San Carlos City Council
January 26, 2026

Funding
Shared parking agreements should be funded by the Citywide TMA once it is formed. The costs of individual shared parking agreements can vary significantly based on each agreement. For example, the City of Sacramento has a long history of entering into shared parking agreements and maintains over 20 shared parking agreements with privately owned parking facilities. In this example, the City initially assumes the cost of upgrading the facility to meet regulations and to hire staff. When the lot begins to be profitable, the City starts paying itself back and once it breaks even, it can share profits with the private lot owner. The City typically assumes two models of shared parking – enforcement only where there would be no revenue sharing and private owners would give right of entry to the City, and full management, where the City manages the revenue collection, insurance, citation, branding, and maintenance of the parking facility.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 870
62 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Parking Enforcement
Short-Term Strategy 7 – It is recommended that the City either transition from enforcement through the County Sheriff’s Office to an internal office of Community Service Officers (CSOs) or third-party enforcement, or work with the Sherriff’s Office to augment enforcement. If internal enforcement is selected, the City should invest in one or more electric interceptor vehicles with Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR) technology.

Description
Parking enforcement has evolved over the years as the transportation field has become more heavily influenced by technology. While parking enforcement has traditionally been conducted on foot and with chalk markings on tires, there are several more modern innovations to assist in making enforcement more time- and cost-efficient. One of the most recognized technologies is Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR). ALPR is a camera system (typically mounted to a vehicle) that takes pictures of license plates and uses a computer algorithm to determine whether a vehicle is in violation of the posted regulation. ALPR is an increasingly prevalent enforcement practice and has been adopted by many jurisdictions because it offers the potential to reduce staff and labor costs, resulting in long-term savings.

Existing parking enforcement in Downtown San Carlos is carried out by the County Sheriff’s Office, which has its San Carlos Police Bureau offices at City Hall. Although relatively few drivers in Downtown were observed to park on the street for longer than the posted time restriction, vehicles parked long term (over four hours) occupied spaces for a disproportionate number of hours (22 percent of the total hours that vehicles occupied spaces). Enhanced parking enforcement would increase turnover for high demand onstreet spaces by ensuring drivers illegally parked long-term parkers receive a citation. Efficient and frequent enforcement enables parking management strategies such as time restrictions and Residential Permit Parking (RPP) to be successful, as otherwise drivers have little incentive to obey time limits or purchase permits.

Purpose
The primary purpose of parking enforcement in an area with time limits is to ensure that there is a proper turnover of vehicles, particularly in retail districts where it is not desirable for long-term parkers (e.g., employees) to occupy prime, store-front parking. The turnover of vehicles can be critical to the economic success of a downtown and a consistent pattern of parking enforcement can have a profound impact. The use of modern technology such as ALPR can make parking enforcement a cost-effective option.

Enforcement is not meant to be used to raise revenue or be cost neutral, but to create the desired parking behavior by enforcing parking regulations.

Additionally, the current system of relying on County police officers for parking enforcement could be improved, as officers generally have several responsibilities in addition to enforcing parking regulations, many of which are prioritized over parking enforcement. Hiring one or more Community Service Officer(s) (CSOs) would ensure that staff time is fully dedicated to enforcement each week rather than split between multiple tasks. Alternatively, the City can pay and/or share a portion of citation revenues with a third-party company for full-time enforcement services. LAZ Parking currently provides parking enforcement for the City of San Bruno, City of San Mateo, and City of South San Francisco and, among other companies, could be considered as a potential partner for the City of San Carlos. CSOs or third-party enforcement also would have more flexibility than the County’s Sherrif Office to conduct parking enforcement outside of regular

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 871
63 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
business hours, such as during weekends and evenings. As a result, the use of CSOs or third-party enforcement would be expected to result in more consistent and effective parking enforcement.

Implementation
If internal enforcement or continued enforcement through the Sherriff’s office is chosen, it is recommended that investment be made in one or more electric interceptors with ALPR mounted on the vehicle to increase the efficiency of parking enforcement Citywide; each electric interceptor with ALPR costs approximately $50,000. In addition to upgraded technology, the City could transition from the County Sheriff’s Office for enforcement to an internal office of CSOs working within and outside of regular business hours. It is estimated that each individual CSO would cost the City about $159,000 per year, including benefits, similar to that of CSOs paid for by the Sheriff’s office. Enforcement can also be conducted through a third-party company, such as LAZ Parking. For comparison purposes, the third-party enforcement contract between LAZ Parking and the City of South San Francisco is up to $3.5 million for five years ($700,000 per year) but it is noted that South San Francisco has about twice the population of San Carlos and a substantial number of office parks east of US 101. A more precise scope of services would be necessary to obtain a specific price quote from LAZ Parking for San Carlos.

Privacy
User privacy is a common concern that often arises from the use of ALPR, with some motorists worried their vehicle information could be used or distributed without their consent. If ALPR or other such technology is to be employed in San Carlos, it is recommended that the City develop a policy regarding the security and use of data collected. In the Bay Area, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency has an effective two-page policy that could serve as a guideline to the City of San Carlos; a copy is provided in Appendix B.

By incorporating a privacy policy into a revised enforcement approach, the City can both address potential concerns and demonstrate that it is using new parking strategies strictly for their intended uses.

Resident Permits for New Developments
Short-Term Strategy 8 – Introduce permits for residents of new multi-family developments in Downtown to park without limits in time restricted or, if pricing is eventually implemented, priced on-street spaces along or near their building’s frontage. The cost of the permit should be equivalent to the market value of the space.

Description
The City of Sacramento is currently conducting a pilot of a Supplemental Parking Permit (SPP) program at three recent residential developments. The SPP pilots allow residents to purchase a permit to be exempt from on-street pricing and time limits. Unlike the permit described in the “Resident Permits for Priced Parking” section, these permits would allow residents to park long term in spaces adjacent to their buildings and the cost of the permit would be substantially higher to reflect the market value of the parking space.

Purpose
Residents of new multi-family developments may not be able to park long term on the street due to time limited, permitted, and/or priced parking (if pricing is eventually implemented) particularly if new residents are not allowed to purchase residential permits to park in RPP zones. Allowing residents of new developments to purchase cheap residential permits could cause excess demand beyond the available parking supply. Many new residents also may not have available on-site parking in their buildings, as there

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 872
64 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
are generally no minimum parking requirements applicable to new development in Downtown. There should be a system for residents of new developments without on-site parking spaces to have the option to pay a market rate to park in public on-street spaces. This would give new residents the option to park in convenient locations if needed, but the relatively high “market rate” price would prevent the street from being oversaturated with resident vehicles and encourage residents to pay for on-site parking if it is available.

Implementation
It is recommended that a Supplemental Parking Permit (SPP) program similar to the pilot program in Sacramento be implemented in the short term for Downtown San Carlos. Residents of new multi-family developments should be given the option to purchase a permit for unlimited parking in time restricted or, if pricing is implemented in the future, priced on-street spaces along or near the building’s frontage. The cost of the permit should be equivalent to the market value of the space (e.g., $250 per month), or the expected annual revenue a priced space would produce. In addition to providing information about the SPP program, managers of new multi-family developments that do not provide on-site parking should be clear to residents that parking on the street without a permit is not a feasible alternative given time limits, pricing, and/or RPP restrictions.

Daylighting and Accessible Parking
Short-Term Strategy 9 – When improving Downtown streets, prohibit parking near intersections per the state “Daylighting” law and designate accessible on-street spaces required by the federal Public Right-ofWay Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG).

California Assembly Bill (AB) 413, or the “Daylighting” law, prohibits on-street vehicle parking within 20 feet on the approach to an unmarked or marked crosswalk, or within 15 feet of a crosswalk where there is a curb extension. Applying parking prohibitions near intersections per AB 413 improves visibility between drivers and pedestrians in a crosswalk or waiting to cross. Additionally, the Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG), United States Access Board, adopted by the U.S. Department of Transportation in 2024, require that any modification of on-street vehicle parking (on new or altered facilities) must add accessible spaces to the curb according to Table R211. Table R211 requires a minimum number of accessible spaces based on the total spaces provided on a block perimeter. Table 20 shows the 18 blocks in the Downtown, their current and required number of accessible spaces, and the resulting surplus or deficit.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 873
65 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
When improving Downtown streets, it is recommended that the City complies with the Daylighting law and PROWAG by using signage and/or curb paint to prohibit parking near intersections and designate the minimum number of required on-street spaces as accessible. These changes to on-street parking would be easiest to implement as part of the planned streetscape changes in Downtown rather than gradually on a location-by-location basis. Streetscape changes would trigger PROWAG’s requirement for accessible onstreet parking spaces, so the City would not be able to legally delay adding accessible spaces to modified streets.

Mid-Term Strategies
Downtown Bicycle Parking Hub
Mid-Term Strategy 1 – Install a Downtown bicycle parking “hub” on the 700 Block of Laurel Street that includes bicycle racks, bicycle lockers, and a bicycle repair station.

Table 20 – Accessible Spaces Provided and Required by PROWAG Block Name
Total
Provided
Spaces
Accessible
Required Spaces
Accessible
Provided Spaces
Surplus/
Deficit
Holly-San Carlos-ECR-Laurel 36 2 0 -2
Holly-San Carlos-Walnut-Laurel 45 2 0 -2
Holly-San Carlos-Walnut-Elm 56 3 0 -3
Cherry-San Carlos-ECR-Laurel 45 2 2 0
Cherry-San Carlos-WalnutLaurel 51 3 0 -3
Cherry-San Carlos-Walnut-Elm 40 2 0 -2
Cherry-San Carlos-Chestnut-Elm 51 3 6 3
Cherry-Olive-ECR-Laurel 37 2 0 -2
Cherry-Olive-Walnut-Laurel 44 2 0 -2
Cherry-Olive-Walnut-Elm 66 3 0 -3
Arroyo-Olive-ECR-Laurel 42 2 2 0
Arroyo-Olive-Elm-Laurel 75 3 1 -2
Arroyo-Morse-ECR-Laurel 47 2 1 -1
Arroyo-Morse-Walnut-Laurel 53 3 0 -3
Arroyo-Morse-Walnut-Elm 65 3 0 -3
Brittan-Morse-ECR-Laurel 21 1 0 -1
Brittan-Morse-Walnut-Laurel 46 2 1 -1
Brittan-Morse-Walnut-Elm 62 3 0 -3
TOTAL 882 43 13 -30

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 874
66 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Description
Every bicycle trip begins and ends with bicycle parking. It is important to provide user-friendly, secure, and convenient bicycle parking that is highly visible and close to popular destinations. This strategy aims to provide bicycle riders with secure storage downtown, create a more welcoming environment for potential bicycle riders, and encourage bicycle trips as an alternative to automobile trips. Currently, there are 48 shortterm bicycle rack spaces and eight long-term bicycle parking spaces located near the San Carlos Caltrain station. While there are some bicycle racks along Laurel Street, they are limited in number and of decorative styles, which can inadvertently impede their use. At the Wheeler Parking Garage, there are 25 short-term bike parking spaces. There are no public long-term bicycle parking spaces located in Downtown, with the exception of the lockers at the Caltrain station.

As part of the Downtown Specific Plan project, a new public plaza is proposed for the 700 block of Laurel Street, prohibiting the flow of general vehicle traffic. Road diets for the 600 and 800 blocks of Laurel Street will further reduce traffic volumes near the plaza. Additionally, new protected bike lanes would be added to San Carlos Avenue, El Camino Real, and Brittan Avenue which would improve bicycle access to Downtown.

The newly opened public space on Laurel Street presents an opportunity to provide short- and long-term bicycle parking and amenities within the expanded public right-of-way.

Purpose
There are multiple benefits to providing bicycle parking, such as the following. • Increase visibility of bicycling as a mode and encourage bicycle travel. • Create additional customer parking capacity and attract bicycle customers (particularly to certain businesses such as coffee shops).
• Maximize usage of on-street spaces (on-street corrals offer approximately eight bicycle parking spaces for one vehicle parking space).
• Can be implemented at a relatively low cost.
• Provide space efficiency that is especially effective when implemented at special events, where vehicle parking is limited.
• Provide a cost-effective way to attract visitors to Downtown (with inverted u-racks costing roughly $200 and bike lockers costing $2,000 to $3,000).

The existing bicycle racks along Laurel Street in
Downtown San Carlos feature an unusual shape
that is visually appealing such as the rack shown
in Figure 35. However, traditional bicycle rack
shapes (specifically, inverted U or post-and-ring
racks) tend to be more space efficient, more cost
effective, intuitive to use, and accommodate a
variety of bike types and attachments. Providing
public long-term bicycle parking spaces
Downtown, such as bicycle lockers, would allow
employees and visitors with longer stays in
Downtown to store bicycles without fear of
bicycle wheels and attachments being stolen.

Including a bike repair station near bicycle parking would cost about $1,000 to $2,000 and provide

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 875
67 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
convenience for riders traveling to Downtown that experience issues (such as flat tires) or need to perform regular maintenance on their bicycles.

Implementation
It is recommended that a Downtown bicycle parking “hub” be installed on the 700 Block of Laurel Street when it is converted into a permanent car-free
public plaza. The particular location along the
Laurel Street block should be coordinated with
other streetscape changes, but the location should generally be a sufficient distance from the existing bicycle parking at the San Carlos Caltrain station and be highlighted by wayfinding signage for bicyclists.

The bicycle parking hub should include short-term bicycle parking spaces (of traditional inverted U or post-and-ring shapes) and longterm bicycle lockers for employees and longer-term visitors. These lockers would supplement the existing bicycle lockers at Caltrain but could serve cyclists visiting uses farther away from Caltrain and/or not reaching Downtown via Caltrain. A bicycle repair station, similar to the station shown in Figure 36, should be located at the hub and feature a stand to mount a bicycle, basic tools for do-it-yourself bicycle repair, tire patches, and a bicycle pump at a minimum. Should a bicycle valet service be set up in Downtown during special events, the bicycle parking hub could serve as the pick-up/drop-off point. It is recommended that the TMA fund regular maintenance of the bicycle parking hub.

Residential Permit Parking District
Mid-Term Strategy 2 – Designate residential streets within Downtown as a potential Residential Permit Parking (RPP) district. Establish an escalating permit price structure (e.g. $25 for the first permit, $50 for the second permit, etc.) and tiered price structure based on a residence’s off-street parking capacity (e.g. residents of homes with no garage or driveway receive free permits while residents with more off-street parking spaces pay a greater amount). Include a lower cost or free permit option for lower income households.

Description
A Residential Permit Parking (RPP) program operates by exempting permitted vehicles from the parking restrictions and time limits for non-metered, on-street parking spaces within a geographic area, typically in a residential neighborhood setting. A conventional RPP is one that allows those without a permit to park for generally two to four hours within a specified time frame, such as 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Permit holders are exempt from these regulations. Ownership of a permit does not, however, guarantee the availability of a parking space. RPP programs are prevalent across the country and have been used for decades to prioritize residential parking needs.

Greater East San Carlos (GESC) is currently the only residential permit parking district included in the City’s RPP program. Two-hour time restrictions generally apply to on-street parking within GESC, but vehicles with permits are exempt from restrictions. Petitions for inclusion or removal of the program are limited to one per block and must be signed by 50 percent of residences on the block. Within GESC, residential permits Figure 36 Decorative Bicycle Rack in Downtown
Figure 35 Bicycle Repair Station

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 876
68 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
are free, and each residence can be assigned permits for up to four vehicles and two guests. Employees of businesses pay $38 per six months for a GESC Business Permit. The GESC residential parking program has 1,429 annual permits issued as of 2024 and costs $1,674 per year in material costs, as well as 35 hours per year of staff time. The existing GESC Residential and Business Permit zone locations are shown in Figure 37.

Figure 37 Existing GESC Permit Zones
Purpose
As most new planned developments would not be required to provide off-street parking and parking costs must be unbundled from leasing or rental costs, spillover residential, visitor, and employee parking is expected to occur as many new uses will not include free on-site parking. Unregulated parking on residential streets could become in high demand as (a) Downtown visitors or employees try to avoid time limits, pricing (if it is implemented), or paying for permits and (b) Downtown residents with unbundled parking try to avoid paying for parking with their unit by parking on the street. Pricing parking spaces could be a suitable strategy for managing on-street excess parking demand on non-residential streets, but in neighborhoods there is often an expectation that residents and their visitors will be able to park on the street without paying hourly rates. Residents of single-family houses without driveways or garages are often particularly dependent on the availability of on-street parking near their home. No streets in Downtown San Carlos are currently part of an RPP zone, but one could be introduced to manage excess on-street parking demand on residential streets while allowing established residents and their visitors to park on the street at a reasonable cost.

Implementation
The decision to implement an RPP program in Downtown should involve both the support of the neighborhood (first by a petition signed by at least 50 percent of residences) and data analysis by the City

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 877
69 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
demonstrating that there is a parking spillover problem. If those two elements indicate an RPP is appropriate, the City would need to work with the local neighborhood to determine the appropriate boundaries of the permit zone, and consideration should be given to potential impacts to immediately adjacent neighborhoods. The permit zone should generally include primarily residential streets close to the Laurel Street commercial corridor, such as Walnut Street and Elm Street. All residences within the proposed zones would be eligible to purchase permits, but application forms, payment, and proof of residency should be required. Residents of new multi-family developments should be excluded from the RPP program if analysis shows that allowing them to purchase residential permits would cause excess demand beyond the available on-street supply. The City can alternatively offer permits for on-street parking to residents of new multi-family developments at a higher “market” rate (see the “Resident Permits for New Developments” strategy).

The hours of operation for the RPP district should align with the hours of spillover impacts (e.g., 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. Monday to Sunday). To reflect that households without private garages or driveways are often more dependent on parking on street, a tiered pricing structure should be established based on an address’s off-street parking capacity (e.g. residents of homes with no garage or driveway receive free permits while residents with a two-car garage and two-space driveway would pay more). Additionally, an escalating price structure should be set (e.g., $25 for the first permit, $50 for the second permit, etc.) to disincentivize the storage of multiple vehicles on the street rather than in private garages and driveways. As is the current policy in GESC, there should be a limit on the number of permits per household. An equity provision should be included so that low-income households are not disproportionately burdened by the price of permits.

Resident permits would take the form of an online permit linked to the resident’s license plate number, while guest permits could be a hanging placard, sticker, or online permit. The program should be based on a cost recovery model, as the Downtown RPP program should generally not generate more revenue for the City than the program costs. Ultimately, the Citywide parking study currently underway will be developing precise protocols for the City’s future RPP program, and thus a potential Downtown district should conform to its rules.

Long-Term Strategies
Special Event Valet Parking
Long-Term Strategy 1 – Operate vehicle and bicycle valet programs for special events in Downtown.

Vehicle Valet Parking
Vehicle valet parking during large special events in Downtown can shift demand to underutilized off-street lots, increase the ease of parking for visitors, and discourage drivers from circulating within Downtown. It can also make more efficient use of the parking supply as valet operators can “tandem” or “triple” park vehicles. Valet parking also offers a highly convenient parking option for those customers willing to pay for it but could also be offered to customers at no cost. The City should implement a special event valet parking program for Downtown events which could generate substantially higher than usual parking demand such as the Art and Wine Faire. The program could be operated and funded through the Citywide TMA, and the service should be a single, seamless operation with consistent branding required (signage and uniform) and valet stands placed at convenient visible locations. The City should consider using the Caltrain lot, Wheeler Parking Garage, and/or the SamTrans Garage as vehicle valet parking locations as these facilities are large

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 878
70 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
and relatively vacant throughout the week (the SamTrans lot has higher weekday occupancies but most floors are largely empty on weekends).

Advances in technology have enabled valet parking drop-off, pick-up, and payment to be relatively seamless. Numerous valet operators now employ technology (e.g., point-of-sale handheld computers, key “fobs,” self-serve kiosks, mobile phone technology) that facilitates easy retrieval of vehicles and payment.

For example, a customer can notify the valet operator five to ten minutes before desired pickup so that a vehicle is returned by the time the customer is ready to leave. This technology can also enable more accurate collection of parking data and revenue.

Bicycle Valet Parking
During special events within Downtown, the City, a
contractor, or a bike-related organization should
operate a bicycle valet parking program for attendees.

Bicycle valet parking is similar to traditional vehicle valet parking in that staff are present to park many
bikes in a secure location that is space efficient. While vehicle valet parking services should be located
slightly outside of Downtown in lower activity areas,
bicycle valet parking should be within Downtown in a
visible location, preferably the Downtown bicycle
parking “hub” on Laurel Street recommended
previously. The continual monitoring of bicycles by
staff is a significant safety incentive to encourage
bicycling to special events. As an example, the City of Portland recommends organized bicycle parking for event organizers, and that the number of bicycle parking spaces equal two percent of the attendance or more, while five percent is ideal. Another example of a bicycle valet parking program, from Oracle Park in San Francisco, is shown in Figure 38.

Zoning Ordinance Updates
The following recommended updates to the Zoning Ordinance are subject to change with the adoption of Citywide TDM and parking standards.

Downtown Parking District
Zoning Code Update 1 – Establish Downtown San Carlos as a distinct parking district.

The Zoning Ordinance currently maintains different minimum vehicle parking requirements for the MixedUse Districts (or parcels zoned as “MU”), the Industrial Arts District (parcels zoned as “IA”), and Other Districts which includes the remainder of the City. While the Mixed-Use District includes most of Downtown and several blocks to the north and south of Downtown, it is recommended that the City establish Downtown as a distinct parking district. This would allow the City to tailor strategies and Zoning Ordinance regulations precisely to Downtown. The recommended boundaries of the new Downtown Parking District are shown in Figure 39.

Figure 38 Bicycle Valet Parking at Oracle Park,
San Francisco

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 879
71 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Figure 39 Downtown Parking District Map
Eliminate Parking Minimums
Zoning Ordinance Update 2 – Eliminate vehicle parking minimums for Downtown from the City’s Code.

California Assembly Bill (AB) 2097, which took effect in January 2023, prohibits a public agency from imposing minimum parking requirements on most developments within a half-mile of a major transit stop.

Sections 21155 and 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code define a major transit stop as a site containing an existing or planned rail or rapid bus station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with service intervals of 15 minutes or less during the morning and evening peak commute periods.

The existing San Carlos Caltrain station and planned bus rapid transit stops at the intersection of El Camino Real/Brittan Avenue qualify as major transit stops per the Public Resources Code definition. As a result, all of Downtown is within a half-mile of a major transit stop and AB 2097 prohibits most parking minimums within the entire Downtown Parking District. Further, the elimination of minimum parking requirements within a half-mile of the San Carlos Caltrain station is necessary to comply with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Transit Oriented Community (TOC) Policy and maintain eligibility for One Bay Area Grant funds. The Zoning Ordinance was amended in January 2023, to conform to AB 2097, which eliminates

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 880
72 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
the great majority of minimum requirements. However, it is recommended that the City remove all parking minimums for the Downtown Parking District from its Zoning Code to comply with the MTC TOC Policy.

Shared Parking
Zoning Ordinance Update 3 – Per AB 2097, the City can require that parking built within Downtown be shared with the public.

In addition to removing minimum parking requirements within a half-mile of existing and planned major transit stops, AB 2097 allows public agencies to require that any parking provided within the half-mile radius be shared with the public, priced, and/or include spaces for car sharing. As noted previously, AB 2097 is applicable within all of Downtown as it is within a half mile of either the San Carlos Caltrain station and planned bus rapid transit stops at El Camino Real/Brittan Avenue. The City should note that it has the ability per AB 2097 to require that new parking within Downtown be shared with the public. The Citywide parking study will determine specific requirements for new developments to make a portion of their parking supply publicly accessible.

Unbundled Parking
Zoning Ordinance Update 4 – Mandate unbundled parking for new residential and non-residential developments within Downtown.

Typically, rental and purchase prices for residential units and leasing prices of commercial/office space include the cost of parking. Doing so encourages auto ownership since residents and tenants must pay for parking regardless of whether they are using it or not. Although the parking cost may be “hidden,” it is eventually passed on to all users. By requiring that new development “unbundle” the cost of parking (i.e., keep the price of parking separate from the price of purchasing or leasing property or units), residents and tenants can opt to pay for parking based on their need, in turn encouraging households with fewer vehicles to locate to residential units with unbundled parking based on their affordability. Unbundled parking can reduce the demand for on-site parking, increase affordability, and allow those without cars to avoid paying for parking they do not use. A jurisdiction must allow unbundled parking to comply with the MTC TOC policy.

It is recommended that the following provisions for unbundled parking be added to the Zoning Ordinance and apply to new developments within the Downtown Parking District. For a multi-unit residential use (i.e., three or more units) or non-residential project greater than 10,000 square feet, the City shall require leased or sold parking spaces to be leased or sold separately from the rental or purchase of dwelling units for the life of the dwelling unit, such that the potential renters or buyers have the option of renting or buying a unit at a price lower than if there were a single price for both the unit and the parking space.

The requirement for unbundled parking would not apply to residential uses with individual garages that are functionally part of the property or unit, affordable housing units, projects receiving low-income housing tax credits, developments financed by tax-exempt bonds through the California Housing Finance Agency, or units leased to tenants receiving federal housing assistance vouchers. Leases for parking spaces should have a maximum term of one year and the cost of the parking space should be included as a separate line item in the leasing agreement.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 881
73 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Electric Vehicle and Accessible Parking
Zoning Ordinance Update 5 – Reference state and federal standards for electric vehicle and accessible parking in the Zoning Code and ensure compliance for new and altered facilities.

For off-street parking provided voluntarily by a development, the Zoning Ordinance should reference the requirements for accessible parking and electric vehicle charging stations from the California Building Code, 2022, and the California Green Building Standards Code, 2022, and as updated in the 2025 code cycle that will take effect on January 1, 2026. In addition to these guidelines for off-street parking, the Zoning Code should also reference the Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG), United States Access Board, adopted by the U.S. Department of Transportation in 2024, which require that any modification of on-street vehicle parking must add accessible parking spaces to the curb per Table R211. Compliance is required for new and altered facilities. Offering accessible on-street parking would improve access to new buildings for people with disabilities, as these spaces would be in a convenient location even if the development does not supply off-street parking.

Bicycle Parking
Zoning Ordinance Update 6 – Revise the existing bicycle parking requirements for Downtown to be independent from the number of vehicle parking spaces required, consider newer and/or emerging bicycle types, and include more specificity in the design guidelines.

Description
Offering secure bicycle parking facilities for short- and long-term use in Downtown is an important aspect to encouraging bicycling trips and reducing reliance on private vehicles. Currently, the Zoning Ordinance requires that certain developments provide short-term parking spaces equal to 10 percent of the number of vehicle parking spaces required, and a minimum of four short-term spaces must be offered per use.

Short-term bicycle parking requirements apply to multi-family residential uses with five or more units; public and semipublic uses except cemeteries and community gardens; and commercial uses except animal care, sales, and services and artists’ studios. Per the Zoning Ordinance, one long-term bicycle parking space is required for every five multi-family residential units and for establishments with over 25 full-time equivalent employees at a rate of one per 20 vehicle spaces. Parking structures are required to provide at least one long-term bicycle parking space per 50 vehicle spaces, located near the entrance to the facility. The Zoning Ordinance includes security, location, dimensional, and clearance requirements for short- and long-term bicycle parking spaces.

Proposed Standards
It is recommended that the bicycle parking requirements shown in Table 21 apply for new uses and changes of use larger than 10,000 square feet in the Downtown Parking District.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 882
74 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Table 21 – Proposed Bicycle Parking Requirements for Downtown Land Use Short-Term
Spaces
Long-Term
Spaces
Cargo &
Adaptive
Electric
Bicycles
Showers Lockers
Residential 0.25 per unit 0.75 per unit
10% of
required
LT spaces
1 outlet or
other
charging
infrastructure
per 5
required LT
spaces

N/A N/A
Office 0.167 per ksf 0.50 per ksf
1 unisex for first 40
ksf; 1 unisex for each
additional 20 ksf;
minimum of 1
75% of
required
LT bicycle
spaces,
minimum
of 2 Hotel 0.05 per
room

0.05 per
room
N/A
Retail/Dining 0.375 per ksf 0.125 per ksf
5% of
required
LT spaces

N/A N/A
Note: A minimum of two short-term spaces and one long-term space shall be provided for each site with a nonresidential use included in this table; LT = long-term; sf = square feet; ksf = 1,000 square feet Additionally, the following siting, design, and signage standards should be added to the Zoning Code. • All bicycle parking shall:
o Be well-lit during both daytime and nighttime hours.
o Be identified by clear signage visible from all major building entrances. o Include at least five (5) feet of maneuvering space adjacent to bicycle parking (this would replace the existing requirement for two (2) feet of clearance between spaces and adjacent walls, poles, and other fixed objects).
o Ideally include 45 and never fewer than 30 inches of space between side-by-side bicycle racks. • Short-term bicycle parking shall:
o Be located along the “desire line” or path most likely for people who are using a bicycle to travel. o Ideally be located less than 25 feet and never 50 feet away from major building entrances. o Be located in sheltered areas with weather protection, when possible. • Long-term bicycle parking shall:
o Be located in areas with controlled access, either through use of a key, smart card, keycode, or similar technology.
o Be easily navigable and accessible for people with less common bicycle types, including larger cargo bicycles and three-wheeled bicycles.
o Be located no lower than the first basement level or the first complete parking level below ground, and no higher than the first above-ground level.

Discussion
While, in most cases, the City currently requires bicycle parking as a proportion of the number of vehicle spaces required, the removal of minimum vehicle parking requirements necessitates that bicycle requirements be based on the size of a development rather than required vehicle spaces. The proposed standards require short- and long-term bicycle spaces by number of residential units, hotel rooms, or square footage, and the standards exclude industrial and research and development uses given they are generally unexpected in Downtown. New and emerging types of bicycles that take up more space than traditional

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 883
75 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
bicycles, such as cargo bicycles and adaptive bicycles, are included in the proposed requirements. Requiring charging equipment for E-bicycles is recommended as E-bicycles gain popularity. Showers and lockers should also be required for certain uses that may have employees with longer bicycle commutes.

For the City to comply with MTC TOC policy and be eligible for grant funding, one secure bicycle parking space per new residential unit and one secure space per 5,000 occupied square feet of new commercial office development within a half-mile of the San Carlos Caltrain station must be required. In combining the short- and long-term requirements, the proposed standards mandate one space per unit for residential uses and one space per 1,500 square feet of office space; both of which would bring the City in compliance with TOC policy. The recommended siting, design, and signage guidelines would expand on the existing location, security, size, and accessibility requirements in the Zoning Code, offering greater specificity than the current code and meeting the space requirements of larger bicycle types.

Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Zoning Ordinance Update 7 – For Downtown TDM policy reforms, refer to the project to update the Citywide TDM Ordinance.

There is an ongoing project to update the City’s existing TDM Ordinance that is due to be completed in spring 2026. Rather than create a unique TDM framework for Downtown as part of this project (which would be made redundant by the Citywide TDM project), it is recommended that the City refer to the Citywide project for TDM policy reforms within Downtown.

Strategies for Future Consideration
The following strategies are often included in parking management toolkits and were evaluated as potential recommendations. While they are not recommended as of the writing of this report, the City may wish to consider implementing these strategies in the future.

Parking Pricing
Strategy for Future Consideration 1 – The City could implement a program of priced parking on certain non-residential streets and in some off-street public facilities with higher occupancy. A graduated rate structure for on-street spaces may be adopted, and City staff could be authorized to adjust rates $0.50 at a time within set boundaries to maintain occupancy levels of 70 to 85 percent. All-day visitor and employee permits in off-street lots may be offered as an alternative to hourly parking. The City should conduct a downtown-wide parking occupancy survey every other year. If total parking occupancy in the downtown (excluding the Caltrain station lots) reaches 70 percent for three or more hours on a single day, parking pricing should be implemented.

Description
San Carlos permits the use of prime on-street parking spaces free of charge and instead uses time limits as the primary means of managing public on-street parking demand. The rate of utilization of on-street parking spaces in prime locations at any given time depends on the demand for motor vehicle access to the area, the supply of parking spaces available, any restrictions on the use of spaces (e.g., regulations, time limits), and, no less importantly, the price charged. With a high demand and no price for parking, Downtown curbside parking can be regularly filled to capacity during peak hours, causing motorists to search and circle

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 884
76 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
in a wider area for available parking. Congestion associated with the competition for on-street parking in prime locations can be a major issue from the perspective of Downtown businesses and visitors alike.

According to May 2023 occupancy data for Downtown San Carlos, on-street parking demand tends to be highest on Laurel Street and on east-west oriented streets within a block of Laurel Street. On these street segments, on-street parking occupancy during peak times is consistently greater than 85 percent, primarily during the midday period. On-street parking occupancy on Sundays is especially high, likely due to a lack of parking restrictions and increased demand from the Farmers’ Market, as the peak occupancy for onstreet spaces in the North Downtown was recorded to reach 80 percent. Similarly, off-street parking demand is high during peak hours in Clark Parking lot and South Parking lot, given their proximity to Laurel Street.

As multi-family residential, commercial, and hotel development identified in the Downtown Specific Plan occurs, the new uses will not be required to provide parking per California Assembly Bill (AB) 2097. Since some of these new developments will expect their customers, tenants, or employees to walk, bicycle, take public transit, or park on the street, it is probable that on-street parking demand in Downtown will continue to increase and priced on-street parking could be an appropriate strategy to manage demand.

California Senate Bill (SB) 532 was approved in September 2024 and authorizes a pilot program of “meterless” paid parking in San Francisco, Long Beach, and Santa Monica. Meterless parking may be significantly more financially feasible given it can be implemented without installing any costly physical infrastructure improvements and it removes the need for meters obstructing the sidewalk. These three jurisdictions will be able to require meter payments by mobile device, although citations for failing to pay are to be reduced and there must be an equitable cash alternative to paying by mobile device. The pilot programs may last for up to five years or until January 1, 2033, and must be associated with a report evaluating the impacts of the program. Lessons learned from the pilot programs could address equity concerns associated with meterless parking, as there should be ways for users without mobile devices to pay for priced spaces and avoid citation. While meterless parking is currently not legal outside of the three pilot locations, there could be an opportunity to implement meterless parking in other cities such as San Carlos should these meterless parking programs be successful.

Purpose
The primary goal of parking pricing is to make it as easy and convenient as possible to find and pay for time occupying a parking space. It should not be treated as a means to generate revenue - the goal is to establish prices low enough to achieve the desired parking occupancy level. By setting specific availability targets and adjusting pricing (up or down), demand can be effectively managed so that when a motorist chooses to park, they can do so without circling the block or searching aimlessly. Demand-based pricing can result in the following benefits.
• Ensures consistent availability and ease in finding a parking space. • Provides flexible time limits or eliminates them altogether, thereby removing the need to move a vehicle to avoid time restrictions.
• Can have convenient payment methods that eliminate the need to “feed the meter” and make it easier to pay for parking and avoid parking tickets.
• Incentivizes long-term parkers and employees to park in less prime off-street lot locations. • Reduces search time for parking, resulting in less local congestion and vehicle emissions. • Reduces illegal parking and improves safety and street operations. • Distributes short-term parking demand throughout the Downtown area, taking advantage of on-street parking capacity on side streets.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 885
77 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Implementation
In the future, the City could implement a program of priced on-street parking on non-residential streets in Downtown. A four-part strategy could ensure the maintenance of parking availability: (1) establish a policy goal, or target for the occupancy of on-street and off-street parking, (2) install a meterless paid parking system or smart parking meters that are easy to use and enforce, (3) commit to periodically monitoring occupancy and adjusting parking rates and regulations to meet established targets, and (4) dedicate revenues to a future Downtown Parking Benefit District (PBD). The following elements should be addressed to achieve this strategy.
• Establish targets: The City may establish a policy goal, or target, for the ideal occupancy of on-street and off-street parking on non-residential street segments in Downtown. Achieving a commonly used occupancy target (e.g., 70 to 85 percent), could mean that―on average―a few curbside parking spaces on each block-face in the area could remain open and available for use by incoming vehicles, even during periods of peak demand. A block-face or lot should be priced (via mobile payments and/or meters) if (1) occupancy is equal to or exceeds 70 percent continually over a three-hour period and (2) the street segment or lot primarily serves non-residential or mixed uses. Figure 40 shows which nonresidential block-faces in Downtown could be eligible for priced parking based on 2023 occupancy data for Thursday and Saturday when time restrictions are in place, as well as Sunday when there are no restrictions. Additional segments are identified that could be priced to maintain continuity with nearby priced segments. For primarily residential streets, Residential Permit Parking (RPP) is a preferred onstreet management strategy to priced parking.

