State and Federal law, that reduce reliance on surface parking, encourage shared and structured parking solutions, and prioritize Transportation Demand Management strategies to support transit, biking, and pedestrian travel. Action items include exploring the feasibility of introducing tiered parking maximums, and standards are set forth for the removal of minimum

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 384

Project Description

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 13 parking requirements, unbundling of parking costs, and shared parking agreements as key tools to guide parking supply while aligning with broader mobility and sustainability goals.

To improve access and reduce traffic congestion, the plan also recommends a comprehensive wayfinding system, including signage and smart technology, to guide drivers to available parking facilities. Parking and loading activity is strategically relocated to alleys to maintain active street frontages, with successful alley designs serving as models for future enhancements. The chapter identifies public and bicycle parking infrastructure, including the potential for a future public parking garage at the SamTrans site and a bicycle parking facility at the Caltrain Station, to strengthen multimodal connectivity. These strategies support a flexible and efficient parking system that enhances downtown access while reinforcing its pedestrian-oriented character.

Public Realm (Chapter 7)
Chapter 7 of the DTSP establishes a comprehensive framework for enhancing the public realm through a cohesive, high-quality network of pedestrian-friendly streets, plazas, and park spaces. The chapter introduces physical changes to the downtown core, including widening sidewalks on Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue, constructing a network of new multi-use plazas on the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street, and reconfiguring Harrington Park with new amenities. As shown in Figure 3, these areas will feature performance pavilions, water features, shaded seating, raingardens, and designated zones for pop-ups and community events and other programming opportunities. Streetscape improvements are guided by detailed design standards aligned with the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan (approved by the City Council on April 28, 2025, Resolution No. 2025-031), which defines material palettes, furnishing types, and landscaping strategies tailored to each street typology.

Additional enhancements include permanent public seating, sculptural street furniture, and updated paving treatments such as curbless streets and varied textures to create a pedestrian-scaled environment. Outdoor dining is supported through regulated awnings, umbrellas, and quality enclosures, while upgraded lighting, Wi-Fi, charging stations, and “smart poles” integrate modern infrastructure needs. A full wayfinding program, including signage and electronic panels with real- time parking data, will facilitate navigation. Bicycle racks, drinking fountains, and stormwater management features further contribute to a comfortable and sustainable streetscape. Collectively, these improvements support ongoing programming and events while transforming the Plan Area into a functional and inclusive public space designed to support placemaking and identity, downtown vibrancy, multimodal mobility and connectivity, equity, and long-term environmental goals.

Public Art (Chapter 8)Chapter 8 focuses on integrating public art into the downtown streetscape to enhance cultural identity, visual appeal, and community engagement. It emphasizes art as a tool for placemaking, celebrating San Carlos’ cultural and ecological heritage through murals, sculptures, and interactive installations. Key locations include Centennial Plaza on the 700 block of Laurel Street, the new plaza on the 600 block, and gateways such as San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real.

Policies encourage collaboration with local artists, rotating exhibits, and site-specific works, while aligning with the City’s Public Art Master Plan. The chapter also outlines strategies for funding and implementation, including sponsorship programs, partnerships, and potential updates to the Public Art Master Plan to reflect downtown priorities.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 385

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

14 Figure 3 Downtown Core Illustrative Plan

Source: City of San Carlos 2025b

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 386

Project Description

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 15 Sustainability and Resiliency (Chapter 9)
Chapter 9 of the DTSP outlines strategies for promoting long-term environmental sustainability and climate resilience. It establishes goals and standards for integrating green infrastructure, including rain gardens, permeable paving, and interconnected soil systems, to manage stormwater, improve water quality, and enhance ecological function throughout the Plan Area. These elements are designed not only to mitigate the impacts of extreme weather but also to serve as passive recreational amenities.

The chapter also requires all new development to meet enhanced energy efficiency and green building standards under CALGreen Tier 1. It emphasizes the installation of EV charging infrastructure, including smart poles powered by renewable energy, and calls for educational programs to promote sustainable practices among residents and businesses. Together, these policies aim to prepare the Plan Area for future environmental challenges while supporting a cleaner, more resilient urban landscape.

Infrastructure and Utilities (Chapter 10)
Chapter 10 of the DTSP addresses infrastructure improvements needed to support future development and quality of life within the Plan Area. It outlines policies and actions for coordinated upgrades to water, sewer, and stormwater systems, such as upsizing sewer pipelines and modernizing drainage infrastructure in flood-prone areas, and emphasizes collaboration with utility providers like CalWater and PG&E to align projects with the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan.

The chapter also highlights integration of smart technologies including LED street lighting, Level 2 EV charging, smart waste bins, and public Wi-Fi via multifunctional “smart poles” throughout the Plan Area.

Additional strategies and actions call for enhancing broadband connectivity through a fiber optic network, expanding capacity for emergency services, and implementing sustainable waste management practices aligned with circular economy goals. The DTSP promotes energy-efficient development and identifies funding pathways like public-private partnerships and developer impact fees to implement improvements. Collectively, these infrastructure policies and standards support a modern, resilient downtown equipped to accommodate growth and technological change.

Administration and Implementation (Chapter 11)
Chapter 11 establishes the regulatory and procedural framework for adopting, administering, and implementing the Downtown Specific Plan. It explains the legal authority under California Government Code Section 65450 and details required plan components, including land use distribution, infrastructure, development standards, and implementation measures. The chapter describes the adoption and amendment process, ensuring consistency with the General Plan and compliance with state law. It also introduces strategies for phasing streetscape improvements, financing infrastructure, and coordinating public and private investments. This section serves as a roadmap for long-term implementation, outlining responsibilities, funding mechanisms, and actions to achieve the Plan’s vision over the next 20 years.

Downtown Streetscape Master Plan (Appendix A to the DTSP) The Downtown Streetscape Master Plan was formulated concurrently with the DTSP and separately adopted on April 28, 2025 (Resolution No. 2025-031). As shown on Figure 3 above, this plan sets

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 387

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

16 forth new designs for the downtown’s entire street network, including new public plazas. The Downtown Streetscape Master Plan is included as Appendix A to the DTSP.

DTSP Appendices
In addition to the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan which is included as Appendix A to the DTSP, the DTSP includes the following additional appendices:
 Appendix B – Downtown Parking Study
 Appendix C – Prosperity Plan
 Appendix D – Traffic Operations Study
 Appendix E – Infrastructure Memo
 Appendix F – Fiscal Impact Analysis Survey memo
 Appendix G – Civic Engagement
 Appendix H – Terms, Definitions, and Abbreviations

3.3 Proposed General Plan Text Amendments
To ensure consistency between the City’s General Plan and the proposed DTSP, the project includes text amendments to policies in the General Plan Land Use Element and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element. As described above under the description of the Land Use and Urban Design chapter of the proposed DTSP, the proposed project includes changes to the General Plan map to reflect the General Plan land use designation for the SamTrans parcel. In addition, the proposed text amendments include revisions to Goal LU-7, policies LU-2.1, LU-2.2, LU-2.3, LU-2.16, LU-2.18, LU-

2.19, LU-2.20, LU-5.8, LU-5.17, LU-7.3, and LU-7.5 and actions LU-2.1, LU-2.2, LU-2.8, LU-2.10 of the Land Use Element and Policy CSH-2.2, CSH-3.7, and CSH-3.17 of the Circulation and Scenic Highways Element. These text revisions are listed in Appendix A.

3.4 DTSP Buildout
The General Plan Reset EIR evaluated the overall residential and non-residential buildout potential for the city through 2045, including the buildout of the anticipated DTSP. The DTSP provides more detailed, site-specific guidance and design standards to implement that vision. The maximum buildout scenario that could occur within the Plan Area based on implementation of the DTSP, including rezoning of the SamTrans parcel, is shown below in Table 3 and provides the basis for this analysis. According to the development projections to the year 2045, as shown in Table 3, the DTSP could result in up to 1,565 new residences and up to 420,820 square feet of non-residential uses within the Plan Area compared to existing conditions. As discussed above under Section 2, the General Plan Reset EIR analyzed this buildout as part of the environmental review for the 2045 General Plan Reset. Table 3 also presents the total buildout estimates for the General Plan Reset.

The DTSP also envisions a range of physical changes to the public realm within Plan Area, including protected bicycle lanes, expanded sidewalk widths, new and enhanced public plazas, upgraded alleyways, and streetscape improvements such as lighting, landscaping, and seating. While the General Plan Reset EIR analyzed future residential and non-residential development in the Plan Area, it did not specifically analyze potential impacts associated with public realm improvements.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 388

Project Description

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 17 Table 3 DTSP Buildout Assumptions
Category DTSP Buildout
Residential
Housing Units 1,565 units
Population 2,990 persons
Non-Residential
Office 163,702 sf
General Commercial 92,721 sf
Restaurant 60,445 sf
Hotel 103,951 sf
Total Non-Residential Square Footage 420,820 sf

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 389

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

18 4 Conclusion Regarding Preparation of an
Addendum to the General Plan Reset EIR
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, a lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary, but none of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.

The impact analysis that follows in Section 5 of this Addendum, concludes, based on substantial evidence, that the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant environmental impacts beyond those identified in the General Plan Reset EIR due to substantial changes in the previously approved project, substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project is undertaken, or new information of substantial importance. None of the conditions described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that would call for preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met because of the DTSP’s changes to the approved 2045 General Plan Reset. Therefore, this Addendum is the appropriate level of environmental documentation to prepare for the DTSP under CEQA. The City will consider this Addendum, along with the General Plan Reset EIR, prior to making a decision on the DTSP.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 390

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 19 5 Environmental Impacts of the Proposed
Downtown Specific Plan
This Addendum analyzes the changes proposed under the DTSP compared to the analysis of the 2045 General Plan Reset within the General Plan Reset EIR to determine if any of the criteria in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 that call for preparing a subsequent EIR would apply to the DTSP.

The existing environmental conditions on and around the Plan Area are substantially the same under present conditions as those described in the General Plan Reset EIR. The analysis contained in this section provides updates to existing environmental conditions, where necessary, to characterize potential impacts of the DTSP.

Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines provides a checklist of environmental issues areas suggested for assessment in a CEQA analysis. The General Plan Reset EIR addressed most of these environmental issue areas in detail including the following:
 Aesthetics
 Air Quality
 Biological Resources
 Cultural Resources
 Energy
 Geology and Soils
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
 Hydrology and Water Quality
 Land Use and Planning
 Noise
 Parks and Recreation
 Population and Housing
 Public Services
 Transportation
 Tribal Cultural Resources
 Utilities and Service Systems
 Wildfire
No impacts associated with agriculture and forestry resources or mineral resources were found to occur, and these issues were not analyzed further in the General Plan Reset EIR. The Plan Area is located within the EIR Study Area analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR, which includes the entire city of San Carlos and its SOI. For the same reasons as stated in the General Plan Reset EIR, the DTSP would not result in impacts related to agriculture and forestry resources or mineral resources because those resources are not present in the Plan Area. Therefore, these issues are not addressed further in this Addendum. The remaining environmental issue areas included in Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines were analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR.

Potential environmental impacts of the DTSP are analyzed in this Addendum to determine if they are consistent with the impact analysis in the General Plan Reset EIR, and whether additional mitigation measures are required to minimize or avoid further potential impacts. Where the following analysis identifies impacts, mitigation measures identified in the General Plan Reset EIR and existing applicable policies and regulations are discussed, as relevant, with respect to mitigating potentially significant impacts of the DTSP that are different from (new) or substantially more severe than those identified in the General Plan Reset EIR.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 391

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

20 5.1 Aesthetics
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
Senate Bill 743 (California Public Resources Code Section 21099), passed in 2013, made changes to CEQA for projects located in transit-oriented development areas. Among these changes are that a project’s aesthetics impacts are no longer considered significant impacts on the environment if the project is a residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center project and if the project is located on an infill site within a “transit priority area” (TPA). Pursuant to Section 21099 of the California Public Resources Code, a “transit priority area” is defined as an area within 0.5 mile of an existing or planned major transit stop. A “major transit stop” is defined in Section 21064.3 of the California Public Resources Code 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 20 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.

Impacts of the DTSP
The entirety of the Plan Area is located within a TPA (City of San Carlos 2025a). The Plan Area is located within 0.5 mile of the San Carlos Caltrain station. Therefore, because the DTSP would facilitate residential uses within a TPA, aesthetics impacts may not be considered significant impacts on the environment. Pursuant to CEQA Statute Section 21099.d, “aesthetic impacts do not include impacts on historical or cultural resources.” Analysis of impacts related to historic or cultural resources is provided below in Section 5.4, Cultural Resources.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur related to aesthetics, and no new mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Aesthetic impacts within TPAs, such as the Plan Area, are not considered to be significant effects on the environment. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to aesthetics than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.2 Air Quality
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality, of the General Plan Reset EIR, the 2045 General Plan Reset demonstrates consistency with Bay Area Air District (Air District)3 2017 Clean Air Plan through its alignment with key objectives including air quality standards attainment, public health protection, and greenhouse gas reduction. While the plan emphasizes infill development and includes policies to protect sensitive populations through its Land Use and Environmental Management Elements; and would facilitate development that generates both construction-related and long-term

3 The Bay Area Air District was formerly known as the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD).

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 392

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 21 operational emissions. Despite incorporating policies and mitigation measures, the General Plan Reset would generate construction and operational emissions that would significantly contribute to the area’s existing nonattainment status for federal and State air quality standards. Therefore, impacts to air quality would remain significant after mitigation.

The General Plan Reset EIR stated that implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset could cause or contribute significantly to elevated pollutant concentration levels such that it would expose sensitive receptors to elevated pollutant concentrations. Future operational impacts include complex challenges, particularly regarding toxic air contaminants (TACs) and PM2.5 (fine particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 micrometers or less) emissions from both stationary and nonpermitted sources. While stationary sources would be regulated through the Air District’s permitting process, nonpermitted sources like truck idling and transport refrigeration units pose greater regulatory challenges. Despite showing a 5 percent decrease in daily per service population vehicle miles traveled (VMT) through 2045 and including policies to reduce emissions exposure, the cumulative operational emissions would significantly contribute to the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin’s nonattainment designations. While odor impacts would be less than significant through compliance with Air District regulations, the overall air quality impact remains significant and unavoidable at the program level.

Impacts of the DTSP
The General Plan Reset EIR analyzed potential air quality impacts from buildout of the entire EIR Study Area, including the Plan Area. This analysis determined that buildout of the 2045 General Plan Reset would generate long-term emissions exceeding the Air District’s regional significance thresholds and would cumulatively contribute to the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin’s nonattainment status. The DTSP also includes public realm improvements, the construction of which could result in air pollutant emissions. However, construction in existing rights-of-way for improvements such as expanding public spaces, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, signage, sidewalk widening, art installations, lighting, and landscaping would not require substantial grading or other activities that would generate substantial air pollutant emissions. The DTSP includes policies to promote sustainable development and improve air quality, including Policies PR14 through PR21 to provide green infrastructure, urban trees, and landscaping and Policies SR1 through SR5 to incorporate green infrastructure and green building features. While development facilitated by the General Plan Reset, including future development under the DTSP, could result in significant and unavoidable air quality impacts, the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts beyond those already analyzed and mitigated for in the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur related to air quality, and no new mitigation measures are required. San Carlos’s Standard COA requiring construction BMPs, as referenced in the General Plan Reset EIR, would remain applicable to future development projects in the Plan Area as well as the mitigation measures from the General Plan Reset EIR, listed below.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2.1
Prior to discretionary approval by the City for development projects subject to CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) review (i.e., discretionary, nonexempt projects), future project applicants shall prepare and submit a technical assessment evaluating potential project construction-related air quality impacts to the City for review and approval. The evaluation shall be

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 393

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

22 prepared in conformance with current Air District methodology for assessing air quality impacts identified in the Air District’s CEQA Air Quality Guidelines. If construction-related criteria air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed the District-adopted thresholds of significance, the City shall require feasible mitigation measures to reduce air quality emissions.

Measures shall require implementation of current Air District Best Management Practices for construction-related fugitive dust emissions. At the time of preparation of this EIR, such practices include:

 Water all exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, grading areas, and unpaved access roads) at least twice daily or as often as needed to control dust emissions.  All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.  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.
 All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.  All roadways, driveways, sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seedling or soil binders are used.  All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph.
 All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.  Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-inch layer of compact layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.  Prior to the commencement of construction activities, individual project proponents shall post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at the City regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.

Measures shall be incorporated into appropriate construction documents (e.g., construction management plans) and shall be verified by the City.

Mitigation Measure AQ-2.2
Prior to discretionary approval by the City for development projects subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) review (i.e., nonexempt projects), future project applicants shall prepare and submit a technical assessment evaluating potential project operational air quality impacts to the City for review and approval. The evaluation shall be prepared in conformance with Air District methodology in assessing air quality impacts identified in the Air District current CEQA Air Quality Guidelines at the time that the project is considered.

If operation-related air pollutants are determined to have the potential to exceed the Air District- adopted thresholds of significance, the City shall require the project applicant(s) to incorporate mitigation measures to reduce air pollutant emissions during operational activities. The identified measures shall be included as part of the conditions of approval or a mitigation monitoring and reporting plan adopted for the project as part of the project CEQA review. Possible mitigation measures to reduce long-term emissions could include, but are not limited to the following:
 Implementing commute trip reduction programs.
 Unbundling residential parking costs from property costs.  Expanding bikeway networks.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 394

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 23  Expanding transit network coverage or hours.
 Using cleaner-fueled vehicles.
 Exceeding the current Title 24 Building Envelope Energy Efficiency Standards.  Establishing on-site renewable energy generation systems.  Requiring all-electric buildings.
 Replacing gas-powered landscaping equipment with zero-emission alternatives.  Implementing organics diversion programs.
 Expanding urban tree planting.

Conclusion
No substantial changes are included in the DTSP that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to air quality than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.3 Biological Resources
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of the General Plan Reset EIR, the EIR Study Area is not located within any habitat conservation plan areas. Additionally, the 2045 General Plan Reset includes policies and SCMC regulations to protect sensitive natural communities and special-status species. While cumulative development in the region could incrementally reduce natural wildlife habitat, fragment movement corridors, and degrade aquatic environments through erosion and urban pollutants; the impact of individual projects would be site-specific and subject to federal, State, and regional regulations for habitat and species protection as required by General Plan Policies EM-1.1 and EM-1.2.

Development facilitated by the 2045 General Plan Reset is expected to occur predominantly in existing urbanized areas, both within the EIR Study Area and its SOI. Any development proposed in undeveloped areas would likely undergo independent environmental review by the relevant jurisdiction. With the 2045 General Plan Reset’s goals, policies, and actions addressing potential impacts on sensitive biological and wetland resources, contribution to cumulative biological resource impacts due to implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset would be less than significant.

Impacts of the DTSP
The General Plan Reset EIR analyzed potential biological impacts from full buildout of the 2045 General Plan Reset, including the Plan Area, and found no potentially significant impacts to biological resources with implementation of General Plan goals, policies, and actions and compliance with existing regulations. As discussed in the General Plan Reset EIR, the growth anticipated in the Plan Area would be infill development in an urbanized area. The potential for occurrence of special-status species in the developed Downtown area is generally remote in comparison to undeveloped lands with natural habitat that contain essential habitat characteristics for the range of species known in the EIR Study Area vicinity. The General Plan Reset EIR found that

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 395

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

24 Plan Area does not contain known special-status species, riparian habitat, or wetlands, and no such resources are located within a half-mile radius of the Plan Area. Therefore, future development in the Plan Area, including the public realm improvements, would not impact sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the DTSP would not result in new or more severe impacts to biological resources.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to biological resources, and no new mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would have less than significant impacts with respect to biological resources. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to biological resources than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.4 Cultural Resources
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.4, Cultural Resources, of the General Plan Reset EIR, the EIR Study Area contains historical resources. These include three properties listed in the National and California Register of Historical Resources and potentially undiscovered archaeological resources. The known and unknown cultural resources could potentially be impacted by the development facilitated by the 2045 General Plan Reset. Potential impacts include demolition, incompatible modifications, and new construction that clashes with historic contexts. However, multiple protective measures are in place: CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 requires evaluation of impacts to historical resources; SCMC Chapter 15.04 implements the California Historical Building Code; and the 2045 General Plan Reset’s Land Use Element includes specific policies for cultural resource protection. The program-level nature of the 2045 General Plan Reset requires individual projects to undergo project-specific environmental review to evaluate and mitigate potential impacts.

While San Carlos has few known archaeological sites, ground-disturbing activities could potentially impact undiscovered resources, including human remains. However, several factors minimize this risk: the city and its SOI is highly developed, meaning most development would occur in previously disturbed areas; federal, State, and local laws protect cultural resources; and specific protocols exist for handling archaeological discoveries and human remains. Although cumulative impacts could occur through incremental loss of historic character or resources, the combination of existing regulations and policies within the 2045 General Plan Reset support the conclusion that impacts to cultural resources, both at the project and cumulative level, would be less than significant.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 396

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 25 Impacts of the DTSP
Historical Resources
As discussed in the General Plan Reset EIR, development facilitated by the DTSP would be subject to the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, federal and State laws, SCMC, and General Plan policies, despite the program-level nature of the document precluding project-specific analyses. Since the DTSP would not alter these existing regulatory frameworks or change development patterns beyond what was analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR, it would not result in new or more severe impacts to historical resources. Future projects subject to CEQA would still require project-level CEQA review to evaluate potential effects on historical resources, and existing requirements for compliance with regulatory standards would continue to support the conclusion that impacts remain less than significant, consistent with the General Plan Reset EIR’s conclusions.

Archaeological Resources and Human Remains
Development facilitated by the DTSP would be subject to existing goals and policies in place to preserve archaeological resources. These include:
 Goal LU-1: Ensure a sustainable land use pattern.
 Policy LU-1.10: Require that development within the Pulgas, Brittan and Cordilleras Creek watersheds shall preserve watershed integrity, including natural vegetation, soil and slope stability, water quality, scenic values and potential archaeological resources.  Goal LU-12: Protect San Carlos’ historic and cultural resources to maintain and enhance a unique sense of place.
 Policy LU-12.5: Treat with respect and dignity any human remains discovered during implementation of public and private projects within the city and fully comply with the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act and other appropriate laws.

Compliance with existing federal, State, and local laws and regulations, and the General Plan goals and policies listed above would protect recorded and unrecorded archaeological deposits in the General Plan Reset EIR’s Study Area, including the Plan Area.

Since the proposed DTSP would not alter these General Plan policies or increase potential buildout of the Plan Area beyond what was previously analyzed, it would not result in new or more severe impacts to archaeological resources. Further, construction in existing rights-of-way for public realm improvements such as expanding public spaces, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, signage, sidewalk widening, art installations, lighting, and landscaping would not require substantial grading below existing pavement or other activities that would impact cultural resources beyond what was previously analyzed. The existing requirements for compliance with federal, State, and local laws, combined with the General Plan’s protective policies, would continue to support the conclusion that impacts remain less than significant, consistent with the original EIR’s conclusions. Therefore, the DTSP would not result in new or more severe impacts to archaeological resources or human remains.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to cultural resources, and no mitigation measures are required.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 397

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

26 Conclusion
There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to historical resources than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

Implementation of the DTSP would have less than significant impacts with respect to archaeological resources and human remains. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to archaeological resources or human remains than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.5 Energy
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.5, Energy, of the General Plan Reset EIR, potential energy impacts due to construction facilitated by the 2045 General Plan Reset encompass both temporary construction demands and long-term operational needs through 2045. While total energy consumption would increase significantly, electricity by 54 percent, natural gas by 71 percent, and transportation energy varying between 37-294 percent, per service population consumption would actually decrease due to multiple efficiency factors. These improvements stem from compliance with CALGreen requirements, the all-electric building requirements described in Chapter 15.04 of the SCMC and the 2045 General Plan Reset’s energy efficiency policies. Additionally, transportation energy efficiency would improve through increased electric vehicle adoption, reduced VMT per service population, and enhanced vehicle fuel economy standards.

The 2045 General Plan Reset aligns with both state and local energy goals through several mechanisms. California’s Renewable Portfolio Standard Program mandates 100 percent renewable energy sources by 2045. The utility purveyors serving the area, Pacific Gas and Electric and Peninsula Clean Energy are on track to meet or exceed the 100 percent renewable energy target.

The 2045 General Plan Reset supports these goals through requirements for rooftop photovoltaic systems, battery storage infrastructure, and policies promoting renewable energy use. Similarly, it maintains compatibility with San Carlos’s Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan’s greenhouse gas reduction targets (40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and 80 percent by 2050). While cumulative development would increase overall energy demand, compliance with efficiency standards and regulations, combined with improved vehicle technology and the project’s energy reduction policies, would support the conclusion that impacts remain less than significant at both project and cumulative levels.

Impacts of the DTSP
Development facilitated by the DTSP would be subject to federal, state, and local energy efficiency regulations (including Building Energy Efficiency Standards, CALGreen, Renewables Portfolio Standard, and Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards), General Plan goals and policies promoting efficient land use, transportation planning, and renewable energy generation. The proposed buildout was previously analyzed within the General Plan Reset EIR which determined

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 398

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 27 future development would reduce per capita transportation energy consumption, decrease fossil fuel reliance, and increase renewable energy use. The DTSP would include a variety of public realm improvements such as expanded sidewalks, new and upgraded public plazas, enhanced lighting, outdoor dining infrastructure, and interactive street furnishings. These features could have incremental impacts on energy use due to increased demand for lighting, electrical outlets, and event-based amenities. However, because these improvements are primarily located within existing rights-of-way and are designed to support pedestrian and bicycle activity, incorporate drought- tolerant landscaping, and utilize energy-efficient technologies such as LED lighting and smart infrastructure, associated energy demand is expected to be minimal and consistent with previously evaluated levels in the General Plan Reset EIR. As a result, construction and operation of these features are not expected to generate substantial energy consumption beyond what was previously analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR.

Additionally, policies SR2, SR3, and SR4 of the DTSP reinforce a commitment to environmental sustainability by promoting the use of green infrastructure to manage runoff and improve water quality, requiring all new developments to meet green building and high-efficiency energy standards, and promoting clean energy transportation options. Together, these initiatives demonstrate a coordinated approach to balancing downtown revitalization with long-term energy conservation and climate goals that would offset the incremental increase in energy use. The existing, and proposed, requirements and policies would continue to support the conclusion that energy consumption remains efficient and not wasteful, consistent with the General Plan Reset EIR’s less than significant impact determination.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects related to energy would occur, and no new mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would have less than significant impacts with respect to energy. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to energy than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.6 Geology and Soils
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.6, Geology and Soils, of the EIR, while the EIR Study Area is located approximately one mile from the San Andreas fault, it is not within an Alquist-Priolo fault zone.

However, the area could experience significant ground shaking from nearby faults (San Gregorio, Hayward, and San Andreas), particularly in areas east of Alameda de las Pulgas due to artificial fill and Bay mud conditions. With compliance with the California Building Code (CBC), SCMC and the 2045 General Plan Reset’s Environmental Safety and Public Services Element policies, impacts would be less than significant.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 399

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

28 The EIR determined that liquefaction potential ranges from very low to very high in the eastern portion of the Study Area, while the western half presents moderate to high landslide risks.

However, since future development would occur primarily in previously developed areas and would be required to comply with site-specific geotechnical evaluation requirements and the City’s grading and building codes, impacts related to geological hazards were found to be less than significant.

While construction activities could result in soil erosion, development would be required to comply with Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans for sites disturbing one or more acres and implement appropriate erosion control measures. Additionally, since most development would occur as infill in urban areas, substantial soil erosion is unlikely. The EIR found that with compliance with the CBC and SCMC requirements, impacts related to soil erosion would be less than significant.

The EIR found that while the Study Area’s geology and soils are common to the region, underlying geological formations have potential to contain unique paleontological resources. Development would be required to comply with both the federal Paleontological Resources Preservation Act and PRC Section 5097, with specific protocols for handling discoveries during construction. With these requirements in place, impacts to paleontological resources would be less than significant.

The EIR found no significant impacts related to septic systems, as SCMC Chapter 13.04 requires all new construction to connect to the City of San Carlos sanitary sewer system. Wastewater from new lots or parcels would be discharged into the existing public sanitary sewer system serviced by the City.

Impacts of the DTSP
According to Figures 8-5, 8-6, and 8-8 of the City’s General Plan Environmental Safety and Public Services Element, the Plan Area is in an area subject to severe earthquake ground shaking, medium liquefaction risk, and no landslide hazards (City of San Carlos 2025c). Because the closest known active fault is 1 mile from the EIR Study Area, fault-line surface rupture is not a direct hazard to development within the Plan Area. Nonetheless, future development in the Plan Area could be subject to seismic groundshaking and liquefaction. However, the Plan Area is located within the EIR Study Area and therefore was included in its analysis of potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking and liquefaction.

Future development in the Plan Area would be subject to existing regulations and requirements, including site-specific geotechnical evaluations, City grading and building codes, Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans, and protocols for paleontological resource protection under federal and state law. Further, construction in existing rights-of-way for public realm improvements such as expanding public spaces, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, signage, sidewalk widening, art installations, lighting, and landscaping would not require substantial grading or other activities that would create geology and soils impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. Compliance with existing regulations and General Plan would ensure that future development of the Plan Area would not result in new or more severe impacts than the General Plan Reset EIR.

Because the proposed DTSP would not alter existing regulations or geological conditions or increase potential buildout of the Plan Area beyond what was previously analyzed, it would not result in new or more severe impacts related to geology, soils, or paleontological resources. The existing requirements for geotechnical review, erosion control, paleontological resource protection, and sewer connections would continue to support the conclusion that impacts remain less than significant, consistent with the original EIR’s conclusions.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 400

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 29 Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to geology and soils, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would have less than significant impacts with respect to geology and soils. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to geology and soils than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.7 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.7, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of the General Plan Reset EIR, the Plan’s projected buildout could result in a significant and unavoidable increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions through 2045, primarily due to increased VMT and off-road equipment use associated with population growth. While the project would reduce per service population emissions and focus on infill and transit-oriented development, the net increase would still exceed the no-net-increase significance threshold. Despite incorporating multiple GHG reduction measures, including the City’s Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan, State reduction measures (Low Carbon Fuel Standard mandate and Renewable Portfolio Standard requirements), and various General Plan Element policies, the projected growth would not achieve Assembly Bill (AB) 1279’s carbon neutrality goal by 2045. Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1, requiring a Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan update to address long-term GHG reduction goals, would not guarantee achievement of these targets given the substantial population growth and magnitude of required emissions reductions.

Since GHG emissions are inherently cumulative and dispersed worldwide, the project’s impacts represent a contribution to global climate change rather than project-specific impacts. The 2045 General Plan Reset’s various elements (Land Use, Circulation and Scenic Highways, Environmental Management, and Parks and Recreation) contain specific policies to help minimize GHG emissions from residential and nonresidential land uses in the EIR Study Area. However, while Impact GHG-2 (conflict with applicable plans) would be less than significant, Impact GHG-1 (contribution to cumulative global climate change) remains significant and unavoidable, even with implementation of all available mitigation measures and GHG reduction strategies.

Impacts of the DTSP
The General Plan Reset EIR analyzed potential GHG impacts due to buildout of the entire General Plan Reset EIR Study Area, including the Plan Area. This analysis determined that buildout of the 2045 General Plan Reset could adversely contribute to cumulative global climate change in a significant and unavoidable way, despite the implementation of various reduction measures including the City’s Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan, State mandates, and General Plan policies. Development under the DTSP, including all public realm improvements, would be subject to these applicable plans, policies, and regulations, including those specifically aimed at improving sustainable transportation in the Plan Area to reduce GHG emissions. Further, the DTSP includes

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 401

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

30 policies SR1 through SR5 and Actions SR1 and SR4 that that support energy-efficient and climate- responsive development, such as the installation EV charging stations integrated into street infrastructure, energy-efficient design, and expanded tree canopies that offer natural cooling.

Additional examples include the creation of raingardens and permeable paving along Laurel Street, which reduce heat island effects while enhancing stormwater management in the downtown core.

Even with these policies and requirements, impacts associated with implementation of DTSP could remain significant and unavoidable, consistent with the findings of the General Plan Reset EIR.

Nonetheless, the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts beyond those already analyzed and mitigated in the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects related to GHG emissions would occur and no new mitigation measures are required. The following mitigation measure from the General Plan Reset EIR would continue to apply:

Mitigation Measure GHG-1
The City of San Carlos shall prepare an update to its Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan (CMAP) to chart a trajectory to achieve the long-term GHG reduction goal set by AB 1279. The updated CMAP shall be completed within three years of certification of the General Plan EIR. The updated CMAP shall be updated every five years to ensure the City is monitoring the CMAP’s progress toward achieving the City’s GHG reduction target(s), and the City shall amend the CMAP if it is not achieving such targets. The CMAP update shall consider a trajectory consistent with the GHG emissions reduction goal established under AB 1279 for year 2045, and the latest applicable statewide legislative GHG emission reduction that may be in effect at the time of the CMAP update.

The CMAP update shall include the following:
 GHG inventories of existing and forecast year GHG levels.  Tools and strategies for reducing GHG emissions to ensure a trajectory with the long-term GHG reduction goal and carbon neutrality goal for year 2045 of AB 1279.  Plan implementation guidance that includes, at minimum, the following components consistent with the CMAP update:
 Administration and Staffing
 Finance and Budgeting
 Timelines for Measure Implementation
 Community Outreach and Education
 Monitoring, Reporting, and Adaptive Management
 Tracking Tools
Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or more severe impacts than previously described in the General Plan Reset EIR analysis, which included the potential buildout of the DTSP.

No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR.

There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to GHG emissions than were identified in

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 402

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 31 the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.8, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset could result in several potential hazard-related impact. However, all potential impacts were determined to be less than significant.

Construction activities would involve hazardous materials including paints, sealants, solvents, adhesives, cleaners, and diesel fuel, while operational impacts would vary by land use type, with industrial and commercial uses potentially utilizing larger quantities of hazardous materials than residential uses. Development could occur within 0.25 miles of eleven K-12 schools, potentially exposing sensitive receptors to hazardous emissions. Additionally, construction and development activities could encounter contamination at any of the 35 open hazardous waste sites in the EIR Study Area, and four hazardous gas transmission pipelines could pose risks during construction or operation.

The General Plan Reset EIR determined that development within two miles of the San Carlos Airport could result in safety hazards, particularly for structures over 200 feet in height or within 10,000 linear feet of runways. Emergency response and evacuation could be impacted where major transportation routes (I-280, SR-82, and Highway 101) cross disaster-prone areas, including very high fire hazard zones, flood zones, and landslide hazard zones.

However, the EIR found that these impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels through compliance with federal regulations (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, Federal Aviation Administration requirements), state requirements (California Division of Occupational Safety and Health, CCR Title 22, Government Code Section 65850.2), and local oversight (SCMC, Certified Unified Program Agency requirements, Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan). The 2045 General Plan Reset’s Environmental Safety and Public Services Element policies, combined with existing emergency response plans and hazardous materials management regulations would facilitate proper handling of materials, site assessment and cleanup, emergency access, and development controls near sensitive areas. Therefore, all project-level and cumulative impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant.

Impacts of the DTSP
The General Plan Reset EIR evaluated multiple potential hazard-related impacts from the 2045 General Plan Reset, including construction and operational use of hazardous materials, proximity to schools and contaminated sites, airport safety zones, emergency response considerations, and gas transmission pipeline risks. All impacts were determined to be less than significant through compliance with Environmental Safety and Public Services General Plan goals, policies, and actions as well as existing regulations and policies such as the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act requirements, California Division of Occupational Safety and Health standards, local SCMC and Certified Unified Program Agency requirements.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 403

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

32 The DTSP would involve the same level of buildout as was analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR and would generally involve the same level and extent of grading, site preparation, construction, and operation. Public realm improvements would not involve substantial grading or excavation beyond what was assumed in the General Plan Reset EIR. Future development under the DTSP, including the public realm improvements, would not result in substantial changes to the circulation patterns or emergency access routes and would not block or otherwise interfere with use of evacuation routes or emergency evacuation plans.

The Plan Area is within two miles of the San Carlos Airport. However, the DTSP would not increase allowed building heights or otherwise create conditions that would result in a safety hazard. While the proposed zoning changes to the SamTrans parcel would allow building heights up to 75 feet, this is similar to the height of the existing building on the site and would not exceed the airspace protection surface elevation of 155 feet above mean sea level in this area. Although Federal Aviation Administration notification is required for structures exceeding 200 feet above ground level, it is also required for any structure that penetrates the defined airspace surfaces under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 77. The proposed building height would remain below both thresholds.

Therefore, similar to the environmental issues and site conditions that were analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR, with adherence to federal, State, and local regulations pertaining to hazardous materials, impacts would be less than significant. There would be no new or substantially more severe impacts than what was analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur related to hazards and hazardous materials, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in more severe significant effects would occur with respect to hazards and hazardous materials. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to hazards and hazardous materials than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset could result in several potential water quality impacts. During construction, soil disturbance and use of materials like fuels and solvents could increase pollutants in stormwater runoff, particularly for projects disturbing one or more acres.

During operations, new development could create additional sources of contamination through increased impervious surfaces and changed land uses, especially for projects creating or replacing 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface. Future development could also alter drainage patterns, potentially causing increased runoff, erosion, and stream channel impacts, particularly in

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 404

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 33 western and southwestern San Carlos where hydromodification concerns exist. Additionally, development in several areas around El Camino Real, between Highway 101 and El Camino Real, and along Pulgas and Brittan Creek would be exposed to Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year flood zones, while areas east of the railroad tracks could face sea level rise impacts by 2100. However, the General Plan Reset EIR found all impacts would be less than significant through required compliance with multiple regulations and controls. Construction projects must implement Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans with specific Best Management Practices, while operational impacts would be addressed through Low Impact Development requirements and Stormwater Control Plans. Development in flood zones must meet FEMA standards and SCMC requirements, including OneShoreline recommendations for 3-foot elevation above base flood level in sea level rise areas. The built-out nature of the EIR Study Area means most development would occur as infill projects with existing drainage infrastructure. Furthermore, groundwater impacts would be minimal as the local basin is designated low priority and municipal water comes entirely from surface water sources. Cumulative impacts across the watershed would also be less than significant through the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board’s basin-wide approach to stormwater management.

Impacts of the DTSP
According to the General Plan Reset EIR, there are no open creeks or surface waterways within the Plan Area and the Plan Area is within a 500-year flood zone. The proposed DTSP would facilitate development in the Plan Area, but this development was anticipated and analyzed within the buildout assumptions of the General Plan Reset EIR. The same regulatory frameworks and requirements identified in the General Plan Reset EIR, including Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans, Low Impact Development standards, FEMA requirements, and SCMC provisions, would continue to apply to development under the DTSP. In addition to the buildout analyzed under the General Plan Reset EIR, the DTSP includes public realm improvements which would include rain gardens, permeable paving, and drought-tolerant landscaping, that are designed to improve water quality and manage stormwater on site without negatively impacting water quality within the Plan Area. DTSP Policies PR14, PR15, PR16, PR17, PR18, PR21, and SR1 promote green infrastructure and climate-resilient landscaping to reduce runoff and support urban ecological function. In coordination with these design strategies, DTSP Policy IU7 calls for upgraded stormwater systems to meet growing demands.t As buildout of the Plan Area was previously analyzed impacts would remain less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur related to hydrology and water quality, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant effects with respect to hydrology and water quality. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to hydrology and water quality than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 405

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

34 5.10 Land Use and Planning
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.10, Land Use and Planning, of the General Plan Reset EIR, cumulative land use impacts were evaluated by considering future development facilitated the 2045 General Plan Reset combined with development on adjacent lands. The 2045 General Plan Reset would not divide established communities or conflict with existing land use plans, as it maintains current patterns and focuses on infill development in specific areas: Downtown, El Camino Real corridor, Old County Road between Holly Street and Terminal Avenue, and East San Carlos Avenue. Commercial, office, and industrial growth would be concentrated in appropriate zones without creating land use conflicts.

The General Plan Reset EIR found that while development would continue in surrounding cities and unincorporated San Mateo County areas, such growth would occur primarily in already urbanized areas and would not require development or demolition that would create land use conflicts or divide communities. Therefore, with implementation of 2045 General Plan Reset policies promoting orderly development and consistency with regional planning frameworks, the project’s contribution to cumulative land use impacts would not be considerable, and cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

Impacts of the DTSP
As development facilitated by the DTSP was already anticipated and analyzed within the buildout assumptions of the General Plan Reset EIR, it would not result in new or more severe land use impacts. The development would occur within the previously identified infill areas and would continue to be subject to the General Plan Reset policies that promote orderly development and consistency with regional planning frameworks. The associated public realm improvements, such as widened sidewalks, street furnishings, tree planting, and European-style outdoor dining, would not divide the Plan Area. These enhancements would be consistent with San Carlos’s existing environmental policies, as they would support multimodal access, urban greening, and reduced vehicle reliance. Rather than creating physical or social barriers, the DTSP describes these improvements as aligning with broader City goals for livability, sustainability, and equitable public space access. Additionally, the policies in Chapter 3 of the DTSP, particularly LU1 through LU18, aim to promote a diverse mix of compatible land uses, integrated streetscape design, and active ground- floor uses intended to support accessibility, economic functionality, and alignment with community planning goals. With the City’s existing and proposed policies, the DTSP would not divide established communities or create land use conflicts, and impacts would remain less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur related to land use and planning, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to land use and planning. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 406

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 35 would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to land use and planning than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.11 Noise
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.11, Noise, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset could result in various noise and vibration impacts. Construction activities could generate noise levels from 81 to 101 dBA4 at 50 feet, exceeding the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) criterion of 80 dBA Leq5(8hr), while construction equipment could produce vibration levels exceeding Caltrans’ architectural damage criteria (0.12 to 0.3 in/sec PPV6) within 150 feet of sensitive uses. However, these impacts would be less than significant through compliance with SCMC requirements limiting construction hours and implementing best management practices such as noise-control equipment, strategic equipment placement, and temporary barriers.

The General Plan Reset EIR evaluated operational noise from multiple sources, including traffic, rail, airport, and stationary sources. Traffic noise increases would be less than significant, with no roadway segments experiencing increases over 1.5 dBA CNEL7. While the Caltrain corridor generates day-night average noise levels of 67 to 69 dBA Ldn8 at 100 feet (with warning whistles reaching 105 dBA), and the San Carlos Airport creates audible noise in flight paths north and east of US Highway 101, impacts would be less than significant through required noise compatibility evaluations and compliance with General Plan policies. Stationary noise sources from residential, commercial, and industrial activities would also be adequately controlled through SCMC requirements and non- transportation noise standards, therefore resulting in less than significant impacts.

Cumulative impacts were also evaluated, considering the combined effects of construction, traffic, and stationary noise sources. While overlapping construction within 500 feet could create significant impacts, these would be reduced through required noise evaluations and control measures.

Cumulative traffic noise would not exceed significance thresholds, with project contributions below 1 dBA CNEL on all segments. All individual development projects must demonstrate compliance with City noise standards and General Plan policies during review, maintaining less than significant cumulative impacts through appropriate noise reduction measures and development restrictions in noise-impacted areas.

4 A-Weighted Decibel (dBA). An overall frequency-weighted sound level in decibels that approximates the frequency response of the human ear
5 Equivalent Continuous Noise Level (Leq); also called the Energy-Equivalent Noise Level. The value of an equivalent, steady sound level which, in a stated time period (often over an hour) and at a stated location, has the same A-weighted sound energy as the time-varying sound. Thus, the Leq metric is a single numerical value that represents the equivalent amount of variable sound energy received by a receptor over the specified duration.
6 Peak Particle Velocity (PPV). The peak rate of speed at which soil particles move (e.g., inches per second) due to ground vibration. 7 Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). The energy average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 5 dB added from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and 10 dB from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. For general community/environmental noise, CNEL and Ldn values rarely differ by more than 1 dB (with the CNEL being only slightly more restrictive, that is, higher than the Ldn value). As a matter of practice, Ldn and CNEL values are interchangeable and are treated as equivalent in this assessment. 8 Day-Night Sound Level (Ldn or DNL). The energy-average of the A-weighted sound levels occurring during a 24-hour period, with 10 dB added to the sound levels occurring during the period from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 407

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

36 Impacts of the DTSP
The proposed DTSP would facilitate development in the Plan Area which could involve construction noise, stationary noise (such as air conditioning systems), and additional traffic on roadways within and around the Plan Area. However, development facilitated by the DTSP was already anticipated and analyzed within the buildout assumptions of the General Plan Reset EIR. The proposed DTSP plans and policies would not create conditions that would exceed noise levels described in the General Plan Reset EIR such as by planning construction closer to sensitive receptors or increasing traffic noise beyond what was anticipated.

The proposed DTSP would involve public realm improvements which would involve additional construction activities in the Plan Area other than those associated with future residential and non- residential development. However, construction in existing rights-of-way for public realm improvements such as expanding public spaces, bicycle and pedestrian improvements, signage, sidewalk widening, art installations, lighting, and landscaping would not require substantial grading or other activities that would create noise impacts beyond what was previously analyzed. Potential noise or vibrations from the public realm improvements would be temporary and would be subject to the same SCMC requirements for construction hours and noise control measures, noise compatibility evaluations, and General Plan policies that were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR.

The DTSP includes Policy PR2 to expand and enhance public plazas to create community gathering spaces. Therefore, there could be additional community gatherings that could generate noise levels greater than was anticipated in the General Plan Reset EIR. However, as set forth in DTSP Policy PR24, downtown programmed activities would be required to comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance (Chapter 9.30), including Section 9.30.040 for permitted events, and performance venues would be designed and equipped to minimize excessive ambient sound. Development and planned activities would remain subject to the City’s review process requiring demonstration of compliance with noise standards. Therefore, construction, operational, and cumulative noise impacts would remain less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan Reset EIR.

The Plan Area is approximately 0.6 miles from the San Carlos Airport and would facilitate additional residential development in the Plan Area. However, the Plan Area is outside of the 60 dB CNEL noise contour for the airport (San Mateo County 2025). Therefore, future residents would not be subject to excessive noise from airport operations. This impact would be less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur related to noise and vibration, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to noise. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to land use and planning than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 408

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 37

5.12 Parks and Recreation
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.12, Parks and Recreation, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset would increase demand for parks and recreational facilities through new residential development and increased population. The General Plan Reset EIR Study Area’s current ratio of 2.2 acres of parks per 1,000 residents (already below the City’s 2.5-acre standard) could decrease to 1.34 acres per 1,000 residents by 2045 with the projected population of 46,450 people. This increased population could also lead to physical deterioration of existing facilities through increased use by new residents and workers.

However, the General Plan Reset EIR found that impacts to park facilities would be less than significant because population growth would occur incrementally over the 20-year horizon, while multiple requirements promote adequate facility expansion. As required by the SCMC, new residential development would be required to either dedicate parkland or pay park impact fees to generate revenue to fund the park facilities needed to serve new development. In addition to those within the SCMC, the City’ s Land Use and Parks and Recreation Elements contain policies to expand, maintain, and improve park facilities to prevent deterioration from increased use.

While specific recreational facility projects are not proposed in the 2045 General Plan Reset, any future construction would undergo separate environmental review and City permitting processes to support the conclusion that potential impacts are properly disclosed and mitigated. As State law and SCMC regulation and policies require new development to fund park improvements through impact fees, cumulative impacts from regional growth were found to be less than significant.

Impacts of the DTSP
According to the General Plan Reset EIR, San Carlos has 62.5 acres of parkland and buildout under the General Plan Reset would reduce the parks ratio in the city from 2.2 acres per 1,000 residents to

1.24 acres per 1,000 residents, which is below the City’s parkland standard of 2.5 acres per 1,000 residents. As development facilitated by DTSP was already anticipated and analyzed within the buildout assumptions of the General Plan Reset EIR, it would not further reduce the parkland ratio in the City compared to what was already analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR. There is one park within the Plan Area, Frank D. Harrington Park, and several parks in the vicinity of the Plan Area including Burton Park. The proposed DTSP includes a range of public realm improvements to provide public recreational and amenity spaces, including the redesign of Frank D. Harrington Park and the creation of new plazas on the 600 and 800 blocks of Laurel Street. These plazas and public amenities would serve future residents and Downtown visitors.

Further, the DTSP includes Policies PR2, PR9, and PR22 which call for the expansion and enhancement of public plazas and providing a full range of street amenities while maintaining inclusivity.

Potential impacts from construction of the public realm improvements would be temporary and subject to the same SCMC requirements for construction hours, noise control measures, and General Plan policies that were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. Additionally, future development in the Plan Area would continue to be subject to the same SCMC requirements for parkland dedication and impact fees, along with applicable General Plan policies upholding adequate park expansion and maintenance. Development would remain subject to the City’s review process, requiring demonstration of consistency with parkland standards and funding mechanisms.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 409

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

38 Therefore, impacts to parks and recreational facilities, including cumulative effects from regional growth, would remain less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur related to public services and recreation, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to parks and recreation. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to public services and recreation than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.13 Population and Housing
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.13, Population and Housing, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset would not induce substantial unplanned population growth, as it serves as the overarching policy document that plans for and guides future development. The 2045 General Plan Reset’s focus on infill development in already urbanized areas promotes growth to occur where infrastructure and services can support it. That being said, the General Plan Reset EIR did not identify existing or anticipated infrastructure deficiencies in utilities, parks, recreation, or public services that would result from the planned growth. While some existing residents could be temporarily displaced through redevelopment activities, particularly in infill areas near Downtown and along major corridors, this would be offset by the net increase of 8,300 housing units by 2045 and mitigated through General Plan policies protecting existing residents.

The General Plan reset EIR also evaluated cumulative impacts by considering the 2045 General Plan Reset’s growth combined with development on adjacent lands. As the 2045 General Plan Reset provides adequate planning to accommodate proposed growth and would not cause substantial displacement requiring replacement housing elsewhere, cumulative impacts were found to be less than significant.

Impacts of the DTSP
As the potential buildout of the DTSP was already anticipated and analyzed within the buildout assumptions of the General Plan Reset EIR, it would not result in new or more severe population and housing impacts. The DTSP supports infill development in already urbanized areas, maintaining that growth occurs where infrastructure and services can accommodate it. This approach aligns with DTSP as it promotes an increase in residential and commercial development within the urbanized Plan Area. Specific DTSP policies, including Policies LU8 and LU11 encourage an increase in population to support the new and existing businesses in the Plan Area.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 410

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 39 The General Plan Reset EIR did not identify existing or anticipated infrastructure deficiencies in utilities, parks, recreation, or public services due to planned growth. Additionally, the public realm improvements proposed under the DTSP are not associated with changes to land use designations, zoning capacity, or residential density, and therefore would not directly induce population growth or generate new housing demand. Although the DTSP would involve rezoning the SamTrans site to increase allowed residential density, the increase in allowed density from 100 residential units per acre to 120 units per acre on an approximately 1-acre site would only allow an increase in approximately 20 units compared to current standards. This would not represent a substantial population increase. Further, this increase in population was assumed as part of the buildout of the Plan Area analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR.

As discussed in the General Plan Reset EIR, due to the buildout nature of the Plan Area, future development would largely occur through redevelopment and therefore it is possible that future development could displace existing residents or housing. Nonetheless, implementation of General Plan policies would minimize impacts associated with displacement, displacement is expected to be temporary, and overall implementation of the DTSP is designed to add housing to the Plan Area.

The General Plan Reset EIR evaluated cumulative population and housing impacts, including growth in adjacent areas. Because the DTSP would adequately accommodate projected growth and would not require replacement housing elsewhere, cumulative impacts would be less than significant, consistent with the General Plan Reset EIR analysis.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur related to population and housing, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to population and housing. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to population and housing than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.14 Public Services
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
San Carlos is served by the Redwood City-San Carlos Fire Department (RC-SCFD) and the San Mateo County Sheriff’s Office (SMCSO) has been contracted to provide law enforcement services to the City of San Carlos. The San Carlos School District (SCSD) and Sequoia Union High School District provide public school services to the Plan Area. As discussed in Section 4.14, Public Services, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset would result in less than significant direct impacts to all public services despite increased demand from population growth over the 20-year buildout period. Potential impacts to fire services within the EIR Study Area would be less than significant after implementing California Fire Code and General Plan policies. Similarly, police services impacts would remain less than significant through development fees and General Plan policies. School service impacts would be less than significant through mandatory development

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 411

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

40 impact fees under California Government Code Section 65995. Library service impacts would also be less than significant through County property taxes and General Plan policies.

Cumulative impacts for all public services would also be less than significant. Fire and police service cumulative impacts would be managed through incremental development in already-served areas, inter-agency coordination, and individual project review. School cumulative impacts would be addressed through continued collection of development impact fees and project-level review of facility improvements. Library cumulative impacts would be mitigated through property tax funding and assessed expansion needs over time. All future facility improvements would undergo separate environmental review to identify and mitigate potential impacts, while the General Plan’s Environmental Safety and Public Services Element provides additional policies to verify adequate service levels as development occurs. Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

Impacts of the DTSP
Public facilities that serve the Plan Area include RC-SCFD Station 13, which is within the Plan Area at 525 Laurel Street, the San Mateo County Sheriff substation office located approximately one block from the Plan Area at 600 Elm Street, and the San Carlos Library approximately one block from the Plan Area at 610 Elm Street. The General Plan Reset EIR determined that impacts to fire, police, schools, and libraries would be less than significant, supported by existing funding mechanisms, regulations, and incremental growth planning. The proposed DTSP would facilitate residential and non-residential development in the Plan Area which would add population to the area and increase demand for public services. However, as the potential buildout of the DTSP was already anticipated and analyzed within the 2045 General Plan Reset EIR, it would not result in new or more severe impacts to public services beyond what was previously assessed. The DTSP would not introduce new development patterns that would exceed the anticipated citywide growth accounted for in the General Plan reset EIR. Further, DTSP Policies such as LU8 and LU10 promote a balanced mix of uses and population density that supports economic vitality and livability without straining public service capacity. Additionally, I6 calls for equitable access to emergency and community services, reinforcing the DTSP’s alignment with citywide service planning.

Public realm improvements proposed under the DTSP would not be growth-inducing and would not increase demand for public services beyond what was already considered in the General Plan Reset EIR. Instead, they would support community well-being and safety, consistent with Policies PR9, PR22, and IU2, which guide the integration of smart infrastructure, inclusive design, and equitable access to public services including emergency services.

Because public services, infrastructure, and mitigation measures remain in place as outlined in the General Plan Reset EIR, the DTSP would not trigger additional environmental impacts. Therefore, public service impacts would remain less than significant, consistent with the prior findings of the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur related to public services and recreation, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to public services and recreation. No substantial changes have occurred that

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 412

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 41 require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to public services and recreation than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.15 Transportation
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.15, Transportation, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset could result in less than significant impacts for most transportation categories, but significant and unavoidable impacts related to VMT. The 2045 General Plan Reset would result in less than significant impacts to the circulation system through its concentration of development near transit and policies supporting non-vehicular modes. Transportation design hazards would also be less than significant through compliance with design standards and safety policies, while emergency access impacts would be less than significant through required compliance with City standards and specific General Plan policies requiring adequate access and evacuation routes.

However, the 2045 General Plan Reset could result in significant and unavoidable direct and cumulative impacts related to VMT, exceeding City thresholds across multiple metrics: total project- generated VMT per service population (26.51 vs. threshold of 23.20), home-based VMT per resident (15.84 vs. threshold of 13.71), and home-based work VMT per employee (18.55 vs. threshold of

14.80). While the City is updating its Transportation Demand Management program to include more stringent trip reduction requirements, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable until the program is amended, and it is unknown if the amended program would achieve sufficient VMT reductions. The 2045 General Plan Reset could also increase total countywide VMT by 0.7 percent compared to 2045 conditions without the project, resulting in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts.

Impacts of the DTSP
The General Plan Reset EIR determined that impacts to circulation, transportation hazards, and emergency access would be less than significant with implementation of policies supporting transit- oriented development, non-vehicular mobility, and compliance with City safety standards. The DTSP would facilitate the same amount of residential and non-residential development as was anticipated in the General Plan Reset EIR. Therefore, the DTSP remains consistent with these assumptions by maintaining that planned growth aligns with both existing infrastructure capacity and future transportation improvements. This includes integration with adopted policies and planned streetscape enhancements, such as the road diet and multimodal upgrades on the 1100–1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue, intended to improve safety, walkability, and connectivity while supporting the overall vision for a vibrant, pedestrian-oriented downtown. While the proposed DTSP includes public realm improvements, such as bicycle and pedestrian improvements and amenities, these would not create hazards or prevent emergency access. Proposed public realm improvements within the DTSP would be designed to improve safety, accessibility, and circulation without altering traffic patterns in a way that would exacerbate impacts. These proposed enhancements are consistent with Policies PR3, PR5, and PR6, which guide the design of well-

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 413

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

42 connected public spaces and adequate sidewalks that support walkability and reduce reliance on single-occupancy vehicles.