Figure 40 Candidate Block-Faces for Priced Parking from 2023 Occupancy Data Once a space is priced, the target occupancy for a given time period should be between 70 and 85 percent. Performance could be measured by comparing the average occupancy for all priced spaces to the target occupancy.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 886
78 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
• Meters or Mobile Payments: If priced parking is to be implemented, the City would have to decide whether to implement paid parking using mobile payments only or using physical meters. Currently, meterless paid parking can only be implemented in the pilot locations (San Francisco, Long Beach, and Santa Monica), but meterless paid parking using mobile payment could become an option for San Carlos if the pilot programs were completed and deemed successful. Should physical meters be selected, the City would need to evaluate technology and vendor options for the installation and operation of meters closer to the date of implementation. The City could consider a few criteria focused on convenience for the motorist and ease of enforcement in the selection of meters/vendors. a. User-friendly smart meters should accept payment by credit or debit card via insertion, swipe, or tap (in addition to cash or coins).
b. The City may wish to work with meter vendors to accept payment by smart/mobile phone. c. The City should consider the appropriate type of meters, opting for either multi-space meters (one or two on each block face), with a “pay and display” or “pay by space” model or the conventional deployment of one parking meter for each parking space. The optics of fewer meters may be more attractive to a community wary of installing parking meters as a primary strategy. d. Meters could include ALPR to detect parking violations for on-street metered spaces, link the violations with the vehicle’s license plate, and forward the information to enforcement personnel who can cite the vehicle’s owner.
• Graduated Rates: Initial on-street “base” rates may be $1.00 per hour (comparable to nearby jurisdictions – parking is $1.00 per hour in the Core Downtown in Redwood City and $1.50 per hour in San Bruno) and then adjusted based on how parking patterns change over time if needed. Rather than maintaining the existing two-hour parking limits with the addition of parking pricing, the City could establish a “2+” graduated rate structure. For example, hourly parking can be priced at the “base” rate of $1.00 per hour for the first two hours, $2.50 for the third hour, $3.50 for the fourth and subsequent hours. Signage at priced on-street spaces could reflect that parking is for “2+” hours with the pricing structure clearly detailed. The graduated rate system could maintain turnover in convenient on-street parking spaces through lower rates for short-term parking; however, by allowing the option to stay longer at a premium rate, the system could offer flexibility for on-street parkers to patronize several local businesses during the same trip. Because higher turnover is not needed for off-street lots, time restrictions or graduated rates are not needed for the off-street facilities. While free all-day parking can accommodate long-term visitor or employee needs until lots are priced, the City may offer all-day visitor permits and flexible employee permits as an alternative to hourly parking upon pricing off-street facilities.
• Hours: One of the best ways to balance parking supply and demand and generate turnover is with hours of operations and pricing that take into account when spaces are actually occupied. Future parking occupancy could be monitored and the hours of operation for meters be set whenever there is sufficient demand (e.g. 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. including on Sundays). • Monitor and adjust: The City could commit to monitoring the use of parking spaces Downtown on an annual basis and adjusting meter rates and regulations as necessary to meet the established availability targets. This means modifying the hours of operation and pricing for meters as needed to achieve the City’s adopted target. City staff may be granted the authority to set parking rates and paid hours as needed without seeking approval from the City Council, within a set of boundaries. If the City is committed to regular monitoring and adjustments of parking pricing, San Carlos should adopt a system of adjusting parking rates similar to the methodology detailed in the 2022 Paid Parking Annual Report, Seattle Department of Transportation (SDOT), September 2023. In this system, rates for the morning (before 11:00 a.m.), afternoon (11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), and evening (after 5:00 p.m.) periods are adjusted separately to account for varying demand throughout the day. If the average occupancy for a

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 887
79 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
time period is over 85 percent, the parking rates are increased by $0.50 per hour and if under 70 percent, rates are decreased by $0.50 per hour. Base rates cannot be lower than $0.50 per hour or higher than $5.00 per hour.
• Dedicate meter revenue to local access: The primary goal of a smart parking pricing program is to enhance the ease and convenience of access to Downtown, not to maximize revenue. To ensure merchant and public support for parking pricing, any meter and/or fine revenue collected in excess of program costs may be dedicated to parking and/or transportation improvements through the Downtown’s Parking Benefit District, rather than going to the City’s General Fund.

Funding
Installation, operation, and maintenance of parking meters for Downtown parking spaces (assuming meters are needed) could be funded by the TMA. If physical meters are to be installed, traditional smart parking meters can range in price, generally costing from $250 to $500 per single meter. As an example, there are roughly 340 candidate on-street parking spaces for meters identified within Downtown (on the segments shown previously in Figure 40). Metering this many spaces may range in cost from $85,000 to $170,000. For off-street lots, multi-space “pay by plate” meters can used, limiting the need for numerous meters. If needed, the TMA may distribute a portion of the parking citation and meter revenues collected within Downtown back into the upkeep of on-street parking meters in addition to using citation and meter revenue for other parking and/or transportation expenditures.

Parking Benefit District
Strategy for Future Consideration 2 – If parking pricing is implemented, consider establishing Downtown San Carlos as a Parking Benefit District (PBD) to return priced parking revenues to Downtown as transportation and public realm improvements.

Parking benefit districts (PBDs) are defined geographic areas, typically in downtowns or along commercial corridors, in which any revenue generated from on-street and off-street parking facilities within the district is returned to the district to finance neighborhood improvements. While a TMA is the entity which manages the policy and resources within a defined district, the PBD is the mechanism that allows revenues that often go into the City’s General Fund (e.g., parking fees) to instead remain within the district that generates them.

By funding local transportation projects or improved parking through the PBD, residents, visitors, employees, and local businesses can see that there is a visible and clear benefit to paying for parking. In contrast, strategies such as paid parking can be unpopular when parking revenue is placed into a city’s general fund, as drivers and local business owners may feel there is little direct benefit to the district.

Parking Assessment Districts (PADs) function differently from a PBD and cannot be used as a substitute for a PBD. A PAD raises funds to build more parking by levying a fee on developments within the PAD whereas a PBD simply directs funding from various sources to remain in the district. A PBD is only applicable if there are revenues from assessments, business fees, user fees, or some other source to generate funding.

If priced parking were to be implemented in Downtown, the Citywide TMA may establish the Downtown Specific Plan area as a PBD such that City revenues from drivers parked in priced on- or off-street parking spaces (after subtracting the administrative costs of managing the PBD and meter operation costs) would return to the area in the form of transportation and public realm improvements. In practice, a successful PBD in San Carlos could be implemented in the following fashion and incorporate certain key elements.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 888
80 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025

1. Adoption of a City ordinance creating a Downtown PBD, stipulating that all parking revenue generated within the PBD be used to fund designated improvements.

2. Development of an approved program of revenue expenditures by the TMA, subject to final approval by the City Council.

3. Adoption of a defined list of PBD revenue expenditures, which can include the following:
a. Shared parking agreements;
b. Purchase and installation costs of meters;
c. Construction of additional parking, if deemed to be necessary; d. Transit, pedestrian, bicycle, and other micromobility (scooters, E-bikes, etc.) infrastructure and amenities;
e. Additional parking enforcement;
f. Marketing and promotion of PBD and local businesses; g. Management activities for the TMA;
h. Valet parking services during special events or peak periods; i. Shuttle services;
j. Landscaping and streetscape greening;
k. Street cleaning, power-washing of sidewalks, and graffiti removal; and l. “Mobility Ambassadors” to provide assistance to visitors as well as additional security.

4. Development of a coordinated public relations plan, which could use wayfinding, signage, and public outreach to articulate how parking revenue is being used to benefit downtown.

5. Performance of ongoing evaluation and management of PBD policies and expenditures.

Resident Permits for Priced Parking
Strategy for Future Consideration 3 – Should parking be priced in Downtown, the City may create virtual permits (linked to license plate numbers) for residents to park in priced spaces free of charge.

Description
Resident meter parking permits are placards, stickers, or virtual permits that allow residents within a city or geographic area to park at meters free of charge. One of the best local examples of a resident meter permit program is in Mill Valley, where the City has operated a Resident Shopper Vehicle Permit (RSVP) program for several years. The program allows residents of Mill Valley and those in surrounding zip codes to purchase annual permits for $75 to $105 for one or more vehicles. Other towns known for being tourist destinations such as San Clemente and Newport Beach in Orange County also employ similar programs, and fees for these programs range from $50 to $627.50 per year.

Purpose
Priced parking is often used as a way to manage visitor or employee-driven parking demand. However, residents often object to the notion of paying for parking when the “problem” is being caused by those not living there. A resident permit for priced on-street parking allows the community to take advantage of the benefits of priced parking in managing demand while allowing residents to pay a small fee for unlimited short-term use of those parking spaces.

Implementation
Should priced parking be implemented in Downtown San Carlos, virtual permits for priced parking could be offered to residents at a relatively low cost. The permits could be linked to a vehicle’s license plate

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 889
81 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
number and enforcement could recognize vehicles with permits using license plate recognition (LPR). The City would need to clearly define the area(s) in which residents are eligible for meter parking permits, although it would be simplest for all San Carlos residents to be eligible. If resident permits are used, they would only exempt users from paying for short-term parking, as turnover should still be maintained for high-demand on-street spaces. For spaces with a “2+ hour” graduated rate structure, residents with permits for priced on-street parking would be exempt from paying for the first two hours. After two hours of parking, residents would be expected to pay for subsequent hours. Similarly, permits in off-street lots may exempt users from paying parking fees for the first three hours.

Parking Benefit District (PBD) and Parking Management Authority Strategy for Future Consideration 4 – The City could establish the authority and guidelines to implement a future Parking Benefit District (PBD) in the Zoning Ordinance. Consider granting parking management authority to the Director of Public Works.

In combination with the “Parking Benefit District” and “Parking Pricing” strategies referenced previously, the City could establish the authority and guidelines to implement a future Parking Benefit District (PBD) in the Zoning Ordinance, including granting parking management authority to the Director of Public Works. The Zoning Ordinance could outline the process for establishing a PBD; for example, a PBD is initiated by a neighborhood business representative, organization (such as the TMA), or the Director of Public Works and a complete application is reviewed by City Council. PBD revenue allocation and oversight of the organization could be described within the Code along with a list of potential PBD revenue expenditures.

To enable City staff to be responsive to changes in travel patterns and parking demand in Downtown, the Director of Public Works may be enabled to sign or mark spaces with appropriate regulations as necessary.

These types of space regulations could include time-limited vehicle parking, permit parking, accessible parking, loading zones, bicycle parking, electric vehicle charging spaces, car share parking spaces, outdoor dining areas, or other regulations. The Director of Public Works could also be able to price on- and offstreet spaces, adjust the hours of fee collection, and raise or lower meter rates within set rules and boundaries. As described in the “Parking Pricing” section, a primarily non-residential or mixed-use blockface or lot could be priced if the occupancy exceeds 70 percent continually for three hours. After a space is priced, the Director could modify paid hours and parking rates for the morning (before 11:00 a.m.), afternoon (11:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.), and evening (after 5:00 p.m.) periods to achieve a target parking occupancy of 70 to 85 percent. This could be done through an annual survey of parking occupancy. If the average occupancy for a time period is over 85 percent, the base parking rates are increased by $0.50 per hour and if under 70 percent, rates are decreased by $0.50 per hour. Rates must be between $0.50 and $5.00 per hour.

Parking Maximums
Strategy for Future Consideration 5 – Implement tiered vehicle parking maximums for Downtown with a district-wide cap on the number of new parking spaces.

Description
Providing more parking than is necessary reduces the land available for other uses, impacts walkability and a district’s placemaking while increasing traffic congestion, vehicle miles traveled, and housing and transportation costs. Currently, Downtown San Carlos has an oversupply of parking, particularly private

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 890
82 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
parking as occupancy for private parking was not recorded to exceed 57 percent during any hour surveyed.

During the peak hour of demand on Thursday at 12 p.m., Downtown San Carlos has a surplus of 834 spaces (32.8 percent of the effective parking supply) which indicates that there is a need to better utilize the existing parking spaces in Downtown rather than build additional parking.

Parking maximums set a cap on the amount of new parking that an individual project or a district can supply.

Maximums can reduce the oversupply of new parking as Downtown experiences the significant growth anticipated for the next 20 years per the Downtown Specific Plan, encouraging developers to rely on the existing parking supply in addition to providing new parking. Parking maximums support affordability (particularly housing affordability) by mandating that developers use their land efficiently and avoid building excessively large parking facilities, as high construction and land costs of excess parking are often passed onto residents and tenants. Additionally, maximums support sustainable travel behavior by decreasing the amount of land allocated to parking, which in turn leads to denser development and a more walkable environment. Denser development in Downtown increases ridership for nearby transit lines and permits more households and businesses to locate close to transit and other amenities.

Setting parking maximums that comply with the MTC TOC policy allows the City to be eligible for grant funding. Within a half-mile of the San Carlos Caltrain station (classified as a Tier 3 station by MTC), MTC requires that a parking maximum of 1.0 space per unit or lower is set for residential development, and a parking maximum of 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet or lower is set for commercial developments. Upon completion of the 20 years of development included in the Downtown Specific Plan, assuming that the maximums from the TOC policy apply (and that residential and office projects build to their maximums while other retail and restaurant uses do not provide new parking), the existing effective Downtown parking supply would be expected to slightly exceed peak demand (there would be two excess spaces in the North Downtown and 67 excess spaces in the South Downtown).

Currently, MTC offers flexibility in complying with its policy. For example, the City could set a district-wide maximum (meaning that parking is limited for the entire district but is not capped on a site-by-site basis) or set a residential maximum by bedroom rather than unit, provided that the “per bedroom” maximum is approximately equivalent to the “per unit” maximum. Recent multi-family residential developments in San Carlos included 1.7 bedrooms per unit (or 0.6 units per bedroom) on average, so MTC’s 1.0 space per unit maximum could be implemented as a 0.6 space per bedroom maximum in San Carlos. This would be favorable to developers who expressed that the number of bedrooms per unit factors heavily into the decision of how much parking to provide. A cap of one space per unit could allow more than enough parking for a development with largely studio or one-bedroom units, while this same maximum would be overly constrained for a development with two- or three-bedroom units.

Proposed Standards
A “soft” (Tier 1) and “firm” (Tier 2) maximums could be implemented for the Downtown Parking District. A developer can supply parking up to the Tier 2 maximum if they (a) make 100 percent of on-site parking publicly accessible and potentially priced during some or all hours; (b) provide supplemental TDM measures in addition to those required in the TDM ordinance; or (c) pay an in-lieu fee to the City that would offset the impacts of building additional parking.

To comply with MTC TOC policy, a district-wide cap of 1.0 space per residential unit and 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of non-residential development would be set based on anticipated growth in Downtown by 2045. Developers should be able to supply parking up to the Tier 1 or Tier 2 maximums until the

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 891
83 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Downtown Parking District contains the maximum allowed spaces for all land use types combined. If the General Plan is adjusted to increase or decrease the projected development in Downtown, the maximum allowed spaces should be adjusted accordingly. The proposed vehicle parking maximums are provided in Table 22.

Table 22 – Proposed Vehicle Parking Maximums for Downtown Land Use Tier 1 Tier 2 MTC TOC Downtown Parking District Cap Ratio Projected
Growth
Allowed
Spaces*
Multi-Family Residential 0.7 spaces/bdr 0.8 spaces/bdr 1 space/unit 1,516 units 1,516 spaces Non-Residential 2.0 spaces/ksf 2.5 spaces/ksf 2.5 spaces/ksf 421 ksf 1,052 spaces Hotel 0.7 spaces/rm 0.9 spaces/rm 1 space/unit 100 rooms 100 spaces Other Determined by Director N/A N/A N/A
Total N/A N/A N/A 2,668 spaces
Note: All requirements represent parking maximums; bdr = bedroom; ksf = 1,000 square feet; rm = room; TOC policy is not
specific regarding hotel maximums. Residential maximums have been used as the closest proxy; * = Number of
allowed spaces for individual land use types can be exceeded before 2045 if the number of allowed spaces for all land
uses combined is not yet met
Discussion
Including the ability for developers to exceed maximums up to a “Tier 2” level offers flexibility for property owners wishing to provide more vehicle parking to buyers, tenants, visitors, and/or public use, while still maintaining a cap on the number of spaces that can be built. The added flexibility could reduce the likelihood of parking maximums discouraging new development, as supplying what developers consider “sufficient” parking is important to developers in ensuring their products will be marketable. However, as building extra parking above the maximum requirements could induce more driving and negatively impact the walkability of Downtown, developers should select measures to offset the effects of building more parking. Making parking spaces publicly accessible increases the utilization of spaces and reduces the need to build additional public spaces elsewhere in the area. Additional TDM measures would reduce the vehicle miles traveled of the building’s occupants to counteract the increasing driving enabled by building more parking. A parking in-lieu fee could be used to pay for multimodal improvements or parking management strategies to reduce the reliance on private vehicles and better utilize the existing parking supply.

Data from developments in San Carlos (primarily within or near Downtown) from 2019 to 2024 show that fully market-rate residential developments have supplied 0.73 spaces per bedroom on average, partially affordable residential developments have supplied 0.75 spaces per bedroom on average, and fully affordable developments have supplied 0.48 spaces per bedroom on average. Non-residential office and research and development projects included 2.07 spaces per 1,000 square feet and a recent 188-room hotel development included 0.82 spaces per room. Recent development data suggests that non-residential development would likely not be affected by the 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet maximum from the TOC policy. However, residential developers would not be able to provide their desired parking ratios with a 0.6

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 892
84 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
space per bedroom maximum (which is about equal to the 1.0 space per unit maximum from the TOC policy). As such, the maximums proposed in Table 22 are intended to better match actual marked conditions (i.e., providing greater flexibility to residential development and less to commercial development). With a

0.8 space per bedroom maximum and Downtown district cap on vehicle parking spaces, developers would generally be able to supply up to their desired parking ratios.

If the overall cap on new vehicle spaces is met within 20 years (based on the sum of allowed spaces for residential, non-residential, and hotel land use types), then new developments in Downtown would be unable to supply new parking and would need to lease spaces from nearby facilities or rely on the public parking supply. While spaces that are currently underutilized may be available for use, new developments would be required and/or incentivized to make their parking spaces publicly accessible, which would increase the publicly accessible parking supply. A growing public parking supply would allow residents, employees, and visitors to park for uses unable to provide private parking after the district cap is met.

Although Table 22 notes that 1,516 spaces are permitted for multi-family residential uses in Downtown, more residential parking spaces (1,700 for example) could be built if the total number of spaces is less than the overall cap of 2,668 spaces for the Downtown. By treating residential, non-residential, and hotel parking spaces as interchangeable for the purposes of the district cap, the approach gives greater flexibility for residential developers to build more parking spaces than one space per unit if non-residential developers elect to provide less than 2.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet. The total number of spaces allowed in Downtown should be changed each time the General Plan is adjusted, such that more parking spaces can be built if the amount of expected development increases.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 893
85 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions
Although available parking may be difficult to find in high-demand parts of Downtown during peak hours, parking is generally underutilized in Downtown San Carlos, particularly in certain facilities such as the SamTrans garage, the Wheeler Parking Garage, and the Caltrain lot. Over the next 20 years, the completion of anticipated development would increase parking demand and is expected to increase the need for parking management in Downtown. Future growth presents an opportunity for the City to adjust the Zoning Ordinance to better take advantage of existing parking resources, mandate robust bicycle parking, and reward drivers who do not own a car with lower housing costs through “unbundled” parking. The City should consider implementing some or all of the strategies and Zoning Code changes in this plan to more efficiently manage downtown parking, promote alternatives to driving alone, prepare for incoming development, and create a more welcoming environment for all users.

Recommendations
The following phased strategies are recommended for implementation in the Downtown. Zoning updates are listed separately from the operational strategies, but they are assumed to be implemented in the shortterm. An overall recommendation is that the City conduct parking occupancy surveys every other year to determine if more robust parking management measures are needed.

Short-Term Strategies (2025-2030)
• Short-Term Strategy 1 – Suspend the Downtown Employee Parking Permit program. Designate the second floor of the Wheeler Parking Garage and the top floor of the SamTrans Garage as free ten-hour parking.
• Short Term Strategy 2 – Modify the time-restricted hours for all on-street parking and high-demand public off-street parking to include the period between 6:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m., as well as Sundays.

Move the time-restricted hours for all Downtown public parking to begin at 8:00 a.m. instead of 7:00 a.m. if this is supported by future data collected.
• Short-Term Strategy 3 – Create a Citywide Transportation Management Association (TMA) for San Carlos that includes Downtown.
• Short-Term Strategy 4 – Install parking wayfinding signs to guide drivers to new free ten-hour parking spaces, as well as shared, private parking spaces should they become accessible to the public. • Short-Term Strategy 5 – In advance of formation of the TMA, the City should provide online mobility information for visitors, employees, and residents traveling to and from Downtown including information on multimodal travel options, commuter programs, parking lot locations, parking costs, and parking regulations.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 894
86 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
• Short-Term Strategy 6 – The City should pursue shared parking agreements with private off-street lot owners and Caltrain to better utilize the existing parking resources within Downtown. The Citywide TMA would take over responsibility for pursuing and managing shared parking agreements once it is formed. • Short-Term Strategy 7 – The City should either transition from enforcement through the County’s Sheriff Office to an internal office of Community Service Officers (CSOs) or third-party enforcement, or augment enforcement through the Sherriff’s office. If internal or augmented enforcement is selected, investment should be made in one or more electric interceptor vehicles with Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR) technology.
• Short-Term Strategy 8 – Introduce permits for residents of new multi-family developments in Downtown to park without limits in time restricted or priced on-street spaces along or near their building’s frontage. The cost of the permit should be equivalent to the market value of the space. • Short-Term Strategy 9 – When improving Downtown streets, prohibit parking near intersections per the state “Daylighting” law and designate accessible on-street spaces required by the federal Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG).

Mid-Term Strategies (As part of Downtown Street Improvements) • Mid-Term Strategy 1 – Install a Downtown bicycle parking “hub” on the 700 Block of Laurel Street that includes bicycle racks, bicycle lockers, and a bicycle repair station. • Mid-Term Strategy 2 – Designate residential streets within Downtown as a potential Residential Permit Parking (RPP) district. Establish an escalating permit price structure (e.g. $25 for the first permit, $50 for the second permit, etc.) and tiered price structure based on a residence’s off-street parking capacity (e.g. residents of homes with no garage or driveway receive free permits while residents with more offstreet parking spaces pay a greater amount).

Long-Term Strategies (Following Mid-Term and If Needed) • Long-Term Strategy 1 – Operate vehicle and bicycle valet programs for special events in Downtown.

Zoning Ordinance Updates
• Update 1 – Establish Downtown San Carlos as a distinct parking district. • Update 2 – Eliminate vehicle parking minimums for Downtown from the City’s parking requirements. • Update 3 – Per AB 2097, the City can require that parking built within Downtown be shared with the public.
• Update 4 – Mandate unbundled parking for new multi-unit residential and non-residential developments within Downtown.
• Update 5 – Reference state and federal standards for electric vehicle and accessible parking in the Zoning Ordinance and ensure compliance for new and altered facilities.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 895
87 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
• Update 6 – Revise the existing bicycle parking requirements for Downtown to be independent from the number of vehicle parking spaces required, consider newer and/or emerging bicycle types, and include more specificity in the design guidelines.
• Update 7 – For Downtown TDM policy reforms, refer to the project to update the Citywide TDM Ordinance.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 896
88 San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Study Participants and References
Study Participants
Principal in Charge Brian Canepa, TDM-CP
Transportation Engineer Nathan Sharafian, EIT
Editing/Formatting Jessica Bender, Rebecca Mansour, Erika Totanes Quality Control Dalene J. Whitlock, PE, PTOE
References
2022 Paid Parking Annual Report, Seattle Department of Transportation, September 2023 Automated License Plate Recognition Policy, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority, https://www. sfmta. com/about-us/sfmta-board-directors/sfmta-policies/automated-license-platerecognition-policy, accessed April 7, 2022 California Building Code, 2022
California Green Building Standards Code, 2022
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways, California Department of Transportation, 2014
Public Right-of-Way Accessibility Guidelines (PROWAG), United States Access Board, adopted 2024 San Carlos 2030 General Plan, 2009
San Carlos Municipal, Code, 2024
Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Policy, Metropolitan Transportation Commission, https://mtc.ca.gov/planning/land-use/transit-oriented-communities-toc-policy accessed 2024 SCA038

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 897
i
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Appendix A
Shared Parking Agreement Template

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 898
ii
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Sample Shared Parking Agreement

CITY OF SACRAMENTO

PARKING MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
This Parking Management Agreement (“Agreement”) is made and entered into on ____________, 2021 (“Effective Date”), by and between ___________________, a ____________ corporation (“OWNER”) and the City of Sacramento, a municipal corporation (“City”).

Background
Based on the facts in the foregoing background, the City and OWNER agree as follows:

1. Parking Lot. The terms of this Agreement apply to the parking lot located at ________________ in Sacramento, California (hereafter “Lot”), as identified in the map attached hereto as Exhibit A.

2. Term; Termination.

A. Term. Unless terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Section 2, the Initial Term of the Agreement commences on the Effective Date and expires on ____________. OWNER is entitled to ___________ option to extend this Agreement (“Extended Term”), by providing written notice of extension to City not less than 180 calendar days prior to the expiration of the Initial Term.

B. Termination.
(1) Termination for Convenience. Either party may terminate this Agreement, at any time, by providing the other party written notice no less than 30 calendar days prior to the selected date of termination. Termination or expiration of this Agreement shall not release any party hereto from any liability or obligation hereunder, whether of indemnity or otherwise, resulting from any acts, omissions, or events happening prior to such termination or expiration. Upon termination or expiration of this Agreement, City will have 30 calendar days to remove any personal property from the Lot. All improvements paid for by OWNER shall remain the property of OWNER. (2) Early Termination Fee. _________ acknowledges certain initial costs incurred by City to activate this Agreement. As such, OWNER agrees to pay City $XXXXX if OWNER terminates this Agreement within 12 months after the Effective Date. Any early termination payment must be made by check payable to “City of Sacramento” and sent to the City address specified in Section 8 within 30 calendar days after receipt of City’s invoice.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 899
iii
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025

3. Use. The Lot will be used solely and exclusively for the operation of a parking lot. Hours of operation will be determined by OWNER. Any change in use to all or a portion of the Lot must be mutually agreed upon in writing by both parties. The Lot will primarily be used for the following parking purposes unless otherwise agreed to by the parties:

A.

4. Management of Lot. Beginning on the Effective Date, City will manage parking operations for the Lot according to the following terms and conditions:

A. Parking Enforcement. City will add the Lot to its regular patrol coverage and issue citations for violations of posted signs. OWNER hereby consents to individuals parking on its Lot for purposes of City Code section 10.44.010(A).

B. Revenue Collection. City will collect all revenue from citations issued to vehicles parked in the Lot, perform billings, and collect accounts receivable in relation to City’s operation of the Lot. Revenue includes the total amount of cash receipts generated from all business operations conducted upon or from the Lot by City, including monthly permits, daily fees, and validations (collectively, “Total Gross Revenue”). Citation fees collected by City from its enforcement of the Lot will not be included in the Total Gross Revenue.

C. Electronic Permit Fees. City will invoice OWNER $1 for every electronic permit issued whereby the permit fee is collected directly by City. City will invoice OWNER $5 for every electronic permit issued whereby the permit fee is collected by OWNER. Payment must be made by check payable to “City of Sacramento” and sent to the City address specified below in Section 8 within 30 calendar days after receipt of City’s invoice.

D. Revenue Distribution. City will pay OWNER 80 percent of Total Gross Revenue collected at the Lot during each month (“OWNER Proceeds”). City will pay OWNER Proceeds to OWNER within 60 calendar days after completion of each month. Payment will be made by check mailed to OWNER’s address specified below in Section 8. Upon payment, City shall provide brief details of the income sources in a form reasonably acceptable by OWNER. The remaining 20 percent of Total Gross Revenue will be retained by City for its labor expenses, operating expenses, and monthly management fee.

E. Dismissal of Citations. If OWNER requests dismissal of a citation and City evaluates and dismisses the citation, OWNER shall pay City a $25 administrative fee (per citation) to recoup City’s staff time. Payment must be made by check payable to “City of Sacramento” and sent to the City address specified below in Section 8 within 30 calendar days after receipt of City’s invoice.

F. Improvements. OWNER, at OWNER’s expense, is responsible for all improvements to the Lot, including without limitation re-paving, striping, and installation of all signage required by City or other governmental regulations. OWNER may request that City perform such improvements to the Lot, but OWNER will be responsible for the cost and City may decline to perform such improvements in its sole discretion.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 900
iv
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
G. Maintenance, Repair, and Custodial. OWNER shall keep and maintain the Lot and all improvements thereon in good repair and in a neat and satisfactory condition, and shall make all repairs and replacements that may become necessary to the Lot, whether structural or nonstructural, ordinary or extraordinary. OWNER may request that City maintain the Lot and all improvements, but OWNER will be responsible for the cost and City may decline to perform such maintenance in its sole discretion. All notices and signs upon the Lot shall be neat and properly maintained. OWNER has the right to enter the Lot at all reasonable times to inspect the same. City is responsible for performing light custodial services such as minor trash pick up and clean up.

H. Payment Machines. City will install and maintain one parking payment machine to be used by customers parking in the Lot. City will retain ownership of the parking pay machine and will promptly remove it from the Lot upon termination or expiration of this Agreement.

I. Security. City will add the Lot to its regular security patrol route, but City shall not be responsible for the personal safety or security of any person or personal property on the Lot.

J. Utilities and Services. All charges for water, gas, light, heat, power, electricity, telephone or other communication service, janitorial service, trash pick-up, sewer, and all other services supplied to or consumed on the Lot, and all taxes, levies, fees, or surcharges related to the Lot shall be the sole responsibility of OWNER.

5. Release of Liability. OWNER shall release and hold City harmless for loss, damage, theft, or vandalism to property and equipment, or personal injury, of OWNER and its officers, employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors, invitees, volunteers, and others acting under its or their authority while such individuals, property or equipment is in or on the Lot, except where such loss of or damage to property and equipment, or personal injury, results from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of City and its officials, employees, agents or volunteers.

6. Indemnity.

A. Each party shall defend, hold harmless and indemnify the other party, its officers and employees, and each and every one of them, from and against any and all actions, damages, costs, liabilities, claims, demands, losses, judgments, penalties, costs and expenses of every type and description, including, but not limited to, any fees and/or costs reasonably incurred by staff attorneys or outside attorneys and any fees and expenses incurred in enforcing this provision (hereafter collectively referred to as “Liabilities”), including but not limited to Liabilities arising from personal injury or death, damage to personal property, real property, or the environment, contractual or other economic damages, or regulatory penalties, arising out of or in any way connected with performance of or failure to perform this Agreement by the indemnifying party, any subcontractor or agent, anyone directly or indirectly employed by any of them or anyone for whose acts any of them may be liable, whether or not (i) such Liabilities are caused in part by a party indemnified hereunder or (ii) such Liabilities are litigated, settled or reduced to judgment; provided that the foregoing indemnity does not apply to liability for any damage or expense for death or bodily injury to persons or damage to property to the extent arising from the sole negligence or willful misconduct of the indemnified party, its agents, servants, or independent contractors who are

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 901
v
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
directly responsible to the indemnified party, except when such agents, servants, or independent contractors are under the direct supervision and control of the indemnifying party. The provisions of this Section 6 shall survive any expiration or termination of this Agreement.

B. It is the intention of City and OWNER that, where comparative fault is determined to have been contributory, principles of comparative fault will be followed and each party shall bear the proportionate cost of any damage attributable to the fault of that party, its officers, directors, agents, employees, volunteers, and contractors.

7. Insurance Requirements. During the entire term of this Agreement, OWNER shall maintain the insurance coverage described in this Section 7. Insurance requirements are subject to review and revision every five (5) years to assure that policy terms, conditions and limits are maintained in accordance with current insurance industry standards for comparable premises and buildings.

City will not provide any compensation for OWNER’s insurance premiums. Any available insurance proceeds in excess of the specified minimum limits and coverages shall be available to the City.

It is understood and agreed by OWNER that its liability to the City shall not in any way be limited to or affected by the amount of insurance coverage required or carried by OWNER in connection with this Agreement.

A. Minimum Scope & Limits of Insurance Coverage.
(1) Commercial General Liability Insurance providing coverage at least as broad as ISO CGL Form 00 01 on an occurrence basis for bodily injury, including death, of one or more persons, property damage, and personal injury, arising out of activities performed by or on behalf of OWNER, its sub-consultants, and subcontractors, products and completed operations of OWNER, its sub-consultants, and subcontractors, and premises owned, leased, or used by OWNER, its sub-consultants, and subcontractors, with limits of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per occurrence. The policy shall provide contractual liability and products and completed operations coverage for the term of the policy. (2) Automobile Liability Insurance providing coverage at least as broad as ISO Form CA 00 01 for bodily injury, including death, of one or more persons, property damage, and personal injury, with limits of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000) per accident. The policy shall provide coverage for owned, non-owned, and/or hired autos as appropriate to the operations of OWNER.
(3) Excess Insurance: The minimum limits of insurance required above may be satisfied by a combination of primary and umbrella or excess insurance coverage; provided that any umbrella or excess insurance shall contain, or be endorsed to contain, a provision that it shall apply on a primary basis for the benefit of the City, and any insurance or selfinsurance maintained by City, its officials, employees, or volunteers shall be in excess of such umbrella or excess coverage and shall not contribute with it. (4) Workers’ Compensation Insurance with statutory limits, and Employers’ Liability Insurance with limits of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000). The Workers’ Compensation policy shall include a waiver of subrogation in favor of the City.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 902
vi
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
B. Additional Insured Coverage.
(1) Commercial General Liability Insurance: The City, its officials, employees, and volunteers shall be covered by policy terms or endorsement as additional insureds as respects general liability arising out of: activities performed by or on behalf of OWNER, its subconsultants, and subcontractors; products and completed operations of OWNER, its subconsultants, and subcontractors; and premises owned, leased, or used by OWNER, its subconsultants, and subcontractors. (2) Automobile Liability Insurance: The City, its officials, employees, and volunteers shall be covered by policy terms or endorsement as additional insureds as respects auto liability.

C. Other Insurance Provisions.

The policies are to contain, or be endorsed to contain, the following provisions:
(1) OWNER’s insurance coverage, including excess insurance, shall be primary insurance as respects City, its officials, employees, and volunteers. Any insurance or self-insurance maintained by City, its officials, employees, or volunteers shall be in excess of OWNER’s insurance and shall not contribute with it.
(2) Any failure to comply with reporting provisions of the policies shall not affect coverage provided to City, its officials, employees, or volunteers. (3) Coverage shall state that OWNER’s insurance shall apply separately to each insured against whom claim is made or suit is brought, except with respect to the limits of the insurer’s liability.
(4) City will be provided with thirty (30) days written notice of cancellation or material change in the policy language or terms.

D. Acceptability of Insurance.

Insurance shall be placed with insurers with a Bests’ rating of not less than A:VI. Self-insured retentions, policy terms or other variations that do not comply with the requirements of this Section 7 must be declared to and approved by the City in writing prior to execution of this Agreement.