As the potential buildout of the DTSP was already anticipated and analyzed within the General Plan Reset EIR, future development under the DTSP would not result in new or more severe transportation impacts beyond those previously assessed. Although the General Plan Reset EIR found that VMT impacts could be significant and unavoidable, the DTSP would not create additional VMT beyond what was assumed in the General Plan Reset EIR because it would result in the same amount of future development. Further, the DTSP would result in potentially lower VMT than in other parts of San Carlos as it would promote development in a TPA and encourage housing near transit. The Plan Area is served by SamTrans Route ECR which provides service along El Camino Real from the Palo Alto Transit Center to the Daily City Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) Station. The Plan Area is also adjacent to the San Carlos Caltrain Station at El Camino Real and San Carlos Avenue. The DTSP would support multimodal transportation and active mobility, consistent with Policies M1 through M3, which prioritize pedestrian infrastructure, protected bike lanes, and safe crossings.

These policies reinforce the City’s Complete Streets approach and align with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The DTSP also includes policies to reduce VMT and promote shifts to transit, walking, and biking through implementation of TDM programs with DTSP Policies PTDM1 through PTDM12.

Therefore, transportation impacts, including cumulative effects, remain consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan Reset EIR. No new or more severe significant effects would occur.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to transportation and circulation, and no new or revised mitigation measures are required. The following mitigation measure from the General Plan Reset EIR would continue to apply:

Mitigation Measure TRAN-2
The City of San Carlos shall amend its Transportation Demand Management program (San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.25, Transportation Demand Management) to increase the required trip reduction to the extent feasible.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to transportation. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to transportation than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 414

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 43

5.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.16, Tribal Cultural Resources, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset would result in less than significant direct and cumulative impacts to tribal cultural resources. While the Native American Heritage Commission identified sacred lands within the EIR Study Area, and the Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe provided specific recommendations during consultation, impacts would be adequately addressed through multiple mechanisms. The General Plan’s Land Use Element contains protective policies including early consultation requirements, respectful treatment of human remains, and archaeological sensitivity mapping. Future development projects would be required to conduct AB 52 tribal consultations when potential impacts are identified. The combination of these consultation requirements, compliance with federal, State, and local regulations, and adherence to General Plan policies would support the conclusion that appropriate protection of tribal cultural resources and prevent both direct and cumulative adverse effects on Native American tribal resources and lands.

Impacts of the DTSP
As part of its tribal cultural resources identification process under Senate Bill 18, the City of San Carlos sent letters via certified mail to Native American Tribes in the geographic area that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the Tribes on May 16, 2025. The City did not receive any requests for consultation.

As the potential buildout of the DTSP was already anticipated and analyzed within the General Plan Reset EIR, it would not result in new or more severe impacts to tribal cultural resources beyond what was previously assessed. The General Plan Reset EIR determined that while the Native American Heritage Commission identified sacred lands within the EIR Study Area, and the Costanoan Rumsen Carmel Tribe provided consultation recommendations, impacts would remain less than significant due to established protections.

The DTSP would be consistent with these assumptions, maintaining compliance with early consultation requirements, archaeological sensitivity mapping, and respectful treatment of human remains, as outlined in the General Plan’s Land Use Element. Development facilitated by the DTSP would continue to comply with AB 52 tribal consultation requirements when potential impacts to tribal cultural resources are identified.

Public realm improvements proposed under the DTSP would be located within previously disturbed urban areas and would not involve ground disturbance in undeveloped or archaeologically sensitive locations. These improvements would be consistent with DTSP Policy LU2, which calls for honoring the historic significance of the downtown area.

As improvements implemented through the buildout of the DTSP would not introduce new development in areas not previously analyzed, and because federal, state, and local protections remain in effect, the project would not introduce additional environmental impacts. Therefore, both direct and cumulative impacts to tribal cultural resources would remain less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan Reset EIR.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 415

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

44 Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to tribal cultural resources, and no new or revised mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to tribal cultural resources. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to tribal cultural resources than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset would result in less than significant direct and cumulative impacts to water systems. While both Cal Water-MPS (serving 6,769 new units and 4.3M sq ft non-residential) and MPWD (serving 1,531 new units and 4.7M sq ft non-residential) project potential shortages during dry years if the Bay Delta Plan Amendment is implemented, impacts would be managed through multiple mechanisms. These include Cal Water’s Development Offset Program, demonstrated conservation success (27% reduction for Cal Water-MPS, 10% for MPWD), Water Supply Assessment requirements, and comprehensive General Plan policies promoting conservation and recycled water use.

As discussed in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the General Plan Reset EIR, the 2045 General Plan Reset would result in less than significant direct and cumulative impacts to wastewater systems. The additional 1.6 MGD of wastewater from new development (bringing San Carlos’ total to 4.45 MGD by 2045) would be well within the Silicon Valley Clean Water Treatment Plant’s residual capacity of 11.1 MGD. Both direct and cumulative impacts would be managed through the City’s Capital Improvement Program for sewer collection upgrades, annual service charges funding system improvements, and General Plan policies requiring Best Management Practices and system upgrades.

As discussed in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2034 General Plan Reset would result in less than significant direct and cumulative impacts to solid waste disposal. While new development would generate approximately 195 tons per day of additional waste, this represents only 11% of Ox Mountain Landfill’s residual capacity. The City’s current disposal rates (6.8 pounds per day per resident, 10.7 pounds per day per employee) are well below CalRecycle targets, and even with projected countywide growth of 15% by 2040, cumulative waste generation would utilize only 63% of landfill capacity. Multiple mechanisms would support compliance with these standards and limitations, including CALGreen requirements for construction waste recycling, mandatory commercial recycling requirements, and ReThinkWaste’s current 65% diversion rate.

As discussed in Section 4.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the General Plan Reset EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset would result in less than significant direct and cumulative impacts to stormwater infrastructure. While new development could increase

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 416

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 45 impervious surfaces and runoff, impacts would be minimal as most development would occur in already developed infill areas. Projects creating or replacing 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface must implement specific site design, source control, and treatment measures.

The 2045 General Plan Reset includes comprehensive policies to manage impacts, including maintaining natural creek channels and requiring adequate drainage systems. Cumulative impacts across the five watersheds encompassing San Carlos would be managed through multiple mechanisms, including compliance with the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit, low-impact- development measures, and NPDES requirements.

Lastly, the General Plan Reset EIR found the 2045 General Plan Reset would result in less than significant direct and cumulative impacts to energy infrastructure. While development would increase electricity consumption by 93.7 million kilowatt-hours and natural gas use by 4.7 million therms annually, these represent only 0.2% of Pacific Gas and Electric’s projected electricity supply and 0.01% of gas supply. Per capita usage would decrease through efficiency requirements, including California Energy Code compliance, the City’s all-electric appliance requirements for new development, and General Plan policies promoting energy efficiency. Cumulative impacts would remain less than significant, supported by regional trends showing minimal electricity consumption growth despite significant economic expansion.

Impacts of the DTSP
The DTSP would facilitate residential and non-residential development which would increase water demand, wastewater generation, and solid waste generation in the Plan Area. However, potential buildout of the DTSP and associated water use and wastewater and solid waste generation were already anticipated and analyzed within the General Plan Reset EIR. Therefore, the DTSP would not result in new or more severe impacts to utilities and service systems beyond what was previously assessed. The General Plan Reset EIR determined that impacts to water, wastewater, solid waste, stormwater, and energy infrastructure would be less than significant, supported by existing policies, infrastructure capacity, and conservation programs.

Overall, the DTSP would be consistent with these assumptions and would not introduce development that would exceed the anticipated citywide growth accounted for in the EIR. Further, DTSP policies such as IU1 through IU8and SR1 promote infrastructure upgrades and green infrastructure strategies that support long-term service capacity and environmental performance and are anticipated to accommodate the envisioned DTSP buildout. Additionally, Policy SR3 and Action IU1B encourage energy-efficient design and smart technologies, aligning with California Energy Code requirements and supporting per capita reductions in energy consumption. Lastly, Policy IU10 calls for the development of waste management strategies that prioritizes reduction, recycling, and composting.

Public realm improvements proposed under the DTSP would be designed to enhance pedestrian comfort and ecological resilience without increasing utility demand. These improvements would be consistent with DTSP Policies PR18, PR19, PR21, SR1 and SR2, which guide the integration of drought-tolerant landscaping resilient infrastructure, and low-impact development practices.

Because these enhancements do not involve new residential or commercial development, they would not generate substantial additional demand for water, wastewater, or solid waste services.

Water supply would continue to be managed through conservation programs, offset requirements, and General Plan policies supporting recycled water use. Wastewater demand would remain within existing treatment capacity, and solid waste generation would not exceed landfill capacity or diversion targets. Stormwater infrastructure would continue to be regulated through site design,

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 417

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

46 source control, and drainage system policies, maintaining compliance with regional stormwater management requirements. Energy consumption would also align with prior projections, with efficiency measures demonstrating per capita reductions consistent with California Energy Code requirements.

Because utilities and service systems impacts were previously analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR, and existing policies remain in place, the DTSP would not introduce additional environmental effects. Therefore, both direct and cumulative impacts would remain less than significant, consistent with the conclusions of the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to utilities and service systems, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to utilities and service systems. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to utilities and service systems than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

5.18 Wildfire
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
As discussed in Section 4.18, Wildfire, of the EIR, implementation of the 2045 General Plan Reset would result in less than significant impacts in most wildfire-related categories, but significant impacts related to wildfire risk exposure. While the Plan includes comprehensive mechanisms to demonstrate adequate emergency response and evacuation (including two ingress/egress points and evacuation route studies), manage infrastructure installation (through underground utilities and greenbelts), and address post-fire hazards (via geotechnical requirements and drainage controls), development in western San Carlos could expose people to significant wildfire risks. These areas are characterized by steep topography that creates wind tunnels, Diablo winds reaching 80 mph, and highly flammable vegetation in grassland areas. Despite compliance with Building and Fire Codes and General Plan policies requiring fire-resistant landscaping and vegetation management, the potential for exacerbating wildfire risks remains significant due to severe environmental conditions.

Furthermore, the EIR found significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts when considering development in combination with surrounding jurisdictions. While future development would be required to comply with State regulations (including Fire Safe Regulations and Public Resources Code requirements), local ordinances, and regional wildfire protection plans, the inherent risk of increased human activity in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones (FHSZ) and Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI) areas could create cumulatively considerable impacts. The EIR found that development in these areas, particularly when combined with similar projects in adjacent jurisdictions with steep slopes and high fuel loads, would potentially expose occupants to pollutant concentrations from wildfire or uncontrolled spread of wildfire. No feasible mitigation measures were identified beyond the proposed General Plan policies, as the only way to fully avoid the impact

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 418

Environmental Impacts of the Proposed Downtown Specific Plan

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 47 would be to prohibit development in Very High FHSZ or Wildland-Urban Interface areas throughout the region, which was deemed infeasible.

Impacts of the DTSP
According to the General Plan Reset EIR, Very High FHSZs are located in the western portions of the San Carlos. The Plan Area is not within in a Very High FHSZ or WUI area and the closest areas are over 1 mile west of the Plan Area. The Plan Area does not contain characteristics such as steep topography, high fuel loads, or exposure to extreme wind conditions, that would increase wildfire risk.

Since the Plan Area lacks wildfire-prone conditions, the project would not result in wildfire impacts.

Public realm improvements proposed under the DTSP would be located within an already urbanized environment and would not introduce new ignition sources or increase exposure to wildfire hazards.

These improvements would be consistent with DTSP Policies PR13 through PR15, which promote native and drought-tolerant landscaping and regular maintenance of planted areas to reduce fire risk and support ecological resilience. The Plan Area is not within or near a Very High FHSZ or WUI and lacks wildfire-prone conditions and the DTSP does not propose development in areas susceptible to wildfire. Consistent with the findings of the General Plan Reset EIR, the proposed DTSP would result in less than significant wildfire impacts with respect to emergency access and response, requiring the installation or maintenance of infrastructure that would exacerbate fire risk, or exposing people or structures to significant wildfire risks.

As with future development under the General Plan Reset, future development in the DTSP could involve exposing project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire. In addition, future development in San Carlos, including development under the DTSP, in combination with other surrounding projects in the Very High FHSZ and WUI could result in cumulative impacts associated with the exposure of project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or uncontrolled spread of a wildfire due to slope, prevailing winds, or other factors and this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. The proposed DTSP would facilitate development consistent with the buildout assumptions in the DTSP area under the General Plan Reset EIR and therefore this development was already assumed to be part of the cumulative growth analyzed in the General Plan Reset EIR. Therefore, the proposed DTSP would not result in a substantially more severe project or cumulative unavoidable wildfire impact than was already identified. The DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe impacts beyond those already identified in the General Plan Reset EIR.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to wildfire, and new mitigation measures are required. The General Plan Reset EIR found a significant and unavoidable cumulative wildfire impact; however, no feasible mitigation measures were identified.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would not result in new or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to wildfire. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to wildfire than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 419

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

48 6 Cumulative Impacts
In addition to the specific impacts of individual projects, CEQA requires consideration of potential cumulative impacts of the DTSP. CEQA defines “cumulative impacts” as two or more individual impacts that, when considered together, are substantial or will compound other environmental impacts. Cumulative impacts are the combined changes in the environment that result from the incremental impact of development of the DTSP and other past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts. For example, noise impacts of two nearby projects may be less than significant when analyzed separately, but could have a significant impact when analyzed together. The cumulative impact analysis provides a reasonable forecast of future environmental conditions and can more accurately gauge the effects of a series of projects.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 requires cumulative impact analysis in EIRs to consider either a list of planned and pending projects that may contribute to cumulative effects or a summary of projections contained in an adopted planning document such as a general plan.

6.1 Cumulative Setting
Impacts Identified in the General Plan Reset EIR
The cumulative setting for the analysis in the General Plan Reset EIR is explained in Section 3, Environmental Setting, of the General Plan Reset EIR. The cumulative impact analysis in the General Plan Reset EIR was based on a projections approach, taking into account growth facilitated by the 2045 General Plan Reset, including the DTSP, in combination with impacts from projected growth in the rest of San Mateo County and the surrounding region, as forecasted by Plan Bay Area 2050.

The cumulative analysis within Chapters 4.1 through 4.18 of the General Plan Reset EIR defines the geographic scope for each impact based on the nature of the effect. Broader issues like air quality rely on regional air basin projections, while aesthetic impacts are assessed within the immediate project area where visual changes are noticeable. The geographic extent varies depending on whether the impact would be localized or widespread.

For the 2045 General Plan Reset, broad-scale resource areas, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, energy, transportation, utilities and service systems, hydrology and water quality, and hazards (including wildfire), were evaluated at the county or regional level. These topics inherently accumulate impacts across large geographic areas (e.g., the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin for air pollutants and GHG emissions; watershed boundaries for water resources; service-area extents for utilities).

Local and neighborhood-scale issues, biological and cultural resources, noise, land use and planning, population and housing, public services, parks and recreation, and tribal cultural resources, were analyzed within a more limited geographic context that reflects where impacts would actually occur or be experienced (e.g., adjacent parcels, park-and-recreation provider service areas, or tribal territories).

The General Plan Reset EIR identified the following environmental issue areas as potentially subject to significant cumulative impacts:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 420

Cumulative Impacts

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 49  Air Quality
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 Transportation
 Wildfire
The General Plan Reset EIR found that cumulative development pursuant to the 2045 General Plan Reset, including the potential buildout of the Plan Area, could have the potential to impact air quality. The cumulative air quality analysis within the General Plan Reset EIR considered the entire San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin, a region already designated nonattainment for ozone and PM2.5 and PM10. While individual projects alone do not trigger such designations, cumulative emissions from buildout, during both construction and operation, would exceed Air District thresholds and contribute to regional pollution levels, resulting in significant and unavoidable cumulative air quality impacts. Similarly, although toxic air contaminants from individual development projects would generally remain below Air District risk thresholds, their collective contribution would increase localized cancer risk levels across the region. As a result, cumulative toxic air contaminants impacts are also considered significant and unavoidable, even with implementation of mitigation measures.

The General Plan Reset EIR found that cumulative development pursuant to the 2045 General Plan Reset, including the potential buildout of the Plan Area, would have the potential to impact GHG emissions. Because GHG emissions are global in nature, emissions facilitated by the 2045 General Plan Reset were assessed as part of a broader cumulative impact. Although 2045 General Plan Reset would not conflict with applicable climate action and planning documents, development facilitated by the 2045 General Plan Reset, including the Plan Area, could contribute to global climate change, and this impact is considered significant and unavoidable.

The transportation analysis in the General Plan Reset EIR found that while the 2045 General Plan Reset would not conflict with existing transportation programs or create design or safety issues, it would result in increased VMT above regional efficiency thresholds. Despite policies aimed at mitigating traffic impacts, including consideration of regional traffic effects and maintaining acceptable service levels, the cumulative increase in VMT could be significant and unavoidable.

The cumulative wildfire analysis found that while future development under the 2045 General Plan Reset would not interfere with emergency plans or directly increase infrastructure-related wildfire hazards, it could still expose people to pollutant concentrations and wildfire spread risks in sloped, high-fuel areas due to factors like wind and topography. When combined with other foreseeable development in similar environments across the region, this could result in a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact. Although all projects must comply with applicable state and regional fire safety regulations, and various wildfire risk reduction strategies are in place, no additional feasible mitigation was identified beyond what is already included in the General Plan. As such, cumulative wildfire risk remains significant and unavoidable.

For all other impact areas, the General Plan Reset EIR found that the 2045 General Plan Reset would not result in cumulatively considerable impacts.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 421

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

50 6.2 Impact Analysis
Impacts of the DTSP
The environmental conditions described in the General Plan Reset EIR are substantially the same as the current conditions in the Plan Area, city, and region. Therefore, the cumulative setting in the General Plan Reset EIR has not changed and remains the same for the purposes of this analysis. As discussed throughout this Addendum, The DTSP would not result in new or more severe impacts than those found within the General Plan Reset EIR, including the significant cumulative impacts to air quality, GHG emissions, traffic and wildfire. Similar to development facilitated by the 2045 General Plan Reset, the DTSP would result in less than significant cumulative impacts related to all other impact areas with adherence to State and local regulations as well as the City’s General Plan policies and Standard COAs; therefore, the DTSP would not make a new or more severe cumulatively considerable contribution to a cumulative impact.

Effects and Mitigation Measures
No new or substantially more severe significant effects would occur to cumulative impacts, and no mitigation measures are required.

Conclusion
Implementation of the DTSP would have cumulatively considerable impacts related to air quality, GHG emissions, traffic and wildfire, and less than significant cumulative impacts with respect to all other impact areas. No substantial changes have occurred that require major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR. There is no new information indicating that the DTSP would have new significant impacts or substantially more severe significant impacts with respect to cumulative impacts than were identified in the General Plan Reset EIR. None of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent EIR have been met.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 422

Conclusion

Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report 51 7 Conclusion
As discussed in detail in the preceding sections, potential impacts associated with the DTSP are consistent with potential impacts disclosed in the General Plan Reset EIR. Major revisions to the General Plan Reset EIR are not required, because no new significant impacts or significant impacts of substantially greater severity than previously described would occur because of the DTSP.

Therefore, the conditions outlined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(3)(A) and (D) for preparation of a subsequent EIR would not be met.

Based on the analysis contained in this Addendum, the following determinations are applicable:
 No further evaluation of environmental impacts is required for the DTSP.  No subsequent EIR is required pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.  This Addendum is the appropriate level of environmental analysis and documentation for the DTSP pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164(c), the decision making body of the City will consider this Addendum along with the General Plan Reset EIR prior to making a decision on the DTSP.

Documents related to this Addendum will be available at the City of San Carlos Development Services Counter located on the first floor of City Hall at 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, California 94070.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 423

City of San Carlos
San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan

52 8 References and Preparers

8.1 References
San Carlos, City of. 2025a. 2045 General Plan Reset Final EIR. April 2025. https://cms3.revize.com/revize/sancarlos/Final%20EIR_2045GPR.pdf (accessed August 2025)
_______. 2025b. San Carlos Downtown Streetscape Master Plan. April 28, 2025. https://www.sancarlosdowntownplan.com/_files/ugd/f9fd48_0dc9022af0a843e5b87c7493 116d9f78.pdf (accessed August 2025)
_______. 2025c. San Carlos 2030 General Plan, amended 2025. https://cms3.revize.com/revize/sancarlos/Document%20Center/2045GeneralPlanReset_Re visedPublicReviewDraft_20250430.pdf?t=202504301924490&t=202504301924490 (accessed August 2025)
San Mateo County. 2025. San Carlos Airport 2035 Noise Contours. https://hub.arcgis.com/datasets/smcmaps::san-carlos-airport-2035-noise- contours/explore?location=37.452540%2C-122.210043%2C11.75 (accessed August 2025)

8.2 List of Preparers
Persons and firms involved in data gathering, analysis, project management, and quality control include:

Rincon Consultants, Inc.

Abe Leider, AICP CEP, Principal-in-Charge
Karly Kaufman, MESM, Project Manager
Zoe Zepp, Environmental Planner
Vivian Phan, MESM, GIS Analyst
Debra Jane Seltzer, Formatting Specialist

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 424

Appendix A
General Plan Text Amendments

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 425

Downtown Specific Plan: General Plan Amendments

Header, Policy, or
Action Number
Existing Proposed

Land Use Element

Downtown
(pg. 23)
The Land Use Element often
mentions the City’s Downtown
area. The Downtown is generally
defined as Laurel Street
from Holly Street to Arroyo Street,
including properties west
to the predominantly multi-family
Walnut Street and the Civic
Center on Elm Street. This area is
commercial in nature and
marked by numerous restaurants,
personal service uses, and
small retail shops. The Downtown
Urban Design Guidelines
were developed for this area of
the City in order to retain and
enhance the vitality of the
Downtown as a central point for
social interaction and commercial
activity.

Note: The City is preparing two
new specific plans for the
downtown and northeast areas
which are both on schedule to be
adopted by the end of 2025.

The Land Use Element often
mentions the City’s Downtown
area. The Downtown is generally
defined comprised of parcels
along El Camino Real asand
Laurel Street, framed by
from Holly Street to the north,
Greenwood Avenue to the south,
El Camino Real to the east, and to
ArroyoWalnut Street to the west.,
including properties west
to the predominantly multi-family
Walnut Street and the Civic
Center on Elm Street. This area is
commercial in nature and marked
by numerous restaurants,
personal service uses, and small
retail shops. The Downtown Urban
Design Guidelines were
developed for this area of the City
in order to retain and enhance the
vitality of the Downtown as a
central point for
social interaction and commercial
activity. The Downtown Specific
Plan and Downtown Streetscape
Master Plan were adopted in 2025
to set forth regulations for the
future development and
enhancement of the Downtown.

Note: The City is preparing
twoalso preparing a new specific
plans for the downtown and
northeast areas which are both is
on schedule to be adopted by the
end of 20265.

General Plan Map
(pg. 29)
1250 San Carlos Avenue
(SamTrans site) displayed as
Mixed-Use 75-100 DUs/Ac
1250 San Carlos Avenue
(SamTrans site) displayed as:

Mixed-Use 75-100 90-120 DUs/Ac
Policy LU-2.1 (pg.
38)
The downtown is generally
defined as Laurel Street from
The boundaries of the Ddowntown
are consistent with the Downtown

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 426

Holly Street to Arroyo Street,
including properties west to
Walnut Street and Civic Center.

Specific Planis generally defined
bordered byas Laurel Street from
Holly Street to Arroyo Street,
including properties west to
Walnut Street and Civic
Center.Holly Street to the north,
Greenwood Avenue to the south,
El Camino Real to the east, and
Walnut Street to the west.

The Downtown Core is generally
defined as the 600, 700, and 800
blocks of Laurel Street and the
1100 and 1200 blocks of San
Carlos Avenue.

Policy LU-2.2 (pg.
38)
Strive to maintain the character of
the historic Downtown core, which
is centered at the 1100 and 1200
blocks of San Carlos Avenue and
the 600, 700 and 800 blocks of
Laurel Street.

Strive to maintain enhance the
character of the historic Downtown
Ccore with a mixed-use
pedestrian friendly environment,
consistent with the Downtown
Specific Plan and Downtown
Streetscape Master Plan. , which
is centered at the 1100 and 1200
blocks of San Carlos Avenue and
the 600, 700 and 800 blocks of
Laurel Street.

Policy LU-2.3 (pg.
38)
Encourage development that
respects the character of the
historic Downtown core.

Encourage development that
respects contributes to the overall
uniquenessthe character of the
historic Downtown cCore.

Policy LU-2.16
(pg. 39)
Ensure adequate accessibility to
the Downtown, which may include
expanding automobile parking,
bicycle parking and public transit.

Ensure adequate accessibility to
the Downtown, which may include
expanding automobile parking,
bicycle parking and public
transit.through bicycle and public
transit enhancements.

Policy LU-2.18
(pg. 40)
Consider innovative and flexible
approaches to parking in the
Downtown area.

Consider innovative and flexible
approaches to parking in the
Downtown area, as contemplated
in the Downtown Parking Study
and continue to monitor state law
and its impacts on parking
requirements in the Downtown
Specific Plan Area..

Policy LU-2.19
(pg. 40)
Encourage opportunities for
pedestrian linkages from the
parking plazas to the streets.

Encourage opportunities for
pedestrian linkages from the
parking plazas lots to the streets.

Policy LU-2.20
(pg. 40)
Facilitate expansion of public
parking in conjunction with the
Facilitate expansion of public
parking in conjunction with the

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 427

redevelopment of consolidated
parcels.
redevelopment of consolidated
parcels.

Action LU-2.1
(pg. 40)
Review the Zoning Ordinance to
ensure standards support a
vibrant and diverse Downtown.

As necessary, Reviewamend the
Zoning Ordinance to ensure
support the goals of the
Downtown Specific Plan and
Downtown Streetscape Master
Plan to ensure a uniquestandards
support a , vibrant, and diverse
Downtown.

Action LU-2.2
(pg. 40)
Amend the Zoning Ordinance as
necessary to maintain and
enhance the character of Laurel
Street.

Amend the Zoning Ordinance as
necessary to maintain and
enhance the character of Laurel
Street.

Action LU-2.8
(pg. 41)
Study existing alleys within the
Downtown area to define the use
of the alley prior to consideration
of removal.

Study existing alleys within the
Downtown area to define the use
of the alley prior to consideration
of removal.

Action LU-2.10
(pg. 41)
Examine the viability of converting
the 600, 700 and/or 800 blocks of
Laurel Street to a more
pedestrian-friendly environment.

Examine the viability of converting
the 600, 700 and/or 800 blocks of
Laurel Street, and the 1100 and
1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue
to a more pedestrian-friendly
environment.

Policy LU-5.8
(pg. 48)
Encourage retail uses along
Laurel Street south of the
Downtown to extend and increase
the area’s economic vitality and
support surrounding uses.

Encourage retail uses along
Laurel Street south of the
Downtown to extend and increase
the area’s economic vitality and
support surrounding uses.Support
the transformation of the South
Laurel sub-district (as defined by
the Downtown Streetscape Master
Plan) into a mixed-use corridor.

Policy LU-5.17
(pg. 49)
Encourage the development as
well as improvements to the
ingress and egress on the
following public parking lots: South
Plaza, Williams Plaza, Wheeler
Plaza and Clark Plaza. Encourage
the consolidation and acquisition
of parcels when opportunities
become available to expand the
public parking lots, provide
improved ingress and egress and
improve the efficiency of design.

Encourage the development as
well as improvements to the
ingress and egress on the
following public parking lots: South
Plaza, Williams Plaza, Wheeler
Plaza and Clark Plaza within the
Downtown Core including.

Encourage the potential
consolidation and acquisition of
parcels when opportunities
become available to expand the
public parking lots, provide
improved ingress and egress and
improve theenhance efficiency of
design.

Goal LU-7
(pg. 65)
Promote the community character
of San Carlos, including the
Promote the community character
of San Carlos and the overall

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 428

unique village character of
Downtown.
uniqueness, including the unique
village character of the Downtown.

Policy LU-7.3
(pg. 65)
Provide for a downtown scale of
development that is compatible
with San Carlos’ unique village
character.

Provide for a downtown scale
ofSupport development that is
compatible with San Carlos’
unique village characterDowntown
and consistent with the Downtown
Specific Plan.

Policy LU-7.5
(pg. 65)
Consider the inclusion of public art
as part of development projects.

Consider the inclusion of public art
as part of development and
capitaland capital projects.

Circulation and Scenic Highways Element

Streets and
Sidewalk
Standards
(pg. 89)
Local conditions may necessitate
modification and flexibility of street
and sidewalk standards where
topography, location, or other
conditions warrant. Detailed
standards for street and sidewalk
improvements, including street
trees and landscaped strips are
set forth in San Carlos Subdivision
Ordinance and Standard Details.