E. Verification of Coverage.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 903
vii
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
(1) OWNER shall furnish City with certificates and required endorsements evidencing the insurance required. The certificates and endorsements shall be forwarded to the City Representative named in Section 8. Copies of policies shall be delivered to the City on demand. Certificates of insurance shall be signed by an authorized representative of the insurance carrier.
(2) For all insurance policy renewals during the term of this Agreement, OWNER shall send insurance certificates reflecting the policy renewals directly to:

City of Sacramento
c/o Exigis LLC
PO Box 947
Murrieta, CA 92564
(3) Certificate Holder must be listed as:

City of Sacramento
c/o Exigis LLC
PO Box 947
Murrieta, CA 92564
(4) The City may withdraw its offer of contract or cancel this Agreement if the certificates of insurance and endorsements required have not been provided prior to execution of this Agreement. The City may cancel the Agreement if the insurance is canceled or OWNER otherwise ceases to be insured as required herein.

F. Subcontractors.

OWNER shall require and verify that all sub-consultants and subcontractors maintain insurance coverage that meets the minimum scope and limits of insurance coverage specified in subsection A, above.

8. Notices. All notices shall be in writing and shall be deemed received when delivered personally or deposited in the United States mail, registered or certified, postage prepaid, or delivered by overnight courier, and addressed to the following address:

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 904
viii
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
To OWNER:

To City:

Parking Services Division
Attn: Parking Services Manager
300 Richards Blvd., 2nd Floor
Sacramento, CA 95811

9. No Agency. This Agreement does not create or imply any partnership, agency, or joint venture. No relationship of employer-employee shall exist between OWNER and City for any purpose whatsoever.

OWNER shall not be entitled to any benefits payable to employees of the City. OWNER shall have no authority, express or implied, to act on behalf of City in any capacity whatsoever as an agent or to bind City to any obligations whatsoever.

10. Binding Effect. This Agreement shall be binding on the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of the parties.

11. Headings. The headings contained in this Agreement are for purposes of convenience only and are not to be used to interpret or construe this Agreement.

12. Waiver. A party’s failure to insist on strict performance of this Agreement or to exercise any right or remedy upon breach of this Agreement will not constitute a waiver of the performance, right, or remedy. Wavier of a breach of any provision in this Agreement is not a continuing waiver or a waiver of any later breach of the same or any other provision. No waiver will be effective unless it is in writing and signed by the waiving party.

13. Severability. In the event that any provision of this Agreement is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid or is rendered invalid by any provision of state or federal law, the remainder of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.

14. Enforcement of Agreement. This Agreement shall be governed, construed, and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Venue of any litigation arising out of or connected with this Agreement shall lie exclusively in the state trial court or federal district court located in Sacramento County, California, and the parties consent to jurisdiction over their persons and over the subject matter of any such litigation in such courts, and consent to service of process issued by such courts.

15. Attorney Fees. Except as required by Section 6 above, the parties shall bear their own costs and attorneys’ fees incurred in connection with this Agreement.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 905
ix
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025

16. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is solely for the benefit of the City and OWNER. It is not intended to benefit any third parties.

17. Counterparts. The parties may sign this Agreement in counterparts, each of which is considered an original, but all of which constitute the same agreement. Facsimiles, pdfs, and photocopies of signature pages have the same binding effect as originals. The parties agree that this document may be executed with electronic signatures.

18. Authority. The persons signing this Agreement represent and warrant that they are fully authorized to sign this Agreement on behalf of their respective party and to bind their respective party to the performance of the Agreement’s obligations.

19. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, which includes all attachments and all documents that are incorporated by reference, contains the entire agreement between the parties and supersedes whatever oral or written understanding they may have had prior to the execution of this Agreement. No alteration to the terms of this Agreement shall be valid unless approved in writing by both parties. [Signature Page Follows]

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 906
x
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Executed as of the Effective Date stated above.

OWNER CITY OF SACRAMENTO
a Municipal Corporation
By: __________________________ By: ______________________________ Assistant City Manager
Name: __________________________ For: City Manager
Title: __________________________
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
________________________________ BY: ___________________________ State I.D. No. Senior Deputy City Attorney
________________________________ ATTEST:

Fed. Tax ID No.

By: ___________________________
________________________________ Assistant City Clerk
City of Sac. Business Op. Tax Cert. No.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 907
xi
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Exhibit A – Map

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 908
xii
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Appendix B
Sample ALPR Policy

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 909
B
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 2025
Sample Automated License Plate Recognition Policy
The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) provides transportation and parking services for residents and visitors to the City of San Francisco. SFMTA uses Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) to support this mission.

What Is ALPR?
ALPR is a camera system that takes a picture of a license plate and uses a computer algorithm to convert the image of the license plate, and the characters it contains, into computer-readable data (ALPR data).

Purpose
SFMTA collects ALPR data for the purposes of managing SFMTA parking facilities and calculating parking fees, issuing citations for violations of parking laws and regulations, and collecting citation fines.

Authorized Users
Parking enforcement officers, SFMTA staff and contractors involved in issuing citations and collecting parking citation fines, and parking facility operators are authorized to access ALPR data.

Training
SFMTA conducts annual training of staff on the proper handling of personal information which includes ALPR data. The training addresses appropriate handling and transmission procedures, as well as consequences of an ALPR data security breach. SFMTA contractors and parking facility operators are required to provide similar training to their employees who access ALPR data.

Information Security
SFMTA utilizes physical access controls, computer application permission controls, and other technological, administrative, procedural, operational, and personnel security measures to record who has accessed ALPR data, the time and date of access, and reason for access, and to protect ALPR data from unauthorized access, destruction, use, modification or disclosure.

Official Custodian
The SFMTA’s Director of Security, Investigation and Enforcement is the Official Custodian of the SFMTA collected ALPR data and responsible for implementing this policy.

Audit
An ALPR Data Custodian performs a yearly audit to verify that all persons who access ALPR data are authorized to do so and that they have been properly trained. The Data Custodian reviews ALPR data requests and verifies they were properly approved. The Data Custodian also verifies that the SFMTA’s data retention policy has been properly enforced.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 910
xiv
San Carlos Downtown Parking Management Plan
October 14, 2025
Information Sharing
SFMTA only shares ALPR data with employees and contractors who responsible for processing citations and handling parking payments. SFMTA does not sell ALPR data to anyone, nor is it disclosed to the public. SFMTA will provide ALPR data to law enforcement if requested as part of a criminal investigation or if subpoenaed by a court or other public agency that has the legal authority to require the release of ALPR data.

Accuracy
Employees visually verify license plate data when a citation is issued or if there is a mismatch when a car leaves a parking facility.

Data Retention
ALPR data is stored based on the following schedule:
• License Plates collected, but not cited: Not retained • License Plates for issued parking citations: 5 years
• License Plates for parking in a parking garage: 60 days

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 911
 S TRATEGY AND P LANNING
 M ARKET AND L OCATION I NTELLIGENCE
 D EVELOPMENT M ANAGEMENT

G REENSFELDER C OMMERCIAL R EAL E STATE LLC
S AN F RANCISCO B AY A REA | W ASHINGTON , DC
415.696.6767 | WWW . GREENSFELDER . NET
S ENDER ’ S CONTACT INFORMATION :

D AVID S. G REENSFELDER

M ANAGING P RINCIPAL
D IRECT D IAL : 510.708.8927
E MAIL : DAVID @ GREENSFELDER . NET
DRAFT

APPENDIX C

DOWNTOWN PROSPERITY PLAN

INTRODUCTION
The goal of the San Carlos Downtown Prosperity Plan is to ensure that the success of downtown in the years ahead is shared broadly amongst all retailers and merchants of the downtown business community. This Downtown Prosperity Plan builds and expands upon the recently adopted San Carlos Economic Development Plan 2025-2028 and incorporates feedback from the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Streetscape Master Plan’s comprehensive community engagement process. The Prosperity Plan presents recommended policies, actions, and programs for the City of San Carlos to consider over the life of the Downtown Specific Plan.

The following goal for Downtown San Carlos is stated in the Downtown Specific Plan:

Ensure that the Downtown’s success is shared broadly among retailers providing diverse goods, food and beverages (F&B), and personal services in a setting that is attractive, welcoming, and safe while retaining and supporting the City creating an environment conducive to a unique mix of independent “local momand-pop” retailers in the downtown.

From a retail vitality perspective, the areas immediately adjacent to and close to Downtown are important because each represents an immediately local source of demand for goods and services from Downtown businesses. This Plan explores the factors that should be taken into consideration to ensure downtown San Carlos is successful in providing a diverse array goods, food and beverages, services, and other everyday needs.

In addition, this Plan describes the sort of place that is conducive to achieving these goals.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 912
10 BACKGROUND
Study Area Defined
Downtown San Carlos represents 67.46 acres of the City of San Carlos, 51.66 acres of which is parcelized and developed. The following map shows its relationship to surrounding neighborhoods and districts. The boundary of the Downtown Specific Plan is outlined in a solid red line on Figure 2 below, and will be referred to as the “Study Area” in this Prosperity Plan.

Figure 1. Downtown San Carlos Geographic Context
City of San Carlos’ 2025-2028 Economic Development Plan On March 24,2025, the City of San Carlos City Council adopted the 2025-2028 Economic Development Plan.

The 2025-2028 Economic Development Plan identifies several themes, three of which were particularly applicable to the Study Area: nurture placemaking and beautification, support enhanced connectivity and mobility, foster growth in the business community, and pro-actively plan for future growth. The previous plan (2021-24) also recognized that the Study Area is “essential to what defines San Carlos as a unique community.”
This plan, and its predecessor plan, made a number of observations and recommendations applicable to the

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 913
11 Study Area:
 San Carlos is well located on the Peninsula and has a residential population and a workforce with high incomes and education levels.
 There is limited room for businesses to expand within the City limits.  Maintain the current program of City events, and identify new opportunities to develop arts and cultural offerings as well as other community events.
 Development of public spaces should be prioritized in the Downtown area.  Improve sidewalks and parking in the Downtown area.
 Explore the formation of a Downtown merchants association or other entity to support implementation of the Downtown Specific Plan when it is complete.

In 2020, the City was pro-active in responding to the pandemic by recognizing that retail shopping patterns for goods, services, and food & beverage rapidly shifted. In response, the City established a tenant assistance program to help residential renters, and closed a portion of Laurel Street for pedestrians only. During that time, circumstances compounded with pandemic-related shifts in how business needed to be conducted and put pressure on retailers to change how they did business including an increased emphasis on leveraging alternative retail platforms and finding new ways to reach out to consumers. Some retailers were better positioned to meet these challenges than others.

The 2025-2028 Economic Development Plan did not contain a SWOT analysis, but the SWOT analysis from the 2021-2024 Economic Development Plan is as relevant today as it was when drafted:

The 2025-2028 Economic Development Plan identifies a number of recommended actions for improving the Study Area’s business climate and attractiveness including:

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 914

12  Develop and implement a formal business outreach strategy,  Conduct periodic business needs surveys to understand evolving needs,  Promote business diversity by supporting the development of affordable spaces for small businesses and start-ups,
 Activate vacant spaces with temporary uses,
 Create an inventory of developable sites, and
 Promote San Carlos businesses.

There are also actions identified in the 2021-2024 Economic Development Plan that still apply today including evaluating zoning constraints on retail uses, converting Wheeler Plaza into a community gathering place, and exploring the creation of a Downtown Business Improvement District (BID).

The action identified above was to evaluate zoning constraints on retail uses (eg. limits on permitted uses, outdoor food trucks, outdoor seating, pop-up retail, outdoor kiosks, and special events). Other identified priorities included updating the zoning code to provide greater flexibility for various uses, improving walkability, increasing the use of shared parking strategies, and increasing residential capacity in close proximity to CalTrain.

Downtown Demographic, Sales Tax, and Vulnerabilities
Key demographic characteristics for the City of San Carlos are summarized in the following table:

Number Percent
POPULATION 30,722 100%
Under 18 Years of Age 7,293 23%
65 Years of Age or Older 5,321 17%
Median Age 45.2
HOUSEHOLDS 11,791 100%
Total Family Households 8,093 68%
Average Household Size 2.60
Median Household Income $200,001

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Population Age 25 Years and Under 9,354 30%
High School Diploma or Higher 21,606 97%
Bachelor’s Degree or Higher 15,553 70%
Graduate or Professional Degree 8,407 38%
HOUSING UNITS 12,385 100%
Occupied Housing Units 11,879 96%
Owner Occupied 8,385 71%

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 915
13 Source: City of San Carlos 2025-2028 Economic Development Plan The overall picture is of an affluent suburb with high income ($200,001 median household income, and an impressive $102,982 per-capita income, a measure of purchasing power) and education levels, corresponding high rates of home ownership, and, by extension, an assumption that residents have a high degree of ownership in the community.

As part of understanding how retail has fared between 2018 and 2023, sales tax data was examined for 275 businesses in the Study Area on Laurel Street and San Carlos Avenue for the period between fiscal years 2018- 19 and between 2022-23 to try to determine the impact of Covid on store closures and sales over that period.

The following observations were made:
 60 of 275 businesses closed during the Covid pandemic.  Covid had an almost across-the-board negative effect on sales.  167 of 275 businesses had year-over-year sales increases for the 2022-23 period compared to the 2018-19 period.
 Only 161 of 275 businesses had annual sales increases from 2020-21 to 2022-23, meaning that most of the recovery from the onset of the pandemic had happened by 2020-21.  The most resilient category during Covid was Casual Dining Restaurants followed by specialty stores. The following observations were made about other retail categories:
o 5/8 Women’s Apparel Stores increased 2018-19 to 2022-23, but only 3/8 increased 2020-21 to 2022-23 (2 closed)
o 7/10 Family Apparel Stores increased 2018-19 to 2022-23, but only 4/10 increased 2020-21 to 2022-23 (2 closed)
o 3/7 Art/Gift/Novelty Stores increased 2018-19 to 2022-23, and 3/7 increased 2020-21 to 2022-23 (3 closed)
o 7/13 Quick Serve Restaurants increased 2018-19 to 2022-23, but 6/13 increased 2020-21 to 2022- 23 (4 closed)
o 52/69 Casual Dining Restaurants increased 2018-19 to 2022-23, but 42/67 increased 2020-21 to 2022-23 (11 closed)
o 13/17 Personal Service Stores increased 2018-19 to 2022-23, but 6/17 increased 2020-21 to 2022- 23 (2 closed)
o 35/47 Specialty Stores increased 2018-19 to 2022-23, but 29/47 increased 2020-21 to 2022-23 (11 closed)
The overall picture is of a retail base that had been impacted by Covid and Covid-recovery, but was not

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 916
14 devastated by the pandemic. The relatively low number of vacancies is encouraging, however, it should not be interpreted as though everything is stable. There are many businesses that continue to struggle compared with their performance pre-pandemic, and non-food-and-beverage businesses in the Downtown merit special attention to retain a diversity of retail offerings in Downtown San Carlos. This Prosperity Strategy is intended to address these issues as well as to make suggestions for the overall health of Downtown San Carlos.

Downtown San Carlos’ Vulnerabilities
The following qualitative observations about Downtown San Carlos include:
 Downtown San Carlos’ retail and food & beverage businesses do not operate in a vacuum. People have many choices within a short distance including Downtown San Mateo, Downtown Redwood City, Downtown Mountain View, Downtown Palo Alto, and Downtown Burlingame. Therefore, all businesses in downtown San Carlos operate in a competitive environment to attract consumer dollars.  At present, Downtown San Carlos does not compare favorably in terms of atmosphere and offerings with some other downtowns that are just a short drive away.
 Currently, sidewalks and amenities in Downtown San Carlos do not engender the quality of visitor experience that is expected by residents and visitors alike.  Non-F&B businesses sales are reported to have gone down significantly, and several business owners that were interviewed have laid off employees to a bare bones level (the ability to control labor expense is a key barometer for the health of a business).
 Several people interviewed said they like the environment, but others commented on the non-uniform and "junky" look of many of the improvements that have been made.  The 700-block closure necessitates the creation of a multi-modal circulation plan prioritizing bikes and pedestrians while redirecting autos to the perimeter of Downtown San Carlos. This plan will need to have a robust way-finding element to make Downtown intuitive to navigate all transportation modes.

Commodity and Specialty Retail – How Retail Functions Today Each community’s retail offering organizes and calibrates itself to local demand, and each community’s commercial strategy must be calibrated for a variety of local conditions including the local real estate market, consumer demographics, changes in consumption patterns, community vision, perspective and capabilities of property owners and tenants, a city’s available resources, available public-private partnership (P3) resources, and other factors. Any strategy should be clear, deliberate, and most importantly should differentiate the subject area from other destinations.

Understanding distinction between commodity and specialty retail, and how they lend themselves to the analysis of and any recommendations related to various retail projects and districts will be extremely useful.

Think less about retail as “box stores” or “malls,” and instead in a way that clearly distinguishes between “commodity” retail uses and “specialty” retail uses. In its simplest form, commodity retailers sell the goods

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 917
15 and services that we use every day, while specialty retailers sell what we splurge on. Because the factors that maximize performance of commodity retail projects and specialty retail districts are so different, we seek to clearly differentiate each in our analysis and strategic recommendations. This approach is further discussed in the Urban Land Institute’s Professional Real Estate Development handbook.

The goods commodity retailers sell generally are the same regardless of the origin of purchase. A cell phone or a reusable water bottle, for example, are exactly the same regardless of whether purchased from an airport vending machine, a store, or online. For this reason they are purchased with the trade-off between price and convenience being the primary decision-making function for the consumer who is asking the question, “Do I need it right now, or can I wait and get a better price?” An emotional connection to the purchase is not a part of this equation.

In contrast, specialty goods and services involve allocating discretionary income (i.e. income not earmarked for necessities like shelter or groceries) and discretionary time (i.e. time not devoted to required activities like work or school). Because discretionary income and time are limited, we have more of an emotional connection to how we allocated these scarce resources. For this reason, the physical environment and a sense of place in which these purchases are made become increasingly important. When we go out for a "white tablecloth" dinner, we prefer a High Street or a Lifestyle Center's neighborhood (location) and environment (improvements or facilities) to a quick-serve restaurant located on the outparcel of a big-box retail store or a power center.

Retailers and service providers are not strictly commodity or specialty in nature; they can straddle the line and be both. By extension, it is important to remember that commodity and specialty retail describes shopping behaviors as much, and perhaps more, than it describes a specific retailer or service provider. For example, all of the products sold in an Apple store strictly fall under the definition of commodities; the products are the same regardless of where we get them. That said, Apple has carefully curated its brand and their stores are designed to maximize “retail theater.” Similarly, the majority of the SKU’s in a Whole Foods store are

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 918
16 commodities, however, Whole Foods continues to add specialty and prepared foods to its in-store offerings. In some cases, Whole Foods stores have restaurants and the on-sale of alcoholic beverages. We shop the Apple Store much differently than we might shop for electronics at Costco or Walmart, and while we might buy commodities at Whole Foods, we often take advantage of offerings that are not readily available at a Safeway supermarket. Like the attention to branding and retail theater, both Apple and Whole Foods have a level of fit and finish meant to elicit a more emotional connection than we have at competing retailers. It is important to think about all of these factors when deciding if a retailer is commodity or specialty in nature, or about the sort of consumer behaviors that will be created when such a store opens. The same retailer might be either depending upon context or location. Do the project's location, neighborhood, customer base, and traffic patterns lend themselves more to commodity or specialty purchasing behaviors? CASE STUDIES: A LOOK AT SEVERAL DOWNTOWNS ALONG THE PENINSULA To understand the competitive environment in which Downtown San Carlos exists, a number of other downtown areas on the Peninsula were evaluated. A number of observations were made during site visits.

Downtown Burlingame
Burlingame Avenue is largely a 5-block corridor with some businesses on side streets. Like Downtown San Carlos, Burlingame Avenue's retail is a corridor more than a gridded district. Virtually no vacancy was observed, and sidewalks were well proportioned to allow for easy pedestrian movement with enough space for streetscape amenities. No portion of Burlingame Avenue was closed off to vehicles, instead the City took a traffic calming approach. The street’s width allowed for easy, casual street crossing, which is an important attribute for retail shopping streets. There is street parking (generally $1.00 per hour), district-serving parking in lots behind stores (also $1.00 per hour). While there are plenty of food & beverage operators, the overall tenant mix is well varied. There is connection to the CalTrain station, but CalTrain does not have enough riders to be a significant demand driver for Burlingame Avenue. Parklets appear to be reserved for specific merchants.

Downtown San Mateo
Downtown San Mateo is comprised by 16 square blocks that extends from 2nd to 5th Streets (4 blocks) and from El Camino Real to the railroad tracks (4 blocks). B Street is closed to vehicle traffic for 2 blocks, but the balance of the downtown is open to vehicles. Sidewalks are too narrow to accommodate streetscape amenities comfortably. B Street has a significant number of food & beverage operators, and there is a mix of both commodity and specialty retail throughout the balance of streets downtown. Low vacancy, an active leasing market, and far more independent merchants were observed in Downtown San Mateo than on Burlingame Avenue. In addition to street parking, there is district-level parking in garages and behind businesses (on-street parking is $1.50 per hour with a 3-hour limit in a core area and $1.00 per hour with a 3-

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 919
17 hour limit in a perimeter area; garages cost $1.25 per hour). Pedestrians were observed less on 4th Street, a much wider street with 2 vehicle lanes in each direction plus curbside parking. Pedestrians could easily, casually cross the streets in other locations, but not on 4th Street. One restaurant owner pointed out that Downtown San Mateo is less expensive than Burlingame Avenue, and that they do well with a lot of catering business from nearby offices. Similar to Burlingame Avenue, CalTrain is not a major demand driver for the district.

Downtown Redwood City
Less than a 10-minute drive from Downtown San Carlos is downtown Redwood City. Downtown Redwood City has the most diverse and mature mix of uses of any of the Peninsula downtowns that were surveyed with significant retail, entertainment, office, and residential uses. The area contains a central public plaza as its focal point and is more of a gridded commercial district than a single corridor. Similar to Downtown San Mateo, there is a limited street closure that appears to work well, and some road diet implementation that has led to easy street crossing in some areas, but not in other areas. Sidewalks of varying widths accommodate streetscape amenities to a greater or lesser degree depending on the block, and the wayfinding program and gateway monuments are better executed than in any other downtown surveyed as part of this study. In addition to street parking, there are centrally located parking garages (street parking costs $1.00 per hour, and garages are free for 1½ hours and then cost $1.00-2.50 per hour thereafter). Retail compatible non-retail uses, such as medical providers, share Downtown Redwood City with both commodity and specialty retail uses, and vacancies were relatively few. Similar to Downtown Burlingame and Downtown San Mateo, CalTrain is not a major demand driver for the district.

Mountain View – Downtown and Castro Street
Downtown Mountain View’s Castro Street includes a three-block long street closure. The tenant mix skews overwhelmingly towards food & beverage with some services and just a handful of other retailers along the pedestrian mall portion of Castro Street. There is a moderate amount of vacancy. Parking is available on parallel streets as well as in some public lots with 2-hours free. There is pedestrian access through pathways to parking lots on each closed block, and street parking on the blocks open to vehicles as well as on side streets. There has been some attempt to present streetscape uniformity with outdoor seating and amenities, but these amenities could be better designed and executed. Each parallel street has 2-way traffic, and crossstreets support vehicle circulation. CalTrain is easily accessible and a short distance away from the streetclosure. Like with the other downtowns, Caltrain ridership is not a major demand driver.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 920
18 Downtown San Carlos
Finally, Downtown San Carlos is a six-block corridor along Laurel Street and a two-block stretch of San Carlos Avenue. As of December 2023, the permanent closure of the 700-block of Laurel Street went into place. As already noted, circulation is less straightforward than in other Peninsula downtowns (such as Downtown Mountain View) because of the 700-block closure some cross streets being one-way, and El Camino Real (with difficult left turns) being one of Laurel Street’s parallel streets. A robust circulation plan will be needed to create an environment in which retailers are able to enjoy needed convenience attributes and to thrive. There are both commodity daily-needs retailers and specialty retail businesses. On the closed block, there is an informal and non-uniform blend of amenities that were incorporated during the pandemic. Some of these amenities are of haphazard construction, and the long-term consequences of their construction was not considered (eg. outdoor seating that nearly blocks sidewalks in some areas). Similar to Downtown Burlingame, there is an appropriation of public space for use by private sector businesses (primarily restaurants). Non-food & beverage retailers claimed varying degrees of material hardship that was attributed to a combination of the street closure, the pandemic, and the street character not being inviting. For merchants, the street closure and concerns about maintenance were seen as larger issues because merchants observed customers could no longer easily park where they had before, and some business had simply not come back. Finally, while Laurel Street has good informal crossing ability, the sidewalk section is narrow, leaving very little room for streetscape amenities. There is street parking (generally $2.00 per hour), district-serving parking in lots behind stores (no meters), and garages (90 minutes free and then $1.00 per 15 minutes thereafter with a $25.00 max during weekdays and a $10.00 max on evenings and weekends). CalTrain is not a significant demand driver for retail.

Case Study Conclusions
A number of actions can be taken to sustain a diverse retail mix in Downtown San Carlos. These proposed actions are pertinent because of the Laurel Street closure. Street closures tend to lean in favor of food & beverage businesses, and tenant mix on closed streets tend to be less diverse than on streets that allow multimodal transportation. While the street closure addresses the bulk of the community and City Council desires, it nonetheless creates a need for key strategies to ensure a mix of uses can be sustained.

There are four conclusions that this Downtown Prosperity Plan attempts to address:

1. The buildings in Downtown San Carlos are owned and operated by a myriad of owners, each making their own decisions about the sorts of businesses to which they rent space. The City of San Carlos and the general public are not part of the property owner’s decisions that lead to new leases and new business openings. What the City can do is set policy and land use regulations aimed at achieving

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 921
19 certain goals, gathering stakeholder feedback as part of this process.

2. The Downtown Specific Plan’s goals, policies, objectives and programs/actions, including zoning and parking regulations, as well as incentives are among the tools that the City can leverage to achieve certain goals. Policy and zoning standards should be carefully crafted to address unintended outcomes, in particular those that, while well intentioned, throttle economic activity.

3. To be successful, Downtown San Carlos businesses will need to rely on revenue from more than just San Carlos residents and workers who do not represent enough of a demand driver to support the scale of commercial activity to ensure the economic sustainability and downtown vibrancy that is desired.

4. Downtown San Carlos will need to distinguish itself as a worthy, unique, and interesting destination on its own merits as compared with other nearby areas to which consumers might travel.

To address these conclusions, the balance of this Retail Downtown Prosperity Plan is organized as follows:
 Case Studies of Three Downtowns and Lessons Learned
 Strategies for Activation and Programming
 Summary of Previous Community Outreach
 Suitable Streets, Plazas and/or Parks For Activation Programming  Review Zoning Code Land Use Regulations
 Mixed-use Ground Floor Design Best Practices Checklist  Downtown Branding Strategy
 Retail Vibrancy Vision and Story, and the Retailer Site Selection Process

CASE STUDIES OF THREE DOWNTOWNS AND LESSONS LEARNED
The following case studies identify steps three suburban cities have taken to activate their downtowns (to varying degrees of success). Downtown Mountain View has chosen to close several blocks of its downtown while Downtown Burlingame has opted instead for a traffic calming approach. Finally, Boulder, Colorado’s Pearl Street offers an interesting compare-and-contrast example in which different types of retailers have selfselected locations on the pedestrian mall portion of Pearl Street as opposed to the portions of Pearl Street that are not closed to vehicular traffic. These case studies are intended to give examples of what has and has not worked in other situations.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 922
20 9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 923
21 9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 924
22 There are a few important take-aways that these case studies illustrate:
 Non-food & beverage tenants have a hard time on a closed street, so the retail tenant mix tends in the direction of less diversity where street closures are imposed. This negative externality isn’t a surprise. For

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 925
23 example, smaller community central business district’s offer a wide variety of shopping options to the communities they serve, but daily needs and local-serving retailers tend to be hard hit when the convenience attributes on which these retailers rely (ease of access and circulation, good visibility, easy parking, loading/service and trash facilities) are impacted by a street closure. In addition, pick-ups and deliveries which have increased significantly since the pandemic are made more difficult when streets are closed, so the sorts of food & beverage operators may also become less diverse. Leveraging existing assets such as improving alleys as paseos, loading/service areas, and for convenient parking is an important strategy for mitigating expected loss of retail diversity.  Infrastructure such as special hardscape can be expensive to install and maintain, so resources need to be set aside for the public sector to properly support the place-making and place-maintaining functions for which it is responsible.
 Equity issues need to be addressed as non-food & beverage users eventually are forced to look for locations from which they will be able to conduct their operations, and as food & beverage users leverage public space (ie. the closed street) for which they pay little or nothing to increase their capacity and appeal.

STRATEGIES FOR ACTIVATION AND PROGRAMMING
Activation Programming Matrix
There are a variety of ways in which cities and their partners can activate their central business districts. These strategies generally fall into several categories including community engagement, placemaking, fostering entrepreneurship, infrastructure, arts and culture, sustainability, and equity. The chart in Appendix A shows a variety of initiatives within each area as well as who would lead each effort, the estimated cost, funding sources, and if the initiative is short-, medium-, or long-term to implement.

Laurel Street Branding and Community Event Programming
A brand statement conveys a point of differentiation. In the case of Laurel Street, the brand statement would convey how Laurel Street is different from every other downtown commercial street or district on the Peninsula. Since many cities including San Mateo, Redwood City, Palo Alto, and Mountain View have instituted street closures, the closure of San Carlos’ Laurel Street’s 700 block is not a point of differentiation; it is a point of sameness. In fact, when streets close to vehicle traffic, case studies have shown that the tenant mix inevitably becomes less diverse and skews heavily in favor of food & beverage uses.

It will be necessary to articulate how San Carlos is different, and these differences may not exist today. They need to be created. It is also important that a branding statement is not merely an expression of an aspiration, rather it communicates what someone can expect from a product, in this case the product being Laurel Street.

Because the brand needs to be executed, the branding statement cannot be a “majority rules” statement of

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 926
24 what the community would like Laurel Street to be…unless what the community wants is both differentiated from other communities and achievable.

Creating reasons for Laurel Street to be a destination for San Carlos residents as well as for visitors from outside San Carlos will be key to the success of Downtown San Carlos, particularly as the street closure-driven retail mix becomes less diverse and more concentrated with food and beverage operators. For example, a variety of events take place in and around Downtown San Carlos. These include special events such as May’s Hometown Days Parade, an Art and Wine Fair and Goblin Walk in October, and Holiday Lights on Laurel Street and Christmas Tree Lane in December. In addition, a Farmers Market takes place every Sunday year-round, the Asian American Pacific Islander (AAPI) celebration during the month of May, Movies in the Park and Music in the Park during the summer, a family campout in August.

In some cases, downtown programming is sponsored by non-downtown organizations. In Pt. Richmond, a small community on the San Francisco Bay, that is precisely what has happened. In this case, a number of community organizations have organized downtown-focused programs. In the case of Second Sundays, an individual merchant recruited other retailers to offer special day-of deals.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 927
25 All of these events as well as other initiatives such as streetscape and placemaking initiatives create reasons to believe in the brand.

From a branding perspective, creating a greater focus on frequency of events and festivals that take place on Laurel Street such as, for example, community dance events on the 700 block, maker festivals, a community swap meet, a Halloween night, and/or a monthly First Sundays event begins to create a point of differentiation: Laurel Street is where people go on the Peninsula for destination events. Regardless of the point of differentiation, a branding statement that clearly and succinctly communicates the point of differentiation needs to be developed and widely broadcast.

Marketing and Programming Recommendations
Retail is demand-driven, and the longer people linger in an area, the more they tend to spend. The goal of a marketing campaign and of downtown programming is really the same: to draw consumers to Downtown San Carlos.
 A successful marketing campaign will be measured by its ability to raise awareness of Downtown San Carlos and its ability to increase the catchment from which Downtown San Carlos draws.  Downtown programming’s success will be measured by its ability to draw repeat visits to Downtown San Carlos and its ability to increase the time spent by people who do visit.

Ultimately the goal of both is to increase footfalls1 and dwell time which will be beneficial to Downtown businesses’ sales. Ultimately success is hoped to build upon success.

Since there is no business improvement district (BID), the City’s Economic Development Division or Parks & Recreation Department, or a downtown association, the chamber of commerce, or some other organization of combination of organizations will need to be responsible for marketing and programming. Alternatively, a 1 A “footfall” refers to the number of people entering a specific location (like a store, mall, downtown district, event, etc) during a particular time period.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 928
26 Business Association or a BID could be formed, and for the smooth functioning of Downtown San Carlos, this strategy is strongly recommended. Many Bay Area cities with successful downtowns similar to what San Carlos hopes to create have a downtown BID. Regardless of who is responsible, the following areas will need to be addressed:
 Market Analysis: Understand the demographics, psychographics, and buying behaviors of catchment from which downtown will draw, and what differentiates this customer base from those of other downtowns on the Peninsula. The 2025-2028 Economic Development Plan can be referenced for some of this information.
 Brand Definition: Define what sets downtown apart from other downtowns on the Peninsula.  Target Audience Segmentation: Identify specific customer segments within the Study Area and tailor marketing efforts to address their needs, preferences, and buying habits.  Marketing Channels: Determine the most effective marketing channels to reach the target audience (eg. social media, email, website, print, radio, TV, events, partnerships).  Customer Experience: Focus on providing exceptional customer service on the district level (eg. wayfinding, ease of access, suggestions/directions from ambassadors, etc).  Feedback: Find ways such as surveys, reviews, and social media to understand consumer experience, and to track this feedback against objective benchmarks.

From a promotion perspective, the following are some recommended strategies:
 Organize regular street festivals, artisan markets, or farmers' markets to attract locals and visitors alike for regular return visits.
 Host art walks or gallery nights where downtown retailers collaborate with local artists to showcase their work.
 Encourage owners to fill vacant storefronts with pop-up shops or temporary retail installations (and make this easy from a regulatory perspective).
 Build upon themed events or promotions already scheduled around holidays or seasons.  Find businesses to sponsor or lead crafts and cooking classes, wellness events, fashion events, and outdoor fitness, yoga, or group workouts in public spaces.
 Partner with local businesses to have regular food and drink-related events such as tastings, seasonal events, or food truck rallies.
 Schedule live performances, concerts, theatrical productions, and community movies in outdoor spaces.  Augment a sense of place with seasonal decorations, community clean-up days, and beautification projects.
 Collaborate with businesses outside of downtown, hotels, or attractions to create joint promotions or offer incentives such as discounts or coupons for downtown businesses or events.

SUMMARY OF PREVIOUS COMMUNITY OUTREACH

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 929
27 Community input from the Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Streetscape Master Plan outreach strategy is summarized below. It should be noted that some stakeholder feedback that was received is not necessarily always aligned with the recommendations proposed in this Strategy. Rather than focus on those areas of inconsistency, highlighted in bold letters are the feedback that should be given particular attention to support retail activation.

Urban Design and Infrastructure:

1. Redesigning Alleyways: Discussions focused on repurposing alleyways for alternative uses such as cycling loops and pedestrian-friendly spaces. Considerations were made regarding the materials for redevelopment, weighing options between concrete and asphalt maintenance. Participants emphasized the need for responsible development, particularly in terms of infrastructure projects like main replacements downtown, which could significantly impact retail areas.

2. Transforming Streetscapes: Ideas were proposed for transforming sections of Laurel Street into pedestrian thoroughfares, aiming to enhance the aesthetic appeal and functionality of retail areas. Suggestions included the installation of features like fountain installations and the use of cobblestone streets to create a more inviting environment for shoppers.

Retail Development and Business Environment:

1. Diverse Retail Offerings: Stakeholders emphasized the importance of maintaining a diverse mix of retail offerings, comprising both local businesses and larger chains, to preserve the unique character of downtown while meeting the diverse needs of consumers.

2. Challenges Amidst Pandemic: Concerns were raised about the impact of the pandemic on retail businesses, particularly regarding high rents and the increasing number of empty storefronts. Participants stressed the need for innovative solutions to support small businesses and prevent the downtown area from becoming dominated solely by restaurants.

3. Mixed-Use Developments: Suggestions were made to explore mixed-use developments that integrate residential or office spaces above retail stores, optimizing land usage and attracting different types of tenants to the area.