Local conditions may necessitate
modification and flexibility of street
and sidewalk standards where
topography, location, or other
conditions warrant. Detailed
standards for street and sidewalk
improvements, including street
trees and landscaped strips are
set forth in San Carlos Subdivision
Ordinance and Standard Details,
Downtown Specific Plan,
Downtown Streetscape Master
Plan, and San Carlos Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan..

Policy CSH-2.2
(pg.98)
Provide for adequate pedestrian
and bicycle facilities as viable
transportation modes in San
Carlos, as recommended in the
San Carlos Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan.

Provide for adequate pedestrian
and bicycle facilities as viable
transportation modes in San
Carlos, as recommended set forth
in the Downtown Specific Plan,
Downtown Streetscape Master
Plan, and San Carlos Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan.

Policy CSH-3.6
(pg.99)
Parking and access facilities in the
Central District shall be designed
to adequately accommodate both
customers and employees.

Parking and access facilities in the
Central DistrictAccess to parking
facilities around the Downtown
Core shall be designed to
adequately prioritize
bothaccommodate both customers
and employees.

Policy CSH-3.17
(pg.101)
The City shall consider revising its
parking requirements to reflect
current trends in business,
industry and housing.

The City shall consider revising
itscontinue monitoring its parking
requirements to reflect current
trends in business, industry and
housingchanges in state law.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 429

1 3
1 6
4 RESOLUTION NO. 2025-____

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

AMENDING THE SAN CARLOS GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP,
LAND USE ELEMENT, AND CIRCULATION AND SCENIC HIGHWAYS ELEMENT. ____________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos has made the planning for the future of its downtown one of its top strategic objectives since 2021, beginning with the adoption of its 2021 Strategic Plan and was reaffirmed during its City Council Retreat on January 21, 2022, and again on January 27, 2023, January 18, 2024, and February 6, 2025; and WHEREAS, in August 2023 the City Council of the City of San Carlos approved a professional services agreement with WRT for consulting services to prepare a Downtown Specific Plan, Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, and an Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report, in response to the City Council’s Strategic Objective to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future; and,
WHEREAS, between August 2022 through August 2025, hundreds of participants attended 37 different civic engagement events and opportunities inclusive of surveys, workshops, open houses, and study sessions with the City Council appointed Downtown Advisory Committee, Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks Recreation and Culture Commission, Youth Advisory Council, Planning and Transportation Commission, and City Council; and WHEREAS, the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan project includes these interrelated documents: the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan; associated amendments to the San Carlos General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; San Carlos Zoning Map and Ordinance Amendments (to implement the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan), and the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and
WHEREAS, the focus of this resolution relates to amendments to the San Carlos General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; and
WHEREAS, amendments to the San Carlos General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element primarily address the redefinition of the “Downtown Area,” specifically its updated boundaries as established by the Downtown Specific Plan are incorporated into the General Plan and are accompanied by policy revisions to ensure consistency with the Downtown Specific Plan’s new vision and goals; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Government Code Section 65300 et seq., the amendments made to the Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element have been developed to be comprehensive, internally consistent, and long term; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos referred the proposed Downtown Specific Plan and associated amendments to the City of San Carlos General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element to all California Native American tribes on the contact list provided by the Native American Heritage Commission and to other entities listed; and

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 430

2 3
1 6
4 WHEREAS, no California Native American tribe requested consultation; and WHEREAS, the Planning and Transportation Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan on November 3, 2025, to consider a recommendation to the City Council on the Downtown Specific Plan and associated amendments to the City of San Carlos General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Transportation Commission has recommended that the City Council approve the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan EIR pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15164. The Addendum studied the potential environmental impacts of changes to the project and determined that the Downtown Specific Plan would not result in new or more severe significant environmental impacts not studied and disclosed in the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report and that only minor changes or additions are required. As such, the proposed Downtown Specific Plan and action to amend the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, and General Plan to implement the Downtown Specific Plan would not result in significant impacts, substantial changes, new information of substantial importance, circumstances or conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, and a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR is not required. Therefore the Addendum is found to be adequate and complete for consideration in making a decision on the merits of the Downtown Specific Plan and associated amendments to the City of San Carlos’ General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing on the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan on November 24, 2025, to consider the Downtown Specific Plan and associated amendments to the City of San Carlos General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element, and WHEREAS, the City Council, on November 24, 2025, adopted a resolution approving the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan EIR pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15164. The Addendum studied the potential environmental impacts of changes to the project and determined that the Downtown Specific Plan would not result in new or more severe significant environmental impacts not studied and disclosed in the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report and that only minor changes or additions are required.

As such, the proposed Downtown Specific Plan and action to amend the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Map, and General Plan to implement the Downtown Specific Plan would not result in significant impacts, substantial changes, new information of substantial importance, circumstances or conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, and a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR is not required. Therefore the Addendum is found to be adequate and complete for consideration in making a decision on the merits of the Downtown Specific Plan and associated amendments to the City of San Carlos’ General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Carlos that:

1. Findings
a. The above recitals are incorporated by reference.
b. Amendments to the General Plan Land Use Map and Land Use and Circulation

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 431

3 3
1 6
4 Elements are necessary to establish consistency between the proposed Downtown Specific Plan’s vision, goals, policies, and actions and the San Carlos General Plan. The Downtown Specific Plan, when adopted, will serve as an extension of the San Carlos General Plan, but provide more localized goals, policies, and actions for the Downtown over the next 20 years.

Amendments are minor in nature and apply to existing text and policies within the General Plan Land Use and Circulations Elements.
c. The proposed General Plan Land Use amendment for 1250 San Carlos Avenue, currently home to the San Mateo County Transit Authority headquarters, creates conditions conducive to increased housing opportunities while honoring the site’s existing development footprint. This approach supports the City’s commitment to creating more housing and vibrant community spaces in areas close to services and public transit. This modification was presented to the Planning and Transportation Commission and City Council on June 16, 2025, and June 23, 2025, respectively, and was recommended for inclusion in the Downtown Specific Plan.

2. Adoption
a. The City Council hereby adopts the amendments to the City of San Carlos’ General Plan’s Land Use Map as set forth in Exhibit A.
b. The Council hereby adopts the amendments to the City of San Carlos’ General Plan’s Land Use Element and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element as set forth in Exhibit B.
* * * *
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 as scheduled meeting thereof held on the 24th day of November, 2025 by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
____________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibits:

A. Amendments to the 2030 City of San Carlos’ General Plan’s Land Use Map B. Amendments to the San Carlos General Plan Land Use Element and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 432

ALLEY

WALNUT ST

LAUREL ST
ELM ST

WALNUT ST
ELM ST

ALLEYALLEY

LAUREL STALLEYSAN CARLOS AVE

EL CAMINO REAL
577
535553
1179
501
1188
632
551
5371355
580
501
640
544
612
617
532 1201
640
535
533
510
545
622
1105
525-5331178
500
510
567
541
542
530
527
540 1148
618
1143625
517
626
620552
525
530
13071301
1335-1395
633
554
616
1163
545
1235
633539
520
512
561
628634
1385
548
657
11711156
630
1321 1324
1187641
1263
552
1250
638
500
657
1125
STATE HIGHWAY 82

SAN CARLOS AVE
Proposed General Plan Amendment
Mixed Use 75 -100 DUs/acreMixed Use 90 -120 DUs/acreMulti-Family 75 -100 DUs/acre 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN: 050-072-380)From: Mixed Use 75-100 DUs/acreTo: Mixed Use 90-120 DUs/acre Downtown Specific Plan Boundary
OCTOBER 2025Source: City of San Carlos, 2025; CALCAD, 2025

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 433

Downtown Specific Plan: General Plan Amendments

Header, Policy, or
Action Number
Existing Proposed

Land Use Element

Downtown
(pg. 23)
The Land Use Element often
mentions the City’s Downtown
area. The Downtown is generally
defined as Laurel Street
from Holly Street to Arroyo Street,
including properties west
to the predominantly multi-family
Walnut Street and the Civic
Center on Elm Street. This area is
commercial in nature and
marked by numerous restaurants,
personal service uses, and
small retail shops. The Downtown
Urban Design Guidelines
were developed for this area of
the City in order to retain and
enhance the vitality of the
Downtown as a central point for
social interaction and commercial
activity.

Note: The City is preparing two
new specific plans for the
downtown and northeast areas
which are both on schedule to be
adopted by the end of 2025.

The Land Use Element often
mentions the City’s Downtown
area. The Downtown is generally
defined comprised of parcels
along El Camino Real asand
Laurel Street, framed by
from Holly Street to the north,
Greenwood Avenue to the south,
El Camino Real to the east, and to
ArroyoWalnut Street to the west.,
including properties west
to the predominantly multi-family
Walnut Street and the Civic
Center on Elm Street. This area is
commercial in nature and marked
by numerous restaurants,
personal service uses, and small
retail shops. The Downtown Urban
Design Guidelines were
developed for this area of the City
in order to retain and enhance the
vitality of the Downtown as a
central point for
social interaction and commercial
activity. The Downtown Specific
Plan and Downtown Streetscape
Master Plan were adopted in 2025
to set forth regulations for the
future development and
enhancement of the Downtown.

Note: The City is preparing
twoalso preparing a new specific
plans for the downtown and
northeast areas which are both is
on schedule to be adopted by the
end of 20265.

General Plan Map
(pg. 29)
1250 San Carlos Avenue
(SamTrans site) displayed as
Mixed-Use 75-100 DUs/Ac
1250 San Carlos Avenue
(SamTrans site) displayed as:

Mixed-Use 75-100 90-120 DUs/Ac
Policy LU-2.1 (pg.
38)
The downtown is generally
defined as Laurel Street from
The boundaries of the Ddowntown
are consistent with the Downtown

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 434

Holly Street to Arroyo Street,
including properties west to
Walnut Street and Civic Center.

Specific Planis generally defined
bordered byas Laurel Street from
Holly Street to Arroyo Street,
including properties west to
Walnut Street and Civic
Center.Holly Street to the north,
Greenwood Avenue to the south,
El Camino Real to the east, and
Walnut Street to the west.

The Downtown Core is generally
defined as the 600, 700, and 800
blocks of Laurel Street and the
1100 and 1200 blocks of San
Carlos Avenue.

Policy LU-2.2 (pg.
38)
Strive to maintain the character of
the historic Downtown core, which
is centered at the 1100 and 1200
blocks of San Carlos Avenue and
the 600, 700 and 800 blocks of
Laurel Street.

Strive to maintain enhance the
character of the historic Downtown
Ccore with a mixed-use
pedestrian friendly environment,
consistent with the Downtown
Specific Plan and Downtown
Streetscape Master Plan. , which
is centered at the 1100 and 1200
blocks of San Carlos Avenue and
the 600, 700 and 800 blocks of
Laurel Street.

Policy LU-2.3 (pg.
38)
Encourage development that
respects the character of the
historic Downtown core.

Encourage development that
respects contributes to the overall
uniquenessthe character of the
historic Downtown cCore.

Policy LU-2.16
(pg. 39)
Ensure adequate accessibility to
the Downtown, which may include
expanding automobile parking,
bicycle parking and public transit.

Ensure adequate accessibility to
the Downtown, which may include
expanding automobile parking,
bicycle parking and public
transit.through bicycle and public
transit enhancements.

Policy LU-2.18
(pg. 40)
Consider innovative and flexible
approaches to parking in the
Downtown area.

Consider innovative and flexible
approaches to parking in the
Downtown area, as contemplated
in the Downtown Parking Study
and continue to monitor state law
and its impacts on parking
requirements in the Downtown
Specific Plan Area..

Policy LU-2.19
(pg. 40)
Encourage opportunities for
pedestrian linkages from the
parking plazas to the streets.

Encourage opportunities for
pedestrian linkages from the
parking plazas lots to the streets.

Policy LU-2.20
(pg. 40)
Facilitate expansion of public
parking in conjunction with the
Facilitate expansion of public
parking in conjunction with the

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 435

redevelopment of consolidated
parcels.
redevelopment of consolidated
parcels.

Action LU-2.1
(pg. 40)
Review the Zoning Ordinance to
ensure standards support a
vibrant and diverse Downtown.

As necessary, Reviewamend the
Zoning Ordinance to ensure
support the goals of the
Downtown Specific Plan and
Downtown Streetscape Master
Plan to ensure a uniquestandards
support a , vibrant, and diverse
Downtown.

Action LU-2.2
(pg. 40)
Amend the Zoning Ordinance as
necessary to maintain and
enhance the character of Laurel
Street.

Amend the Zoning Ordinance as
necessary to maintain and
enhance the character of Laurel
Street.

Action LU-2.8
(pg. 41)
Study existing alleys within the
Downtown area to define the use
of the alley prior to consideration
of removal.

Study existing alleys within the
Downtown area to define the use
of the alley prior to consideration
of removal.

Action LU-2.10
(pg. 41)
Examine the viability of converting
the 600, 700 and/or 800 blocks of
Laurel Street to a more
pedestrian-friendly environment.

Examine the viability of converting
the 600, 700 and/or 800 blocks of
Laurel Street, and the 1100 and
1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue
to a more pedestrian-friendly
environment.

Policy LU-5.8
(pg. 48)
Encourage retail uses along
Laurel Street south of the
Downtown to extend and increase
the area’s economic vitality and
support surrounding uses.

Encourage retail uses along
Laurel Street south of the
Downtown to extend and increase
the area’s economic vitality and
support surrounding uses.Support
the transformation of the South
Laurel sub-district (as defined by
the Downtown Streetscape Master
Plan) into a mixed-use corridor.

Policy LU-5.17
(pg. 49)
Encourage the development as
well as improvements to the
ingress and egress on the
following public parking lots: South
Plaza, Williams Plaza, Wheeler
Plaza and Clark Plaza. Encourage
the consolidation and acquisition
of parcels when opportunities
become available to expand the
public parking lots, provide
improved ingress and egress and
improve the efficiency of design.

Encourage the development as
well as improvements to the
ingress and egress on the
following public parking lots: South
Plaza, Williams Plaza, Wheeler
Plaza and Clark Plaza within the
Downtown Core including.

Encourage the potential
consolidation and acquisition of
parcels when opportunities
become available to expand the
public parking lots, provide
improved ingress and egress and
improve theenhance efficiency of
design.

Goal LU-7
(pg. 65)
Promote the community character
of San Carlos, including the
Promote the community character
of San Carlos and the overall

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 436

unique village character of
Downtown.
uniqueness, including the unique
village character of the Downtown.

Policy LU-7.3
(pg. 65)
Provide for a downtown scale of
development that is compatible
with San Carlos’ unique village
character.

Provide for a downtown scale
ofSupport development that is
compatible with San Carlos’
unique village characterDowntown
and consistent with the Downtown
Specific Plan.

Policy LU-7.5
(pg. 65)
Consider the inclusion of public art
as part of development projects.

Consider the inclusion of public art
as part of development and
capitaland capital projects.

Circulation and Scenic Highways Element

Streets and
Sidewalk
Standards
(pg. 89)
Local conditions may necessitate
modification and flexibility of street
and sidewalk standards where
topography, location, or other
conditions warrant. Detailed
standards for street and sidewalk
improvements, including street
trees and landscaped strips are
set forth in San Carlos Subdivision
Ordinance and Standard Details.

Local conditions may necessitate
modification and flexibility of street
and sidewalk standards where
topography, location, or other
conditions warrant. Detailed
standards for street and sidewalk
improvements, including street
trees and landscaped strips are
set forth in San Carlos Subdivision
Ordinance and Standard Details,
Downtown Specific Plan,
Downtown Streetscape Master
Plan, and San Carlos Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan..

Policy CSH-2.2
(pg.98)
Provide for adequate pedestrian
and bicycle facilities as viable
transportation modes in San
Carlos, as recommended in the
San Carlos Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan.

Provide for adequate pedestrian
and bicycle facilities as viable
transportation modes in San
Carlos, as recommended set forth
in the Downtown Specific Plan,
Downtown Streetscape Master
Plan, and San Carlos Bicycle and
Pedestrian Master Plan.

Policy CSH-3.6
(pg.99)
Parking and access facilities in the
Central District shall be designed
to adequately accommodate both
customers and employees.

Parking and access facilities in the
Central DistrictAccess to parking
facilities around the Downtown
Core shall be designed to
adequately prioritize
bothaccommodate both customers
and employees.

Policy CSH-3.17
(pg.101)
The City shall consider revising its
parking requirements to reflect
current trends in business,
industry and housing.

The City shall consider revising
itscontinue monitoring its parking
requirements to reflect current
trends in business, industry and
housingchanges in state law.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 437

ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
AMENDING THE SAN CARLOS ZONING MAP AND MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 18 – ZONING ORDINANCE, TO CODIFY THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos has made the planning for the future of its downtown one of its top strategic objectives since 2021, beginning with the adoption of its 2021 Strategic Plan and was reaffirmed during its City Council Retreat on January 21, 2022, and again on January 27, 2023, January 18, 2024, and February 6, 2025; and
WHEREAS, in August 2023 the City Council of the City of San Carlos approved a professional services agreement with WRT for consulting services to prepare a Downtown Specific Plan, Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, and an Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report, in response to the City Council’s Strategic Objective to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future; and, WHEREAS, between August 2022 through August 2025, hundreds of participants attended 37 different civic engagement events and opportunities inclusive of surveys, workshops, open houses, and study sessions with the City Council appointed Downtown Advisory Committee, Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks Recreation and Culture Commission, Youth Advisory Council, Planning and Transportation Commission, and City Council; and
WHEREAS, the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan project includes these interrelated documents: the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan; associated amendments to the San Carlos General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; San Carlos Zoning Map and Ordinance Amendments (to implement the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan), and the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and
WHEREAS, the focus of this resolution relates to amendments to the San Carlos Zoning Map, and San Carlos Municipal Code, Titl3 18, Zoning Ordinance for the purposes of implementing the Downtown Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Sections 65853 and 65850 and San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.35.050, when a change in the Zoning Ordinance (Title 18 of the San Carlos Municipal Code) is found necessary, the Planning and Transportation Commission shall hold a public hearing to consider such change and render its decision to the City Council; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.35.050 and the California Government Code Sections 65090 and 65091 a Public Hearing Notice was published in the local newspaper on November 13, 2025, for the Downtown Specific Plan, associated amendments to the General Plan Land Use Map, Land Use Element and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element, and associated amendments to the San Carlos Zoning Map and Title 18, Zoning Ordinance text amendments, with additional notification via social media posts on San Carlos’ Facebook, NextDoor, Instagram, and X accounts, through six A-frame signs

9.a
November 24, 2025 Packet Pg. 438
spread throughout three blocks within the Downtown Specific Plan area, and through email sent to over 1,500 individuals who have signed up to follow the Downtown Specific Plan project; and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2025, City staff mailed the public notice to every property owner address and site address within the Downtown Specific Plan Area and to all property owners and sites within 300 feet of the Downtown Specific Plan Area to inform them of the proposed Downtown Specific Plan and of City Council public hearing of November 24, 2025; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Transportation Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing on amendments to the San Carlos Zoning Map and Zoning Ordinance to hear and consider all comments of all persons interested in or concerned with a proposed amendments of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code, Title 18, Zoning Ordinance, on November 3, 2025 and recommended to the City Council to introduce an Ordinance amending the Zoning Map and Zoning text amendments; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.35.080, the City Council shall make findings regarding a Zoning title text amendment include the reasons for finding that the recommendation is consistent with the City of San Carlos’ General Plan, and consistent with Title 18 to promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare; and WHEREAS, on November 24, 2025, the City Council adopted a resolution approving the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset EIR as adequate and complete in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and as adequate and complete for consideration in making a decision on the merits of the proposed Zoning Ordinance amendments.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS THAT:

1. The above recitals and findings are hereby incorporated by this reference and are hereby approved.

2. Findings (San Carlos Municipal Code Section 18.35.030) a. Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment Findings.
i. This ordinance amendment is consistent with the General Plan, Basis for finding: The San Carlos General Plan, as amended on May 27, 2025, recognized that the Downtown Specific Plan was underway and accounted for its buildout to the year 2045. Accordingly, with the impending adoption of the Downtown Specific Plan, the General Plan Land Use and Circulation and Scenic Highways Elements are proposed for further amendment to reference and refer to the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, including consistency with the vision, goals, policies, and implementation items within these two Plans. With these concurrent amendments, the intent it to attain policy consistency, which is

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 439

necessary for implementation through the San Carlos Zoning Ordinance.
ii. The ordinance amendment is consistent with the purpose of San Carlos Municipal Code, Title 18, to promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare.

Basis for findings: The proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are designed to guide the downtown’s transformation and growth in a deliberate and coordinated manner. By aligning land use regulations and development standards with the vision and goals of the Downtown Specific Plan, these amendments help ensure that development and capital improvements occur predictably, efficiently, and in harmony with City priorities.
b. Zoning District Boundary Amendment Findings:
i. The change in district boundaries is consistent with the General Plan.

Basis for finding: To change the Zoning designation for 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN 050-072-380) from Mixed-Use Downtown Core, 100 units/acre (MU-DC-100) to Mixed-Use, Downtown, 120 units/acre would be consistent with the concurrent General Plan Land Use amendment for this site. In addition, this change is consistent with the City’s commitment to encourage, support, and facilitate the create of safe, inclusive, diverse, and affordable supply of housing for all income levels as set forth in the City’s adopted Housing Element, including Housing Element Policy HOU-2.1, which calls for well- designed multi-family housing and mixed-use projects in the downtown area and along San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real.

In addition, Action HOU-3.9 promotes residential development on nonvacant sites by continuing to proactively outreach to property owners and support new housing efforts.
ii. The change in district boundaries is consistent with the purpose of this title to promote the growth of the City in an orderly manner and to promote and protect the public health, safety, peace, comfort and general welfare.

Basis for finding: The proposed amendments to the Zoning Map would change the property at 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN 050- 072-380) from MU-DC-100 to MU-D-120. The current distribution of MU-D-120 is adjacent to and in proximity to the subject site and would not result in a development type inconsistent with the vision, goals, policies, and standards set forth in the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Downtown Specific Plan.
iii. The change in district boundaries is necessary to achieve the balance of land use desired by the City, consistent with the General Plan, and to increase the inventory of land within a given zoning district.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 440

Basis for finding: The subject site at 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN 050-072-380) is just over 1 acre in size (approximately 49,693 square feet). The current Zoning designation is MU-DC-100, which allows for 86 to 114 housing units on the site at a maximum building height of 50 feet (notwithstanding provisions for additional height under SCMC

18.15.060 and through waivers/concessions from State Density Bonus law). If rezoned to MU-D-100, this would allow for an increase to 103 to 137 housing units at a maximum building height of 75 feet (again, notwithstanding provisions for additional height under SCMC

18.15.060 and through waivers/concessions from State Density Bonus law). This represents a 20% increase in the number of potential housing units. This change would is consistent with the City’s commitment to encourage, support, and facilitate the create of safe, inclusive, diverse, and affordable supply of housing for all income levels as set forth in the City’s adopted Housing Element, including Housing Element Policy HOU-2.1, which calls for well-designed multi- family housing and mixed-use projects in the downtown area and along San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real. Through the Downtown Specific Plan process, the site is ripe for redevelopment as a result of SamTrans moving its headquarters to the City of Millbrae.

Accordingly, an opportunity to redevelop the site with ground floor commercial uses and housing above, the proposed zone change would allow more housing units in a location that is within San Carlos’ priority development area, adjacent to downtown and essential services, and in walking distance of public transit and Caltrain station.

3. Severability
a. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and section by section, and does hereby declare that any provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason any sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.

4. Adoption
a. The City Council hereby adopts the Zoning Ordinance amendments as set forth in Exhibit “A” and adopt the accompanying changes to the Zoning Map as set forth in Exhibit “B”.
b. This Ordinance shall be published and posted according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption. * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced on the 24th day of November 2025, and passed and adopted as an Ordinance of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting thereof held on the ___ day of __________ 2025, by the following vote:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 441

________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
____________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibits:

A.Amendments to Title 18 - Zoning
B.Amendments to the City of San Carlos zoning map
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 442

Chapter 18.14.1

DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
Sections:

18.14.1.010 Purpose.

18.14.1.020 Applicability.

18.14.1.030 Procedures.

18.14.1.040 Consistency with Downtown Specific Plan.

18.14.1.050 Downtown Specific Plan contents and chapters.

18.14.1.010 Purpose.

The Downtown Specific Plan establishes a comprehensive framework to guide the long- term development in the Downtown, focusing on land use, urban design, mobility, sustainability, and the public realm. The purpose of this chapter is to provide regulations and reference to the Downtown Specific Plan aimed at supporting connectivity, identity, and vibrancy within the Downtown.

18.14.1.020 Applicability.

The Downtown Specific Plan applies to all areas as delineated in the map below.

Figure 1. Downtown Specific Plan Area

18.14.1.030 Procedures.

A. Administrative Regulations. All applications and permits subject to the Downtown Specific Plan shall be subject to the administrative regulations including discretionary entitlement applications and other permits in Article IV of the Municipal Code.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 443

B. Planning Authorities. All applications and permits subject to the Downtown Specific Plan shall be subject to approval by the bodies, officials, and administrators set forth in Chapter 18.26.

C. Common Procedures. Approval of all applications and permits subject to the Downtown Specific Plan shall be subject to procedures that are common to the application and processing of all permits and approvals set forth in Chapter 18.27.

18.14.1.040 Consistency with Downtown Specific Plan.

A. Findings. In addition to required findings pursuant to applicable entitlement applications, no application or permit may be approved, no local public works project may be approved, no tentative map or parcel map for which a tentative map was not required may be approved, no zoning ordinance may be adopted or amended within in area covered by the Downtown Specific Plan unless they are consistent with the adopted Downtown Specific Plan.

B. Conflict. All provisions of the Municipal Code that are not expressly modified or superseded by the Downtown Specific Plan shall continue to apply within the Downtown area. In the event of a conflict between provisions of the Downtown Specific Plan and Title 18 of the Municipal Code, the Downtown Specific Plan shall prevail.

C. Amendments. The Downtown Specific Plan may be amended as often as deemed necessary by the City Council.

18.14.1.050 Downtown Specific Plan contents and chapters.

A. The Downtown Specific Plan (view the online version or print version) is organized into the following sections and chapters:

1. Executive Summary;

2. Introduction and Vision, Principles, and Framework for Urban Design and Policy;

3. Land Use and Urban Design;

4. Prosperity and Economic Development;

5. Mobility and Connectivity;

6. Parking and Transportation Demand Management;

7. Public Realm;

8. Public Art;

9. Sustainability and Resiliency;

10.Infrastructure and Utilities;

11.Administration and Implementation.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 444

ALLEY

WALNUT ST

LAUREL ST
ELM ST

WALNUT ST
ELM ST

ALLEYALLEY

LAUREL STALLEYSAN CARLOS AVE

EL CAMINO REAL
577
535553
1179
501
1188
632
551
5371355
580
501
640
544
612
617
532 1201
640
535
533
510
545
622
1105
525-5331178
500
510
567
541
542
530
527
540 1148
618
1143625
517
626
620552
525
530
13071301
1335-1395
633
554
616
1163
545
1235
633539
520
512
561
628634
1385
548
657
11711156
630
1321 1324
1187641
1263
552
1250
638
500
657
1125
STATE HIGHWAY 82

SAN CARLOS AVE
Proposed Zoning Amendment
MU-D-120 - Mixed Use DowntownMU-DC-100 - Mixed Use Downtown CoreMU-SC-120 - Mixed Use San Carlos AvePD - Planned DevelopmentRM-100 - Multi-Family, Medium Density 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN: 050-072-380)From: MU-DC-100To: MU-D-120 Downtown Specific Plan BoundaryOCTOBER 2025Source: City of San Carlos, 2025; CALCAD, 2025

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 445

ORDINANCE NO. _____

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
ADOPTING THE SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN.

WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos has made the planning for the future of its downtown one of its top strategic objectives since 2021, beginning with the adoption of its 2021 Strategic Plan and was reaffirmed during its City Council Retreat on January 21, 2022, and again on January 27, 2023, January 18, 2024, and February 6, 2025; and
WHEREAS, in August 2023 the City Council of the City of San Carlos approved a professional services agreement with WRT for consulting services to prepare a Downtown Specific Plan, Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, and an Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report, in response to the City Council’s Strategic Objective to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future; and, WHEREAS, between August 2022 through August 2025, hundreds of participants attended 37 different civic engagement events and opportunities inclusive of surveys, workshops, open houses, and study sessions with the City Council appointed Downtown Advisory Committee, Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks Recreation and Culture Commission, Youth Advisory Council, Planning and Transportation Commission, and City Council; and
WHEREAS, prior to the 37 different civic engagement events, the City of San Carlos staff conducted robust community outreach to encourage maximum participation. This included social media posts on San Carlos’ Facebook, NextDoor, Instagram, and X accounts.