Community Engagement and Events:

1. Inclusive Planning Process: Discussions highlighted the importance of inclusive community engagement throughout the planning process, ensuring that the needs and preferences of all stakeholders are considered. Suggestions included engaging youth through advisory committees and organizing pop-up events tailored to their interests.

2. Promotion of Events: Stakeholders emphasized the significance of organizing events to foster community cohesion and support local businesses. Ideas included creating event spaces, hosting community gatherings, and collaborating with local organizations to enhance the vibrancy of the downtown area.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 930
28 3. Benchmarking Against Other Downtowns: Participants discussed challenges and opportunities in comparison to other downtown areas, sharing insights into successful strategies implemented elsewhere, such as streetscape improvements, parking management, and economic revitalization efforts.

Mobility and Accessibility:

1. Enhanced Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure: Stakeholders proposed measures to improve pedestrian safety, bicycle infrastructure and safe routes for micro-mobility options such as e-bikes.

2. Accessibility Concerns: Concerns were raised regarding the accessibility of retail areas for seniors, children, and individuals with special needs. Suggestions included wider sidewalks, safer crossings, and the provision of designated ADA parking spaces closer to storefronts to enhance accessibility.

Public Space Design and Streetscape Improvements:

1. Welcoming Public Spaces: Stakeholders advocated for the creation of inviting public spaces with ample seating, greenery, and gathering areas to enhance the pedestrian experience. Suggestions included the establishment of central gathering spaces like plazas or piazzas, along with the organization of community events to foster social interaction.

2. Artistic Enhancements: Emphasis was placed on incorporating unique artistic displays and public art installations into downtown spaces to attract pedestrians and enhance the area's visual appeal.

Participants also discussed revitalizing alleys with art installations to create surprise elements and promote exploration.

3. Cohesive Streetscape: Concerns were raised about the disjointed nature of current streetscape elements, such as parklets, prompting suggestions for cohesive architectural design and thoughtful urban planning interventions to improve the visual coherence of the downtown area.

Funding and City Planning:

1. Financial Considerations: Stakeholders queried how the project would be funded, expressing concerns about potential impacts on taxes and the allocation of funds from the General Fund by the City Council.

Discussions revolved around identifying sources of funding and ensuring transparency in financial planning.

Participants highlighted the importance of balancing budgetary considerations with the need for comprehensive downtown revitalization efforts.

2. Timeline and Exclusions: Concerns were expressed about the project timeline and the exclusion of certain areas from the downtown plan. Participants sought clarification on the rationale behind excluding specific areas and inquired about future plans to address those regions separately.

3. Guiding Principles: Stakeholders emphasized the importance of establishing guiding principles for downtown development, ensuring that community input is incorporated into decision-making processes.

Suggestions were made to prioritize inclusivity and future-oriented planning to address the diverse needs of stakeholders.

Preservation of Unique Character and History:

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 931
29 1. Historic Preservation: Participants emphasized the importance of preserving the unique character and history of downtown San Carlos while enhancing its vibrancy and appeal. Suggestions included revitalizing historic buildings, preserving landmarks like the Carlos Club, and incorporating design elements that reflect the area's heritage.

2. Cultural Significance: Discussions highlighted the cultural significance of downtown San Carlos and the need to celebrate its history through various initiatives, including galleries, art exhibitions, and public art installations. Stakeholders emphasized the role of arts and culture in fostering community identity and pride.

3. Heritage Tourism: Ideas were proposed to leverage downtown San Carlos's historic character to attract visitors and promote heritage tourism. Participants discussed strategies to showcase the area's unique heritage through guided tours, interpretive signage, and historical preservation efforts.

Safety and Security:

1. Pedestrian Safety Measures: Stakeholders emphasized the importance of pedestrian safety in downtown areas, particularly at intersections controlled by Caltrans. Suggestions were made to influence Caltrans regarding traffic signal timing and pedestrian safety measures to enhance the safety of retail areas.

2. Crime Prevention: Discussions focused on enhancing public safety through increased police presence, surveillance cameras, and community engagement initiatives. Participants emphasized the importance of collaborative efforts between law enforcement agencies and the community to address safety concerns effectively.

3. Accessibility for Vulnerable Groups: Concerns were raised about ensuring the safety and accessibility of downtown areas for vulnerable groups, including seniors, children, and individuals with special needs.

Suggestions included improving lighting, enhancing wayfinding, and providing designated safe zones for vulnerable pedestrians.

Environmental Sustainability:

1. Green Initiatives: Stakeholders discussed the importance of incorporating environmentally sustainable practices into downtown revitalization efforts. Suggestions included the implementation of green infrastructure, such as rain gardens and permeable pavements, to manage stormwater runoff and improve water quality.

2. Energy Efficiency: Participants emphasized the need for energy-efficient design and construction practices in downtown redevelopment projects. Ideas included the use of renewable energy sources, such as solar panels, and the integration of energy-efficient building materials to minimize environmental impact.

3. Waste Management: Discussions focused on waste management strategies to reduce the environmental footprint of downtown areas. Stakeholders explored options for implementing recycling programs, composting initiatives, and waste reduction campaigns to promote sustainable waste management practices.

Economic Development and Job Creation:

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 932
30 1. Local Employment Opportunities: Participants highlighted the importance of supporting local businesses and fostering economic growth in downtown San Carlos. Suggestions included initiatives to promote entrepreneurship, provide business support services, and facilitate access to funding for small businesses.

2. Job Training Programs: Stakeholders discussed the potential role of job training programs in equipping local residents with the skills needed to access employment opportunities in downtown retail establishments. Ideas included partnerships with local educational institutions and workforce development agencies to provide job training and skills enhancement programs.

3. Tourism and Hospitality: Discussions centered on leveraging downtown San Carlos's attractions to promote tourism and hospitality industry growth. Participants explored opportunities to develop tourism infrastructure, attract visitors through marketing initiatives, and support local hospitality businesses, such as hotels, restaurants, and entertainment venues.

Technology and Innovation:

1. Smart City Solutions: Stakeholders discussed the integration of technology and innovation into downtown revitalization efforts to create smart, connected urban environments. Ideas included deploying smart sensors for traffic management, implementing digital signage for wayfinding, and developing mobile applications for community engagement.

2. E-commerce and Digital Marketing: Participants explored opportunities to leverage e-commerce platforms and digital marketing strategies to support local businesses and expand their reach beyond traditional brick-and-mortar storefronts. Discussions focused on developing online marketplaces, implementing digital advertising campaigns, and enhancing businesses' online presence.

3. Data-driven Decision Making: Discussions centered on the importance of data-driven decision-making in urban planning and economic development. Stakeholders explored the use of data analytics tools and geographic information systems (GIS) to gather insights into consumer behavior, market trends, and infrastructure performance, informing strategic decision-making processes.

A community workshop was conducted on December 9, 2024. The following is a brief summary of feedback from workshop participants:

Public Realm Design and Street-related Feedback:

1. Interest in specific design elements like outdoor dining, tree shading, and balancing retail and restaurant space.

2. Concerns about safety, accessibility, and financial feasibility.

3. Preferences for hybrid design approaches and integration of bicycles.

4. Preferences for linear water features, concerns about mixing bikes into pedestrian areas, and suggestions for skateboard facilities.

5. Concerns about safety in Wheeler Plaza parking lot.

6. Regulations governing pop-up venues.

7. Better street lighting and traffic control measures.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 933
31 8. Suggestions for one-way streets, traffic calming measures, and considerations for accommodating different demographics in mobility planning.

9. Focus on enhancing pedestrian accessibility and safety, including practical considerations for street design and accommodating emergency vehicles.

10. Suggestions for placemaking improvements such as public restrooms, community spaces, outdoor game areas, flood mitigation, community spaces, outdoor game areas, and public art to enhance the overall environment.

11. Feedback on specific street concepts, including preferences for two-way bike lanes, support for middle turn lanes, and questions about Right of Way (ROW) width. There was an emphasis on safer pedestrian and bike connections, concerns about traffic flow, and suggestions for directing drivers to parking garages to alleviate congestion.

12. Desire for more enforcement of traffic and moving violations, suggestions for speed control measures, and concerns about traffic flow and lighting for pedestrian safety.

Downtown Development:

1. Discussions on the downtown area's development, emphasizing transportation modes, stakeholder involvement, and holistic approaches.

2. Street cross-sections and circulation scenarios that prioritize pedestrian movement in a multi-modal environment, and intuitive way-finding for all modes of transportation.

3. Focus on creating pedestrian-friendly environments, addressing concerns about traffic flow, and considering various circulation scenarios.

Place, Economic Impact and Retail Diversity:

1. Concerns about the economic impact on local businesses, suggestions for improving retail diversity, and feedback on the expense and diversity of products in downtown stores.

2. Concerns about frequent block closures for events, expectations regarding leveraging closed blocks for events and festivals, and suggestions for minimizing closures' impact on businesses.

3. Preference for independent businesses, supporting small, local businesses, and catering to diverse consumer needs.

4. Desire to avoid over-commercialization, and concerns about parking availability.

5. Emphasis on collaboration between the city and local merchants, desire for greenery, and suggestions for outdoor dining options.

SUITABLE STREETS, PLAZAS AND/OR PARKS FOR ACTIVATION PROGRAMMING A series of public gathering spaces were identified for investment in temporary or permanent activation:
 700 block of Laurel Street as permanent pedestrian central plaza space

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 934
32  600 & 800 blocks of Laurel, and 1100 & 1200 blocks on San Carlos Ave as temporary closure spaces for discreet festivals and events
 “Wheeler Plaza" (to be renamed) -- currently the temporary parking lot on the 600 block of Laurel Street
 Harrington Park off the 700 Block of Laurel Street
 800 Block of Laurel Street, a central Plaza
 Caltrain Station Plaza
With respect to each of these places, the goal is to create an amenity that makes Downtown San Carlos a more interesting place to visit, but also to provide public spaces as amenities that will induce people to linger for longer Downtown. With respect to each, the following should be addressed:
 Attempt to create positive externalities to counter the negative externalities resulting from the street closure (i.e. create reasons to go to Downtown San Carlos and support businesses despite access, circulation, and challenges; leveraging existing assets such as improving alleys as paseos, loading/service areas, and for convenient parking is an important strategy for mitigating expected loss of retail diversity).

Care needs to be taken to address the externality without negatively impacting economic activity.  Create attractive, welcoming, and safe areas that will complement Downtown San Carlos’ unique mix of independent “local mom-and-pop” retailers.
 Each public space should be thought through in terms of what sorts of programming would be appropriate and possible from the space, and the sorts of enhancements and activating measures that will be needed.  The question of whether parklets represent the appropriation of public space for a single private entity, and it’s recommended that this could create a retail equity issue that should be addressed on a policy level.
 Regardless of approach, each initiative should be mindful that there are many building owners each making their own leasing decision, that Downtown San Carlos will need to rely on demand from people living and working outside of San Carlos to be successful and that the Downtown will need to distinguish itself from other areas and then communicate that distinction to the larger community from which the Downtown needs to draw to support businesses.

REVIEW ZONING CODE LAND USE REGULATIONS
The City of San Carlos zoning code should evaluate permitted uses to be considered as part of creating a retailfriendly environment.

It is also recommended that the Economic Development and the Planning Divisions collaborate on an ombudsman program designed to create a single point of contact charged with walking prospective business owners through the process of identifying the process for obtaining needed approvals, and then applying for and processing needed approvals and permits with various City departments and other agencies (eg. County Health Department, ABC, etc.). The objective of such a program goes beyond the scope and purpose of a pre9.k January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 935
33 application meeting. The objective should be to increase transparency, and to promote a business-friendly and pro-active stance towards helping prospective businesses as a major point of differentiation.

MIXED-USE GROUND FLOOR DESIGN BEST PRACTICES CHECKLIST
The purpose of this checklist is to ensure maximum opportunity and flexibility for retail uses whether as a stand-alone project, or as part of a mixed-use development. A number of elements are outlined for architects and developers to consider so that new ground floor retail space can accommodate active uses both in the near term and/or in the future. Actual specifications will vary from project to project.

Early attention to these elements will add value for all stakeholders: retailers, owners/developers, municipalities, consumers, and residents. It is recommended that a retail development expert peer-review early design development drawings with the following factors in mind so that changes that will positively impact the leaseability, usability, and the retail space’s economic value can be incorporated. Project-specific specifications should be incorporated into a tenant work-letter and cross-referenced with the A&E team and the project pro-forma prior to marketing. The intent of this checklist is that staff has something against which it can evaluate if all key retail-ready elements have been addressed.

DOWNTOWN BRANDING STRATEGY
As noted earlier, it is important to look at the Downtown San Carlos in a larger context: as noted in the Downtown Specific Plan Market Study’s Retail Market Overview, downtown San Carlos operates in an ecosystem in which the consumer has a variety of specialty retail options to consider. For purposes of this discussion, specialty goods and services as those where acquiring them involves allocating discretionary income (i.e., income not earmarked for necessities like shelter or groceries) and discretionary time (i.e., time not devoted to required activities like work or school). Because discretionary income and time are limited, consumers have more of an emotional connection to how they allocate these two scarce resources. For this reason, the physical environment and the sense of place in which these purchases are made becomes increasingly important (with a preference for a rich sensory one).

There are a number of additional considerations for Study Area branding on top of what was discussed in the branding and programming sections, above. There are a number of categories of specialty uses that are likely to gain greater traction than commodity retail uses. Remember that commodity uses and specialty uses are really defined by the behaviors associated with obtaining commodity or specialty goods or services. It is possible for a use to be both or either commodity or specialty depending upon how the retailer conducts its business. For example, Draeger’s sells all of the commodity categories of goods one would expect to find in any full-service grocery store, however, it also sells made-to-order goods, specially prepared items,

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 936
34 housewares and kitchen wares, and its operation and level of customer service are highly refined to appeal to a higher-income demographic. By way of contrast, Safeway, Lucky, or Aldi are primarily engaged in selling commodity grocery and related items.

Based on a review of street closures in communities of varying sizes and in many geographies, it is reasonable to expect the closed 700 block of Laurel Street to tend heavily towards an overconcentration of food & beverage businesses. By way of contrast, a lesser degree of overconcentration (but overconcentration nonetheless) can be expected on the 600 and 800 blocks. The Mid-Laurel area, south of the 800 block of Laurel Street, has a greater variety of uses including more professional services firms. This area’s building form and urban design is not as well set up for the sort of intense retail uses that have been found on the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street. Commodity and daily-needs retailers are more sensitive to key convenience attributes such as good visibility, convenient access, and easy parking than specialty retailers, and the most resilient retail districts are designed to accommodate both. The Study Area needs to be competitive with other Peninsula downtown districts with respect to access, circulation, parking, and loading/service and trash facilities in order to attract businesses and consumers, whether commodity or specialty in nature, so attention to these details will have an impact on what retailers and which consumers will be attracted to Downtown.

The Study Area is expected to fare better for destination specialty uses than for convenience-driven commodity uses.

Tying back to points discussed earlier in this Plan the goal is to create a vibrant environment. Footfalls and repeat visits will be key to vibrancy and business success. For this reason, it will be important to focus on more than simply retail uses for Downtown San Carlos, particularly on the 600, 700, and 800 blocks of Laurel Street.

In addition to specialty retail, service and office uses would be appropriate, and will generate additional trips and footfalls from which neighboring businesses can benefit. Co-working is an excellent use that is compatible with a destination commercial district and a street closure. Craftwork in the City of Healdsburg is an excellent model of a compatible non-retail use.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 937
35 Other destination personal care, fitness, specialty food, and entertainment uses are also compatible with the expected future direction of downtown San Carlos.

RETAIL VIBRANCY VISION AND STORY, AND THE RETAILER SITE SELECTION PROCESS Retailers, and particularly specialty retailers, do better when there is a critical mass of merchants gathered in the same area. This phenomenon is one reason that shopping centers have become the dominant suburban retail typology. The Peninsula has its share of shopping centers, but it is unique in that it retains a set of unique, downtown shopping districts that were originally developed nearly a century ago.

These districts have different tenant mixes and enjoy varying degrees of vitality, but one common element is that they are all walkable and have parking programs geared to the district as a whole, as opposed to for a particular business. When making site location decisions and with the constraint that a limited number of stores can be opened, retailers note the visibility-access-parking trifecta discussed above as well as loading/service and trash facilities, the overall vitality of the area, if they think they might be a good fit for the area, and if they think they can generate ample sales to cover expenses (capital and operating) and still generate a profit.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 938
36 Communicating Downtown San Carlos’ story to retailers is an important function for the City. The following points should be considered as an indispensable part of a retailer attraction strategy:

Downtown Retail Vision Statement
Facilitate the creation of a Downtown Retail Vision Statement that differentiates Downtown from other areas, and that articulates Downtown’s potential. Use this vision as the barometer for whether initiatives, decisions, and awareness/attraction campaigns are on target. It should be forward-looking and aspirational, not a description of what Downtown looks like or the area’s demographic profile.

Retail is demand-driven. Build-it-and-they-will-come strategies should not be relied upon. Regardless of whether a potential retailer is an independent entrepreneur or a multi-unit regional or national chain, the retailer must be able to project enough sales to cover both fixed and variable expenses, and then leave room to generate a profit.

Telling “The Story”
When recruiting retailers, in addition to having a vision about what types of retailers are best to recruit, it is important to know how to tell a story about why Downtown San Carlos presents a definitive opportunity for a retailer to open and profitably operate a store. This story isn’t a tall tale; it is a well-reasoned argument about the risks and benefits of opening and operating a store Downtown.

Generally, the story should start out with the big picture including the size of the market, population growth (both residential and business), and visitor and tourism data. Each retailer has its own customer profile, so having a community demographic profile is helpful, but there is no need to go into greater detail.

The story should then move in an increasingly more focused direction. Explaining the locations of major retail nodes (ie. Downtown, along 101, other nearby retail nodes not in San Carlos) will provide some context about the options for an aspiring retailer. It will be important to explain how each of these areas is different from the others. From a differentiation perspective, it will be helpful to be able to give both hard and anecdotal evidence about Downtown’s success. For example, gather information about the number of retailers in the Downtown sub-market, growth in number of retailers year-over-year for the past 5 years, sales tax generated from the Downtown sub-market for each of the past 5 years, and specific retail success-story anecdotes.

Many retailers are extremely deliberate about deciding if and where to open new stores, but their decisionmaking process can be opaque. It can also be readily explained. As noted, build-it-and-they-will-come is not a viable strategy. The strategy is to explain to retailers why they will be a success if they come.  First, retail is demand-driven, so the opportunity Downtown presents should be explained in terms of the opportunity to capture retail sales from residents, daytime workers, and visitors. This opportunity

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 939
37 can be explained in terms of the amount of sales already being done in the Downtown sub-market, the small amount of vacant space, and the number of footfalls.  Second, the opportunity can be explained in terms of co-location. Retailers tend to like to cluster together in the same general area. This phenomenon is the reason that the retail lineup in so many malls looks the same. In Downtown’s case, the retail lineup is different than can be found anywhere else in that the retailers who have co-located Downtown are all independent, specialty retailers and not chains or commodity retailers.
 Third, it will be important to help potential retailers understand that the Downtown environment supports the types of consumer behaviors associated with successful specialty retail. These include a welcoming atmosphere with a unique and differentiated sense of place, walkability, and an atmosphere generally supportive of consumers lingering for longer than would be the case for commodity retail.
 Fourth, facts and information about Downtown should be gathered. Examples include:
 Availability of space (current or expected, existing or new construction), a general range for rents and landlord concessions should be gathered.
 Providing tools and resources (eg. approval process flow chart, etc) so that the vision, the place, and the process can more easily be understood will be helpful. These could be 1-page “cheat sheet” resources.
 Collect information about which retailers have done well Downtown. In addition to objective facts, anecdotal evidence of Downtown retailer success is a good way to convey the larger Downtown picture. Creating one-page case study profiles of several, representing a variety of business types, will help tell the story. Ideally these profiles will also have a “data” section that includes information such as time in business at the Downtown location, size of store, and sales (or at least sales trend if the retailer does not want to share sales) since opening or over the past 5 years as well as the softer story.
 A list of expected improvements such as streetscape or public gathering spaces, public markets and other events, and cultural resources. These are all reasons to believe in the overall Downtown ecosystem.

While there may be temptation to sell the Downtown area, that should be resisted. Downtown isn’t for everyone, and it’s better to lose a potential retailer to another part of town (ie. know when to say, “no”) than to have a retailer that doesn’t really belong in the Downtown sub-market.

There are a variety of ways to connect with potential retailers that range from canvassing the community or other similar communities (ie. size, geography) and engaging retailers in a discussion about San Carlos. In addition, there are trade organizations like ICSC, but these meetings tend to draw brokers, developers, and national and regional chain retailers as opposed to independent retailers. Nonetheless, these organizations may provide a good opportunity to build awareness and “get the word out.” Helping Retailers Through the Process

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 940
38 Locating and opening a new retail outlet can be particularly vexing for independent retailers. It isn’t that these challenges show a lack of business acumen or good idea for a store, rather it shows that the intricacies of site location, lease negotiation, obtaining permits, and managing construction aren’t necessarily familiar territory.

These tasks require a unique set of skills that are much different than those needed to operate a public-facing establishment.

An ombudsman can help an aspiring business owner overcome some of these challenges. The role of an ombudsman could include the following:
 An understanding of the regulatory environment in Downtown San Carlos. These regulations might include knowledge of zoning regulations, the process for obtaining needed approvals such as a restaurant’s right to sell alcohol, or obtaining a conditional use permit for a use that is not approved by-right.
 Help through regulatory red tape.
 Streamline approval, construction, and opening process which will save time and money.  Knowledge of construction difficulties in the sub-market including those associated with older or historic structures.
 Referrals to competent, licensed vendors such as architects, engineers, contractors, and subcontractors that a prospective business owner could interview.

Other Considerations
 Tenant attraction strategies for districts in which there are multiple ownerships should differentiate between what has been described here and having the City try to be a matchmaker (ie. a leasing broker).

The former removes obstacles making Downtown a lower friction place to do business. The later confuses business with accomplishment because the City does not have a seat at the table making landlord-tenant deals.
 Formula retail ordinances such as San Carlos Code Section 18.23.260 are enacted to try to maintain a local feel and keep ubiquitous chains from taking over local retail districts; however, they are fraught with unintended consequences. One such consequence is that the retailer community knows which areas are difficult to enter because of such ordinances, and may dismiss those areas without making the effort to fully understand if they would be able to open and what approvals may be needed. Another consequence is that the City may inadvertently miss the opportunity to attract a desired business. Reevaluating the current ordinance, and modifying it to allow for more flexibility should be considered, and a culture of openness and flexibility should be communicated to the retail leasing community.  Providing high quality infrastructure that supports a diversity of retailers goes beyond amenities, and needs to include wayfinding/visibility (the current wayfinding system should address a more navigation friendly Downtown), ease of access, and ease and availability of parking. Furthermore, in an attempt to keep as wide a variety of retailers and service providers in the Downtown, retailers affected by the street

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 941
39 closure should be offered relocation assistance to other parts of Downtown where they can enjoy needed convenience attributes.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 942

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 943
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK…DELETING WILL CHANGE HEADERS/FOOTERS.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 944
Draft Report
Downtown San Carlos
Traffic Operations Study
Prepared for the
City of San Carlos
October 7, 2025
490 Mendocino Avenue, Suite 201 SANTA ROSA, CA 95401 707.542.9500 414 13th Street, 5th Floor OAKLAND, CA 94612 510.444.2600 w-trans.com

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 945

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 946
i Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Table of Contents
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................................... 1 Introduction........................................................................................................................................................................ 2 Transportation Setting .................................................................................................................................................... 3 Circulation System............................................................................................................................................................ 9 Capacity Analysis............................................................................................................................................................. 13 Conclusions and Recommendations.........................................................................................................................38 Study Participants and References.............................................................................................................................39 Figures

1. Study Area................................................................................................................................................................................ 4

2. Existing Lane Configurations.............................................................................................................................................. 5

3. Existing Traffic Volumes.....................................................................................................................................................16

4. Cumulative Traffic Volumes..............................................................................................................................................28

5. Cumulative with San Carlos Avenue Road Diet Traffic Volumes............................................................................31 Tables

1. Planned Pedestrian Facility Summary ............................................................................................................................. 9

2. Bicycle Facility Summary ...................................................................................................................................................10

3. Transit Routes.......................................................................................................................................................................12

4. Intersection Level of Service Criteria..............................................................................................................................14

5. Existing 2023 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service............................................................................................18

6. Existing 95th Percentile Queues at Key Locations.......................................................................................................20

7. Existing Peak Hour Travel Times by Scenario..............................................................................................................23

8. Existing Peak Hour Average Speeds by Scenario .......................................................................................................23

9. Trip Generation Summary.................................................................................................................................................25

10. Trip Distribution Assumptions.........................................................................................................................................25

11. Cumulative 2045 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service.....................................................................................26

12. Cumulative with San Carlos Ave and El Camino Real Road Diets Intersection Levels of Service .................33

13. Cumulative 95th Percentile Queues at Key Locations................................................................................................36

14. Signal Warrant Summary...................................................................................................................................................37 Plates

1. Map of existing transit facilities in San Carlos. Source: SamTrans..........................................................................11

2. Existing and Proposed San Carlos Avenue Cross Sections......................................................................................21

3. Existing and Proposed El Camino Real Cross Sections..............................................................................................22 Appendices
A. Traffic Counts
B. Intersection Level of Service Calculations
C. Queues at Signalized Intersections
D. Travel Time and Speed Model Runs
E. Internal Capture Spreadsheets
F. Traffic Signal Warrant Spreadsheets

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 947

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 948
1 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Executive Summary
The proposed project includes implementation of the Downtown Area Specific Plan for the City of San Carlos.

Land use changes associated with this plan indicate that up to 1,630 new residential units, 163,702 additional square feet of office space, 92,721 additional square feet of general commercial space, 60,445 additional square feet of restaurant space and 100 new hotel rooms would be completed by 2045. The proposed net new land uses to be completed by 2045 from the Downtown Specific Plan would be expected to generate 931 vehicle trips during the morning peak hour and 1,012 during the evening peak hour.

This report contains an analysis of existing conditions and cumulative (2045) scenarios. For the cumulative scenarios, the City’s Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) program was referenced to incorporate any potential improvements to the study intersections.

Thirty intersections were evaluated for this study, some of which are expected to operate at deficient Levels of Service (LOS) under the Downtown Area Specific Plan with or without the road diets along San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real.

The Peak Hour Volume Traffic Signal Warrant, which indicates the potential need for a traffic signal, would be met for El Camino Real/Olive Street (#18), El Camino Real/Morse Boulevard (#26), and Elm Street/Brittan Avenue (#27) under Cumulative conditions. With the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet, traffic signals would also be warranted at Elm Street/Holly Street (#1) and Walnut Street/Holly Street (#2).

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 949
2 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Introduction
This report presents an analysis of the potential effects on traffic operation of a road diet on San Carlos Avenue and a road diet on El Camino Real in the City of San Carlos. Additionally, full buildout of land use changes from the Downtown Specific Plan was assumed for the analysis of cumulative conditions. The traffic study was completed in accordance with the criteria established by the City of San Carlos and is consistent with standard traffic engineering techniques. The operational analysis presented in this report is not intended for use in evaluating transportation impacts under the guidelines set forth in the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

The purpose of thisstudy is to provide City staff and policy makers with data that they can use to make an informed decision regarding the potential effects on traffic operation associated with future Downtown growth and the proposed road diets, and any associated improvements that would be required in order to reduce these effects to an acceptable level according to the City of San Carlos Transportation Study Guidelines, pending adoption in 2024.

Project Profile
The Downtown study area is generally bounded by Holly Street, El Camino Real, Greenwood Avenue, and Elm Street. Land use changes from the Downtown Specific Plan indicate that up to 1,630 new residential units, 163,702 additional square feet of office space, 92,721 additionalsquare feet of general commercial space, 60,445 additional square feet of restaurantspace, and 100 new hotel rooms are to be completed by 2045. As part of the Downtown Specific Plan project, a “San Carlos Road Diet” is proposed that would consist of the removal of one through lane in each direction on San Carlos Avenue between Walnut Street and El Camino Real. With the excess roadway width, buffered bicycle lanes would be installed in accordance with the City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Alta Planning + Design, 2020, and the sidewalk would be widened. To make space for protected bicycle lanes on El Camino Real recommended in the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, one southbound through lane would be removed south of San Carlos Avenue, which is referred to as the “El Camino Real Road Diet”.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 950
3 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Transportation Setting
Operational Analysis
Study Area and Periods
The study area includes the following intersections in Downtown San Carlos.

1. Elm Street/Holly Street

2. Walnut Street/Holly Street

3. Laurel Street/Holly Street

4. El Camino Real/Holly Street

5. Chestnut Street/San Carlos Avenue

6. Elm Street/San Carlos Avenue

7. Walnut Street/San Carlos Avenue

8. Laurel Street/San Carlos Avenue

9. El Camino Real/San Carlos Avenue

10. Chestnut Street/Cherry Street

11. Elm Street/Cherry Street

12. Walnut Street/Cherry Street

13. Laurel Street/Cherry Street

14. El Camino Real/Cherry Street

15. Elm Street/Olive Street

16. Walnut Street/Olive Street

17. Laurel Street/Olive Street

18. El Camino Real/Olive Street

19. Elm Street/Arroyo Avenue

20. Walnut Street/Arroyo Avenue

21. Laurel Street/Arroyo Avenue

22. El Camino Real/Arroyo Avenue

23. Elm Street/Morse Boulevard

24. Walnut Street/Morse Boulevard

25. Laurel Street/Morse Boulevard

26. El Camino Real/Morse Boulevard

27. Elm Street/Brittan Avenue

28. Walnut Street/Brittan Avenue

29. Laurel Street/Brittan Avenue

30. El Camino Real/Brittan Avenue
Pedestrian trips were evaluated in the study region bounded by the 30 study intersections; this region is also referred to as the “project site” for purposes of this analysis. Bicycle trips were analyzed in the area that included all streets within one mile of the study intersections that lie along primary routes of bicycle travel.

Operating conditions during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods were evaluated to capture the highest potential operational effects of the proposed project as well as the highest volumes on the local transportation network.

The morning peak hour occurs between 7:00 and 9:00 a.m. and reflects conditions during the home to work or school commute, while the p.m. peak hour occurs between 4:00 and 6:00 p.m. and typically reflects the highest level of congestion during the homeward bound commute.

Study Intersections
For the purposes of this analysis, roadways parallel to US 101, such as El Camino Real, are considered to have a north-south orientation. The locations of the study intersections and the existing lane configurations and controls are shown in Figures 1 and 2. A detailed description of each intersection is provided below.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 951
Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
Figure 1 – Study Area

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 952
Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
sca037.ai 10/23
Figure 2 – Existing Lane Configurations
El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St
El Camino Real
Elm St
Laurel St
El Camino Real
2 3 4
 8 9
13 Laurel St
Walnut St Elm St
Elm St
Elm St
Chestnut St
Chestnut St
10 Walnut St
11 12 14 15 Elm St
Walnut St 16 17 18 19 20
1 5
6 9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 953
Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
sca037.ai 10/23
Figure 2 – Existing Lane Configurations
El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St
El Camino Real
Elm St
Laurel St
El Camino Real
2 3 4
 8 9
13 Laurel St
Walnut St Elm St
Elm St
Elm St
Chestnut St
Chestnut St
10 Walnut St
11 12 14 15 Elm St
Walnut St 16 17 18 19 20
1 5
6 9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 954
7 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Elm Street/Holly Street (#1) is an unsignalized tee intersection that is stop controlled on the westbound Holly Street approach. There is a marked crosswalk across the east leg.

WalnutStreet/Holly Street(#2) is a four-way intersection with stop controls on the northbound and southbound approaches. Crosswalks are striped across all four legs.

Laurel Street/Holly Street (#3) is a four-way signalized intersection with split phasing on the eastbound and westbound Holly Street approaches. There are crosswalks and pedestrian phasing on all four legs.

El Camino Real/Holly Street (#4) is a four–legged signalized intersection with protected left-turn phasing on the northbound and southbound El Camino Real approaches and split phasing on the eastbound and westbound Holly Street approaches. Crosswalks and associated pedestrian signal heads are present on all four legs.

El Camino Real/San Carlos Avenue (#9) is a signalized tee intersection with protected left-turn phasing on the northbound approach. Crosswalks and associated pedestrian signal phasing are present on all three legs, and the crosswalk across the north leg is served by an exclusive pedestrian phase.

Walnut Street/Cherry Street(#12) is an unsignalized four-way intersection with stop control on the northbound and southbound approaches as well as crosswalks marked across all legs.

El Camino Real/Cherry Street (#14) is a signalized four-legged intersection with protected left-turn phasing on the northbound and southbound El Camino Real approaches. The intersection has crosswalks and associated pedestrian signal heads on the north, east, and west legs.

Elm Street/Olive Street (#15) is an unsignalized tee intersection with stop control on the terminating southbound Olive Street approach.

El Camino Real/Olive Street (#18) is a four-legged unsignalized intersection. The eastbound and westbound approaches are stop controlled and separated by a median through which only northbound left turns from El Camino Real are permitted. There is a crosswalk across the east leg.

Walnut Street/Arroyo Avenue (#20) is an unsignalized tee intersection with stop control on the terminating northbound Walnut Street approach. A crosswalk is marked on the south leg of the intersection.

El Camino Real/Arroyo Avenue (#22) is a signalized tee intersection with protected left-turn phasing on the northbound El Camino Real approach. Crosswalks and associated pedestrian signal heads are present at the north and west legs.

Elm Street/Morse Boulevard (#23) is an unsignalized four-legged intersection with a raised median “traffic circle.” The eastbound and westbound Morse Boulevard approaches are stop controlled while yield control is present at the northbound and southbound Elm Street approaches.

El Camino Real/Morse Boulevard (#26) is an unsignalized tee intersection with stop control on the terminating eastbound Morse Boulevard approach.

Laurel Street/Brittan Avenue (#29) is a signalized, four-legged intersection with protected left-turn phasing on the eastbound and westbound Brittan Avenue approaches. Crosswalks and associated pedestrian signal heads are present on all four legs.

El Camino Real/Brittan Avenue (#30) is a four-legged signalized intersection with protected left-turn phasing on the northbound and southbound El Camino Real approaches and split phasing on the eastbound and westbound Brittan Avenue approaches. Crosswalks and associated pedestrian signal heads are present on all four legs.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 955
8 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
The following are four-way signalized intersections with permissive left-turn phasing, crosswalks, and associated pedestrian signal heads on all four legs.
• Chestnut Street/San Carlos Avenue (#5)
• Elm Street/San Carlos Avenue (#6)
• Walnut Street/San Carlos Avenue (#7)
• Laurel Street/San Carlos Avenue (#8)
The following intersections have four legs, no marked crosswalks, and are stop controlled on the northbound and southbound approaches.
• Chestnut Street/Cherry Street (#10)
• Walnut Street/Olive Street (#16)
• Walnut Street/Morse Boulevard (#24)
• Walnut Street/Brittan Avenue (#28)
The following four-legged intersections have all-way stop controls and marked crosswalks on all four legs. • Elm Street/Cherry Street (#11)
• Laurel Street/Cherry Street (#13)
• Laurel Street/Olive Street (#17)
• Elm Street/Arroyo Avenue (#19)
• Laurel Street/Arroyo Avenue (#21)
• Laurel Street/Morse Boulevard (#25)
• Elm Street/Brittain Avenue (#27)

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 956
9 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Circulation System
Pedestrian Facilities
Existing and Planned Pedestrian Facilities
Pedestrian facilities include sidewalks, crosswalks, pedestrian signal phases, curb ramps, curb extensions, and various streetscape amenities such as lighting, benches, etc. In general, a network of sidewalks, pedestrian signals, and curb ramps provides access for pedestrians in the study area. While not all intersections in Downtown San Carlos have crosswalks, typically crosswalks are marked at signalized intersections or along streets with higher pedestrian traffic such as Laurel Street and Cherry Street. Curb extensions are installed within the study area at Laurel Street’s intersections with Cherry Street, Olive Street, Arroyo Avenue, Morse Boulevard, and Brittan Avenue, as well as at one corner of Walnut Street/Olive Street. The 700-block of Laurel Street between Cherry Street and Olive Street is a pedestrian-only zone closed to vehicles and bicycles.

Citywide planned pedestrian improvements are documented in the City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. A summary of the planned pedestrian improvements in the study area are shown in Table 1.

Table 1 – Planned Pedestrian Facility Summary
Location Curb
Extensions
HighVisibility
Crosswalks
Advance
Stop Bars
Leading
Pedestrian
Intervals
Pedestrian
Refuge
Island(s)
Laurel St/Holly St (#3) X X X
El Camino Real/Holly St (#4) X X X X
Laurel St/San Carlos Ave (#8) X X
El Camino Real/San Carlos Ave (#9) X X X
Chestnut St/Cherry St (#10) X X X
El Camino Real/Cherry St (#14) X
Elm St/Olive St (#15) X X X
El Camino Real/Arroyo Ave (#22) X
El Camino Real/Brittan Ave (#30) X X X X
Source: City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Alta Planning + Design, 2020 Bicycle Facilities
Existing and Planned Bicycle Facilities
The Highway Design Manual, Caltrans, 2020, classifies bikeways into four categories:
• Class I Multi-Use Path – a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians with cross flows of motorized traffic minimized.
• Class II Bike Lane – a striped and signed lane for one-way bike travel on a street or highway. • Class III Bike Route – signing only for shared use with motor vehicles within the same travel lane on a street or highway.
• Class IV Bikeway – also known as a separated bikeway, a Class IV Bikeway is for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a separation between the bikeway and the motor vehicle traffic lane. The separation may include, but is not limited to, grade separation, flexible posts, inflexible physical barriers, or on-street parking.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 957
10 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
In the study area, Class II bike lanes exist on Alameda de las Pulgas, Brittan Avenue, Industrial Road, Old County Road, and San Carlos Avenue. Bicyclists ride in the roadway and/or on sidewalks along all other streets within the study area. Table 2 summarizes the existing and planned bicycle facilities in the project vicinity, as contained in the City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.

Table 2 – Bicycle Facility Summary
Status
Facility
Class Length
(miles)
Begin Point End Point
Existing
Alameda de las Pulgas II 1.5 San Carlos Ave South City Limits Brittan Ave II 0.9 Laurel St Alameda de las Pulgas
Industrial Rd II 2.1 North City Limits South City Limits Old County Rd II 1.0 Terminal Wy South City Limits
San Carlos Ave II 1.0 Elm St Beverly Dr
East San Carlos Ave IIIB 0.3 Old County Rd Industrial Rd Arroyo Ave III 0.9 El Camino Real Tamarack Ave
Cedar St III 2.0 Eaton Ave North City Limits
Howard Ave III 0.2 Old County Rd Industrial Rd
Old County Rd III 1.2 North City Limits Terminal Wy
San Carlos Ave III 0.2 El Camino Real Elm St
Planned
Bransten-Commercial Path I 0.3 Old County Rd Industrial Rd Pulgas Creek Path I 0.3 Old County Rd Industrial Rd
Commercial St II 0.3 Old County Rd Industrial Rd
Alameda de las Pulgas IIB 1.5 San Carlos Ave South City Limits Brittan Ave IIB 0.3 Elm St Cedar St
San Carlos Ave IIB 0.6 El Camino Real Vista Ave
Elm St IIIB 1.4 Magnolia Ave Eaton Ave
Cherry St IIIB 0.4 El Camino Real Cedar St
Arroyo Ave IIIB 0.8 El Camino Real Tamarack Ave
Cedar St IIIB 2.0 Eaton Ave North City Limits
Howard Ave IIIB 0.9 Laurel St Alameda de las Pulgas
Hull Rd IIIB 0.3 Cedar St El Camino Real
Magnolia Ave/Laurel St IIIB 0.6 Cedar St Hull Dr
El Camino Real IV 1.9 North City Limits South City Limits Old County Rd IV 2.0 North City Limits South City Limits Industrial Rd IV 2.1 North City Limits South City Limits Source: City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Alta Planning + Design, 2020; Class IIB = buffered bike lane; Class IIIB = bicycle boulevard

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 958
11 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Transit Facilities
Existing Transit Facilities
Caltrain
Caltrain is the commuter rail line serving the San Francisco Peninsula with a station in San Carlos. This service connects San Carlos with San Francisco to the north and San Jose and Gilroy to the south. On weekdays there are 61 combined trains servicing the San Carlos station in the northbound and southbound directions, 15 of which provide limited-stop, express service. On weekends there are 32 trains that stop at the station. The San Carlos Station is located just east of the El Camino Real/San Carlos Avenue intersection proximate to Downtown, on the edge of the study area. Both bicycle racks and lockers are provided at the San Carlos station. Bicycle racks are available on a first come, first served basis, while lockers can be reserved. Paid vehicle parking is available at the station for riders.

San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans)
The San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) provides fixed route bus service in San Carlos and throughout San Mateo County. SamTrans buses are equipped with bike racks that can carry two bicycles. Bike rack space is on a first come, first served basis and riders must be able to load and unload their bicycles without any help from the operator. Two additional bicycles are allowed on SamTrans buses at the discretion of the driver and depending on passenger loads. The SamTrans Administrative Office is located at 1250 San Carlos Avenue within the study area, and monthly bus passes and discounted ticket packages may be purchased in person at the office’s Transit Ticket Booth.

Within the study area, there are stops served by Routes ECR, 61, 260, 295, 397, and 398. Existing transit routes and their operation are shown in Plate 1 and summarized in Table 3.

Plate 1 Map of existing transit facilities in San Carlos. Source: SamTrans

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 959
12 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Table 3 – Transit Routes
Transit
Agency
Route
Service Connection
Days of
Operation
Time Frequency
Caltrain
Local Mon – Fri
Sat – Sun
5:15 a.m. – 12:45 a.m.
7:30 a.m. – 12:45 a.m.
30 min San Jose Diridon Station to San Francisco via
Mountain View, Palo Alto, and Redwood City
SamTrans
ECR Mon – Fri
Sat
Sun
4:30 a.m. – 1:30 a.m.
5:15 a.m. – 1:45 a.m.
5:15 a.m. – 1:45 a.m.
15 – 30 min
20 – 30 min
20 – 40 min
Daly City BART to Palo Alto Transit Center via
El Camino Real
Route 61
(Schooloriented
Route)
Mon – Fri 7:30 a.m. – 9:45 a.m.
1:15 p.m. – 4:45 p.m.
5 – 165 min; 3
buses in a.m.
and 2 buses in
p.m.

San Carlos Caltrain Station to Carlmont Village
via Brittan Ave including Heather School,
Tierra Linda School, and Carlmont High School
Route 260 Mon – Fri
Sat
6:00 a.m. – 7:15 p.m.
8:00 a.m. – 8:00 p.m.
60 min
60 min
San Carlos Caltrain Station to Carlmont Village
via Bridge Pkwy
Route 295 Mon – Fri 6:30 a.m. – 7:45 p.m. 60 min Redwood City Transit Center to Hillsdale Shopping Center
Route 397 Mon – Sun 1:45 a.m. – 6:00 a.m. 45 – 60 min Palo Alto to San Francisco via El Camino Real and San Francisco International Airport (SFO)
Route 398 Mon – Fri 6:15 a.m. – 11:15 a.m.
6:00 p.m. – 8:00 p.m.
120 min
120 min
Redwood City Transit Center to San Francisco
via SFO
Source: https://www.caltrain.com/; https://samtrans.com/ On-Demand Transportation Services
On-demand private vehicle services (e.g., taxi, Uber, Lyft, etc.) are available in the study area 24 hours per day.

These vehicles can be used for trips within San Carlos or to farther destinations, including nearby airports and major transit stations.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 960
13 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Capacity Analysis
Intersection Level of Service Methodologies
Level of Service (LOS) is used to rank traffic operation on various types of facilities based on traffic volumes and roadway capacity using a series of letter designations ranging from A to F. Generally, Level of Service A represents free flow conditions and Level of Service F represents forced flow or breakdown conditions. A unit of measurement that indicates a level of delay generally accompanies the LOS designation.

The study intersections were analyzed using methodologies published in the Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2016 (HCM). This source contains methodologies for various types of intersection control, all of which are related to a measurement of delay in average number of seconds per vehicle.

The Levels of Service for the intersections with side street stop controls, or those which are unsignalized and have one or two approaches stop controlled, were analyzed using the “Two-Way Stop-Controlled” intersection capacity method from the HCM. This methodology determines a level of service for each minor turning movement by estimating the level of average delay in seconds per vehicle. Results are presented for each stop-controlled approach together with the weighted overall average delay for the intersection. The intersection of Elm Street/Morse Boulevard (#23), which is controlled by a traffic circle, was evaluated using the Unsignalized Methodology of the Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000 (HCM 2000), because the HCM 6th Edition is not capable of modeling the combination of stop and yield control found at Elm Street/Morse Boulevard (#23).

The study intersections with stop signs on all approaches were analyzed using the “All-Way Stop-Controlled” Intersection methodology from the HCM. This methodology evaluates delay for each approach based on turning movements, opposing and conflicting traffic volumes, and the number of lanes. Average vehicle delay is computed for the intersection as a whole and is then related to a Level of Service.

The study intersections that are currently controlled by a traffic signal were evaluated using the signalized methodology from the HCM. This methodology is based on factors including traffic volumes, green time for each movement, phasing, whether the signals are coordinated or not, truck traffic, and pedestrian activity. Average stopped delay per vehicle in seconds is used as the basis for evaluation in this LOS methodology. For purposes of this study, delays were calculated using signal timing obtained from the City of San Carlos and Caltrans. The intersection of El Camino Real/San Carlos Avenue (#9) includes an exclusive pedestrian phase that can be modeled with HCM 2000 methodology but not the HCM 6th Edition; as a result, delay for this intersection was determined using HCM 2000 methodology.

The ranges of delay associated with the various levels of service are indicated in Table 4.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 961
14 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Table 4 – Intersection Level of Service Criteria
LOS Two-Way Stop-Controlled All-Way Stop-Controlled Signalized A Delay of 0 to 10 seconds. Gaps in
traffic are readily available for
drivers exiting the minor street.

Delay of 0 to 10 seconds. Upon
stopping, drivers are immediately
able to proceed.

Delay of 0 to 10 seconds. Most
vehicles arrive during the green
phase, so do not stop at all.

B Delay of 10 to 15 seconds. Gaps in
traffic are somewhat less readily
available than with LOS A, but no
queuing occurs on the minor street.

Delay of 10 to 15 seconds. Drivers
may wait for one or two vehicles
to clear the intersection before
proceeding from a stop.

Delay of 10 to 20 seconds. More
vehicles stop than with LOS A, but
many drivers still do not have to
stop.

C Delay of 15 to 25 seconds.

Acceptable gaps in traffic are less
frequent, and drivers may approach
while another vehicle is already
waiting to exit the side street.

Delay of 15 to 25 seconds. Drivers
will enter a queue of one or two
vehicles on the same approach
and wait for vehicle to clear from
one or more approaches prior to
entering the intersection.

Delay of 20 to 35 seconds. The
number of vehicles stopping is
significant, although many still pass
through without stopping.

D Delay of 25 to 35 seconds. There are
fewer acceptable gaps in traffic, and
drivers may enter a queue of one or
two vehicles on the side street.

Delay of 25 to 35 seconds. Queues
of more than two vehicles are
encountered on one or more
approaches.

Delay of 35 to 55 seconds. The
influence of congestion is
noticeable, and most vehicles have
to stop.

E Delay of 35 to 50 seconds. Few
acceptable gaps in traffic are
available, and longer queues may
form on the side street.

Delay of 35 to 50 seconds. Longer
queues are encountered on more
than one approach to the
intersection.

Delay of 55 to 80 seconds. Most, if
not all, vehicles must stop and
drivers consider the delay
excessive.

F Delay of more than 50 seconds.

Drivers may wait for long periods
before there is an acceptable gap in
traffic for exiting the side streets,
creating long queues.

Delay of more than 50 seconds.

Drivers enter long queues on all
approaches.

Delay of more than 80 seconds.

Vehicles may wait through more
than one cycle to clear the
intersection.

Reference: Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000; Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2016
Traffic Operations Standards
According to the City of San Carlos Transportation Study Guidelines, 2024, the City maintains a standard of LOS D for intersections. If the existing LOS is E or F, a project would have an adverse impact on operations if the LOS worsens by a letter grade or if the total volume at the study intersection increases by five percent or more due to project trip generation. Analysis should be conducted using the latest version of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM).

For queueing, the Guidelines state that a deficiency would occur if a project causes the 95th percentile vehicle queue length to exceed the existing or planned length of a turn pocket or freeway off-ramp. If queue lengths already exceed the available storage length, a project would cause a deficiency by increasing the queue by more than 50 feet.

Existing Conditions
The Existing 2023 Conditions scenario provides an evaluation of current operation based on existing traffic volumes gathered in April 2023. Volume data was collected at the 30 study intersections on Tuesday, April 25, 2023, during the a.m. and p.m. peak periods (7:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) when local schools were in session and during the closure of the 700-block of Laurel Street between Cherry Street and Olive Street.

Summaries of these counts are provided in Appendix A.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 962
15 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Under Existing conditions, all 30 study intersections operate acceptably at LOS D or better. The existing traffic volumes are indicated in Figure 3. A summary of the intersection Level of Service calculations is contained in Table 5, and copies of Level of Service calculations for all scenarios are provided in Appendix B.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 963
Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
sca037.ai 10/23
Figure 3 – Existing Traffic Volumes
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
LEGEND
24(41)
171(199)
1 5(8)
189(244)
79(56)
(11)5
(124)292
(1)3
2 15(18)
219(255)
60(63)
(10)15
(180)352
(12)8
3 131(242)
259(272)
421(501)
(26)14
(208)441
(61)22
4 10(15)
574(782)
14(19)
(11)26
(621)967
(6)4
5 6(14)
401(555)
21(28)
(57)62
(451)674
(137)262
6 30(22)
380(502)
15(30)
(35)33
(428)613
(24)65
7 14(26)
367(478)
37(55)
(71)70
(419)525
(46)80
8 (178)174
(343)350
9 14(14)
50(71)
9(14)
(2)13
(62)94
(6)10
10 14(24)
36(56)
10(14)
(14)19
(54)112
(11)13
11 16(37)
51(76)
5(27)
(12)10
(78)138
(9)9
12 28(49)
59(108)
(112)129
(34)39
13 8(19)
3(3)
7(8)
(104)114
(4)8
(115)51
14 39(66)
27(61)
15 (0)2
(1)0
(0)2
25(70)
40(71)
3(6)
(11)5
(53)39
(15)11
16 47(99)
32(54)
(48)40
(56)47
17 1(2)
(77)69
18 33(41)
71(93)
4(9)
(4)9
(109)100
(36)28
19 El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St
El Camino Real
Elm St
Laurel St
Laurel St El Camino Real
Walnut St Elm St
Elm St
Elm St
Chestnut St
Chestnut St
Walnut St
Elm St

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 964
Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
sca037.ai 10/23
Figure 3 – Existing Traffic Volumes Cont.
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
LEGEND
99(125)
4(3)
(6)4
(140)146
20 14(35)
56(69)
10(17)
(16)17
(68)93
(49)40
21 (58)89
(75)58
22 6(30)
8(16)
5(7)
(3)6
(11)4
(2)1
23 YIELD YIELD
3(58)
21(49)
3(13)
(0)1
(25)16
(4)2
24 32(49)
18(19)
8(6)
(10)3
(20)18
(11)6
25 26
(32)36
(14)5
5(9)
286(434)
13(16)
(9)12
(381)403
(17)8
27 31(72)
302(408)
29(41)
(26)29
(348)402
(42)26
29 87(161)
255(337)
188(239)
(46)41
(321)380
(88)50
30 (3)3
(8)2
28 10(5)
294(455)
11(10)
(402)442
Walnut St
Elm St Walnut St Laurel St
El Camino Real Elm St
El Camino Real
Laurel St
El Camino Real
Laurel St
Walnut St
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
LEGEND
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 965
18 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Table 5 – Existing 2023 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection AM Peak PM Peak
Approach Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. Elm St/Holly St 5.7 A 6.5 A
Westbound (Holly St) Approach 14.9 B 13.0 B

2. Walnut St/Holly St 3.2 A 3.0 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 13.2 B 11.3 B
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 18.0 C 14.3 B

3. Laurel St/Holly St 31.9 C 35.4 D

4. El Camino Real/Holly St 37.1 D 35.5 D

5. Chestnut St/San Carlos Ave 8.9 A 3.0 A

6. Elm St/San Carlos Ave 7.8 A 7.2 A

7. Walnut St/San Carlos Ave 2.9 A 4.8 A

8. Laurel St/San Carlos Ave 5.5 A 6.1 A

9. El Camino Real/San Carlos Ave* 36.1 D 29.4 C

10. Chestnut St/Cherry St 4.1 A 3.5 A
Northbound (Chestnut St) Approach 10.9 B 10.6 B
Southbound (Chestnut St) Approach 11.6 B 11.0 B

11. Elm St/Cherry St 8.5 A 8.7 A

12. Walnut St/Cherry St 4.0 A 7.1 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 11.5 B 14.3 B
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 12.4 B 14.8 B

13. Laurel St/Cherry St 8.2 A 8.6 A

14. El Camino Real/Cherry St 13.2 B 17.5 B

15. Elm St/Olive St 3.2 A 4.2 A
Westbound (Olive St) Approach 10.2 B 11.0 B

16. Walnut St/Olive St 4.5 A 4.9 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 10.2 B 11.9 B
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 10.4 B 11.5 B

17. Laurel St/Olive St 7.7 A 8.4 A

18. El Camino Real/Olive St 0.9 A 1.2 A
Eastbound (Olive St) Approach 14.3 B 15.7 C
Westbound (Olive St) Approach 10.6 B 12.0 B

19. Elm St/Arroyo Ave 8.6 A 8.7 A

20. Walnut St/Arroyo Ave 0.5 A 1.2 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 10.2 B 10.2 B

21. Laurel St/Arroyo Ave 8.6 A 9.4 A

22. El Camino Real/Arroyo Ave 5.7 A 5.2 A

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 966
19 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Table 5 – Existing 2023 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection AM Peak PM Peak
Approach Delay LOS Delay LOS

23. Elm St/Morse Blvd* 7.4 A 7.5 A
Eastbound (Morse Blvd) Approach 7.0 A 7.3 A
Westbound (Morse Blvd) Approach 7.2 A 7.3 A

24. Walnut St/Morse Blvd 3.6 A 2.5 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 9.3 A 9.8 A
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 9.3 A 10.1 B

25. Laurel St/Morse Blvd 7.7 A 8.4 A

26. El Camino Real/Morse Blvd 0.7 A 1.0 A
Eastbound (Morse Blvd) Approach 16.8 C 25.6 D

27. Elm St/Brittan Ave 12.5 B 15.7 C

28. Walnut St/Brittan Ave 0.4 A 0.6 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 13.2 B 13.4 B
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 13.3 B 16.8 C

29. Laurel St/Brittan Ave 15.2 B 18.3 B

30. El Camino Real/Brittan Ave 35.3 D 36.3 D
Note: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics; * = average delay calculated using HCM 2000 methodology Existing Queues at Key Locations
Under Existing conditions, 95th percentile queues at the study intersections were determined using the Synchro traffic operations software. Queues at a set of key locations are shown in Table 6; these key locations are generally left-turn pockets at intersections, movements that are particularly affected by proposed road diets (for example, the southbound through movement on El Camino Real or eastbound through movement on San Carlos Avenue), or other movements at intersections that have relatively high volumes. Queues at unsignalized intersections are displayed with Level of Service outputs in Appendix B, and queues for all movements at signalized intersections are provided in Appendix C.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 967
20 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Table 6 – Existing 95th Percentile Queues at Key Locations Study Intersection
Movement
Available
Storage (ft)
Existing (ft)
AM Peak PM Peak

3. Laurel St/Holly St
NB Through 580* 74 85
EB Through 300* 163 91
WB Through 285* 68 431

4. El Camino Real/Holly St
SB Left Turn 200 110 98
SB Through 985* 292 357
EB Through 285* 272 186
WB Left Turn 75 212 237
WB Through 160* 287 282

6. Elm St / San Carlos Ave
SB Through 580* 37 35
EB Left Turn 150 186 18
EB Through 315* 245 22

8. Laurel St / San Carlos Ave
EB Through 305* 10 74

9. El Camino Real / San Carlos Ave
NB Left Turn 240 147 180
SB Through 550* 380 472
EB Left Turn 300* 195 192

14. El Camino Real / Cherry St
NB Left Turn 120 63 97
SB Through 565* 41 50
EB Left Turn/Through 300* 80 153

22. El Camino Real / Arroyo St
NB Left Turn 225 33 70
SB Through 565* 309 339
EB Left Turn 290* 82 107

30. El Camino Real / Brittan Ave
NB Left Turn 260 94 111
SB Left Turn 325 166 144
SB Through 530* 230 237
Note: 95th Percentile Queue from Synchro; all distances are measured in feet; * = distance to nearest upstream intersection; Bold text = queue length exceeds available storage Roadway Configurations Evaluated
The following potential changes to roadway configuration were evaluated as part of this analysis.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 968
21 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
San Carlos Road Diet
The “San Carlos Road Diet” is proposed with the Downtown Specific Plan project and includes the removal of one through lane in each direction on San Carlos Avenue between Walnut Street and El Camino Real. The space made available after removing and narrowing lanes would be reallocated to widen the sidewalks and install buffered bicycle lanes (per the recommendation from City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan). Approaching Walnut Street, the outer eastbound through lane was assumed to become a right-turn lane. On the segment between Walnut Street and El Camino Real with the reduction in through lanes, left-turn pockets (100 feet) were assumed approaching each intersection. An existing cross section on San Carlos Avenue and a proposed cross section with the road diet are shown in Plate 2.

Plate 2 Existing and Proposed San Carlos Avenue Cross Sections El Camino Real Road Diet
For the proposed “El Camino Real Road Diet,” one southbound through lane would be removed on El Camino Real south of San Carlos Avenue, resulting in two through lanes and protected bicycle lanes in each direction. This change is proposed as part of the Downtown Specific Plan project and is consistent with the City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan in which a separated bikeway is recommended along El Camino Real.

Approaching each intersection south of San Carlos Avenue, southbound right-turn pockets (100 feet) were modeled as it was assumed that drivers would be permitted to weave into the bicycle lane in advance of an intersection to decelerate before turning right. Existing and proposed cross sections for El Camino Real are shown in Plate 3.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 969
22 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Plate 3 Existing and Proposed El Camino Real Cross Sections Adjustments to Signal Timing and Volumes
Under Existing conditions with the proposed road diets, signal timing splits were optimized at each intersection on San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real, while coordinated cycle lengths at signals were not modified.

Coordinated signal cycle lengths, offsets, and splits were optimized throughout the network in all Future scenarios. Additionally, future volumes were adjusted for scenarios with the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet to account for changes in travel behavior due to the reduction in capacity on San Carlos Avenue. A portion of vehicles traveling between El Camino Real to the north and San Carlos Avenue to the west, as well as some trips between Holly Street to the east and San Carlos Avenue to the west, were re-routed to avoid the constrained portion of San Carlos Avenue and travel an additional two or three blocks on Holly Street parallel to the road diet. Although redistribution of traffic was assumed, no change in total vehicle traffic was assumed as a result of improved bicycle and pedestrian facilities. Thus, the analysis is conservative and did not assume potential modal shifts.

Travel Time and Speed
Existing travel times and speeds along two routes through Downtown San Carlos were determined using the SimTraffic application of Synchro. SimTraffic is a stochastic microsimulation tool that is capable of tracking individual vehicles through a road network to estimate performance measures. Since the arrival of vehicles occurs randomly in SimTraffic and each model run produces a slightly different outcome, the model was run ten times and results shown here represent the average of ten runs. The effects of the proposed road diets on travel time and speeds were evaluated for existing conditions only because higher volumes networkwide that are forecast under future scenarios were shown to result in gridlock at certain parts of the network, and therefore no meaningful travel time predictions could be drawn from the SimTraffic model under future 2045 scenarios.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 970
23 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
With the addition of the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet, travel times through Downtown would be expected to increase by between 0.1 and 1.2 minutes during the a.m. peak hour and by between 0.2 and 0.7 minutes during the p.m. peak hour. Including the El Camino Real Road Diet would not cause an appreciable change in travel time compared to conditions with only the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet. Travel times for each route, direction, and existing scenario are shown in Table 7, and copies of the ten SimTraffic travel time and speed runs are included in Appendix D.

Table 7 – Existing Peak Hour Travel Times by Scenario
Route
Direction
Existing Existing with San Carlos
Ave Road Diet
Existing with San Carlos Ave
and El Camino Real Road Diets
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Route 1 – Between Chestnut St/San Carlos Ave and El Camino Real/Brittan Ave via San Carlos Ave and El Camino Real Northbound 3.2 3.7 3.3 3.9 3.1 3.8
Southbound 3.5 3.9 4.7 4.6 4.2 4.3
Route 2 – Between El Camino Real/Holly St and Elm St/Brittan Ave via El Camino Real, San Carlos Ave, and Elm St Northbound 4.0 4.2 4.9 4.9 4.5 4.6
Southbound 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.7
Note: Travel Time is measured in minutes
Speeds through Downtown would be expected to decrease by between 0 and 4 mph on average with the San Carlos Road Diet, and speeds would generally remain unchanged with the El Camino Real Road Diet. Average speeds for each route, direction, and existing scenario are shown in Table 8 Table 8 – Existing Peak Hour Average Speeds by Scenario Route
Direction
Existing Existing with San Carlos
Ave Road Diet
Existing with San Carlos Ave
and El Camino Real Road Diets
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Route 1 – Between Chestnut St/San Carlos Ave and El Camino Real/Brittan Ave via San Carlos Ave and El Camino Real Northbound 17 15 17 14 17 14
Southbound 16 14 12 12 13 13
Route 2 – Between El Camino Real/Holly St and Elm St/Brittan Ave via El Camino Real, San Carlos Ave, and Elm St Northbound 14 14 12 13 13 13
Southbound 18 18 16 16 17 16
Note: Average speeds are measured in mph
Cumulative (2045) Conditions
Intersection volumes for the horizon year of 2045 were derived from the Draft Traffic Operations Analysis for the Alexandria Center for Life Sciences Project, W-Trans, 2024, and modified to account for future growth and land use changes proposed with the Downtown Specific Plan project. As part of the Alexandria analysis, cumulative volumes at five study intersections (El Camino Real/Holly Street (#4), El Camino Real/San Carlos Avenue (#9), El Camino Real/Arroyo Avenue (#22), Laurel Street/Brittan Avenue (#29), and El Camino Real/Brittan Avenue (#30)) were developed from the County’s travel 2040 demand model and assume the completion of several planned developments nearby, including the following projects:
• 1030 Brittan Avenue (96,175 square feet of Life Science) • 888 Bransten Road (105,000 square feet of Life Science)

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 971
24 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
• 800 Old County Road (325,473 square feet of Life Science) • 405 Industrial Road (205,273 square feet of Life Science) • 777 Industrial Road (120,000 square feet of Life Science) • 501 Industrial Road (188-room hotel)
• 987 Commercial Street (1.6 million square feet of Life Science) Using an annual growth rate calculated from the difference between 2023 and 2040 volumes, cumulative volumes at the five study intersections included in the Alexandria study were projected an additional five years to 2045.

The 2045 volumes at the five intersections were then extrapolated to all 30 study intersections using a method of volume balancing. Through volume balancing, increases in turning movements are carried over to neighboring intersections such that few vehicles are “gained” or “lost” on the segments between study intersections (i.e. the volume exiting an intersection to the north on a street would equal the volume entering a neighboring intersection from the south on that same street).

Trip Generation
The anticipated trip generation of the land uses projected to be built by 2045 according to the Downtown Specific Plan project was estimated using standard rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021. These trips were added to the baseline 2045 volumes to develop the cumulative volumes used in this analysis. “Multifamily Housing (Mid-Rise) Close to Rail Transit” rates (LU #221) were applied to future residential units, “General Office Building” rates (LU #710) to office uses, “Strip Retail Plaza (<40k)” rates (LU #822) to general commercial uses, “Fine Dining Restaurant” rates (LU #931) to restaurant uses, and “Hotel” rates (LU #310) to hotel uses.

Internal Capture Trips
The production of internal trips that may occur within the proposed Downtown land uses was estimated using the data and methodologies contained within Enhancing Internal Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed-Use Developments, National Cooperative Highway Research (NCHRP) Report No. 684, Transportation Research Board, 2011. The tool is intended to determine the proportion of internal trips that may occur within a development area up to 300 acres in size that includes a variety of land uses. As the Downtown Specific Plan study area is close to 70 acres in size, the NCHRP methodologies are applicable to estimate the reduction in vehicle trips from Downtown residents walking to adjacent retail and restaurant uses, as well as employees of nonresidential uses in Downtown patronizing other nonresidential uses (such as office workers eating at adjacent restaurants). Copies of the spreadsheets indicating the derivation of the internal capture rates are provided in Appendix E.

While some portion of the traffic associated certain land use types (such as retail, gas station, and fast food) is drawn from existing traffic on nearby streets, it was concluded that based on the types of land uses proposed the proportion of “pass-by” trips to and from Downtown would be negligible. The improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities proposed by the Downtown Specific Plan project would likely increase the proportion of trips to and from each land use made by walking and bicycling. However, this analysis takes a conservative approach and uses standard ITE rates without a trip reduction due to improved pedestrian and bicycle connectivity.

Total Trip Generation of Net New Land Uses
The expected trip generation for buildout of the proposed change in land uses in Downtown is indicated in Table 9, with deductions taken for internal capture. Without deductions due to internal capture, the projected land uses would be expected to generate an average of 20,434 vehicle trips per day, including 1,080 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 1,850 during the p.m. peak hour. After internal capture deductions are taken into account, the new land uses within Downtown would be expected to generate 931 vehicle trips during the a.m. peak hour and 1,012 during the p.m. peak hour.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 972
25 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Table 9 – Trip Generation Summary
Land Use Net
Increase
Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Trips Rate* Trips In Out Rate Trips In Out
Multifamily Housing 1,630 du 4.75 7,743 0.32 522 188 334 0.29 473 307 166 Internal Capture - - -4% -19 -6 -13 -40% -187 -111 -76
Office 163.70 ksf 10.84 1,775 1.52 249 219 30 1.44 236 40 196 Internal Capture - - -18% -44 -31 -13 -22% -51 -18 -33
Retail 92.72 ksf 54.45 5,049 2.36 219 131 88 6.59 612 306 306 Internal Capture - - -19% -41 -17 -24 -50% -306 -125 -181 Restaurant 60.45 ksf 83.84 5,068 0.73 44 22 22 7.80 471 316 155 Internal Capture - - -75% -33 -21 -12 -54% -254 -145 -109 Hotel 100 rm 7.99 799 0.46 46 26 20 0.59 59 30 29
Internal Capture - - -26% -12 -1 -11 -69% -41 -20 -21
Total Without Internal Capture 20,434 1,080 586 494 1,851 999 852 Total - 931 510 421 1,012 580 432
Note: du = dwelling unit; ksf = 1,000 square feet; rm = room; * = Internal capture rates are calculated separately for entering and exiting trips
Trip Distribution
The pattern used to allocate new trips to the street network was based on the distribution percentages from the Draft Traffic Operations Analysis for the Alexandria Center for Life Sciences Project and modified to increase the proportion of trips originating or ending to the west in the City of San Carlos, rather than the broader region. This would reflect that Downtown San Carlos is more likely to attract local visitors than a major employment center, for which employees are more likely to live farther away and commute from separate cities. While the proportion of local trips was presumed to be higher for Downtown land uses than the Alexandria Center, a substantial portion (72 percent) of Downtown trips were still distributed to or from the region (i.e. outside of San Carlos). The following distribution assumptions were applied to the traffic analysis as shown in Table 10.