Announcements about the project and workshops were made at public meetings including City Council, Planning and Transportation Commission, Economic Development Advisory Council, Parks Recreation and Culture Commission, and Youth Advisory Council meetings. In addition, the workshops were promoted through the project website (sancarlosdowntownplan.com), direct email to over 1,500 individuals signed up to follow the project, City of San Carlos’ Good Living Newsletters, City Council Newsletters, Adult Community Center Newsletters, Chamber of Commerce Newsletters, and San Carlos’ E-notify (email) communication system. Grassroots efforts included booths City sponsored events such as the San Carlos Farmer’s Market and Art & Wine Faire, and passing out flyers and posting A-Fame signage throughout the Downtown; and
WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos has undertaken a process to prepare the Downtown Specific Plan in accordance with State law; and
WHEREAS, the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan project includes these interrelated documents: the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan; associated amendments to the San Carlos General Plan’s Land Use Map, Land Use Element, and Circulation and Scenic Highways Element; San Carlos Zoning Map and Ordinance Amendments (to implement the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan), and the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR); and
WHEREAS, the focus of this resolution relates to adopting the Downtown Specific Plan; and

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 446

WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos referred Downtown Specific Plan to all California Native American tribes on the contact list provided by the Native American Heritage Commission and to other entities listed; and
WHEREAS, no California Native American tribe requested consultation; and WHEREAS, on October 13, 2025, City staff mailed the public notice to every property owner address and site address within the Downtown Specific Plan Area and to all property owners and sites within 300 feet of the Downtown Specific Plan Area to inform them of the proposed Downtown Specific Plan and of Planning and Transportation Commission public hearing of November 3, 2025; and
WHEREAS, on October 14, 2025, a legal notice was published in the local newspaper with information regarding the proposed Downtown Specific Plan and associated amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report, and of the Planning and Transportation Commission public hearing of November 3, 2025; and
WHEREAS, on October 14, 2025, the Public Draft Downtown Specific Plan was released for review and comment, and
WHEREAS, on November 3, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission held a duly noticed public hearing and reviewed, considered, and evaluated the staff report and Draft Downtown Specific Plan for the City of San Carlos, including the attachments to the staff report, public comments and written testimony; and
WHEREAS, the on November 3, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission adopted a resolution making findings of adequacy and recommended that the City Council approve the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Environmental Impact Report as adequate and complete in compliance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, and as adequate and complete for consideration in making a decision on the merits of the Downtown Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2025, City staff mailed the public notice to every property owner address and site address within the Downtown Specific Plan Area and to all property owners and sites within 300 feet of the Downtown Specific Plan Area to inform them of the proposed Downtown Specific Plan and of the City Council public hearing of November 24, 2025; and
WHEREAS, on November 13, 2025, a legal notice was published in the local newspaper with information regarding the proposed Downtown Specific Plan and associated amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Environmental Impact Report, and of the City Council public hearing of November 24, 2025; and WHEREAS, on November 24, 2025, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing and reviewed, considered, and evaluated the staff report and Draft Downtown Specific Plan for the City of San Carlos, including the attachments to the staff report, public comments and written testimony.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 447

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS, AS FOLLOWS:

1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated by reference into this action.

2. The City Council, having independently heard, considered, and weighed all the evidence in the record present on behalf of interested parties and being fully informed of the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan project, finds that City of San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan’s goals, policies, and actions represent a shared vision for San Carlos’ downtown and are based on foundational principles embodying equity and resilience, placemaking and identity, downtown vibrancy, and mobility and connectivity and have been prepared in conformance with California Government Code Section 65450.

3. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and section by section, and does hereby declare that any provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason any sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.

4. Based on the foregoing, the City Council hereby adopts the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan. This Ordinance shall be published and posted according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption.
* * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced on the 24th day of November 2025, and passed and adopted as an Ordinance of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting thereof held on the ___ day of __________ 2025, by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
____________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A: City of San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 448

ADOPTED:

ORDINANCE:

SAN CARLOS

DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN
Public Review Draft Oct 14, 2025

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 449

SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN

CITY COUNCIL
Sara McDowell, Mayor
Pranita Venkatesh, Vice Mayor
John Dugan
Neil Layton
Adam Rak
Ron Collins (Former)

PLANNING AND TRANSPORTATION

COMMISSION
Kristen Clements, Chair
Summer Bundy, Vice Chair
Twisha Anand
Frank Kenniasty
Jorge Tapias
Janet Castaneda (Former)
Ellen Garvey (Former)
Jim Iacaponi (Former)
David Roof (Former)

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

ADVISORY COMMISSION
Kelly Hickey
Anthony Kamm
Rajesh Krishnan
Madhura Kumar
Heather Liu
Sailesh Mehra
Karen Molinari
Laura Kotee (Alternate)

PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURE

COMMISSION
Robert Bollier
Elaine Kistenmacher
Julie Lubetkin
Alexandria Seeber
Mark Stogner
Alexis McFarlane (Alternate)
John Durkin (Former)
Cecile Lee (Former)

YOUTH ADVISORY COUNCIL
Maya Kacholiya
Aditya Gupta
Eva Greenebaum
Ellora Mehta
Hanna Kent
Nikhil Nunna
Avi Cancilla
Keira Nayberg
Vir Rao
Karan Sangani
Johan Sijp
Doris Lin
Connor Huh (Alternate)
Dylan Karmin (Former)
Sufiya Kaul (Former)
Cecily Mock (Former)
Saba Rahimi (Former)
Zuri Kadiwar (Former)
A good plan involves everyone!

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 450

DOWNTOWN ADVISORY COMMITTEE
Allie Board
Madison Blanton
Robert Bollier
Amy Buckmaster
Allison Chang
Tom Davids
Jean Dehner
Zuri Kadiwar
Anthony Kamm
Dylan Karmin
Monette Meredith
Joaquin Pedrin
James Bertram (Alternate)
Cecile Lee (Alternate)
Elizabeth Min (Alternate)
Elisa Espinoza (Former)
Samina Ginwalla (Former)
Mark Maxwell (Former)

CITY STAFF
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
Al Savay, Community and Economic
Development Director
Lisa Porras, Planning Manager, Project Lead
Rendell Bustos, Senior Planner
Linnet Kwok, Senior Administrative Clerk
Hanieh Houshmandi, Senior Traffic Engineer

CONSULTANTS
WRT
Prime Consultant, Urban Design
CSW/ST2
Civil Engineering

W-TRANS
Traffic, Parking, Mobility

SYSTEMATICA
Transportation Planning and Engineering
BAE
Urban Economics

GREENSFELDER
Strategic Planning and Market Analytics
RINCON
Environmental Planning
GOOD CITY CO.

Strategic Advisor
This Specific Plan represents the result of three
years of collaboration and civic engagement.

Through workshops, surveys, public meetings,
and study sessions, community members
voiced a clear and heartfelt vision for the future
of Downtown. The outpouring of ideas and
feedback illustrates the community’s belief in
Downtown as San Carlos’ central gathering
place and focal point for civic life.

In loving memory of Jean Dehner.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 451

CONTENTS
Executive Summary | 06
Document Organization | 08
How To Use the Document | 10
01 Introduction | 12

1.1 Purpose and Objective of the Specific Plan 14

1.2 Specific Plan Authority & Scope 14

1.3 Relationship to General Plan 15

1.4 Relationship to Citywide Zoning 16

1.5 Preparation Process 16

1.6 California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA) Compliance 17

1.7 Relationship to Other Plans 17

1.8 Location and Demographics 22

1.9 Plan Area Context 26

1.10 Community Engagement 30
02 Vision, Principles, and Framework for
Urban Design and Policy | 40

2.1 Vision Statement 42

2.2 Guiding Principles 44

2.3 Urban Design Framework 44

2.4 Goals and Policies Framework 52
03 Land Use and Urban Design | 54

3.1 Overview 56

3.2 Land Use 56

3.3 Future Development Potential 59

3.4 Zoning Districts within the Specific Plan Area 61

3.5 Development Policies and Actions 64

3.6 Land Use Regulations 66

3.7 Private Property Development Standards 74
04 Prosperity and Economic
Development | 108

4.1 Overview 110

4.2 Policies and Actions 110
05 Mobility and Connectivity | 114

5.1. Overview 116

5.2. Balancing the Network 116

5.3. Policies and Actions 118

5.4. Mobility and Connectivity Standards 124

5.5. State Law Compliance 128

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 452

06 Parking and Transportation Demand
Management | 130

6.1. Overview 132

6.2. Development Policies and Actions 132

6.3. Parking and TDM Standards 140
07 Public Realm | 142

7.1. Overview 144

7.2. Development Policies and Actions 148

7.3. Public Realm Development Standards 152
08 Public Art | 180

8.1. Overview 182

8.2. Public Art Strategy 183

8.3. Development Policies and Actions 184

8.3. Public Art Standards 186
09 Sustainability and Resiliency | 188

9.1 Overview 190

9.2 Development Policies and Actions 190

9.3 Development Standards for Capital Improvements 191 10 Infrastructure and Utilities | 194

10.1 Overview 196

10.2 Development Policies and Actions 196

10.2 Development Standards for Public Realm Utilities 199 11 Administration and Implementation | 202

11.1 Plan Approval and Administration 204

11.2 Development Review 205

11.3 Streetscape Phasing 205

11.4 Financing Strategy 208

11.5 What Needs to Be Funded 210

11.6 Funding Sources and Financing Tools 210

11.7 Anticipated Fiscal Impacts 221

11.8 Financing Strategy Implementation Actions 222

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 453

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
San Carlos has exciting new opportunities to rethink its public spaces. This project transforms the Downtown into a lively, welcoming environment with vibrant urban plazas and tree-lined streets—meeting the community’s growing desire for outdoor gathering, walkability, and meaningful connection

PLANNING CONTEXT AND PROJECT

INITIATION
In 2021, the San Carlos City Council introduced the idea of creating a new plan for Downtown San Carlos. It had been 12 years since a vision statement and accompanying policies for the Downtown were established in the 2009 General Plan. In addition, the 2020 pandemic gave rise to new expectations for Downtown, including its management and operations. Around the same time, other efforts were at play, including creation of a brand-new Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan and a new Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan. Together, with the temporary closure of the 700 block of Laurel Street to pedestrian-only access, new ideas and a robust discussion about Laurel Street began to emerge. Thus, it became the ideal time to address the future of Laurel Street and its surroundings. For these reasons, in 2021 the San Carlos City Council established the following goal in its 2021 Strategic Plan:
“The City of San Carlos will work with residents, property owners, business owners, committees, commissions, the Chamber of Commerce, and all other interested members of the community to develop a plan to understand and ensure that the Downtown meets the needs of the community and businesses now and into the future.” Subsequently, the Downtown Specific Plan project began in spring 2022. Just over a year later, in the summer of 2023, preparation of a Downtown Streetscape Master Plan was added to the scope of work to address the calls from city leadership to fast-forward transformation of the Downtown streets.

UNDERSTANDING COMMUNITY

ASPIRATIONS IN A TIME OF CHANGE
Through an inclusive planning process, the City engaged residents, business owners, and stakeholders to uncover a shared vision for the future of Downtown. Community members voiced a strong desire for a more walkable, vibrant, and people-centered public realm—one that supports local businesses, fosters social connection, and reflects the unique character of San Carlos. These insights provided the foundation for

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 454

7Executive Summary
the Downtown Specific Plan and Streetscape Master Plan, ensuring that the community’s values and aspirations are at the heart of Downtown’s transformation.

ANTICIPATING GROWTH AND

EMBRACING INNOVATION
Downtown is poised to evolve in the face of technological and societal change, including the rise of autonomous vehicles, new mobility options, and shifting preferences in how people live, work, and gather. In addition, San Carlos’ Housing Element reflects a strategic focus on concentrating residential growth in walkable, transit-accessible areas such as the Downtown. The Downtown Specific Plan provides a flexible framework that supports growth, mobility, innovation, and adaptability over time, ensuring that Downtown remains resilient and relevant in the decades ahead.

LAYING THE GROUNDWORK FOR THE
FUTURE
In response to both community input and broader trends, the Downtown Specific Plan introduces a series of bold yet practical policy shifts— ranging from reimagined street uses and public spaces to refinements to Downtown’s zoning and design standards. These policy foundations will guide City decision-making and investment over the next 20 years, enabling San Carlos to thoughtfully manage change while staying true to the spirit of its community.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 455

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
8 DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION
The San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan (DTSP, referred to as Plan) is organized to serve a broad audience, including prospective developers, City staff, elected officials, and community members. The structure of the plan is designed to guide both long-term visioning and near-term decision-making, with each chapter building upon the previous to provide a comprehensive and user-friendly framework for Downtown development and improvements.

Chapter 1: Introduction and Plan Context
This chapter presents the purpose and objectives of the Specific Plan, its authority and scope, its relationship to other regulatory documents, as well as its location (referred to as the Plan Area), demographics, and the civic engagement process.

Chapter 2: Vision, Principles, and Framework for Urban
Design and Policy
This chapter presents the vision, guiding principles, and a framework for urban design and policy for private development and public space improvements within the Plan Area.

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
This chapter establishes a framework for the land uses and the physical form of Downtown San Carlos. This includes a land use map, land use designations, as well as a zoning map and zoning designations and corresponding land use regulations and development standards.

Chapter 4: Prosperity and Economic Development
This chapter outlines strategies to support a thriving Downtown economy.

It focuses on strengthening local businesses, attracting new investment, fostering a diverse mix of commercial uses, and enhancing San Carlos’s position as a regional destination. Policies aim to create a supportive environment for innovation, entrepreneurship, and inclusive economic growth.

Chapter 5: Mobility and Connectivity
This chapter presents a multimodal transportation approach that prioritizes safety, connectivity, and accessibility for all modes of travel.

The main emphasis is onimprovements to walking, bicycling, and transit infrastructure to achieve a balanced and multimodal street network.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 456

9Document Organization
Chapter 6: Parking and Transportation Demand
Management (TDM)
This chapter addresses Downtown parking management while promoting more sustainable travel behavior. It introduces strategies to optimize existing parking resources, reduce parking demand through TDM programs, and make possible a mode shift where there is more equity for transit users, pedestrians, and bicyclists—all while maintaining access for residents, visitors, and businesses. Policies and standards are established to address parking management, on-street parking and loading, off-street parking and loading, and bicycle parking.

Chapter 7: Public Realm
This chapter outlines a strategy that prioritizes a strong, well-designed public realm to create a socially vibrant and economically thriving Downtown with multi-functional streets, generous sidewalks, inviting plazas, and accessible green spaces. Together, these elements support community interaction, enhance walkability, and contribute to the overall appeal and success of Downtown San Carlos.

Chapter 8: Public Art
This chapter outlines a vision for integrating public art into the fabric of Downtown. It encourages collaboration with artists, local organizations, and the community to create engaging, site-specific works that reflect San Carlos’s identity, activate public spaces, and contribute to a vibrant cultural landscape.

Chapter 9: Sustainability and Resiliency
This chapter establishes goals and policies to advance environmental sustainability and climate resilience. It promotes green infrastructure, energy efficiency, water conservation, and climate adaptation strategies that reduce environmental impacts while preparing the Downtown for future challenges.

Chapter 10: Infrastructure and Utilities
This chapter provides a high-level summary of infrastructure improvements serving the Plan Area, including wet utilities and solid waste disposal.

Chapter 11: Administration and Implementation
This chapter describes the regulatory framework that will be utilized to implement the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan and recommends development phasing, financing, and implementation responsibilities.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 457

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
10 IF YOU ARE A COMMUNITY MEMBER
If you’re a member of our community seeking deeper insight into this Plan and its objectives, consider starting with Chapter 1. This section provides valuable context about Downtown San Carlos. Moving forward, Chapter 2 delves into the vision and guiding principles for the next 20 years. Additionally, Chapter 2 also outlines the framework aligning with the vision, and informing the policies, actions and development standards which are discussed in the following chapters.

HOW TO USE THE DOCUMENT

IF YOU ARE A PROPERTY OWNER OR

DEVELOPER
For property owners or developers interested in building within the Plan Area, it would be essential to acquaint themselves with the planning framework detailed in Chapter 2. Development applications and project designs shall be consistent with the development standards outlined in Chapter 3. Additionally, ensure compliance with standards and requirements for circulation and parking (Chapter 5 and 6), infrastructure improvements (Chapter 10), and streetscape and public realm design (Appendix A: San Carlos Downtown Streetscape Master Plan).

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 458

11How to Use the Document

IF YOU ARE A BUSINESS OWNER/

OPERATOR
For existing or prospective business owners/operators interested in establishing a business in Downtown San Carlos, it would be beneficial to learn about the vision and guiding principles set forth in Chapter 2. In addition, Chapter 4 provides policies and actions pertaining to economic development and prosperity. A menu of land use options and regulations are provided in Chapter 3. Additionally, streetscape and public realm design for future Downtown streetscape construction are provided in Appendix A: San Carlos Downtown Streetscape Master Plan and standards for outdoor dining or retail are provided in Chapter 7.

IF YOU WORK FOR THE CITY/ARE A

CITY OFFICIAL
If you work for the City of San Carlos or are a City official, you will be responsible for guiding future development in the Plan Area to be consistent with the regulatory framework as well as supporting the vision, goals, and policies outlined in this document. The ‘Implementation’ chapter (Chapter 1 1) provides specific tasks and responsibilities for implementing the Plan.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 459

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 460

01 INTRODUCTION

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 461

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
14 1.1 PURPOSE AND

OBJECTIVE OF THE

SPECIFIC PLAN
The San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan sets forth regulations for the future development, revitalization, and enhancement of Downtown San Carlos. It is intended to guide the long-term physical and economic evolution of the city’s Downtown core. Its primary objective is to provide a cohesive vision and framework for land use and urban design, prosperity and economic development, mobility and transportation, parking and Transportation Demand Management (TDM), public realm, public art, sustainability and resiliency, and infrastructure that reflects the community’s aspirations and responds to changing needs.

The Plan establishes clear goals, policies, and strategies to support a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly, inclusive, and economically- resilient Downtown. It aims to shape a lively Downtown core that reflects the unique character of San Carlos while supporting residential, commercial, and mixed-use opportunities that cater to the evolving needs of the community. It serves as a tool to shape new development, public realm improvements, and policy decisions in a way that enhances quality of life, preserves local character, and supports environmental sustainability.

Designed to be both visionary and actionable, the Specific Plan aims to align public and private investment with a unified vision for Downtown San Carlos.

1.2 SPECIFIC PLAN

AUTHORITY & SCOPE
California Government Code Section 65450 allows the City of San Carlos to adopt a specific plan to establish detailed goals, policies, and implementation items for the Downtown. The Downtown Specific Plan shall, consistent with Government Code Section 65451, contain land use and zoning maps, delineate essential facilities such as multimodal transportation and circulation networks, infrastructure – including water, drainage, sewer – and other essential facilities to support future growth and change in the Downtown over the next 20 years. In addition, standards for new development and implementation actions and financing strategies to support future planning programs and capital improvements are required by state law.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 462

Introduction
15 1.3 RELATIONSHIP TO

GENERAL PLAN
A comprehensive update to the San Carlos General Plan was adopted by the City Council in 2009 and amended most recently in May 2025 to reset the General Plan buildout projections to the year 2045. The San Carlos General Plan provides a framework to guide future land use and development decisions in the city. The policies, goals and objectives of the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan are required to be consistent with the overall vision of the General Plan, which is still true today as it was in 2008:
“San Carlos is a safe, beautiful, vibrant and livable community with tree-lined streets, open space, public art, high-quality architecture and state-of-the-art infrastructure. We enjoy a balance of residential, schools, retail, commercial and industrial uses and services that enhance our quality of life, support the fiscal health of the City and sustain a robust local economy. Downtown San Carlos is the heart of the community – a place to experience and savor the joys of daily life while enjoying a mix of stores and services.

Housing in San Carlos meets the needs of a diverse community. People who work in San Carlos can afford to live here. San Carlans are also able to work for employers located within the community. The City pursues creative solutions to economic development objectives and encourages innovative environmentally sustainable industries and businesses to locate and remain in San Carlos.

San Carlos is committed to sustainability. Sustainability promotes the use of resources in the present in a manner that does not compromise the choices and quality of life of future generations.

Mobility is part of the San Carlos way of life. It is precious to us, and we value our collective ability to freely and efficiently move about the city and region. The airport remains a unique part of our transportation system.

Sidewalks, paths and bikeways connect residential neighborhoods to all commercial areas, schools, parks and open space. Destinations and places in San Carlos are accessible using all forms of transportation.

Quality educational opportunities, at all levels, are available to the entire community. Our outstanding educational system, providing both formal and informal learning opportunities, enhances our quality of life.

Public service, charitable giving, volunteerism and citizen participation are integrated into public, non-profit and educational services offered.

Community care services are inclusive for seniors and citizens with mental and physical disabilities.

San Carlans enjoy a wide variety of private and public community venues, including parks, trails, community centers, arts, museums, cultural centers and clubs, faith-based places of worship and congregation, recreational facilities, sports and other civic and cultural events. We enjoy access to affordable and high-quality health services. The City’s government contributes to our distinctive community identity and sense of civic pride.” - City Council endorsed Vision Statement, February 11, 2008

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 463

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
16 1.4 RELATIONSHIP TO

CITYWIDE ZONING
The standards for development contained in the Downtown Specific Plan (Plan) draw from the City of San Carlos’ Municipal Code, Title 18, Zoning.

No changes to land use or zoning designations were made, except for one site at APN 050-072-380, consisting of approximately 1.1 acres and located at 1250 San Carlos Avenue. The land use and zoning change for this site allows greater development intensity, replacing the designation from Mixed-Use, Downtown Core, 100 (MU-DC-100) to Mixed-Use, Downtown, 120 (MU-D-120). All other changes to zoning regulations are refinements in nature, addressing the entitlement process, responding to State law, or minor adjustments to design and architectural features.

1.5 PREPARATION

PROCESS

INITIATION
In 2021, the San Carlos City Council set a strategic goal directing City staff to collaborate with the community and key stakeholders to develop a Specific Plan for the Downtown area. By spring 2022, a consultant team had been retained, a Citizens Advisory Committee was appointed by the Council, and the first public outreach meeting was held.

Over the next three years, City staff and consultants engaged residents, business owners, and other stakeholders in meaningful discussions about the future of Downtown San Carlos—exploring how it could better serve the community, local businesses, the workforce, and visitors. Topics ranged from urban design and land use to economic development and market trends.

The planning process also included the evaluation and refinement of several street redesign scenarios, with a focus on improving safety and supporting community programming.

On April 28, 2025, the City Council adopted the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, which the Downtown Specific Plan references and supports through corresponding policies.

REVIEW AND APPROVAL
On November 3, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Downtown Specific Plan (Resolution No. 2025-__).

Subsequently, on November 24, 2025, the City Council formally adopted the Downtown Specific Plan (Ordinance No. ___).

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 464

Introduction
17 1.6 CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL

QUALITY ACT (CEQA)

COMPLIANCE
An Addendum to the 2045 General Plan Reset Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (State Clearinghouse # 2024060037) was prepared by the City of San Carlos. The General Plan Reset EIR was certified and the mitigation measures within it were adopted by the City of San Carlos on Tuesday, May 27, 2025.

1.7 RELATIONSHIP TO

OTHER PLANS
As part of the analysis of the regulatory context, the following were reviewed to inform development of the Plan:

San Carlos Objective Development Standards (ODS): The ODS establish clear, measurable criteria for building form, site design, and architectural quality. Developed to streamline project review and ensure design consistency, these standards support high-quality, context- sensitive development while aligning with state housing laws. The ODS informed the Plan by elevating the design character for new office, mixed-use and multi-family developments.

San Carlos General Plan: The San Carlos General Plan acts as a comprehensive guide for the city’s long-term development and growth.

It outlines a broad framework for land use, housing, transportation, and environmental policies, shaping the community’s future. This plan is instrumental to inform the Plan, as it lays the foundation in shaping the community’s vision for its Downtown.

San Carlos Housing Element 2023-2031: The 6th Cycle, 2023- 2031, Housing Element is a key component that outlines strategies and policies to meet current and future housing needs of the community. It plays a crucial role in shaping the Plan in relation to housing development, affordability, and diversity.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 465

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
18 Climate Mitigation and Adaptation Plan (CMAP): San Carlos’ CMAP provides a roadmap for reducing greenhouse gas emissions while preparing the community for climate-related risks such as extreme heat, flooding, and sea level rise. For the Plan, the CMAP is especially important as it shapes strategies for sustainable growth in the city’s core—integrating energy efficiency, resilient infrastructure, and expanded low-carbon mobility choices. By aligning Downtown planning with CMAP goals, San Carlos can ensure new development not only enhances the vitality of the city center but also advances long-term resilience and climate action commitments.

East-side Innovation District Vision Plan: The East-side Innovation District Vision Plan aims to transform this area into a multi-modal neighborhood, integrating a mix of commercial uses including existing businesses and new science and technology enterprises. The plan emphasizes connectivity, community amenities, and a resilient and inclusive future. This plan is important in guiding key connections to the Downtown area to create synergy between San Carlos’ east side and the Downtown.

San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan: This plan, adopted in 2020, lays out a comprehensive strategy for enhancing bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure in San Carlos. It aims to improve safety, connectivity, and accessibility for all non-motorized modes of transport, promoting a healthier and more sustainable urban environment. The plan details critical strategies for the Downtown area that affect the integration of bicycle facilities into key Downtown streets.

San Carlos Zoning Map and Ordinance: San Carlos has a detailed zoning map that guides development and future land uses in the city.

San Carlos’ Zoning Ordinance is key for future city development, defining essential standards such as land use, density, building heights, step- backs and setbacks, and shaping the direction of the Plan in line with the city’s vision for future buildout. The zoning districts within the Downtown include MU-D-120, MU-DC-100, MU-N-50, MU-N-40, MU-SB-100, MU- SB-120, PK (Park), and Planned Developments 1, 14, 15, 19, 24, and 26.

Northeast Area Specific Plan: The Northeast Area Specific Plan envisions the transformation of underutilized industrial and commercial lands north of Downtown into a vibrant, mixed-use neighborhood with approximately 2,000 new homes, employment opportunities, and community amenities. A key connector from the northeast area to Downtown is the F Street underpass, which provides a critical connection to El Camino Real and strengthens links between the Northeast Area and the Downtown. By creating a walkable, transit-supportive district, the plan not only accommodates significant housing growth but also expands the community of residents, workers, and visitors who will rely on and contribute to the vitality of Downtown San Carlos.

Relevant polices from these plans and regulations that
informed the Downtown Specific Plan are summarized
below.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 466

Introduction
19 SAN CARLOS OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS (ODS)
Land Use and Character: The ODS supports a vibrant, mixed-use Downtown through clear standards for density, height, transitions, and active ground floor uses. Minimum and maximum densities in mixed-use districts (e.g., MU-DC-100: 75–100 units/net acre) reinforce the intent for compact, walkable development. Building placement and form standards (e.g., build-to lines, height transitions adjacent to RS zones) as well as standards for landscaping and open space ensure sensitivity to existing residential neighborhoods while accommodating growth.

Mobility and Connectivity: The ODS enhances pedestrian and multimodal connections through pedestrian-first standards, including widened walkways, curb cut restrictions on Laurel Street, and clear connections to transit and adjacent areas. Parking standards prioritize rear or underground placement, with minimum setbacks of 40 feet from the street, supporting a continuous and safe pedestrian realm.

Urban Design and Placemaking: The ODS establishes a high-quality public realm and architectural character through upper story stepback to preserve human-scale design. Similarly, massing breaks, base/middle/ top articulation, and roof variety requirements contribute to visual interest and architectural integrity.

Mixed-Use Development: ODS promotes integration of uses including minimum and maximum commercial FARs and active frontage standards to ensure economic activity and accessibility. Standards for residential- only development clarify how projects shall still align with objectives of the mixed-use districts.

Ground Floor Activation: Vital for a vibrant Downtown, the ODS supports active frontage along public streets, with transparent glazing, and distinctive entries. Prohibited curb cuts on Laurel Street ensure uninterrupted pedestrian pathways and minimize vehicle-pedestrian conflicts.

Public Realm Design: Design elements create welcoming and functional shared spaces with corner entries, pedestrian-scale facades, and public-facing amenities (e.g., seating, plazas, awnings) supporting interaction and placemaking.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 467

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
20 2045 SAN CARLOS GENERAL PLAN
Land Use and Character (Policies LU-2.1 to LU-2.7): These policies aim to preserve the unique character of Downtown San Carlos, maintaining its scale, walkable environment, and economic vitality by encouraging a mix of uses, including active ground-floor retail and upper- floor residential. Policies LU-2.2 and LU-2.3 emphasize maintaining the area’s unique character, especially along Laurel Street.