Table 10 – Trip Distribution Assumptions
Route Percent
To/From the North via US 101, Industrial Rd, or Old County Rd 25% To/From the North via El Camino Real 10%
To/From the North via Elm St 2%
To/From the South via US 101, Industrial Rd, or Old County Rd 25% To/From the South via El Camino Real 10%
To/From the South via Elm St 2%
To/From the East via Holly St (East of US 101) 2%
To/From the West via San Carlos Ave 12%
To/From the West via Arroyo Ave 4%
To/From the West via Brittan Ave 8%
TOTAL 100%

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 973
26 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Cumulative Condition Levels of Service
The intersection improvements identified in the City of San Carlos Traffic Impact Fee Nexus Study, W-Trans, 2020, (TIF) for intersections included in the study area were not assumed as being complete for the cumulative condition analysis since the status of each improvement is uncertain. Under the anticipated Cumulative (2045) volumes, including buildout of projected land uses within Downtown and optimized signal coordination throughout the network, six of the 30 study intersections are expected to operate with deficient Levels of Service during one or both peak periods. Cumulative volumes are shown in Figure 4 and operating conditions are summarized in Table

11. Table 11 – Cumulative 2045 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection AM Peak PM Peak
Approach Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. Elm St/Holly St 8.9 A 12.3 B
Westbound (Holly St) Approach 28.3 D 25.1 D

2. Walnut St/Holly St 5.9 A 4.5 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 21.9 C 15.8 C
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 42.8 E 26.2 D
All-Way Stop Control 18.6 C 17.1 C
Traffic Signal 9.2 A 8.4 A

3. Laurel St/Holly St 39.8 D 39.3 D

4. El Camino Real/Holly St 55.6 E 65.8 E

5. Chestnut St/San Carlos Ave 8.9 A 3.5 A

6. Elm St/San Carlos Ave 9.2 A 9.9 A

7. Walnut St/San Carlos Ave 4.5 A 6.7 A

8. Laurel St/San Carlos Ave 5.9 A 7.3 A

9. El Camino Real/San Carlos Ave* 43.7 D 33.5 C

10. Chestnut St/Cherry St 4.6 A 3.6 A
Northbound (Chestnut St) Approach 11.9 B 11.2 B
Southbound (Chestnut St) Approach 13.1 B 11.9 B

11. Elm St/Cherry St 10.4 B 11.0 B

12. Walnut St/Cherry St 5.0 A 9.7 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 13.5 B 19.3 C
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 15.0 C 20.3 C

13. Laurel St/Cherry St 8.8 A 9.7 A

14. El Camino Real/Cherry St 28.5 C 10.2 B

15. Elm St/Olive St 3.5 A 4.9 A
Westbound (Olive St) Approach 11.9 B 14.5 B

16. Walnut St/Olive St 5.3 A 6.7 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 11.9 B 16.5 C
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 12.5 B 16.2 C

17. Laurel St/Olive St 8.8 A 10.9 B

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 974
27 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Table 11 – Cumulative 2045 Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection AM Peak PM Peak
Approach Delay LOS Delay LOS

18. El Camino Real/Olive St 3.1 A 3.7 A
Eastbound (Olive St) Approach 35.1 E 32.3 D
Westbound (Olive St) Approach 12.7 B 15.0 C
Traffic Signal* 4.7 A 6.5 A

19. Elm St/Arroyo Ave 10.7 B 11.4 B

20. Walnut St/Arroyo Ave 0.5 A 1.1 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 11.5 B 11.2 B

21. Laurel St/Arroyo Ave 12.3 B 15.3 C

22. El Camino Real/Arroyo Ave 19.1 B 9.4 A

23. Elm St/Morse Blvd* 7.9 A 8.1 A
Eastbound (Morse Blvd) Approach 7.4 A 7.7 A
Westbound (Morse Blvd) Approach 7.6 A 7.8 A

24. Walnut St/Morse Blvd 3.0 A 2.3 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 9.5 A 10.2 B
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 9.5 A 10.6 B

25. Laurel St/Morse Blvd 9.1 A 10.5 B

26. El Camino Real/Morse Blvd 13.3 B 63.7 F
Eastbound (Morse Blvd) Approach ** F ** F
Traffic Signal 3.9 A 4.4 A

27. Elm St/Brittan Ave 46.3 E 100.4 F
Traffic Signal 9.2 A 9.6 A

28. Walnut St/Brittan Ave 0.4 A 0.8 A
Northbound (Walnut St) Approach 17.3 C 18.2 C
Southbound (Walnut St) Approach 17.2 C 29.5 D

29. Laurel St/Brittan Ave 28.6 C 40.4 D

30. El Camino Real/Brittan Ave 67.5 E 85.2 F
Convert WBR to WBT/R Lane 60.9 E 80.5 F
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; WBR = westbound right-turn; WBT/R westbound through/right-turn; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics; * = average delay calculated using HCM 2000 methodology; Shaded cells = conditions with indicated improvements

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 975
Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
sca037.ai 11/24
Figure 4 – Cumulative Traffic Volumes
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
LEGEND
34(68)
229(340)
1 7(14)
251(414)
178(131)
(17)9
(228)501
(1)4
2 20(32)
362(482)
89(129)
(15)20
(374)653
(18)12
3 261(411)
454(585)
595(692)
(35)26
(428)798
(125)92
4 15(22)
913(1198)
21(28)
(16)38
(967)1515
(9)6
5 9(21)
644(801)
38(52)
(125)122
(663)1019
(215)419
6 53(32)
602(702)
22(42)
(56)48
(630)918
(47)120
7 21(34)
586(643)
54(72)
(106)103
(596)763
(66)148
8 (354)458
(348)315
9 23(21)
78(106)
14(21)
(3)19
(93)138
(9)16
10 27(38)
60(84)
19(22)
(21)28
(81)164
(16)19
11 24(59)
94(117)
7(41)
(18)15
(124)206
(15)13
12 41(81)
105(169)
(176)196
(55)57
13 12(28)
4(4)
10(12)
(163)187
(6)12
(177)90
14 70(108)
47(97)
15 (0)3
(1)0
(0)3
40(109)
73(115)
33(50)
(32)19
(113)86
(24)16
16 115(202)
93(104)
(72)74
(133)97
17 1(3)
(158)178
18 57(75)
110(156)
11(20)
(6)14
(177)209
(63)50
19 El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St
El Camino Real
Elm St
Laurel St
Laurel St El Camino Real
Walnut St Elm St
Elm St
Elm St
Chestnut St
Chestnut St
Walnut St
Elm St

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 976
Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
sca037.ai 11/24
Figure 4 – Cumulative Traffic Volumes Cont.
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
LEGEND
165(225)
6(4)
(9)6
(247)304
20 20(57)
96(130)
20(28)
(28)40
(130)212
(79)58
21 (135)168
(142)197
22 12(50)
12(24)
11(16)
(4)9
(16)8
(3)1
23 YIELD YIELD
4(87)
38(84)
4(19)
(0)1
(44)38
(6)3
24 56(76)
35(37)
14(9)
(15)6
(37)38
(16)10
25 26
(68)77
(56)27
14(15)
403(733)
19(25)
(13)18
(507)620
(63)43
27 88(140)
376(665)
38(115)
(66)37
(426)626
(48)54
29 239(378)
381(712)
309(518)
(92)48
(388)685
(70)56
30 (4)4
(12)3
28 15(7)
406(787)
16(15)
(520)693
Walnut St
Elm St Walnut St Laurel St
El Camino Real Elm St
El Camino Real
Laurel St
El Camino Real
Laurel St
Walnut St
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
LEGEND
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 977
30 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Potential Measures to Address Deficient Levels of Service The intersection of Walnut Street/Holly Street (#2) would operate unacceptably on the stop-controlled, southbound approach during the a.m. peak hour. Conversion of the intersection to all-way stop control would result in LOS C operation during both peak hours, while the installation of a traffic signal with permissive left-turn phasing would result in LOS A.

Deficient operation of LOS E is expected at El Camino Real/Holly Street (#4) during both peak hours. The City’s TIF does not recommend physical improvements to the intersection due to right-of-way constraints. As this analysis already includes optimized signal timing and coordination settings (including cycle length, splits, and offsets), it was concluded that acceptable operation cannot be reasonably achieved at El Camino Real/Holly Street under Cumulative conditions without reductions in traffic volumes. Instead of physical or signal timing modifications, Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures to encourage more sustainable modes of transportation, decrease the number of commuting vehicle trips, or shift trips to occur outside of peak hours would be more appropriate to address deficient operation.

While the stop-controlled eastbound approach to El Camino Real/Olive Street (#18) would operate at LOS E during the a.m. peak hour, the intersection would operate at LOS A with a traffic signal including protected northbound left-turn phasing. It was assumed that the existing turn restrictions at the intersection would remain with the proposed traffic signal, so only the northbound left turn, southbound through, and eastbound right turn movements were modeled to be signal controlled. The westbound right turn and northbound through movements would remain stop controlled and uncontrolled, respectively. Eliminating turn restrictions at El Camino Real/Olive Street would be more costly than keeping restrictions and would involve the removal of mature trees in the median on El Camino Real, while the benefits from allowing all movements at the intersection were considered relatively minor.

The intersection of El Camino Real/Morse Boulevard (#26) is expected to operate at a deficient Level of Service during both peak hours, particularly during the p.m. peak hour when the two-way stop controlled intersection would operate at an overall Level of Service F. The addition of a traffic signal with protected northbound left-turn phasing would achieve LOS A operation.

The all-way stop controlled intersection of Elm Street/Brittan Avenue (#27) would operate unacceptably during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours. Installation of a traffic signal with permissive left-turn phasing and 100-foot left-turn pockets on Brittan Avenue would result in LOS A for both peak hours.

The City’s TIF includes a recommendation to convert the existing westbound right-turn lane at El Camino Real/Brittan Avenue (#30) to a shared through/right-turn lane, and this modification would require an additional westbound receiving lane on Brittan Avenue between Laurel Street and El Camino Real. Implementation of this recommendation from the TIF would be expected to decrease overall delay during both peak hours but would not result in acceptable operation. Like El Camino Real/Holly Street (#4), TDM measures to reduce vehicle trips during peak hours would be most appropriate to address deficient operation at the intersection rather than physical or signal timing improvements.

Cumulative Conditions with San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real Road Diets Upon the implementation of the San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real Road Diets, and with the anticipated Cumulative volumes, the intersection of Elm Street/Holly Street (#1) would operate unacceptably on the stopcontrolled westbound approach. Five of the six intersections operating that are projected to operate at a deficient LOS would continue operating at unacceptable Levels of Service with both road diets. Removing a southbound through lane at El Camino Real/Olive Street (#18), however, would improve side-street delay to an acceptable level by reducing the number of conflicting southbound lanes and thus decreasing the time needed for drivers to turn onto the major street during a gap in traffic, according to the HCM methodology. Cumulative volumes with adjustments to account for the reduced capacity on San Carlos Avenue with the Road Diet are shown in Figure 5.

Operating results are summarized in Table 12.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 978
Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
sca037.ai 11/24
Figure 5 – Cumulative with San Carlos Avenue Road Diet Traffic Volumes (xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
LEGEND
El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St El Camino Real
Walnut St Laurel St
El Camino Real
Elm St
Laurel St
Laurel St El Camino Real
Walnut St Elm St
Elm St
Elm St
Chestnut St
Chestnut St
Walnut St
Elm St
34(68)
289(415)
1 7(14)
311(489)
239(207)
(17)9
(286)553
(1)4
2 20(32)
483(633)
89(129)
(15)20
(490)758
(18)12
3 261(411)
514(660)
535(617)
(35)26
(486)850
(183)145
4 15(22)
913(1198)
21(28)
(16)38
(967)1515
(9)6
5 9(21)
584(726)
38(52)
(125)122
(605)967
(273)471
6 53(32)
481(551)
22(42)
(56)48
(514)813
(105)173
7 21(34)
465(492)
54(72)
(106)103
(480)658
(66)148
8 (354)458
(232)210
9 23(21)
78(106)
14(21)
(3)19
(93)138
(9)16
10 27(38)
60(84)
19(22)
(21)28
(81)164
(16)19
11 24(59)
94(117)
7(41)
(18)15
(124)206
(15)13
12 41(81)
105(169)
(176)196
(55)57
13 12(28)
4(4)
10(12)
(163)187
(6)12
(177)90
14 70(108)
47(97)
15 (0)3
(1)0
(0)3
40(109)
73(115)
33(50)
(32)19
(113)86
(24)16
16 115(202)
93(104)
(72)74
(133)97
17 1(3)
(158)178
18 57(75)
110(156)
11(20)
(6)14
(177)209
(63)50
19 9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 979
Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
sca037.ai 11/24
Figure 5 – Cumulative with San Carlos Avenue Road Diet Traffic Volumes Cont. (xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
LEGEND
Walnut St
Elm St Walnut St Laurel St
El Camino Real Elm St
El Camino Real
Laurel St
El Camino Real
Laurel St
Walnut St
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
LEGEND
(xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
Study Intersection
165(225)
6(4)
(9)6
(247)304
20 20(57)
96(130)
20(28)
(28)40
(130)212
(79)58
21 (135)168
(142)197
22 12(50)
12(24)
11(16)
(4)9
(16)8
(3)1
23 YIELD YIELD
4(87)
38(84)
4(19)
(0)1
(44)38
(6)3
24 56(76)
35(37)
14(9)
(15)6
(37)38
(16)10
25 26
(68)77
(56)27
14(15)
403(733)
19(25)
(13)18
(507)620
(63)43
27 88(140)
376(665)
38(115)
(66)37
(426)626
(48)54
29 239(378)
381(712)
309(518)
(92)48
(388)685
(70)56
30 (4)4
(12)3
28 15(7)
406(787)
16(15)
(520)693

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 980
33 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Table 12 – Cumulative with San Carlos Ave and El Camino Real Road Diets Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection
Approach
Cumulative (2045) Cumulative with San
Carlos Ave Road Diet
Cumulative with San
Carlos Ave and El
Camino Real Road Diets
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS

1. Elm St/Holly St 8.9 A 12.3 B 15.1 C 21.0 C 15.1 C 21.0 C WB (Holly St) Approach 28.3 D 25.1 D 46.6 E 42.8 E 46.6 E 42.8 E All-Way Stop Control - - - - 17.0 C 17.3 C 17.0 C 17.3 C Traffic Signal - - - - 19.2 C 21.0 C 19.2 C 21.0 C

2. Walnut St/Holly St 5.9 A 4.5 A 9.5 A 6.6 A 9.5 A 6.6 A NB (Walnut St) Approach 21.9 C 15.8 C 35.8 E 23.4 C 35.8 E 23.4 C SB (Walnut St) Approach 42.8 E 26.2 D 96.7 F 50.4 F 96.7 F 50.4 F All-Way Stop Control 18.6 C 17.1 C 37.3 E 45.0 E 37.3 E 45.0 E Traffic Signal 9.2 A 8.4 A 9.9 A 8.8 A 9.9 A 8.8 A

3. Laurel St/Holly St 39.8 D 39.3 D 41.8 D 41.7 D 41.8 D 41.7 D

4. El Camino Real/Holly St 55.6 E 65.8 E 61.2 E 64.3 E 61.3 E 66.5 E

5. Chestnut St/San Carlos Ave 8.9 A 3.5 A 9.8 A 3.6 A 9.3 A 3.6 A

6. Elm St/San Carlos Ave 9.2 A 9.9 A 11.8 B 12.3 B 11.1 B 12.3 B

7. Walnut St/San Carlos Ave 4.5 A 6.7 A 7.6 A 9.7 A 7.0 A 9.7 A

8. Laurel St/San Carlos Ave 5.9 A 7.3 A 7.2 A 8.8 A 6.8 A 8.8 A

9. El Camino Real/San Carlos
Ave* 43.7 D 33.5 C 42.4 D 39.0 D 43.4 D 34.4 C

10. Chestnut St/Cherry St 4.6 A 3.6 A 4.6 A 3.6 A 4.6 A 3.6 A NB (Chestnut St) Approach 11.9 B 11.2 B 11.9 B 11.2 B 11.9 B 11.2 B SB (Chestnut St) Approach 13.1 B 11.9 B 13.1 B 11.9 B 13.1 B 11.9 B

11. Elm St/Cherry St 10.4 B 11.0 B 10.4 B 11.0 B 10.4 B 11.0 B

12. Walnut St/Cherry St 5.0 A 9.7 A 5.0 A 9.7 A 5.0 A 9.7 A NB (Walnut St) Approach 13.5 B 19.3 C 13.5 B 19.3 C 13.5 B 19.3 C SB (Walnut St) Approach 15.0 C 20.3 C 15.0 C 20.3 C 15.0 C 20.3 C

13. Laurel St/Cherry St 8.8 A 9.7 A 8.8 A 9.7 A 8.8 A 9.7 A

14. El Camino Real/Cherry St 28.5 C 10.2 B 25.8 C 10.1 B 26.1 C 10.1 B

15. Elm St/Olive St 3.5 A 4.9 A 3.5 A 4.9 A 3.5 A 4.9 A WB (Olive St) Approach 11.9 B 14.5 B 11.9 B 14.5 B 11.9 B 14.5 B

16. Walnut St/Olive St 5.3 A 6.7 A 5.3 A 6.7 A 5.3 A 6.7 A NB (Walnut St) Approach 11.9 B 16.5 C 11.9 B 16.5 C 11.9 B 16.5 C SB (Walnut St) Approach 12.5 B 16.2 C 12.5 B 16.2 C 12.5 B 16.2 C

17. Laurel St/Olive St 8.8 A 10.9 B 8.8 A 10.9 B 8.8 A 10.9 B

18. El Camino Real/Olive St 3.1 A 3.7 A 3.1 A 3.7 A 1.9 A 1.8 A EB (Olive St) Approach 35.1 E 32.3 D 35.1 E 32.3 D 23.0 C 20.4 C

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 981
34 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Table 12 – Cumulative with San Carlos Ave and El Camino Real Road Diets Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection
Approach
Cumulative (2045) Cumulative with San
Carlos Ave Road Diet
Cumulative with San
Carlos Ave and El
Camino Real Road Diets
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS WB (Olive St) Approach 12.7 B 15.0 C 12.7 B 15.0 C 12.7 B 15 C Traffic Signal* 4.7 A 6.5 A 7.6 A 5.7 A 9.2 A 7.7 A

19. Elm St/Arroyo Ave 10.7 B 11.4 B 10.7 B 11.4 B 10.7 B 11.4 B

20. Walnut St/Arroyo Ave 0.5 A 1.1 A 0.5 A 1.1 A 0.5 A 1.1 A NB (Walnut St) Approach 11.5 B 11.2 B 11.5 B 11.2 B 11.5 B 11.2 B

21. Laurel St/Arroyo Ave 12.3 B 15.3 C 12.3 B 15.3 C 12.3 B 15.3 C

22. El Camino Real/Arroyo Ave 19.1 B 9.4 A 16.8 B 9.4 A 10.1 B 15.1 B

23. Elm St/Morse Blvd* 7.9 A 8.1 A 7.9 A 8.1 A 7.9 A 8.1 A EB (Morse Blvd) Approach 7.4 A 7.7 A 7.4 A 7.7 A 7.4 A 7.7 A WB (Morse Blvd) Approach 7.6 A 7.8 A 7.6 A 7.8 A 7.6 A 7.8 A

24. Walnut St/Morse Blvd 3.0 A 2.3 A 3.0 A 2.3 A 3.0 A 2.3 A NB (Walnut St) Approach 9.5 A 10.2 B 9.5 A 10.2 B 9.5 A 10.2 B SB (Walnut St) Approach 9.5 A 10.6 B 9.5 A 10.6 B 9.5 A 10.6 B

25. Laurel St/Morse Blvd 9.1 A 10.5 B 9.1 A 10.5 B 9.1 A 10.5 B

26. El Camino Real/Morse Blvd 13.3 B 63.7 F 13.3 B 63.7 F 9.7 A 48.4 E EB (Morse Blvd) Approach ** F ** F ** F ** F ** F ** F
Traffic Signal 3.9 A 4.4 A 3.9 A 4.4 A 6.1 A 4.9 A

27. Elm St/Brittan Ave 46.3 E 100.4 F 46.3 E 100.4 F 46.3 E 100.4 F Traffic Signal 9.2 A 9.6 A 9.2 A 9.6 A 9.2 A 9.6 A

28. Walnut St/Brittan Ave 0.4 A 0.8 A 0.4 A 0.8 A 0.4 A 0.8 A NB (Walnut St) Approach 17.3 C 18.2 C 17.3 C 18.2 C 17.3 C 18.2 C SB (Walnut St) Approach 17.2 C 29.5 D 17.2 C 29.5 D 17.2 C 29.5 D

29. Laurel St/Brittan Ave 28.6 C 40.4 D 28.6 C 40.4 D 28.7 C 40.4 D

30. El Camino Real/Brittan Ave 67.5 E 85.2 F 65.3 E 85.2 F 72.9 E 96.8 F Convert WBR to WBT/R
Lane 60.9 E 80.5 F 60.9 E 80.5 F 72.7 E 85.8 F
Note: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics; * = average delay calculated using HCM 2000 methodology; Shaded cells = conditions with indicated improvements
With the redistribution of traffic volumes from San Carlos Avenue to Holly Street due to the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet, the intersection of Elm Street/Holly Street (#1) would be expected to operate unacceptably at LOS E on the stop-controlled Holly Street approach. The addition of all-way stop control or a traffic signal with permissive left-turn phasing would result in LOS C during both peak hours and both road diet scenarios evaluated.

While all-way stop control at Walnut Street/Holly Street (#2) results in acceptable operation without the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet, it would not improve operation to an acceptable level with the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet.

For all scenarios evaluated, Walnut Street/Holly Street would operate at LOS A with the installation of a traffic signal with permissive left-turn phasing.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 982
35 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Operations would continue to be acceptable at El Camino Real/Olive Street (#18), El Camino Real/Morse Boulevard (#26), and Elm Street/Brittan Avenue (#27) with signalization. Acceptable LOS would not be achievable at El Camino Real/Holly Street (#4) or El Camino Real/Brittan Avenue (#30) even with implementation of the measures included in the City’s TIF.

Cumulative Condition Queues at Key Locations
The addition of the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet would result in queues exceeding their available storage length at multiple locations. These include the eastbound left-turning movements at Elm Street/San Carlos Avenue (#6) and El Camino Real/San Carlos Avenue (#9). Upon removing one southbound through lane from El Camino Real, southbound through queues at El Camino Real/Arroyo Street (#22) and El Camino Real/BrittanAvenue (#30) would begin to spill over into the upstream intersection during the p.m. peak hour. Queues at key locations under Cumulative conditions, with and without the proposed road diets on San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real, are shown in Table 13.

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 983
36 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Table 13 – Cumulative 95th Percentile Queues at Key Locations Study Intersection
Movement
Available
Storage
(ft)
Cumulative (2045) Cumulative with
San Carlos Ave
Road Diet
Cumulative with
San Carlos Ave and
El Camino Real
Road Diets
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak

3. Laurel St/Holly St
NB Through 580* 96 159 98 163 98 163
EB Through 300* 361 240 432 322 432 322
WB Through 285* 457 39 189 100 189 100

4. El Camino Real/Holly St
SB Left Turn 200 220 237 225 244 225 244
SB Through 985* 445 525 472 553 472 553
EB Through 285* 565 346 613 467 613 467
WB Left Turn 75 312 374 272 311 272 311
WB Through 160* 599 846 694 941 694 941

6. Elm St/San Carlos Ave
SB Through 580* 70 67 91 80 81 80
EB Left Turn 150 224 120 537 268 267 268
EB Through 315* 21 17 15 28 14 25

8. Laurel St/San Carlos Ave
EB Through 305* 79 77 47 94 77 97

9. El Camino Real/San Carlos
Ave
NB Left Turn 240 428 437 432 437 429 437
SB Through 550* 455 724 492 658 492 658
EB Left Turn 300* 179 214 257 316 257 316

14. El Camino Real/Cherry St
NB Left Turn 120 75 155 121 155 121 155
SB Through 565* 425 112 130 161 100 148
EB Left Turn/Through 300* 50 249 134 249 134 249

22. El Camino Real/Arroyo St
NB Left Turn 225 27 53 28 45 50 40
SB Through 565* 45 437 521 394 125 604
EB Left Turn 290* 106 87 106 87 250 87

30. El Camino Real/Brittan Ave
NB Left Turn 260 134 212 134 212 134 247
SB Left Turn 325 454 402 454 404 461 405
SB Through 530* 360 328 360 363 482 550
Note: 95th Percentile Queue from Synchro; all distances are measured in feet; * = distance to nearest upstream intersection; Bold text = queue length exceeds available storage

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 984
37 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Traffic Signal Warrants
A traffic signal warrant analysis was conducted to determine the potential need for a traffic signal at each unsignalized intersection operating with deficient Level of Service. Chapter 4C of the California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CA-MUTCD) provides guidance on when a traffic signal should be considered. For the purposes of this study only Warrant 3, a peak hour warrant, was considered.

Warrant 3 is satisfied when an engineering study finds that the criteria in either of the following two categories are met:

A. If all three of the following conditions exist for the same one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day:

1. The total stopped time delay experienced by the traffic on one minor-street approach (one direction only) controlled by a STOP sign equals or exceeds: four vehicle-hours for a one-lane approach; or five vehiclehours for a two-lane approach, and

2. The volume on the same minor-street approach (one direction only) equals or exceeds 100 vehicles per hour for one moving lane of traffic or 150 vehicles per hour for two moving lanes, and

3. The total entering volume serviced during the hour equals or exceeds 650 vehicles per hour for intersections with three approaches or 800 vehicles per hour for intersections with four or more approaches.

B. The plotted point representing the vehicles per hour on the major street (total of both approaches) and the corresponding vehicles per hour on the higher-volume minor-street approach (one direction only) for one hour (any four consecutive 15-minute periods) of an average day falls above the applicable curve in Figure 4C-3 for the existing combination of approach lanes.

Under cumulative conditions, a traffic signal would be warranted for at least one peak hour at El Camino Real/Olive Street (#18), El Camino Real/Morse Boulevard (#26), and Elm Street/Brittan Avenue (#27). The peak hour warrant would not be satisfied at Walnut Street/Holly Street (#2) with unadjusted cumulative volumes. Upon the implementation of the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet and redistribution of vehicles to Holly Street, traffic signals would be warranted at the same three intersections as well as at Elm Street/Holly Street (#1) and Walnut Street/Holly Street (#2). With both the El Camino Real and San Carlos Avenue Road Diets, signals would be generally warranted at the same intersections as if only the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet was implemented. These results are summarized in Table 14, and copies of the signal warrant worksheets are included in Appendix F.

Table 14 – Signal Warrant Summary
Study Intersection Cumulative (2045) Cumulative with San Carlos Ave Road Diet
Cumulative with San
Carlos Ave and El Camino
Real Road Diets
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak

1. Elm St/Holly St - - W W W W

2. Walnut St/Holly St NW NW W W W W

18. El Camino Real/Olive St W W W W - -

26. El Camino Real/Morse Blvd NW W W W W W

27. Elm St/Brittan Ave NW W NW W NW W
Notes: W = Signal warranted per Warrant 3; NW = Warrant 3 not satisfied; “-“ = Not evaluated as Level of Service is acceptable for the given scenario

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 985
38 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operation Study
October 6, 2025
Conclusions and Recommendations
Conclusions
• Under Existing conditions, all 30 study intersections operate with acceptable Levels of Service of D or better. • With the addition of the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet, travel times through Downtown would increase by up to 1.2 minutes during the a.m. peak hour and up to 0.7 minutes during the p.m. peak hour. Speeds would decrease by between 0 and 4 mph on average. With the addition of the El Camino Real Road Diet, travel times and speeds would generally remain unchanged.
• The proposed net new land uses to be completed by 2045 from the Downtown Specific Plan would be expected to generate 931 vehicle trips during the morning peak hour and 1,012 during the evening peak hour.
• Under cumulative (2045) conditions, including buildout of the Downtown Specific Plan land use changes, six of the 30 study intersections would be expected to operate with deficient LOS. Signalization at Walnut Street/Holly Street (#2), El Camino Real/Olive Street (#18), El Camino Real/Morse Boulevard (#26), and Elm Street/Brittan Avenue (#27) would result in acceptable Level of Service, as well as all-way stop control at Walnut Street/Holly Street (#2). Even with recommended improvements from the City’s TIF, El Camino Real/Brittan Avenue (#30) would operate unacceptably. The TIF recognizes that physical improvements to El Camino Real/Holly Street (#4) to reduce delay are not feasible due to right-of-way constraints. • Due to the redistribution of traffic volumes from San Carlos Avenue to Holly Street, Elm Street/Holly Street (#1) would operate unacceptably with the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet and cumulative volumes. However, acceptable operation could be achieved though all-way stop control or signalization. Signalization would continue to improve future LOS to an acceptable level at Walnut Street/Holly Street (#2), El Camino Real/Olive Street (#18), El Camino Real/Morse Boulevard (#26), and Elm Street/Brittan Avenue (#27) with one or both road diets also being implemented.
• Cumulative condition queues would exceed the available storage lengths at a variety of key locations within the study area, and the implementation of road diets on San Carlos Avenue and El Camino Real would result in additional queues to spill over out of turn pockets or into adjacent intersections. • Of the unsignalized intersections with deficient Levels of Service, a traffic signal would be warranted at El Camino Real/Olive Street (#18), El Camino Real/Morse Boulevard (#26), and Elm Street/Brittan Avenue (#27) under Cumulative conditions. With the San Carlos Avenue Road Diet, traffic signals would also be warranted at Elm Street/Holly Street (#1) and Walnut Street/Holly Street (#2).

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 986
39 Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 6, 2025
Study Participants and References
Study Participants
Principal in Charge Mark E. Spencer, PE (Traffic)
Senior Engineer Kenneth Jeong, PE (Traffic)
Associate Engineer Nathan Sharafian, EIT
Graphics Jessica Bender
Editing/Formatting Rebecca Mansour, Jessica Bender
Quality Control Kevin Carstens, PE (Civil, Traffic)
References
California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices for Streets and Highways Revision 8, California Department of Transportation, 2024
Caltrain, http://www.caltrain.com/schedules.htm
City of San Carlos Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Alta Planning + Design, 2020 City of San Carlos Traffic Impact Fee Nexus Study, W-Trans, 2020 City of San Carlos Transportation Study Guidelines, City of San Carlos, 2024 Draft Traffic Operations Analysis for the Alexandria Center for Life Sciences Project, W-Trans, 2024 Enhancing Internal Trip Capture Estimation for Mixed-Use Developments, National Cooperative Highway Research Report No. 684, Transportation Research Board, 2011
Highway Capacity Manual, 6th Edition, Transportation Research Board, 2016 Highway Capacity Manual, Transportation Research Board, 2000 Highway Design Manual, 7th Edition, California Department of Transportation, 2020 SamTrans, http://www.samtrans.com/
Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, Institute of Transportation Engineers, 2021 SCA037

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 987

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 988
A
Draft Downtown San Carlos Traffic Operations Study
October 2025
Appendix A
Traffic Counts

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 989

9.k
January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 990
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2446451
1036
1 0 1 5 11 0 0 16
1 3
Peak Hr 0 9 0 2 11 0 0
Count Total 0 10 1 2 13 0 1 3 0 4 16 16
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 2 1 3
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 8:30 AM 0 2 0 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 3 0
0 0
8:15 AM 0 4 0 0 4 0 0
0 1 0 1 2 2
5 0 0
8:00 AM 0 1 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
1 0 0
0 7:30 AM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 3 1 0
0 1 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 2 0 1 3
0 0 3
HV% - - - - 0% - - 0%
0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 1
West North South
7:00 AM 0 0 1
5 0 1 170 0 24 0 0 78 227 0 69 43
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
3% - 17% 0% - 1% 2% - 2%
Peak Hour
All 0 0 0
42 0 0 105 349 0
0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 11 0
0 612 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 1 259 0 112 76 0 944 0
0 25 0 5 0 0 13 43 0 12 15 0 113 598
20 3 0 166 612
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 29 79 0
155 555
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 33 0
0 35 0 11 0 0 19 56 0 18 16 0
17 16 0 164 456
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 16 52 0
127 346
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 60 0
1 42 0 8 0 0 14 40 0 14 8 0
14 7 0 109 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
7 0 0 7 40 0
56 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 34 0
0 16 0 4 0 0 2 20 0 8 6 0
9 5 0 54 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 07:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 2 0 0 5 19 0
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
N/A Holly St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB 1.8% 0.82
TOTAL 1.8% 0.92

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
WB 4.6% 0.77
NB 0.0% 0.71
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %: PHF
EB - -
Date: 04/25/2023
N Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
Elm St
Holly St
Holly St
Elm St
Elm St
TEV: 612
PHF: 0.92
43 69 112
102
0 24170 195
297
1 227
78 213
305
0 00
01 0
0 0
0 115
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 4 0
1 0 0 0 0 1 2
0 1
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 2
2 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
11 0
Interval
Start
N/A Holly St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound
0 5 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
1 1 0 13 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 4 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8
0 0 0 2 11
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 10
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 2 6
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 5
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
N/A Holly St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 991
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
84795763
49 2 2 10 4 22 0 1 27
2 1
Peak Hr 0 2 2 0 4 0 6
Count Total 0 6 5 1 12 0 6 2 2 10 9 37
5:45 PM 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0
0 3 2 4 0 0
0 5:30 PM 0 2 1 0 3 0 3 0
1 0 3 0 7 0
0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
1 1 1 3 1 4
7 0 1
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 1 1
7 0 0
0 4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 2
0 2 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
HV% - - - - 0% - - 0%
0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 3 0 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 5
West North South
4:00 PM 0 2 0
1 0 1 198 0 41 0 0 79 110 0 33 57
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
1% - 2% 2% - 0% 0% - 1%
Peak Hour
All 0 0 0
81 0 0 151 216 0
0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 4 0
0 519 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 1 390 0 66 112 0 1,017 0
0 52 0 13 0 0 18 19 0 6 17 0 125 505
10 15 0 125 519
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 21 26 0
130 517
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 44 0
1 51 0 12 0 0 16 26 0 9 15 0
6 13 0 125 508
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
15 0 0 19 28 0
139 512
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 44 0
0 59 0 5 0 0 23 30 0 8 14 0
7 13 0 123 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
9 0 0 24 17 0
121 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 53 0
0 36 0 6 0 0 19 39 0 10 11 0
10 14 0 129 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 04:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 51 0 12 0 0 11 31 0
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
N/A Holly St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB 0.0% 0.90
TOTAL 0.8% 0.93

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
WB 0.8% 0.94
NB 1.1% 0.89
Peak Hour: 4:45 PM 5:45 PM
HV %: PHF
EB - -
Date: 04/25/2023
N Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
Elm St
Holly St
Holly St
Elm St
Elm St
TEV: 519
PHF: 0.93
57 33 90
120
0 41198 240
144
1 110
79 255
189
0 20
02 1
5 0
1 224
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Peak Hour 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 2 0 2 0 10 0
Count Total 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 2 0 2 0 10 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 9
3 10
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3 7
5:30 PM 0 0 0 3 0 05:15 PM 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
1 0 1 0 3 4
1 5:00 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 1
0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
4 0
Interval
Start
N/A Holly St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound
0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 12 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 1 0 0 0 5 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 6
0 0 0 3 4
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 0
0 2
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 5
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 6
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
N/A Holly St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 992
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
58866467
50 0 0 1 10 1 7 4 22
15 10
Peak Hour 1 11 3 0 15 1 0
Count Total 2 13 5 0 20 2 1 1 1 5 16 9
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 3 3 1
0 0 3 0 3 0
1 8:30 AM 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 1
1 2
8:15 AM 0 3 0 0 3 0 0
0 0 0 1 3 0
0 2 1
8:00 AM 1 2 0 0 3 1
0 0 0 0 0 3
2 0 4
1 7:30 AM 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 1 4 2 1
0 2 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 4 2 0 6
0 0 2
HV% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% - 0% 8%
4 0
7:15 AM 1 0 0 0 1 1 0
1 0 0 1 0 1
West North South
7:00 AM 0 1 1
1 5 1 78 189 5 0 2 13 78 0 5 5
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
1% 5% 0% 3% - 0% 0% 0% 2%
Peak
Hour
All 1 2 292
9 0 6 18 127 0
10 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 15 0
3 679 0
HV 0 0 1 0 0
Count Total 1 2 459 7 2 130 293 14 10 4 1,082 0
0 29 27 0 0 3 1 16 0 2 3 1 140 675
1 2 1 195 679
8:45 AM 0 0 56 2
1 0 1 4 31 0
162 611
8:30 AM 0 2 96 2 0 22 32
0 21 44 2 0 0 4 16 0 2 1 0
1 2 1 178 527
8:15 AM 0 0 70 2
2 0 0 3 18 0
144 407
8:00 AM 0 0 70 0 1 15 65
0 20 48 0 0 1 2 13 0 1 0 1
6 0 0 127 0
7:45 AM 1 0 56 1
3 0 1 2 12 0
78 0
7:30 AM 0 0 53 0 0 10 40
0 9 22 0 0 0 1 14 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 58 0
7:15 AM 0 0 29 07:00 AM 0 0 29 0 1 4 15 1 0 0 1 7 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 0.0% 0.81
TOTAL 2.2% 0.87
TH RT
WB 4.0% 0.82
NB 3.2% 0.65
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.3% 0.75
0 10
000
000
0 00
7 4
1 10
N
Walnut St
Holly St
Holly St
Walnut St
Holly St
Walnut St
TEV: 679
PHF: 0.87
355
13 20
0 5
189
78 273
376
1 13
782
88 93
0 5
292
2 300
195
1 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 00 2 0 0 1 00 0 0 0
000
1 00
LT TH
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 100
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 10 1 0 0 5 0
0 0
1 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3
0 1
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
1 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 2
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 0
2 8:00 AM
0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
0 0 0
7:00 AM 1 0
RT
15 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 1 10 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 0 0 20 0
Peak Hour 0 0 1 0
Count Total 0 0 2 0 0 2 11 0 0 0 2 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9
0 0 0 3 15
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
3 14
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 12
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 11
8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 1 3 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
1 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
7:15 AM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 993
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
4749
16 873
58 0 1 4 11 8 11 7 37
16 11
Peak Hour 1 1 0 0 2 1 2
Count Total 6 6 2 0 14 1 5 1 1 8 18 13
5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1
0 3 3 1 2 1
1 5:30 PM 1 1 1 0 3 0 3 0
0 0 3 1 2 4
3 4
5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 1 2
0 0 0 0 5 4
2 4 1
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 2
0 0 1
0 4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 2 3 2
0 2 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 3
HV% - 0% 0% 9% - - 0% 0%
1 2
4:15 PM 4 1 1 0 6 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
West North South
4:00 PM 0 2 0
0 11 0 56 244 8 0 5 15 69 0 5 5
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 0% 0% 0% - 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 1 124
16 0 10 33 134 1
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
3 546 0
HV 0 0 0 1 0
Count Total 0 3 269 15 2 104 456 10 12 4 1,069 0
1 13 62 4 0 1 5 12 0 1 2 0 128 528
1 1 1 122 544
5:45 PM 0 0 27 0
2 0 1 7 13 1
147 546
5:30 PM 0 0 34 1 0 12 48
0 18 68 0 0 1 4 17 0 2 0 1
1 3 2 131 532
5:15 PM 0 0 33 3
5 0 0 4 18 0
144 541
5:00 PM 0 1 32 1 0 11 53
0 17 59 1 0 3 1 19 0 0 2 0
2 0 0 124 0
4:45 PM 0 0 38 4
2 0 1 6 15 0
133 0
4:30 PM 0 0 21 3 0 10 64
0 15 40 0 0 2 2 21 0 3 1 0
0 3 0 140 0
4:15 PM 0 0 48 14:00 PM 0 2 36 2 1 8 62 2 0 1 4 19 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.0% 0.54
TOTAL 0.4% 0.93
TH RT
WB 0.3% 0.90
NB 0.0% 0.97
Peak Hour: 4:30 PM 5:30 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.7% 0.81
0 10
010
000
0 20
11 7
8 11
N
Walnut St
Holly St
Holly St
Walnut St
Holly St
Walnut St
TEV: 546
PHF: 0.93
355
13 24
0 8
244
56 308
198
0 15
695
72 89
0 11
124
1 136
252
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 1 00 0 0
0 3 00 0 0
0 1 0 0 2 00 1 0 0 5 00 0 0 0
000
0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 1 0 40 1 0 0 8 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
3 7
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
4 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 3
0 2
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 1 00 0 0
0 2 0
2 5:00 PM
0 0 0 1
0 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0
RT
2 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 0 0 14 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 1
Count Total 0 0 4 2 0 2 4 0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5
0 0 0 3 4
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
1 2
5:30 PM 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 7
5:15 PM 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 9
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
4:15 PM 0 0 4 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 994
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
7135
1012
7 1055
1 0 4 16 10 10 3 39
12 5
Peak Hour 2 6 1 2 11 3 0
Count Total 5 14 2 4 25 4 0 2 0 6 26 12
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 7 0 2 1
0 1 1 5 0 1
0 8:30 AM 1 2 0 0 3 0 0 1
0 0 1 4 4 4
4 1
8:15 AM 0 2 1 1 4 1 0
0 0 0 1 4 1
2 0 1
8:00 AM 1 2 0 1 4 1
0 0 1 0 1 2
0 0 1
0 7:30 AM 1 2 0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0
0 2 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 1 4 0 2 7
0 0 2
HV% - 0% 1% 0% - - 0% 0%
2 0
7:15 AM 1 0 1 0 2 1 0
0 0 0 0 5 0
West North South
7:00 AM 0 2 0
0 15 0 60 219 15 0 6 12 106 0 27 26
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 3% 0% 1% - 4% 0% 4% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 8 352
27 0 7 18 164 0
6 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 11 0
27 873 0
HV 0 0 2 0 0
Count Total 0 12 566 18 0 95 380 46 37 38 1,408 0
0 19 42 0 0 3 4 29 0 7 4 6 191 873
5 10 8 249 866
8:45 AM 0 2 71 4
6 0 1 5 31 0
211 785
8:30 AM 0 4 110 6 0 15 48
0 16 57 4 0 2 1 20 0 9 5 7
6 7 6 222 670
8:15 AM 0 1 84 5
5 0 0 2 26 0
184 535
8:00 AM 0 1 87 0 0 10 72
0 13 63 1 0 0 3 19 0 5 5 5
6 4 4 168 0
7:45 AM 0 1 68 1
5 0 0 2 13 0
96 0
7:30 AM 0 2 69 1 0 13 49
0 4 25 4 0 1 1 12 0 1 2 1
7 0 1 87 0
7:15 AM 0 1 43 17:00 AM 0 0 34 0 0 5 24 2 0 0 0 14 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 2.5% 0.87
TOTAL 1.3% 0.88
TH RT
WB 2.0% 0.84
NB 0.8% 0.84
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.5% 0.78
0 30
000
010
0 00
10 3
10 16
N
Laurel St
Holly St
Holly St
Laurel St
Holly St
Laurel St
TEV: 873
PHF: 0.88
27 26
27 80
35 0
15 219
60 294
485
0 106
126
101
124
0 15
352
8 375
252
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 3 0 0 0 00 4 0 0 0 00 0 0 0
000
1 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 100
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 1 0 0 0 0 40 2 0 0 6 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 4
1 4
8:45 AM
0 1 0 0
3 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 3
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 1 00 0 0
0 0 0
2 8:00 AM
0 1 0 1
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
0 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
11 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 6 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
2 1 1 25 0
Peak Hour 0 0 2 0
Count Total 0 1 4 0 0 1 13 0 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11
0 0 0 3 18
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 18
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
1 0 0 4 16
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
7 14
8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 3 0
7:45 AM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
7:15 AM 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 995
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
86 14
7 2019101094
1 1 8 20 10 17 12 59
24 17
Peak Hour 0 1 1 2 4 1 5
Count Total 5 6 3 2 16 1 5 8 2 16 32 21
5:45 PM 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 5 2 0 3
0 2 2 2 5 1
5 5:30 PM 0 1 0 1 2 0 2 0
0 0 3 6 2 6
6 3
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
1 1 0 2 7 4
1 2 0
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 4
5 3 2
0 4:30 PM 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0
4 1 5 3 2 1
0 2 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 2 0 0 2
0 0 4
HV% - 0% 0% 0% - 0% 0% 0%
1 3
4:15 PM 5 0 1 0 6 0 0
0 3 0 3 1 3
West North South
4:00 PM 0 2 0
1 10 0 63 255 18 1 9 19 103 0 15 25
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
2% 0% 0% 1% - 0% 0% 5% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 12 180
38 1 23 37 187 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 4 0
39 749 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 32 369 21 0 123 482 41 40 68 1,462 0
0 26 67 2 0 2 5 22 0 3 4 13 191 749
6 2 7 163 744
5:45 PM 0 2 42 3
7 1 3 6 20 0
212 745
5:30 PM 0 4 43 0 0 10 54
0 15 72 4 0 3 6 35 0 3 8 13
3 11 6 183 708
5:15 PM 0 3 46 4
5 0 1 2 26 0
186 713
5:00 PM 0 3 49 3 0 12 62
0 17 63 4 0 3 7 16 0 4 7 10
8 0 8 164 0
4:45 PM 0 2 48 5
7 0 4 1 24 0
175 0
4:30 PM 0 5 30 2 0 12 63
0 13 46 6 0 3 5 17 0 6 4 5
8 4 6 188 0
4:15 PM 0 8 62 04:00 PM 0 5 49 4 0 18 55 3 0 4 5 27 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 2.5% 0.82
TOTAL 0.5% 0.88
TH RT
WB 0.3% 0.88
NB 0.8% 0.75
Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.0% 0.92
0 10
010
010
0 50
17 12
10 20
N
Laurel St
Holly St
Holly St
Laurel St
Holly St
Laurel St
TEV: 749
PHF: 0.88
39 25
15 79
49 0
18 255
63 336
298
0 103
199
99 132
1 10
180
12 202
303
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 2 00 0 0
0 1 0 0 5 00 1 0 0 5 00 0 0 0
000
0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 1 00 0 00
LT TH
0 1 0 0 1 0 80 3 5 1 16 0
0 0
0 1
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8
2 7
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
5 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 3
2 7
5:15 PM
0 1 0
0 1 00 0 0
0 2 0
8 5:00 PM
0 0 0 0
0 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM4:15 PM 0 0 1 3 0 0 1 5
0 0
0 0 0
4:00 PM 3 0
RT
4 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 0 2 16 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 5 0 0 2 4 0 0 1 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4
0 0 1 2 5
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 5
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 11
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
2 12
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
6 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
4:15 PM 0 0 5 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 996
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2356
11 248
41 1 0 3 6 0 15 4 25
16 12
Peak Hour 4 30 19 24 77 2 0
Count Total 9 61 37 46 153 2 1 1 0 4 9 4
8:45 AM 0 7 4 8 19 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 3 4
0 0 2 0 2 0
0 8:30 AM 1 8 3 4 16 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 2
8 0
8:15 AM 0 9 3 6 18 1 0
0 0 0 1 3 0
2 0 4
8:00 AM 3 6 9 6 24 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 2
1 7:30 AM 1 11 4 6 22 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 1
3 14 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 2 10 4 6 22
0 0 2
HV% - 0% 1% 0% - 0% 0% 2%
0 1
7:15 AM 2 4 5 7 18 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 1
West North South
7:00 AM 0 6 5
18 14 0 421 259 131 9 13 548 361 5 163 561
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
4% 2% 5% 2% 0% 1% 4% 0% 3%
Peak
Hour
All 0 22 441
215 10 23 888 676 8
6 6 0 0 10 9 0 2 22 0 77 0
37 2,985 0
HV 0 0 4 0 0
Count Total 0 51 678 31 0 725 445 269 957 52 5,028 0
0 83 53 30 3 3 142 89 0 39 133 8 696 2,985
49 146 15 762 2,960
8:45 AM 0 5 104 4
33 4 5 120 91 2
776 2,781
8:30 AM 0 7 129 1 0 107 53
0 115 72 40 2 2 153 92 0 34 141 8
41 141 6 751 2,444
8:15 AM 0 7 105 5
28 0 3 133 89 3
671 2,043
8:00 AM 0 3 103 4 0 116 81
0 110 70 21 1 3 119 80 2 32 131 5
28 105 5 583 0
7:45 AM 0 13 78 6
24 0 2 100 91 0
439 0
7:30 AM 0 7 69 8 0 83 61
0 62 28 13 0 3 73 78 1 27 95 3
19 65 2 350 0
7:15 AM 0 4 51 17:00 AM 0 5 39 2 0 49 27 26 0 2 48 66 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St El Camino Real El Camino Real 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 3.1% 0.90
TOTAL 2.6% 0.96
TH RT
WB 3.7% 0.89
NB 2.0% 0.93
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.8% 0.87
0 20
000
010
0 00
15 4
06 N
El Camino Real
Holly St
Holly St
El Camino Real
Holly St
El Camino Real
TEV: 2,985
PHF: 0.96
37 561
163
766
706
5 131
259
421
811
965
0 548
361
13 1,005
931
9 14
441
22 477
309
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 2 0 0 0 00 2 0 0 1 00 0 0 0
000
0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 100
0 0 00 1 00
LT TH
0 1 0 0 0 0 30 1 0 0 4 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3
0 2
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
2 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 2
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 1 00 0 0
0 0 0
1 8:00 AM
0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
0 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
77 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St El Camino Real El Camino Real 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 18 6 6 0 0 10 9 0 2 22 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
4 42 0 153 0
Peak Hour 0 0 4 0
Count Total 0 1 8 0 0 41 12 8 0 0 20 17 0
0 6 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 1 7 0 19 77
0 4 0 16 80
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 2 1 0
18 86
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 3 2
0 6 2 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 5 0
0 6 0 24 86
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 3 6 0
22 76
8:00 AM 0 0 3 0 0 3 2
0 6 4 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 5 0
0 6 0 22 0
7:45 AM 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 4 0 0
18 0
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 9 2
0 4 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 7 0
1 2 0 14 0
7:15 AM 0 0 2 0
2 0 0 2 3 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 4 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St El Camino Real El Camino Real 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 997
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
6234
10 911
36 1 0 6 8 0 11 2 21
20 3
Peak Hour 0 5 11 13 29 0 5
Count Total 6 15 38 20 79 1 7 2 0 10 12 1
5:45 PM 0 2 2 3 7 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0
0 3 0 0 0 1
0 5:30 PM 0 1 2 3 6 0 3 0
0 0 0 3 0 6
5 1
5:15 PM 0 0 2 2 4 0 0
2 0 0 2 4 0
0 2 0
5:00 PM 0 2 5 5 12 0
0 1 0 0 1 2
0 2 0
0 4:30 PM 1 3 9 3 16 0 1 0
1 0 1 1 0 1
1 14 1
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 1 7 1 9
0 1 1
HV% - 0% 0% 0% - 0% 0% 1%
4 1
4:15 PM 5 0 4 2 11 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 1
West North South
4:00 PM 0 6 7
2 26 0 501 272 242 6 21 695 390 17 130 642
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 0% 1% 1% 0% 3% 1% 0% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 61 208
442 13 36 1,358 727 30
1 2 0 0 6 5 0 4 9 0 29 0
45 3,256 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 126 416 60 0 969 526 257 1,265 94 6,319 0 0 121 71 57 1 6 164 77 6 17 158 19 764 3,256
33 166 7 826 3,243
5:45 PM 0 12 46 9
71 4 9 167 106 1
830 3,174
5:30 PM 0 14 56 5 0 136 51
0 114 79 54 0 4 188 103 6 41 155 8
39 163 11 836 3,132
5:15 PM 0 20 52 6
60 1 2 176 104 4
751 3,063
5:00 PM 0 15 54 6 0 130 71
0 115 69 49 0 3 151 85 4 26 155 11
33 170 11 757 0
4:45 PM 0 14 63 6
44 3 8 175 75 0
788 0
4:30 PM 0 16 38 7 0 110 67
0 123 52 55 1 1 169 97 3 35 152 17
33 146 10 767 0
4:15 PM 0 23 51 94:00 PM 0 12 56 12 0 120 66 52 3 3 168 80 6

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St El Camino Real El Camino Real 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 1.6% 0.96
TOTAL 0.9% 0.97
TH RT
WB 0.5% 0.97
NB 1.0% 0.94
Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.0% 0.95
0 00
000
001
0 41
11 2
08 N
El Camino Real
Holly St
Holly St
El Camino Real
Holly St
El Camino Real
TEV: 3,256
PHF: 0.97
45 642
130
834
1,015
17 242
272
501
1,015
728
0 695
390
21 1,175
1,112
6 26
208
61 295
338
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
1 2 00 0 0
0 0 0 1 4 00 1 0 2 5 00 1 0 0
000
0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 2 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 1 0 0 0 60 1 1 0 10 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 6
3 6
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
4 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 5
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 0
4 5:00 PM
0 0 0 1
1 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM4:15 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
1 0
1 0 0
4:00 PM 1 0
RT
29 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St El Camino Real El Camino Real 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 2 1 2 0 0 6 5 0 4 9 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
4 15 1 79 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 5 1 0 7 4 4 0 0 22 16 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 7 29
0 3 0 6 31
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0
4 41
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 0
2 3 0 12 48
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 3 2 0
9 50
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 6 1 0 0 0 1
0 3 0 16 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 5 4 0
11 0
4:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 0
0 1 0 14 0
4:15 PM 0 0 4 1
0 0 0 3 4 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 4 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St El Camino Real El Camino Real 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 998
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
14 6
161912181816
119
0 0 3 8 4 22 30 64
31 59
Peak Hour 7 11 1 0 19 3 0
Count Total 15 33 3 0 51 12 1 0 0 13 19 10
8:45 AM 3 2 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 1 4 0 1 11
0 1 0 1 9 8
6 8:30 AM 1 3 0 0 4 1 0 0
0 0 0 2 3 7
5 5
8:15 AM 2 3 1 0 6 0 0
0 0 0 1 2 0
1 4 8
8:00 AM 1 3 0 0 4 1
4 1 0 0 5 6
2 2 9
4 7:30 AM 2 5 1 0 8 1 0 0
0 0 2 1 1 0
0 2 2
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 6 11 1 0 18
0 1 3
HV% - 0% 1% 0% - - 7% 0%
3 8
7:15 AM 0 4 0 0 4 2 0
0 0 0 2 1 2
West North South
7:00 AM 0 2 0
1 26 0 14 574 10 0 15 4 25 0 15 4
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
7% 2% 0% 0% - 0% 0% 0% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 4 967
18 0 18 5 38 0
10 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 0
13 1,671 0
HV 0 0 7 0 0
Count Total 1 5 1,436 34 0 26 985 23 6 22 2,617 0
0 2 103 5 0 3 1 6 0 4 0 3 340 1,671
3 3 2 447 1,666
8:45 AM 0 1 201 11
3 0 2 1 11 0
415 1,496
8:30 AM 0 1 286 4 0 4 127
0 4 146 0 0 3 2 3 0 4 0 5
4 1 3 469 1,263
8:15 AM 0 2 238 8
2 0 7 0 5 0
335 946
8:00 AM 0 0 242 3 0 4 198
0 3 167 5 0 1 0 6 0 2 1 3
4 1 3 277 0
7:45 AM 1 1 144 1
0 0 1 0 3 0
182 0
7:30 AM 0 0 147 2 0 6 110
0 2 82 1 0 1 1 3 0 1 0 0
1 0 3 152 0
7:15 AM 0 0 89 27:00 AM 0 0 89 3 0 1 52 2 0 0 0 1 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Chestnut St Chestnut St
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 0.0% 0.89
TOTAL 1.1% 0.89
TH RT
WB 1.8% 0.73
NB 2.3% 0.79
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.7% 0.86
0 30
000
000
0 00
22 30
48 N
Chestnut St
San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave
Chestnut St
San Carlos Ave
Chestnut St
TEV: 1,671
PHF: 0.89
134
15 32
18 0
10 574
14 598
1,007 0
254
15 44
44 0
26 967
4 997
602
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 3 0 0 0 00 12 0 0 1 00 2 0 0
000
2 01
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 100
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 13 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3
1 7
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
7 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 9
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 00 1 0
0 0 0
10 8:00 AM
0 0 0 5
1 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0
0 1 0
7:00 AM 2 0
RT
19 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Chestnut St Chestnut St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 1 10 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 0 0 51 0
Peak Hour 0 0 7 0
Count Total 0 0 15 0 0 3 30 0 0 2 0 1 0
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 19
0 0 0 4 32
8:45 AM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 36
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 3
0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 34
8:15 AM 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
18 32
8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 1 2
0 0 11 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 8 0
7:45 AM 0 0 6 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
4 0
7:30 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 5
0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Chestnut St Chestnut St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 999
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1812101917121614
118
0 0 3 12 11 18 23 64
34 44
Peak Hour 2 2 0 1 5 1 2
Count Total 11 10 0 1 22 4 3 0 1 8 23 17
5:45 PM 0 2 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 3 1 1 5 7
0 1 3 2 9 2
4 5:30 PM 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 0
0 0 1 2 5 1
5 9
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 2 1
3 3 8
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 5
3 0 5
2 4:30 PM 4 2 0 0 6 1 0 0
0 0 0 8 0 2
0 6 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 1 2 0 0 3
1 2 2
HV% - 0% 0% 9% - - 0% 0%
9 7
4:15 PM 3 0 0 0 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
West North South
4:00 PM 2 4 0
0 11 0 19 782 15 0 26 3 33 0 5 4
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 0% 0% 0% - 20% 0% 0% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 6 621
26 0 38 11 62 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 5 0
4 1,529 0
HV 0 0 1 1 0
Count Total 0 11 1,177 29 0 37 1,449 9 12 8 2,869 0
0 5 186 4 0 3 0 3 0 1 2 1 332 1,523
1 2 0 378 1,529
5:45 PM 0 0 124 3
2 0 4 0 11 0
427 1,473
5:30 PM 0 1 149 1 0 10 197
0 2 224 3 0 8 0 9 0 2 1 3
2 0 0 386 1,396
5:15 PM 0 2 171 2
8 0 8 1 10 0
338 1,346
5:00 PM 0 3 173 4 0 1 176
0 6 185 2 0 6 2 3 0 0 1 1
1 2 0 322 0
4:45 PM 0 0 128 4
0 0 6 0 7 0
350 0
4:30 PM 0 4 126 2 0 5 169
0 4 161 2 0 2 6 14 0 1 2 1
1 2 2 336 0
4:15 PM 0 0 151 64:00 PM 0 1 155 7 0 4 151 5 0 1 2 5 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Chestnut St Chestnut St
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 7.7% 0.54
TOTAL 0.3% 0.90
TH RT
WB 0.2% 0.89
NB 0.0% 0.82
Peak Hour: 4:45 PM 5:45 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.3% 0.89
0 10
000
000
0 20
18 23
11 12
N
Chestnut St
San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave
Chestnut St
San Carlos Ave
Chestnut St
TEV: 1,529
PHF: 0.9
445
13 24
0 15
782
19 816
659
0 333
26 34
62 0
11 621
6 638
812
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 1 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 1 00 1 0
0 1 0 0 2 00 4 0 0 3 00 0 0 0
000
0 01
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 8 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 1
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 5
1 3
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
4 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 3
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 1 0
3 5:00 PM
0 0 0 1
2 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0
RT
5 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Chestnut St Chestnut St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
1 0 0 22 0
Peak Hour 0 0 1 1
Count Total 0 0 10 1 0 0 8 2 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4
1 0 0 2 5
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 9
5:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 12
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 18
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 6 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0
4:30 PM 0 0 4 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 6 0
4:15 PM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 4

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Chestnut St Chestnut St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1000
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1011173017202221
148
2 0 9 5 10 26 39 80
45 72
Peak Hour 7 7 0 5 19 5 2
Count Total 14 25 1 10 50 14 3 2 0 19 12 19
8:45 AM 3 2 0 0 5 1 0 1 0 2 3 4 4 10
0 2 0 2 10 10
12 8:30 AM 1 2 0 2 5 1 0 1
0 0 2 1 2 5
7 7
8:15 AM 2 2 0 2 6 0 2
0 0 0 3 1 2
6 9 13
8:00 AM 1 1 0 1 3 3
4 1 0 0 5 2
1 5 10
4 7:30 AM 2 3 0 2 7 1 0 0
0 0 2 2 2 3
0 2 2
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 5 9 1 3 18
0 1 1
HV% - 0% 1% 0% - - 0% 0%
2 6
7:15 AM 0 4 0 0 4 2 0
0 0 0 2 2 0
West North South
7:00 AM 0 2 0
0 62 0 21 401 6 0 42 38 22 0 6 54
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 2% 0% 0% - 0% 6% 1% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 262 674
11 0 62 68 35 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 19 0
150 1,738 0
HV 0 0 7 0 0
Count Total 0 373 1,024 86 0 30 694 11 71 261 2,726 0
0 5 77 1 0 8 7 3 0 2 16 20 347 1,738
2 8 27 469 1,729
8:45 AM 0 50 145 13
1 0 17 11 7 0
432 1,558
8:30 AM 0 94 192 17 0 4 89
0 6 108 1 0 5 12 7 0 1 19 37
1 11 66 490 1,317
8:15 AM 0 58 161 17
3 0 12 8 5 0
338 988
8:00 AM 0 60 176 15 0 6 127
0 3 111 3 0 7 14 7 0 0 5 46
3 6 34 298 0
7:45 AM 0 39 94 9
1 0 4 9 2 0
191 0
7:30 AM 0 34 116 5 0 3 81
0 2 65 0 0 4 4 1 0 1 4 17
1 2 14 161 0
7:15 AM 0 19 69 57:00 AM 0 19 71 5 0 1 36 1 0 5 3 3 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Elm St Elm St
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 2.4% 0.67
TOTAL 1.1% 0.89
TH RT
WB 1.6% 0.79
NB 0.0% 0.73
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.7% 0.82
1 31
000
011
0 20
26 39
105
N
Elm St
San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave
Elm St
San Carlos Ave
Elm St
TEV: 1,738
PHF: 0.89
150
546
210
306
0 6
401
21 428
702
0 42
38 22
137
102
0 62
674
262
998
593
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
1 3 1 0 2 03 9 2 0 3 00 2 0 0
000
0 11
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 1 210
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 1 1 0 0 0 90 1 1 0 19 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 9
2 12
8:45 AM
0 0 1 0
11 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 2
3 11
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 00 0 1
0 2 0
10 8:00 AM
0 0 0 5
1 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0
0 1 0
7:00 AM 2 0
RT
19 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Elm St Elm St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 3 7 50 0
Peak Hour 0 0 7 0
Count Total 0 0 14 0 0 0 25 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 19
0 1 1 5 32
8:45 AM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 34
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 1 3 32
8:15 AM 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
18 31
8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 9 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3
0 0 2 7 0
7:45 AM 0 0 5 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0
7:30 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 3
0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Elm St Elm St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1001
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2721301524241331
185
1 3 8 12 19 15 30 76
48 69
Peak Hour 3 4 0 1 8 1 3
Count Total 15 9 2 5 31 6 5 1 3 15 27 41
5:45 PM 0 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 1 7 2 9 13
0 2 2 4 4 3
7 5:30 PM 2 0 0 1 3 0 2 0
0 0 0 2 10 5
3 11
5:15 PM 1 2 0 0 3 0 0
0 1 2 3 6 4
1 3 9
5:00 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0
1 1 0 1 3 2
9 7 9
10 4:30 PM 3 1 0 1 5 1 1 0
0 0 0 2 3 6
2 7 3
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1
0 2 5
HV% - 0% 1% 0% - - 0% 0%
11 7
4:15 PM 8 0 1 0 9 0 0
1 0 0 4 1 8
West North South
4:00 PM 1 3 1
1 57 0 28 555 14 0 75 56 26 0 8 49
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
4% 0% 14% 0% - 0% 0% 1% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 137 451
29 0 146 122 58 0
1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 0
181 1,637 0
HV 0 0 3 0 0
Count Total 0 262 863 113 0 55 1,002 16 106 364 3,136 0 0 8 110 5 0 14 15 9 0 2 14 51 359 1,618
2 16 37 402 1,637
5:45 PM 0 23 94 14
6 0 20 12 4 0
445 1,621
5:30 PM 0 37 110 11 0 7 140
0 11 152 4 0 17 10 6 0 1 12 53
3 9 41 412 1,556
5:15 PM 0 36 125 18
1 0 19 17 11 0
378 1,518
5:00 PM 0 32 133 12 0 5 129
0 5 134 3 0 19 17 5 0 2 12 50
2 18 49 386 0
4:45 PM 0 32 83 16
7 0 20 20 10 0
380 0
4:30 PM 0 28 95 17 0 6 114
0 4 117 1 0 18 16 6 0 2 9 38
2 16 45 374 0
4:15 PM 0 42 112 154:00 PM 0 32 111 10 0 9 106 2 0 19 15 7 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Elm St Elm St
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.4% 0.90
TOTAL 0.5% 0.92
TH RT
WB 0.7% 0.89
NB 0.0% 0.84
Peak Hour: 4:45 PM 5:45 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.5% 0.90
0 10
120
100
0 30
15 30
19 12
N
Elm St
San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave
Elm St
San Carlos Ave
Elm St
TEV: 1,637
PHF: 0.92
181
498
238
207
0 14
555
28 597
485
0 75
56 26
134
157
0 57
451
137
645
811
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 1 00 1 1
0 2 00 0 0
0 1 0 0 3 00 4 2 0 5 00 1 2 0
000
0 01
LT TH
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
1 0 0 0 2 1 81 0 0 1 15 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 2
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 6
2 8
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
8 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 8
5:15 PM
1 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 0
9 5:00 PM
0 0 0 3
2 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0
0 1 0
4:00 PM 4 0
RT
8 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Elm St Elm St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 0 5 31 0
Peak Hour 0 0 3 0
Count Total 0 3 12 0 0 1 6 2 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 9
0 0 1 3 8
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 10
5:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 16
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 22
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 5 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
9 0
4:30 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 7 0
4:15 PM 0 3 5 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 3

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Elm St Elm St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1002
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
9 12152626233412
157
1 0 7 19 8 31 37 95
45 72
Peak Hour 8 7 0 0 15 4 2
Count Total 16 27 2 1 46 9 2 1 1 13 25 15
8:45 AM 3 2 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 1 4 0 2 6
0 2 8 4 12 10
13 8:30 AM 1 2 0 0 3 1 0 1
0 0 2 3 2 5
12 8
8:15 AM 3 1 0 0 4 0 2
0 0 0 2 4 2
1 8 16
8:00 AM 1 2 0 0 3 2
3 0 0 1 4 1
2 4 7
7 7:30 AM 2 3 0 0 5 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 3 1
0 5 2
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 6 10 0 1 17
0 0 2
HV% - 0% 1% 0% - - 0% 0%
1 5
7:15 AM 0 4 0 0 4 0 0
0 0 0 2 2 1
West North South
7:00 AM 0 3 2
0 33 0 15 380 30 0 16 23 18 0 11 24
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 2% 0% 0% - 0% 0% 0% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 65 613
48 0 24 41 29 0
7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 0
32 1,260 0
HV 0 0 8 0 0
Count Total 0 85 947 46 2 20 666 17 38 46 2,009 0
0 4 62 9 0 5 2 3 0 3 13 10 270 1,260
2 4 7 323 1,236
8:45 AM 0 11 138 10
5 0 5 13 5 0
327 1,129
8:30 AM 0 18 163 9 0 5 87
0 2 106 11 0 4 5 6 0 3 5 7
3 2 8 340 961
8:15 AM 0 18 153 7
5 0 2 3 4 0
246 749
8:00 AM 0 18 159 7 0 4 125
0 2 105 11 0 2 5 4 0 0 6 12
3 1 1 216 0
7:45 AM 0 5 93 1
4 0 2 4 2 0
159 0
7:30 AM 0 5 109 5 0 1 79
1 0 66 2 0 4 6 3 0 2 4 0
1 3 1 128 0
7:15 AM 0 4 63 47:00 AM 0 6 69 3 1 2 36 1 0 0 3 2 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Walnut St Walnut St
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 0.0% 0.64
TOTAL 1.2% 0.93
TH RT
WB 1.6% 0.79
NB 0.0% 0.62
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.1% 0.94
0 40
000
001
0 20
31 37
8 19
N
Walnut St
San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave
Walnut St
San Carlos Ave
Walnut St
TEV: 1,260
PHF: 0.93
32 24
11 67
118
0 30
380
15 425
642
0 16
23 18
72 57
0 33
613
65 711
428
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 10 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 4 0 0 2 00 9 0 0 2 00 2 0 0
000
0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 200
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 1 0 0 0 70 0 1 1 13 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 7
2 10
8:45 AM
0 0 1 0
8 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 2
2 6
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 00 1 0
0 2 0
6 8:00 AM
0 0 0 4
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
7:00 AM 2 0
RT
15 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Walnut St Walnut St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 0 1 46 0
Peak Hour 0 0 8 0
Count Total 0 2 13 1 0 0 25 2 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 15
0 0 0 3 27
8:45 AM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 29
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 29
8:15 AM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
17 31
8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 0 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 5 0
7:45 AM 0 1 4 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0
7:30 AM 0 1 1 0 0 0 3
0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 5 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 1 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Walnut St Walnut St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1003
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1719131014
9 2111
114
0 1 7 19 12 22 1 54
54 1
Peak Hour 0 1 2 2 5 1 5
Count Total 9 5 2 3 19 4 6 0 1 11 35 24
5:45 PM 0 1 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 2 1 1 9 0
0 3 11 1 9 0
1 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
0 0 1 2 4 2
10 0
5:15 PM 0 0 1 1 2 0 1
0 0 0 0 2 2
5 1 0
5:00 PM 0 0 1 1 2 0
1 1 0 1 3 4
1 5 0
0 4:30 PM 3 0 0 0 3 1 0 0
0 0 0 4 6 9
0 3 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1
0 1 7
HV% - 0% 0% 0% 0% - 2% 0%
9 0
4:15 PM 5 1 0 0 6 0 0
1 0 0 1 4 4
West North South
4:00 PM 1 2 0
0 35 1 29 502 22 0 49 32 42 0 18 37
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 0% 0% 2% - 0% 0% 5% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 24 428
45 0 95 72 77 0
1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 5 0
44 1,263 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 52 814 67 2 60 905 32 65 84 2,370 0
1 15 106 6 0 10 9 12 0 4 6 12 283 1,253
6 8 9 304 1,263
5:45 PM 0 3 92 7
3 0 13 9 8 0
325 1,215
5:30 PM 0 6 102 8 0 5 127
1 4 131 6 0 10 7 14 0 0 9 11
5 9 12 341 1,167
5:15 PM 0 6 117 9
6 0 8 13 9 0
293 1,117
5:00 PM 0 8 123 11 0 10 127
0 10 117 7 0 18 3 11 0 7 11 12
4 4 10 256 0
4:45 PM 0 4 86 7
3 0 12 12 6 0
277 0
4:30 PM 0 4 93 6 0 5 97
0 4 91 5 0 15 9 6 0 3 9 11
3 9 7 291 0
4:15 PM 0 11 103 104:00 PM 0 10 98 9 0 7 109 9 0 9 10 11 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Walnut St Walnut St
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 2.0% 0.83
TOTAL 0.4% 0.93
TH RT
WB 0.2% 0.97
NB 1.6% 0.96
Peak Hour: 4:45 PM 5:45 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.0% 0.86
0 10
010
000
0 50
22 1
12 19
N
Walnut St
San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave
Walnut St
San Carlos Ave
Walnut St
TEV: 1,263
PHF: 0.93
44 37
18 99
78 0
22 502
29 554
489
1 49
32 42
101
123
0 35
428
24 487
595
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 1 00 0 0
0 3 00 0 0
0 1 0 0 5 00 4 0 0 6 00 0 0 0
000
0 01
LT TH
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 1 0 70 0 0 0 11 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 1
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 6
3 7
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
5 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 4
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 1 0
5 5:00 PM
0 0 0 3
1 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 1 0
4:00 PM 1 0
RT
5 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Walnut St Walnut St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 1 2 19 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 9 0 0 0 4 1 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 6
0 0 0 0 5
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 8
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 2 12
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
1 13
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 0
4:30 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 0
4:15 PM 0 0 5 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Walnut St Walnut St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1004
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1825285434513235
277
0 0 7 33 17 27 75 152
45 145
Peak Hour 8 10 0 0 18 5 2
Count Total 14 27 4 2 47 12 2 0 0 14 61 26
8:45 AM 3 2 0 0 5 1 0 0 0 1 8 4 7 16
0 1 5 7 4 16
26 8:30 AM 1 2 0 0 3 1 0 0
0 0 3 13 4 8
8 17
8:15 AM 3 3 0 0 6 1 2
0 0 0 2 7 2
3 11 27
8:00 AM 1 3 0 0 4 2
4 0 0 0 4 13
2 4 16
13 7:30 AM 1 3 1 1 6 1 0 0
0 0 0 6 3 3
0 5 2
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 4 8 1 1 14
0 1 6
HV% - 0% 2% 0% - - 0% 0%
0 14
7:15 AM 0 4 0 0 4 0 0
0 0 0 2 3 1
West North South
7:00 AM 1 2 2
2 70 0 37 367 14 0 19 22 29 0 13 32
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
5% 2% 7% 0% - 0% 0% 0% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 80 525
22 0 39 33 42 0
7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 0
33 1,241 0
HV 0 0 8 0 0
Count Total 1 122 821 95 0 64 643 17 50 50 1,999 0
0 13 60 4 0 7 5 7 0 6 9 7 276 1,241
4 11 9 313 1,209
8:45 AM 0 18 116 24
4 0 6 6 7 0
322 1,121
8:30 AM 0 25 138 16 0 5 82
0 12 100 4 0 3 5 8 0 2 9 9
1 3 8 330 953
8:15 AM 0 16 138 16
2 0 3 6 7 0
244 758
8:00 AM 0 21 133 14 0 7 125
0 5 107 3 0 4 3 2 0 3 7 5
0 6 7 225 0
7:45 AM 0 14 84 7
4 0 3 4 3 0
154 0
7:30 AM 0 11 99 3 0 7 78
0 4 56 0 0 10 1 5 0 1 3 3
0 2 2 135 0
7:15 AM 1 11 52 77:00 AM 0 6 61 8 0 11 35 1 0 3 3 3 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Laurel St Laurel St
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 0.0% 0.81
TOTAL 1.5% 0.94
TH RT
WB 2.4% 0.78
NB 0.0% 0.92
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.2% 0.94
0 41
000
000
0 20
27 75
17 33
N
Laurel St
San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave
Laurel St
San Carlos Ave
Laurel St
TEV: 1,241
PHF: 0.94
33 32
13 78
116
0 14
367
37 418
567
0 19
22 29
139
70 0
70 525
80 675
419
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
1 4 0 0 2 01 11 0 0 2 00 2 0 0
000
0 01
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 200
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 70 0 0 0 14 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 7
1 10
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
10 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 3
2 7
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 1 01 0 0
0 2 0
7 8:00 AM
0 0 0 4
1 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
7:00 AM 2 0
RT
18 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Laurel St Laurel St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 2 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 1 1 47 0
Peak Hour 0 0 8 0
Count Total 0 0 14 0 0 2 24 1 0 1 2 1 0
0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 18
0 0 0 3 27
8:45 AM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 30
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2
0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 28
8:15 AM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
14 29
8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 1 2
0 0 8 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
0 1 0 6 0
7:45 AM 0 0 4 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
4 0
7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 3
0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 5 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Laurel St Laurel St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1005
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
4456455472764261
450
1 0 6 64 52 36 99 251
74 182
Peak Hour 5 2 1 0 8 4 1
Count Total 14 6 2 2 24 7 2 6 0 15 109 85
5:45 PM 1 1 0 0 2 3 0 0 0 3 15 15 9 22
0 1 10 10 5 17
26 5:30 PM 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 0
0 0 0 28 13 9
13 34
5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 1 0 2 11 14
7 13 20
5:00 PM 1 1 1 0 3 1
1 0 0 0 1 14
10 3 18
31 4:30 PM 3 1 0 0 4 1 0 1
3 0 3 8 6 11
1 5 1
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 1 0 1 2
0 2 14
HV% 0% 0% 1% 0% - - 0% 4%
11 14
4:15 PM 5 0 0 0 5 0 0
1 1 0 3 9 10
West North South
4:00 PM 1 2 1
0 71 0 55 478 26 0 20 26 34 0 20 45
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 0% 4% 0% - 0% 0% 0% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 1 45 419
51 0 40 42 59 0
1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 0
52 1,292 0
HV 0 0 5 0 0
Count Total 1 81 821 105 0 102 878 47 81 90 2,398 0
0 9 117 6 0 5 8 11 0 7 12 12 306 1,292
3 12 9 317 1,273
5:45 PM 0 9 90 20
4 0 4 6 10 0
340 1,217
5:30 PM 1 9 104 16 0 20 119
0 16 116 7 0 6 6 9 0 7 10 19
3 11 12 329 1,139
5:15 PM 0 12 111 21
9 0 5 6 4 0
287 1,106
5:00 PM 0 15 114 14 0 10 126
0 14 110 7 0 4 3 5 0 9 8 20
5 8 6 261 0
4:45 PM 0 6 90 11
9 0 5 6 3 0
262 0
4:30 PM 0 12 98 4 0 12 93
0 10 88 4 0 3 4 10 0 4 9 6
9 11 6 296 0
4:15 PM 0 11 103 104:00 PM 0 7 111 9 0 11 109 5 0 8 3 7 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Laurel St Laurel St
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.0% 0.81
TOTAL 0.6% 0.95
TH RT
WB 0.4% 0.96
NB 1.3% 0.83
Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.9% 0.93
1 21
000
010
0 10
36 99
52 64
N
Laurel St
San Carlos Ave
San Carlos Ave
Laurel St
San Carlos Ave
Laurel St
TEV: 1,292
PHF: 0.95
52 45
20 117
97 0
26 478
55 559
473
0 20
26 34
171
80 0
71 419
45 536
551
1 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 1 00 0 0
1 2 1 0 1 02 4 1 0 2 01 0 0 0
000
0 01
LT TH
1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
1 1 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 1 0 0 0 0 61 5 0 0 15 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 6
1 4
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
5 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 8
5:15 PM
0 1 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 0
9 5:00 PM
0 0 0 1
2 0
4:45 PM
1 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM4:15 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 3
0 0
0 0 0
4:00 PM 3 0
RT
8 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Laurel St Laurel St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
2 0 0 24 0
Peak Hour 0 0 5 0
Count Total 0 1 13 0 0 0 5 1 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8
0 0 0 2 8
5:45 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 10
5:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 14
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
2 16
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 4 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0
4:30 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 5 0
4:15 PM 0 1 4 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave San Carlos Ave Laurel St Laurel St
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1006
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
8 20131015422023
151
0 0 0 9 5 35 38 87
56 74
Peak Hr 4 0 26 39 69 0 0
Count Total 7 0 46 74 127 0 0 0 0 0 11 10
8:45 AM 0 0 6 14 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 14
0 0 4 1 4 11
16 8:30 AM 1 0 4 7 12 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 3 19
4 10
8:15 AM 0 0 4 8 12 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 8 1
8:00 AM 2 0 7 11 20 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
3 2 8
10 7:30 AM 1 0 5 12 18 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 8
2 7 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 1 0 11 13 25
0 0 0
HV% - 0% - 2% - 0% 6% 4%
3 4
7:15 AM 2 0 4 7 13 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
West North South
7:00 AM 0 0 5
0 174 0 0 0 0 1 90 573 0 0 0 665
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
- - - - - - 4% 3% 3%
Peak Hour
All 0 350 0
0 1 148 992 0 0
0 0 0 5 21 0 0 0 29 10 69 0
312 2,165 0
HV 0 1 0 3 0
Count Total 0 570 0 273 0 0 0 0 1,167 504 3,655 0
0 0 0 0 0 16 130 0 0 0 177 64 491 2,144
0 184 67 552 2,165
8:45 AM 0 73 0 31
0 0 20 137 0 0
525 2,033
8:30 AM 0 100 0 44 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 25 128 0 0 0 159 77
0 169 92 576 1,839
8:15 AM 0 82 0 54
0 0 23 155 0 0
512 1,511
8:00 AM 0 90 0 47 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 22 153 0 0 0 153 76
0 155 52 420 0
7:45 AM 0 78 0 29
0 0 19 115 0 0
331 0
7:30 AM 0 48 0 31 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 17 91 0 0 0 105 44
0 65 32 248 0
7:15 AM 0 58 0 167:00 AM 0 41 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 6 83 0 0
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave N/A El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB 4.0% 0.94
TOTAL 3.2% 0.94