Parking and Transportation (Policies LU-2.16 to LU-2.20): The General Plan encourages strategies to enhance accessibility including parking management, improving bicycle and pedestrian access, and creating pedestrian linkages between parking areas and streets.

Urban Design and Connectivity (Policies LU-7.1, LU-7.3): There is a focus on integrating high-quality architectural design and enhancing the physical connections between neighborhoods and the Downtown, including walkable streets and public spaces.

Public Gathering Spaces (Policies LU-2.13, LU-2.15): These policies prioritize maintaining Downtown and Burton Park as central community gathering spaces and encourage the development of additional parks and public areas nearby.

Mixed-Use and Vibrancy (Policy LU-2.6): This policy supports active uses such as retail, restaurants, etc. along Laurel Street, with residential on upper floors to maintain vibrancy at the street level.

SAN CARLOS BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN
(ADOPTED 2020)
Pedestrian Safety and Accessibility: The plan emphasizes improvements for pedestrian safety, including enhancing visibility at crosswalks and intersections, installing pedestrian-scale lighting, and addressing areas with incomplete sidewalk networks. These measures are particularly important for Downtown streets like Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue.

Bikeway Network Expansion: The plan proposes the expansion of low-stress bikeways throughout San Carlos, including Downtown. This includes adding Class IV separated bikeways and buffered lanes to San Carlos 2030 General Plan

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 468

Introduction
21 improve safety and comfort for cyclists. Key corridors recommended for improvement include El Camino Real, Brittan, Arroyo to Commercial and San Carlos Avenue.

Wayfinding Program: Recommendations include implementing a comprehensive wayfinding program for bicyclists and a pedestrian- friendly Downtown, directing visitors to key destinations such as parks, transit stations, and commercial areas.

City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan

SAN CARLOS HOUSING ELEMENT
High-Quality, Higher-Density Housing (Goal HOU-2): The Housing Element promotes well-designed, higher-density multi-family housing near transit, especially in Downtown and along San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real. It supports mixed-use developments and high-quality design standards to enhance the area’s character.

Complete Streets and Connectivity (Policy HOU-2.2): Emphasis is placed on pedestrian and bicycle-friendly environments, consistent with the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, to ensure Downtown remains accessible and connected. The policy encourages developments that support the City’s Complete Streets Policy.

Affordable Housing Incentives (Actions HOU-2.2, HOU-3.2): The Housing Element suggests incentivizing affordable housing Downtown through density bonuses, relaxed development standards, and flexibility for small lot developments. These strategies align with goals to increase affordability and support diverse housing options.

Transportation and Parking (Action HOU-4.2): The Housing Element addresses parking management, and recognizes the removal of parking minimums near transit and Downtown, to encourage more housing options and support a pedestrian-oriented urban core.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 469

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
22 Figure 1.1 - Regional Significance of San Carlos

1.8 LOCATION AND

DEMOGRAPHICS
A. REGIONAL CONTEXT
Downtown San Carlos holds a significant position in the regional economic ecosystem, encompassing key drivers such as life science campuses, technology campuses, premier education and research clusters, and neighboring Downtowns on the peninsula. Its strategic location between US 101 and Interstate 280 provides direct north-south connectivity across the Bay Area. The Caltrain system enhances its accessibility, offering convenient rail service throughout the peninsula.

Additionally, the San Mateo and Dumbarton bridges facilitate east-west travel, linking San Carlos to the East Bay.

B. LOCAL (CITY) CONTEXT
The City of San Carlos sits between Belmont to the north and Redwood City to the south, framed by the foothills and open space of Edgewood County Park to the west and the San Francisco Baylands to the east.

Downtown San Carlos lies at the heart of the community along El Camino Real and the Caltrain corridor, providing the community’s primary civic, commercial, and cultural hub. The city’s location, midway between San Francisco and San José and adjacent to San Carlos Airport, positions it as both a regional gateway and a livable environment, balancing access to jobs, transit, and recreation.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 470

Introduction
23 Figure 1.2 - Local (City-level) Context.

N

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 471

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
24 Figure 1.3 D - D emographic Composition of San C arlos Downtown development that other communities in the Bay Area and across the nation can emulate.

D. DEMOGRAPHICS
As per the 2023 Housing Element, San Carlos is home to a diverse and affluent population of approximately 30,754 residents. The median age of 41 reflects a balanced mix of working professionals, retirees and families, creating a dynamic yet mature atmosphere. The city’s economic strength is evident in its median household income of $204,570 as of 2022.

White

63.2%

18.2%

6.86%

22.5%
Asian Foreign-bornTwo or More Races
10 50
30 70
20 60
40 80
C. THE PLAN AREA
Downtown San Carlos, within the regional economic ecosystem, holds pivotal importance locally, offering a charming main street atmosphere for the San Carlos community and neighboring visitors alike. The Plan Area is comprised of approximately 67.5 acres. This study area runs along the El Camino Real and Laurel Street corridors and is framed by Holly Street at the north end and Greenwood Avenue on the south end, with El Camino Real to the east and Walnut Street to the west. These boundaries capture the heart of the city’s Downtown, retail, and transit- oriented center. Laurel Street serves as the bustling spine and epicenter of activity, while the nearby US-101 interchanges at Holly Street and Brittan Avenue, along with the Caltrain Station at El Camino Real and San Carlos Avenue, ensure seamless accessibility and connectivity to and from Downtown.

El Camino Real, flanking the eastern perimeter of Downtown, presents significant potential for enhancement, poised to serve as a prominent gateway to Downtown and create distinct entry points along this vital regional corridor. The close proximity and connection to the Civic Center further enrich Downtown’s appeal, providing an opportunity to expand its identity by integrating social and civic activities.

This Specific Plan aims to enhance and celebrate the strong cultural identity of Downtown San Carlos. Leveraging its strategic physical location, the plan envisions a vibrant Downtown that serves as a model for dining, shopping, and social experiences. By fostering a thriving, dynamic community, Downtown San Carlos can set a new standard for

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 472

Introduction
25 Figure 1.4 - Downtown Specific Plan Area. Source: City of San Carlos.

The racial composition of the city is predominantly White (63.2%), followed by Asian (18.2%), and individuals identifying as Two or More Races (6.86%). This diversity is further enriched by a foreign-born population of 22.5%, contributing to the multicultural fabric of the city.

Housing in San Carlos is characterized by high property values, with the median home value around $1.9 million in 2020. This highlights the desirability of people to live and work around San Carlos making it a highly sought-after location to live, work, and to enjoy its local recreational opportunities.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 473

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
26 1.9 PLAN AREA CONTEXT
A. BRIEF HISTORY
The first known human inhabitants of the San Carlos area were the Ohlone, who were also known as the Costanoans. Historians believe that two sub-tribes existed in and around San Carlos, the Salson to the north of Belmont Creek and Lhamshin around the greater San Carlos area.

Spanish settlement of the area, beginning in 1769, led to the dispersal of the tribes to the Spanish missions and eventually the shrinking of the Ohlone as a cultural group.

Colonization of the San Francisco Bay Area accelerated in 1776 with the establishment of the Mission San Francisco de Asis. By the 1790s, the mission and other San Francisco establishments were being supported by small farms as far south as San Mateo. To encourage further settlement of the area, the Spanish government granted land to retired soldiers and men of influence. Don Jose Dario Arguello, commandante of the Presidios at San Francisco and later governor of Alta California, received a 35,000-acre land grant that encompassed what would later become Atherton, Belmont, Menlo Park, Redwood City, San Carlos and part of San Mateo.

Early attempts to develop San Carlos began in the late 1800s. These early efforts were generally not successful until 1917, when the Mercantile Trust Company hired Fred Hugh Drake, a prominent real estate and business promoter to oversee the development of the city.

Drake expanded infrastructure, established a chamber of commerce, encouraged the development of housing, and gave the city the motto “The City of Good Living.”
Downtown San Carlos has been the historic and cultural heart of the city since its early days as a planned subdivision in the late 1800s, when the San Carlos Land Company and later the San Carlos Park Syndicate laid out the original street grid prior to the construction of El Camino Real. Historic maps show the early subdivision pattern centered on the railroad, which quickly gave rise to a small-town business district and gathering place for commerce and community life.

Over time, Laurel Street and its surrounding blocks developed into a thriving commercial corridor, defined by small locally-owned shops, restaurants, and professional services that created the city’s enduring “small-town” identity. Today, Downtown continues that tradition while also serving as an employment hub. Some of the city’s largest employers (such as PG&E, Home Depot, Natera, and Check Point Software) have offices here, adding a daytime workforce and economic vitality to the Downtown.

Just two blocks away from the Downtown core, City Hall and the Civic Center anchor public life, while SamTrans has long been headquartered at 1250 San Carlos Avenue, serving as a major institutional presence.

In 2026, SamTrans will relocate to a new site in Millbrae, creating opportunities for the city to reimagine this centrally-located property in the years ahead.

Downtown has also remained a cultural hub for community celebrations and public life. At the time this Plan was adopted in 2025, San Carlos was celebrating its Centennial, marking 100 years since incorporation and reaffirming Downtown’s role as the symbolic and social center of the community.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 474

Introduction
27 Figure 1.5 - Views of Laurel Street, Top(L) – archival photo from 1954, top (R)- post 700 block closure from 2024,
bottom – rendering of proposed design from the San Carlos Downtown Streetscape Master Plan.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 475

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
28 B. PLAN AREA IN ACRES
The Plan Area consists of approximately 67.5 acres, which includes all land within the plan boundary as defined in the City’s Geographic Information System (GIS)—this total encompasses public rights-of-way such as streets, sidewalks, and other infrastructure. Of this, approximately

51.7 acres represent the actual parcel acreage, referring to the combined area of all privately and publicly owned parcels located within the Plan Area boundary.

C. EXISTING RESIDENCES AND MAJOR

LAND USES
The Plan Area currently includes approximately 557 residential units, contributing to the district’s mixed-use character and providing a built-in population to support other uses including 262,067 square feet of office space, 356,340 square feet of general commercial space, 154,891 square feet of restaurant uses, and 13,993 square feet of hotel space.

D. EXISTING BUSINESSES
Downtown San Carlos hosts a diverse mix of approximately 275 businesses, spanning food and beverage, specialty retail, personal services, and general commercial uses. While the COVID-19 pandemic resulted in the closure of 60 businesses and placed pressure on others, many businesses, especially casual dining restaurants and specialty retailers, have since shown strong signs of recovery or have moved into spaces vacated during the pandemic. However, not all sectors have rebounded equally, and some non-food & beverage businesses continue to face challenges related to foot traffic, access, and visibility. As the Figure 1.6 - Downtown San Carlos Streetscape (Top & Bottom)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 476

Introduction
29 district evolves, maintaining a balanced and resilient retail ecosystem will be essential to sustaining Downtown’s long-term economic vitality and community character.

E. EXISTING PARKING SPACES
The existing parking supply in the San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan Area is a mix of on-street, public off-street, and private off-street spaces, accommodating residents, employees, visitors, and transit riders.

According to the 2013 Downtown Parking Study, at the time of the parking survey, the northern portion of Downtown contained 2,217 parking spaces of which 672 are on-street, 376 are public off-street, and 1,169 are private off-street. However, the COVID-19 pandemic prompted the repurposing of 1 10 on-street spaces (91 of which were on Laurel Street) for outdoor dining parklets, and a section of Laurel Street was closed to vehicular traffic, making an additional 62 spaces inaccessible.

Most on-street spaces are time-restricted, predominantly with two-hour limits, while unrestricted spaces are found just outside the Plan Area.

Today, public off-street parking includes the Wheeler Parking Garage (256), SamTrans Parking Garage (259), and Caltrain Station lot (248), collectively offering approximately 760 spaces. A Downtown Employee Parking Permit Program designates 126 spaces on the second floor of the Wheeler Parking Garage and 76 spaces on top of the SamTrans Parking Garage for workers, though many remain underutilized. Private lots, which account for nearly 40% of the total supply, typically serve adjacent businesses and are often underused. Despite localized high demand—particularly on Laurel Street and in the Clark Plaza—overall parking occupancy was manageable pre-pandemic, suggesting that while certain hotspots face pressure, Downtown parking capacity as a whole remains adequate.

Figure 1.7 - L aurel Street 600 Block Sidewalk

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 477

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
30 1.10 COMMUNITY

ENGAGEMENT
The Downtown Specific Plan, launched by the City of San Carlos in early 2022, has been an inclusive and collaborative effort to shape a vibrant and livable Downtown. Informed by a series of workshops and online surveys, the City worked closely with the community, and the City Council appointed an 18-member Downtown Advisory Committee (DTAC) to develop a shared vision and guiding principles and provide input into the street and public space designs for the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan and the Downtown Specific Plan policies. The DTAC members represented business operators, property owners, older adults, community members with special needs, the City’s Economic Development Advisory Commission, Parks, Recreation and Culture Commission, Youth Advisory Council, the San Mateo County Chamber of Commerce, and the community at-large. The Downtown Streetscape Master Plan and Downtown Specific Plan processes, occurring between June 2022 and November 2025, were grounded in ongoing community engagement that gathered diverse perspectives from residents, business owners, youth, and other stakeholders. This iterative process ensured the proposed streetscape improvements and planning strategies and policies truly reflect the aspirations and needs of the San Carlos community.

Early community feedback emphasized the need for a more pedestrian- friendly environment, leading to proposals for wider sidewalks, more urban greenery, and flexible public spaces to accommodate a diverse mix of events and activities. Through multiple rounds of engagement from surveys, workshops, and study sessions, the themes of comfort, safety, and public space activation, improved Downtown connectivity, and balanced economic opportunity consistently emerged. Stakeholders helped refine ideas around integrating public amenities with support for local businesses, while concerns about parking and traffic flow were addressed through detailed analysis. As the project progressed, community feedback directly influenced adjustments to design, programming, and infrastructure, resulting in a thoughtful and inclusive roadmap for San Carlos’s Downtown transformation.

Photos 1-3: Ideation Workshop: Community Feedback on
the Opportunities, Constraints and the Concept Alternatives (Source: WRT)
1 9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 478

Introduction
31 DTAC Meeting - Welcome and
Orientation
June 2022
The first Downtown Advisory Committee (DTAC)
meeting served as a welcome and orientation for
members. The City and project team introduced
the planning process, outlined the goals of the
Downtown Specific Plan, and provided an overview
of the committee’s role in guiding the vision for the
future of Downtown San Carlos.

DTAC Meeting
July 2022
DTAC members picked up their binders, received
instructions on accessing future materials, and set
up their official City email accounts. The meeting
concluded with an outdoor ice cream social and
icebreaker, where members shared what they value
about Downtown and their hopes for its future.

Stakeholder Focus Groups Interviews
August 2022
The City hosted focus groups with key stakeholders
to understand challenges and needs. Topics
included infrastructure (RethinkWaste, Cal Water,
Mid-Peninsula Water District), mobility (SV Bicycle
Coalition, SamTrans, Caltrans, San Carlos Bikes,
Healthy Cities Tutoring), seniors/children/special
needs (Adult Community Center, Arbor Bay School,
2 3

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 479

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
32 Downtown Community Workshop #2
February 2023
The second workshop drew 70 participants to explore
ideas for the 700 block of Laurel Street, new plazas
and parks, and reimagined alleyways. Input was
collected through live polling, Q&A, and discussion.

Coffee and Comments Open House
March 2023
Over 70 community members joined an open house
at the San Carlos Library to review three preliminary
Downtown concepts, including improvements to
Laurel Street, Harrington Park, alleyways, and a
potential new plaza.

Community Survey 2
March 2023
A follow-up online survey captured feedback on the
same concepts discussed in February’s workshop and
March’s open house, with results informing design
ideas for Laurel Street, Harrington Park, alleyways,
and a new plaza.

Downtown Specific Plan – Status
Update and Progress Report
April 17 and April 24, 2023
City staff presented progress on the Downtown’s
20-year vision to the Planning & Transportation
Art BIAS), and Downtown business and events (City
Parks, Chamber of Commerce).

Community Survey 1
August 2022
An interactive mapping survey gathered 470
comments on mobility, streetscape, gathering
spaces, allowable uses, and other topics.

Downtown Community Workshop #1
August 2022
About 150 community members joined the first
virtual workshop to learn about the Downtown
Specific Plan, review existing conditions, and share
input through live polling and breakout discussions.

DTAC Meeting
September 2022
Staff gave a presentation on existing conditions
and market analysis overview. DTAC conducted an
Interactive exercise and staff gave a recap of the
Downtown Community Workshop
DTAC Meeting
January 2023
Presentation by consultant team on the draft
concepts for the 700 Block Laurel Street, followed
by DTAC discussion.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 480

Introduction
33 Commission and City Council. Foundational concepts
included Laurel Street closure, alley improvements,
Harrington Park design, and a new plaza.

Downtown Business Stakeholder
Meeting
May 2023
Following the Council’s decision to permanently close
the 700 block of Laurel Street, City staff met with 23
representatives from Downtown businesses at Stamp
Bar & Grill to discuss opportunities and next steps.

DTAC Meeting
June 2023
Building on City Council’s input from April 24, city staff shared project update, community feedback and
work in progress, followed by DTAC comments and
discussion.

Streetscape Master Plan Kick-Off
Meeting
September 2023
Building on City Council’s April 24, 2023, direction
to permanently close the 700 block of Laurel Street,
the Streetscape Master Plan process began with a
kick-off meeting to establish a foundation for the
Plan. This meeting introduced the project team and
stakeholders to the plan’s scope, objectives, and
early design considerations.

Photo: Project Team Conducting PRCC Meeting (Source: WRT)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 481

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
34 and design elements. Feedback informed the
development of design concepts for key streets
within the Plan Area.

EDAC & PRCC Meetings
January–February 2024
The Economic Development Advisory Commission
(EDAC) explored the potential business benefits of
proposed improvements, while the Parks, Recreation,
and Culture Commission (PRCC) addressed
integration with park areas, cultural features, and
logistics for large events like the Farmers’ Market
and Art & Wine Faire.

Interdepartmental Meeting
February 2024
This session ensured continued coordination across
departments as detailed design strategies for street
cross-sections, alleys, and public spaces progressed.

Youth Advisory Council (YAC) Meeting
March 2024
Engaging with the YAC brought forward youth
perspectives on street activation, active transportation, safety, and recreational programming.

Interdepartmental Meeting
November 2023
These sessions gathered input from multiple City
departments to ensure alignment and coordination
across City services.

DTAC Meeting
November 2023
The Downtown Advisory Committee (DTAC) reviewed
the revised vision, guiding principles, and initial
design alternatives. Discussions focused on mobility
strategies, public space design, and streetscape
improvements to reinforce Downtown San Carlos
as the community’s living room.

Virtual & In-Person Ideation Workshop
December 2023
Hosted both online and in-person, this workshop
invited community members to share ideas for
enhancing the Downtown streetscape. Participants
emphasized greenery, flexible gathering spaces, safe
and accessible movement, and programming that
supports both daily life and special events.

Online Survey
December 2023
A citywide survey captured broader community input
on streetscape priorities, pedestrian accessibility,

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 482

Introduction
35 DTAC Meeting
March 2024
This meeting further refined feedback on public
space programming, street designs, and mobility
strategies.

Focus Group Meetings
February - May 2024
Targeted sessions with Art Bias, SamTrans, the Silicon
Valley Bicycle Coalition, and the Fire Department
addressed technical issues related to transit
operations, bicycle infrastructure, and emergency
access.

Planning and Transportation
Commission (PTC) Meeting
May 2024
The PTC reviewed DTAC-endorsed street designs,
focusing on alignment with long-term planning and
transportation policy.

City Council Meeting
June 2024
The City Council reviewed the plan’s progress, shared
feedback on street and public space design, and
recommended refinements based on community
and Council input.

Photo: Youth Council during hands-on workshop session at YAC Meeting (Source: WRT)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 483

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
36 Interdepartmental Meeting - Goals and
Policies
March 2025
City departments convened to align on the goals
and policy framework for the Downtown San Carlos
Specific Plan, ensuring consistency with citywide
priorities and operational feasibility.

DTAC Meeting - Goals and Policies
March 2025
The DTAC reviewed and provided feedback on draft
goals and policies, emphasizing livability, walkability, and support for local businesses.

Planning and Transportation
Commission (PTC) and Council
Meetings
April 2025
The Planning and Transportation Commission
reviewed and City Council adopted the final
Streetscape Master Plan on April 28, 2025.

DTAC Meeting – Parking
April 2025
The committee focused on the on-street parking,
way-finding and parking management strategies,
discussing the balance between flexible use of
Online Survey
August 2024
A second citywide survey gathered input on materials,
planting, paving, and street furnishings to refine the
streetscape’s character and experience.

Downtown Business Stakeholder
Meeting
August 2024
This meeting addressed concerns from local
businesses, including outdoor dining, access, and
parking, ensuring the plan supports vibrant economic
activity.

All Commissions Meeting
September 2024
A joint session with DTAC, EDAC, PRCC, YAC, and
Downtown Subcommittee members ensured the
plan reflected broad, cross-departmental input and
community priorities.

City Council Meeting
September 2024
The City Council formally endorsed the final street
designs through Resolution No. 2024-1 1 1, marking
a key milestone in the plan’s development.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 484

Introduction
37 parking spaces, shared parking models, and business
access needs.

DTAC Meeting - Specific Plan Policies
and Standards
June 3, 2025
The committee reviewed draft goals, policies, actions,
and standards for the Downtown Specific Plan and
provided feedback critical to implementing the
vision of making Downtown San Carlos as a vibrant,
pedestrian-friendly, safe, charming, futuristic, and
accessible destination.

Interdepartmental Meeting - Specific
Plan
June 6, 2025
City departments met to review the goals, policies,
standards, and actions and provide feedback to
strengthen the recommendations in the Specific Plan.

PTC Study Session
June 16, 2025
The Planning & Transportation Commission received
a staff presentation and provided direction on the
draft Downtown Specific Plan.

Photo: Ideation Workshop (Source: WRT)
Photo: Pilot Demonstration of Sidewalk Widths (Source: WRT)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 485

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
38 City Council Hearing
November 24, 2025
The City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-__
and Ordinance No. ___ adopting the Downtown
Specific Plan
City Council Study Session
June 23, 2025
The City Council discussed the Downtown Specific
Plan, offering feedback and guidance on proposed
policies and design standards.

Downtown Business Stakeholder
Meeting
August 7, 2025
Staff went door-to-door inviting restaurant
operators and retailers to a meeting at Stamp Bar
& Grill. Fourteen representatives from the business
community shared feedback on proposed outdoor
dining and retail display requirements for the
Downtown Specific Plan.

City Council Study Session
August 25, 2025
The City Council discussed the Downtown Specific
Plan, offering feedback and guidance on proposed
policies and design standards.

Planning and Transportation
Commission Hearing
November 03, 2025
Planning and Transportation Commission adopted
Resolution No. 2025 –XX recommending the City
Council adopt the Downtown Specific Plan.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 486

Introduction
39 Photo: DTAC Meeting (Source: City of San Carlos)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 487

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 488

02 VISION, PRINCIPLES,

AND FRAMEWORK

FOR URBAN DESIGN

AND POLICY

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 489

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
42 2.1 VISION STATEMENT
The San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan establishes a strong vision for San Carlos’ Downtown providing the essential ingredients to fulfill its role as San Carlos’ “living room”. As the Vision Statement proclaims, “Downtown is the heart of San Carlos that provides a vibrant, pedestrian-friendly, safe, charming, futuristic, and accessible destination for the community and strongly expresses its unique culture and heritage. It is a place for celebration and gathering that offers diverse and authentic experiences through a draw of food, retail, services, art and music in a visually attractive environment for the growing community. Downtown is an inclusive place with easy access for all, opportunities for housing and businesses of all types, and inviting spaces for all users. Downtown San Carlos is a sustainable district, with landscape that supports ecological and community health & well-being.” The Vision Statement was developed based on input from the DTAC, stakeholders, community members, and City decision makers through an extensive civic engagement process.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 490

Introduction
43 A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO A SUCCESSFUL

DOWNTOWN
Downtown San Carlos is more than just a geographical location. It is the City’s commercial and cultural hub, characterized by a high concentration of businesses, jobs, cultural institutions, and social infrastructure. As the “beating heart” of San Carlos, the Downtown serves as both a neighborhood and a destination—a place where community identity, economic vitality, and shared experiences converge.

To honor the Downtown, the Specific Plan establishes a clear Urban Design Framework composed of four critical layers or “Guiding Principles”:

Mobility & Connectivity, Character & Identity and Downtown Vibrancy with an over-arching focus on Equity & Resilience. This approach brings all the tools of making a successful Downtown to bear considering social, economic and experiential factors, and developing strategies that integrate these components seamlessly.

The framework recognizes that while individual needs matter, they must be translated into the needs of the entire community—both today and for future generations through 2045. The Plan is forward-looking, acknowledging that San Carlos is growing and that more people will be living near Downtown over the next 20 years. These future residents and workers will require safe streets, wider sidewalks, accessible bicycle lanes, reliable transit connections, and a full range of services to support daily life.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 491

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
44 2.2 GUIDING PRINCIPLES
Based on the Downtown vision statement, Guiding Principles for Placemaking & Identity, Mobility & Connectivity, Downtown Vibrancy, and Equity & Resilience help to frame the Downtown Specific Plan and Streetscape Master Plan goals, policies, actions and standards.

2.3 URBAN DESIGN FRAMEWORK
In order to achieve the intent behind the Guiding Principles, an urban design framework was developed with four layers – one for each of the Guiding Principles.

EQUITY AND RESILIENCE
The Plan Area is envisioned as an equitable and resilient place; one that offers social, economic, housing, and recreational opportunities at varying levels of affordability for all users while preparing for the realities of a changing climate. A balanced mix of shopping, dining, personal services, community amenities, jobs, housing, and public spaces will ensure that Downtown continues to serve the diverse needs of the community, welcoming everyone.

Equitable access to Downtown will be reinforced through a full range of mobility choices, making it easy to arrive by foot, bicycle, transit, or car.

Streetscape and public realm design will incorporate green infrastructure and urban greening strategies that address urban heat and flood risk while also enhancing comfort, shade, and visual character.

High standards for sustainable design will guide new development, encouraging buildings to use energy and water efficiently while reducing carbon emissions. Greening strategies and open spaces will be prioritized not only for their ecological function and water conservation benefits, but also for their role in connecting people to the natural environment and enhancing community well-being.

Together, these strategies will support the City’s broader climate goals:
minimizing auto trips to and from Downtown, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and expanding access to affordable electric vehicle charging— while reinforcing Downtown as a vibrant, inclusive, and sustainable heart of San Carlos.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 492

Introduction
45 FIGURE 2.1 - V ision and Guiding Principles

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 493

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
46 PLACEMAKING AND IDENTITY FRAMEWORK
The Placemaking and Identity framework identifies a Downtown core centering around the Pedestrian Priority Zone – the connection from the San Carlos Caltrain Station, up the 1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Ave to Laurel Street and down the 600, 700 and 800 blocks with the center of the new Centennial Plaza midway on the closed 700 block of Laurel Street. Three other Downtown-area sub-districts are defined as the Civic Center, Mid-Laurel and SoLa (short for South Laurel). All of these districts offer opportunities for streetscape placemaking that can lend each a distinct identity. The 500 block of Laurel Street retains its existing configuration, with streetscape enhancements focused on improving the pedestrian experience through the addition of trees and wider, more walkable sidewalks. El Camino Real also has the potential to reinforce placemaking strategies for the Downtown by providing pedestrian-scaled frontage along the Downtown edge as well as protected bicycle lanes, and safer crossings, and marking important entry points into the Downtown core.

FIGURE 2.2 - Placemaking and I dentity Framework
Legend

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 494

Introduction
47 9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 495

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
48 DOWNTOWN VIBRANCY FRAMEWORK
The Downtown Vibrancy framework establishes priorities for activation with the Downtown core being the highest level of activation through programmable space as well as interaction with ground floor commercial uses. “Community Activator” spaces offer additional opportunity for events, pop-up businesses and other flexible programming.

Figure 2.3 - D owntown Vibrancy Framework
Legend

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 496

Introduction
49 9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 497

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
50 Figure 2.4 - M obility and Connectivity Framework

MOBILITY & CONNECTIVITY FRAMEWORK
The Mobility & Connectivity framework shows a fully developed network of Downtown streets. Each has its place in a circulation hierarchy balancing all the various modes of mobility (pedestrian, bicycle, transit, vehicle, etc.).

Pedestrian circulation is prioritized along the 1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue and the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street; vehicular and bicycle access is accommodated on San Carlos Avenue and surrounding streets. For cars, the network prioritizes efficient access to parking facilities, circumventing the Downtown core to the greatest extent possible.

To accomplish all this (and as shown in Figure 2.4), each street and street type is rebalanced with its appropriate emphasis. This includes the Downtown pedestrian priority routes, priority bicycle routes, and strategies to allow San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real to become more pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly, and overall, to allow vehicles to flow more efficiently around the Downtown core and to parking areas.

Legend

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 498

Introduction
51 9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 499

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
52 2.4 GOALS AND POLICIES FRAMEWORK
The goals and policy framework will guide the evolution of Downtown San Carlos into a more vibrant, inclusive, and resilient district over the coming decades. Rooted in community values and informed by technical analysis, these policies are organized into key thematic areas that reflect the multifaceted nature of Downtown San Carlos.

Together, they provide a comprehensive blueprint for shaping land use, urban design, mobility, economic development, public space, sustainability, and infrastructure. Each policy area builds upon the vision established through the planning process and offers direction for decision-making, implementation, and investment.

This framework ensures that future growth and change contribute to a cohesive, livable, and economically-robust Downtown that meets the needs of both current and future San Carlos residents, workers, and visitors.

The following chapters discuss in detail the policy areas listed below:
◆ Land Use and Urban Design
◆ Prosperity and Economic Development
◆ Mobility and Connectivity
◆ Parking and Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
◆ Public Realm
◆ Public Art
◆ Sustainability and Resiliency
◆ Infrastructure and Utilities
◆ Administration and Implementation

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 500

Introduction
53 Photo: Laurel Street 700 Block, Street Mural (Source: City of San Carlos)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 501

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 502

03 LAND USE AND

URBAN DESIGN

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 503

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
56 3.1 OVERVIEW
This chapter provides direction on land use and the character of development within the Plan Area by establishing policies, actions, and standards that support the vision for a more inclusive Downtown, one that offers housing, jobs, placemaking, and community amenities. The Downtown Specific Plan seeks to cultivate a distinct identity shaped by its built form and unique experiences. It aims to foster a vibrant, safe, and attractive environment for residents and visitors alike, while supporting local businesses and promoting economic vitality. The Land Use and Urban Design chapter is closely integrated with the Public Realm, Mobility and Transportation, Parking and Transportation Demand Management, and Prosperity and Economic development chapters, which function together as a cohesive system.

Goal:

San Carlos Downtown is a vital social place for the community, with a strong, distinct character and identity, rooted in its culture, history, and context. This identity is defined by thoughtful land use, the physical form of the built environment, and the overall experience of the Downtown area.

3.2 LAND USE
The San Carlos General Plan establishes a strong foundation for the Downtown area by designating medium- to high-density land uses within the Downtown Specific Plan area. Building upon this foundation, the Downtown Specific Plan provides refined direction for implementing the General Plan’s land use vision. Chapter 2 of the Downtown Specific Plan introduced an Urban Design Framework for Equity and Resilience, Placemaking and Identity, Downtown Vibrancy, and Mobility and Connectivity, which integrates placemaking strategies and economic development with land use planning.

Land uses within the Specific Plan boundary remain consistent with the General Plan Land Use Map, except for the SamTrans site at 1250 San Carlos Avenue, which was changed from Mixed-Use, 75-100 DUs/Acre to Mixed-Use, 90-120 DUs/Acre. The Downtown Specific Plan area is comprised by a good portion of Plan Area 2, and a small portion of Plan Area 3; these Plan Areas are delineated in Figure 31: Planning Areas of the General Plan, Land Use Element. Notably, the Downtown Specific Plan area is included in San Carlos’ Priority Development Area (PDA), which promotes bringing “transit, jobs and housing together in Downtowns, along main streets and around rail stations.” The San Carlos Caltrain Station is located within Plan Area 2, in close proximity to Downtown San Carlos,and is recognized as part of a Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) corridor, emphasizing higher-density housing, job growth, and enhanced multi-modal transportation options.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 504

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
57 Figure 3.1- Land Use Map from General Plan 2045, for the Downtown Specific Plan Area.

N

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 505

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
58 The Downtown core is generally defined as the 1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue and the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street. The Downtown core is primarily commercial, featuring a mix of restaurants, personal services, and small retail shops. The Specific Plan seeks to preserve and enhance the Downtown core’s role as a vibrant hub for commerce and social interaction by encouraging high- activation ground floor uses and dynamic programming. These active uses include retail, restaurants, and other pedestrian-oriented businesses that contribute to a lively, walkable environment and that serve daily needs.

While nearly all the parcels in the Plan Area (except Harrington Park) have a mixed-use zoning designation, El Camino Real and San Carlos Avenue accommodate the highest density residential development. The Plan Area’s close proximity to Caltrain makes it an ideal location for a rich mix of uses in a compact, transit-accessible setting.

The Specific Plan also reimagines El Camino Real, particularly the blocks within the Downtown core, as the “front door” to Downtown. This vision supports high-activation uses and business incubation, supported by mixed-use designations with high-density residential that fosters a walkable, pedestrian-friendly atmosphere and transforms El Camino Real from an auto-centric corridor to a multimodal grand boulevard. South of Arroyo Avenue, neighborhood retail mixed-use zoning designations encourage small-format retail and continued main street activation.

South of Arroyo Avenue and west of Laurel Street consist of low-density residential neighborhoods.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 506

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
59 to accommodate significant net new development approximately:
◆ 168,672 sq. ft. of new office space; and
◆ 92,721 sq. ft. of general commercial; and
◆ 60,445 sq. ft. of restaurant uses; and
◆ 103,951 sq. ft. of hotel space; and
◆ 1,565 new residential units.

The build-out analysis anticipates approximately 1,565 new residential units over the planning horizon (i.e. to 2045), aligning with two Housing Element cycles—the 6th cycle (2023–2031) and 7th cycle (2032– 2040)—plus an additional five years of projected development through 2045.

A total of 557 existing residential units were accounted for at the writing of this Plan. It is assumed that 82 of the existing residential units will be replaced with new development. As a result, only 475 existing units are counted toward the total build-out figure (557 total existing units minus 82 redeveloped units).

The total existing office square footage excludes 152,656 sq. ft. occupied by the SamTrans building, based on the assumption that these parcels will be redeveloped into a mixed-use project, potentially incorporating a smaller office component integrated with residential uses.

3.3 FUTURE DEVELOP-

MENT POTENTIAL
The future development potential within the Plan area to the year 2045 was developed by evaluating each parcel against a defined set of criteria, including:

Ownership Patterns: Parcels with shared ownership, particularly adjacent ones, were considered more likely to redevelop, with City-owned parcels and alleys excluded from this assumption.

Utilization Levels: Parcels utilizing less than twenty five percent (25%) of their total area or allowable Floor Area Ratio (FAR) were identified as underutilized and therefore more likely to be redeveloped.

Housing Element Designation: Parcels identified as housing opportunity sites in the 2023–2031 Housing Element were prioritized for redevelopment potential.

Planned or Approved Projects: Sites with existing development approvals or projects already underway were excluded from further redevelopment consideration.

Historic Significance: Parcels with notable historic value were considered less likely to redevelop, consistent with General Plan policies that support adaptive reuse and preservation of historic character.

This analysis formed the basis of the build-out projections, summarized in Table 3.1. Over the 2025–2045 planning horizon, the area is projected

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 507

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
60 TABLE 3.1

SUMMARY OF BUILD-OUT PROJECTIONS DURING THE PLAN HORIZON (2025-2045)

LAND USE
TOTAL

EXISTING
AREA
(SQ. FT.)
TOTAL NO. OF
EXISTING RES. UNITS
(CUMULATIVE OF

PARCELS NOT LIKELY

TO REDEVELOP)

NET NEW AREA
IN 20 YEARS
(SQ. FT.)

TOTAL AREA
IN 20 YEARS
(SQ. FT.)

NOTES &

ASSUMPTIONS
2045

PROJECTIONS
Office 262,067 N/A 163,702 425,769
Total existing office square
footage excludes 152,656
sq. Ft/ of SamTrans building,
assuming impending
redevelopment of those
parcels into a mixed-use
development, which could
include a small office
integrated with residential.

Existing res. Units number
includes built units, under
construction units, and
approved units.

The build-out analysis projects
about the same number
of residential units (757)
over two cycles of Housing
Element Update - 6th cycle
(2023-31) + 7th cycle (2032-
2040) + development over
additional 5 years (through
2045)
The build-out analysis
assumes that 82 existing units
will be redeveloped with new
ones. Therefore no. of existing
units included in the overall
total units is 557-82=475.
212,885 Sq. Ft.

General Commercial 356,340 N/A 92,721 449,061 224,531 Sq. Ft.

Restaurant 154,891 N/A 60,445 215,336 107,668 Sq. Ft.

Hotel 13,993 N/A 103,951 117,944 58,972 Sq. Ft.

Residential
(# of units) 557 475 1,565 2,040 2,040 (# of Units)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 508

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
61 3.4 ZONING DISTRICTS

WITHIN THE SPECIFIC

PLAN AREA
The Plan Area includes the seven Zoning Districts derived and consistent with Chapter 18.05.010 Purpose of Mixed-Use Districts, Title 18 Zoning, San Carlos Municipal Code.

MU-DC-100 Mixed-Use Downtown Core:

This district is intended to maintain the pedestrian-oriented environment in the heart of San Carlos’s Downtown, with a focus on ground-level active storefronts and pedestrian- and transit-oriented development that encourages pedestrian activity and supports multimodal transportation.

Physical form is regulated to reflect the urban character of the Downtown core. Allowable uses include retail, commercial, and office uses, as well as residential development of up to one hundred (100) units per net acre.

MU-D-120 Mixed-Use Downtown:

This district is intended to maintain the pedestrian-oriented environment around the Downtown core and connect surrounding districts. Physical form is regulated to provide shopfront buildings that frame the street and support pedestrian- and transit-oriented development that encourages pedestrian activity and supports multi-modal transportation. Allowable uses include retail, commercial, and office uses, as well as residential development of up to one hundred twenty (120) units per net acre.

MU-SB-100 Mixed-Use South Boulevard:

This district is intended to facilitate the transformation of the southeastern portion of Laurel Street into a mixed-use corridor. The physical form varies to transition from MU-N-40 west of Laurel Street to MU-SB-120 on El Camino Real. This district allows a mix of residential development of up to one hundred (100) units per net acre and retail and commercial uses.

MU-SB-120 Mixed-Use South Boulevard:

This district is intended to facilitate the transformation of the southern portion of El Camino Real into a multimodal, mixed-use corridor. The physical form varies to reflect the urban character of the El Camino Real corridor. This district allows a mix of residential development of up to one hundred twenty (120) units per net acre and retail and commercial uses, as well as hotels and other commercial uses oriented towards a regional market.

MU-N-40 Neighborhood Mixed-Use:

This district is intended to provide an appropriate transition from mixed- use areas into residential neighborhoods. This district allows a mix of residential and commercial development appropriately scaled to ensure a residential physical form to relate to adjacent single-family residential neighborhoods. Allowable uses include retail, commercial, and office uses, as well as residential development of up to forty (40) units per net acre.

MU-N-50 Neighborhood Mixed-Use:

This district is intended to provide an appropriate transition from mixed- use areas into residential neighborhoods. This district allows a mix of

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 509

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
62 residential and commercial development appropriately scaled to ensure a residential physical form to relate to adjacent single-family residential neighborhoods. Allowable uses include retail, commercial, and office uses, as well as residential development of up to fifty (50) units per net acre.

Planned Development (PD):

A PD District enables coordinated development across one or more properties with standards tailored to site conditions. It offers flexibility in regulations (e.g., setbacks, building height, FAR, and open space), supports General and Specific Plan policies, promotes efficient public services, encourages creative and amenity-rich design, and ensures public health and safety. PD Districts are also used for adopting and administering specific plans under the Government Code.

Park (PK):

This classification is intended to maintain areas for active and passive public parks, including outdoor and indoor recreation such as playing fields, playgrounds, community centers, and other appropriate recreational uses.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 510

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
63 Figure 3.2 - Zoning Map for the Downtown Specific Plan Area.

N

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 511

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
64 3.5 DEVELOPMENT

POLICIES AND ACTIONS
LU-1: Establish the Plan Area as a pedestrian-oriented, vibrant mixed- use district and a community and cultural hub.

LU-2: Develop a unified identity for the Plan Area that also honors its historic significance.

LU-3: Create a distinct identity for each sub-area within the Plan Area:

The Downtown Core, Mid-Laurel, and South Laurel (SoLa), by prioritizing appropriate land uses, development character and intensity, and public realm design.

LU-4: Maximize development potential within the Plan Area, encouraging a mix of uses that create vitality and vibrancy by offering diverse employment opportunities, support various businesses, provide community amenities and social gathering spaces, and encourage new residential development that can add to the customer base and support activation throughout the day and night.

LU-5: Coordinate with SamTrans to align the redevelopment of its headquarters parcel with a mix of land uses including housing, services, public space, and other community-serving amenities.

LU-6: Encourage a mix of uses that promote convenience, economic vitality, fiscal stability, safety and a high quality of life.

Action LU-6A: To ensure the Downtown remains vibrant
with a mix of businesses and offerings for the San Carlos community, conduct additional research and evaluation of the City’s Formula Business Ordinance and consider removing constraints.

Action LU-6B: To ensure Downtown vibrancy, develop a
program to monitor the mix of Downtown businesses on a
regular basis, identify needs, and make adjustments to land use regulations as necessary.

Action LU-6C: Review the definition of Formula Businesses and Personal Services and amend as necessary.

LU-7. Promote a population in the Plan Area to better support Downtown businesses.

LU-8: The Downtown core (1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue and the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street) shall seek to provide a mix of uses, including dining, retail, and everyday services and needs, to become a Downtown that supports the local residents, workforce and businesses.

LU-9: Enhance the identity and function of Laurel Street as the “heart of San Carlos”, prioritizing a unique experience on the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street and 1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue and transforming these areas into the “living room” of the community.

LU-10: Support land use and distinct design strategies for the 1 100– 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue that establish this segment of the Downtown core as a multimodal gateway and welcoming entrance to Downtown.

LU-11: Promote and support a mix of uses that draw visitors and the local community into the Downtown as a place to do business, shop, dine, gather, and have easy access to everyday needs on the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street and the 1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 512

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
65 LU-12: Enhance the experience along El Camino Real through infill development with active ground-floor uses and high-quality architecture and street greening, thereby establishing it as the front door to Downtown and as an active transportation-friendly gateway at key intersections such as San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real, Arroyo Avenue and El Camino Real, and Brittan Avenue and El Camino Real.

LU-13: Ensure zoning regulations are adaptive by making adjustments as necessary in response to new challenges, opportunities, policy directives, and state law, while preserving long-term consistency with the Downtown vision.

Action LU-13: Pursuant to Senate Bill 79, effective July 1, 2026 and signed by the Governor on (Oct 10, 2025) San
Carlos will initiate amendments to its zoning ordinance to make development standards consistent with the provisions of the bill.

LU-14: Prioritize ground-floor activation (through food and beverage, retail and other activating uses) along the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street and the 1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue and at key intersections of El Camino Real with Arroyo Avenue and Brittan Avenue.

LU-15: Ensure that all mixed-use buildings with retail and service commercial uses on the ground floor maintain consistent ground-floor design to enhance the pedestrian experience and create a cohesive public realm.

LU-16: Encourage high-performing retail spaces on the ground floor that support successful retail activity and the economic stability of the Downtown area.

LU-17: Ground-floor public spaces along the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street and 1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue are encouraged to incorporate outdoor dining and retail displays, including but not limited to bistro seating, awnings, and umbrellas to create visible, inviting, human-scaled and comfortable spaces that activate the Downtown core.

LU-18: Establish development standards that improve the visual quality of development, creating a unified, distinctive, and attractive character along Downtown streets within the Plan Area.

LU-19: Promote and encourage secondary business entrances along the alleyways; secondary entrances should be clean, maintained, organized, landscaped, well-lit, and with enclosed trash receptacles to create a welcoming presence acknowledging the need for safe pedestrian circulation, wayfinding and ease of access.

LU-20: Taller buildings introduce complex fire life safety requirements including higher fire-flows, smoke control, emergency elevator access, fire command centers, and standpipe systems per California Fire Code §907–912. All developments 4+ stories must be reviewed for enhanced life safety systems.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 513

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
66 3.6 LAND USE

REGULATIONS
Table 3.2 prescribes the land use regulations for the mixed-use and park districts within the Downtown Specific Plan Area. The regulations for each district are established by letter designations as follows:
“P” designates permitted uses.
“M” designates use classifications that are permitted after review and approval of a minor use permit by the Zoning Administrator. “C” designates use classifications that are permitted after review and approval of a conditional use permit by the Planning and Transportation Commission.
“(#)” Numbers in parentheses refer to specific limitations listed at the end of the table.
“-” Designates uses that are not permitted.

Use classifications listed in the table below are defined in Chapter 18.40, Use Classifications of the San Carlos Municipal Code. In cases where a specific land use or activity is not defined, the Director shall assign the land use or activity to a classification that is substantially similar in character. Use classifications and subclassifications not listed in the table or not found to be substantially similar to the uses below are prohibited.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 514

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
67 Table 3.2
LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR THE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA. ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS REFER TO SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS CONTAINED IN TITLE 18, ZONING.

USE CLASSIFI-

CATIONS
MU-
DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 PK ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS Residential Uses
Residential Housing Types See subclassifications below
Multi-Unit Residential P(1) P P P P P -
Accessory Dwelling Unit P P P P P P - Only if it includes a proposed or existing dwelling
Junior Accessory Dwelling
Unit
- - - - - - -
Elderly and Long-Term
Care
- - - - - - -
Family Child Care See subclassifications below
Small P P P P P P -
Large P P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.090,
Day care centers and large family
child care homes
Residential Care Facilities See subclassifications below General - M(1) - - - - - See SCMC Section 18.23.200,
Residential care facilities
Limited P P P P P P -
Senior - M(1) - - - - - See SCMC Section 18.23.200,
Residential care facilities
Single Room Occupancy C(1) C(1) C(1) C C C - See SCMC Section 18.23.220, Single room occupancy hotels
Transitional Housing P P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.250, Transitional and supportive
housing

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 515

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
68 Table 3.2
LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR THE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA. ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS REFER TO SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS CONTAINED IN TITLE 18, ZONING.

USE CLASSIFI-

CATIONS
MU-
DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 PK ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS Supportive Housing P P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.250, Transitional and supportive
housing
Public and Semi-Public Uses
Colleges and Trade
Schools, Public or Private
- - P P - - -
Community Assembly, Less
Than 3,500 Square Feet
P P P P M M C See SCMC Section 18.23.080,
Community assembly facilities
Community Assembly,
3,500 Square Feet or
More
- C M M - - C
Community Garden P P P P P P P
Cultural Institutions C P M M M M c
Day Care Centers - P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.090, Day care
Emergency Shelter C - P P - - - See SCMC Section 18.23.1 10, Emergency shelters
Government Offices C P P P P P -
Hospitals and Clinics - P P P - - -
Instructional Services P (16) P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Park and Recreation
Facilities, Public

P P P P P P P
Public Safety Facilities - C C C C C -
Schools, Public or Private - - C C C C -
Social Service Facilities - - C C C C -
Cemeteries

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 516

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
69 Table 3.2
LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR THE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA. ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS REFER TO SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS CONTAINED IN TITLE 18, ZONING.

USE CLASSIFI-

CATIONS
MU-
DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 PK ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS Commercial Uses
Animal Care, Sales and
Services
See subclassifications below
Grooming and Pet Stores C P P P P(2) P(2) - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Veterinary Services - C(2) C(2) C(2) C(2) C(2) -
Artists’ Studios M P P P P(2) P(2) -
Automobile/Vehicle Sales
and Services
See subclassifications below
Automobile Rentals - - C(4) C(4) - - - See SCMC Section 18.23.050, Automobile/vehicle sales and
services, Automobile/Vehicle Sales
and Leasing
- P(3, 4) P(3,4) P(3, 4) - - -
Automobile/Vehicle
Washing
- - C(3) C(3) - - -
Service Station - - C(3) C(3) - - -
Banks and Financial
Institutions
P(5) P P P M(6) M(6) - See SCMC Section 18.23.260,
Formula business uses
Business Services - P(6) P(6) P(6) P(6) P(6) -
Commercial Entertainment and Recreation See subclassifications below Cinema/Theaters C(13) C(13) C(13) C(13) - - - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Small-Scale - C(13) C(13) C(13) - - -
Large-Scale - C(13) - - - - -

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 517

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
70 Table 3.2
LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR THE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA. ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS REFER TO SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS CONTAINED IN TITLE 18, ZONING.

USE CLASSIFI-

CATIONS
MU-
DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 PK ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS Eating and Drinking
Establishments
See subclassifications below
Bars/Night Clubs/
Lounges
C(13) C(13) C(13) C(13) - - - See Chapter 7 , Outdoor Dining Standards, and SCMC Section

18.23.260, Formula business uses
Full Service P(13) P(13) P(13) P(13) C ( 7, 13) C ( 7, 13) - Convenience P(14) P(14) P(14) P(14) C(7) C(7) - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Food Preparation P P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Funeral Parlors and
Mortuaries
- C C C - - -
Lodging See subclassifications below
Bed and Breakfast P P P P P P - See SCMC Sections 18.23.070, Bed and breakfast lodging, and

18.23.260, Formula business uses
Hotels and Motels P(8, 13) P(13) P(13) P(13) M(, 13) M(13) - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Nurseries and Garden
Centers
P(6, 15) P ( 7, 16) P(6, 15) P(6, 15) P(6, 15) P(6, 15) - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Offices See subclassifications below
Business and Professional P(9) P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Medical and Dental P(9) P P P P(6) P(6) - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Walk-In Clientele P P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 518

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
71 Table 3.2
LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR THE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA. ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS REFER TO SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS CONTAINED IN TITLE 18, ZONING.

USE CLASSIFI-

CATIONS
MU-
DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 PK ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS Personal Services
General Personal Services P(10) P P P P P - See SCMC Sections 18.23.170, Personal services, and 18.23.260,
Formula business uses
Tattoo or Body
Modification Parlor
- - M M - - -
Retail Sales See subclassifications below
Cannabis Dispensary - - - - - - -
Convenience Markets P(14) P(14) P P P(14) P - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Food and Beverage Sales P(14) P(14) P P P(12) P(12) - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
General Retail P P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.260, Formula business uses
Price Point Retail - - M M - - -
Second-Hand Store - - P P P P -
Retail Establishments
Selling Ammunition or
Firearms
- - - - - - -
Industrial Uses
Recycling Facility, Reverse
Vending Machine
- - P P P - - See SCMC Section 18.23.190,
Recycling facilities
Transportation, Communication, and Utilities Uses
Communication Facilities See subclassifications below
Antenna and Transmission
Towers
See Chapter 18.24, Wireless Telecommunications Facilities

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 519

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
72 Table 3.2
LAND USE REGULATIONS FOR THE DISTRICTS WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN AREA. ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS REFER TO SAN CARLOS MUNICIPAL CODE SECTIONS CONTAINED IN TITLE 18, ZONING.

USE CLASSIFI-

CATIONS
MU-
DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 PK ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS Facilities within Buildings - P P P P P -
Transportation Passenger
Terminals
- - - - - - -
Utilities, Minor P P P P P P P
Other Applicable Types
Accessory Uses and
Structures
See SCMC Section 18.23.030, Accessory uses, and SCMC Section 18.15.020, Accessory buildings and structures
See Chapter 18.24, Wireless
Telecommunications Facilities
Home Occupations P P P P P P - See SCMC Section 18.23.120, Home occupations
Drive-In and Drive-
Through Facilities
Prohibited in MU districts; see SCMC Section 18.23.100, Drive-in and drive-through facilities Prohibited in MU districts; see Section 18.23.100, Drive-in and
drive-through facilities
Nonconforming Use See SCMC Section18.19, Nonconforming Uses, Structures, and Lots Temporary Use See SCMC Section 18.31, Temporary Use Permits

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 520

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
73 SPECIFIC LIMITATIONS:
1) Not allowed on the ground floor along Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue frontages.
2) Provided that such use shall be completely enclosed in a building of soundproof construction.
3) For properties without frontage along El Camino Real, only retail sales consistent with the definition of “general retail” and five thousand (5,000) square feet or less.
4) Must be within a fully enclosed structure.
5) Limited to establishments with a gross floor area of two thousand five hundred (2,500) square feet or less. Limited to the ground floor of a building located on an interior lot a minimum of five hundred (500) feet from any other financial institution.
6) Limited to establishments with a gross floor area of five thousand (5,000) square feet or less.
7) Permitted after review and approval of a minor use permit by the Zoning Administrator if less than twelve (12) chairs.
8) Limited to upper stories unless at least fifty percent (50%) of ground floor street frontage is occupied by food service use.
9) Limited to upper stories.
10) Permitted if existing. Additions to existing facilities and establishment of new facilities are subject to San Carlos Municipal Code Section

18.23.170, Personal services.
11) Limited to neighborhood groceries with less than one thousand five hundred (1,500) square feet of sales area when located along East San Carlos Avenue.
12) The sale of alcoholic beverages is prohibited.
13) Not permitted on sites where the shopfront of such nonresidential use faces onto R zoning districts.
14) Minor use permit required for sites adjacent to R districts. 15) Uses that require a commercial cannabis business permit are not permitted.
16) Instructional Services shall be required to submit a Pick-Up and Drop-Off Plan, subject to review and approval by the Planning Director. The Planning Director may refer items directly to the Zoning Administrator when in his/her/their opinion the public interest would be better served by having the Zoning Administrator conduct review and approval of Instructional Services.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 521

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
74 3.7 PRIVATE PROPERTY

DEVELOPMENT STAN-
DARDS
Development standards help achieve the land use and urban design framework. This section includes development standards that are applicable to all parcels within the Specific Plan area. The Downtown Specific Plan area shall also comply with the development standards in the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Title 18 of the Municipal Code) unless otherwise specified herein. If there is any conflict between Title 18 of the Municipal Code and the Downtown Specific Plan, then the Downtown Specific Plan shall prevail.

A. LOT, DENSITY, AND FLOOR AREA

RATIO (FAR) STANDARDS
Additional regulations are denoted in a right-hand column. Individual letters refer to subsections that directly follow the table. The numbers in each illustration in this section refer to corresponding regulations in the “#” column in the associated Table 3.3.

INCREASED FAR FOR MIXED-USE BUILDINGS
The maximum allowable FAR may be increased by up to ten percent (10%) for buildings that contain a mix of residential and non-residential uses through the provision of one (1) or more of the following elements beyond what is otherwise required, subject to conditional use permit approval:
1) Provision of off-site improvements. This may include off-site amenities and/or infrastructure (other than standard requirements and improvements) such as right-of-way or streetscape improvements or funding for parks, public safety facilities, libraries, senior centers, community meeting rooms, childcare, or recreation or other community benefits. The Director may require a fiscal and economic impact report, or equivalent, as part of the conditional use permit application.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 522

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
75 Table 3.3

LOT, DENSITY, AND FLOOR AREA RATIO(FAR) STANDARDS FOR MU DISTRICTS WITHIN THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA

DISTRICT MU-
DC-100
MU-
D-120
MU-
SB-100
MU-
SB-120
MU-N-
40 MU-
N-50 PK ADDITIONAL

REGULATIONS
Maximum Density (units/net acre) 100 120 100 120 40 50 NA Minimum Density (units/net acre) 75 90 75 90 30 38 NA
Minimum Lot Size (sq. ft.) 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 NA Minimum Lot Width (ft.) 50 50 50 50 50 50 NA
Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Maximum Floor Area (FAR) for Commercial-Only Development

2.5(A) 3.0(A) 3.0(A) 3.0(A) 3.00(A) 2.5(A) NA
Minimum and Maximum Commercial Floor Area in Mixed-Use
Development: When commercial floor area is provided within a mixed- use development, the commercial space shall be subject to the minimum and maximum commercial FAR as specified.

0.1 minimum - 0.7 maximum
Residential Only Development n/a (no maximum FAR) NA
Residential Floor Area in Mixed-Use Development n/a (no maximum FAR) NA

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 523

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
76 B. BUILDING PLACEMENT STANDARDS
Where MU district is adjacent to RS district, the following standards shall apply:
1) Rear Transitions, MU districts
For the MU zoning district, the maximum height at the rear setback line shall be twenty-eight (28) feet maximum to match the RS district height maximum. Above twenty-eight (28) feet, a stepback of at least six (6) feet shall be provided from the story below. If the building is five (5) stories or more, the upper stories shall step back from the fourth story by at least another six (6) feet.
2) Side Setbacks, MU districts
The maximum height at the side setback line adjacent to a RS district shall be twenty-eight (28) feet maximum to match the RS district height maximum. Above twenty-eight (28) feet, a step back of at least six (6) feet shall be provided from the story below. If the building is five (5) stories or more, the upper stories shall step back from the fourth story by at least another six (6) feet.
3) Landscape Buffers.

A minimum ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer area shall be provided along all rear boundaries adjacent to an RS district (Type 2 - Refer to SCMC Section 18.18.050 Landscaping Tables 18.18.050-B (1) and Table 18.18.050-B (2) for buffer types). Trees and shrubs shall be planted continuously in the landscape buffer along the site’s property Figure 3.3 - Rear Transitional Standards — MU Districts.

Figure 3.4 - Side Transitional Standards — MU Districts.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 524

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
77 Table 3.4

BUILDING PLACEMENT STANDARDS FOR MU DISTRICTS WITHIN THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA DISTRICT MU-DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 PK ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS #
Street Frontage Setbacks, Commercial and Mixed-Use Development (ft) Laurel Street
(600, 700, and
800 blocks only)
Property line; except that the ground floor shall be set back a minimum of 4.5 ft. 0 ft (C) 1 Laurel Street Property line or 10 ft from curb (the greater) for all MU districts 0 ft El Camino Real Property line or 20 ft from curb (the greater) for all MU districts along El Camino Real No encroachment including steps or ramps shall be permitted within the 20 ft setback zone 0 ft (C) 1
San Carlos
Avenue
Property line or 15
ft from curb (the
greater)
n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 ft (C) 1
Brittan Avenue
and Arroyo
Avenue
5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
0 ft
Elm Street 0 min, 10 feet max n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 ft 1 All Other Streets 5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
5 ft min
15 ft max*
0 ft 1
Interior Side (ft) 0 ft min; 10 ft min adjacent to RS district for all MU districts 0 ft (B) 2 Rear (ft) 0 ft min; 20 ft min adjacent to RS district for all MU districts 0 ft (B) 3 Corner Build-
Area
20 ft.; Ground floor building facades shall be in accordance with the required setbacks within 20 ft. of every corner. Ground floor publicly accessible plazas may be at the street corner instead, provided buildings are built to the edge of the publicly accessible plaza. 4 9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 525

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
78 line to create privacy screening between properties. Selected species shall be of a fast-growing, evergreen variety and capable of attaining a minimum height of twenty-five (25) feet at maturity. Trees shall be planted at a minimum interval of twenty to thirty (20-30) feet on center (with a five (5) foot gap between canopies) depending on the species and mature canopy width or growth habitat. Continuous shrubbery planting is required between the trees and shall be a minimum six (6) feet in height when planted. Species selection and placement shall be approved by the City Arborist. A minimum of fifteen (15) gallon planting stock shall be utilized, unless otherwise approved by the City Arborist. a) Type 2 Buffers: Shall be ten (10) feet wide. For every one hundred (100) feet in rear property line length a minimum of five (5) trees and six (6) shrubs shall be planted.
b) For other landscaping buffer requirements, refer to Section

18.18.050 Areas to be landscaped.
c) All new proposed tree species shall adhere to the City’s most recent preferred tree list or as specified by the City Arborist.

Where conflict between this section and landscaping requirements of SCMC Section 18.18.050 occurs, the provisions of this Chapter shall apply.

Figure 3.5 - Building Placement Key - MU Districts

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 526

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
79 C. BUILD-TO LINE.

Buildings shall be constructed at the required setback for at least eighty percent (80%) of their linear street frontage. The remaining twenty percent (20%) of linear street frontage shall be further set back by at least two (2) feet, including building massing breaks, recessed entrances, service or utility areas, and/or vehicle access areas. The area between the building and property line shall be paved in the MU-DC-100 zoning district, so that it functions as a wider public sidewalk. Any area between the building face and the property line/back of public sidewalk shall be paved with the same material as the sidewalk.

D. STREET FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS.

Landscaping and/or planters along ground-floor residential unit frontages, where permitted (see Table 3.2, Land Use Regulations) and along facades without windows and openings may be established to reduce the visual impact of blank walls, provided the landscaping and/or planters do not reduce the sidewalk pedestrian clearance width below the pedestrian zone requirement. Features including entry courtyards, plazas, building entries, and outdoor eating and display areas located between the property line and the building count towards the eighty percent (80%) build-to line requirement provided the buildings are built to the edge of these features.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 527

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
80 E. HEIGHT LIMITATIONS AND
EXCEPTIONS.
1) Vertical Projections. A parapet wall, cornice or sloping roof may project up to five (5) feet above the height limit (see SCMC Section

18.15.060 for vertical projection allowances).
2) Towers. If the project site is greater than fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet, a tower or other projecting architectural elements may extend up to ten (10) feet above the top of the roof; provided, that the square footage of the element(s) does not total more than ten percent (10%) of the building footprint. The area above the uppermost permitted floor of the element(s) shall not be habitable. a) The composition of the tower element shall be balanced, where the width of the tower has a proportional relationship to the height of the tower.
b) The tower element shall be proportional to rest of the building. c) The roof shall be sloped and include architectural detailing, such as a cornice or eave.

Figure 3.6 - Building Heights Key - MU Districts.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 528

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
81 Table 3.5

BUILDING HEIGHT STANDARDS FOR MU DISTRICTS WITHIN THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA DISTRICT MU-DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 PK ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS #
Building Height
Maximum (ft.)
50 75 60 75 75 50; 30 (D); See SCMC
Section 18.15.060,
Height and height
exceptions
1 Building
Maximum
Adjacent to RS
District
28 ft. along the rear and side setback lines (see 2., Rear and Side Transitions MU Districts) Above 28 ft., the building shall step back by at least 6 ft. If the building is five (5) or more stories, the fifth story and above shall step back from the fourth story by at least another 6 ft. -
Building Minimum
(ft.)
n/a 25; Applicable
only along
Laurel Street
and El Camino
Real frontages
n/a - 2
Maximum Stories 4 6 5 6 4; 3 along E.

San Carlos Ave.
in MU-N-40
district
- 4
Ground Floor
Uses (ft.)
14 min and 16
max
14 min and 16
max
12 12 12 - 3

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 529

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
82 F. UPPER STORY STEPBACKS.

Upper story stepbacks help mitigate building height by providing visual and spatial relief more consistent with the context of San Carlos. As illustrated in Figure 3.7, the stepbacks shall be allowed to be used as balconies or shared outdoor space. All required upper story stepbacks shall occur for at least seventy percent (70%) of the facade length. ◆ Laurel Street. The third and fourth stories of all street-facing facades along the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street shall be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from the second story below. ◆ Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Stories. The fourth, fifth, and sixth stories of all street-facing facades shall be stepped back a minimum of six (6) feet from the third story below, except as provided in this section. ◆ On the 1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue, all four (4) stories may align; no upper story stepback is required, except as provided in this section.
◆ Along the 1200 block of San Carlos Avenue, at the site located at 1250 San Carlos Avenue (APN 050-072-380), the fifth and sixth stories shall be stepped back a minimum of six (6) feet from the fourth story below.
◆ El Camino Real. All six (6) stories may align; no upper story stepback is required.

G. GROUND FLOOR ACTIVATION
◆ Ground floor uses in a mixed-use building shall occupy at least sixty-five percent (65%) of the public street frontage including any side street frontage (Refer Figure 3.8). Commercial ground floor uses shall have a depth of at least 12 feet (12 ft.) without walls or partitions, providing unobstructed views into the commercial space. Distinct awning, canopy, or entry treatments shall be provided for commercial uses to distinguish from residential uses. Different treatments shall include, but are not limited to, doorway materials and recesses, signage, and paving in front of commercial entries.
◆ New development in mixed-use zoning districts shall comply with the window and transparency requirements of Chapter 3, 3.6 Windows and Ground Floor Transparency and shall incorporate at least one (1) of the Public-Semi Public and Commercial uses, as set forth in Table

3.2, Land Use Regulations, within the ground floor along public street frontages.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 530

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
83 Min 65% building frontage
FIGURE 3.7 - U pper Story Setbacks - MU Districts. FIGURE 3.8 - G round Floor Active Uses - MU Districts MU-N-40 MU-DC-100

LAUREL STREET
600,700 AND 800 BLOCKS
MU-N-50
10’0”
MU-D-120
1200 Block

SAN CARLOS AVENUE
MU-DC-100
MU-SB-120

EL CAMINO REAL

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 531

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
84 H. BUILDING PROJECTIONS AND
MAXIMUM LENGTH OF BLANK WALL.

For MU-DC-100, On 600, 700 and 800 blocks of Laurel Street, the building projections such as bay windows etc. shall be 4.5 feet from the building façade. Building projections shall maintain a minimum fourteen (14) foot clearance above sidewalk grade This 4.5 feet may vary based on the current façade line and property line. Awnings, overhangs, and canopies shall maintain a minimum eight (8) foot clearance above the sidewalk.

No building projection, awning, overhang, or canopy shall be ground supported, e.g. with posts or other structural elements within the public right-of-way.

For the depth of the projections, the following regulations shall apply:
◆ On 600 and 800 blocks of Laurel and 1 100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue, the maximum projection shall be 8 feet
◆ On 700 Block of Laurel the maximum projection shall be 9 feet ◆ On El Camino Real, the projection shall be a maximum of 5 feet Blank walls along the building’s street-facing facades shall not exceed ten (10) feet in length along the ground floor and twenty-five (25) feet in length along the upper floors. If a blank wall area includes vertical interior spaces such as elevator towers or trash chutes, a change in building material, color, or texture, or a change in facade plane depth shall be provided if those vertical interior spaces would otherwise cause the blank wall to exceed the length limits.

Figure 3.9 - Projections And Blank Walls - MU Districts

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 532

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
85 Table 3.6

BUILDING FORM STANDARDS FOR MU DISTRICTS WITHIN THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA DISTRICT MU-DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS #
Maximum Length of
Blank Wall (ft.)
Ground floor: 10
Upper floors: 25
25 25 25 25 25 1
Maximum Building
Projections (ft.)
On 600, 700 and
800 blocks of
Laurel Street:

4.5 feet* from the
building façade,
14 feet above
sidewalk grade.
* 4.5 feet may
vary based on the
current façade
line and property
line.

Building projections such as bay windows etc. shall be within the property line, 14 feet above sidewalk grade.
(F) 2
Awnings and
Overhangs
Projections (ft.)
Not required, but if awnings or overhangs are provided, the following regulations shall apply:

Minimum 8 feet above sidewalk grade and the maximum projection shall be measured from the building face
On 600 and 800 blocks of Laurel Street and 1100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos Avenue, the maximum projection shall be 8 feet
On 700 Block of Laurel the projection shall be a maximum of 9 feet On El Camino Real, the projection shall be a maximum of 5 feet 3 9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 533

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
86 Table 3.7

PARKING AND LOADING LOCATION STANDARDS FOR MU DISTRICTS WITHIN THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA DISTRICT MU-DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS #
Setback from Street
Property Line
40 ft.; buildings shall be placed as close to the street as possible, with parking underground, behind a building, or on the rear of the site.
1 (G)
Setback from
Buildings
8 ft: 5 ft walkway plus 3 ft landscaping; applicable only to above-ground parking. 2 Access Location Along the 1100 and 1200 blocks of San Carlos, and the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street, access to parking and loading shall be restricted to the alley. For all other locations, access shall be from the alley where provided, or a side street if infeasible 3 Curb Cuts Prohibited on the
1100 and 1200
blocks of San
Carlos Avenue
and the 600,
700, and 800
blocks of Laurel
Street
Curb cuts shall be minimized and shall be placed in areas least likely to impede pedestrian circulation.

Loading/Service
Area
Side or rear of lot; must be screened from public ROW. 4 Parking Podium Maximum height of a parking podium visible from the street is 5 feet above finished grade. 5

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 534

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
87 Figure 3.10 - Parking and Loading Areas in MU Districts I. PARKING AND LOADING LOCATION
Parking shall be located forty (40) feet from the street-facing property line, subject to the following requirements.
1) Underground and Partially Submerged Parking. Parking completely or partially underground may match the setbacks of the main structure.

The maximum height of a parking podium visible from a street is five (5) feet from finished grade.
2) Surface Parking. Above-ground surface parking is allowed within forty (40) feet from a street-facing property line only when all of the following occur:
a) Buildings are built to setback standards and as close to the public sidewalk as feasible; and the parking area is at least eight (8) feet from the public right-of-way, screened from adjacent properties with a minimum four (4) foot tall wall, hedges or landscaping, or a trellis; and a maximum of three and half feet (3.5 ft.) along public- rights-of-way; and minimum of a six (6) foot tall wall, hedges or landscaping, or trellis along side and rear property lines. Fences shall meet the requirements pursuant to SCMC 18.15.040. b) The site is constrained such that underground, partially submerged, or surface parking located more than forty (40) feet from the street frontage is not feasible due to site-specific circumstances.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 535

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
88 J. PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY DESIGN
1) Walkways shall have a minimum clear unobstructed width of five (5) feet, shall be hard-surfaced, and paved with concrete, stone, tile, brick, or comparable material.
2) Where a required walkway or sidewalks crosses driveways, parking areas, or loading areas, it shall be clearly identifiable through the use of a raised crosswalk, a different paving material, or similar method to prevent conflict between pedestrians and vehicles. Where a required walkway is parallel and adjacent to an auto travel lane, it must be raised or separated from the auto travel lane by a raised curb at least four (4) inches high, bollards, or another physical barrier.

K. COMMERCIAL LOADING AND/OR

SERVICE AREAS
Commercial loading or service spaces for private use shall not be located along the primary street frontage and shall be located at the rear of the structure. Loading and/or service areas may occur along the street when the subject property fronts only one street and where there is no onsite vehicle circulation and/or access point.

L. LANDSCAPING AND RESIDENTIAL

OPEN SPACE
Landscaping and residential open space shall be provided as required as set forth by Landscaping and Open Space Standards in Table 3.8.

Residential open space shall be usable space and may be common, private, or a combination thereof. Common open space areas consist of courtyards, plazas, terraces, lawns, patios, swimming pools, barbecue areas, playgrounds, or other usable outdoor areas. Private open areas consist of balconies, decks, patios, porches, or fenced yards. Private open areas, when provided, shall provide a minimum six (6) foot by six (6) foot clear area and be directly accessed from a residential unit. Landscaping consists of planting areas, stormwater management features, treed areas, gardens, and other vegetation areas not otherwise considered common or private open space.
a) Usability: A surface shall be provided that allows convenient use for outdoor living and/or recreation. Such a surface may be any practicable combination of lawn, garden, flagstone, wood planking, concrete, or other serviceable, dust-free surfacing. The maximum slope shall not exceed ten percent (10%).
b) Accessibility: The private open space shall be accessible to only one (1) living unit by a doorway to a habitable room or hallway The common open space shall be accessible to the living units on the lot. It shall be served by any stairway or other access way qualifying as an egress facility from a habitable room.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 536

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
89 Table 3.8

LANDSCAPING AND OPEN SPACES STANDARDS FOR MU DISTRICTS WITHIN THE SPECIFIC PLAN AREA DISTRICT MU-DC-100 MU-D-120 MU-SB-100 MU-SB-120 MU-N-40 MU-N-50 ADDITIONAL REGULATIONS Minimum Common
and/ or Private Open
Space (% of site)
10% min.; applicable only to mixed-use and nonresidential development on lots greater than 15,000 square feet; and applicable to developments that are 100% residential regardless of lot size.

Landscaped portions of common open space may also be counted toward the minimum 10% of site landscaping requirement.

Minimum Usable
Area for Common
Open Space (sq. ft.)
200 square feet minimum, with a minimum width of 10 feet Minimum Usable
Area for Private
Open Space (sq.ft.)
36 square feet minimum, with minimum 6 foot depth

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 537

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
90 M. STREET, ALLEY AND PLAZA
PRESERVATION.

Existing public right-of-way(s) shall be preserved. Public right-of-way shall not be eliminated or abandoned.

N. STREET FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENTS.

New developments shall provide street frontage improvements in accordance with the following:
1) Between the Property Line and the Parking Zone, or Travel Lane, or Bus Lane, or Bicycle Lane.
a) Sidewalks: Sidewalks shall be provided if none already exist or if the existing sidewalks are in poor condition as determined by the Public Works Director. Sidewalks shall be designed consistent with the standards established in the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan. The sidewalks standards may be further refined in accordance with the City Council–approved street design during the implementation phase, as detailed in each street’s Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E). If minimum sidewalk dimensions cannot be accommodated in the public right-of-way, a sidewalk easement shall be required.
b) Street Furniture: Trash receptacles, benches, bike racks, and other street furniture shall be consistent with the standards established in the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan. These elements may be further refined in accordance with the City Council–approved street design during the implementation phase, as detailed in each street’s Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E). These elements shall be located outside of the required pedestrian zone. c) Street Lights: Pedestrian-scaled street lights, including attachments from which banners may be hung, shall be located as set forth in the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, or as set forth in accordance with the City Council–approved street design during the implementation phase, as detailed in each street’s Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E).
d) Street Trees: Street trees and grates shall be required as set forth in the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, or in accordance with the City Council–approved street design during the implementation phase, as detailed in each street’s Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E).When trees cannot be accommodated due to site constraints a minor deviation may be requested subject to the discretion of the City Arborist and Director.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 538

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
91 Main Building Entrance - Partially Recessed
Canopies and awnings project
3’-0” max into public ROW
Canopies and
awnings 8’-0” min
clear within public
ROW
4’-0” min
covered area
Sidewalk
Property Line
Figure 3.11- Main Building Entrances - MU Districts
Main Building Entrance - Recessed
4’-0” min
covered area
Awnings project 3’-0”
max into public ROW
Sidewalk
Awnings 8’-0”
min clear
within public
ROW
Property Line
Main Building Entrance - Canopied
Canopies and
awnings 8’-0”
min clear
within public
ROW
4’-0” min
covered area
Sidewalk
Property Line
Canopies and awnings project
3’-0” max into public ROW
1) Main Building Entrance: Recessed
2) Main Building Entrance: Partially Recessed
3) Main Building Entrance:
21 3

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 539

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
92 2) Use of Frontage Area Adjacent to the Property Line.

Except where occupied by a building, entryways, or areas required for vehicle access, the portion of the site extending ten (10) feet inward from the front property line shall be designed to accommodate active outdoor uses along at least sixty-five percent (65%) of the site’s street frontage. Unless otherwise specified below, acceptable uses in this area include, but are not limited to:
a) Outdoor dining or retail display areas
b) Paved public space that functions as an extension of the public sidewalk (required in the MU-DC-100 Zoning District),
c) Stormwater management planters,
d) Landscaping,
e) Public art installations, and/or
f) Pedestrian amenities such as benches or other outdoor seating O. BUILDING ENTRANCES.
1) Orientation.

All ground-floor commercial and residential uses located along a public right-of-way shall orient their primary entrances toward the right-of-way to promote an active and pedestrian-friendly streetscape. 2) Main Building Entrances.

If a building has a main entrance to a commercial space or shared residential lobby, the main entrance shall incorporate either a canopy, recess, or combination thereof. A covered area a minimum of four (4) feet deep shall be provided. Refer to canopy projection standards. Entry canopies, stoops, patios, and balconies shall be constructed of all- weather, durable materials. If an entrance requires an accessible ramp, the ramp shall be integrated into the building and landscape design to minimize the visual impact of the ramp. Clear access to the ramp shall be maintained.
3) Ground Floor Dwelling Units.

Exterior entrances to ground floor units shall be connected to the public sidewalk by a paved walkway with a minimum width of five (5) feet. An at-grade patio, a raised stoop, or a raised porch may serve as a ground floor unit entrance. Raised stoops or porches shall not exceed five (5) feet above grade. Patios, stoops, and porches shall provide a minimum six (6) foot by six (6) foot clear area. Ground floor patios shall be surrounded by a low wall, fence, railing, and/or landscaping no higher than 42 inches to distinguish private outdoor space from the public sidewalk area. Ground floor exterior unit entrances may be recessed or project no more than eight (8) feet from the building facade. Fences shall meet the requirements pursuant to SCMC 18.15.040.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 540

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
93 Residential Unit Entrance - At-Grade Patio
6’-0” min clear depth, 8’-0” max
depth from building facade
6’-0” min clear width
Low wall, fence, railing,
and/or landscaping
(no higher than 3’-6”)
5’-0” min pathway width
7’-0” min from
sidewalk
Property line
7’-0” min from sidewalk
6’-0” min clear width
6’-0” min clear depth
5’-0” max height
above grade
Residential Unit Entrance - Recessed Porch or Stoop
5’-0” min pathway width
Property line
Residential Unit Entrance - Porch or Stoop
8’-0” max
depth from
building
facade
5’-0” min pathway width Property line
6’-0” min clear width
6’-0” min clear depth
5’-0” max height
above grade
7’-0” min from sidewalkFigure 3.12 - R esidential Unit Entrance Applicable for 100% residential units within MU Districts
1) Residential Unit Entrance: At-Grade Patio
2) Residential Unit Entrance: Recessed Porch or Stoop
3) Residential Unit Entrance: Porch or Stoop
21 3

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 541

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
94 4) Corner Entrances.

Corner building entrances shall have a distinct architectural treatment to animate the intersection and facilitate pedestrian flow around the corner.

Different treatments may include canopies, trellises, angled or rounded corners, arches, and/or other architectural elements. All building and dwelling units located in the interior of a site shall have entrances from the sidewalk that are designed as an extension of the public sidewalk and connect to a public sidewalk.

P. MASSING BREAKS.

Massing breaks provide visual relief for longer buildings by breaking down the building scale into smaller elements more compatible with San Carlos. Massing break standards apply to all front, side, and rear building facades. Exceptions include: buildings on lots seventy-five (75’) feet wide or less require only one (1) minor massing break on side facades; internal courtyard facades not visible from public rights-of-way. 1) Buildings between fifty (50) feet and one hundred (100) feet in length shall include at least one (1) minor massing break, defined as a minimum of four (4) feet wide by two (2) feet deep extending the full height of the building above the ground floor and shall include a corresponding break in the roof line. The required minor massing break shall be positioned such that no more than two thirds of the total building length is without a massing break. When a building has an upper floor stepback, the minor massing break minimum dimensions shall also apply to the upper floors and shall include a corresponding break in the roof line
2) Buildings greater than one hundred (100) feet and up to two hundred (200) feet in length shall include at least one (1) minor massing break (defined above) and one (1) major massing break, defined as a minimum of ten (10) feet wide by ten (10) feet deep extending the full height of the building above the ground floor and shall include a break in the roof line. The required major and minor massing breaks shall be positioned such that no more than two thirds of the total building length is without a massing break. When a building has an upper floor stepback, the minor massing break minimum dimensions apply to the upper floors and shall include a break in the roof line, and the major massing break may continue vertically to align with the walls below the stepback and shall include a break in the roof line. 3) Buildings greater than two hundred (200) feet in length must include at least one (1) minor massing break and two (2) major massing breaks (defined above). The required minor and major massing breaks shall be positioned such that no more than two thirds of the total building length is without a massing break. When a building has an upper floor stepback, the minor massing break minimum dimensions shall also apply to the upper floors and shall include a corresponding break in the roof line. The major massing break may continue vertically to align with the walls below the stepback and shall include a corresponding break in the roof line.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 542

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
95 Buildings 50’ ≤ x ≤ 100’
Min 4’-0” wide by 2’-0” deep
≤ 2/3 building length Optional on ground floor
≤ 2/3 building length
Buildings 101’ ≤ x ≤ 200’
Min 4’-0” wide by 2’-0” deep
Min 10’-0” wide by 10’-0” deep
≤ 2/3 building length
Optional on ground floor
≤ 2/3 building length
Buildings 200’ ≤ x
Min 4’-0” wide by 2’-0” deep
Optional on ground floor
≤ 2/3 building length
Min 10’-0” wide by 10’-0” deep
Min 10’-0” wide by 10’-0” deep
Figure 3.13 - M assing Breaks - MU Districts
(Reference 18.05.040-D: Massing Breaks - MU Districts)

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 543

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
96 Q. CORNERS.

Corner buildings shall emphasize the street corner through a combination of building massing and facade variation.
1) All corners shall be defined for at least twenty (20) feet along each of the two street-facing facades. The corner portion shall either have a minimum two (2) foot change in building plane from its adjacent facades, or a minimum two (2) foot by two (2) foot recessed reveal where it meets the adjacent facades.
2) Building corners shall be further differentiated from the rest of the street-facing facades by at least one (1) of the following: a change in roof form with at least a five (5) foot difference in roof height, a change in building material, color, or texture, or a variation in fenestration placement.
3) Alternatively, the corner can either be a common roof terrace above the ground floor or a common plaza at the ground floor.

Figure 3.14 - C ORNERS - MU DISTRICTS
Material, Color, or Texture Variety
Primary material, color,
or texture
Corner material, color,
or texture
Fenestration Variety
Primary fenestration
pattern
Corner fenestration
pattern

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 544

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
97 Terrace or Plaza
Upper floor terrace or
ground floor corner plaza
≥ 20’-0” min from corner
Architectural Roof Feature
Min 5’-0” above main roof line
≥ 20’-0” min from corner
Main roof line
Lower Roof
≥ 20’-0” min from corner
Min 5’-0” below main roof line Main roof line
Higher Roof
≥ 20’-0” min from corner
Min 5’-0” above main roof line Main roof line

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 545

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
98 R. BASE, MIDDLE, AND TOP
TREATMENT.

All buildings three (3) stories and taller shall be composed of the following:
a distinct base (in some cases this can be treated as the ground story or combined first two stories), a middle (the majority of the building facade area), and a top (parapet cap/coping, cornice, sloped roof, or in some cases this can be treated as the top story or combined top two stories).

Each of these elements shall be distinguished from one another for at least seventy percent (70%) of its facade length by either a change in material, a change in color, and/or a facade plane change of at least two (2) feet. A ground floor or in some cases, a combined ground floor and second floor stepback of at least two (2) feet in addition to the required setback from floors above may be considered a base. Base, middle, and top treatment standards apply to all front, side, and rear building facades. Exceptions include: internal courtyard facades not visible from public rights-of-way.
1) A base for buildings of three (3) to five (5) stories must either be limited to 30 inches in height from grade and project maximum of six (6) inches from the building façade or be treated as the full height of the ground story. For a 3-story building, the base is limited to 30 inches if the top is treated as the full height of the top story. 2) A base for buildings of six (6) stories or more must either be limited to 30 inches in height from grade and project maximum of six (6) inches from the building façade or be treated as the full height of the ground story, or be treated as the height of the ground story and second story combined. If the top of the building is treated as the combined height of the top two (2) stories, the base is limited to the full height of the ground story.
3) The middle portion of buildings of three (3) or four (4) stories shall be a minimum of two stories in height.
4) The middle portion of buildings of five (5) to six (6) stories shall be a minimum of three stories in height.
5) The middle portion of buildings of greater than six (6) stories shall be a minimum of the total amount of stories minus three (3). For example, an eight (8) story building must have a middle portion that is at least five (5) stories in height.
6) The top of all buildings must have a parapet cap/coping, a cornice, or be a sloped roof.
7) A top for buildings of three (3) to five (5) stories may be treated as the full height of the top story. For a 3-story building, the top is limited to a parapet cap/coping, a cornice, or a sloped roof if the base is treated as the full height of the ground story.
8) A top for buildings of six (6) stories or more may be treated as the full height of the top story. The top may also be treated as the full height of the top two (2) stories combined, only if the base is limited to the height of the ground story.

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 546

Chapter 3: Land Use and Urban Design
99 Figure 3.15 - B ase, Middle, And Top- MU Districts

9.a
November 24, 2025

Packet Pg. 547

San Carlos Downtown Specific Plan
100
S. FENESTRATION VARIETY
To achieve the fenestration variety standard, buildings shall include rhythms of at least two (2) types of openings for at least seventy percent (70%) of its facade length - the required seventy percent (70%) length does not have to be continuous. Various types of distinct openings include storefront windows and doors, residential entry doors, living room windows, bedroom windows, bathroom windows, common hallway windows, and stairway windows. Windows may be grouped vertically or horizontally or designed with shading devices or other architectural features to achieve pattern variety. Fenestration standards apply to all front, side, and rear building facades. Exceptions include: internal courtyard facades not visible from public rights-of-way.

T. MATERIALS, COLORS, AND TEXTURE

VARIETY
To achieve this standard, buildings shall provide at least two (2) different materials, colors, or textures for at least seventy percent (70%) of its facade length. Material transitions along any facade shall only occur on the inside corner of a plane change. When material changes need to occur in the same plane, bands, trims, cornices, or other architectural elements shall project at least two (2) inches from the facade plane to create a corner for the material transition. Materials, colors, and texture variety standards apply to all front, side, and rear building facades.