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
WB - -
NB 3.9% 0.93
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.8% 0.91
Date: 05/03/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
0 0
00 00
35 38
59 N
El Camino Real
San Carlos Ave
El Camino Real
El Camino Real
San Carlos Ave
TEV: 2,165
PHF: 0.94
312
665 977
923
0 573
90 840
664
1 174
350 524
402
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 08:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
69 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave N/A El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound
0 0 0 0 0 5 21 0 0 0 29 10
0 55 19 127 0
Peak Hour 0 1 0 3
Count Total 0 1 0 6 0 0 0 0 0 8 38 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 9 5 20 64
0 5 2 12 69
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 3 0 0
12 75
8:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 6 2
0 7 4 20 76
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 6 0 0
25 63
8:00 AM 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 3 8 0 0 0 11 2
0 9 3 18 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 4 0 0
13 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 6 1
0 2 0 7 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 2
0 0 1 4 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave N/A El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1007
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
161720241328
9 31
158
0 0 0 4 12 26 32 74
51 64
Peak Hr 9 0 25 14 48 0 0
Count Total 14 0 40 23 77 0 0 0 1 1 8 35
5:45 PM 2 0 2 3 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 7 12
0 0 0 3 3 3
10 5:30 PM 1 0 4 2 7 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 6 10
5 5
5:15 PM 1 0 4 1 6 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 2
3 7 11
5:00 PM 2 0 10 5 17 0
0 0 0 0 0 3
6 4 10
6 4:30 PM 3 0 6 3 12 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 10
3 9 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 3 0 4 3 10
0 0 0
HV% 0% 1% - 2% - 0% 3% 2%
5 7
4:15 PM 1 0 5 3 9 0 0
0 0 1 1 1 3
West North South
4:00 PM 1 0 5
0 178 0 0 0 0 3 132 856 0 0 0 806
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
- - - - - - 1% 1% 2%
Peak Hour
All 1 342 0
0 11 264 1,622 0 0
0 0 0 4 21 0 0 0 9 5 48 0
399 2,717 0
HV 0 5 0 4 0
Count Total 2 640 0 352 0 0 0 0 1,596 786 5,273 0
0 0 0 0 2 44 166 0 0 0 168 100 610 2,622
0 213 105 646 2,659
5:45 PM 0 80 0 50
0 0 32 186 0 0
643 2,680
5:30 PM 1 68 0 41 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 36 211 0 0 0 191 101
0 204 107 723 2,717
5:15 PM 0 60 0 41
0 1 43 237 0 0
647 2,651
5:00 PM 0 80 0 51 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 24 191 0 0 0 216 100
0 198 95 667 0
4:45 PM 0 78 0 36
0 0 32 209 0 0
680 0
4:30 PM 1 90 0 42 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 33 219 0 0 0 188 97
0 218 81 657 0
4:15 PM 0 94 0 49
4:00 PM 0 90 0 42 0 0 0 0 3 20 203 0 0
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave N/A El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
SB 1.2% 0.95
TOTAL 1.8% 0.94

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
WB - -
NB 2.5% 0.88
Peak Hour: 4:15 PM 5:15 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.7% 0.91
Date: 05/03/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
0 0
00 00
26 32
124
N
El Camino Real
San Carlos Ave
El Camino Real
El Camino Real
San Carlos Ave
TEV: 2,717
PHF: 0.94
399
806 1,205
1,198
0 132
856
987
991
3 178
342 521
532
1 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 05:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
48 0
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave N/A El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound
0 0 0 0 0 4 21 0 0 0 9 5
0 18 5 77 0
Peak Hour 0 5 0 4
Count Total 0 7 0 7 0 0 0 0 0 6 34 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 3 0 7 37
0 2 0 7 40
5:45 PM 0 1 0 1
0 0 0 4 0 0
6 45
5:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 0
0 5 0 17 48
5:15 PM 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 9 0 0
10 40
5:00 PM 0 2 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 2
0 2 1 12 0
4:45 PM 0 1 0 2
0 0 2 4 0 0
9 0
4:30 PM 0 1 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 1 2
0 3 0 9 0
4:15 PM 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 5 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
San Carlos Ave N/A El Camino Real El Camino Real
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1008
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
10 758
1214261193
0 0 1 12 17 16 18 63
34 20
Peak Hour 1 2 0 1 4 1 0
Count Total 3 3 1 3 10 4 2 0 0 6 16 23
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 7
0 0 5 7 8 6
2 8:30 AM 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 1 4 6 2
3 3
8:15 AM 0 1 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 3 3
1 6 1
8:00 AM 0 0 0 1 1 0
2 2 0 0 4 0
1 3 0
1 7:30 AM 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 4 1
1 2 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 1 1 0 1 3
0 0 1
HV% - 0% 0% 8% - - 0% 0%
8 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 2 0
West North South
7:00 AM 1 0 0
0 13 0 9 50 14 0 6 22 21 0 25 14
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 2% 7% 0% - 0% 0% 25% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 10 94
20 0 7 31 35 0
1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0
4 282 0
HV 0 0 0 1 0
Count Total 0 14 127 14 1 13 70 38 17 6 393 0
0 0 16 4 0 0 3 4 0 7 4 0 58 282
7 3 0 76 254
8:45 AM 0 2 18 0
4 0 1 6 9 0
74 211
8:30 AM 0 3 28 7 0 3 5
0 3 12 4 0 3 4 4 0 9 5 1
2 2 3 74 165
8:15 AM 0 3 23 3
2 0 2 9 4 0
30 111
8:00 AM 0 2 25 3 0 3 17
0 1 4 1 0 0 4 4 0 2 0 0
4 3 0 33 0
7:45 AM 0 4 9 1
1 0 0 2 4 0
28 0
7:30 AM 0 0 12 0 0 1 6
0 2 6 2 0 1 3 4 0 3 0 1
4 0 1 20 0
7:15 AM 0 0 6 07:00 AM 0 0 6 0 1 0 4 2 0 0 0 2 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Chestnut St Chestnut St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 2.3% 0.72
TOTAL 1.4% 0.93
TH RT
WB 2.7% 0.83
NB 0.0% 0.77
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.9% 0.77
0 10
000
000
0 00
16 18
17 12
N
Chestnut St
Cherry St
Cherry St
Chestnut St
Cherry St
Chestnut St
TEV: 282
PHF: 0.93
4 14
25 43
46 0
14 50
9 73
140
0 22
216
36 49
0 1394
10 117
60 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 00 2 2 0 2 00 0 0 0
020
1 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 0 6 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 5
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
5 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 5
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 1 00 0 0
0 0 0
5 8:00 AM
0 0 0 4
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
0 2 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
4 0
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Chestnut St Chestnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
2 0 1 10 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 1
Count Total 0 1 1 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
0 0 0 2 7
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 6
8:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 5
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 6
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 2 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Chestnut St Chestnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1009
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1223171316141410
119
0 1 2 8 10 30 17 65
48 30
Peak Hour 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
Count Total 1 1 0 1 3 0 1 1 1 3 26 15
5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 2 4
0 0 3 3 6 2
4 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 7 1 2
8 3
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 5 0
0 4 7
5:00 PM 0 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
1 12 3
5 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 4 4 10
0 1 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
1 1 1
HV% - 0% 2% 0% - - 0% 0%
4 2
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 5
West North South
4:00 PM 1 0 0
0 2 0 14 71 14 0 2 14 11 1 10 12
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 6 62
35 0 5 21 20 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
8 227 0
HV 0 0 1 0 0
Count Total 1 9 97 4 0 30 148 17 27 12 427 0
0 3 18 6 0 1 2 2 0 2 3 1 50 200
1 7 1 50 204
5:45 PM 0 1 10 1
5 0 1 1 3 0
48 215
5:30 PM 0 0 8 1 0 4 18
0 5 21 7 0 0 3 0 0 3 1 1
1 4 1 52 217
5:15 PM 0 1 6 0
3 0 1 1 4 0
54 227
5:00 PM 1 1 11 0 0 4 20
0 5 18 7 0 0 0 2 0 4 3 3
1 3 1 61 0
4:45 PM 0 1 10 1
2 0 0 4 3 1
50 0
4:30 PM 0 2 18 0 0 3 23
0 2 14 3 0 0 5 3 0 2 3 2
3 3 2 62 0
4:15 PM 0 2 13 14:00 PM 0 1 21 0 0 4 16 2 0 2 5 3 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Chestnut St Chestnut St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.0% 0.78
TOTAL 0.4% 0.92
TH RT
WB 0.0% 0.83
NB 0.0% 0.68
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM 5:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.4% 0.80
0 00
001
000
0 10
30 17
108
N
Chestnut St
Cherry St
Cherry St
Chestnut St
Cherry St
Chestnut St
TEV: 227
PHF: 0.92
8 12
10 31
35 1
14 71
14 99
83 0
14 112
28 27
0 2
62 6
70 81
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 00 0 0 0 1 00 0 0 0
000
0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 0 00 1 00
LT TH
0 0 0 1 0 0 20 0 1 0 3 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
2 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 3
5:15 PM
0 0 1
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 0
2 5:00 PM
0 0 0 0
1 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 1
0 4:30 PM4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0
RT
1 0
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Chestnut St Chestnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 1 0 3 0
Peak Hour 0 0 1 0
Count Total 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Chestnut St Chestnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1010
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
18 59
1318132432
132
2 0 6 16 21 27 23 87
45 30
Peak Hour 1 1 1 3 6 1 3
Count Total 4 1 2 3 10 2 5 2 1 10 26 31
8:45 AM 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 8 8 8 8
0 0 4 5 9 6
4 8:30 AM 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0
1 0 5 1 5 3
7 5
8:15 AM 0 0 0 2 2 1 3
0 0 0 0 3 3
4 5 2
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 2 2
3 1 1
1 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 2 3 0 1
0 2 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 4
HV% - 8% 0% 0% 0% - 4% 0%
11 3
7:15 AM 1 0 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 3
West North South
7:00 AM 1 0 1
1 19 1 9 36 14 0 23 81 18 0 30 64
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
11% 0% 0% 0% - 0% 2% 6% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 13 112
25 0 31 118 28 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 6 0
35 455 0
HV 0 1 0 0 0
Count Total 0 28 163 25 1 14 58 44 91 45 671 0
1 4 8 5 0 9 15 4 0 9 14 9 109 455
8 14 9 120 406
8:45 AM 0 3 26 2
2 0 2 24 6 0
119 345
8:30 AM 0 6 31 7 0 2 9
0 1 9 4 0 5 26 4 0 3 23 9
10 13 8 107 278
8:15 AM 0 1 30 4
3 0 7 16 4 0
60 216
8:00 AM 0 3 25 6 0 2 10
0 3 5 1 0 2 14 0 0 4 11 2
3 6 4 59 0
7:45 AM 0 6 11 1
4 0 2 9 3 0
52 0
7:30 AM 0 5 12 3 0 1 7
0 0 6 2 0 2 7 4 0 3 7 3
4 3 1 45 0
7:15 AM 0 2 14 27:00 AM 0 2 14 0 0 1 4 4 0 2 7 3 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 2.3% 0.92
TOTAL 1.3% 0.95
TH RT
WB 1.7% 0.83
NB 0.8% 0.87
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.7% 0.82
0 10
000
011
0 03
27 23
21 16
N
Elm St
Cherry St
Cherry St
Elm St
Cherry St
Elm St
TEV: 455
PHF: 0.95
35 64
30 129
108
0 14
36 9
60 161
1 23
81 18
92 122
0 19
112
13 144
94 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 1 0 3 0 00 1 1 3 2 00 0 0 0
000
0 10
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 1 1 0 0 0 60 1 1 0 10 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 6
0 7
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
7 8:30 AM
0 0 1 0 0 0 5
0 4
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 1 00 0 0
3 0 0
4 8:00 AM
0 0 0 2
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2
0 0
0 2 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
6 0
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 1 2 10 0
Peak Hour 0 1 0 0
Count Total 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6
0 0 1 2 5
8:45 AM 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
2 3
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 2
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 4
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0
7:15 AM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1011
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2426251826212017
177
2 3 9 17 20 38 15 90
68 38
Peak Hour 0 0 0 1 1 2 2
Count Total 0 2 1 1 4 2 2 2 5 11 28 43
5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 5 8
0 0 3 6 8 3
4 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 3 7 7
9 4
5:15 PM 0 0 0 1 1 0 2
0 1 1 3 7 6
3 6 4
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 2 2 5
4 16 3
5 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
0 2 2 4 7 10
0 1 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 2
HV% - 0% 0% 0% - - 0% 0%
7 7
4:15 PM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 8
West North South
4:00 PM 0 0 1
0 14 0 14 56 24 0 24 124 19 0 24 81
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 0% 0% 0% - 4% 0% 0% 0%
Peak
Hour
All 0 11 54
45 0 43 239 48 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
34 479 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 28 107 28 0 31 114 46 156 60 945 0
0 4 16 4 0 6 31 9 0 7 18 6 119 468
2 24 9 108 453
5:45 PM 0 7 9 2
5 0 2 24 4 0
122 479
5:30 PM 0 3 10 0 0 4 21
0 5 17 4 0 6 28 4 0 10 23 8
8 16 8 119 473
5:15 PM 0 4 12 1
7 0 4 31 6 0
104 477
5:00 PM 0 3 9 6 0 5 16
0 2 9 9 0 8 25 3 0 2 18 10
4 24 8 134 0
4:45 PM 0 1 13 4
4 0 6 40 6 0
116 0
4:30 PM 0 3 20 3 0 2 14
0 7 7 6 0 9 29 9 0 8 11 6
5 22 5 123 0
4:15 PM 0 1 17 64:00 PM 0 6 17 6 0 2 14 6 0 2 31 7 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.7% 0.85
TOTAL 0.2% 0.89
TH RT
WB 0.0% 0.84
NB 0.0% 0.80
Peak Hour: 4:30 PM 5:30 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.0% 0.76
1 10
021
020
0 02
38 15
20 17
N
Elm St
Cherry St
Cherry St
Elm St
Cherry St
Elm St
TEV: 479
PHF: 0.89
34 81
24 139
159
0 24
56 14
94 97
0 19
124
24 109
167
0 1454
11 79
114
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
1 1 00 1 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 1 1 2 0 00 1 1 2 0 00 0 0 0
100
0 01
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 2 0 1 2 0 90 2 0 0 11 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 3 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
0 7
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
9 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 2
3 9
5:15 PM
0 1 0
0 0 00 0 0
2 0 0
6 5:00 PM
0 0 0 2
2 0
4:45 PM
0 1 0 0
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2
0 0
0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0
RT
1 0
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
1 0 0 4 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Elm St Elm St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1012
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
13 459
18112121
102
2 0 8 15 5 28 23 71
40 33
Peak Hour 1 2 1 0 4 3 3
Count Total 4 2 3 1 10 5 5 2 0 12 17 12
8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 4 1 7 9
0 2 5 2 10 4
6 8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1
0 0 5 2 0 3
8 4
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 3
0 0 0 0 4 2
1 5 2
8:00 AM 1 1 0 0 2 0
0 2 0 0 2 1
3 0 2
1 7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 1 2 0
0 4 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0
HV% - 0% 0% 10% - - 0% 0%
7 5
7:15 AM 1 0 0 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
West North South
7:00 AM 2 0 2
0 10 0 5 51 16 0 7 20 19 0 24 28
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 2% 6% 5% - 0% 0% 0% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 9 138
19 1 8 47 24 1
1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 0
6 333 0
HV 0 0 0 1 0
Count Total 0 11 212 10 0 10 82 43 38 12 518 0
0 1 16 3 0 2 6 6 0 11 7 1 90 333
4 8 0 89 289
8:45 AM 0 2 33 2
5 0 0 5 5 0
77 255
8:30 AM 0 5 36 5 0 2 14
0 1 12 6 0 2 6 4 0 6 5 1
3 8 4 77 222
8:15 AM 0 2 31 1
2 0 3 3 4 0
46 185
8:00 AM 0 0 38 2 0 1 9
0 2 9 2 0 0 6 2 0 7 3 1
6 3 2 55 0
7:45 AM 0 1 13 0
1 1 0 7 1 0
44 0
7:30 AM 0 1 19 0 0 3 11
0 0 8 0 0 0 9 0 1 4 2 0
2 2 3 40 0
7:15 AM 0 0 20 07:00 AM 0 0 22 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 5 2 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 0.0% 0.76
TOTAL 1.2% 0.93
TH RT
WB 2.8% 0.86
NB 2.2% 0.82
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.6% 0.85
0 30
000
020
0 30
28 23
5 15
N
Walnut St
Cherry St
Cherry St
Walnut St
Cherry St
Walnut St
TEV: 333
PHF: 0.93
6 28
24 58
45 0
16 51
5 72
181
0 20
197
43 46
0 10
138
9 157
64 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 3 0 0 3 00 3 2 0 5 00 0 0 0
000
0 20
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 2 0 0 0 0 80 2 0 0 12 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 8
2 9
8:45 AM
0 1 0 0
7 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 5
0 4
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 2 00 1 0
0 3 0
4 8:00 AM
0 0 0 2
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0
0 2 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
4 0
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 1 0 10 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 1
Count Total 0 0 3 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4
0 0 0 1 4
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 3
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 4
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
1 6
8:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0
7:15 AM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 2 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1013
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1626281716333018
184
0 3 10 15 10 41 28 94
76 51
Peak Hour 1 1 2 0 4 4 3
Count Total 1 2 4 1 8 6 4 0 4 14 38 19
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 6 7
0 0 10 3 13 4
14 5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 3 8 2 9
9 4
5:15 PM 1 1 0 0 2 1 2
0 0 0 0 2 1
1 7 6
5:00 PM 0 0 2 0 2 0
2 0 0 1 3 3
6 16 4
6 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 3 5 3 12
1 1 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
2 4 2
HV% - 0% 1% 0% 0% - 0% 1%
4 6
4:15 PM 0 1 2 0 3 2 1
0 0 1 1 4 2
West North South
4:00 PM 0 0 0
0 12 1 26 76 37 0 8 76 26 1 23 46
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 0% 3% 4% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 0 9 78
77 0 19 141 65 1
0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 0
13 432 0
HV 0 0 1 0 0
Count Total 0 30 151 23 2 47 148 52 80 25 861 0
0 6 18 12 0 3 16 10 0 5 8 2 107 430
7 4 3 99 415
5:45 PM 0 7 20 0
15 0 3 16 6 0
124 432
5:30 PM 0 4 7 4 0 5 25
0 11 21 20 0 2 15 7 0 7 9 5
7 17 5 100 410
5:15 PM 0 4 17 6
2 0 2 15 6 0
92 431
5:00 PM 0 2 19 2 0 6 17
1 5 20 7 0 0 24 4 1 4 9 2
5 11 1 116 0
4:45 PM 0 1 12 2
8 0 4 22 9 0
102 0
4:30 PM 0 2 30 2 0 4 18
0 5 12 4 0 3 16 10 0 9 9 2
8 13 5 121 0
4:15 PM 0 4 23 54:00 PM 0 6 23 2 1 5 17 9 0 2 17 13 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.0% 0.72
TOTAL 0.9% 0.87
TH RT
WB 0.7% 0.67
NB 1.8% 0.79
Peak Hour: 4:30 PM 5:30 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.0% 0.73
0 40
021
000
1 20
41 28
10 15
N
Walnut St
Cherry St
Cherry St
Walnut St
Cherry St
Walnut St
TEV: 432
PHF: 0.87
13 46
23 83
123
1 37
76 26
140
128
1 76
268
84 110
0 1278
9 99
97 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 1 0
0 1 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 4 0 0 2 12 4 0 0 3 10 0 0 0
000
0 01
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
2 0 000
0 0 00 1 00
LT TH
0 0 0 1 2 0 100 0 0 0 14 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 1 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
0 6
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
10 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 3
0 10
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 1 00 0 0
0 2 0
11 5:00 PM
0 0 0 3
4 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 1
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
0 1
0 0 0
4:00 PM 1 0
RT
4 0
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 1 0 8 0
Peak Hour 0 0 1 0
Count Total 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4
0 0 0 0 4
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 4
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 5
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 1 0
0 4
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Walnut St Walnut St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1014
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2938212425424948
276
0 0 6 40 65 38 21 164
50 32
Peak Hour 1 3 0 2 6 3 3
Count Total 4 7 0 3 14 3 3 0 0 6 108 86
8:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 12 15 12 9
0 1 5 28 10 6
4 8:30 AM 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 5 18 13 7
9 2
8:15 AM 0 1 0 1 2 2 3
0 0 0 0 5 9
7 3 2
8:00 AM 0 1 0 1 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 12
3 4 2
6 7:30 AM 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 26 3 3
0 4 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 12
HV% - 0% 1% - - - - -
2 1
7:15 AM 1 1 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 18 8
West North South
7:00 AM 2 2 0
0 0 0 0 59 28 0 0 0 0 0 40 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
- 5% 0% - - 0% - 7% 2%
Peak
Hour
All 0 39 129
48 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 0
30 325 0
HV 0 0 1 0 0
Count Total 0 54 205 0 2 0 82 74 0 61 526 0
0 0 12 7 0 0 0 0 0 12 0 12 87 325
11 0 6 92 287
8:45 AM 0 13 31 0
9 0 0 0 0 0
70 259
8:30 AM 0 10 36 0 0 0 20
0 0 15 5 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 7
6 0 5 76 231
8:15 AM 0 7 25 0
7 0 0 0 0 0
49 201
8:00 AM 0 9 37 0 0 0 12
0 0 10 7 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 4
15 0 12 64 0
7:45 AM 0 1 18 0
5 0 0 0 0 0
42 0
7:30 AM 0 6 20 0 0 0 6
0 0 7 5 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 3
4 0 12 46 0
7:15 AM 0 3 18 07:00 AM 0 5 20 0 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 2.9% 0.73
TOTAL 1.8% 0.88
TH RT
WB 3.4% 0.75
NB - -
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.6% 0.91
1 20
000
000
3 00
38 21
65 40
N
Laurel St
Cherry St
Cherry St
Laurel St
Cherry St
Laurel St
TEV: 325
PHF: 0.88
300
40 70
67 0
28 59
0 87
169
0 000
00 0
0 129
39 168
89 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 2 1 0 0 30 2 1 0 0 30 0 0 0
000
0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 6 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
1 6
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
5 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 5
0 0
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 2 00 0 1
0 0 3
0 8:00 AM
0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
6 0
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
1 0 2 14 0
Peak Hour 0 0 1 0
Count Total 0 0 4 0 1 0 3 3 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6
0 0 0 1 6
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 6
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 2 6
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 8
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0
7:15 AM 0 0 1 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 2 0 1 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1015
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
548095699683
101
94 672
0 0 4 129 153 55 37 374
93 67
Peak Hour 2 1 0 0 3 2 2
Count Total 6 1 0 0 7 4 5 0 0 9 227 285
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 25 49 14 6
0 0 39 41 13 8
15 5:30 PM 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 3 24 29 15
13 8
5:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 1 2
0 0 0 0 41 34
31 5 8
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 25
42 17 14
5 4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 1 28 38 9
0 3 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 22
HV% 0% 0% 2% - - - - -
7 3
4:15 PM 1 0 0 0 1 0 1
1 0 0 1 23 21
West North South
4:00 PM 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 108 49 0 0 0 0 0 57 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
- 1% 0% - - 0% - 0% 1%
Peak
Hour
All 1 33 112
91 0 0 0 0 1
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0
75 435 0
HV 0 0 2 0 0
Count Total 1 75 215 0 0 0 195 92 0 135 805 0
0 0 27 10 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 16 105 435
23 0 24 124 422
5:45 PM 1 12 29 0
14 0 0 0 0 0
113 387
5:30 PM 0 8 21 0 0 0 34
0 0 27 12 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 24
14 0 11 93 361
5:15 PM 0 5 35 0
13 0 0 0 0 0
92 370
5:00 PM 0 8 27 0 0 0 20
0 0 28 10 0 0 0 0 1 14 0 12
11 0 13 89 0
4:45 PM 0 11 16 0
10 0 0 0 0 0
87 0
4:30 PM 0 7 30 0 0 0 18
0 0 17 10 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 16
6 0 19 102 0
4:15 PM 0 10 30 04:00 PM 0 14 27 0 0 0 24 12 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.0% 0.70
TOTAL 0.7% 0.88
TH RT
WB 0.6% 0.82
NB - -
Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.4% 0.87
0 02
000
000
0 20
55 37
153
129
N
Laurel St
Cherry St
Cherry St
Laurel St
Cherry St
Laurel St
TEV: 435
PHF: 0.88
750
57 132
82 0
49 108
0 157
169
0 000
00 0
0 112
33 146
184
1 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
2 0 0 0 2 02 0 2 0 2 30 0 0 0
011
0 00
LT TH
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 0 00 0 10
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 9 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4
0 4
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
6 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 3
0 4
5:15 PM
0 0 0
1 0 00 0 0
0 2 0
5 5:00 PM
0 0 0 1
2 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1
0 0 0
4:00 PM 1 0
RT
3 0
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 0 0 7 0
Peak Hour 0 0 2 0
Count Total 0 1 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
0 0 0 2 3
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 1
5:30 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 4
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 0
4:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 1 2 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St Laurel St Laurel St 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1016
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
9424693
1047
0 0 2 2 8 18 0 28
26 0
Peak Hour 3 3 21 34 61 2 0
Count Total 8 8 37 70 123 2 0 0 1 3 8 13
8:45 AM 1 1 5 10 17 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 6 0
0 1 0 1 2 0
0 8:30 AM 1 0 4 7 12 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 2 7
3 0
8:15 AM 0 0 5 7 12 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 3
1 2 0
8:00 AM 1 2 7 10 20 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
1 0 0
0 7:30 AM 2 1 6 14 23 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 2
6 10 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 1 6 8 15
1 1 1
HV% - 4% 0% 1% - 0% 3% 3%
4 0
7:15 AM 2 1 3 8 14 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 3
West North South
7:00 AM 1 2 1
2 114 0 7 3 8 6 40 607 4 5 14 783
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
29% 0% 13% 0% 0% 21% 4% 4% 4%
Peak
Hour
All 0 51 8
15 6 61 1,057 7 5
0 1 0 1 20 0 0 3 29 2 61 0
50 1,700 0
HV 0 2 0 1 0
Count Total 0 91 13 188 0 14 4 25 1,303 76 2,865 0
0 2 1 0 1 13 135 1 3 3 209 14 422 1,700
6 177 13 423 1,636
8:45 AM 0 11 1 28
0 3 13 164 1 2
417 1,557
8:30 AM 0 15 2 27 0 0 0
0 1 1 2 0 10 156 0 0 2 194 12
3 203 11 438 1,402
8:15 AM 0 11 0 28
6 2 4 152 2 0
358 1,165
8:00 AM 0 14 5 31 0 4 1
0 0 0 1 0 6 146 0 0 5 164 10
4 149 7 344 0
7:45 AM 0 8 0 18
2 0 5 140 0 0
262 0
7:30 AM 0 16 1 18 0 2 0
0 4 0 2 0 7 98 3 0 1 115 6
1 92 3 201 0
7:15 AM 0 9 1 167:00 AM 0 7 3 22 0 1 1 2 0 3 66 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St El Camino Real El Camino Real 15-min Total

UT LT TH RT
Date: 04/25/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 4.0% 0.93
TOTAL 3.6% 0.97
TH RT
WB 16.7% 0.41
NB 3.2% 0.91
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.7% 0.87
0 20
000
000
0 00
18 0
82 N
El Camino Real
Cherry St
Cherry St
El Camino Real
Cherry St
El Camino Real
TEV: 1,700
PHF: 0.97
50 783
14 852
671
5 8
3 7
18 26
0 4
607
40 910
657
6 114
8 51
173
93 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy VehiclesTwo-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any. 1 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 0 00 0 0
0 2 0 0 0 00 2 0 0 0 00 0 0 0
000
0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 000
0 0 00 0 00
LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 0 3 0
0 0
0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
1 2
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
2 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 1
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 1 00 1 0
0 0 0
1 8:00 AM
0 0 0 0
1 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
61 0
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St El Camino Real El Camino Real 15-min Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 2 0 1 0 1 20 0 0 3 29 2

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
6 59 5 123 0
Peak Hour 0 2 0 1
Count Total 0 6 0 2 0 3 0 5 0 2 35 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 1 8 1 17 61
1 6 0 12 59
8:45 AM 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 4 0 0
12 70
8:30 AM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 1 6 0
0 9 1 20 72
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 7 0 0
15 62
8:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 0 1 5 0 0 2 6 0
0 14 0 23 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 6 0 0
14 0
7:30 AM 0 1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 1 6 1
0 4 2 10 0
7:15 AM 0 2 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 1 0 0 0 1 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Cherry St Cherry St El Camino Real El Camino Real 15-min Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] January 26, 2026 Packet Pg. 1017
www.idaxdata.com
toto
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
6 10
88 1611111080
0 2 2 9 19 18 2 48
28 2
Peak Hour 0 2 15 17 34 0 0
Count Total 4 6 34 37 81 0 2 0 7 9 12 38
5:45 PM 0 0 4 3 7 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 5 0
1 1 4 3 4 0
0 5:30 PM 0 0 2 5 7 0 0 0
0 1 1 4 3 4
5 2
5:15 PM 0 0 3 5 8 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 9
6 1 0
5:00 PM 0 2 6 4 12 0
0 0 0 1 1 1
4 2 0
0 4:30 PM 0 0 5 5 10 0 0 0
0 1 2 0 7 3
5 15 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 1 1 5 1 8
1 1 2
HV% - 0% 0% 0% - 0% 2% 2%
4 0
4:15 PM 1 1 3 9 14 0 1
1 0 2 3 0 2
West North South
4:00 PM 2 2 6
0 104 0 8 3 19 9 50 798 5 4 12 801
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
0% 0% 11% 20% 0% 8% 2% 1% 2%
Peak
Hour
All 0 115 4
36 24 108 1,527 7 9
0 2 0 1 13 1 0 1 15 1 34 0
101 2,033 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 207 5 190 0 16 5 22 1,623 164 3,943 0
0 5 0 1 2 12 180 2 2 2 186 32 471 2,033
3 207 28 520 2,019
5:45 PM 0 25 1 21
4 4 14 201 1 0
492 1,990
5:30 PM 0 31 1 26 0 0 0
0 1 1 3 2 13 199 0 0 3 185 24
4 223 17 550 1,993
5:15 PM 0 29 2 30
11 1 11 218 2 2
457 1,910
5:00 PM 0 30 0 27 0 2 2
0 5 0 7 3 18 171 1 2 5 188 14
0 213 16 491 0
4:45 PM 0 25 0 18
5 4 12 186 0 0
495 0
4:30 PM 0 28 0 26 0 1 0
0 2 0 1 3 12 190 1 1 1 222 18
4 199 15 467 0
4:15 PM 0 21 0 234:00 PM 0 18 1 19 0 0 2 4 5 16 182 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound