Agenda packet — San Carlos City Council, June 8, 2026 (part 7 of 11)

Type of Services Screening Level Environmental Site Assessment Location San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California

SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
This report presents the results of the Screening Level Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) performed for properties within the San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan boundary in San Carlos, California (Site) as shown on Figures 1 and 2. This work was performed for David J.

Powers & Associates in accordance with our agreement dated January 10, 2023 (Agreement).

1.1 SITE/PROJECT DESCRIPTION
We understand that David J. Powers & Associates is providing CEQA consulting services to facilitate preparation of the San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan. The San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan encompasses approximately 120 acres spanning the area north of Holly Street (excluding the single-family neighborhood and the area already included in the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan), to the San Carlos city limits at Belmont Creek, and between Highway 101 and Old County Road. This area, which has historically been referred to as the Harbor Industrial Area, was annexed into the City of San Carlos city limits in 1997. Since that time, there have been very few changes to the land use regulations in the area.

The Northeast Area Specific Plan will help to manage and direct changes in development patterns and guide present and future land uses, zoning changes, economic development, urban design, infrastructure, transportation circulation management and mobility, service provision, open space, and community benefits.

1.2 PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF WORK
The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the presence of documented hazardous substance releases at the Site and in the Site vicinity, and to provide an assessment of potential impacts to current and future Site uses. As presented in our Agreement, the scope of work performed for this Screening Level ESA included the following:
Review of selected documents obtained from the state Geotracker (http://geotracker.- waterboards.ca.gov) and Envirostor (http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov) databases to obtain information regarding reported on-Site and nearby spill incidents. Review of readily available historical aerial photographs, topographic maps and Sanborn fire insurance maps to help evaluate past and current Site uses. Preparation of a written report summarizing our findings and recommendations.

Is! CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1496
San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California
118-146-1

Page 2 ends

The limitations for the Screening Level ESA are presented in Section 5.

SECTION 2: GEOTRACKER AND ENVIROSTOR DOCUMENT REVIEW
To obtain information regarding documented spill incidents in the Site vicinity, a cursory review of readily available documents obtained from the state Geotracker (http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov) and Envirostor (http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov) databases was performed. Geotracker is a database and geographic information system (GIS) that provides online access to environmental data. It tracks regulatory data about leaking underground storage tank (LUST), Department of Defense, Site Cleanup Program and Landfill facilities. The Envirostor database is maintained by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) and contains information on investigation, cleanup, permitting, and/or corrective actions that are planned, being conducted or have been completed under DTSC’s oversight. The Envirostor database includes the following facility types:

Federal Superfund sites; State Response sites; Voluntary Cleanup sites; and School sites.

Available information regarding reported on-Site spill incidents is summarized in Table 1. The locations of on-Site properties at which spill incidents have been reported (i.e., reported LUST and cleanup program site [CPS] cases) are identified on Figure 2.

Table 1. Summary of Reported On-Site Spill Incidents
ID* Facility Name and Address Comments
Open Cleanup Program Sites
4 Circuits Facility
641 Quarry Road
Listed as an open case on the Cleanup Program Site (CPS) database under Regional Water Quality Control Board (Water Board) oversight. The property was used for printed circuit board manufacturing from the 1960s until 1990.

Investigations have detected significant levels of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in soil, soil vapor and groundwater resulting from former manufacturing activities. Interim remedial measures conducted in the early to mid-1990s included the excavation of unsaturated soil at the rear of the property, both inside and outside the building. Characterization activities are on-going and are being conducted under Water Board oversight. The lateral extent of impacted groundwater resulting from releases at the 641 Quarry Road property does not appear to have been established.
8 9
Putnam Honda and Tiegel
Family Trust
495 Bragato Road
(aka, 268 Industrial Road)
Delta Star
270 Industrial Road
The 495 Bragato Road property is listed as two open cases on the CPS database: Putnam Honda (Case # SL18390810 ) and Tiegel Family Trust (Case # T0608100797).

Delta Star, Inc. at 270 Industrial Way is listed as an open case on the CPS database and also on the Envirostor database as a state response site that is subject to a deed restriction (Land Use Covenant). Delta Star also is listed as a closed LUST case.

The 495 Bragato Road property has been used for a variety of light industrial purposes since the 1940s. The adjoining 270 Industrial Road property was used by a steel fabrication business and other industrial uses during the 1950s and subsequently for manufacturing of electrical transformers. The transformers manufactured prior to 1974 contained dielectric fluid containing polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and trichlorobenzenes (TCBs).

In 1988, elevated PCB concentrations were detected in soil at the 270 Industrial Way property. Between 1989 and 1991, remedial activities were conducted under San Mateo County Department of Environmental Health (DEH) and DTSC oversight that included the removal of soil impacted with PCBs exceeding 25 15! CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP
I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1497
San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California
118-146-1

Page 3 ends

mg/kg, among other actions. A Land Use Covenant was established for a portion of the 270 Industrial Road property where PCB concentrations exceeding the established cleanup standard remained. Among other provisions, the Land Use Covenant prohibits certain sensitive uses of the property (e.g., residential, schools, hospitals, day care facilities, etc.) unless approved by the DTSC.

In 1998, Delta Star and Tiegel conducted a soil and groundwater investigation that identified impacted soil and groundwater along the shared property boundary between 495 Bragato Road and 270 Industrial Road. In 1999, the Water Board adopted Site Cleanup Requirements, Order No. 99-062 requiring investigation and cleanup of environmental contamination at the border between the two properties. The Water Board currently is overseeing on-going investigation, groundwater monitoring and cleanup activities. US EPA also is involved with review and oversight of ongoing investigation and cleanup activities at the properties that involve PCBs.

Identified contaminants predominantly include PCBs, TCBs, petroleum hydrocarbons and VOCs. The former Circuits Facility at 641 Quarry Road (discussed above) reportedly is considered by the Water Board to be a possible source of some of the VOCs identified at the Delta Star and Tiegel properties. 13 Peninsula Laboratories
601 Taylor Street
Listed as an open case on the CPS database.

Previous occupants of the property included a tool and machine company (from approximately 1968 to 1994) and a pharmaceutical manufacturer (from 1994 to 2004). Numerous environmental investigations have been conducted at the property since 2003. Elevated concentrations of VOCs were identified in soil, soil vapor and groundwater. Remedial activities have included the excavation of VOC impacted soil in 2005 and the installation of a sub-slab vapor extraction system in 2021. Characterization and remedial efforts are ongoing and are being conducted under DEH oversight.

Closed Cleanup Program Sites
7** Former Spacesonic
266 Industrial Road
Listed as a closed case on the CPS database.

The property was developed in 1959/1960 and has been used for an electrical insulation business and die-cutting, slitting, cable assembly, and fabrication of metal wire. Portions of the property were used for fleet vehicle storage by various organizations. Spacesonic Sheet Metal Fabrication, a metal product (primarily steel and aluminum) manufacturing company, occupied the property from approximately 1995 to 2015. Various contaminants (primarily metals and VOCs) were detected in soil, soil vapor and/or groundwater. The CPS case was closed by the San Mateo County Department of Environmental Health (DEH) in 2021. Residual contaminant concentrations were reported to remain at the property.
14 EIMAC-Varian
301 Industrial Road
Listed as a closed case on the CPS database.

The property was developed in the mid- to late 1950s as an electronic component manufacturing facility that included the production of ceramic/metal power grid tubes and cavities by Eitel-McCullough, Inc. (EIMAC), a company reportedly acquired by Varian Associates, Inc. (Varian) in 1965. Varian continued to manufacture electronic components at the property after it acquired the property. Varian held a hazardous waste facility permit issued by the DTSC to store hazardous wastes, including solvents, acids, bases, cyanides, and polychlorinated biphenyl wastes, and to treat wastewater generated at the Site beginning with interim status in 1981. The hazardous waste facility permit was transferred to Communications and Power Industries (CPI) when it purchased the EIMAC portion of the company in 1995. CPI continued to manufacture vacuum tubes and related electrical components at this location until 2006.

Since 1984, numerous environmental investigations were performed to assess soil and groundwater conditions in the historical manufacturing and chemical handling areas of the property. In 1994, the DTSC completed a RCRA Facility 15! CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1498
San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California
118-146-1

Page 4 ends

Assessment (RFA) for the property, which identified 24 Solid Waste Management Units (SWMUs) and 18 Areas of Concern (AOCs). Varian/CPI performed several soil and groundwater investigations between 1994 and 1997 in response to the RFA. The DTSC required no further action for active SWMUs, which were to be addressed during facility closure. CPI decommissioned its hazardous material facilities and vacated the property in 2006. Remediation of the remaining SWMUs and AOCs was conducted after facility closure, between December 2007 and December 2011 consistent with planned future redevelopment of the property for unrestricted uses. A total of 1,900 soil samples, 725 soil vapor samples, and 163 groundwater samples were collected at the property during Remedial Action Plan (RAP) implementation activities.

RAP implementation activities included complete demolition of all above grade structures, and excavation of nearly 107,000 cubic yards (CY) of soil over 7 acres (38%) of the Site. Of that total volume, approximately 54,000 CY of soil were treated and reused, nearly 32,000 CY of “clean” soil were reused without treatment, and approximately 21,000 CY of soil were disposed at licensed landfills. Remediation successfully achieved the RAP objectives for property cleanup and reuse. The Water Board issued a No Further Action letter in 2012.

Residual contaminant concentrations remain at the property.

Open LUST Cases
15 B&H Technical Ceramics
390 Industrial Road
Identified as an open case on the LUST database.

The property was developed in 1961 and reportedly historically was occupied by automotive related businesses, a moving and storage company, and B&H Technical Ceramics. Two gasoline USTs were removed in 1989. Elevated concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons and VOCs have been identified at the property, primarily in groundwater and soil vapor. Ongoing characterization activities are being conducted under Water Board oversight.

Closed LUST Cases
1**
2 3
5**
6**
10**
11 12
Matagrano, Inc.
610 Quarry Road
Sam Trans/Ickler
Construction
599 Quarry Road
(also identified as 580, 585
and 591 Quarry Road)
Olympian Cardlock Stn.
200 Industrial Road (also
identified as 220 Industrial)
Carey Property
580 Bragato Road
Bragato Paving
535 Bragato Road
PG&E
275 Industrial Road
Story’s Brake Service
1670 Old County Road
(Currently 235 or 239 Old
County Road)
Parmel Properties
267 Old County Road
Each of the on-Site LUST cases listed to the left is identified as being closed.

However, residual contaminant concentrations potentially remain at each of these properties.
* See Figure 2
15! CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1499
San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California
118-146-1

Page 5 ends

** Site management requirements were stipulated in the regulatory agency case closure documentation that consisted of the following (or substantially similar) language: As a result of residual contaminant concentrations, changes in land use or removal of soil and groundwater from the affected area may create a risk. Therefore, any proposed change in land use or proposed soil or groundwater removal activity at or in close proximity to the subject site must be submitted to the San Mateo County Groundwater Protection Program (GPP) for our review under government code section 65850.2 so we can evaluate whether the residual contaminates will likely pose a risk to public health and the environment if the proposed activities are implemented.

In addition to the on-Site spill incidents listed in Table 1, two off-Site spill incidents were identified that are considered to have potential to impact the northern portion of the Specific Plan area.

These include documented VOC releases originating from the Purex Industries property (Former Baron-Blakeslee Incorporated facility) at 511 O’Neill Avenue and at the Brusco Property at 248 Harbor Boulevard. The locations of these off-Site facilities are shown on Figure 2.

Characterization, monitoring and remedial efforts are on-going at these facilities, which are open CPS cases under DEH and Water Board oversight.

SECTION 3: HISTORICAL USE INFORMATION
To develop a history of the previous uses of the Site and surrounding area, the following historical information sources were reviewed. Our findings are summarized in Table 2. Historical Aerial Photographs: We reviewed aerial photographs dated between 1943 and 2020 obtained from Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) of Milford, Connecticut; copies of aerial photographs reviewed are presented in Appendix A. Historical Topographic Maps: We reviewed USGS 15-minute and 7.5-minute historic topographic maps dated 1896, 1899, 1915, 1939, 1947, 1949, 1953, 1968, 1973, 1980, 1993, 1997, 2012, 2015 and 2018; copies of historic topographic maps reviewed are presented in Appendix A.
Historical Fire Insurance Maps: EDR reported that the Site was not within the coverage area of fire insurance maps.

Table 2. Summary of Historical Source Information for the Site Date Source Comment
1943 and
1946
Aerial
photographs
In 1943, the Site is shown to consist mainly of undeveloped land.

The eastern portion of the Site appears to consist of marshland.

What appear to be a few residences with associated outbuildings are present, along with what may have been a greenhouse. By 1948, a few commercial buildings are shown to have been constructed on the western portion of the Site and the former greenhouse is shown to have been removed.
1956 to 2020 Aerial
photographs
By 1956, the marshland on the eastern portion of the Site is shown to have been filled and an increase in commercial development of the Site is apparent. Several of the existing commercial buildings are shown to have been constructed and the former Belmont Speedway (a ¼ mile oval dirt motorsports track and associated grandstand) is shown at the location of the current PG&E facility. The Speedway was removed by 1963.

A gradual increase in commercial development is apparent during the 15! CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1500
San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California
118-146-1

Page 6 ends

1960s and 1970s. By the 1980s, most Site parcels appear to have been developed for commercial use.
1896, 1899
and 1915
Topographic
maps
The Site is shown to consist mainly of undeveloped land. The eastern portion of the Site consists of marshland. What appear to be a few residences with associated outbuildings are present. Belmont Creek is shown to traverse the Site, generally from west to east. 1947 and
1949
Topographic
maps
By 1947, a few commercial building are shown to have been constructed on-Site, mainly along Old County Road.
1953, 1968,
1973 and
1980
Topographic
maps
By 1953, the marshland on the eastesrn portion of the Site is shown to have been filled and an increase in on-Site commercial development is apparent. Further increases in commercial development are shown during the 1960s and 1970s.
1993 to 2018 Topographic
maps
The Site is shown within the urban developed area of San Carlos.

SECTION 4: CONCLUSIONS (FINDINGS) AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Cornerstone performed this Screening Level ESA to support David J. Powers & Associates in evaluation of the general environmental setting of the Site. Our conclusions and recommendations are summarized below.

4.1 SITE HISTORY
Based on the information obtained during this study, the Site consisted predominantly of undeveloped land between the late 1800s and early 1940s, except for a few residences and a potential greenhouse. Additionally, the eastern portion of the Site historically consisted of marshland and Belmont Creek traversed the Site, generally from west to east.

By the mid-1940s, a few commercial buildings were constructed on-Site, mainly along Old County Road. By 1953, the marshland on the eastern portion of the Site was filled. A gradual increase in commercial development occurred in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. By the 1980s, most Site parcels were developed for commercial use.

4.2 REPORTED SPILL INCIDENTS
As is common in commercial areas, multiple on-Site businesses appear to have handled and stored hazardous substances such as petroleum hydrocarbons, metals, VOCs and PCBs.

As summarized in Table 1 and depicted on Figure 2, spill incidents have been reported at several on-Site properties that have impacted soil, soil vapor and/or groundwater. In general, identified contaminants have included VOCs, petroleum hydrocarbons, metals and/or PCBs.

Several of the associated LUST and CPS cases have been closed by the overseeing regulatory agencies. One LUST case and four CPS cases remain open; at these parcels, characterization, monitoring and/or remediation activities are on-going and are being conducted under regulatory agency oversight (i.e., DEH, Water Board, and/or US EPA).

At the closed LUST and CPS case locations, residual contamination may remain in soil, soil vapor and/or groundwater. For several of the closed LUST and CPS cases, Site management requirements were established by the overseeing regulatory agencies (see Table 1 footnote).

Compliance with the established Site management requirements should be maintained. 15! CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1501
San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California
118-146-1

Page 7 ends

Note that risk-based screening levels published by regulatory agencies are routinely reviewed and revised as new scientific information becomes available. The general trend is that contaminant concentrations that are considered to be acceptable often are lowered (i.e., become more healthprotective) over time. This is particularly the case in recent years with soil vapor screening levels.

Due to these changes in regulatory guidance, some of the screening levels and/or cleanup goals previously utilized to support LUST and CPS case closures may no longer be appropriate in certain development scenarios. Thus, even for the closed LUST and CPS cases for which no Site management requirements were established, we recommend that remaining residual contaminant concentrations (if any) be compared to current screening levels to evaluate if additional sampling, health risk assessment, and/or remedial measures may be warranted.

At parcels with open LUST or CPS cases, any planned redevelopment activities should be coordinated with the overseeing regulatory agencies.

For the Delta Star property at 270 Industrial Road, a Land Use Covenant was established for a portion of the property where soil with PCB concentrations exceeding the established cleanup standards was left in place and capped. Among other provisions, the Land Use Covenant prohibits certain sensitive uses of the property (e.g., residential, schools, hospitals, day care facilities, etc.) unless approved by the DTSC. Compliance with the provisions of the Land Use Covenant should be maintained.

Two off-Site spill incidents were identified that are considered to have potential to impact the northern portion of the Specific Plan area. These include documented VOC releases originating from the Purex Industries property (Former Baron-Blakeslee Incorporated facility) at 511 O’Neill Avenue and at the Brusco Property at 248 Harbor Boulevard. Groundwater impacts from these facilities are predominantly off-Site to the north of Belmont Creek.

4.3 RECOMMENDED PROPERTY-SPECIFIC STUDIES AND PLANS
Prior to redevelopment of Site parcels, a property-specific Phase I ESA should be completed in accordance with ASTM Standard Designation E 1527-21 (or most recent version) to identify Recognized Environmental Conditions1, evaluate the property history, and establish if the property is likely to have been impacted by chemical releases. Soil, soil vapor and/or groundwater quality studies should subsequently be conducted, if warranted based on the findings of the property-specific Phase I ESAs, to evaluate if remedial measures are needed to protect the health and safety of Site occupants and construction workers.

Prior to the start of earthwork activities (e.g., excavation, trenching, grading, etc.) on properties with known contaminants of concern (COC) exceeding the lower of the then-current DTSC, Water Board or US EPA residential screening levels2, an appropriate corrective action/risk management plan (e.g RAP, removal action workplan [RAW] or Site Management Plan [SMP], etc.) should be prepared that reflects the results of the on-Site investigations. The corrective 1 As defined by ASTM E1527-21, the term Recognized Environmental Condition means 1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release to the environment; 2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or 3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.
2 Note that naturally occurring background concentrations of some metals may exceed their respective screening levels. Regulatory agencies generally do not require cleanup of contaminants in soil to below background levels. For some metals, Site specific background levels commonly are substituted for the published screening levels. 15! CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1502
San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California
118-146-1

Page 8 ends

action/risk management plan should describe measures necessary to protect the health and safety of future Site occupants, and establish appropriate management practices for handling and monitoring of impacted soil, soil vapor and groundwater that potentially may be encountered during construction activities. The corrective action/risk management plan should be prepared by an Environmental Professional and be submitted to an appropriate overseeing regulatory agency (e.g., DEH, DTSC or Water Board) for review. Regulatory agency approval should be obtained prior to commencing earthwork activities. A Health and Safety Plan (HSP) also should be prepared to establish health and safety protocols for personnel working at the Site. All remedial measures should be completed under regulatory agency oversight and meet all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations and requirements. Following completion, a report documenting compliance with the provisions of the corrective action/risk management plan and describing the work completed should be submitted to and approved by the overseeing regulatory agency.

4.4 LEAD-BASED PAINT
In 1978, the Consumer Product Safety Commission banned lead-containing paints and coatings sold for consumer use. Some lead-containing products, such as industrial coatings, however, are still allowed. Based on the age of many of the existing buildings, lead-containing paint may be present. If demolition is planned, the removal of lead-containing paint is not required if it is bonded to the building materials. However, if the lead-containing paint is flaking, peeling, or blistering, it should be removed prior to demolition. In either case, applicable OSHA regulations must be followed; these include requirements for worker training, air monitoring and dust control, among others. Any debris or soil containing lead must be disposed appropriately.

4.5 ASBESTOS AND OTHER HAZARDOUS BUILDING MATERIALS
Due to the age of many of the on-Site structures, building materials may contain asbestos. If demolition, renovation, or re-roofing of a building is planned, an asbestos survey is required by local authorities and/or National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) guidelines. NESHAP guidelines require the removal of potentially friable asbestos containing building materials prior to building demolition or renovation that may disturb these materials.

Some components encountered as part of a building demolition waste stream may contain hazardous materials. Universal wastes, lubrication fluids and refrigerants should be removed before structural demolition begins. Materials that may result in possible risk to human health and the environment when improperly managed include lamps, thermostats, and light switches containing mercury; batteries from exit signs, emergency lights, and smoke alarms; lighting ballasts which contain PCBs; and lead pipes and roof vent flashings. Demolition waste such as fluorescent lamps, PCB ballasts, lead acid batteries, mercury thermostats, and lead flashings have special case-by-case requirements for generation, storage, transportation, and disposal.

Before disposing of any demolition waste, the demolition contractor should determine if the waste is hazardous and ensure proper disposal of waste materials.

4.6 FACILITY CLOSURES
As part of the facility closure process for occupants with permits for storage of hazardous materials and/or generation of hazardous waste, the DEH typically requires that a closure plan be submitted by the occupant that describes required closure activities, such as removal of remaining hazardous materials, cleaning of hazardous material handling equipment, Ii! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1503
San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California
118-146-1

Page 9 ends

decontamination of building surfaces, and waste disposal practices, among others. We recommend that facility closure activities be coordinated with the DEH to ensure that required closure activities are completed prior to redevelopment of Site parcels or change in use.

4.7 IMPORTED SOIL
If a development will require importing soil for property grading, we recommend documenting the source and quality of imported soil. The DTSC’s Clean Fill Advisory (October 2001) provides useful guidance on evaluating imported fill.

4.8 GROUNDWATER WELLS
Groundwater monitoring wells associated with the identified open LUST and CPS cases are located on some Site parcels. These wells must be protected during construction. Upon written approval from the overseeing regulatory agency and the well owner, the wells could be destroyed under permit from the DEH prior to development activities. Relocation of the wells may be required. Monitoring wells that are no longer in use, or any unidentified wells (such as former agricultural wells) encountered during construction activities, should be properly destroyed in accordance with DEH requirements. Abandoned wells (i.e., those that are not properly destroyed) can act as a conduit for the vertical migration of groundwater contamination.

Also, if groundwater levels rise, an abandoned well can become an artisan well with uncontrolled water flow that can adversely impact future developments.

SECTION 5: LIMITATIONS
Cornerstone performed this Screening Level ESA to support David J. Powers & Associates in evaluation of the general environmental setting of the Site. Conclusions presented in this report are based on selected, readily available public information. Screening Level ESAs are inherently limited because findings are developed based on information obtained from a nonintrusive Site evaluation. If a greater degree of confidence is desired, soil, groundwater and/or soil vapor samples should be collected by Cornerstone and analyzed by a state-certified laboratory to establish a more reliable assessment of environmental conditions.

This report, an instrument of professional service, was prepared for the sole use of David J.

Powers & Associates and may not be reproduced or distributed without written authorization from Cornerstone. Cornerstone makes no warranty, expressed or implied, except that our services have been performed in accordance with the environmental principles generally accepted at this time and location.

Ii! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1504
3URMHFW1XPEHU
)LJXUH1XPEHU
'DWH 'UDZQ%\

)LJXUH
551
9LFLQLW\0DS
6DQ&DUORV1RUWKHDVW$UHD6SHFLILF3ODQ
6DQ&DUORV&DOLIRUQLD
-DQXDU\
1 6,7(
"¾
0, % i.

Ii!
'@
Carlmont High School
9 e,,,"'°'
Notre Dame
de Namur
University
9 •"
..,..1~<1""'
~"o
... 'I,
..

DEVON SHI RE
,s
t
<ti
a
Belmont
Twin
Pines Park
s

CORNERSTONE

EARTH GROUP
\.
i.
\
o,;
,Rd
r
<5 l~
'.,
\
MarlnePkW)'
q
a
San Carlos
Marlin Park
~.,
C.,Electronic Arts
9 Nob Hill Foods
Bay Club
Redwood Shores
"
San Carlos
Airport
'
:11-.,-1
o,,,
t,"I, <!>"' "<-,.
~/'9q
The Horne Depotf+'
<',, CJ,
":,'?a
-?,, <l>/
REI
,;
"''" '111/-90'
Burton Parl<
I
Bair/.

SI,
Marin
Bair Isla
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1505
%DVHE\*RRJOH0DSVGDWHG
2YHUOD\E\&RXQW\RI6DQWD&ODUD6DQERUQGDWHG

3URMHFW1XPEHU
)LJXUH1XPEHU
'UDZQ%\ 'DWH
)LJXUH

551
6LWH3ODQ
6DQ&DUORV1RUWKHDVW$UHD6SHFLILF3ODQ
6DQ&DUORV&DOLIRUQLD
-DQXDU\

$3352;,0$7( 6&$/(
)((7

1 *HQHUDODUHDRIUHSRUWHGJURXQGZDWHUFRQWDPLQDQWSOXPHVWKDWKDYHH[WHQGHGEH\RQGVRXUFHSURSHUW\ERXQGDULHV4XHULHGZKHUHWKHH[WHQWRILPSDFWKDVQRWEHHQHVWDEOLVKHG5HSRUWHG2SHQ/867RU&36FDVH6HHWDEOH5HSRUWHG&ORVHG/867RU&36FDVH6HHWDEOH /HJHQG

"
"
"
"
" "
"
"
"" "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
" " "
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
"
)RUPHU%DURQ%ODNHVOHH
3XUH[
IDFLOLW\2¶1HLOO$YHQXH
%UXVFR3URSHUW\+DUERU%RXOHYDUG
\
' ..... ....
\""°\
\J
' ' \
\
\
\
\
\
dnO~~ H.1~'13
3NO.lSH3NHO~ iii

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1506
San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan
San Carlos, California
118-146-1
APPENDIX A – HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS AND TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS Ii! CORNERSTONE EARTH GROUP

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1507
7KH('5$HULDO3KRWR'HFDGH3DFNDJH
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Inquiry Number:

December 28, 2022
7212984.8
6 Armstrong Road, 4th floor
Shelton, CT 06484
Toll Free: 800.352.0050
www.edrnet.com

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1508
2020 1"=625' Flight Year: 2020 USDA/NAIP
2016 1"=625' Flight Year: 2016 USDA/NAIP
2012 1"=625' Flight Year: 2012 USDA/NAIP
2009 1"=625' Flight Year: 2009 USDA/NAIP
2005 1"=625' Flight Year: 2005 USDA/NAIP
1998 1"=625' Flight Date: August 27, 1998 USDA
1993 1"=625' Acquisition Date: July 10, 1993 USGS/DOQQ
1982 1"=625' Flight Date: July 08, 1982 USDA
1974 1"=625' Flight Date: June 26, 1974 USGS
1970 1"=625' Flight Date: April 19, 1970 USGS
1968 1"=625' Flight Date: June 14, 1968 USGS
1963 1"=625' Flight Date: June 24, 1963 EDR Proprietary Aerial Viewpoint 1958 1"=625' Flight Date: July 25, 1958 USGS
1956 1"=625' Flight Date: September 08, 1956 USGS
1946 1"=625' Flight Date: July 29, 1946 USGS
1943 1"=625' Flight Date: October 05, 1943 USDA
EDR Aerial Photo Decade Package 12/28/22
Phase I ESA
Site Name: Client Name:

Cornerstone Earth Group
270 Industrial Road 1259 Oakmead Parkway
San Carlos, CA 94070 Sunnyvale, CA 94085
EDR Inquiry # 7212984.8 Contact: Stason Foster
Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) Aerial Photo Decade Package is a screening tool designed to assist environmental professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDR’s professional researchers provide digitally reproduced historical aerial photographs, and when available, provide one photo per decade.

Search Results:

Year Scale Details Source
When delivered electronically by EDR, the aerial photo images included with this report are for ONE TIME USE ONLY. Further reproduction of these aerial photo images is prohibited without permission from EDR. For more information contact your EDR Account Executive.

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice
Copyright 2022 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission.

EDR and its logos (including Sanborn and Sanborn Map) are trademarks of Environmental Data Resources, LLC or its affiliates. All other trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners.
7212984 8 - page 2
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, LLC. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. This Report is provided on an “AS IS”, “AS AVAILABLE” basis. NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT.

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES AND THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, OF ANY

KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN

THIS REPORT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING ACCURACY, QUALITY, CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS,

COMPREHENSIVENESS, SUITABILITY, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, TITLE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, MISAPPROPRIATION, OR OTHERWISE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC OR ITS

SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES OR THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR ANY DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL,

CONSEQUENTIAL OR OTHER DAMAGES OF ANY TYPE OR KIND (INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF PROFITS, LOSS OF USE, OR LOSS OF DATA), ARISING OUT OF OR IN ANY WAY CONNECTED WITH THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THIS REPORT.

Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels, or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property. Only an assessment performed by a qualified environmental professional can provide findings, opinions or conclusions regarding the environmental risk or conditions in, on or at any property.
~EDR'

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1509
7212984.8
2020
= 625'
YEAR:
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1510
7212984.8
2016
= 625'
YEAR: _____ _
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1511
7212984.8
2012
= 625'
YEAR: -------
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1512
7212984.8
2009
= 625'
YEAR: --------
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1513
7212984.8
2005
= 625'
YEAR: ------

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1514
7212984.8
1998
= 625'
YEAR: -------
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1515
7212984.8
1993
= 625'
YEAR:
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1516
7212984.8
1982
= 625'
YEAR:
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1517
7212984.8
1974
= 625'
YEAR: -------
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1518
7212984.8
1970
= 625'
YEAR: --------
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1519
7212984.8
1968
= 625'
YEAR:
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1520
7212984.8
1963
= 625'
YEAR:
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1521
7212984.8
1958
= 625'
INQUIRY#: ____ _
YEAR: _____ _
~EDR"

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1522
7212984.8
1956
= 625'

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1523
7212984.8
1946
= 625'

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1524
7212984.8
1943
= 625'
YEAR: ------

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1525
('5+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS5HSRUW
Inquiry Number:
$UPVWURQJ5RDGWKIORRU
6KHOWRQ&7
7ROO)UHH

ZZZHGUQHWFRP
ZLWK4XDG0DWFK
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
December 28, 2022
7212984.4

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1526
('5+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS5HSRUW
('5,QTXLU\
Search Results:
32
3URMHFW

0DSV3URYLGHG

Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark 1otice
('5DQGLWVORJRV
LQFOXGLQJ6DQERUQDQG6DQERUQ0DS
DUHWUDGHPDUNVRI(QYLURQPHQWDO'DWD5HVRXUFHV//&RULWVDIILOLDWHV$OORWKHUWUDGHPDUNVXVHGKHUHLQ DUHWKHSURSHUW\RIWKHLUUHVSHFWLYHRZQHUV
page
&RRUGLQDWHV:
/DWLWXGH

/RQJLWXGH

870=RQH

870;0HWHUV

870<0HWHUV

(OHYDWLRQ

&RQWDFW

6LWH1DPH
&OLHQW1DPH

2018
2015
2012
1997
1993, 1994, 1996
1980
1973
1968
1953, 1956
1949
1947, 1948
1939, 1940, 1943
1915
1899
1896
12/28/22
Phase I ESA Cornerstone Earth Group
270 Industrial Road 1259 Oakmead Parkway
San Carlos, CA 94070 Sunnyvale, CA 94085
7212984.4 Stason Foster
EDR Topographic Map Library has been searched by EDR and maps covering the target property location as provided by Cornerstone Earth Group were identified for the years listed below. EDR’s Historical Topo Map Report is designed to assist professionals in evaluating potential liability on a target property resulting from past activities. EDRs Historical Topo Map Report includes a search of a collection of public and private color historical topographic maps, dating back to the late 1800s.
118-146-1 37.516581 37° 31' 0" North
San Carlos Specific Plan -122.263871 -122° 15' 50" West Zone 10 North
565052.57
4152435.39

13.39' above sea level
This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, LLC. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. This Report is provided on an “AS IS”, “AS AVAILABLE” basis. NO WARRANTY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT.

ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, LLC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES AND THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, OF ANY

KIND OR NATURE, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, ARISING OUT OF OR RELATED TO THIS REPORT OR ANY OF THE DATA AND INFORMATION PROVIDED IN

THIS REPORT, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES REGARDING ACCURACY, QUALITY, CORRECTNESS, COMPLETENESS,

SUBSIDIARIES, AFFILIATES OR THIRD PARTY SUPPLIERS BE LIABLE TO ANYONE FOR ANY DIRECT, INCIDENTAL, INDIRECT, SPECIAL,

Copyright 2022 by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. All rights reserved. Reproduction in any media or format, in whole or in part, of any report or map of Environmental Data Resources, Inc., or its affiliates, is prohibited without prior written permission. 7212984 4 2
~EDR'

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1527
page
Topo Sheet .H\
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets.
2018 Source Sheets
2018
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
2018
Redwood Point

7.5-minute, 24000
2018
Woodside

7.5-minute, 24000
2018
Palo Alto

7.5-minute, 24000
2015 Source Sheets
2015
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
2015
Redwood Point

7.5-minute, 24000
2015
Woodside

7.5-minute, 24000
2015
Palo Alto

7.5-minute, 24000
2012 Source Sheets
2012
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
2012
Redwood Point

7.5-minute, 24000
2012
Woodside

7.5-minute, 24000
2012
Palo Alto

7.5-minute, 24000
1997 Source Sheets
1997
Woodside

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1991
1997
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1997
7212984 4 3
--~~- __ ; .., - ~
·-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1528
page
Topo Sheet .H\
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets.
1993, 1994, 1996 Source Sheets
1993
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1993
1994
Woodside

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1991
1994
Palo Alto

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1991
1996
Redwood Point

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1993
1980 Source Sheets
1980
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1978
1980
Redwood Point

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1978
1973 Source Sheets
1973
Woodside

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1973
1973
Redwood Point

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1973
1973
Palo Alto

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1973
1973
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1973
1968 Source Sheets
1968
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1968
1968
Palo Alto

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1968
1968
Woodside

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1968
1968
Redwood Point

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1968
7212984 4 4
,.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1529
page
Topo Sheet .H\
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets.
1953, 1956 Source Sheets
1953
Palo Alto

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1948
1953
Woodside

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1948
1956
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1946
1949 Source Sheets
1949
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1946
1947, 1948 Source Sheets
1947
San Mateo

7.5-minute, 24000
Aerial Photo Revised 1946
1948
Redwood Point

7.5-minute, 24000
1939, 1940, 1943 Source Sheets
1939
San Mateo
15-minute, 62500
Aerial Photo Revised 1939
1940
Halfmoon Bay
15-minute, 62500
Aerial Photo Revised 1939
1943
Palo Alto
15-minute, 62500
Aerial Photo Revised 1940
7212984 4 5

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1530
page
Topo Sheet .H\
This EDR Topo Map Report is based upon the following USGS topographic map sheets.
1915 Source Sheets
1915
Haywards
15-minute, 62500
1915
San Mateo
15-minute, 62500
1915
Hayward
15-minute, 62500
1899 Source Sheets
1899
Palo Alto
15-minute, 62500
1899
Haywards
15-minute, 62500
1899
San Mateo
15-minute, 62500
1896 Source Sheets
1896
San Mateo
15-minute, 62500
7212984 4 6

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1531
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
2018
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 2018, 7.5-minute
NE, Redwood Point, 2018, 7.5-minute
SE, Palo Alto, 2018, 7.5-minute
SW, Woodside, 2018, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 7
wood <ll
ores
goon <:>'I! 1 A of_\_\l'~ SHOe

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1532
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
2015
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 2015, 7.5-minute
NE, Redwood Point, 2015, 7.5-minute
SE, Palo Alto, 2015, 7.5-minute
SW, Woodside, 2015, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 8
.Redwoo
I Shores
1,I.,agoon

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1533
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
2012
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 2012, 7.5-minute
NE, Redwood Point, 2012, 7.5-minute
SE, Palo Alto, 2012, 7.5-minute
SW, Woodside, 2012, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 9
~EDR" 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1534
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1997
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1997, 7.5-minute
SW, Woodside, 1997, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 10
~EDR" 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1535
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1993, 1994, 1996
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1993, 7.5-minute
NE, Redwood Point, 1996, 7.5-minute
SE, Palo Alto, 1994, 7.5-minute
SW, Woodside, 1994, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 11
~EDR"
-,

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1536
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1980
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1980, 7.5-minute
NE, Redwood Point, 1980, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 12

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1537
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1973
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1973, 7.5-minute
NE, Redwood Point, 1973, 7.5-minute
SE, Palo Alto, 1973, 7.5-minute
SW, Woodside, 1973, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 13
~EDR"
"-,,
't AN,
e i"E'$
' ,;,
BUffJ PARK'<~
. 1•: b A(
CAR~O~.
" • ,;,.:,; I II .,,_
SALT
;::~~ - ~l,;,~-
:;:: :;::

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1538
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1968
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1968, 7.5-minute
NE, Redwood Point, 1968, 7.5-minute
SE, Palo Alto, 1968, 7.5-minute
SW, Woodside, 1968, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 14
' -
J
!,
,,
I It
I
/ '
............ :.:;:: .. t ·~ ::;;;::.,~:~~~----.,,,, / ,' SALT

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1539
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1953, 1956
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1956, 7.5-minute
SE, Palo Alto, 1953, 7.5-minute
SW, Woodside, 1953, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 15
~.: ;;::,"r •Mr, ,,,,,
, l "'··
---'·_··-.;_,-o~ \ •
·-... '• .• ~ ~ <r ..... '•,;. -

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1540
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1949
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1949, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 16

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1541
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1947, 1948
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1947, 7.5-minute
NE, Redwood Point, 1948, 7.5-minute
7212984 4 17
~EDR" 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1542
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1939, 1940, 1943
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1939, 15-minute
SE, Palo Alto, 1943, 15-minute
SW, Halfmoon Bay, 1940, 15-minute
7212984 4 18

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1543
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1915
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1915, 15-minute
NE, Haywards, 1915, 15-minute
NE, Hayward, 1915, 15-minute
7212984 4 19

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1544
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1899
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1899, 15-minute
NE, Haywards, 1899, 15-minute
SE, Palo Alto, 1899, 15-minute
7212984 4 20
~EDR" 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1545
+LVWRULFDO7RSR0DS
page
SITE NAME:

ADDRESS:

CLIENT:

This Ueport includes information from the
following map sheet(s).

: (
6:66(
1:11(
1896
0 Miles 0.25 0.5 1 1.5
Phase I ESA
270 Industrial Road
San Carlos, CA 94070
Cornerstone Earth Group
TP, San Mateo, 1896, 15-minute
7212984 4 21

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1546
870 Market Street, Suite 1278
San Francisco, CA 94102
(408) 246-4848
[email protected]

MEMORANDUM
DATE: March 26, 2025 Job #: DPOW.130
TO: Natalie Noyes
Desiree Dei Rossi
David J. Powers & Associates
FROM: Daniel Schaaf, PE
Cindy Steele, PE
SUBJECT: San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan Flood Impact Study Introduction
David J. Powers & Associates contracted Schaaf & Wheeler to prepare this Flood Impact Study for the San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan. Schaaf & Wheeler has reviewed the Project Description, Proposed Zoning District Map, and Civil Infrastructure Narrative provided by David J. Powers & Associates to update the Storm Drain Master Plan model and report the impacts of the Specific Plan per Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.

Approach to Analysis
This impact evaluation for the City of San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan identifies the hydrologic and hydraulic impacts of the proposed development compared to existing conditions.

This study utilizes and expands a PC SWMM model previously developed by GHD for the City of San Carlos 2017 Storm Drain Master Plan. Schaaf & Wheeler converted the SWMM model to MIKE+, updated the 2D terrain model with 2017 LiDAR, refined subcatchment boundaries, and added an existing U.S. Highway 101 culvert crossing. Impacts of the Specific Plan are determined by modeling the proposed land use and storm drain improvements as well as studying the FEMA FIRM and FIS for San Mateo County. Impacts of the proposed development are found to be “less than significant.”
Thresholds of Significance
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines and the Regulatory Setting requirements considers the proposed project to have a significant environmental impact with regard to hydrology if it would:
x Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would:
o Result in a substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site (Impact 1); o Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site (Impact 2);
o Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff (Impact 3); or
Schaaf ~ Wheeler

CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1547
To: David J. Powers & Associates
2 March 26, 2025
o Impede or redirect flood flows (Impact 4).
x In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation (Impact 5).

Project Location
The Northeast Area Specific Plan consists of approximately 145 acres, roughly bound by Belmont Creek, U.S. Highway 101, the western property lines of the residential parcels along Northwood Drive, the northeastern property lines of the residential parcels along Fairfield Drive, the southeast property line of the Palo Alto Medical Facilities and Old County Road in the City of San Carlos (Figure 1).

Figure 1: Project Location
Project Description Summary
The City proposes a Specific Plan to create a vision, policies, and standards to guide new development within the area in a way that supports existing and new businesses, residents, and the overall community. The Northeast Area Specific Plan will manage and direct changes in the development patterns within the area and guide present and future land uses, zoning changes, economic development, urban design, infrastructure, transportation circulation management and mobility, service provisions, and community benefits.

The Specific Plan anticipates new development and change over an approximate 20-year period, through 2045, and would allow for an increase of 1,890 residential units (no residential units exist within the Specific Plan area currently), as well as an increase in the net new square footage of existing non-residential land uses. The parcels within the Northeast Area Specific

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1548
To: David J. Powers & Associates
3 March 26, 2025
Plan are currently designated as IL: Light Industrial, IP: Industrial Professional, and PD: Planned Development. Figure 2 shows the proposed zoning.

Figure 2: Project Proposed Zoning
A new street segment extending Bragato road to Quarry Road would be constructed as part of the Specific Plan. Additionally, the Specific Plan would include improvements to the existing transportation network, such as a pedestrian/bicycle connection to Belmont Creek from Quarry Road and the redesign of Industrial Road as a multi-modal district boulevard.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1549
To: David J. Powers & Associates
4 March 26, 2025
The Plan area is served by existing catch basins and storm drainpipes in Quarry Road, Bragato Road, Taylor Way, and Industrial Road. The stormwater is then conveyed into drainage ditches on the north side of Holly Street and the south side of U.S. Highway 101, which convey water to the right-hand shoulder of southbound 101 into a series of underground storm drain pipes that collect water and convey it beneath the highway and into Phelps Slough. Phelps Slough drains water into a retention pond in Redwood Shores before it is pumped into Steinberger Slough, which drains into the San Francisco Bay.

The 2017 City of San Carlos Storm Drain Master Plan identified several storm drainpipes within the Specific Plan area as being undersized to convey the 10-year design storm runoff, including an 18-inch pipe in Quarry Road, 24-inch pipe in Industrial Road, and 16-inch pipe in Bragato Road. Future development under the Specific Plan would require construction of new storm drainpipes or development would be required to pay a fair share contribution to the improvement. Figure 3 shows the Proposed Storm Drain (new or future by others improvement).

The Specific Plan would also include green stormwater infrastructure improvements along all roadways.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1550
To: David J. Powers & Associates
5 March 26, 2025
Figure 3: Storm Drain Plan
Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Impact 1: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site area or, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site.

Finding: Less than Significant
There is no stream or river alteration proposed as part of this project. Since the Specific Plan area and vicinity is already developed, there is little potential for an increase in erosion through the addition of impervious surfaces.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1551
To: David J. Powers & Associates
6 March 26, 2025
Within the Northeast San Carlos Specific Plan area, current land use is mostly light industrial, professional industrial, and planned development. The proposed industrial professional, production and innovation, and mixed-use northeast land use will likely consist of reduced impervious surfaces relative to existing land use. The proposed zoning and green stormwater street improvements result in an estimated reduction of impervious surface (Table 1).

Table 1: Estimated Impervious Surface
Condition
Estimated
Impervious %
Existing 82.8
Proposed 78.6
Redevelopment will be subject to San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program per the Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit. Requirements include site design measures, source controls, stormwater treatment measures, and hydromodification management (if applicable) to reduce water quality impacts like siltation from increased pervious surfaces.

Therefore, since the risk of increased erosion is negligible, the project would have a Less than Significant Impact.

Impact 2: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site area or, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site.

Finding: Less than Significant
There is no stream or river alteration proposed as part of this project. Since the Specific Plan area and vicinity is already developed, there is little potential for an increase in rate or volume of surface runoff which would result in flooding through the addition of impervious surfaces.

The SDMP model identified existing catchment impervious percentage and calculated existing runoff peak flow. Catchment impervious percentage was updated in a proposed condition model to calculate the runoff peak flow per the proposed Specific Plan land use. The proposed condition reduces 10-year peak flow by approximately 3% (Table 2). This minor change in runoff to the existing drainage system does not cause any significant increase in flooding downstream of the project boundary based on post-project modeling.

Table 2: Project Area Runoff
Condition 10-year Runoff (cfs) 100-year Runoff (cfs)
Existing 213 354
Proposed 206 344
Therefore, the project would have a Less than Significant Impact.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1552
To: David J. Powers & Associates
7 March 26, 2025
Impact 3: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site area or, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.

Finding: Less than Significant
There is no stream or river alteration proposed as part of this project. Since the Specific Plan area is already developed, there is little potential for creating runoff which would result in exceeding the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems through the addition of impervious surfaces.

The proposed project incorporates upsizing storm drains as recommended by the Storm Drain Master Plan and additional upstream end of line extensions. The proposed condition reduces Specific Plan area flooding as shown in Figures 4 and 5.

Figure 4: 10-year Existing Flood Depth

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1553
To: David J. Powers & Associates
8 March 26, 2025
Figure 5: Proposed 10-year Flood Depth with Storm Drain Improvements Downstream of the Specific Plan area, stormwater is conveyed beneath Highway 101 and into Phelps Slough. Phelps Slough drains water into a retention pond in Redwood Shores before it is pumped into Steinberger Slough, which drains into the San Francisco Bay. Peak flows downstream of the site are not impacted by the increased onsite conveyance because flow is choked by the Highway 101 culverts, which have limited capacity and are typically obstructed by up to 18 inches of sediment.

Therefore, the project would have a Less than Significant Impact.

Impact 4: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site area or, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would impede or redirect flood flows.

Finding: Less than Significant
There is no stream or river alteration proposed as part of this project. Since the Specific Plan area is already developed, there is little potential to impede or redirect flood flows through the addition of impervious surfaces.

The Specific Plan includes the following Flooding Adaptation Development Standards:
x All new development within the Plan, regardless of whether the site is located within the 100-year flood zone shall adhere to the San Carlos Municipal Code, Chater 15.56 – Flood Damage Prevention.
x Critical site infrastructure (such as transformers and generators) shall be elevated to provide resilience to current and future flooding conditions in the area.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1554
To: David J. Powers & Associates
9 March 26, 2025
x The City of San Carlos shall determine on a case-by-case basis if individual project requires a building height variance to accommodate proposed finished flood elevations that have been elevated to provide flood resilience.
x For any new development within a 100-year flood zone, the project would be required to set the finished floor elevation above the 100-year base flood elevation.

The Specific Plan lists Sea Level Rise Development Standards which include:
x Future development shall assess sea level rise risk for the site and elevate the finished floor elevation of the new building further above the 100-year BFE to provide resiliency to future sea level rise.

According to the San Mateo County Flood Insurance Study, “North of Holly Street and west of U.S. 101, ponding will occur as a result of the inability of the Harbor Industrial District Channel culvert under U.S. 101 to pass the larger flood flows.” The Highway 101 culverts that drain the Specific Plan area are undersized for even the 10-year condition, given that they are typically obstructed by up to 18 inches of sediment and modeled as such. The FEMA Floodplain is shown in Figure 6.

Figure 6: FEMA Floodplain
The proposed project standards include elevating new finished floors above the 100-year base flood elevation. As redevelopment occurs in the Specific Plan area, fill will be placed to elevate

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1555
To: David J. Powers & Associates
10 March 26, 2025
building pads and structures above the base flood elevation plus sea level rise, providing some potential to displace the floodplain. For offsite flood flows to be increased, grading and building construction would have to block the active conveyance of flood flows through the project site.

To meet the NFIP, the project cannot incur more than one (1) foot of cumulative impact to the floodplain. Furthermore, the City of San Carlos requires that projects located within the floodplain shall perform a hydrology and hydraulic analysis to verify that proposed improvements will not adversely affect the floodplain or exacerbate flooding of other properties.

The properties south of the Specific Plan area are inundated by Pulgas Creek overflow during high-tide conditions up to a base flood elevation of 12 feet NAVD. The base flood elevation onsite is 10 feet NAVD. The result of placing fill in the onsite floodplain will be minor displacement of floodplain volume into the streets which will remain low lying. Filling the site would not cause an impediment to any offsite flows running through the site since the onsite floodplain is generated by onsite runoff and the offsite base flood elevations are higher than onsite base flood elevations.

Therefore, the project would have a Less than Significant Impact.

Impact 5: In flood hazards, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation.

Finding: Less than Significant
A tsunami is a potentially destructive wave resulting from seismic activity. The project site is located significantly far away from the ocean to be outside the Tsunami Evacuation Zones per the Association of Bay Area Governments (Figure 7).

Figure 7: Tsunami Evacuation Area

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1556
To: David J. Powers & Associates
11 March 26, 2025
A seiche is the resonant oscillation of water, usually limited to partially or fully enclosed basins.

San Francisco Bay is an enclosed body of water and is in the general vicinity of the project site.

There are several levees positioned between the bay and the site that would dampen any effects of a seiche (Figure 8).

Figure 8: Levees between the Specific Plan Area and San Francisco Bay Therefore, the project would have a Less than Significant Impact.

Conclusion
Based on this analysis, impervious coverage is estimated to decrease, project area runoff is estimated to decrease, local flooding is estimated to decrease, and floodplain impacts are found to be negligible given the proposed project zoning, storm drain improvements, and development standards. The project area is outside of tsunami and seiche zones. Therefore, flood impacts of the proposed San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan are found to be less than significant.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1557

NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN

NOISE AND VIBRATION ASSESSMENT

SAN CARLOS, CALIFORNIA
April 3, 2025
Prepared for:

Desirée Dei Rossi
Project Manager
David J. Powers & Associates, Inc.
1736 Franklin Street, Suite 400
Oakland, CA 94612
Prepared by:

Carrie Janello
429 East Cotati Avenue
Cotati, CA 94931
(707) 794-0400
I&R Job No.: 23-003

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1558
1 INTRODUCTION
The Northeast Area Specific Plan (NEASP) is proposed in the geographical region north of Holly Street (excluding the single-family neighborhood and the area already included in the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan) to the San Carlos City Limits at Belmont Creek, and between Highway 101 and Old County Road within the City of San Carlos, California. Figure 1 shows the plan area boundaries. The Palo Alto Medical Foundation site is located at 301 Industrial Road and is included within the proposed study area. However, this 18-acre site already has an approved development agreement and an approved Planned Development Permit to build a hospital within the next 10 years.

FIGURE 1 Project Study Area
This report evaluates the potential to result in significant noise and vibration impacts with respect to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines. The report is divided into three sections: 1) the Setting Section provides a brief description of the fundamentals of environmental noise and groundborne vibration, summarizes applicable regulatory criteria, and discusses the results of the ambient noise monitoring survey completed to document existing noise conditions; 2) the General Plan Consistency Section discusses noise and land use compatibility utilizing policies in the City of San Carlos’s General Plan; and 3) the Impacts and Mitigation Measures Section describes the significance criteria used to evaluate impacts that would result from j y

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1559
2 implementation of the Specific Plan upon sensitive receptors at a programmatic level, provides a discussion of each impact, and presents measures, where necessary, to mitigate the impacts.

SETTING
Fundamentals of Environmental Noise
Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Noise is usually objectionable because it is disturbing or annoying. The objectionable nature of sound could be caused by its pitch or its loudness. Pitch is the height or depth of a tone or sound, depending on the relative rapidity (frequency) of the vibrations by which it is produced. Higher pitched signals sound louder to humans than sounds with a lower pitch. Loudness is intensity of sound waves combined with the reception characteristics of the ear. Intensity may be compared with the height of an ocean wave in that it is a measure of the amplitude of the sound wave.

In addition to the concepts of pitch and loudness, there are several noise measurement scales used to describe noise in a particular location. A decibel (dB) is a unit of measurement that indicates the relative amplitude of a sound. The zero on the decibel scale is based on the lowest sound level that the healthy, unimpaired human ear can detect. Sound levels in decibels are calculated on a logarithmic basis. An increase of 10 decibels represents a ten-fold increase in acoustic energy, while 20 decibels is 100 times more intense, 30 decibels is 1,000 times more intense, etc. There is a relationship between the subjective noisiness or loudness of a sound and its intensity. Each 10 decibel increase in sound level is perceived as approximately a doubling of loudness over a fairly wide range of intensities. Technical terms are defined in Table 1.

There are several methods of characterizing sound. The most common in California is the Aweighted sound level (dBA). This scale gives greater weight to the frequencies of sound to which the human ear is most sensitive. Representative outdoor and indoor noise levels in units of dBA are shown in Table 2. Because sound levels can vary markedly over a short period of time, a method for describing either the average character of the sound or the statistical behavior of the variations must be utilized. Most commonly, environmental sounds are described in terms of an average level that has the same acoustical energy as the summation of all the time-varying events.

This energy-equivalent sound/noise descriptor is called Leq. The most common averaging period is hourly, but Leq can describe any series of noise events of arbitrary duration.

The scientific instrument used to measure noise is the sound level meter. Sound level meters can accurately measure environmental noise levels to within about plus or minus 1 dBA. Various computer models are used to predict environmental noise levels from sources, such as roadways and airports. The accuracy of the predicted models depends upon the distance the receptor is from the noise source. Close to the noise source, the models are accurate to within about plus or minus 1 to 2 dBA.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1560
3 TABLE 1 Definition of Acoustical Terms Used in this Report Term Definition
Decibel, dB A unit describing the amplitude of sound, equal to 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio of the pressure of the sound measured to the reference pressure. The reference pressure for air is 20 micro-Pascals.

Sound Pressure Level Sound pressure is the sound force per unit area, usually expressed in microPascals (or 20 micro-Newtons per square meter), where 1 Pascal is the pressure resulting from a force of 1 Newton exerted over an area of 1 square meter. The sound pressure level is expressed in decibels as 20 times the logarithm to the base 10 of the ratio between the pressures exerted by the sound to a reference sound pressure (e. g., 20 micro-Pascals). Sound pressure level is the quantity that is directly measured by a sound level meter.

Frequency, Hz The number of complete pressure fluctuations per second above and below atmospheric pressure. Normal human hearing is between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz. Infrasonic sound are below 20 Hz and Ultrasonic sounds are above 20,000 Hz.

A-Weighted Sound
Level, dBA
The sound pressure level in decibels measured on a sound level meter using the A-weighting filter network. The A-weighting filter de-emphasizes the very low and very high frequency components of the sound in a manner similar to the frequency response of the human ear and correlates well with subjective reactions to noise.

Equivalent Noise Level,
Leq
The average A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.

Lmax, Lmin
The maximum and minimum A-weighted noise level during the measurement period.

L01, L10, L50, L90 The A-weighted noise levels exceeded 1%, 10%, 50%, and 90% of the time during the measurement period.

Day/Night Noise Level,
Ldn or DNL
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 10 decibels to levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.

Community Noise
Equivalent Level,
CNEL
The average A-weighted noise level during a 24-hour day, obtained after addition of 5 decibels in the evening from 7:00 pm to 10:00 pm and after addition of 10 decibels to sound levels measured in the night between 10:00 pm and 7:00 am.

Ambient Noise Level The composite of noise from all sources near and far. The normal or existing level of environmental noise at a given location.

Intrusive That noise that intrudes over and above the existing ambient noise at a given location. The relative intrusiveness of a sound depends upon its amplitude, duration, frequency, and time of occurrence and tonal or informational content as well as the prevailing ambient noise level.

Source: Handbook of Acoustical Measurements and Noise Control, Harris, 1998.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1561
4 TABLE 2 Typical Noise Levels in the Environment
Common Outdoor Activities Noise Level (dBA) Common Indoor Activities 110 dBA Rock band
Jet fly-over at 1,000 feet
100 dBA
Gas lawn mower at 3 feet
90 dBA
Diesel truck at 50 feet at 50 mph Food blender at 3 feet 80 dBA Garbage disposal at 3 feet
Noisy urban area, daytime
Gas lawn mower, 100 feet 70 dBA Vacuum cleaner at 10 feet Commercial area Normal speech at 3 feet
Heavy traffic at 300 feet 60 dBA
Large business office
Quiet urban daytime 50 dBA Dishwasher in next room
Quiet urban nighttime 40 dBA Theater, large conference room Quiet suburban nighttime
30 dBA Library
Quiet rural nighttime Bedroom at night, concert hall
(background)
20 dBA
Broadcast/recording studio
10 dBA
0 dBA
Source: Technical Noise Supplement (TeNS), California Department of Transportation, September 2018.

Since the sensitivity to noise increases during the evening and at night -- because excessive noise interferes with the ability to sleep -- 24-hour descriptors have been developed that incorporate artificial noise penalties added to quiet-time noise events. The Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) is a measure of the cumulative noise exposure in a community, with a 5 dB penalty added to evening (7:00 pm - 10:00 pm) and a 10 dB addition to nocturnal (10:00 pm - 7:00 am) noise levels. The Day/Night Average Sound Level (DNL or Ldn) is essentially the same as CNEL, with

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1562
5 the exception that the evening time period is dropped and all occurrences during this three-hour period are grouped into the daytime period.

Effects of Noise
Sleep and Speech Interference
The thresholds for speech interference indoors are about 45 dBA if the noise is steady and above 55 dBA if the noise is fluctuating. Outdoors the thresholds are about 15 dBA higher. Steady noises of sufficient intensity (above 35 dBA) and fluctuating noise levels above about 45 dBA have been shown to affect sleep. Interior residential standards for multi-family dwellings are set by the State of California at 45 dBA Ldn. Typically, the highest steady traffic noise level during the daytime is about equal to the Ldn and nighttime levels are 10 dBA lower. The standard is designed for sleep and speech protection and most jurisdictions apply the same criterion for all residential uses.

Typical structural attenuation is 12 to 17 dBA with open windows. With closed windows in good condition, the noise attenuation factor is around 20 dBA for an older structure and 25 dBA for a newer dwelling.1
Sleep and speech interference is therefore possible when exterior noise levels are about 57 to 62 dBA Ldn with open windows and 65 to 70 dBA Ldn if the windows are closed.

Levels of 55 to 60 dBA are common along collector streets and secondary arterials, while 65 to 70 dBA is a typical value for a primary/major arterial. Levels of 75 to 80 dBA are normal noise levels at the first row of development outside a freeway right-of-way. In order to achieve an acceptable interior noise environment, bedrooms facing secondary roadways need to be able to have their windows closed, those facing major roadways and freeways typically need special glass windows.

Annoyance
Attitude surveys are used for measuring the annoyance felt in a community for noises intruding into homes or affecting outdoor activity areas. In these surveys, it was determined that the causes for annoyance include interference with speech, radio and television, house vibrations, and interference with sleep and rest. The Ldn as a measure of noise has been found to provide a valid correlation of noise level and the percentage of people annoyed. People have been asked to judge the annoyance caused by aircraft noise and ground transportation noise. There continues to be disagreement about the relative annoyance of these different sources. When measuring the percentage of the population highly annoyed, the threshold for ground vehicle noise is about 50 dBA Ldn. At a Ldn of about 60 dBA, approximately 12 percent of the population is highly annoyed.

When the Ldn increases to 70 dBA, the percentage of the population highly annoyed increases to about 25 to 30 percent of the population. There is, therefore, an increase of about 2 percent per dBA between a Ldn of 60 to 70 dBA. Between a Ldn of 70 to 80 dBA, each decibel increase increases by about 3 percent the percentage of the population highly annoyed. People appear to respond more adversely to aircraft noise. When the Ldn is 60 dBA, approximately 30 to 35 percent of the population is believed to be highly annoyed. Each decibel increase to 70 dBA adds about 3 percentage points to the number of people highly annoyed. Above 70 dBA, each decibel increase results in about a 4 percent increase in the percentage of the population highly annoyed.2 1 Based on the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration document “Highway Traffic Noise:

Analysis and Abatement Guidance” (2010) and data from Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. noise monitoring projects. 2 Kryter, Karl D. The Effects of Noise on Man. Menlo Park, Academic Press, Inc., 1985.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1563
6 Fundamentals of Groundborne Vibration
Ground vibration consists of rapidly fluctuating motions or waves with an average motion of zero.

Several different methods are typically used to quantify vibration amplitude. One is the Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) and another is the Root Mean Square (RMS) velocity. The PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of the vibration wave. The RMS velocity is defined as the average of the squared amplitude of the signal. The PPV and RMS vibration velocity amplitudes are used to evaluate human response to vibration. In this report, a PPV descriptor with units of mm/sec or in/sec is used to evaluate construction generated vibration for building damage and human complaints. Table 3 displays the reactions of people and the effects on buildings that continuous vibration levels produce. The annoyance levels shown in Table 3 should be interpreted with care since vibration may be found to be annoying at much lower levels than those shown, depending on the level of activity or the sensitivity of the individual. To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be annoying.

Low-level vibrations frequently cause irritating secondary vibration, such as a slight rattling of windows, doors, or stacked dishes. The rattling sound can give rise to exaggerated vibration complaints, even though there is very little risk of actual structural damage. In high noise environments, that are more prevalent where groundborne vibration approaches perceptible levels, this rattling phenomenon may also be produced by loud airborne environmental noise causing induced vibration in exterior doors and windows.

Typical background vibration levels in residential areas are usually 50 VdB or lower, well below the threshold of perception for most humans (60 to 70 VdB). Perceptible vibration levels inside residences are attributed to the operation of heating and air conditioning systems, door slams and foot traffic. Table 3 illustrates some common sources of vibration and the association to human perception or the potential for structural damage. Construction activities, train operations, and heavy truck and bus traffic are some of the most common external sources of vibration that can be perceptible inside residences.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1564
7 TABLE 3 Typical Levels of Groundborne Vibration
Human/Structural
Response Velocity Level, VdB
Typical Events
(50-foot setback)
Threshold, minor cosmetic
damage 100
Blasting, pile driving,
vibratory compaction
equipment
Heavy tracked vehicles
(Bulldozers, cranes, drill rigs)
Difficulty with tasks such as
reading a video or computer
screen
90 Commuter rail, upper range
Residential annoyance,
infrequent events 80 Rapid transit, upper range
Residential annoyance,
occasional events
Commuter rail, typical Bus or
truck over bump or on rough
roads
Residential annoyance,
frequent events 70 Rapid transit, typical
Approximate human
threshold of perception to
vibration
Buses, trucks and heavy
street traffic
60 Background vibration in
residential settings in the
absence of activity
Lower limit for equipment
ultra-sensitive to vibration 50
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, US Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration, September 2018.

Construction Vibration
Construction activities can cause vibration that varies in intensity depending on several factors.

The use of pile driving and vibratory compaction equipment typically generates the highest construction related groundborne vibration levels. Because of the impulsive nature of such activities, the use of the PPV descriptor has been routinely used to measure and assess groundborne vibration and almost exclusively to assess the potential of vibration to induce structural damage and the degree of annoyance for humans.

The two primary concerns with construction-induced vibration, the potential to damage a structure and the potential to interfere with the enjoyment of life, are evaluated against different vibration limits. Studies have shown that the threshold of perception for average persons is in the range of

0.008 to 0.012 in/sec PPV. Human perception to vibration varies with the individual and is a function of physical setting and the type of vibration. Persons exposed to elevated ambient vibration levels such as people in an urban environment may tolerate a higher vibration level.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1565
8 Structural damage can be classified as cosmetic only, such as minor cracking of building elements, or may threaten the integrity of the building. Safe vibration limits that can be applied to assess the potential for damaging a structure vary by researcher and there is no general consensus as to what amount of vibration may pose a threat for structural damage to the building. Construction-induced vibration that can be detrimental to the building is very rare and has only been observed in instances where the structure is at a high state of disrepair and the construction activity occurs immediately adjacent to the structure.

Table 4 displays continuous vibration impacts on human annoyance and on buildings. As discussed previously, annoyance is a subjective measure and vibrations may be found to be annoying at much lower levels than those shown, depending on the level of activity or the sensitivity of the individual.

To sensitive individuals, vibrations approaching the threshold of perception can be annoying.

TABLE 4 Reactions of People and Damage to Buildings From Continuous or Frequent Intermittent Vibration Levels
Velocity Level,
PPV (in/sec) Human Reaction Effect on Buildings

0.01 Barely perceptible No effect.

0.04 Distinctly perceptible Vibration unlikely to cause damage of any type to any structure.

0.08 Distinctly perceptible to
strongly perceptible
Recommended upper level of the vibration to
which ruins and ancient monuments should be
subjected.

0.1 Strongly perceptible
Threshold at which there is a risk of damage to
fragile buildings with no risk of damage to
most buildings.

0.25 Strongly perceptible to
severe
Threshold at which there is a risk of damage to
historic and some old buildings.

0.3 Strongly perceptible to
severe
Threshold at which there is a risk of damage to
older residential structures.

0.5 Severe - Vibrations
considered unpleasant
Threshold at which there is a risk of damage to
new residential and modern
commercial/industrial structures.

Source: Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual, California Department of Transportation, April 2020.

Rail Vibration
Railroad operations are potential sources of substantial ground vibration depending on distance, the type and the speed of trains, and the type of railroad track. People’s response to ground vibration has been correlated best with the RMS velocity level of the ground. The velocity of the ground is expressed on the decibel scale. The reference velocity is 1 x 10-6 in/sec RMS, that equals 0 VdB, and 1 in/sec equals 120 VdB. Although not a universally accepted notation, the abbreviation “VdB” is used in this document for vibration levels in decibels to reduce the potential for confusion with airborne sound levels in decibels.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1566
9 One of the problems with developing suitable criteria for groundborne vibration is the limited research into human response to vibration and more importantly human annoyance inside buildings. The U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has developed rational vibration limits that can be used to evaluate human annoyance to groundborne vibration. These limits are summarized in Table 5. These criteria are primarily based on experience with passenger train operations, such as rapid transit and commuter rail systems.

The main difference between passenger and freight operations is the time duration of individual events; a passenger train lasts a few seconds whereas a long freight train may last several minutes, depending on speed and length.

TABLE 5 FTA Groundborne Vibration Impact Criteria
Land Use Category
Impact Levels
(VdB re 1 micro-inch /sec)
Frequent
Events1
Occasional
Events2
Infrequent
Events3
Category 1: Buildings where vibration
would interfere with interior operations. 65 VdB4
65 VdB4 65 VdB4
Category 2: Residences and buildings
where people normally sleep. 72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB
Category 3: Institutional land uses with
primarily daytime use. 75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB
Source: US Department of Transportation Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, September 2018.

Notes:

1. "Frequent Events" is defined as more than 70 vibration events per day. Most rapid transit projects fall into this category.

2. "Occasional Events" is defined as between 30 and 70 vibration events of the same source per day. Most commuter trunk lines have this many operations.

3. "Infrequent Events" is defined as fewer than 30 vibration events per day. This category includes most commuter rail systems.

4. This limit is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment such as optical microscopes.

Vibration from Heavy Trucks and Buses
Groundborne vibration levels from heavy trucks and buses are not normally perceptible, especially if roadway surfaces are smooth. Buses and trucks typically generate groundborne vibration levels to about 63 VdB at a distance of 25 feet when traveling at a speed of 30 mph. Higher vibration levels can occur when buses or trucks travel at higher rates of speed or when the pavement is in poor condition. Vibration levels below 65 VdB are not normally perceptible.

Regulatory Background
This section describes the relevant guidelines, policies, and standards established by Federal and State Agencies, San Mateo County, and the City of San Carlos. The State CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G, are used to assess the potential significance of impacts pursuant to local General Plan policies, Municipal Code standards, or the applicable standards of other agencies. A summary of the applicable regulatory criteria is provided below.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1567
10 Federal
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
HUD environmental criteria and standards are presented in 24 CFR Part 51. New residential construction qualifying for HUD financing proposed in high noise areas (exceeding 65 dBA Ldn) must incorporate noise attenuation features to maintain acceptable interior noise levels. A goal of 45 dBA Ldn is set forth for interior noise levels and attenuation requirements are geared toward achieving that goal. It is assumed that with standard construction any building will provide sufficient attenuation to achieve an interior level of 45 dBA Ldn or less if the exterior level is 65 dBA Ldn or less. Approvals in a "normally unacceptable noise zone" (exceeding 65 dBA but not exceeding 75 dBA) require a minimum of 5 dBA additional noise attenuation for buildings if the day-night average is greater than 65 dBA but does not exceed 70 dBA, or minimum of 10 dBA of additional noise attenuation if the day-night average is greater than 70 dBA but does not exceed 75 dBA.

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Proposed federal or federal-aid highway construction projects at a new location, or the physical alteration of an existing highway that significantly changes either the horizontal or vertical alignment or increases the number of through-traffic lanes requires an assessment of noise and consideration of noise abatement per Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 772 (23 CFR Part 772), “Procedures for Abatement of Highway Traffic Noise and Construction Noise.” FHWA has adopted noise abatement criteria (NAC) for sensitive receivers such as picnic areas, recreation areas, playgrounds, active sport areas, parks, residences, motels, hotels, schools, churches, libraries, and hospitals when “worst-hour” noise levels approach or exceed 67 dBA Leq.

The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has further defined approaching the NAC to be 1 dBA below the NAC for noise-sensitive receivers identified as Category B activity areas (e.g., 66 dBA Leq is considered approaching the NAC).3

Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
The FTA has identified construction noise thresholds in the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual,
4 which limit daytime construction noise to 80 dBA Leq at residential land uses and to 90 dBA Leq at commercial and industrial land uses.

The FTA has identified vibration impact criteria for sensitive buildings, residences, and institutional land uses near rail transit and railroads. The thresholds for residences and buildings where people normally sleep (e.g., nearby residences) are 72 VdB for frequent events (more than 70 events of the same source per day), 75 VdB for occasional events (30 to 70 vibration events of the same source per day), and 80 VdB for infrequent events (less than 30 vibration events of the same source per day).

3 Traffic Noise Analysis Protocol, Caltrans Division of Environmental Analysis, May, 2011. 4 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, FTA Report No. 0123, September 2018.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1568
11 State of California
2022 California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2.

The current version of the California Building Code (CBC) requires interior noise levels in multifamily residential units attributable to exterior environmental noise sources to be limited to a level not exceeding 45 dBA Ldn/CNEL in any habitable room.

Division of Aeronautic Noise Standards
Title 21 of the California Code of Regulations5
sets forth the State’s airport noise standards. In the
findings described in Section 5006, the standard states the following: “A level of noise acceptable to a reasonable person residing in the vicinity of an airport is established as a CNEL value of 65 dB for purposes of these regulations. This criterion has been chosen for reasonable persons residing in urban residential areas where houses are of typical California construction and may have windows partially open. It has been selected with reference to speech, sleep, and community reaction.” Based on this finding, the airport noise standard as defined in Section 5012 is set at a CNEL of 65 dBA.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) – Construction Vibration Caltrans recommends a vibration limit of 0.5 in/sec PPV for buildings structurally sound and designed to modern engineering standards. A conservative vibration limit of 0.25 to 0.30 in/sec PPV has been used for older buildings that are found to be structurally sound but cosmetic damage to plaster ceilings or walls is a major concern. For buildings that are documented to be structurally weakened, a conservative limit of 0.08 in/sec PPV is often used to provide the highest level of protection. All of these limits have been used successfully and compliance to these limits has not been known to result in appreciable structural damage. All vibration limits referred to herein apply on the ground level and take into account the response of structural elements (i.e. walls and floors) to groundborne excitation.

CEQA Guidelines
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) contains guidelines to evaluate the significance of effects of environmental noise attributable to a proposed project. Under CEQA, noise impacts would be considered significant if the project would result in:
(a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; (b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; 5 California Code of Regulations Airport Noise Standards, Title 21, Public Works Division 2.5, Division of Aeronautics (Department of Transportation), Chapter 6 Noise Standards, Article 1.General.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1569
12 (c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, if the project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
2022 California Building Cal Green Code
The State of California established exterior sound transmission control standards for new nonresidential buildings as set forth in the 2022 California Green Building Standards Code (Section

5.507.4.1 and 5.507.4.2). The sections that pertain to this project are as follows:

5.507.4.1 Exterior noise transmission, prescriptive method. Wall and roof-ceiling assemblies exposed to the noise source making up the building envelope shall meet a composite STC rating of at least 50 or a composite OITC rating of no less than 40, with exterior windows of a minimum STC of 40 or OITC of 30 when the building falls within the 65 dBA Ldn noise contour of a freeway or expressway, railroad, industrial source or fixed-guideway noise source, as determined by the local general plan noise element.

5.507.4.2 Performance method. For buildings located, as defined by Section 5.507.4.1, wall and roof-ceiling assemblies exposed to the noise source making up the building envelope shall be constructed to provide an interior noise environment attributable to exterior sources that does not exceed an hourly equivalent noise level (Leq (1-hr)) of 50 dBA in occupied areas during any hour of operation.

The performance method that establishes the acceptable interior noise level is the method typically used when applying these standards.

County of San Mateo
Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Carlos Airport The policies and maps included in this document are related to the state-mandated airport compatibility factors – noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight. The following noise compatibility policies shall apply to the ALUCP and are applicable to this project:

Noise Policy 1 – Noise Impact Area. The threshold for evaluation is the projected CNEL 60 dB contour depicted on Exhibit 4-2. This contour defines the noise impact area of the Airport. All land uses located outside this contour are consistent with the noise compatibility policies of this ALUCP.

Noise Policy 2 – Airport Noise/Land Use Compatibility Criteria. The noise compatibility policies set forth in this section shall be used in conjunction with the 20-year future noise exposure contours depicted on Exhibit 4-2 and noise/land use compatibility criteria presented in Table 4-3. a. The compatibility criteria in this section indicate the maximum acceptable airport-related noise levels, which are measured in terms of CNEL, for a range of land uses.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1570
13 b. Noise compatibility policies only apply to the identified noise contours. Within the four noise exposure ranges, each land use type is shown as “compatible”, “conditionally compatible”, or “incompatible”. The meaning of these terms is provided in Table 4-3. c. Land uses not specifically listed in Table 4-3 shall be evaluated using the criteria for similar listed uses.

Noise Policy 4 – Interior Noise Levels. Within all identified noise contours, land uses for which interior activities may be easily disrupted by noise shall be required to comply with the following interior noise level criteria (calculations should assume windows are closed):
a. The maximum, aircraft-related, interior noise level which shall be considered acceptable for land uses within the airport influence area is CNEL 45 dB in:

1. Living and sleeping areas of single- or multi-family residences;

2. Hotels and motels;

3. Religious facilities, cemetery chapels, and mortuaries; and

4. Schools, libraries, and museums.
b. The maximum, aircraft-related, interior noise level which shall be considered acceptable for the following land uses is CNEL 50 dB in:

1. Office environments;

2. Eating and drinking establishments; and

3. Other commercial facilities.
c. When reviewed as part of a general plan or zoning ordinance amendment or as a major land use action, evidence that proposed structures will be designed to comply with these criteria shall be submitted to the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission (the C/CAG Board) under the following circumstances:

1. Any single- or multi-family residence within the CNEL 60 dB contour, as identified on Exhibit 4-2.

2. Any hospital or nursing home, religious facility, school, library, or other noise-sensitive nonresidential use within the CNEL 60 dB contour, as identified on Exhibit 4-2.

3. Any hotel, motel, or transient lodging within the CNEL 65 dB contour, as identified on Exhibit 4-2.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1571
14 . .'·-, .. ,.
"S' ' •1
" '
,._,,,<>-c ,'" q,?
'S}IIilfilaJJJJii[coJBllj)
= Nol&e c o ntour• ~2035)
--- JurJ&d l cUon a l Boundar y

NOISE SE NSITIVE FACILITIES
! School
1:1 H06pltal
;t Place or wor&hlp
GENEftALIZEO PL.ANNEO LANO U S.f
_ Single Family Res idential
- Multl-famuy Re&1oen 11 a1 - commerclal - •nou, rnal - Public - Mh:edU&e Open SpacefRecrea tfon /Pruervallon
- Parll./Golf CouruJCeme tery - wau-r D vacanl/Unclaulfled t
3000
""
. San Carlos Airport ALUCP _ 130753
SOURCE: &Elrnon.t, t 911,2'; San, Mateo county, 1986; Fa&:er aty. 1993; Menlo Part, 19~; san Ciill06, 2009; Cly or San Ma'.~. 2010; Reito1'00II City. 201 D; ESRI, 201.i; ESA Alrportt., 2015 E xhibit 4 - 2 Future Conditions (2035) Aircraft Noise Contours
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1572
15 TABLE 4-3

NOISE COMPATIBIUTY CRITERIA
Community Noise Equivalent Level (dBA}
Land Use Category <60 60-64 65-69 70-75
Residential and Lodging
Residential Singte-famiry (detached, semi-detached, attach.ed row) y C(2) N N Multi~family residential y C(2) N N
Mobile home par1<s or coulis y N N N
Retirement homes; intem1ediate care tacm1ies y C(2) N N Hotels; motels ; other transient lodging y y C(1) N
Public/Institutional
Children's schools (K-12) and child care facil'ities y C(2) C(2) N Adult schools; colleges; uni,versities (excluding laboratories, gymnasiums, y y C(1) N and outdoor athletic facilities) Outdoor amphitheaters and stadiums y N N N
Auditoriums; concert halls; indoor arenas y y C(1) N
Hospitals; nursing homes; o her health care services y C(2) N N Religious facflili-es; cemetery chapels; mortuaries.; libraries; museums y C(2) N N Prisons; reformatories y y C(3) N
Public safety facilities (e.g., police, fire stations) y y C(3) C(3) Cemetelies y y y N
Recreational
Children-oriented neighbomood parks; playgrounds y y N N Community par1<s; regional paJ1\s; golf courses; tennis courts ; athletic fields; y y N N outdoor spoctator sports; fairgrounds; water recreation facilities Recreation lmi ldings; gymnasiums; d ub houses; athletic d ubs; d:ance studios y y C(3) C(3) campgrounds; recreational vehicle/motor home parks y C(4) N N Commercial
Office buitdings; office areas of industrial facilities; medical clinics; y y C(3) N lal)Oratories; radio, television, and recording studios Retail sales; eating/drinking establishments; movie theaters; personal y y C(3) N seivices Wholesafe sales; warehouses; mini/other indoor storage y y y C(3) Auto and marine sales and repair services; car washes; gas stations y y y C(3) Animal shelters/kennels y C(4) C(4) N
lnd1JStrial
Light ind'ustrial/ma:nufacturing; miscellaneous manufacturing; research and y y y C{3) development facilities Printing, publishing, and allied industries y y y y
Processing of food, "'"°od and paper products; warehouses; wholesale y y y y storage

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1573
16 Noise Policy 5 – Application of Noise Contours to Individual Project Sites to Determine Compatibility. Future/projected aircraft noise contours are inherently imprecise because flight paths and other factors that influence noise exposure are variable and activity projections are always uncertain. Given this imprecision, the San Carlos Airport noise contours shall be utilized, as follows, in assessing the compatibility of a proposed use at a specific development site:
a. In general, the highest CNEL range to which a project site is anticipated to be exposed shall be used in evaluating the compatibility of development over the entire site. b. An exception to this policy is where no part of the building(s) or residential units proposed on the site fall within the higher CNEL range; the criteria for the CNEL range where the buildings are located shall apply.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1574
17 City of San Carlos
San Carlos 2045 General Plan Reset
The City of San Carlos is currently updating the General Plan, and the 2045 General Plan Reset Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR),6
which was completed in January 2025, outlines the
proposed changes to the General Plan, which will be implemented by the time the NEASP is approved. Chapter 9 of the 2045 General Plan Reset includes the Noise Element, which provides goals, policies, and actions to maintain a community with a noise environment that supports a high quality of life. The goals, policies, and actions that apply to the proposed project are as follows:

Goal NOI-1: Encourage compatible noise environments for new development and control sources of excessive noise citywide.

Policy NOI-1.1. Use the Noise and Land Compatibility Standards shown in Figure 9-1, the noise level performance standards in Table 9-1 and the projected future noise contours for the General Plan shown in Figure 9-3 and detailed in Table 9-2, as a guide for future planning and development decisions.

Policy NOI-1.2. Minimize noise impacts on noise-sensitive land uses. Noise-sensitive land uses include residential uses, retirement homes, hotel/motels, schools, libraries, community centers, places of public assembly, daycare facilities, churches, and hospitals.

Policy NOI-1.3. Limit noise impacts on noise-sensitive uses to noise level standards as indicated in Table 9-1.

Policy NOI-1.4. Require a detailed acoustic report in all cases where noise-sensitive land uses are proposed in areas exposed to exterior noise levels of 60 CNEL Ldn or greater. If recommended in the report, mitigation measures shall be required as conditions of project approval.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1575
18 Transmission Control, 2001 Building Code Chapter 12, Appendix 1207.11.2 of the 2007 California Building Coe (or the latest version).
d. Where new residential units (single- and multi-family) would be exposed to intermittent noise levels generated during train operations, maximum railroad noise levels inside homes shall not exceed 50 dBA in bedrooms or 55 dBA in other occupied spaces. These single event limits are only applicable where there are normally four or more train operations per day.

Policy NOI-1.6. Where noise mitigation measures are required to achieve the noise level standards, the emphasis of such measures shall be placed upon site planning and project design. The use of noise barriers shall be considered after practical design-related noise mitigation measures have been integrated into the project.

Policy NOI-1.7. The City shall seek to reduce impacts from groundborne vibration associated with rail operations by requiring that vibration-sensitive buildings (e.g. residences) are sited at least 100 feet from the centerline of the railroad tracks whenever feasible. The development of vibration-sensitive buildings within 100 feet from the centerline of the railroad tracks would require a study demonstrating that groundborne vibration issues associated with rail operations have been adequately addressed (i.e., through building siting, foundation design and construction techniques).

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1576
19 Policy NOI-1.8. All construction activities shall comply with the City’s noise ordinance.

Development projects that require an acoustical study shall incorporate reasonable noise and vibration reduction measures and best management practices to minimize excessive noise levels during all phases of construction activity. Reduction measures and best management practices may include, but are not limited to, noise control techniques for construction tools and equipment, construction site management techniques, temporary noise barriers, noise monitoring and reporting, and/or construction traffic management.

Policy NOI-1.9. Minimize potential transportation-related noise through the use of setbacks, street circulation design, coordination of routing and other traffic control measures and the construction of noise barriers and consider use of “quiet” pavement surfaces when resurfacing roadways.

Policy NOI-1.10. Ensure that mixed-use development projects are designed to minimize noise impacts on residential units.

Policy NOI-1.11. Ensure that proposed noise-sensitive land uses include appropriate mitigation to reduce noise impacts from aircraft operations at San Carlos Airport. Work with the San Carlos Airport Pilots Association and San Mateo County to continue to refine and implement the Airport’s noise abatement procedures.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1577
20 Policy NOI-1.12. Ensure consistency with the noise compatibility policies and criteria contained in the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Carlos Airport.

Policy NOI-1.13. Require a noise analysis for new residential uses located within the 55 CNEL impact area of the San Carlos Airport. If recommended in the report, mitigation measures shall be required as conditions of project approval.

Policy NOI-1.14. The Federal Transit Administration vibration impact criteria and assessment methods shall be used to evaluate the compatibility of train vibration with proposed land uses adjoining the UPRR (Caltrain) corridor. Site specific vibration studies shall be completed for vibration-sensitive uses proposed within 100 feet of active railroad tracks.

Action NOI-1.1. Establish a noise abatement protocol for existing sensitive land uses located in areas anticipated to experience significant noise increases with the implementation of the General Plan. Cumulative traffic noise impacts on existing noisesensitive uses could be reduced through the inclusion of exterior and/or interior soundreduction measures, such as setbacks, noise barriers, forced-air mechanical ventilation and sound-rated window construction. The City should research sources of funding for these actions.

Action NOI-1.2. Revise the City’s Noise Ordinance to be consistent with this Element.

Action NOI-1.3. Require residents of new mixed-use developments to be informed of potential noise from refuse collection and other activities typically associated with commercial activity.

Action NOI-1.4. Require the evaluation of mitigation measures for projects that would cause the following criteria to be exceeded or would cause a significant adverse community response:
a. Cause the Ldn at noise-sensitive uses to increase by 3 dBA or more and exceed the “normally acceptable” level.
b. Cause the Ldn at noise-sensitive uses to increase by 5 dBA or more and remain “normally acceptable.”
c. Cause noise levels to exceed the limits in Table 9-1.

Action NOI-1.5. Enforce Section 27007 of the California Motor Vehicle Code that prohibits amplified sound that can be heard 50 or more feet from a vehicle.

Action NOI-1.6. Enforce Section 27150 of the California Motor Vehicle Code that addresses excessive exhaust noise.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1578
21 Action NOI-1.7. Update and review procedures for dealing with noise complaints in the community.

Action NOI-1.8. Evaluate the necessity of requesting Caltrain to establish a Quiet Zone designation for San Carlos.

City of San Carlos Municipal Code
Chapter 9.30, Noise Control, of the City’s Municipal Code seeks to protect the peace, health and safety of its citizens from unnecessary and unreasonable noises produced by any machine, person or device.

9.30.030 Basic noise regulation. Except as otherwise permitted under this chapter, no person shall cause and no property owner shall permit, as to property owned by him, a noise produced by any person, amplified sound or device, or any combination thereof in excess of the noise limits established in Table 18.21.050-A to emanate from any property, public or private, as measured at the receiving property line. (Ord. 1439 § 4 (Exh. B (part)), 2011: Ord. 1086 § 1 (part), 1991)

9.30.070 Exempt activities. The following noise-generating activities are exempt from the provisions of this chapter:

A. Transportation facilities, such as freeways, airports, buses, and railroads; B. Construction activities; such activities, however, shall be limited to the hours of eight a.m. to five p.m. Monday through Friday, and nine a.m. to five p.m. on Saturdays and Sundays. No construction noise-related activities on the following holidays: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day, Juneteenth, 4th of July, Labor Day, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. All gasoline-powered construction equipment shall be equipped with an operating muffler or baffling system as originally provided by the manufacturer, and no modification to these systems is permitted (the Building Official shall have the authority to grant exceptions to construction noise-related activities); C. Home workshops and gas-powered gardening equipment; such activities, however, shall be limited to the hours of eight a.m. to sunset Monday through Friday, and ten a.m. to sunset on Saturday, Sunday and holidays stated in subsection B of this section; D. Public works and public utilities activities; such activities, however, shall be limited to the hours set forth under subsection B of this section, except for emergency situations (the Public Works Director shall have the authority to grant exceptions to public works and public utilities construction noise-related activities);
E. Emergency vehicles;
F. Solid waste pickup; such activities, however, shall be limited to the hours of collection set forth under the applicable franchise agreement for solid waste pickup, recyclable materials pickup

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1579
22 and/or organic materials pickup as may be restricted for residential, commercial and City facilities. (Ord. 1439 § 4 (Exh. B (part)), 2011: Ord. 1086 § 1 (part), 1991) Chapter 18.21 provides performance standards for noise and vibration. The following sections apply to this report:

18.21.050 Noise.

A. Noise Limits. No use or activity shall create noise levels that exceed the following standards.

The maximum allowable noise levels specified in Table 18.21.050-A, Noise Limits, do not apply to noise generated by automobile traffic or other mobile noise sources in the public rightof-way.

1. Adjustments to Noise Limits. The maximum allowable noise levels of Table 18.21.050- A, Noise Limits, shall be adjusted according to the following provisions. No more than one increase in the maximum permissible noise level shall be applied to the noise generated on each property.
a. Ambient Noise. If the ambient noise level at a noise-sensitive use is ten dBA or more below the standard, the allowable noise standard shall be decreased by five decibels.
b. Duration. The maximum allowable noise level (L50) shall be increased as follows to account for the effects of duration:
i. Noise that is produced for no more than a cumulative period of fifteen minutes in any hour may exceed the noise limit by five decibels; and ii. Noise that is produced for no more than a cumulative period of five minutes in any hour may exceed the noise limits by ten decibels; iii. Noise that is produced for no more than a cumulative period of one minute in any hour may exceed the noise limits by fifteen decibels. c. Character of Sound. If a noise contains a steady audible tone or is a repetitive noise (such as hammering or riveting) or contains music or speech conveying informational content, the maximum allowable noise levels shall be reduced by five decibels.
d. Prohibited Noise. Noise for a cumulative period of thirty minutes or more in any hour which exceeds the noise standard for the receiving land use.

B. Noise Exposure – Land Use Requirements and Limitations. Table 18.21.050-B, Noise Exposure—Land Requirements and Limitations, describes the requirements and limitations of various land uses within the listed day/night average sound level (Ldn) ranges.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1580
23 C. Acoustic Study. The Director may require an acoustic study for any proposed project that could cause any of the following:

1. Locate new residential uses within the fifty-five CNEL impact area of the San Carlos Airport;

2. Cause noise levels to exceed the limits in Table 18.21.050-A; Notes: 1. New residential development in noise impacted areas area subject to the following noise levels:
a. For new single-unit residential development, maintain a standard of 60 Ldn for exterior noise in private use areas.
b. For new multi-unit residential development, maintain a standard of 65 Ldn in community outdoor recreation areas. Noise standards are not applied to private decks and balconies and shall be considered on a case-by-case basis in the MU-DC District. c. Where new residential units (single and multifamily) would be exposed to intermittent noise levels generated during train operations, maximum railroad noise levels inside homes shall not exceed forty-five dBA in bedrooms or fifty-five dBA in other occupied spaces. These singleevent limits are only applicable where there are normally four or more train operations per day.

3. Create a noise exposure that would require an acoustic study and noise attenuation measures listed in Table 18.21.050-B, Noise Exposure – Land Use Requirements and Limitations; or

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1581
24 4. Cause the Ldn at noise-sensitive uses to increase three dBA or more.

D. Establishing Ambient Noise. When the Director has determined that there could be cause to make adjustments to the standards, an acoustical study shall be performed to establish ambient noise levels. In order to determine if adjustments to the standards should be made either upwards or downwards, a minimum twenty-four-hour-duration noise measurement shall be conducted. The noise measurements shall collect data utilizing noise metrics that are consistent with the noise limits presented in Table 18.21.050-A, e.g., Lmax (zero minutes), L02 (one minute), L08 (five minutes), L25 (fifteen minutes) and L50 (thirty minutes). An arithmetic average of these ambient noise levels during the three quietest hours shall be made to demonstrate that the ambient noise levels are regularly ten or more decibels below the respective noise standards. Similarly, an arithmetic average of ambient noise levels during the three loudest hours should be made to demonstrate that ambient noise levels regularly exceed the noise standards.

E. Noise Attenuation Measures. Any project subject to the acoustic study requirements of subsection C of this section may be required as a condition of approval to incorporate noise attenuation measures deemed necessary to ensure that noise standards are not exceeded.

1. New noise-sensitive uses (e.g., schools, hospitals, churches, and residences) shall incorporate noise attenuation measures to achieve and maintain an interior noise level of forty-five dBA.

2. Noise attenuation measures identified in an acoustic study shall be incorporated into the project to reduce noise impacts to satisfactory levels.

3. Emphasis shall be placed upon site planning and project design measures. The use of noise barriers shall be considered and may be required only after all feasible designrelated noise measures have been incorporated into the project. (Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
F. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan Consistency. Where required, conformance with applicable airport land use compatibility plan standards, as described in Section 18.21.150, San Carlos Airport land use compatibility plan consistency, is require. (Ord. 1606 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)

18.21.060 Vibration. No vibration shall be produced that is transmitted through the ground and is discernible without the aid of instruments by a reasonable person at the lot lines of the site.

Vibrations from temporary construction, demolition, and vehicles that enter and leave the subject parcel (e.g., construction equipment, trains, trucks, etc.) are exempt from this standard. (Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1582
25 Notes: 1. New residential development in noise impacted areas area subject to the following noise levels:
a. For new single-unit residential development, maintain a standard of 60 Ldn for exterior noise in private use areas.
b. For new multi-unit residential development, maintain a standard of 65 Ldn in community outdoor recreation areas. Noise standards are not applied to private decks and balconies and shall be considered on a case-by-case basis in the MU-DC District. c. Where new residential units (single and multifamily) would be exposed to intermittent noise levels generated during train operations, maximum railroad noise levels inside homes shall not exceed forty-five dBA in bedrooms or fifty-five dBA in other occupied spaces. These singleevent limits are only applicable where there are normally four or more train operations per day.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1583
26 Existing Noise Environment
The existing noise environment at the site results primarily from traffic noise along US 101, Holly Street, and Industrial Avenue. Traffic noise from other roads such as Harbor Boulevard, Old Country Road, El Camino Real, and other minor roads also contributes to the noise environment.

The Peninsula Corridor/ Union Pacific railroad tracks are just southwest of Old Country Road and are utilized primarily by Caltrain services. San Carlos Airport is located as close as 1,100 feet to the east of the study area. Operational noise from surrounding industrial land uses also contributes to the noise environment. The locations of noise measurements were chosen to fully represent existing noise levels at sites within the study area.

A noise monitoring survey consisting of four long-term (LT-1 through LT-4) and six short-term (ST-1 through ST-6) noise measurements was conducted within the study area and vicinity between Wednesday, January 25, 2023, and Friday, January 27, 2023. All noise measurement locations are shown in Figure 2.

Long-term noise measurement LT-1 was made in the southeast corner of the study area, approximately 90 feet northwest of the centerline of Holly Street, 85 feet northeast of the centerline of Industrial Road, and 780 feet southwest of the centerline of US 101. This location is also approximately 1,450 southwest of the San Carlos Airport. The location was chosen to represent existing noise levels at the southeast limits of the study area. Traffic noise from Holly Street, Industrial Road, and US 101, as well as aircraft noise from the San Carlos Airport were the main sources of noise at this location. Hourly average noise levels typically ranged from 67 to 75 dBA Leq during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.) and from 58 to 71 dBA Leq during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). The day-night average noise level on Thursday, January 26, 2023, was 73 dBA Ldn. The daily trend in noise levels at LT-1 is shown in Figures A1 through A3 of the Appendix.

Long-term noise measurement LT-2 was made in the center of the study area, approximately 40 feet west of the centerline of Industrial Road. The location was chosen to represent existing noise levels along Industrial Road. Traffic noise from Industrial Road was the main source of noise at this location. Aircraft noise, as well as industrial and commercial noise also contributed to the noise environment at this location. Hourly average noise levels typically ranged from 64 to 72 dBA Leq during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.) and from 57 to 68 dBA Leq during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). The day-night average noise level on Thursday, January 26, 2023, was 71 dBA Ldn. The daily trend in noise levels at LT-2 is shown in Figures A4 through A6 of the Appendix.

Long-term noise measurement LT-3 was made near the northwest corner of the study area, approximately 25 feet northeast of the centerline of Old Country Road. The location was chosen to represent existing noise levels along Old Country Road. Traffic noise from Old Country Road was the main source of noise at this location. Train noise, as well as industrial and commercial noise also contributed to the noise environment at this location. Hourly average noise levels typically ranged from 63 to 69 dBA Leq during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.) and from 54 to 67 dBA Leq during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). The day-night average noise

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1584
27 level on Thursday, January 26, 2023, was 70 dBA Ldn. The daily trend in noise levels at LT-3 is shown in Figures A7 through A9 of the Appendix.

Long-term noise measurement LT-4 was made near the northeast boundary of the study area, approximately 215 feet northeast of the centerline of US 101. The location was chosen to represent existing noise levels along US 101. Traffic noise from US 101 was the main source of noise at this location. Aircraft noise also contributed to the noise environment at this location. Hourly average noise levels typically ranged from 66 to 76 dBA Leq during daytime hours (7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.) and from 59 to 75 dBA Leq during nighttime hours (10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.). The day-night average noise level on Thursday, January 26, 2023, was 76 dBA Ldn. The daily trend in noise levels at LT-4 is shown in Figures A10 through A12 of the Appendix.

Short-term noise measurements were made on Wednesday, January 25, 2023, between 11:20 a.m. and 1:20 p.m. in 10-minute intervals. Results of the measurements are summarized in Table 6.

Short-term noise measurement ST-1 was made near the northeast boundary of the study area, approximately 400 feet southwest of the centerline of US 101. This location was chosen to further represent traffic noise levels from US 101. Traffic noise from US 101 was the main source of noise at this location, and typically ranged from 54 to 63 dBA. Aircraft noise from four airplanes ranged from 59 to 69 dBA during the noise measurement. The 10-minute Leq measured at ST-1 was 58 dBA.

ST-2 was made along the north boundary of the residential neighborhood just south of the study area. This location was chosen to represent typical noise levels at the residential neighborhood, which is farther from traffic noise than most other locations within the study area. Distant background traffic noise was the main source of noise at this location, typically ranging from 44 to 50 dBA. Aircraft noise from two airplanes ranged from 50 to 59 dBA during the noise measurement. Distant construction noise was audible at times. The 10-minute Leq measured at ST2 was 48 dBA.

ST-3 was made approximately 65 feet southwest of the centerline of Industrial Road. This location was chosen to further represent traffic noise levels from Industrial Road. Traffic noise from Industrial Road was the main source of noise at this location, typically ranging from 58 to 73 dBA. 79 vehicles passed by during the measurement, with noise levels ranging from 58 to 77 dBA. Six trucks produced noise levels ranging from 66 to 73 dBA. One bus produced noise levels up to 64 dBA. Aircraft noise from four airplanes ranged from 62 to 68 dBA during the noise measurement.

The 10-minute Leq measured at ST-3 was 64 dBA.

ST-4 was made approximately 30 feet northwest of the centerline of Quarry Road, and 410 feet northeast of the centerline of the Caltrain tracks. This location was chosen to represent traffic noise levels along Quarry Road. Traffic noise from Quarry Road was the main source of noise at this location. 13 vehicles passed by during the measurement, with noise levels ranging from 58 to 70 dBA. Two trucks produced noise levels ranging from 65 to 70 dBA. One Caltrain produced noise levels up to 57 dBA. Aircraft noise from three airplanes ranged from 58 to 68 dBA during the noise measurement. Industrial noise, including loading of trucks and liftgates, occasionally ranged from 55 to 71 dBA. The 10-minute Leq measured at ST-4 was 59 dBA.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1585
28 ST-5 was made approximately 75 feet southwest of the centerline of Industrial Road. This location was chosen to further represent traffic noise levels along Industrial Road. Traffic noise from Industrial Road was the main source of noise at this location. 83 vehicles passed by during the measurement, with noise levels ranging from 57 to 71 dBA. One truck produced noise levels up to 68 dBA. Aircraft noise from two airplanes ranged from 69 to 70 dBA during the noise measurement. The 10-minute Leq measured at ST-5 was 63 dBA.

ST-6 was made approximately 60 feet southeast of the centerline of Quarry Road. This location was chosen to further represent traffic noise levels along Quarry Road. Traffic noise from Quarry Road was the main source of noise at this location. Nine vehicles passed by during the measurement, with noise levels ranging from 58 to 63 dBA. Three trucks produced noise levels ranging from 68 to 72 dBA. One airplane produced noise levels up to 66 dBA during the noise measurement. Loading of a truck briefly produced noise levels up to 65 dBA. The 10-minute Leq measured at ST-6 was 58 dBA.

TABLE 6 Summary of Short-Term Noise Measurements (dBA)
Noise Measurement
Location Time Measured Noise Level, dBA
Lmax L(1) L(10) L(50) L(90) Leq
ST-1: ~400 feet from
the centerline of US 101 11:20-11:30 69 65 60 57 55 58
ST-2: ~520 feet from
the centerline of
Industrial Road
11:40-11:50 59 57 50 46 45 48
ST-3: ~65 feet from the
centerline of Industrial
Road
12:00-12:10 77 73 67 60 54 64
ST-4: ~30 feet from the
centerline of Quarry
Road
12:20-12:30 75 70 64 53 47 59
ST-5: ~75 feet from the
centerline of Industrial
Road
12:50-13:00 71 70 67 61 53 63
ST-6: ~60 feet from the
centerline of Quarry
Road
13:10-13:20 72 70 61 51 46 58

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1586
FIGURE 2 Aerial Image of the Project Site and Vicinity Showing Long- and Short-Term Measurement Locations Source: Google Earth, 2024.
g j y g g

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1587
Existing and Future Noise Scenarios
SoundPLAN Version 8.2, a three-dimensional ray-tracing computer program, was used to develop the traffic noise contours calculated for the Existing 2023, the Existing (2023) with Plan (Build), Cumulative (2045) without Plan (No Build), and Cumulative (2045) with Plan (Build) scenarios along major roadways in the plan area. Calculations accounted for the source of noise (traffic), the frequency spectra of the noise source, traffic speeds, vehicle mix information and the topography of the area. In order to provide a credible worst-case assessment of existing and future traffic noise conditions throughout the plan area, the modeling did not incorporate existing buildings or barriers, including centerline K-rails on the expressway medians, into the calculations. The modeling also assumed a hard ground surface for the plan area since it consists of mostly paved roads and buildings and other features commonly found in built environments. The geometric data used to create the model assumed a relatively flat topography, as is the case in the Plan Area. Peak hour traffic data for each scenario was provided by the traffic consultants, and observed travel speeds were input into the model for local roadways. A truck mix of 1% to 2% was used along the local roadways.

Additionally, traffic along US 101 would also impact the Plan Area. According to the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) website,7
the most recent traffic volumes available are
from 2022. A standard traffic volume increase of 1% to 2% each year and the peak hour project trips of 3,546 were used to estimate the Existing 2023, the Existing (2023) with Plan (Build), Cumulative (2045) without Plan (No Build), and Cumulative (2045) with Plan (Build) traffic volumes for the proposed project. The Caltrans website also includes truck mix data, which showed medium trucks to be 3% of the total traffic mix and heavy trucks to be 2% of the total traffic mix, was used in this analysis.

The Caltrain rail lines run parallel to Old County Road, and according to the current Caltrain schedule,8
about 75 trains pass through San Carlos in a 24-hour period. This is expected to continue under future conditions, with and without the build. Additionally, the California High Speed Rail (HSR) system is expected to run from San Francisco to the Los Angeles basin by 2029. For the segment from San Francisco to San José, it is anticipated that Caltrain and HSP would share the existing Caltrain tracks, operating as a blended system. According to the EIR completed for the HSR project,9
the corridor would add 122 to 176 revenue trains and 12 nonrevenue trains per day at the Area Plan. During the peak hour, up to 4 trains per direction would occur. Measured noise levels at LT-3 include noise from existing Caltrain rail activities, as well as the vehicular traffic noise along Old County Road. The Caltrain tracks were included in the SoundPLAN model using typical local conditions for the Existing 2023 and Existing (2023) with Plan (Build) scenarios.

Additional HSR activity was added to the Cumulative (2045) without Plan (No Build) and Cumulative (2045) with Plan (Build) models.

All predicted noise levels were compared to measured noise levels for calibration purposes and adjustments were made, as necessary, to the model. Table 7 summarizes the existing and future 7 https://dot.ca.gov/programs/traffic-operations/census 8 https://www.caltrain.com/station/sancarlos?active_tab=route_explorer_tab&origin=7013 9 California High Speed Rail Authority, “San Francisco to San Jose Project Section Draft Environmental Impact Report,” September 2020.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1588
31 Ldn noise levels at 75 feet from the centerline of the roadway. US 101 was modeled directionally, and the noise level was measured 75 feet from the centerline of the nearest through lane.

Figures 3 through 6 show the noise contours for the Existing 2023, Existing (2023) with Plan (Build), Cumulative (2045) without Plan (No Build), and Cumulative (2045) with Plan (Build) scenarios.

The San Francisco International Airport is a public-use airport located approximately 8 miles northwest of the Plan Area. According to the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport, 10 the project site lies well outside the 65
dBA CNEL/Ldn noise contour. The San Carlos Airport is located east of the Plan Area, opposite the US 101/Holly Street interchange. As shown in Figure 7, the eastern corner of the Plan Area lies within the 60 dBA CNEL/Ldn noise contour, but the entire Plan Area lies outside the 65 dBA CNEL/Ldn noise contour.

PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS
The goal of the NEASP is to create a vision, policies, and standards to guide new development within the Plan area in a way that supports existing and new businesses, residents, and the overall community. The NEASP will manage and direct changes in development patterns within the Plan area and guide present and future land uses, zoning changes, economic development, urban design, infrastructure, transportation circulation management and mobility, service provision, and community benefits. The Plan anticipates new development and change over an approximate 20- year period, through 2045, and would allow for an increase of 1,890 residential units (no residential units exist within the Plan area currently), as well as an increase in net new square footage of existing non-residential land uses within the Plan area.

This section summarizes the analysis of the land use compatibility of the proposed development within the Plan Area with respect to the future noise environment. Recommendations are made to ensure that future developments within the Plan Area are not exposed to excessive noise levels.

10 Ricondo & Associates, Inc. with Jacobs Consultancy and Clarion Associates, Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport, November 2012.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1589
TABLE 7 Existing and Future Modeled Noise Levels Along Surrounding Roadways Roadway Segment
Ldn at 75 feet from the Roadway Centerline,
dBA Increase Over Existing, dBA Ldn Increase of Cumulative Build Scenario Over
Cumulative No Build
Scenarios, dBA
Existing
(2023)
Existing
(2023)
with
Plan
(Build)
Cumulative
(2045)
without
Plan (No
Build)
Cumulative
(2045) with
Plan
(Build)
Existing
(2023)
with
Plan
(Build)
Cumulative
(2045)
without
Plan (No
Build)
Cumulative (2045)
with Plan (Build)
Old County Road/ Caltrain tracks
West of Harbor Blvd. 66 67 68 69.1 1 2 3 1
Harbor Blvd. to Quarry Rd. 67 68 69 70 1 2 3 1 Quarry Rd. to Taylor Way 68 69 71 71 1 3 3 0 Taylor Way to Holly St. 68 69 71 71 1 3 3 0 East of Holly St. 67 68 70 70 1 3 3 0 Industrial Road
Harbor Blvd. to Quarry Rd. 69 70 70 71 1 1 2 1
Quarry Rd. to Taylor Way 68 69 70 70 1 2 2 0 Taylor Way to driveway 68 70 70 71 2 2 3 1 Driveway to Holly St. 68 69 69 70 1 1 2 1 East of Holly St. 69 69 71 71 0 2 2 0 Holly Street
North of US 101 67 68 68 68 1 1 1 0
Industrial Rd. to Old County Rd.
65 66 67 67 1 1 2 1
South of Old County Rd. 66 67 68 69 1 2 3 1
Taylor Way
Industrial Rd. to Old County Rd.
60 62 62 63 2 2 3 1

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1590
33 Roadway Segment
Ldn at 75 feet from the Roadway Centerline,
dBA Increase Over Existing, dBA Ldn Increase of Cumulative Build Scenario Over
Cumulative No Build
Scenarios, dBA
Existing
(2023)
Existing
(2023)
with
Plan
(Build)
Cumulative
(2045)
without
Plan (No
Build)
Cumulative
(2045) with
Plan
(Build)
Existing
(2023)
with
Plan
(Build)
Cumulative
(2045)
without
Plan (No
Build)
Cumulative (2045)
with Plan (Build)
Quarry Road
Industrial Rd. to Old County Rd.
61 63 62 64 2 1 3 2
Harbor Boulevard
North of Industrial Rd. 71 72 73 74 1 2 3 1
Industrial Rd. to Old County Rd.
66 68 67 68 2 1 2 1
US 101 North of Holly Street 82 82 84 84 1 2 2 0

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1591
34 FIGURE 3 Noise Contours for the Existing 2023 Traffic Scenario g

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1592
35 FIGURE 4 Noise Contours for the Existing (2023) With Plan (Build) Traffic Scenario g

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1593
36 FIGURE 5 Noise Contours for the Cumulative (2045) Without Plan (No Build) Traffic Scenario

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1594
37 FIGURE 6 Noise Contours for the Cumulative (2045) With Plan (Build) Traffic Scenario

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1595
38 FIGURE 7 2035 Noise Contours for San Carlos Airport

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1596
FIGURE 8 Map of Proposed Developments in the Plan Area
Noise and Land Use Compatibility
The City of San Carlos’s General Plan sets forth policies with the goal of minimizing the impact of noise on people through noise reduction and suppression techniques and through appropriate land use policies in the City of San Carlos. Policy NOI-1.1 defines the noise level standards required for noise and land compatibility studies. The policy states the following:

Policy NOI-1.1. Use the Noise and Land Compatibility Standards shown in Figure 9-1, the noise level performance standards in Table 9-1 and the projected future noise contours for

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1597
40 the General Plan shown in Figure 9-3 and detailed in Table 9-2, as a guide for future planning and development decisions.

Noise level thresholds included in Figure 9-1 and Policy NOI-1.5 requires future projects proposed within the Plan Area to meet the following noise levels:
x The City’s acceptable exterior noise level standard is 60 dBA Ldn or less for proposed single-family residential uses.
x The City’s acceptable exterior noise level standard is 65 dBA Ldn or less for proposed multi-family residential uses and hotels/motels.
x The City’s acceptable exterior noise level standard is 70 dBA Ldn or less for proposed office buildings, business, commercial and professional uses.
x The City’s acceptable interior noise level standard is 45 dBA Ldn or less for the proposed residential land uses and hotels/motels. Where new residential units (single- and multifamily) would be exposed to intermittent noise levels generated during train operations, maximum railroad noise levels inside homes shall not exceed 50 dBA in bedrooms or 55 dBA in other occupied spaces. These single event limits are only applicable where there are normally four or more train operations per day.
x The Cal Green Code standards specify an interior noise environment attributable to exterior sources not to exceed an hourly equivalent noise level (Leq (1-hr)) of 50 dBA in occupied areas of nonresidential uses during any hour of operation.

Noise levels in the Plan Area were measured and calculated using SoundPLAN Version V8.2. The estimated noise level increases along each roadway segment are summarized in Table 7, and the cumulative plus project noise contours are shown in Figure 6.

Future Exterior Noise Environment
Specific locations for future development projects are unknown at this time. However, distances to the 60, 65, and 70 dBA Ldn thresholds for proposed uses, as summarized in Table 8, were estimated along each roadway segment based on the future exterior noise levels calculated using SoundPLAN Version V8.2.

Noise produced by vehicular traffic along roadways and trains in the vicinity of Plan Area could potentially expose the proposed land uses to levels exceeding the exterior compatibility thresholds.

Future exterior noise levels at a distance of 75 feet from the centerline of the primary roadways within the Plan Area would typically range from 63 dBA Ldn along Taylor Way between Industrial Road and Old County Road to 76 dBA Ldn along Harbor Boulevard, south of Old County Road.

Future exterior noise levels within 75 feet of the nearest through lane of U.S. Highway 101 would be 84 dBA Ldn. Table 8 summarizes the distances to the 60, 65, and 70 dBA Ldn noise contours along the roadways within the Plan Area.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1598
41 Caltrain activity is not expected to change under future conditions. However, the California HSR system is expected to run up to 176 revenue trains and 12 nonrevenue trains per day at the Area Plan, with a peak hour of up to 4 trains per direction. The Cumulative (2045) Without Plan (No Build) and Cumulative (2045) With Plan (Build) scenarios both include noise levels due the future HSR. Since the train corridor runs parallel to Old County Road, the setbacks from the centerline of the roadway in Table 8 reflect the noise from the future rail, as well.

TABLE 8 Cumulative (2045) with Plan (Build) Noise Contour Distances within the Plan Area
Roadway Segment
Distance from Centerline to Traffic
Noise Contour, feet
70 dBA Ldn 65 dBA Ldn 60 dBA Ldn
Old County Road
West of Harbor Blvd. 65 185 555
Harbor Blvd. to Quarry Rd. 85 245 735
Quarry Rd. to Taylor Way 95 290 855
Taylor Way to Holly St. 95 290 855
East of Holly St. 80 235 705
Industrial Road
Harbor Blvd. to Quarry Rd. 95 280 840
Quarry Rd. to Taylor Way 80 240 720
Taylor Way to driveway 90 260 770
Driveway to Holly St. 85 245 735
East of Holly St. 90 270 805
Holly Street
North of US 101 55 160 475
Industrial Rd. to Old County
Rd. < 50 130 380
South of Old County Rd. 60 175 520
Taylor Way Industrial Rd. to Old County
Rd. < 50 55 155
Quarry Road Industrial Rd. to Old County
Rd. < 50 65 190
Harbor Boulevard
North of Industrial Rd. 165 485 1,450
Industrial Rd. to Old County
Rd. 55 155 465
US 101 North of Holly St. 1,655 4,945 2,350
Future Interior Noise Environment
Residential Uses
Standard residential construction provides approximately 15 dBA of exterior-to-interior noise reduction, assuming the windows are partially open for ventilation. Where exterior noise levels range from 60 to 65 dBA Ldn, the inclusion of adequate forced-air mechanical ventilation is often the method selected to reduce interior noise levels to acceptable levels by closing the windows to control noise. Where noise levels exceed 65 dBA Ldn, forced-air mechanical ventilation systems and sound-rated construction methods are normally required. Such methods or materials may include a combination of smaller window and door sizes as a percentage of the total building façade

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1599
42 facing the noise source, sound-rated windows and doors, sound-rated exterior wall assemblies, and mechanical ventilation so windows may be kept closed at the occupant’s discretion.

The setback distances in Table 8 to meet the exterior noise limit of 60 dBA Ldn would also meet the interior noise limit of 45 dBA Ldn, assuming standard residential construction materials.

Buildings within the setback distances to the 65 dBA Ldn contour would require adequate forcedair mechanical ventilation with standard construction materials to meet 45 dBA Ldn within residential units. At or within the 70 dBA Ldn contour distance, sound-rated construction materials would be required to meet the 45 dBA Ldn limit.

Commercial, Office, and Industrial Uses
Standard construction materials for commercial, office, and industrial uses would provide about 25 dBA of noise reduction in interior spaces. The inclusion of adequate forced-air mechanical ventilation systems is normally required so that windows may be kept closed at the occupant’s discretion and would provide an additional 5 dBA reduction. The standard construction materials in combination with forced-air mechanical ventilation would satisfy the daytime threshold of 50 dBA Leq(1-hr) at most commercial, office, and industrial uses.

Spaces where lower noise levels would be desired, such as private offices and conference rooms, may benefit from additional noise control in order to meet a lower, more desirable interior noise level. Additional noise control could be accomplished by selecting higher sound-rated windows (STC 34 or greater along exterior façades).

Recommendations to Reduce Future Exterior and Interior Noise Levels Incorporation of Policies NOI-1.4 and NOI-1.13 require noise studies for all projects where noisesensitive land uses are proposed in areas exposed to exterior noise levels of 60 dBA Ldn or greater or are located within the 55 dBA CNEL/Ldn impact area of the San Carlos Airport. The policies state the following:

Policy NOI-1.4. Require a detailed acoustic report in all cases where noise-sensitive land uses are proposed in areas exposed to exterior noise levels of 60 Ldn or greater. If recommended in the report, mitigation measures shall be required as conditions of project approval.

Policy NOI-1.13. Require a noise analysis for new residential uses located within the 55 CNEL/Ldn impact area of the San Carlos Airport. If recommended in the report, mitigation measures shall be required as conditions of project approval.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1600
43 The study shall determine compliance with the noise and land use compatibility standards, identify potential noise impacts, and propose site-specific measures to reduce exposure to exterior and interior noise levels that exceed maximum permissible levels.

A project-specific acoustical analysis shall be prepared, in compliance with State Building Codes and City noise standards, to ensure that the design incorporates controls to reduce interior noise levels specified in Policy NOI-1.5. The policy states the following:

Policy NOI-1.5. New development of noise-sensitive land uses proposed in noiseimpacted areas shall incorporate effective mitigation measures into the project design to reduce exterior and interior noise levels to the following acceptable levels. a. For new single-family residential development, maintain a standard of 60 Ldn (day/night average noise level) for exterior noise in private use areas. b. For new multi-family residential development maintain a standard of 65 Ldn in community outdoor recreation areas. Noise standards are not applied to private decks and balconies and shall be considered on a case-by-case basis in the downtown core. c. Interior noise levels shall not exceed 45 Ldn in all new residential units (single- and multi-family). Development sites exposed to noise levels exceeding 60 Ldn shall be analyzed following protocols in Appendix Chapter 12, Section 1208, A, Sound Transmission Control, 2001 Building Code Chapter 12, Appendix 1207.11.2 of the 2007 California Building Coe (or the latest version).
d. Where new residential units (single- and multi-family) would be exposed to intermittent noise levels generated during train operations, maximum railroad noise levels inside homes shall not exceed 50 dBA in bedrooms or 55 dBA in other occupied spaces. These single event limits are only applicable where there are normally four or more train operations per day.

The project applicant shall conform with any special building construction techniques requested by the City’s Building Department, which may include sound-rated windows and doors, soundrated wall constructions, and acoustical caulking.

The following general recommendations shall be considered to reduce exterior noise levels to meet the normally acceptable thresholds of 60 dBA Ldn at single-family residences and 65 dBA Ldn at multi-family residences and hotels/motels:
x When developing project site plans, locate noise-sensitive outdoor use areas away from major roadways or other significant sources of noise. Shield noise-sensitive spaces with buildings or noise barriers to reduce exterior noise levels. The final detailed design of the heights and limits of proposed noise barriers shall be completed at the time that the final site and grading plans are submitted.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1601
44 If the 45 dBA Ldn or 50 dBA Leq(1-hr) thresholds would not be met or if maximum instantaneous noise levels generated by train activity near residential dwellings exceed 50 dBA Lmax within bedrooms or exceed 55 dBA Lmax within all other residential rooms, other site-specific measures, such as increasing setbacks of the buildings from the adjacent roadways, using shielding by other buildings or noise barriers to reduce noise levels, implementing additional sound treatments to the building design, etc. shall be considered to reduce interior noise levels to meet the State and City thresholds.

Train Vibration and Land Use Compatibility
The U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) vibration impact assessment criteria11 are used by the City of San Carlos to evaluate the compatibility of proposed projects with vibration levels produced by heavy-rail and light-rail trains proposed within 100 feet of the centerline of the tracks, according to Policies NOI-1.7 and NOI-1.14 of the City’s General Plan. The policies state the following:

The FTA vibration impact criteria are based on maximum overall levels for a single event. The impact criteria for groundborne vibration are shown in Table 6. Note that there are criteria for frequent events (more than 70 events of the same source per day), occasional events (30 to 70 vibration events of the same source per day), and infrequent events (less than 30 vibration events of the same source per day).

Future Vibration Environment
Old County Road borders the Plan Area to the west, and the Caltrain tracks run parallel to Old County Road just outside the Plan Area boundary. The centerline of the nearest tracks would be approximately 60 to 135 feet from the Plan Area’s western boundary. 11U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, May 2006, FTA-VA-90-1003-06.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1602
45 Assuming existing rail activity plus additional HSR activity under future buildout conditions, more than 70 trains would pass through San Carlos in a 24-hour period. Therefore, the vibration level thresholds for train pass-bys would be 65 VdB for buildings where vibration would interfere with sensitive interior operations (e.g., research labs), 72 VdB for residential buildings, and 75 VdB for commercial, office, and institutional buildings.

While vibration measurements were not made within the Plan Area, vibration levels due to train pass-bys were measured for a nearby project.12 At 90 to 100 feet, vibration levels were measured to be 65 to 71 VdB in this previous study. Using these source levels, minimum setback distances for residential and nonresidential buildings along the western boundary of the Plan Area are summarized in Table 9.

TABLE 9 Minimum Distances to the Vibration Thresholds for Proposed Buildings within the Plan Area
Roadway Segment
Distance from Edge of Nearest Tracks, feet
Buildings with
Sensitive Interiors
(65 VdB)
Residences
(72 VdB)
Nonresidential
(75 VdB)
Old County Road 335 75 40
Based on the setback distances presented in Table 9, project-specific vibration analyses shall be prepared for residential buildings proposed along Old County Road within 75 feet of the nearest Caltrain track and for buildings with interiors sensitive to vibration that are within 335 feet of the nearest Caltrain track. These studies should include vibration measurements at the project sites and comparisons of the measurements to the established FTA standards in order to verify vibration and land use compatibility.

All proposed offices, commercial buildings, and institutional buildings would be compatible with the future train vibration environment and would not require project-specific vibration analyses.

NOISE IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
Significance Criteria
The following criteria were used to evaluate the significance of environmental noise resulting from the project:
(a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; (b) Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels; 12 Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc., “789 Old County Road Noise Assessment,” June 21, 2024.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1603
46 (c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, if the project would expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.

Impact 1a: Temporary Construction Noise. Existing residential land uses would be exposed to a temporary increase in ambient noise levels due to project construction activities. With the incorporation of reasonable noise reduction measures, in accordance with Policy NOI-1.8 of the City’s General Plan, temporary construction noise shall be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Noise impacts resulting from construction depend upon the noise generated by various pieces of construction equipment, the timing and duration of noise-generating activities, and the distance between construction noise sources and noise-sensitive areas. Construction noise impacts primarily result when construction activities occur during noise-sensitive times of the day (e.g., early morning, evening, or nighttime hours), the construction occurs in areas immediately adjoining noise-sensitive land uses, or when construction lasts over extended periods of time.

Chapter 9.30.070 of the City’s Municipal Code limits construction activities to between 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and to between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekends. Construction activities are prohibited on the following holidays: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. Additionally, the Municipal Code requires all gasoline-powered construction equipment to be equipped with an operating muffler or baffling system as originally provided by the manufacturer, and no modification to these systems is permitted.

While the City of San Carlos does not establish noise level thresholds for construction activities, this analysis uses the noise limits established by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to identify the potential for impacts due to substantial temporary construction noise. The FTA identifies construction noise limits in the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual. 13 During daytime hours, an exterior threshold of 80 dBA Leq shall be enforced at residential land uses, 85 dBA Leq shall be enforced at commercial and office uses, and 90 dBA Leq shall be enforced at industrial land uses.

Major noise-generating construction activities associated with Specific Plan would typically include removal of existing structures, site grading and excavation, installation of utilities, the construction of building foundations, cores, and shells, paving, and landscaping. Construction activities generate considerable amounts of noise, especially during earth-moving activities when heavy equipment is used. While specific project information is unknown at this time, the construction of building foundations for high-rise building may require impact or vibratory pile driving activities to support the structure, which would generate high noise levels. Site grading, excavation activities, the operation of heavy construction equipment, and the arrival/departure of heavy-duty trucks would also generate high noise levels, as these phases often require the 13 Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, FTA Report No. 0123, September 2018.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1604
47 simultaneous use of multiple pieces of heavy equipment such as dozers, excavators, scrapers, and loaders.

Typical hourly average construction generated noise levels are about 81 to 88 dBA Leq, measured at a distance of 50 feet from the center of the site during busy construction periods (e.g., earth moving equipment, impact tools, etc.). Construction-generated noise levels drop off at a rate of about 6 dBA per doubling of distance between the source and receptor. Shielding by buildings or terrain often results in lower construction noise levels at distant receptors. Lower noise levels result from building construction activities when these activities move indoors, and less heavy equipment is required to complete the tasks. Typical construction noise levels at a distance of 50 feet are shown in Tables 10 and 11. Table 10 shows the average noise level ranges, by construction phase, and Table 11 shows the maximum noise level ranges for different construction equipment.

TABLE 10 Typical Ranges of Construction Noise Levels at 50 Feet, Leq (dBA) Domestic Housing
Office Building,
Hotel, Hospital,
School, Public
Works
Industrial
Parking Garage,
Religious
Amusement &
Recreations,
Store, Service
Station
Public Works
Roads &
Highways,
Sewers, and
Trenches

I II I II I II I II
Ground
Clearing 83 83 84 84 84 83 84 84
Excavation 88 75 89 79 89 71 88 78
Foundations 81 81 78 78 77 77 88 88
Erection 81 65 87 75 84 72 79 78
Finishing 88 72 89 75 89 74 84 84
I - All pertinent equipment present at site.

II - Minimum required equipment present at site.

Source: U.S.E.P.A., Legal Compilation on Noise, Vol. 1, p. 2-104, 1973.

TABLE 11 Construction Equipment, 50-foot Noise Emission Limits Equipment Category Lmax Level (dBA)1,2 Impact/Continuous Arc Welder
Auger Drill Rig
Backhoe
Bar Bender
Boring Jack Power Unit
Chain Saw
Compressor3
Compressor (other)
Concrete Mixer
Concrete Pump
73 85
80 80
80 85
70 80
85 82
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1605
48 Equipment Category Lmax Level (dBA)1,2 Impact/Continuous Concrete Saw
Concrete Vibrator
Crane
Dozer
Excavator
Front End Loader
Generator
Generator (25 KVA or less)
Gradall
Grader
Grinder Saw
Horizontal Boring Hydro Jack
Hydra Break Ram
Impact Pile Driver
Insitu Soil Sampling Rig
Jackhammer
Mounted Impact Hammer (hoe ram)
Paver
Pneumatic Tools
Pumps
Rock Drill
Scraper
Slurry Trenching Machine
Soil Mix Drill Rig
Street Sweeper
Tractor
Truck (dump, delivery)
Vacuum Excavator Truck (vac-truck)
Vibratory Compactor
Vibratory Pile Driver
All other equipment with engines larger than 5 HP
90 80
85 85
85 80
82 70
85 85
85 80
90 105
84 85
90 85
85 77
85 85
82 80
80 84
84 85
80 95
85 Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Impact
Impact
Continuous
Impact
Impact
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Notes: 1 Measured at 50 feet from the construction equipment, with a “slow” (1 sec.) time constant. 2 Noise limits apply to total noise emitted from equipment and associated components operating at full power while engaged in its intended operation.
3 Portable Air Compressor rated at 75 cfm or greater and that operates at greater than 50 psi.

Temporary construction noises are disturbances that are necessary for the construction or repair of buildings and structures in urban and rural areas. Reasonable regulation of the hours of construction, as well as regulation of the arrival and operation of heavy equipment and the delivery of construction materials, are necessary to protect the health and safety of persons, promote the general welfare of the community, and maintain the quality of life. Limiting the hours when construction can occur to daytime hours is often a simple method to reduce the potential for noise impacts. In areas immediately adjacent to construction, controls such as constructing temporary noise barriers and utilizing “quiet” construction equipment can also reduce the potential for noise impacts.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1606
49 Policy NOI-1.8 requires all phases of construction activity to utilize reasonable noise reduction measures to minimize the exposure of neighboring properties to excessive noise levels and comply with the City’s noise ordinance. The policy states the following:

Policy NOI-1.8. All construction activities shall comply with the City’s noise ordinance.

The Municipal Code limits temporary construction work to between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekdays and between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekends. Construction activity is not permitted on following holidays: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day, Juneteenth, 4th of July, Labor Day, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day.

Further, all gasoline-powered construction equipment shall be equipped with an operating muffler or baffling system as originally provided by the manufacturer, and no modification to these systems is permitted. In accordance with Policy NOI-1.8, reasonable noise reduction measures shall be incorporated into all projects within the Plan Area. Such measures shall include, but not be limited to, the following to reduce construction noise levels as low as practical:
x Limit construction activity to weekdays between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. and weekends between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., with no construction on the following holidays: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day, Juneteenth, 4th of July, Labor Day, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day; x Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such technology exists;
x Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment;
x Locate all stationary noise-generating equipment, such as air compressors and portable power generators, as far away as possible from adjacent land uses; x Locate staging areas and construction material areas as far away as possible from adjacent land uses;
x Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines; x If impact pile driving is proposed, multiple-pile drivers shall be considered to expedite construction. Although noise levels generated by multiple pile drivers would be higher than the noise generated by a single pile driver, the total duration of pile driving activities would be reduced;

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1607
50 x If impact pile driving is proposed, temporary noise control blanket barriers shall shroud pile drivers or be erected in a manner to shield the adjacent land uses. Such noise control blanket barriers can be rented and quickly erected; x If impact pile driving is proposed, foundation pile holes shall be pre-drilled to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile. Pre-drilling foundation pile holes is a standard construction noise control technique. Pre-drilling reduces the number of blows required to seat the pile. Notify all adjacent land uses of the construction schedule in writing;
x Designate a “disturbance coordinator” who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem are implemented. x Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction.

With the implementation of these measures to control noise during construction activities, in accordance with Policy NOI-1.8 of the General Plan and Municipal Code allowable construction hours, the temporary construction noise impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure 1a: No further mitigation required.

Impact 1b: Permanent Noise Level Increase/Exceed Applicable Standards. The proposed project would potentially result in a substantial permanent noise level increase at existing noise-sensitive receptors in the project vicinity. Operational noise levels generated by the proposed project would potentially exceed Municipal Code thresholds. With the incorporation of measures to reduce operational noise levels and cumulative project noise level increases within the Plan Area, in accordance with the City’s General Plan, the impact shall be reduced to a less-than-significant level.

For a substantial permanent cumulative noise increase to occur, two qualifications must be met: 1) if the Cumulative (2045) With Plan (Build) traffic volumes result in a noise level increase defined in Action NOI-1.4 of the City’s General Plan; and 2) if the Cumulative (2045) With Plan (Build) traffic volumes result in a 1 dBA Ldn or more noise level increase compared to Cumulative (2045) Without Plan (No Build) conditions, which would be considered a cumulatively considerable contribution to the overall traffic noise increase. The action states the following:

Action NOI-1.4. Require the evaluation of mitigation measures for projects that would cause the following criteria to be exceeded or would cause a significant adverse community response:

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1608
51 a. Cause the Ldn at noise-sensitive uses to increase by 3 dBA or more and exceed the “normally acceptable” level.
b. Cause the Ldn at noise-sensitive uses to increase by 5 dBA or more and remain “normally acceptable.”
c. Cause noise levels to exceed the limits in Table 9-1.

According to Figure 9-1 of the City’s General Plan, the “normally acceptable” threshold for singlefamily receptors is 60 dBA Ldn and for multi-family receptors is 65 dBA Ldn. Policy NOI-1.3 of the General Plan states the noise level standards that shall be used for defining noise impacts at noise-sensitive receptors. The policy states the following:

Policy NOI-1.3. Limit noise impacts on noise-sensitive uses to noise level standards as indicated in Table 9-1.

Table 9-1 of General Plan and the Municipal Code provides exterior and interior daytime and nighttime Leq/L50 and Lmax thresholds for non-transportation sources. For residential, medical, and convalescent receptors, noise levels are limited to 55 and 45 dBA Leq/L50 during daytime and nighttime hours, respectively, and to 70 and 60 dBA Lmax during daytime and nighttime hours, respectively, at exterior property lines. Within residential interiors, noise levels are limited to 40 and 30 dBA Leq/L50 during daytime and nighttime hours, respectively, and to 55 and 45 dBA Lmax during daytime and nighttime hours, respectively. Within medical and convalescent interiors, noise levels are limited to 45 and 35 dBA Leq/L50 during daytime and nighttime hours, respectively, and to 55 and 45 dBA Lmax during daytime and nighttime hours, respectively.

For churches, meeting halls, schools, libraries, and museums, noise levels are limited to 55 dBA Leq/L50 during daytime hours only at exterior property lines. Within church and meeting hall interiors, noise levels are limited to 40 dBA Leq/L50 during daytime and nighttime hours and to 55 dBA Lmax during daytime and nighttime hours. Within school, library, and museum interiors, noise levels are limited to 40 dBA Leq/L50 and to 55 dBA Lmax during daytime hours only. Additionally, theater and auditorium interiors limit interior noise levels to 35 dBA Leq/L50 during daytime and nighttime hours and to 55 dBA Lmax during daytime and nighttime hours.

The Municipal Code includes adjustments to these thresholds. If ambient noise levels are 10 dBA or more below the standards, the allowable noise standards shall be decreased by 5 dBA. If the noise source contains a steady audible tone or is a repetitive noise (e.g., hammering or riveting) or contains music or speech, the noise levels shall also be reduced by 5 dBA. The noise level thresholds would also be adjusted as follows:
x For noise produced for no more than a cumulative period of 15 minutes in any hour, the Leq/L50 threshold shall be increased by 5 dBA;
x For noise produced for no more than a cumulative period of 5 minutes in any hour, the Leq/L50 threshold shall be increased by 10 dBA;

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1609
52 x For noise produced for no more than a cumulative period of 1 minute in any hour, the Leq/L50 threshold shall be increased by 15 dBA.

Policy NOI-1.2 defines the noise-sensitive receptors at which noise impacts shall be minimized.

The policy states the following:

Project Traffic Increase
SoundPLAN Version 8.2 was used to calculate the traffic noise increase expected for the Cumulative (2045) Without Plan (No Build) scenario and for the Cumulative (2045) With Plan (Build) scenario using the traffic data supplied by Nelson/Nygaard Consulting Associates. All of the predicted noise levels and increases are summarized in Table 7. As indicated in Table 7, noise levels on several roadway segments in the Plan Area would increase by more than 3 dBA Ldn with the Cumulative (2045) With Plan (Build) scenario, when compared to the existing traffic conditions:
x Old County Road west of Harbor Boulevard;
x Old County Road between Harbor Boulevard and Quarry Road; x Old County Road between Quarry Road and Taylor Way;
x Old County Road between Taylor Way and Holly Street;
x Old County Road east of Holly Street;
x Industrial Road between Taylor Way and driveway;
x Holly Street south of Old County Road;
x Taylor Way between Industrial Road and Old County Road; x Quarry Road between Industrial Road and Old County Road; and These increases are bolded in the second column from the right of Table 7 to denote their significance with respect to the City’s General Plan requirements. Increased traffic on each of these segments result in a future noise level of 60 dBA Ldn or greater under the Cumulative (2045) With Plan (Build) conditions. Along Old County Road between Quarry Road and Taylor Way, between Taylor Way and Holly Street, and east of Holly Street, a 3 dBA Ldn increase was also calculated under the Cumulative (2045) Without Plan (No Build) scenario. As shown in the last column in Table 7, the increase attributable solely to the Specific Plan would be 0 dBA Ldn. Therefore, the

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1610
53 permanent noise level increase along these three segments would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the overall traffic noise at receptors along these segments.

Along all other segments listed above, the permanent noise level increases would be 1 to 2 dBA Ldn higher than the increases calculated for the Cumulative (2045) Without Plan (No Build) scenario. While each of these segments would result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to the overall traffic noise at the existing receptors along these roadways, no existing noisesensitive receptors (i.e., single- or multi-family residences, schools, hospitals, etc.) are located along Taylor Way, Quarry Road, or Harbor Boulevard. Therefore, these significant noise level increases result in a less-than-significant impact. The Palo Alto Medical Facilities (PAMF) is located along Industrial Road segment between Taylor Way and the driveway, and this would be considered a noise-sensitive receptor. However, this medical facility is located between Industrial Road and U.S. Highway 101, and the existing and future noise environment at the medical facility would be dominated by U.S. Highway 101, which is significantly louder than Industrial Road.

Therefore, the traffic noise increase along Industrial Road would not be noticeable at the Palo Alto Medical Facilities (PAMF) compared to the noise level experienced by the adjoining U.S.

Highway 101.

Additionally, a newly constructed residential building (Artisan Crossing completed in 2023) is located along Old County Road, west of Harbor Boulevard, and would be considered a sensitive receptor exposed to a potentially significant permanent noise level increase; however, new residential buildings are designed to meet the normally acceptable environmental noise conditions under future conditions, typically 20 years or more in the future. The Artisan Crossing building would include adequate noise attenuating features to reduce future exterior noise levels at common outdoor use areas to meet the City thresholds, as well as adequate STC-rated wall assemblies to ensure residential interiors are at or below 45 dBA Ldn under future conditions. These design features included in the Artisan Crossing apartment building are typically recommended mitigation measures to reduce a significant permanent noise level increase to a less-than-significant level.

Incorporation of Policy NOI-1.9 would also minimize potential transportation-related noise. The policy states the following:

Incorporating mitigation measures provided in Action NOI-1.1 of the City’s General Plan could be used to reduce significant cumulative traffic noise increases at existing sensitive land uses. This action states the following:

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1611
54 sound-rated window construction. The City should research sources of funding for these actions.

Such measures include setbacks, noise barriers, forced-air mechanical ventilation and sound-rated window construction. Since the Artisan Crossing building already includes these measures as part of the building design, the permanent noise level increase would be considered a less-thansignificant impact at this new sensitive receptor.

Table 8 above summarizes the noise contour distances to the 60, 65, and 70 dBA Ldn contours along each major roadway segment and the UPRR tracks within the Plan Area. This table can be used as a guide when refining the alignment of new roadways in order to avoid impacting existing sensitive receptors.

Operational Noise
Various mechanical equipment for heating, ventilation, and cooling purposes, exhaust fans, emergency generators, and other similar equipment could produce noise levels exceeding the maximum noise limits when located near existing or proposed residential land uses. Additionally, potential noise-generating sources, such as truck deliveries or other project-specific operational noise sources, may also be proposed at the project-level. The number of variables inherent in the mechanical equipment needs of an individual project (number and types of units, locations, size, housing, specs, etc.), as well as details pertaining to project-specific noise sources, are unavailable at this time. The impacts of operational noise sources on nearby noise-sensitive uses should be assessed during the final design stage of individual projects. Conservatively, this is considered a potentially significant impact.

For mixed-use development projects within the Plan Area, the incorporation of Policy NOI-1.10 would minimize potential operational noise. The policy states the following:

Policy NOI-1.10. Ensure that mixed-use development projects are designed to minimize noise impacts on residential units.

Additionally, the incorporation of Policy NOI-1.6 would ensure noise level standards are met with the inclusion of mitigation measures. The policy states the following:

Summary of Project-Generated Noise
The City of San Carlos General Plan and Municipal Code provides policies and thresholds to reduce operational and transportation noise at sensitive receptors. Chapter 18.21.050 of the Municipal Code regulates all operational noise and noise attenuation measures, including site planning and project design measures, to be incorporated into the project to reduce noise levels to

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1612
55 meet the above thresholds and interior levels of 45 dBA. Noise barriers shall be considered and may be required only after all feasible design-related noise measures have been incorporated into the project. Therefore, the following shall be incorporated into projects within the Plan Area, in accordance with Policies NOI-1.6 and NOI-1.10:

New developments within the Plan Area would be required to comply with City noise standards set forth in the General Plan and Municipal Code. To ensure compliance with the operational noise level thresholds required in the General Plan Municipal Code, a qualified acoustical consultant will be retained to review mechanical equipment systems during final design of the proposed project consistent with standards City practice. The consultant shall review selected equipment and determine specific noise reduction measures necessary to reduce noise to comply with the City’s noise level requirements.

Noise reduction measures could include, but are not limited to, selection of equipment that emits low noise levels and/or installation of noise barriers, such as enclosures and parapet walls, to block the line-of-sight between the noise source and the nearest receptors.

Additionally, enclosures and interior wall treatments shall be considered to reduce noise exposure within the on-site units. Alternate measures may include locating equipment in less noise-sensitive areas, where feasible. The incorporation of the measures recommended by the acoustical consultant to ensure compliance with the City’s requirements would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level.

Action NOI-1.4 in the General Plan establishes thresholds for permanent noise level increases, and noise abatement protocol provided in Action NOI-1.1 would help reduce cumulative traffic noise increases generated by projects within the Plan Area. For all roadways resulting in a significant noise level increase where noise-sensitive receptors are located, the measures provided in Policy NOI-1.9 and Action NOI-1.1 would reduce the noise level increase to a less-than-significant level.

Mitigation Measure 1c: No further mitigation required.

Impact 2: Exposure to Excessive Groundborne Vibration due to Construction.

Construction-related vibration levels resulting from activities within the Plan Area would potentially exceed the thresholds at existing conventional buildings. This is a potentially significant impact.

The construction of the project may generate vibration when heavy equipment or impact tools (e.g., jackhammers, hoe rams) are used. Construction activities would include grading, foundation work, paving, and new building framing and finishing. Detailed information regarding construction equipment and phasing are not available at this time. Therefore, impact or vibratory pile driving activities, which can cause excessive vibration, may be required for the projects within the Plan Area.

The California Department of Transportation recommends a vibration limit of 0.5 in/sec PPV for buildings structurally sound and designed to modern engineering standards, which typically consist of buildings constructed since the 1990s. Conservative vibration limits of 0.25 to 0.3 in/sec PPV has been used for buildings that are found to be structurally sound but where structural damage is a major concern (see Table 4 above for further explanation). For buildings that are documented to be structurally weakened, a cautious limit of 0.08 in/sec PPV is often used to

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1613
56 provide the highest level of protection. No historical buildings or buildings that are documented to be structurally weakened adjoin the Plan Area. For the purposes of this study, groundborne vibration levels exceeding the conservative 0.3 in/sec PPV limit for conventional buildings would have the potential to result in a significant vibration impact.

Table 12 presents typical vibration levels that could be expected from construction equipment at a distance of 25 feet, as well as distances to the 0.08 in/sec and 0.3 in/sec PPV thresholds. Project construction activities, such as drilling, the use of jackhammers, rock drills and other high-power or vibratory tools, and rolling stock equipment (tracked vehicles, compactors, etc.), may generate substantial vibration in the immediate vicinity. Jackhammers typically generate vibration levels of

0.035 in/sec PPV, and drilling typically generates vibration levels of 0.09 in/sec PPV at a distance of 25 feet. Vibration levels would vary depending on soil conditions, construction methods, and equipment used.

Pile driving has the potential of generating the highest ground vibration levels and is of primary concern to architectural damage, particularly when it occurs within 100 to 200 feet of structures.

Vibration levels generated by pile driving activities would vary depending on project conditions, such as soil conditions, construction methods, and equipment used, but could exceed the recommended PPV thresholds to avoid architectural damage. Other project construction activities, such as caisson drilling, the use of jackhammers, rock drills and other high-power or vibratory tools, and rolling stock equipment (tracked vehicles, compactors, etc.), may also potentially generate substantial vibration in the immediate vicinity.

Depending on the proximity of existing structures to each construction site, the structural soundness of the existing buildings, and the methods of construction used, vibration levels may be high enough to damage existing structures. Given the scope of the proposed project and the location of Plan Area with respect to existing structures in the immediate vicinity (i.e., within 200 feet), groundborne vibration impacts would be potentially significant.

As with any type of construction, vibration levels may at times be perceptible. However, construction phases that have the highest potential of producing vibration (pile driving and use of jackhammers and other high-power tools) would be intermittent and would only occur for short periods of time for any individual project site. By use of administrative controls, such as notifying neighbors of scheduled construction activities and scheduling construction activities with the highest potential to produce perceptible vibration to hours with least potential to affect nearby businesses, perceptible vibration can be kept to a minimum and as such would not result in a significant impact with respect to perception.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1614
57 TABLE 12 Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment PPV at 25 ft.
(in/sec)
Minimum
Distance to Meet

0.08 in/sec PPV
(feet)
Minimum
Distance to Meet

0.3 in/sec PPV
(feet)
Pile Driver
(Impact)
upper range 1.158 271 86
typical 0.644 160 51
Pile Driver (Sonic) upper range 0.734 180 57
typical 0.170 48 15
Clam shovel drop 0.202 56 18
Hydromill (slurry
wall)
in soil 0.008 3 1
in rock 0.017 6 2
Vibratory Roller 0.210 58 19
Hoe Ram 0.089 27 9
Large bulldozer 0.089 27 9
Caisson drilling 0.089 27 9
Loaded trucks 0.076 23 8
Jackhammer 0.035 12 4
Small bulldozer 0.003 2 <1
Source: Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual, Federal Transit Administration, Office of Planning and Environment, U.S. Department of Transportation, September 2018, modified by Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc. January 2025.

Mitigation Measure 2:

For projects proposing construction equipment within the Table 12 screening distances of vibration-sensitive receptors, a construction vibration control plan shall be prepared by a qualified professional in accordance with industry-accepted methodology. The plan shall identify necessary construction vibration controls to reduce the potential of cosmetic damage to buildings and to minimize annoyance. Controls may include, but would not be limited to, the following measures:
x Comply with the construction noise ordinance to limit hours of exposure. The City’s Municipal Code allows construction activities between the hours 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. on weekends. Construction activity is not permitted on the following holidays: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr. Day, President’s Day, Memorial Day, 4th of July, Labor Day, Veteran’s Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. x A list of all heavy construction equipment to be used for the project known to produce high vibration levels (tracked vehicles, vibratory compaction, jackhammers, hoe rams, etc.) shall be submitted to the City by the contractor. This list shall be used to identify equipment and activities that would potentially generate substantial vibration and to define the level of effort for reducing vibration levels below the thresholds.
x Place operating equipment on the construction site a far as possible from vibration-sensitive receptors.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1615
58 x Use smaller equipment along project boundaries to minimize vibration levels below the limits. x Avoid using vibratory rollers and tampers near sensitive areas. x Select demolition methods not involving impact tools. x Modify/design or identify alternative construction methods to reduce vibration levels below the limits.
x Avoid dropping heavy objects or materials near sensitive uses. x For projects requiring impact or vibratory pile driving, develop a vibration monitoring and construction contingency plan to identify structures where monitoring would be conducted, set up a vibration monitoring schedule, define structure-specific vibration limits, and address the need to conduct photo, elevation, and crack surveys to document before and after construction conditions. Construction contingencies shall be identified for when vibration levels approached the limits. Conduct a post-construction survey on structures where either monitoring has indicated high vibration levels or complaints of damage has been made. Make appropriate repairs or compensation where damage has occurred as a result of construction activities.

The implementation of a construction vibration control plan would reduce construction vibration levels for projects in the Plan Area to a less-than-significant level.

Impact 3: Excessive Aircraft Noise. The project would not expose people working in the project area to excessive aircraft noise levels. This is a less-than-significant impact.

The San Carlos Airport is located approximately 0.2 mile southeast of the Plan Area. As shown in Figure 7, the eastern portion of the Plan Area lies along the 60 dBA CNEL noise contour. The City’s General Plan includes the following policies regarding noise from San Carlos Airport:

Policy NOI-1.11. Ensure that proposed noise sensitive land uses include appropriate mitigation to reduce noise impacts from aircraft operations at San Carlos Airport. Work with the San Carlos Airport Pilots Association and San Mateo County to continue to refine and implement the Airport’s noise abatement procedures.

Policy NOI-1.12. Ensure consistency with the noise compatibility policies and criteria contained in the San Carlos Airport Land Use Plan.

As shown in Figure 8, residential mixed-use developments are proposed in the southwestern part of the Area Plan, with the nearest potential residences located west of Industrial Road and south

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1616
59 of Taylor Way. While the 2035 Noise Contours for the San Carlos Airport (shown in Figure 7) does not include the 55 dBA CNEL contour line, these proposed residential uses could potentially fall within the 55 dBA CNEL impact area of the San Carlos Airport. In accordance with these General Plan policies, this would require a noise analysis.

When project-level development information, such as site plans, building elevations, floor plans, and the position of buildings and outdoor use areas within the Plan Area are known, site-specific project-level noise studies should be conducted to confirm the recommendations for exterior and interior noise reduction methods for residential uses proposed between Glenn Way and Industrial Road, which could potentially fall within the 55 dBA CNEL impact area of San Carlos Airport, in accordance with the General Plan policies. The study shall determine compliance with the noise and land use compatibility standards for the City of San Carlos and included in the San Carlos Airport Land Use Plan, identify potential noise impacts, and propose site-specific measures to reduce exposure to exterior and interior noise levels that exceed maximum permissible levels.

Exterior and interior noise levels resulting from aircraft associated with San Carlos Airport would be compatible with the proposed project, assuming the incorporation of noise-reducing measures, in accordance with the General Plan policies. Other airports in the vicinity of the project site include the Moffett Federal Airfield (12 miles southeast), Norman Y. Mineta San José International Airport (19 miles southeast), and San Francisco International Airport (8 miles northwest). The project site lies outside the areas of influence for each of the airports, and the noise environment at the site would not substantially increase due to aircraft noise from these airports.

Mitigation Measure 3: No further mitigation required.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1617
Appendix A
FIGURE A1 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-1, Wednesday, January 25, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1618
61 FIGURE A2 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-1, Thursday, January 26, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1619
62 FIGURE A3 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-1, Friday, January 27, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1620
63 FIGURE A4 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-2, Wednesday, January 25, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1621
64 FIGURE A5 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-2, Thursday, January 26, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1622
65 FIGURE A6 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-2, Friday, January 27, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1623
66 FIGURE A7 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-3, Wednesday, January 25, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1624
67 FIGURE A8 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-3, Thursday, January 26, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1625
68 FIGURE A9 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-3, Friday, January 27, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1626
69 FIGURE A10 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-4, Wednesday, January 25, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1627
70 FIGURE A11 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-4, Thursday, January 26, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1628
71 FIGURE A12 Daily Trend in Noise Levels at LT-4, Friday, January 27, 2023

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1629
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 1

MEMORANDUM
To: Sajuti Haque, City of San Carlos
From: Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates
Date: December 13, 2024
Subject: Northeast Area Specific Plan (NEASP) – Transportation Analysis (FINAL)

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The following Memorandum details transportation analysis findings associated with the City of San Carlos’ Northeast Area Specific Plan (NEASP, or the “Plan”). Analysis and documentation provided herein is intended to fulfill vehicle miles traveled (VMT) screening and other transportation analysis requirements related to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Plan’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR). In addition, the Memorandum provides non-CEQA local transportation analysis as required by the City of San Carlos for evaluating the Plan’s effects on the transportation network against any City or County guidance.

The Memorandum includes three parts:

1. A plan description, including the land use plan and the transportation network plan.

2. CEQA-related transportation analysis, which represents findings related to required EIR documentation.

3. Non-CEQA-related transportation analysis, which includes the local transportation study.

Themes and Considerations
The analysis and findings documented in this Memorandum focus solely on transportation impacts under CEQA and vehicle operations performance measures under the local transportation analysis. It does not seek to address critical questions related to broader Plan objectives, such as tradeoffs between accommodating vehicle traffic versus achieving mobility goals or addressing citywide housing and affordability needs. Any planning and decision-making processes related to the Plan should also consider the multimodal analysis, strategies, and recommendations documented in the Plan’s Mobility Action Plan and Parking and Transportation Demand Management Standards in addition to the findings of this Memorandum.

Furthermore, the future traffic conditions analyzed and summarized in this Memorandum represent the full buildout of a large, transformative, and long-range plan. While the analysis is based on a set of reasonable assumptions about future transportation network conditions, travel patterns, trip generation, and roadway configuration, actual future traffic patterns are likely to differ from modeled

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1630
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 2
predictions due to a range of unforeseeable factors. Decisions about how best to plan for and improve any deficiency in the NEASP should be holistic, and they should be revisited and refined as actual network conditions evolve over time.

Finally, recent changes to CEQA processes that removed Level of Service (LOS) as a required method of traffic analysis were intended to avoid having vehicular needs take precedent over critical land use planning and smart growth objectives. The NEASP, which envisions a large, sustainable, mixed-use, and transit-supportive district, is unlikely to appear favorable through an LOS analysis, even though it has the potential to support all of San Carlos’s core planning goals. While the non-CEQA analysis documented in this Memorandum can help identify key locations and potential strategies for managing vehicular traffic on roadways, it should not prevent the City from advancing key planning objectives for the District.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1631
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 3
Summary of CEQA Findings
A summary of findings related to transportation significance criteria as defined by CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations)1 as they apply to the City of San
Carlos NEASP is provided in Table 1. For all four criteria analyzed (T-1 through T-4), the Plan was found to have a less than significant impact. Additional analysis and screening details are provided in Part 2: CEQA Transportation Analysis.

Table 1 CEQA Analysis Summary - Transportation2
Criteria3 Name Description Meets Significance Criteria? T-1
Plans,
Programs,
Ordinances,
or Policies
Conflict with a program,
plan, ordinance or policy
addressing the circulation
system, including transit,
roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
No. Based on the consistency evaluation, the Plan is found to not conflict with local or countywide plans, programs,
ordinances, or policies related to CEQA. The Plan’s
modifications to the public right-of-way align with Citywide pedestrian and bicycle plan, and the NEASP’s land use and mobility vision is consistent with goals and policies set forth in the City of San Carlos General Plan and determination of less than significant impact.

T-2
Causing
Substantial
VMT
Conflict or be inconsistent
with CEQA Guidelines §
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
No. The analysis below shows the Plan area is screened out of VMT analysis due to its location within a transit priority area (TPA) as defined by C/CAG, and therefore is determined to have less than significant impact.

T-3 Geometric
Design
Substantially increase
hazards due to a
geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections)
or incompatible uses (e.g.,
farm equipment)?
Geometric changes proposed to the transportation network as part of this plan include new access points to the existing roadway network for both motorized and non-motorized
transportation that follow the general transportation grid and follow standards as they are proposed and is determined to have less than significant impact.

T-4 Emergency
Access
Impact the ability of
facilities on or near the
project site to
accommodate emergency
service operators?
No. The Plan area utilizes the existing roadway network with several proposed new nonmotorized connections. Changes to the public right-of-way do not alter the ability of emergency service operators to access streets and buildings in the project study area and is determined to have less than
significant impact.
1 https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/ceqa/docs/2018_CEQA_FINAL_TEXT_122818.pdf 2 CEQA Environmental Checklist Form, Appendix G, Section XVII. 3 Criteria labeling/numbering scheme is for use within this document as reference and may differ from other EIR documentation.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1632
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 4
Summary of Non-CEQA Findings
Non-CEQA transportation analysis that was conducted in support of the NEASP included:
A review of the existing transportation network in the Plan and vicinity, including regional roadways, local roadways, and access to private driveways. Existing intersection and segment-level data collection and analysis, including turning movements, daily vehicle volumes, and bicycle and pedestrian use of the Caltrain underpass. Future scenario analysis, including intersection and roadway segment analysis with and without implementation of the Plan.

Findings from the analysis through each scenario yielded the following key themes related to traffic congestion:
Most existing and future projected traffic congestion issues at intersections occur outside of the NEASP on Harbor Blvd. and Holly St., where it is most likely for intersections to exceed capacity in both AM and PM peak hours.
Three intersections internal to the Plan area are projected to exceed the City’s General Plan congestion volume/capacity thresholds with the Plan buildout in 2045 (Industrial Rd./Quarry Rd., Industrial Rd./PAMF Driveway, and Old County Rd./Quarry Rd.), However, all of those locations are not projected to be overcapacity.
At the segment level, Holly St. exceeds congestion thresholds in all scenarios including the Existing baseline. Internal to NEASP, only the south side of Old County Rd. exceeded congestion thresholds in the 2045 Build scenario, however, still is projected to remain under capacity.
Intersections that exceed thresholds would continue to do so even after recommended changes to lane configurations and signal timing.
Of the six intersections within the NEASP that are projected to exceed congestion thresholds in 2045 that would not do so in the no build condition, only two would exceed thresholds using 2023 traffic volumes. This finding shows that conservative regional growth factors obtained from the VTA model, and other nearby approved projects, amplify the vehicle trips generated by the NEASP.
The intersection of Old County Rd. and Quarry Rd. was estimated to experience extensive delay in both Plan buildout scenarios. The Plan does not recommend signalization of this one-way stop-controlled intersection. However, this location should be monitored for potential signalization in the future, as its operations are highly dependent on a parcel development’s driveway locations within the block and their interaction with the new Bragato Rd. street connection that is intended to provide alternative routings.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1633
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 5
It is important to emphasize that the Memorandum does not recommend increasing vehicle capacity through the addition of general purpose lanes inside the Plan area or within the transportation analysis study area. Building new roadways, adding roadway capacity in congested areas, or adding roadway capacity to areas where congestion is expected in the future typically induces additional vehicle travel,4
which would be counterproductive to achieving General Plan vision, policies, and goals such as:
Implementing smart growth policies to decrease the dependency on automobiles (CSH-3.4). Supporting sustainability, for both transportation network and more broadly (San Carlos General Plan Vision Statement, CSH-3.4).
Reducing vehicle trips and VMT (CSH-3.1, CSH-3.2).
Providing comfortable non-motorized transportation options (CSH-2.2, CSH-7.4).

Rather than adding general purpose lanes, which could generate environmental impacts under CEQA and require additional mitigations, the Plan recommendations include strategic, targeted interventions that will help manage congestion without compromising core planning goals and policies. Examples of such interventions include repurposing or reconfiguring existing lanes, adding turn pockets at intersections, modifying traffic signal timing, and adding new traffic control devices.

See Table 17 for recommended intersection level improvements recommended by the Plan.

4 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.

December 2018. https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1634
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 6
PART 1: PLAN DESCRIPTION
The Northeast Area Specific Plan area consists of approximately 145 acres, roughly bound by Belmont Creek, U.S Highway 101 (U.S. 101), the western property lines of the residential parcels along Northwood Drive, the northeastern property lines of the residential parcels along Fairfield Drive, and the southeast property line of the Palo Alto Medical Facilities (PAMF) and Old County Road. The Plan area’s location within San Carlos is shown in Figure 1.

The purpose of the NEASP is to create a vision, policies, and standards to guide new development within the Plan area in a way that supports existing and new businesses, residents, and the overall community.

The NEASP will manage and direct changes in the development patterns within the Plan area and guide present and future land uses, zoning changes, economic development, urban design, infrastructure, transportation circulation management and mobility, service provisions, and community benefits.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1635
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 7
Figure 1 Northeast Area Specific Plan Area
"'
1:1
5 ..
z
~ 'II
Figure 45 Existing Zone M;;p
D tight Industrial (IL)
D Industrial Professional (IP)
D Planned De\lelopment
US HIGHWAY 101
I H I I 1--t-H-++ H-H I I
i g
I i_i l ~
'
-~--~ @- I I H - 1 I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I H--1 ~ I H--1- H I 0 ~ 400 800 Feet

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1636
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 8
Land Use Plan
The NEASP would be built out over an approximate 20-year period and would allow for a net increase of 1,890 residential units (no residential units exist within the Plan area currently), as well as an increase in the net square footage of existing non-residential land uses within the Plan area, as summarized in Table 2.

Table 2 NEASP Development Projections
Land Use Allowable Net Square Footage Increase
Non-Residential Development 4,508,000
Residential Development 1,890,000 (1,890 Units)
The land use categories include Sub-Areas, which would be portions of zoning districts that include light industrial, residential mixed-use, and institutional. A General Plan Amendment and rezoning are proposed to allow for the addition of residential land uses to the Plan area. Figure 2 details the proposed land uses within the NEASP.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1637
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 9
Figure 2 Proposed Land Uses (Subarea Blocks Labeled by Letter) ®
4---1~++-+¥-...

I
D light Industrial
D Re~idential Mixed Use
D ln.situtional
US HIGliW""Y 101
INDUSTRtA.L ROAD
I
- ~
I
I
I ~
I
/...
__,.__ ~
g I
,f~ ..
~
NWA.Y
I
I
I
@ /
{
)

I I I I I II I I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
©
I II I I I I I I I I I I! I
0 ~ BOO Feet

J I I II I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1638
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 10
Transportation Network Plan
A new street segment from Quarry Road to Bragato Road would be implemented as part of the NEASP. Additionally, the NEASP would include improvements to the existing transportation network, such as:
Add a pedestrian/bicycle connection to Belmont Creek from Quarry Road. Increase the setback from Belmont Creek for properties adjacent to Belmont Creek. Redesign Industrial Road as a multi-modal district boulevard. Add a mixed-use path on Old County Road.
Signalize the intersection of Industrial Road and Taylor Way. Add turn pockets and reconfigure lane assignments at intersection approaches. Change signal timing at intersections within and adjacent to the Plan area.

The figures below give an overview of the Plan’s mobility network and provide cross-sections of proposed changes to roadways within the Plan area.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1639
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 11
Figure 3 NEASP Mobility Network
HJitOlrQI
us H!GHWA'r 101
0 ® !NOOSTR!AL 1101\0:
" I ii
~ CULDt!li u.i.TMJtill ITATION
®-+

I I I II I
New Public Street
District Multi-Modal Entries
- 0 - SignaJrzed lnte~ectians - CUrb Zone Allowed
Pedestrian Hybrid .Beacon - Curb Zone Prohibited
lnteroection Daylight o
~
400 800 Feet

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1640
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 12
Figure 4 NEASP Proposed Cross Section: Old County Road
Figure 5 NEASP Proposed Cross Section: Industrial Road
\
\ lO' MIN 8' ti ,2· - SET9Al:X-- aiAR-- - WAUI.WAY f\111.NISHING CURBSI~ / PIIOTlCTCD Z<>Nl alKElANE
3· - BUR'lll
5 ,o·
'IUfflC lAK£ -
~- --- RIGIIT Of WAY
a..----- -,
,!j?.-
0~ 1 ~ l
,___
I -
_________ ! _ ....
._
~~>- ~
IO fliffltl,A.."'11[
. PiffilCTlO
-- o,J:Aa¥l/l,Al,.'W,_T - -
""'"'
'""""

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1641
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 13
Figure 6 NEASP Proposed Cross Section: Quarry Road
Figure 7 NEASP Proposed Cross Section: Taylor Way
\ .....
- I
• ~~---r--.
~
\
• • ;,-:=,--.. 'I
~
20"
1- GROUNO F\OOA ....,,,.,..
s· a· S{TIJICI(. Cll.Mw/lJ..KW14.y
9'
\O' 4
TW(>..WA.V NlOTl.CTl.O - SlOQMWAt'(R'"'"
811(.lUNf. TltlATMtN1
UU,UNlD IUffU
I•• ,f.
10' 6
RIGHT Of WAY
10·
10'
10'
lr

FURNISI-IING/
OHt.MIDl t.OtU
a·
'R.AJRC~ --+-~ 0..tMWNS:.WA.Y

OJUSIOEZON
- ......
(
--lt
__
lGHTOF IO' W - -----
A't
9·
CUAa WAUWA.Y
1 ------
w..afOO
STORMWA'fiR lltUJMCNl
t~ UMl"'S/$Ttfl"$

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1642
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 14
Figure 8 NEASP Proposed Cross Section: Bragato Road
Figure 9 NEASP Proposed Cross Section: Glenn Way
10·
S,:TIACIC
---- t
CWJt
WMJ/.WNI
11 _ , CUI.-ZCNl
10·
TIWflCIAHE
- 60"
MGKJOfWAJ
15'
nuo
I -- t-t 8' a· CllAlt - 10'
YIAlr:wA't' fUIN$tlNO/ -- C\lltlSIDf lONI l'UH'ICLAllia -
IIIGHl'c,#wi._y
10·
>l!M(JC -
9'

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1643
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 15
Figure 10 NEASP Proposed Cross Section: New Street
mi
I
, n~~~
w
• I ,. ,,. ,,. ... . CLEARW.CKW"! fURNISH<NG / l RAHIClANE TRN FIClANE FURNISHING/ 1 CLEAR WALKWAY CURBSIDE ZONE (SHAIIEO) (SH'"EOJ CUR8SICEZONE 60' ,__ - ---------------- ·~
R~HTOFWA.Y
------

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1644
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 16
PART 2: CEQA TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
The following analysis is to support findings related to transportation significance criteria as defined by CEQA Guidelines (Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3 of the California Code of Regulations)5 as they
apply to the City of San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan. Transportation significance criteria for environmental impacts under CEQA are as follows:
T-1. Plans, Programs, Ordinances, or Policies: Does the project conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
T-2. Causing Substantial VMT: Does the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines § 15064.3, subdivision (b)?
T-3. Geometric Design: Does the project substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
T-4. Emergency Access: Does the project impact the ability of facilities on or near the project site to accommodate emergency service operators? Screening, evaluation, and determination of transportation related environmental impacts can be found below.

T-1 Plans, Programs, Ordinances, or Policies
The following section details the concurrency evaluation conducted to ensure that any plans, programs, ordinances, or policies are consistent with local or countywide transit, roadway, pedestrian, or bicycle plans. For reference, an overview of the Plan’s Mobility Goals and Vision are found in Figure 11. Goals within this framework (only as applicable to CEQA significance criteria), the NEASP land use plan, and Plan’s mobility network were utilized to check consistency with local and countywide plans, programs, ordinances, and policies.

Consistency review with plans, programs, ordinances, and policies found the plan to have no conflicts related to significance criteria under CEQA and assumes a less than significant impact. The following sections and tables contain the detailed NEASP consistency review for transportation components under CEQA.
5 https://resources.ca.gov/CNRALegacyFiles/ceqa/docs/2018_CEQA_FINAL_TEXT_122818.pdf

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1645
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 17
Figure 11 NEASP Mobility Goals and Vision
City of San Carlos General Plan
The City’s General Plan’s (2009) Circulation and Scenic Highways Element describes circulation and transportation standards and includes policies and actions to improve streets, traffic, and the pedestrian experience.

Table 3 San Carlos General Plan Consistency Review
Description of Transportation Policy NEASP Consistency Evaluation Under CEQA CSH-1.1 Widths of streets and highways should be
sufficient to address existing and projected traffic
volumes, while providing positive pedestrian and bicycle experiences.
All new vehicular streets proposed under Plan match
widths of their surrounding context.
Street reconfigurations and new non-motorized access
points are intended to improve the pedestrian and
bicycle experiences.
CSH-2.2 Provide for adequate pedestrian and bicycle
facilities as viable transportation alternatives in San Carlos.
New protected bikeways are proposed on multiple
streets within Plan area.
CSH-2.3 Access to public transportation facilities
shouls.d be convenient and designed to encourage use
of public transit.
There is no direct transit service within the Plan area.

However, improvements to the walking and biking
environment within is designed to encourage
connections to nearby rail and bus transit.

Parking
Goal: Manage parking
to provide equitable
access and improve
efficiency of the parking
system
P.l Minimize peak
parking demand
P.2 Manage the curb to
promote turnover
and equal access for
all users and modes
P.3 Maximize access to
shared parking
0 Traffic
andTDM
Goal: Minimize drivealone trips to reduce
vehicle traffic and
pollution
T.l Minimize vehicular
traffic volumes at
district gateways
T.2 Balance hourly VMT
to reduce peak traffic
T.3 Maximize TDM tools
to reduce vehicle trips
Roadway Network
and Access
Goal: Redesign our
streets to expand
multimodal options,
improve safety, reduce
flooding, and create
beautiful places
R.l Maximize
connectivity to, from
and within the district
R.2 Reduce safety
conflicts between
modes
R.3 Integrate stormwater
and streetscape
treatments
Multimodal
Options
Goal: Provide more
travel options and
support equitable access
for all
M.l Create complete
pedestrian and bike
networks
M.2 Support access to
transit and shared
mobility services
M.3 Manage mobility
services
collaboratively

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1646
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 18
Description of Transportation Policy NEASP Consistency Evaluation Under CEQA CSH-3.1 Strive to reduce baseline and developmentrelated traffic by 20 percent through public-private partnership efforts.
The NEASP contains a Transportation Demand
Management framework that sets standards for future
private development parcels to reduce vehicle traffic
and improve mobility options.
CSH-3.2 Support city-wide efforts to reduce vehicular trips and vehicle miles traveled within and through the community.
CSH-3.3 Support the incorporation of Transportation
Demand Measures in new development to reduce
vehicle miles traveled and traffic impacts.
CSH-3.4 Support Smart Growth and Sustainability
principles to reduce travel time from housing to jobs,
provide affordable transportation to all members of the community, allow compact mixed-use development and
decrease dependency on automobiles.
The Plan proposes the introduction of housing in an
area that currently has zero residents and encourages
mixed-use development on parcels that includes
community-serving commercial uses.
Streets internal to the Plan area are proposed to be
reconfigured to have wider sidewalks, protected bike
infrastructure, encourage slow speeds, and promote
non-motorized travel between housing, jobs, and other
places of business.
CSH-3.6 Parking and access facilities in the Central
District shall be designed to adequately accommodate
both customers and employees.
The adequacy of parking for a project shall not support a finding of significance under CEQA.6
CSH-3.8 The City shall continue to evaluate service
levels metrics as provided by the City’s Transportation Study Guidelines. The City recognizes that certain
development project(s) may cause these guidelines to
be exceeded. The City may approve such development
project(s) if specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or other benefits outweigh the effects of exceeding the thresholds as set forth in the
Transportation Study Guidelines. (Reflects proposed
updated language in General Plan Reset, expected
adoption in May 2025)
Automobile delay on its own is no longer an
environmental impact under CEQA (See Pub.

Resources Code, § 21099(b)(2))7 and performance
CSH-3.9 Where appropriate and relevant, based on the measures related to automobile delay are not analyzed. location and scope of a development project under
consideration, the City shall consider regional, as well as local traffic impacts when assessing new
development projects.
CSH-3.10 The City shall support efforts for a
coordinated transportation system and maintaining
acceptable levels of traffic with local, regional and
Caltrans agencies.
6 California Code, Public Resources Code - PRC § 21099(b)(3). 7https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PRC&division=13.&title=&part=&chapter =2.7.&article

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1647
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 19
Description of Transportation Policy NEASP Consistency Evaluation Under CEQA CSH-3.11 New developments and businesses shall be
required to provide adequate loading, unloading and
delivery areas, and/or shall be required to conduct such activities during nonbusiness/ peak hours.
No new specific site development parcels are proposed or designed as part of the Plan; proper design and City review and approval of such developments to ensure
adequate loading and delivery is provided.
On-street curb management guidance to allow for
needed curbside loading is provided in the Plan’s
Parking and TDM Standards document.
CSH-3.14 The City shall support the continued
operation and upgrading of the railroad commuter
service between Gilroy and San Francisco.
Not applicable to the NEASP.
CSH-3.17 The City shall consider revising its parking requirements to reflect current trends in business,
industry and housing.
The adequacy of parking for a project shall not support a finding of significance under CEQA.8
CSH-6.1 Bicycling and walking facilities should be
incorporated into all new development projects to the
maximum extent feasible.
The Plan proposed protected bike facilities and wider sidewalks on streets prioritized in the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan.
CSH-7.4 Support traffic controls that recognize bicycles The Plan proposes new crossings and signalized
intersections to connect existing bike infrastructure to proposed facilities.
8 California Code, Public Resources Code - PRC § 21099(b)(3).

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1648
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 20
Other City of San Carlos and Area Plans
Table 4 Other San Carlos and Area Plan Consistency Review Plan Description of Transportation Policy NEASP Consistency Evaluation Under CEQA Climate
Mitigation &
Adaptation
Plan (CMAP)
CMAP includes several mobility-related
strategies and policies, such as transit-oriented
development, active transportation, curb
management, public transportation, accessible
public spaces and wayfinding, VMT reductions,
electric vehicles, car sharing, and micromobility.
NEASP’s mobility strategies and policies align
with, and support implementation of, CMAP to
ensure compliance with state law.

Downtown
Specific Plan
(DSP)
DSP’s Vision calls for a “balance of mobility
modes that emphasizes pedestrian, bicycle and
transit circulation” and “minimizing autodependence to access downtown.” Mobility improvements in the NEASP supports
safe and multimodal connections to and from
downtown through new non-motorized
infrastructure and crossing opportunities.

City of San
Carlos Bicycle
& Pedestrian
Master Plan
Sets design guidance for bikeway, sidewalk, and
shared use paths, and prioritizes pedestrian and
bike routing citywide.

The NEASP is consistent with recommendations
set forth in the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master
Plan, notably:
Industrial Rd. as a Priority Pedestrian Route
(NEASP proposes improving sidewalks).
Industrial Rd.: Proposed Class IV separated
bikeway (NEASP proposes same facility
type).
Old County Rd.: Proposed Class IV separated
bikeway (NEASP proposes Class I shared
use path).
Taylor Way: Proposed Class II Bicycle Route
(NEASP proposes traffic calming with a new
signal at Taylor Way and Industrial Rd. to
facilitate safer bikeway crossings.
All NEASP bikeway and shared use paths
follow design guidance provided in Master
Plan concepts.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1649
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 21
City of San Carlos Municipal Code
Table 5 San Carlos Municipal Code Consistency Review
Code Section Description of Transportation Code NEASP Consistency Evaluation Under CEQA Chapter 18.20
Establishes vehicle and bicycle parking
standards, depending on land uses. Includes
requirements and guidance for loading spaces.

Citywide parking standards are planned to be
updated in 2024-25 as part of a separate study.
The adequacy of parking for a project shall not
support a finding of significance under CEQA.

Chapter 18.25
Requires developments to have a TDM plan to
decrease vehicle trip generation rates. Citywide
TDM standards are planned to be updated in
2024-25 as part of a separate study.
New developments in the NEASP that meet
applicability requirements must develop a TDM
Plan, and measure transportation impact in
VMT, as per state law (SB 743).
The NEASP and future citywide standards will
need to be coordinated.

Chapter 10.32
Defines on-street parking standards and
guidelines for vehicles and bicycles. Citywide
parking standards are planned to be updated in
2024-25 as part of a separate study.
The adequacy of parking for a project shall not
support a finding of significance under CEQA.

Regional and State Policy
Table 6 Regional and State Policy Consistency Review
Policy Description of Transportation Policy NEASP Consistency Evaluation Under CEQA C/CAG
Congestion
Management
Plan (CMP)
Establishes traffic congestion monitoring
locations and thresholds based on automobile
delay. The only CMP intersection within the City
of San Carlos are on El Camino Real (SR-82)
and US-101, which are outside of the Plan area.

The 2021 CMP Update established a new
“Companion Monitoring Network” (Companion
Network) to be monitored for informational
purposes only.
As automobile delay on its own is no longer
part of CEQA (See Pub. Resources Code, §
21099(b)(2))9, CMP policies relevant to
automobile delay would not conflict with CEQA.
The intersections of Holly St./US-101 Ramps
(CMP Network) and Holly St./Industrial Rd.
(Companion Monitoring Network) were
evaluated as part of this Plan’s non-CEQA
transportation analysis.

C/CAG TDM
Program
Establishes TDM standards for San Mateo
County, requiring any new development project
anticipated to generate at least 100 average
daily trips (ADT) to be subject to the TDM Policy,
complete a TDM Checklist, and implement
associated measures to mitigate traffic impacts.

Includes a tiered approach based on land use
type and project size.
C/CAG TDM requirements are applied at the
project level. The Specific Plan is a programlevel study, however require all projects within its boundaries adhere to C/CAG or any future
local TDM standards at the time of the
development application.

Commute.org
Joint powers agency (JPA) between San Mateo
County Transportation Authority, C/CAG, and
Bay Area Air Quality Management District to
reduce VMT by commuters.
A City/NEASP TMA will coordinate with
Commute.org to deliver the most efficient
package of TDM programs to the NEASP’s
employees, residents, and visitors.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1650
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 22
T-2 Causing Substantial VMT
In 2018, the California Office of Planning and Research proposed updates to CEQA guidelines establish VMT as the primary metric for evaluating a project’s impacts on the environment and transportation system.10 New methodologies under CEQA were needed for evaluating transportation impacts that are better able to promote the state’s goals of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and traffic-related air pollution, promoting the development of a multimodal transportation system, and providing clean, efficient access to destinations.

The Specific Plan’s transportation study was scoped to utilize the City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) of San Mateo County guidelines available at the time. Guidance related VMT screening and analysis was referenced in C/CAG’s SB 743 Implementation Decisions11 documentation.

Transportation Infrastructure within Plan
The NEASP proposes transportation infrastructure changes within the Plan area to achieve a sustainable transportation vision that focuses on the following mobility goals:
Minimize drive-alone trips to reduce vehicle traffic and pollution. Redesign our streets to expand multimodal options, improve safety, reduce flooding, and create beautiful places.
Provide more travel options and support equitable access for all.

The Plan proposes improvements to multimodal access, such as adding new local internal street connections (both motorized and non-motorized) to increase redundancy into the transportation grid and balance traffic distribution.

Under CEQA, all active transportation projects generally reduce VMT and, therefore, are presumed to cause a less than significant impact on transportation.

In addition to multimodal improvements, additional intersection level geometric changes are proposed within the Plan area to better manage vehicle traffic, accommodate new non-motorized crossings, achieve traffic calming and slower, safer speeds, and better organize access throughout the Plan area. These geometric changes include:
Reconfiguration of general purpose lanes to bike lanes and two-way left turn lanes. 9https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displayText.xhtml?lawCode=PRC&division=13.&title=&part=&chapter =2.7.&article
10 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA. Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.

December 2018. https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20190122-743_Technical_Advisory.pdf. 11 https://ccag.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/1_20210929_CCAG_SB_743_Implementation_Decisions_Cln.pdf

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1651
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 23
Signal phase changes for turning movements (for example: permitted phasing, protected phasing, time-of-day based protected left turn phasing with flashing yellow arrows, split phasing, and right turn overlaps).
Adding or reconfiguring turn pockets at signalized and unsignalized intersections. Converting intersections from stop controlled to signalized.

Under CEQA, transportation projects that would not likely lead to a substantial or measurable increase in vehicle travel, and therefore generally should not require an induced travel analysis and are presumed to have a less than significant impact, include:
Addition of an auxiliary lane of less than one mile in length designed to improve roadway safety.
Installation, removal, or reconfiguration of traffic lanes that are not for through traffic, such as left, right, and U-turn pockets, two-way left turn lanes, or emergency breakdown lanes that are not utilized as through lanes.
Timing of signals to optimize vehicle, bicycle, or pedestrian flow.

VMT Screening
The C/CAG’s VMT Estimation Tool12 was utilized to screen all parcels within the Plan area to determine level of VMT analysis required for the Plan. The C/CAG VMT Estimation Tool is intended to evaluate the VMT for proposed land use projects by determining whether the project is located within a low VMT generating area, estimating the project generated VMT, and evaluating the project generated VMT after potential reduction measures have been applied.

The VMT Estimation Tool includes a screening feature that uses the location of the project to determine if the project site is within a low VMT generating area, including low VMT generating traffic analysis zones (TAZ) or parcels and transit priority areas (TPA).

CEQA Statute & Guidelines § 15064.3(b) explicitly states that projects within ½ mile of a high-quality transit corridor or “major” transit station should be presumed to have no impact on VMT. A major transit station is a rail or ferry terminal, or the location where two high-frequency bus lines intersect.

A major transit corridor is defined as a corridor with high-frequency bus service in the peak hour.

It was determined that all Plan area parcels fall within the C/CAG defined TPA, and, therefore, should be presumed to have less than significant impact on VMT.

Figure 12 shows a map of the C/CAG VMT Estimation Tool with all NEASP parcels selected. The full VMT screening reports showing that all parcels within the Plan area “pass” screening for being in a transit priority area can be found in the Appendix.
12 https://gis.smcgov.org/apps/CCAG_VMT_EstimationTool/

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1652
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 24
Figure 12 Screenshot of C/CAG VMT Estimation Tool (TPA overlay in orange with NEASP parcels in blue) T-3 Geometric Design
A review of geometric design hazards, as applicable for a Specific Plan was conducted for the Plan area, which included a review of parcel land use changes as well as proposed changes to the roadway and transportation network.

Land use changes as defined by the Plan would not be applicable to geometric design hazards, but driveway locations on future development parcels within the Plan area are subject to geometric design significance criteria. Detailed driveway design layouts and locations are not part of the Specific Plan; however, future developments will be required to adhere to the City’s municipal code requirements for driveway construction standards.13
Roadway configuration changes proposed within existing streets within the public right-of-way adhere to design guidance set forth by City, state, and national best practices and would not create geometric design hazards as shown in concepts provided by the Plan. New public right-of-way access improvements proposed are considered in line with the general street grid of the Plan area, and intersection geometrics follow standard layouts.

The review of T-3 Geometric Design Hazards as it applies to the NEASP assumes a less than significant impact.
13 Sidewalk and Driveway Approach Construction and Repair. Chapter 12.04. San Carlos Municipal Code. https://www.codepublishing.com/CA/SanCarlos/#!/SanCarlos12/SanCarlos1204.html#12.04 C/ CAG VM T Estimation Tool
Zoom in to your project location. Use the tools
(Add/Remove) belowtoclkkonthemapandselect
11leparcel(s) thatrepresentyourprojectarea.

Alternatively, you can type the APN in the box below.

FormultipleAPNs, typeinoneatatime,pressenter,
andrepeatthisprocessforeachnewAPN.Each
entrywillbeaddedtoyourprojectlocation
(maximum20parcels}.

Add Remove Clear
selection
OR
APX: O-t6054440 ,dtttNI

0. Enrich Map with Layers
Turnlayersonandoftandadjustvisibilitytoaidin
project parcel selection.
- Parcels (zoomtoview) 100%
- TAZs (zoom to view) 100%
Transit PriorityArea (TPA) 50% ■
Jurisdiction Boundaries 100% a Project Area ~

0. 0
~ E<~.NASA NGA.~S j:~•MA E..-,Corr,myn,tyM•P•Contrbuton RodWOP<!C,tyCountyo/SanM•UI<> C.,i,fom.•.C.lfom•SutoP.>r'-' CIOpo,,Sir..nM..p M,<'°"'"-E<ri TOtl'llorn Garm,n.~•ph.Goolochnoloc,,uln< METVNASA,USGS ;;.,:~•yo/L

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1653
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 25
T-4 Emergency Access
Review of the NEASP found that under buildout, planned circulation improvements would be designed to adequately address potentially hazardous conditions (e.g., sharp curves, etc.), potential conflicting uses, and emergency access.

The Plan does not include modifications to restrict access on any existing roadways and infrastructure but would potentially contribute to circulation improvements by incorporating new public right-of-way easements within the Plan area. The Plan also includes a de-facto emergency vehicle lane by way of a dedicated two-way left turn lane on Industrial Rd. and improvements to non-motorized facilities such as pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure in proximity to places of residence, employment, and community-serving retail.

Each parcel’s development application within the Plan area would require plan view drawings showing its adherence to emergency access requirements. Furthermore, proper design and City review and approval of such projects would avoid substantially increased hazards or inadequate emergency access.

The review of T-4 Emergency Access as it applies to the NEASP assumes a less than significant impact.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1654
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 26
PART 3: NON-CEQA TRANSPORTATION

ANALYSIS
This section details all non-CEQA based transportation analysis as it relates to the NEASP buildout.

This analysis considers changes to the land uses within the Plan area and transportation network.

At the onset of this Specific Plan effort, the City of San Carlos did not have approved non-CEQA transportation analysis guidance and as such, the transportation study was scoped specifically for the NEASP effort through ongoing collaboration with City staff. Scoping efforts included determination of study intersections, time periods, analysis scenarios, equivalent land use categories, software utilized for analysis, and general approach on transportation network changes applied to traffic modeling software.

Transportation study guidelines typically require both traditional vehicular delay analysis as well as an increased level of analysis on factors affecting pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit riders. It is important to note that this transportation study for a Plan differs from a project-level analysis. This Plan (or program) level transportation analysis focuses primarily on on-site traffic circulation, and in the context of a Specific Plan, the Plan area bounds and nearby intersections directly adjacent to the Plan area.

Other elements typically found in a transportation study, such as non-motorized, parking, and TDM considerations, can be found separately as part of the Specific Plan’s Mobility Action Plan and Parking and TDM Standards documentation.

Overview
This section describes the existing traffic conditions in the study area for the Northeast Area Specific Plan, which is bounded by Industrial Rd. to the north, Old County Rd. to the south, Holly St. to the east, and the San Carlos City limits with Belmont Creek to the west. The study area boundaries and extents are shown in Figure 13. The existing conditions analysis includes descriptions of the roadways and documentation of existing data collected, analysis methodologies, and vehicular traffic conditions.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1655
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 27
Figure 13 Northeast Specific Plan Study Area
Roadway Network
Regional Roadways
U.S. Highway 101 (U.S. 101, “Bayshore Fwy”) serves San Francisco and the Peninsula/South Bay. Access to and from U.S. 101 in both the northbound and southbound directions is provided via the on-/off-ramps just outside the study area east of Industrial Rd. and Holly St.

There are also a pair of southbound-only on- and off-ramps accessed via Harbor Blvd. California State Road 82 (CA-82, “El Camino Real”) serves the Peninsula/South Bay and runs from San Jose to Daly City. The Caltrain railroad tracks, which run on an elevated berm through San Carlos, separate CA-82 from the study area. Access to and from CA-82 in both the northbound and southbound directions is provided via signalized intersections at Harbor Blvd. and Holly St.

Local Roadways
Industrial Road – Industrial Rd. is a local north/south arterial road consisting of two travel lanes in each direction with bi-directional, curbside Class II bike lanes and a turn lane median for half of the roadway. The roadway has a posted speed of 35 MPH. Old County Road – Old County Rd. is a local north/south arterial road consisting of travel lane in each direction with storage turn lanes at intersections. A short section of the roadway

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1656
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 28
has a striped Class II bike lane, and the rest of the corridor has Class III bike sharrows. The roadway has a posted speed of 30 MPH.
Holly Street – Holly St. is a local east/west arterial road consisting of two travel lanes in each direction that widens near Industrial Rd. and the US-101 on-/off-ramps. The roadway has a posted speed of 25 MPH.
Harbor Boulevard – Harbor Blvd. is a local east/west arterial road consisting of two travel lanes in each direction with no turn lanes, medians, or bike lanes. The north terminus of the roadway is the on-/off-ramps for US-101. The roadway has a posted speed of 35 MPH. Taylor Way – Taylor Way is a local road consisting of one travel lane in each direction with no marked centerline or bike lanes. The roadway has a posted speed of 25 MPH. Quarry Road – Quarry Rd. is a local road consisting of one travel lane in each direction with no marked centerline or bike lanes. The roadway has a posted speed of 25 MPH.

Private Access – Driveways
Local roads in the study area include private driveways that provide access to a variety of light industrial, office, and medical uses. The most significant of these driveways is the one providing access to the Palo Alto Medical Facility (PAMF) at a signalized intersection on Industrial Rd.

Existing Data Collection
For the existing baseline traffic conditions, 10 intersections and five roadway segments were studied, which are listed below. Intersections shown in bold are signalized. Lane configurations for intersection approaches in the existing condition (as of data collection in March 2023) are detailed in Error! Reference source not found..

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1657
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 29
Intersections

1. Industrial Rd. / Harbor Blvd.

2. Old County Rd. / Harbor Blvd.

3. US-101 On/Off Ramp / Holly St.

4. Industrial Rd. / Holly St.

5. Old County Rd. / Holly St.

6. Industrial Rd. / Quarry Rd.

7. Industrial Rd. / Taylor Way

8. Industrial Rd. / PAMF Driveway

9. Old County Rd. / Quarry Rd.

10. Old County Rd. / Taylor Way
Segments

1. Industrial Rd. between Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd.

2. Old County Rd. between Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd.

3. Old County Rd. between Taylor Way and Northwood Dr.

4. Industrial Rd., between PAMF Driveway and Holly St.

5. Holly St. between Industrial Rd. and On Ramp
Multimodal Intersection Turning Movement Counts – Peak Hour Multimodal turning movement count data was collected on Wednesday, March 1, 2023, between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. (“weekday AM”) and 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. (“weekday PM”) for each of the 10 study intersections. The data includes automobile turning movements as well as pedestrian and bicycle counts. The figures below show the weekday AM and PM peak-hour automobile, bicycle, and pedestrian volumes with existing intersection lane configurations. The Appendix provides detailed intersection turning movement count data.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1658
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 30
Figure 14 Existing Intersection Lane Configurations
::5
"' <(
l5
::,
lii
z I
0 i ~ i Ci::
::::>
(!)
ii: z
z ~ 0 Q.
u ~ z (/)
0 j:: •
u
w
~ w I- <(
~ z
(!) ~ Z C u
.:: as tt ~ (!) : >< w fw ...I tat
(/)
9~
~o u Q.
z~
<( <(
(/)
-
I
I
I
I I f::::::::J
I ! ~
1 i;,:_~ c= c
~ [J o~] I ~:::::::==:::::::::::=;~~
~
1 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1659
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 31
Figure 15 Intersection Counts – AM Peak Hour
0 0
I
'\,_ 22/0
Q m
00 M
+-- 1/0
.J l l. .,,-180/0
7 Or,.- ..,
M - M f- Industrial Rd '--..
010 -" 1
I
010 --
1,0 --.
r
= =~ --=- ] = JI
i t i
;§ "'
~
filENWY
===] = I = Ji 0
__ ] ELMERST
~001
o !2 o ti '\,_ 130/0
(:: 2 ,:: - 130/6
.J l l. .,,- 5510 11.s;L -+- Old - - M ...
- - CoontyRd
0 54/0 J I i t i 137/5 -- 0 131/0 •
r ,:;
0 ~I '\,_ 38/0 N ~ I O - 0 £ J fg t +- 120/6 J «>
.J l l. " .,,- 6810
6 us 10 1
-+- Old Romps .... ~----
- - County Rd
3810 -" 3 i t i
102/2 _.,.. ::: e
23/0 , ;:; .5
,:;
Q
lo~oo £ "'"'..,. .J l l.
6 \_ 372/0
.,__ 8110
.,,-21/0
~ + .!:::!, lndusiriol Rd
15410 -" 112 T
eo,2 -- I i t i
33/0 ,

MULTIMODAL TURNING M OVEMENT COUNTS
AM PEAK HOUR (CALCULATED INDIVIDUAllY BY INTERSECTION)
LEGEND

XX/YY AUTOMOBILE/ BICYCLE

IAAI PEDESTRIAN - MARKED CROSSWALK

XX PEDESTRIAN - UNMARKED CROSSWALK/ PROHIBITED CROSSING

Q TRAFFIC SIGNAL
I
QE: ~
$ i"'
I .,.,. STUDY AREA
_____ ___:us 101 -=== = V/ ---- -
==
0 °p ! \ I/(

INDUSTRIAL RD
\I
r1 ~o
o= Ufl I u
/5 D
Is ,---------i D R O c:::J I I \ rr=.dl GLE N~DD ~ i
•
,--------j \ r--' h \ J ~n~/1 ,7 D D D D
[b~~ULJ n 11
I
; T t 11
'\,_ 19/0
+-- 194/0
.,,-2010
5 += Industrial Rd 0 £.
3611 -" 11 1· 11 i t i
217/0 _.
4210 --.
~-
·-·-·-·-·
.!,Q_g
I
~ _j B.CAMN>RW ro~ :c t
i '\,_ 5/0 A '\,_ 14/ 1 Is +-- 284/0 eee e o e ~oo re o -343!0 .J l l. r 8110 .J l l. .,,-10/C 1 3
0 I O Industrial Rd - I ; -1-0 Industrial Rd T 2 0 1/0 -" i t i 6610 -" i t i 225/0 _.,.. f 21810 _.,..
45/0 -. t "' 110 --. t I .!! "
Is
Ii I I!! ,z Ii
oo "'"' "' ~ .J l. !
Q
i
" :,;
'\,_ 41/0
+--190/7
4 - --o _l_~ Old Comfy Rd 1
3810 -"
20616 _.,..

LAUREOLA
PARK
i
i
1 I;;
t
i
!AL~,AIN
,TAf~ON
~-------=--:~ ____, :----,
- !
.• .J
f
!2 Q I '\,_4311
.J l. 11 - 182/7
114 I
o l.o --2!!!.

County Rd
18/0 -"
187/7 _.,..

June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1660
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 32
Figure 16 Intersection Counts – PM Peak Hour
0 o LO Q
Cf) bi
.J l I..

Dr'"'-...:2'..
\... 82/0
+- 210
r 447/1
11 41.
.N + - Industrial Rd
T"" :2:
13/0 J O "'l l i
0/0 -+ 810 ,
Qee "' [::; ....
;j; ;j; l2 \... 79/0
':;: ;;!, +- 208/9
.J l 1.. ,-- 11910
...1131.
____ _
..k.- ~ O "'-l d __
.!:!. ' .=_ County Rd
3210 _, ·1slJ1 ") l i
10215 -+ 12 12 ,::
45/0 t
us 101
Ramps
!I
:£,
~Q :8
"!.
.;;
O ,...... 0 >- i "' .... "' .J l I.. \... 729/0 +- 187/0 , 5810 o _
-:_A_~ Industrial Rd
----
·N ::-y::Ln
32110 __,. ""Tl ~Ir "'l l i
131/0 -+
57/0 , <O
n

MULTIMODAL TURNING M OVEMENT COUNTS

PM PEAK HOUR (CALCULATED INDIVIDUALLY BY INTERSECTION)
LEGEND

XX/YY AUTOMOBILE/ BICYCLE
lxx PEDESTRIAN - MARKED CROSSWALK

XX PEDESTRIAN - UNMARKED CROSSWALK/PROHIBITED CROSSING

Q TRAFFIC SIGNAL
' I , r- .,.,. STUDY AREA
....-::::::::::
------- USlOl --- V/ ------
y Ji:§P t~"nn[\To·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-..... -._,_,_~ _ Fl\¾
=1 <ARlNWV 1U~ 0 U_
= J • 0 : Lr 00 Ch~oOUS,.IALRO
= J B I~
= J7i 0 \ t~t B = 1 , • , , •
nn-~,,
la
l.

I! " .. , •• r O 0.------18 'J O ~ ! I I l I \ "~:i~" l l\l ==__J===~=:!_:::===:='-'===:::=.~J==r=~•-=-=D~-•~&~ D~• GJ~i dl ] _ _Jk,~t ~ ~·-·-·-·-·-·-·*·-·-·-·-·-·~ 1--0 :::::, Lft_...J..l _ _ ...LL _ __J..L_-----, ,:\--'-l.....aa""-----...LL---, :::--__J ~ - . . rn '
r \... 210
e
Q :::: 124,IO :::: 0 Q
;!: +- 23214 (0 "' ;:: 6 +- 419/0
.J l I.. r 10110 I.. r 3410
~5J_ 2 J----in'i ':;° O ld ____ 0 .L -=:.- lndu,triol Rd --: -,-_ County Rd -Y--
- Q 1111t-
"'l t i s,o --" l "'l l i 37/0 --"
129/7 -+
138/2 •
Q Q :c
r-- N
(0 :lSl <O
135/0 -+
3410 , "' "'
a a a 16 +- 470/0
r 58/0 .J l I.. o
+ lndu<J:trial Rd ·O 0 3
010 -' "'l t i
17212 -+ 12 12 12
0 27/0 , .li ,.._
,2
0 12 i \... 5/0
+- 403/0
.J l I.. 0 , 5/0
-
,
----~ -Q-o , Industrial Rd
5 28~~ :: I 1
-
l' 0 .... 010 , ,
A
"
IC f
0 \... 38/2 -t \... 21/0
.) I.. +-32914 .) I.. ,2 +- 276/6
10 Isl
---cn.l...N Old o ..l...o _Q!L___ b County Rd County Rd 4 0
4010 -' 15/1 -'
18316 -+ 215/10 -+
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1661
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 33
Segment Daily Traffic and Speed Counts – Weeklong
24-hour traffic volume and vehicle speed data were collected on five roadway segments over a seven-day period between Thursday, February 24, 2023, and Thursday, March 7, 2023. This data is summarized in Table 7. Weekday average daily traffic (ADT) counts reflect the average total vehicles in both directions on roadway segments collected on Tuesday-Thursday. Weekend ADT counts reflect the average total vehicles in both directions on roadway segments collected on Saturday and Sunday. 85th percentile speed reflects the speed in miles per hour (mph) at which 85% of all vehicles were traveling at or below. Key findings include:
Weekday traffic volumes were considerably higher (approximately 55% more) than weekend traffic due to the heavy weekday commercial and industrial uses in the study area. Like other roadways studied, Holly St. carries higher traffic volumes on the weekday compared with the weekend. However, the difference in volumes is lower than other roadways within the study area due to the local connectivity it provides to US-101. 85th percentile speeds are above the speed limit on all segments. The segments with the highest observed 85th percentile vehicle speeds were:
Southbound on Old County Rd. between Taylor Way and Northwood Dr. (segment 3), where the 85th percentile speed was 8 mph over the speed limit. Eastbound on Holly St. approaching the US-101 interchange (segment 5), where the 85th percentile speed was 11 mph over the speed limit.

Table 7 Segment Count and Speed Data
Location Weekday ADT Weekend ADT 85th % Speed
(mph)
Speed Limit
(mph)

1. Industrial Rd., between Harbor
Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 6,491 3,448 NB: 38.5 SB: 38 35

2. Old County Rd., between Harbor
Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 6,038 3,461 NB: 32.7 SB: 31.9 30

3. Old County Rd., between Taylor
Way and Northwood Dr. 5,312 3,028 NB: 36.0 SB: 38.6 30

4. Industrial Rd., between PAMF
Driveway and Holly St. 10,738 4,992 NB: 34.7 SB: 34.3 35

5. Holly St., between Industrial Rd.
and US-101 On Ramp 35,444 26,408 EB: 36.6 WB: 28.3 25

I I I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1662
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 34
Caltrain Underpass
Pedestrian and bicycle activity was observed and studied at the Caltrain underpass at Old County Rd. and F St. Two-day activity counts were collected between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. to capture peak activity and directionality of travel. The activity in the underpass for people walking and biking, averaged over the two-day period, is summarized in Figure 18. In total, 108 pedestrians and 14 bicyclists used the underpass during the two-day study period. Key findings include:
The direction of travel was roughly split between people entering and leaving the study area. Generally, there were three peaks of combined pedestrian and bicycle activity during the study period:
During the AM peak, which occurred around 7:00 a.m. for pedestrians and around 8:00 a.m. for bicyclists.
During the mid-day peak, which occurred around 1:00 p.m. for both pedestrians and bicyclists.
During the early PM peak, which occurred around 4:00 p.m. for both pedestrians and bicyclists.

Figure 17 F Street Caltrain Underpass
. ... ' . -1·
f •
. i,
t. if
-
-- ..: _._..._ --

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1663
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 35
Figure 18 Caltrain Underpass Activity, Two-day Average
Data Collection Findings
Key findings from the existing conditions data collection effort are summarized below:
Peak-hour traffic within the core of the Specific Plan area is generally low, and vehicular delay is low with the lack of many signalized intersections.
Key nodes just outside the Specific Plan area on Holly St. and Harbor Blvd. do experience vehicle congestion during the peak hours as they are important vehicle connections between other San Carlos neighborhoods and US-101.
While Holly St. and Harbor Blvd. carry significant amounts of vehicle traffic at the edges of the study area, approximately only 37-43% of vehicle throughput in the peak hours is attributed to the Specific Plan area at the four intersections of Industrial Rd./Holly St., Industrial Rd./Harbor Blvd., Old County Rd./Holly St., and Old County Rd./Harbor Blvd. Trucks consist of 9-11% of the vehicles in the study area, however a large majority of the trucks in the area are smaller, box trucks. Only 0.3% of all vehicles are large, tractor trailer sized trucks. As a percentage of each corridor’s total traffic, more trucks travel on Old County Rd. than on Industrial Rd.14
A majority of the right-of-way on the only two roads accessing the Specific Plan area (Holly St. and Harbor Blvd.) are effectively built out with through travel lanes and turn pockets, with only marginal available space to incorporate additional turn pockets through minimizing lane widths.
14 Industrial Rd. N of Holly St., Old County Rd. between Taylor Way and Northwood Dr. 3-day average Tuesday – Thursday counts. Trucks are defined as FHWA Class 5 (2-axle single unit box truck) or higher. Larger trucks are defined as FHWA Class 7 or higher (4-axle single unit or tractor trailer). 0 2
4 6
8 10
12 14
16 Count
--+- Pedestrians -•- Bicyclists

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1664
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 36
Traffic Analysis
Per Senate Bill 743’s requirements to switch from level of service (LOS) to a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) based analysis to satisfy CEQA, this memorandum and subsequent traffic analysis is intended to serve as the traffic analysis required by the City of San Carlos to satisfy any non-CEQA related transportation performance policies as noted in the City’s General Plan.

Additional analysis and strategies for the transportation network outside of the vehicle network and proposals under the Plan are found in the Specific Plan’s Mobility Action Plan and Parking and TDM Standards documentation.

Methods of Analysis
Methods for this analysis are intended to evaluate existing congestion issues at area gateways, inform a better understanding of vehicle movements and travel patterns, and evaluate traffic conditions generated from buildout of the Plan both in the Existing and Cumulative horizon years.

Scenario Overview
In addition to an Existing baseline scenario, traffic conditions were analyzed for the following scenarios:

1. Existing (2023)

2. Existing (2023) with Plan (Build)

3. Cumulative (2045) without Plan (No Build)

4. Cumulative (2045) with Plan (Build)
‘Build’ based scenarios include projected Plan area trips detailed in the Specific Plan Travel Demand section below. ‘Cumulative’ year scenarios include traffic growth rates concurrent with an interpolated future year (2045) using the most current version of the Valley Transportation Authority’s (VTA) regional travel demand model, as well as trips generated from nearby approved projects. Table 8 gives an overview of each scenario and data sources utilized to determine that specific scenario’s traffic volumes.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1665
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 37
Table 8 Traffic Analysis Scenarios
Scenario Existing Traffic
Volume Source
Background and Cumulative
Traffic Growth Source(s) NEASP Site Trips
Existing (2023)
Peak Hour Traffic
Counts, March
2023
n/a n/a
Existing (2023) with
Plan (Build) n/a Full Buildout
Cumulative (2045)
without Plan (No Build Nearby approved projects
VTA Regional Travel Demand
Model: Annualized growth rate
2023 - 2045
n/a
Cumulative (2045)
with Plan (Build) Full Buildout
Analysis Overview and Performance Measures
Transportation engineers commonly describe the operations of roadways, with respect to motor vehicle traffic delays, using the concept of “automobile level of service” (a.k.a. “level of service” or LOS). LOS is a qualitative description of motor vehicle traffic flow based on factors such as motor vehicle speeds, vehicle travel times, and levels of vehicle delay at intersections. Transportation engineers describe six levels of service ranging from LOS A (best operating conditions for motor vehicles) to LOS F (worst operating conditions for motor vehicles). Intersection LOS for motor vehicles are based on the average amount of delay experienced by drivers traveling through the intersection.

The study intersections were analyzed for LOS using Synchro traffic analysis software. Both signalized and unsignalized intersections were evaluated using methods set forth in the Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). Signal timing plans were supplied by the City of San Carlos. If data was not available, but required for intersection operational analysis, reasonable assumptions were made. The most recently released HCM methodology is the 7th Edition, and was the preferred method of analysis. Not all intersection configurations and timing plans are capable of being analyzed under the 7th Edition methodology. In such cases, the most current methodology that could output HCM results across all analysis scenarios was selected for analysis. The 7th Edition, 6th Edition, HCM 2010, and HCM 2000 were tested for analysis. The methodologies used to assess signalized and unsignalized (stop-controlled) intersections are described below.

Intersections were classified using the performance standards identified in the City of San Carlos’ General Plan, which instructs traffic engineers to strive to maintain intersection service levels above the midrange of level D (not to exceed a Volume-to-Capacity Ratio (V/C) of 0.85 or a total average delay time at intersections of 45 seconds whenever V/C Ratio is not available) as a performance

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1666
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 38
measure15. The City shall continue to evaluate service levels metrics as provided by the City’s Transportation Study Guidelines. The City recognizes that certain development project(s) may cause these guidelines to be exceeded. The City may approve such development project(s) if specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits outweigh the effects of exceeding the thresholds as set forth in the Transportation Study Guidelines.

Signalized Intersections
Peak-hour levels of vehicle delay at signalized intersections were estimated using methods provided in Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual. This operations analysis method uses various intersection characteristics (such as traffic volumes, lane geometry, and signal phasing) to estimate the average control delay experienced by motorists traveling through an intersection.

Control delay incorporates delay associated with deceleration, acceleration, stopping, and moving up in the queue. Table 9 summarizes the relationship between average control delay per vehicle and LOS for signalized intersections.

Table 9 Signalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions (HCM Method) Level of
Service
Avg. Control
Delay Per
Vehicle (sec)
Description
A d10.0
Free Flow or Insignificant Delays: Operations with very low delay, when signal progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles arrive during the green light phase. Most vehicles do not stop at all.

B >10.0 and
d20.0
Stable Operation or Minimal Delays: Generally, occurs with good signal progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than with LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay. An occasional approach phase is fully utilized.

C >20.0 and
d35.0
Stable Operation or Acceptable Delays: Higher delays resulting from fair signal progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Drivers begin having to wait through more than one red light.

Most drivers feel somewhat restricted.

D >35.0 and
d55.0
Approaching Unstable or Tolerable Delays: Influence of congestion becomes more noticeable. Longer delays result from unfavorable signal progression, long cycle lengths, or high volume to capacity ratios. Many vehicles stop. Drivers may have to wait through more than one red light. Queues may develop, but dissipate rapidly, w/o excessive delays.

E >55.0 and
d80.0
Unstable Operation or Significant Delays: Considered to be the limit of acceptable delay.

High delays indicate poor signal progression, long cycle lengths and high volume to capacity ratios. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences. Vehicles may wait through several signal cycles. Long queues form upstream from intersection.

F >80.0
Forced Flow or Excessive Delays: Occurs with oversaturation when flows exceed the intersection capacity. Represents jammed conditions. Many cycle failures. Queues may block upstream intersections.

Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual. 15 POLICY CSH-3.8, Circulation and Scenic Highways Element. City of San Carlos General Plan. 2009. Page 98.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1667
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 39
Unsignalized Intersections
For unsignalized (all-way, two-way, and side-street stop controlled) intersections, Synchro software was used again. The software applies the Transportation Research Board’s Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology for unsignalized intersections to determine average control delay per vehicle (measured in seconds) for each stop-controlled movement.

The method incorporates delay associated with deceleration, acceleration, stopping, and moving up in the queue. For side street stop-controlled intersections, delay is represented as the average delay per vehicle for the “worst” approach, not the overall intersection. Table 10 summarizes the relationship between average control delay per vehicle and LOS for unsignalized intersections.

Table 10 Unsignalized Intersection Level of Service Definitions (HCM Method) Level of
Service
Average Control
Delay Per Vehicle
(Seconds)
Description
A d10.0 No delay for stop-controlled approaches.

B 10.0 and d15.0 Operations with minor delay.

C >15.0 and d25.0 Operations with moderate delays.

D >25.0 and d35.0 Operations with increasingly unacceptable delays.

E >35.0 and d50.0 Operations with high delays, and long queues.

F >50.0 Operations with extreme congestion, and with very high delays and long queues unacceptable to most drivers.

Source: Transportation Research Board, Highway Capacity Manual.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1668
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 40
Roadway Segments
Roadway segment analysis utilized data based on the upper bound of capacity ranges from the City of San Carlos General Plan for each roadway’s designated type, which are shown in Table 11. The maximum average daily traffic of data collected (average weekday or average weekend) was used as the baseline traffic volume, and LOS was determined based on City of San Carlos standards for volume/capacity ratio, matching the recommended methodology in the HCM shown in Table 12.

Table 11 Traffic Capacity, by Roadway Type
Type Volume (ADT) Lanes
Highway 20,000 per lane 4-10
Arterial 10,000-30,000 2-4
Major Collector 5,000-10,000 2
Collector 5,000 2
Source: City of San Carlos General Plan Circulation and Scenic Highways Element 2030, Table 5-1, (Adopted 2009).

Table 12 Level of Service, by Volume to Capacity Ratio
Level of Service Volume to Capacity Ratio (V/C)
A Free Flow Less than or equal to 0.60
B Stable Flow (Slight Delay) 0.60-0.70
C Stable Flow (Acceptable Delay) 0.71-0.80
D Approaching Unstable Flow (Tolerable Delay) 0.81-0.90 E Unstable Flow (Congestion; Intolerable Delay) 0.91-1.00 F Forced Flow (Jammed) Greater than 1.00
Source: City of San Carlos General Plan Circulation and Scenic Highways Element 2030, Table 5-2, (Adopted 2009).

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1669
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 41
Scenario Analysis: Existing
Intersection Analysis
The weekday AM and PM peak-hour intersection levels of service and average delay under existing conditions are shown in Table 13. Delays, volume/capacity ratio, and level of service that exceed thresholds set by the City’s General Plan are noted in bold. The table also includes each intersection’s worst movement level of service, regardless of volume (unweighted). The Appendix contains the full intersection LOS conditions analysis output, by lane group, for all analysis scenarios.

Table 13 Existing Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Vehicle Conditions Intersection Control HCM
Methodology2
Peak
Hour
Average
Intersection
Delay (sec)
Average
Intersection
LOS
Average
Intersection/
Worst Lane
Group
v/c Ratio4
Worst
Movement
LOS

1. Industrial
Rd. / Harbor
Blvd.

Signal HCM 2000
AM 12.1 B 0.44 NBL: B
PM 15.5 B 0.55 WBL: C

2. Old County
Rd. / Harbor
Blvd.

Signal HCM 2000
AM 19.2 B 0.46 WBT: C
PM 20.3 C 0.48 NBT: C

3. US-101
On/Off Ramp /
Holly St.

Signal HCM 2000
AM 9.2 A 0.52 SBR: C
PM 5.8 A 0.50 SBR: C

4. Industrial
Rd / Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 36.9 D 0.55 SBL: E
PM 36.5 D 0.66 NBL: E

5. Old County
Rd. / Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 43.1 D 0.72 SBL: F
PM 49.1 D 0.79 SBT: F

6. Industrial
Rd. / Quarry
Rd.

Signal HCM 7th
AM 10.7 B 0.60 (EB) WB: C
PM 13 B 0.75 (WB) SBL: D

7. Industrial
Rd. / Taylor
Way
TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 1.8 A 0.07 (WB) EB: A
PM 1.7 A 0.12 (EB) EB: B

8. Industrial
Rd. / PAMF
Driveway5
Signal HCM 2000
AM 14.0 B 0.22 NBL: E
PM 17.6 B 0.32 SBL: E

9. Old County
Rd. / Quarry
Rd.

TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 1.3 A 0.06 (WB) WB: B
PM 3.4 A 0.31 (WB) WB: C

10. Old County
Rd. / Taylor
Way
TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 2.2 A 0.15 (WB) WB: B
PM 2.5 A 0.23 (WB) WB: B
Notes:

1. AWSC = All-Way STOP-Control Intersection; TWSC = Two-Way STOP-Control Intersection; SSSC = Side street STOP-Control Intersection; Signal = Signalized Intersection; Uncontrolled = No traffic control

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1670
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 42

2. Some intersections do not allow analysis using HCM 7th Edition methodology; HCM 7th, 6th, 2010, and 2000 tested; Most recent methodology utilized that report results across all analysis scenarios

3. TWSC LOS and v/c ratio based on Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method; delay and worst movement LOS based on HCM 2000.

4. HCM 7th Edition does not report average intersection v/c ratios; v/c for worst lane group of listed approach is reported.

5. The signal timing plan was not provided. Signal timing was estimated based on characteristics of nearby signals.

Key findings include:
All but one of the study intersections (Old County Rd./Holly St.) operate within acceptable levels of service set by the City's General Plan (midpoint of LOS D, or 45s of delay). Intersections operating at LOS D all have volume/capacity ratios or intersection capacity utilization under the threshold that the City of San Carlos has set (0.85 or 85%).

Roadway Segments Analysis
An analysis of roadway segments and their associated capacity was conducted using the upper bounds of each roadway’s designated street type listed in the City of San Carlos General Plan. All roadway segments studied are designated as arterials in the General Plan. As an exception, the capacity of Old County Rd. was assumed to be half of the upper bound volume for arterials because:
1) it is only two lanes; 2) has mostly uncontrolled intersections within the study area; and 3) contains three-lane approaches at signals. The segment level analysis for roadways and their respective volume/capacity ratios and level of services are shown in Table 14.

Table 14 Existing Weekday Daily Traffic Segment Analysis Location Weekday ADT
(vehicles)
Capacity
(vehicles)
Volume/Capacity
(v/c) Ratio
Level of Service
(LOS)

1. Industrial Rd., between Harbor
Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 6,491 30,000 0.22 A

2. Old County Rd., between
Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 6,038 15,000 0.40 A

3. Old County Rd., between
Taylor Way and Northwood Dr. 5,312 15,000 0.35 A

4. Industrial Rd., between PAMF
Driveway and Holly St. 10,738 30,000 0.36 A

5. Holly St., between Industrial
Rd. and US-101 On Ramp 35,444 30,0001 1.18 F
Notes:

1. Capacity shown is maximum for 4-lane arterial per City guidance; Holly St. is typically a 4-lane undivided roadway, however Holly St. in this segment contains eight lanes of travel including turn pockets.

I I I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1671
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 43
Key findings include:
All but one of the roadways within the study area are operating at LOS A when analyzed at a daily segment level. The exception is Holly St. between Industrial Rd. and US-101 On Ramp, which is overcapacity in the existing conditions.
It should be noted that this segment of Holly St. where data was collected is adjacent to the US-101 ramps and contains eight lanes of travel including turn pockets, whereas Holly St. typically is a four-lane, undivided roadway.

Specific Plan Travel Demand
The following section describes methods and calculations for motorized travel demand associated with land use changes proposed as part of the NEASP, proposed trip reductions due to transportation demand management (TDM), detailed trip generation, and trip assignment throughout the study area.

Future Land Uses
The Plan area’s future land uses are broken into three major types: light industrial, mixed used residential, and institutional. The light industrial sub area includes both light industrial and industrial professional uses. The mixed-use residential sub area balances the NEASP’s need for living wage jobs with housing options, identifying land to accommodate future population growth in San Carlos. The institutional sub area is preserved for critical services, including PG&E and the Palo Alto Medical Foundation (PAMF), ensuring essential utilities and healthcare access are sustained.

Based on the information provided regarding intended uses of future parcel developments, the following ITE equivalent land uses for proposed new uses was used for trip and parking generation:

Table 15 New NEASP Land Uses, by ITE classification
New NEASP Designated Land Use Corresponding ITE Land Use Light Industrial 110 General Light Industrial
Manufacturing 140 Manufacturing
Warehousing 150 Warehousing
Research and Development 760 Research and Development Center General Office/General Commercial 710 General Office Building Retail 821 Strip Retail Plaza
Utilities 170 Utility
Residential 221 Multifamily Mid-rise

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1672
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 44
Additional general notes on land uses are found below:
For Retail, ‘Strip Retail Plaza (<40ksf)’ was used. Although there is 80ksf retail proposed over the entire Plan area, it is assumed to be split between several blocks and developments, therefore the <40k subtype is most appropriate.
General Office/General Commercial may serve a wide range of community service uses; typically, in Plan area analyses, General Office is used as it is the broadest of the ITE land use types.
Research and Development Center covers biotech uses and their accompanying office facilities.

Trip Reductions
In January 2022, C/CAG’s TDM Policy Update Approach took effect, which sets Countywide standards for vehicle trip reduction targets. The City of San Carlos is currently developing Citywide TDM standards, however, they have not yet been approved. This analysis utilizes C/CAG TDM policy guidance for determining the appropriate TDM trip reductions to apply to the NEASP’s travel demand model.

An assumed 25% vehicle trip reduction for TDM is applied for all trips generated within the NEASP.

This trip reduction level aligns with C/CAG’s requirements for transit-oriented development (TOD) projects regardless of size or land use type. Since the Plan area is fully inside a transit priority area per C/CAG guidance, the 25% trip reduction was selected and applied.

Dedicated NEASP TDM standards are also proposed as part of the Specific Plan’s Parking and TDM Standards documentation that align with C/CAG and apply standards to comply with future Citywide TDM standards throughout the horizon of the Specific Plan.

Figure 19 C/CAG Vehicle Trip Reduction Targets
Source: Transportation Demand Management Policy Update Approach. City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County. Updated September 1, 2021.

Table 2. Vehicle Trip Reduction Targets ----------~-------~------~ Non-Residential: Office, Industrial,
and Institutional
Non-Residential: Medical &Lodging
Non-Residential: Retai l
Residential: Multi-Fami ly
Small Projects
35%
35%
35%
25%
Large Projects
35%
TOD
(Small & Large)
25%

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1673
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 45
Trip Generation
Table 16 consists of the Plan area’s projected vehicle trip generation at full buildout. Trip generation considers net new uses and removes existing uses projected for removal or change, as those trips would have been captured in existing traffic data collection. The trip generation also includes the default TDM reduction as described in the prior section.

Table 16 Trip Generation, Full NEASP Buildout
Land Use ITE Code Size Units
AM Peak PM Peak
Daily Total In Out Total In Out
Proposed
R&D 760 2,964 ksf 3,053 2,503 550 2,905 465 2,440 32,841 Light Industrial 110 700 ksf 518 456 62 455 64 391 3,409 General Office 710 180 ksf 274 241 33 259 44 215 1,951
Retail 821 80 ksf 139 86 53 415 203 212 5,402
Residential (MF
Mid-Rise) 226 1,890 units 699 161 538 737 450 287 8,581 Warehousing 150 40 ksf 7 5 2 7 2 5 68
Manufacturing 140 492 ksf 334 254 80 361 113 248 2,337
GROSS PLAN VEHICLE TRIPS 5,024 3,706 1,318 5,139 1,341 3,798 54,589 TDM REDUCTION (25%) (1,257) (927) (330) (1,285) (335) (950) (13,647) SUBTOTAL PROJECT TRIPS 3,767 2,779 988 3,854 1,006 2,848 40,942 Existing to be removed
Light Industrial 110 303 ksf (224) (197) (27) (197) (28) (169) (1,476) General Office 710 45 ksf (68) (60) (8) (65) (11) (54) (488) Animal Hospital/
Veterinary Clinic 640 10 ksf (36) (24) (12) (35) (14) (21) (215) Warehousing 150 60 ksf (10) (8) (2) (11) (3) (8) (103)
EXISTING TRIPS TO BE REMOVED (338) (289) (49) (308) (56) (252) (2,282) NET PLAN VEHICLE TRIPS 3,429 2,490 939 3,546 950 2,596 38,660 Notes:
Individual parcels' uses are rounded to nearest KSF to generate square footages. Plan area total trip generation are rounded to the nearest trip for each land use. ITE trip generation utilized average rates, general urban context, and AM/PM peak hour of adjacent street traffic.

I I I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1674
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 46
Plan Trip Assignment
Trip generation from the buildout of Plan was assigned to study intersections using a distribution based on existing IN/OUT data collection split at four gateway intersections. Trip distribution to and from the Plan area is based on the surrounding roadway network’s existing travel patterns and considered freeway access points and recent transportation studies from the City of San Carlos within the Plan area for consistency. This Plan’s trip assignment through turning movement counts and distribution is shown on Figure 20.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1675
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 47
Figure 20 Plan Buildout Turning Movement Counts
Mm' 00 \_ 67(308) N M co I'- co -ui'N ] ~t::.. e, "q" L!) - o(O) 0 (") (") (D "' " 0 "~ (") ) l l I r 62(282) ) l l Drivewa Industria l Rd
0(0) -' i t r 64(15) -'
0(0) - 0 M CO 64(34) -
0(0) """\ 0(0) """\
(")"' (") (")
==:====== 34~0
f/
c:.=========:::::==:-:::~~~~~
. V)
e:: ~o £
-133(518) I "" ' 0 L!)~
r 73(218)
~I us 10 1
Old
County Rd
i t r
e: f §' 0 Ms
Ol I'-
NU)
(")
I'.::=
USlOl
f V)
5- i C.O "q" e,_ I '<t N 0
.J l l
174(329) -'
12(41) -
89(243) """\
\.. 0(0)
-45(18)
,r- 6(1)
Industrial Rd
i t r
:;;;-m;:-
0 (D
~;:::
-rr·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·--·-·

KAREN WY
=--
__ ]
: -----~ \
Q-1[1[]
======= ~ . 0
0 ELMER ST
~Jc\ D7u""""'~" !
Q= lJ i 0
D D > [_~~~-=--1 \ i~~-=:i u B . J ~cJn~: g ~
0 g[J[ll] [] f-=:J!
D ~] llef} \l\ [l· ~[P [][J [;::] lJj
D
D
' OLD COUNTY RD I
0 0
0 :,:
0 z
~c---=
_=-;:::,----------i====;-;.e=1 =====i-r=c • .--~ =-----,---- LL ..... .V -~ n

TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS (SPECIFIC PLAN BUILDOUT)

AM/PM PEAK HOUR (NET NEW SPECIFIC PLAN VEHICLE TRIPS ONLY) LEGEND

XX(YY) AM(PM)

Q TRAFFIC SIGNAL
••••• STUDY AREA
cocn
"' 0
z
<( cl
1;;
;l;1
4X%•
~I

SPECIFIC PLAN VEHICLE TRIP

DISTRIBUTION
,.,

SKYWAY RD
c§ - ~~~(91) nr
r
- u\U/ R-Q Ol '<t t- ~m 00 0 ass (") 0 (D I'- ii - 166(261) M oo 0 00 0 - 609(174) r::'N \_ 97(23) ~m \.. 124(73) co (") a (") ,r- 9(2) ) l l r 222(83) ) l l ,r- 0(85) ) l -197(353) ) l - 342(236) Industria l Rd Industrial Rd Industrial Rd O ld I h WAL~ O ld County Rd County Rd
i t r
1 185(41) J
I
i t r rl 0(0) -' i t r 0(0) -' i t r 0(12) -' 30(79) - I moo 165(152) - 83(384) - ! 00<0 171(607) - 00<0 1 345(80) J 0 0 ~I 257(246) - 257(436) - 149(376) """\ Ol (") 0(0) """\ T"" 0(0) """\ f 0) 0(12) """\ N ;:! (D ,!< co .! a June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1676
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 48
Scenario Analysis: Existing with Plan (Build)
Figure 21 shows the weekday AM and PM peak-hour automobile volumes, which include existing turning movements plus the turning movements that the Plan is projected to generate.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1677
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 49
Figure 21 Existing with Plan (Build) Turning Movement Counts CO CD
~s
,-...
) l l
Drivewax_
\.... 89(390)
-1(2)
r 242(729)
Industrial Rd
om;:::-
" Ol <D
(") " co 0) 0 on N
N '<t
) l l r 141(337)
Old County Rd
)
(") 0 vi ~[ i MN l!> (/) i I
co co " ) l l
\.... 372(729)
- 132(205)
r 27(59)
Industrial Rd
n

TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS (EXISTING BUILD)

AM/PM PEAK HOUR (CALCULATED INDIVIDUALLY BY INTERSECT/ON) LEGEND

XX(YY) AM(PM)
0(13)J
0 (
0 )- }l!
1(8) - '<t Ol
"""\ 0 :!,~ 166(136)-
338(650) J
102(m)- 1 t r
122(300) co;:-
=

TRAFFIC SIGNAL
•1••· STUDY AREA
r
c::======
--
\D
,-...
- 23(45) """\
0 ELMER ST
:c
,.
"' < 0
1\l~ITQ"f ;:~c·-·-·-·-·-·-·•·~-~~. ~-w ~
1 0

INDUSTRIAL RD
~= at(f 1 \L---u D i D
[] 11t-Etj1, r=J ! ~3\lf J E1fJ DD [J ~ !
Do [b~~Uo DD

DCOUNTYRD
·-·-·-·
0 0 0
i
:;;
0 z
~I
>- N 0) K f 0 j~ R;:;O -= \.... 161(138) ;::: ::: \....99(11J .~ \.... 5(2J °' N \....14(5J a 5!,' ,._ LA N (") o ......... _........, ,_ coo a '"-f".-N a ......... ,.- ,_ c.o,.- ,_ I -221(267) ~;::: g -360(680) ;:c-o O -686(561) ~§- i:: -952(577) g; :;;- g \..._138(61) :;;-i:: t \..._167(94) ) J I .... "''°', ) J 0 .... "'"' ) J .... 3,,,,.,, ) J .... ,,,,, , j z O _ 38'(682) 1 , _ ,,.,,,,, Old Industrial Rd lndustnal Rd Industrial Rd Old Old h WAL County Rd County Rd
171(9?)J I i t r 221(4?)J i t r 7 1(oiJ ,._ i t r 66(7)J i t r I J 167(208)- 382(287)- 308(556)- -!: 389(889) - 383(124) J 18(27) C.ON,.- O)'"-f"O) > NOr--- ,.-QC"') 280(514) """\ 42(34) ....._ 45(27) """\ ..2 o 8_ 1(12) ....._ f ;::- 463(429) - 444(651 ) - 00)0 • C"') CO >- '"-I'" • o
,.- ,.- ,.- '"-I'" .:: ,.-
N CO ,.- a
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1678
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 50
Intersection Analysis
Intersection LOS analysis was conducted for the Existing with Plan turning movement counts and transportation infrastructure proposed as part of the Plan buildout, which includes signalization of the Industrial Rd./Taylor Way intersection, as well as the reduction of general purpose lanes and the addition of a two-way left turn lane on Industrial Rd.

Intersections were calibrated by optimizing signalized intersection cycle lengths and phase splits, and modifications to turning pockets and phasing schemes were made to better accommodate Plan generated vehicle trips. As the Plan area is contained geographically with limited access points, but also near major regional roadway connections, balancing trips into and out of the Plan area was a key goal of this calibration effort.

All modifications proposed were evaluated and determined to meet right-of-way requirements and best practice design standards in concept. Additional study will be required at each location throughout the timeline of the Plan to determine when intersection modifications are warranted and their detailed design needs. Table 17 lists intersection configuration changes that were applied and modeled for the Existing with Plan (Build) scenario. A graphical representation of Intersection lane configurations for the Cumulative with Plan (Build) scenario that also include additional intersection changes outside of the NEASP can be found in Figure 25 of Scenario Analysis: Cumulative with Plan (Build).

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1679
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 51
Table 17 NEASP Intersection Configuration Changes (All Build Scenarios) Intersection Intersection Changes Applied

1. Industrial Rd. /
Harbor Blvd.
Westbound approach becomes left, left/through, and through/right Eastbound and Westbound change to split phasing
Northbound approach becomes left, left, and through/right Northbound lefts change to protected only phasing
Industrial Road will have two southbound receiving lanes for at least ½ block and transition to a standard 3-lane section with two-way left turn lane where future parcel development guides appropriate location

2. Old County
Rd. / Harbor
Blvd.
Southbound approach becomes left, through/right
Northbound approach changes to protect/permitted phasing (southbound remains permitted) Westbound approach becomes left, left/through, through/right Eastbound/westbound split phasing to remain
Old County Rd. will have two southbound receiving lanes and carry to Quarry Rd.

3. US-101 On/Off
Ramp / Holly St.
No NEASP changes
Geometrics and phasing reflect the US-101/Holly Street Interchange Project with assumptions

4. Industrial Rd. /
Holly St.
Northbound and southbound become a single through lane with left turn pockets Other changes per US-101/Holly St.
Northbound right turn changes reflect US-101/Holly St. project w new pedestrian crossings All dedicated right turn lanes run with overlap phases as applicable Eastbound approach becomes left, through, through, and through/right Eastbound left turns becomes protected phasing

5. Old County
Rd. / Holly St.
Westbound adds a short right turn pocket as ROW permits Northbound adds a right turn pocket
All dedicated right turn lanes run with overlap phases as applicable

6. Industrial Rd. /
Quarry Rd.
Northbound and southbound become a single through lane with left turn pockets Signal remains two-phase, permitted lefts except southbound left protected in AM only (flashing yellow arrow otherwise) – Note: this assumes the north leg of Quarry Rd. becomes a primary entrance to a new parcel development

7. Industrial Rd. /
Taylor Way
New signalized intersection
Northbound and southbound become a single through lane with left turn pockets Eastbound lane configuration remains as existing
Two-phase, concurrent permitted phasing

8. Industrial Rd. /
PAMF Driveway
Westbound lane configuration remains as existing: requiring two southbound receiving lanes on Industrial transition to southbound approach configuration at Holly St. Eastbound and westbound split phasing
Permitted lefts, except southbound left protected-permitted in AM only (flashing yellow arrow otherwise)

9. Old County
Rd./ Quarry Rd.
Remains unsignalized (should be monitored throughout Plan buildout for potential signalization) Southbound left turn pocket, carried from 2nd southbound receiving lane at Harbor Rd. intersection.

10. Old County
Rd. / Taylor Way No changes

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1680
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 52
The weekday AM and PM peak-hour intersection levels of service and average delay under existing with Plan conditions are shown in Table 18. Delays, volume/capacity ratio, and level of service that exceed thresholds set by the City’s General Plan are noted in bold. The table also includes each intersection’s worst movement level of service, regardless of volume (unweighted). The Appendix contains the full intersection LOS conditions analysis output, by lane group, for all analysis scenarios.

Table 18 Existing with Plan Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Vehicle Conditions Intersection Control HCM
Methodology2
Peak
Hour
Average
Intersection
Delay (sec)
Average
Intersection
LOS
Average
Intersection/
Worst Lane
Group
v/c Ratio4
Worst
Movement
LOS

1. Industrial Rd. /
Harbor Blvd. Signal HCM 2000
AM 24.8 C 0.67 SBT: C
PM 29 C 0.74 SB: D

2. Old County Rd. /
Harbor Blvd. Signal HCM 2000
AM 49.7 D 0.96 SBT: E
PM 47.5 D 1.00 WBT: E

3. US-101 On/Off
Ramp / Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 15.9 B 0.79 SBR: D
PM 9.6 A 0.63 SBR: D

4. Industrial Rd. /
Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 32.9 C 0.86 EBL: E
PM 37.2 D 0.85 NBT: E

5. Old County Rd. /
Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 52.9 D 0.84 SBL: F
PM 54.9 D 0.87 SBL: F

6. Industrial Rd. /
Quarry Rd. Signal HCM 7th
AM 11.7 B 0.75 (SBL) SBL: D
PM 17.3 B 0.81 (NBT) SBL: C

7. Industrial Rd. /
Taylor Way Signal HCM 7th
AM 9.6 A 0.76 (NBL) EB: B
PM 17.8 B 0.83 (SBT) NBL: C

8. Industrial Rd. /
PAMF Driveway5 Signal HCM 2000
AM 21.8 C 0.81 WBL: E
PM 17.9 B 0.82 WBL: E

9. Old County Rd. /
Quarry Rd. TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 14.7 B 1.23 (WBL) WB: F
PM 124.8 F 1.68 (WBL) WB: F

10. Old County Rd.
/ Taylor Way TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 4.3 A 0.60 (WB) WB: E
PM 28.3 D 1.27 (WB) WB: F
Notes:

2. Some intersections do not allow analysis using HCM 7th Edition methodology; HCM 7th, 6th, 2010, and 2000 tested; Most recent methodology utilized that report results across all analysis scenarios

3. TWSC LOS and v/c ratio based on Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method; delay and worst movement LOS based on HCM 2000.

4. HCM 7th Edition does not report average intersection v/c ratios; v/c for worst lane group of listed approach is reported.

5. The signal timing plan was not provided. Signal timing was estimated based on characteristics of nearby signals.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1681
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 53
Key findings include:
Locations in the Existing with Plan scenario that continue to exceed General Plan thresholds from prior scenarios:
Old County Rd./Holly St.: PM Peak
In addition, the following locations do not meet performance standards in the Existing with Plan scenario that met performance standards in the Existing scenario:
Old Country Rd./Harbor Blvd.: AM and PM Peaks (delay, v/c ratio) Industrial Rd./Holly St.: AM Peak (v/c ratio)
Old County Rd./Quarry Rd.: AM and PM Peaks (delay, v/c ratio for worst lane group) Old County Rd./Taylor Wy.: PM Peak (v/c ratio for worst lane group) Roadway Segment Analysis
The segment level analysis for roadways and their respective volume/capacity ratios and level of services are shown in Table 19. Weekday ADT represents existing volumes plus the net new daily traffic volumes from Plan buildout. Changes to applicable roadway segment capacity from transportation infrastructure changes implemented with the Plan is noted in the table’s footnotes.

Table 19 Existing with Plan (Build) Weekday Daily Traffic Segment Analysis Location Weekday ADT
(vehicles)
Capacity
(vehicles)
Volume/Capacity
(v/c) Ratio
Level of Service
(LOS)

1. Industrial Rd., between
Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 12,643 20,0001 0.63 B

2. Old County Rd., between
Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 16,610 20,0002 0.83 D

3. Old County Rd., between
Taylor Way and Northwood Dr. 14,307 15,000 0.95 E

4. Industrial Rd., between
PAMF Driveway and Holly St. 20,256 30,000 0.68 B

5. Holly St., between Industrial
Rd. and US-101 On Ramp 45,057 30,0003 1.50 F
Notes:

1. Capacity of Industrial Road with Plan changes from 30,000 to 20,000 due to the arterial changing to a 3-lane roadway for its extents within this segment.

2. Capacity of Old County Rd. between Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd. with Plan changes from 15,000 to 20,000 due to the arterial changing to a 3-lane roadway within this segment.

3. Capacity shown is maximum for 4-lane arterial per City guidance; Holly St. is typically a 4-lane undivided roadway, however Holly St. in this segment contains eight lanes of travel including turn pockets

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1682
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 54
Key findings include:
Locations in the Existing with Plan scenario that continue to exceed General Plan thresholds in the Existing scenario are:
Holly St., between Industrial Rd. and US-101 On Ramp (Note: Holly St. where data was collected is adjacent to the US-101 ramps and contains eight lanes of travel including turn pockets, whereas Holly St. typically is a four-lane, undivided roadway). In addition, the following locations do not meet performance standards in the Existing with Plan scenario that met performance standards in the Existing scenario:
Old County Rd., between Taylor Way and Norwood Dr. (v/c ratio, LOS)

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1683
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 55
Scenario Analysis: Cumulative without Plan (No Build)
As the NEASP is a Plan encompassing a large area over a horizon longer than typical projects with no predetermined phasing plan, no standalone Background scenario was analyzed. Since the magnitude of regional growth surrounding the study area and would exceed traffic generated individually from nearby approved background projects, Cumulative scenarios include approved nearby projects to serve as ‘Background,’ as well as traffic growth rates calculated from the VTA’s regional travel demand model to generate a future 2045 Cumulative scenario.

Approved Nearby Projects
The following Background Projects (nearby approved but not yet built) trip assignments were aggregated throughout the study network based on their individual project transportation studies. If those studies did not assign trips to NEASP study intersections, assumptions were made based on prevailing traffic patterns as appropriate.

Projects were selected based on discussions with City staff and include all approved projects within the Plan area and select projects on key streets adjacent to the study area. Projects approved but not selected for detailed inclusion into the traffic model are assumed to be marginal and would be captured effectively in regional growth factor calculations, which are more conservative in applying trips throughout the study area on major roadways.

Table 20 Approved Nearby Projects
Project Location Approval Year
642 Quarry Rd. Inside NEASP Area 2022
405 Industrial Rd. Outside NEASP Area, north of Holly St. 2022 301 Industrial Rd., “Palo Alto
Medical Center” Inside NEASP Area 2006 (project is partially built; only unbuilt phases’ trips included) 501 Industrial Rd. Outside NEASP Area, south of Holly St. 2022 841 Old County Rd.,
“Sobrato” Outside NEASP Area, south of Holly St. 2022
Alexandria Center for Life
Science Project Outside NEASP Area, south of Holly St. 2024 (under review) Regional Growth Factors
The C/CAG-VTA Regional Travel Demand Model was utilized to estimate traffic conditions in the cumulative horizon year (2045) to include projects in planning, not approved, or further outside of the Plan area’s traffic study area. Cumulative traffic growth for the Plan’s buildout year of 2045 was estimated based on projected region-wide growth due to land use and transportation network changes.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1684
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 56
Varying growth rates were applied to major and minor streets to achieve a more accurate growth rate at the intersection level. Growth projections used interpolated forecasting from the regional model’s baseline year 2019 to the target buildout year (2045). The growth rates were then calibrated to the NEASP’s baseline data collection year of 2023 and buildout year of 2045 over 22 years. Growth rates were only applied to existing turning movement counts.

Growth within the regional model’s traffic analysis zones (TAZs) of the Plan area were removed to better obtain an isolated net amount of traffic growth independent of any buildout within the Plan area. Growth inside of the Plan area would be applied on its own (see Specific Plan Travel Demand), superseding any regional model growth inside the Plan area.

Table 21 details annualized growth factors by roadway segment used in the Cumulative scenario analyses.

Table 21 Cumulative Scenarios Traffic Growth Rates
Segments in Study Area Per Year Traffic Growth Overall Traffic Growth (2023 to 2045)
Harbor Blvd., Industrial Rd., Old
County Rd. 0.28% 6.2%
Holly St., including US-101 Ramp 1.07% 23.6%
All other streets No regional growth applied. Growth from background projects and NEASP new uses applied independently.

Source: Calculated from VTA Travel Demand Model (2019 Baseline and 2050 Build) Transportation Network Changes in Cumulative Conditions A review of transportation projects within the Plan area and surrounding study intersections was conducted to accurately evaluate cumulative conditions in 2045. There were no approved or under way projects in the Plan area independent of proposed transportation network changes as part of the NEASP.

In August 2015, a City-sponsored effort to make modifications to the Holly St. and US-101 interchange was studied and designed16. The US-101/Holly Street Interchange Project was created to accommodate traffic growth in the San Carlos area between 2015 and 2035. The project proposes changing the existing interchange from a four-quadrant cloverleaf to a partial cloverleaf configuration with a separate pedestrian overcrossing. It also improves bicycle and pedestrian circulation through the interchange. The lane configuration changes proposed as part of this project were incorporated into the Cumulative without and Cumulative with Plan scenarios. 16 US-101/Holly Street Interchange Project Final Traffic Operations Report. Fehr & Peers. 2015.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1685
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 57
Figure 22 US-101/Holly St. Interchange Reconstruction Geometric Drawing17 Intersection Turning Movement Counts
Figure 23 shows the weekday AM and PM peak-hour automobile volumes, which include existing turning movements with future year factors applied by corridor, plus turning movements from nearby approved projects.
17 Route 101/Holly St. Interchange Reconstruction Geometric Drawing Layout. Rajappan & Meyer. 2015.

NEW HOSPITAL
N 41"08'54" W
202.62
•f.11; -
i10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1686
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 58
Figure 23 Cumulative without Plan (No Build) Turning Movement Counts :;;-N
0 N ~s
M 0 co C"') C"')
.J l l
Drivewar_
\_ 31(130)
-1(2)
,r 198(505)
Industrial Rd
- CD CD ID 0
(")..,.
so~ CD CD ..,.

CD N
.J l l
0(14) J i l r 42(34) J
0(0) - ;;, ;:- 139(11 5) -
'- 47(11 7) I N CO CO ..- ~ : ..-~! 0 (D._..-._ I
,r 82(178) I ) l
County Rd
i f r 346(216) J l r
I tn I!)' V) CD r--- CD fl (") co (") mm co ..,. en r--- I[) .......... .J l l 160(186) -
\_ 413(964)
- 137(286)
,r 36(79)
Industria l Rd
i l r
:;;- NCO I[) I[)(")
n

TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS (CUMULATIVE NO BUILD)

AM/PM PEAK HOUR (CALCULATED INDIVIDUALLY BY INTERSECT/ON) LEGEND

XX(YY) AM(PM)
= TRAFFIC SIGNAL
O ld ~: m
1 p~l~_..;r1 215(458) J I ;:::- ;:::- "' 840(564) """\ 00 _ ""_ OlOcn ac:ocn ..- 73(138) """\ - co - M!;;: ;g co en
, ,,,..., (")
0 It~ "'"'• 1 • F II " - I_J 1 - e Ld ~ 1 ,._,~
USlOl
••••• STUDYAREA
7 c:====== KAREN WY
ft:
---
0 ELMER ST
ID
i l r 36(7) J
187(160) -
I
co 289(159) - 0 " CO 146(190) """\ st::,;:::- 103(46) """\ Ol N r--- N "N 0
-.-...... _, ·-·-· -·-· -·-·
-rrc] l)JLJ_~ O
I '""""'""
0 w /J ; c==J
De= D
r--7 \\gL-iJ U N c:=:J L_--~-_s \ 1-y~~ L] Gil,~ o = SJ1 ! c_;__tJl ff CJ D CJ L_J t=J I
'1W J~ooo D -
I~ \11 f)• ~~Jil
0 0 0 0
I
!.
0 z
0 z
<(
C,
,§ _ ;~-;(547) n §: t
r
- L.>1\:0>1/ RQ © 0 OD 0 ~::!,
- 216(484) ~ ~o o - 410(437) N N (") 0 N
,r 65(43) ) l l ,r 84(62) ) l l ,r 10(6) ) l
Industria l Rd Industrial Rd Industria l Rd
i l r n 1(1) J i l ( 124(24) J ,I 1 l r 300(207) - ! MO;:- 235(307) - I 38(45) J :;;-;:-o Nor::- 45(27) """\ f :s O t:... 1(0) """\ 235(258) - co :::: (") I[) .!! I[) .! ci CD LO
0 I[) I[)
c \_ 41(38) N,:::' CD ..,.
- 309(374) ) l
Old
County Rd
22(16) J
215(292) -
i
0 >-
.!!
t;;
ix
0 z
0 ::i'
'-53(21)
- 300(318)
Old
County Rd
h WALi
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1687
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 59
Intersection Analysis
The weekday AM and PM peak-hour intersection levels of service and average delay under the cumulative conditions are shown in Table 22. Delays, volume/capacity ratio, and level of service that exceed thresholds set by the City’s General Plan are noted in bold. The table also includes each intersection’s worst movement level of service, regardless of volume (unweighted). The Appendix contains the full intersection LOS conditions analysis output, by lane group, for all analysis scenarios.

Table 22 Cumulative without Plan Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Vehicle Conditions Intersection Control HCM
Methodology2
Peak
Hour
Average
Intersection
Delay (sec)
Average
Intersection
LOS
Average
Intersection/
Worst Lane
Group
v/c Ratio4
Worst
Movement
LOS

1. Industrial Rd. /
Harbor Blvd. Signal HCM 2000
AM 14.3 B 0.53 NBL: B
PM 18.5 B 0.64 WBL: C

2. Old County Rd. /
Harbor Blvd. Signal HCM 2000
AM 20.5 C 0.55 WBL: C
PM 22.3 C 0.63 WBT: C

3. US-101 On/Off
Ramp / Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 19.4 B 0.77 SBR: C
PM 10.9 B 0.63 SBR: D

4. Industrial Rd. /
Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 43.9 D 0.69 NBL: F
PM 43.7 D 0.81 SBL: E

5. Old County Rd. /
Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 74.9 E 1.01 SBT: F
PM 76.7 E 0.99 SBT: F

6. Industrial Rd. /
Quarry Rd. Signal HCM 7th
AM 11.5 B 0.65 (NBL) WB: C
PM 13.9 B 0.74 (WB) SBL: D

7. Industrial Rd. /
Taylor Way TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 1.5 A 0.08 (EB) EB: B
PM 1.5 A 0.13 (EB) EB: B

8. Industrial Rd. /
PAMF Driveway5 Signal HCM 2000
AM 16 B 0.38 NBL: E
PM 25.1 C 0.45 WBL: E

9. Old County Rd. /
Quarry Rd. TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 1.1 A 0.08 (WB) WB: B
PM 3.2 B 0.36 (WB) WB: C

10. Old County Rd. /
Taylor Way TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 2.4 A 0.23 (WB) WB: B
PM 2.4 A 0.27 (WB) WB: C
Notes:

2. Some intersections do not allow analysis using HCM 7th Edition methodology; HCM 7th, 6th, 2010, and 2000 tested; Most recent methodology utilized that report results across all analysis scenarios

3. TWSC LOS and v/c ratio based on Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method; delay and worst movement LOS based on HCM 2000.

4. HCM 7th Edition does not report average intersection v/c ratios; v/c for worst lane group of listed approach is reported.

5. The signal timing plan was not provided. Signal timing was estimated based on characteristics of nearby signals.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1688
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 60
Key findings include:
Locations in the Cumulative scenario that continue to exceed General Plan thresholds in the Existing scenario:
Old County Rd./Holly St.: PM Peak
In addition, the following locations do not meet performance standards in the Existing with Plan scenario that met performance standards in the Existing scenario:
Old County Rd./Holly St.: AM Peak (delay, v/c ratio)
Roadway Segment Analysis
The segment level analysis for roadways and their respective volume/capacity ratios and level of services are shown in Table 23. Weekday ADT for the Cumulative conditions is calculated using regional growth factors obtained from the C/CAG-VTA Regional Travel Demand Model.

Table 23 Cumulative without Plan (No Build) Weekday Daily Traffic Segment Analysis Location Weekday ADT
(vehicles)
Capacity
(vehicles)
Volume/Capacity
(v/c) Ratio
Level of Service
(LOS)

1. Industrial Rd., between
Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 6,893 30,000 0.23 A

2. Old County Rd., between
Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 6,412 15,000 0.43 A

3. Old County Rd., between
Taylor Way and Northwood Dr. 5,641 15,000 0.38 A

4. Industrial Rd., between
PAMF Driveway and Holly St. 11,404 30,000 0.38 A

5. Holly St., between Industrial
Rd. and US-101 On Ramp 43,809 30,0001 1.46 F
Notes:

1. Capacity is maximum for 4-lane arterial per City guidance; Holly St. is typically a 4-lane undivided roadway, however Holly St. in this segment contains eight lanes of travel including turn pockets.

Key findings include:
All but one of the roadways within the study area are operating at level of service A when analyzed at a daily segment level. The exception is Holly St. between Industrial Rd. and US101 On Ramp, which is overcapacity in the existing conditions (Note: Holly St. where data was collected is adjacent to the US-101 ramps and contains eight lanes of travel including turn pockets, whereas Holly St. typically is a four-lane, undivided roadway).

I I I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1689
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 61
Scenario Analysis: Cumulative with Plan (Build)
Intersection Turning Movement Counts
Figure 24 shows the weekday AM and PM peak-hour automobile volumes, which include existing turning movements, future year factors applied by corridor, turning movements from nearby approved projects, and turning movements that the Plan is projected to generate.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1690
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 62
Figure 24 Cumulative with Plan (Build) Turning Movement Counts -
-
rCO 0
<'> N
§: CO r- CD
J l l
Drivewa.r_
\.... 98(438)
-1(2)
,r 260(787)
co;:-:;;;:-
" N CO <'> on
N lD O>
r- co
N '<t
J l l ,r 155(396)
e Old Industrial Rd 1"-.._J County Rd
N V)
'q'" 'q'"""" >-- N N ..-M =
coco r---.._ 0 c.o ......... ..,........__..I
)
us 101 ---+-i~
Ramps
en v,
in 2:-
O') co
0 0 rrJ l l
\.... 413(964)
-182(304)
,r 42(80)
Industrial Rd
n

TURNING MOVEMENT COUNTS (CUMULATIVE BUILD)

AM/PM PEAK HOUR (CALCULATED INDIVIDUALLY BY INTERSECTION) LEGEND

XX(YY) AM(PM)
389(787) J j t ( 0 TRAFFIC SIGNAL
106(49) __, i I ( 3'6(2'6) __, 1 ( ~ "2(2"1 - [ il' i ••••• srnov mA ' 0(14) ::'. l 1 20,,,.,, _ !j' 11 ,008('2S). ![ '62(38' h ::!: § " \ I i' I ,~,~ 0101 0 0 1(8) """\ m O "'"' , "' co~~ ,, , L/L M~
'--I USlOl
J l l
217(239)-
295(566) """\
0 ELMER ST
,0
Old
i t ( o ;:-co 0 CO CO
~t:.,;::::-
co on ron ON
N;:::
221(48) J
454(311)-
103(46) """\
-l~•-•-·-·-·-·-·-·-·-·
0 ~ ,nuv
INDUSTRIAL RD •
-382(745)
,r 74(45)
Industrial Rd
i t (
M:;;;:-r=:- N -<D
:s~M
" co "
~JLt}gtF~!
r7 >
\~UR 0 ~c=J ~cJn~ o gN~ D c:=i B• i BW D -
D
D
"' 0
0 0
0 z
1 tD D0 rh~mP
1(1)J ,._
383(591)-
45(27) """\ i
.2
i t (
MOr::-
" ;!
O')
r- -
N - 0 " - 0
O') 0
J l l
124(24) J
406(914)-
1(12) """\ f
!
-1019(611)
,r 10(91)
i t (
~@: on
0 J l
"' 0
z
<(
383(125) J
492(504)-
,._
0 c \.... 138(61)
Old
N <'>
se.,:s ....
c.o c.o ..Q ;ti
22(28) J
472(728) -
\....177(94)
-642(554)
Old
County Rd
:J
WALi
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1691
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 63
Intersection Analysis
Intersection level of service analysis was conducted for the Cumulative with Plan turning movement counts and transportation infrastructure proposed as part of the Plan buildout, which includes signalization of the Industrial Rd./Taylor Way intersection, as well as the reduction of general purpose lanes and the addition of a two-way left turn lane on Industrial Rd.

In addition, intersections were calibrated by optimizing signalized intersection cycle lengths and phase splits, and modifications to turning pockets and phasing schemes were made to better accommodate Plan generated vehicle trips. All modifications proposed were evaluated and determined to meet right-of-way requirements and best practice design standards in concept.

Additional study will be required at each location throughout the timeline of the Plan to determine when intersection modifications are warranted and their detailed design needs.

Figure 25 shows intersection lane configurations at the approaches that align with changes proposed with the NEASP. See Plan Description for more details on NEASP proposed transportation infrastructure, and Table 17 in Scenario Analysis: Existing with Plan (Build) for more details on proposed intersection configuration changes.

The weekday AM and PM peak-hour intersection levels of service and average delay under cumulative with Plan conditions are shown in Table 24. Delays, volume/capacity ratio, and level of service that exceed thresholds set by the City’s General Plan are noted in bold. The table also includes each intersection’s worst movement level of service, regardless of volume (unweighted). The Appendix contains the full intersection LOS conditions analysis output, by lane group, for all analysis scenarios.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1692
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 64
Figure 25 Cumulative with Plan (Build) Lane Configurations en
9~
~o
u c.. z~
<( <(
en
-
I
I
I
I I f::::::::J
I ! ~ fJ c:3 c= [J w~]
□

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1693
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 65
Table 24 Cumulative with Plan Weekday AM and PM Peak Hour Vehicle Conditions Intersection Control HCM
Methodology2
Peak
Hour
Average
Intersection
Delay (sec)
Average
Intersection
LOS
Average
Intersection
/Worst Lane
Group
v/c Ratio4
Worst
Movement
LOS

1. Industrial Rd. /
Harbor Blvd. Signal HCM 2000
AM 27.9 C 0.76 NBL: D
PM 32.1 C 0.79 SB: D

2. Old County Rd. /
Harbor Blvd. Signal HCM 2000
AM 76 E 1.01 SBL: F
PM 76.8 E 1.09 SBL: F

3. US-101 On/Off
Ramp / Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 46 D 0.98 EBR: F
PM 17.6 B 0.76 SBR: D

4. Industrial Rd. / Holly
St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 67.8 E 1.04 WBR: F
PM 49 D 1.02 NBT: F

5. Old County Rd. /
Holly St. Signal HCM 2000
AM 80.3 F 1.05 SBL: F
PM 97.6 F 1.09 SBL: F

6. Industrial Rd. /
Quarry Rd. Signal HCM 7th
AM 12.0 B 0.77 (SBL) EB: C
PM 23.6 C 0.87 (NBT) EB: D

7. Industrial Rd. /
Taylor Way Signal HCM 7th
AM 12.4 B 0.82 (NBL) EB: C
PM 19.7 B 0.86 (SBT) EB: C

8. Industrial Rd. /
PAMF Driveway5 Signal HCM 2000
AM 27.2 C 0.88 WBL: F
PM 30.2 C 0.86 WBL: F

9. Old County Rd. /
Quarry Rd. TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 21.4 D 1.75 (WBL) WB: F
PM 188.3 F 3.15 (WBL) WB: F

10. Old County Rd. /
Taylor Way TWSC1,3 HCM 7th
AM 9.1 A 0.87 (WB) WB: F
PM 40.7 D 1.54 (WB) WB: F
Notes:

2. Some intersections do not allow analysis using HCM 7th Edition methodology; HCM 7th, 6th, 2010, and 2000 tested; Most recent methodology utilized that report results across all analysis scenarios

3. TWSC LOS and v/c ratio based on Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) method; delay and worst movement LOS based on HCM 2000.

4. HCM 7th Edition does not report average intersection v/c ratios; v/c for worst lane group of listed approach is reported.

5. The signal timing plan was not provided. Signal timing was estimated based on characteristics of nearby signals.

Key findings include:
Locations in the Cumulative with Plan scenario that continue to exceed General Plan thresholds from the Cumulative without Plan scenario:
Old County Rd./Holly St.: AM and PM Peak
In addition, the following locations do not meet performance standards in the Cumulative with Plan scenario that met performance standards in the Cumulative without Plan scenario:

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1694
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 66
Old Country Rd./Harbor Blvd.: AM and PM Peaks (delay, v/c ratio) US-101 Ramps/Holly St.: AM Peak (delay, v/c ratio)
Industrial Rd./Holly St.: AM Peak (delay, v/c ratio) and PM Peak (delay, v/c ratio) Industrial Rd./Quarry Rd.: PM Peak (v/c ratio for worst lane group) Industrial Rd./Taylor Way: PM Peak (v/c ratio for worst lane group) Industrial Rd./PAMF Driveway: AM and PM peaks (v/c ratio) Old County Rd./Quarry Rd.: PM Peak (delay, v/c ratio for worst lane group) Old County Rd./Taylor Way: AM and PM peaks (v/c ratio for worst lane group) Roadway Segment Analysis
The segment level analysis for roadways and their respective volume/capacity ratios and level of services are shown in Table 25. Weekday ADT for the Cumulative conditions is calculated using regional growth factors obtained from the C/CAG-VTA Regional Travel Demand Model, plus the new daily traffic volumes from Plan buildout.

Table 25 Cumulative with Plan (Build) Weekday Daily Traffic Segment Analysis Location Weekday ADT
(vehicles)
Capacity
(vehicles)
Volume/Capacity
(v/c) Ratio
Level of Service
(LOS)

1. Industrial Rd., between
Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 13,045 20,0001 0.65 B

2. Old County Rd., between
Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd. 16,984 20,0002 0.85 D

3. Old County Rd., between
Taylor Way and Northwood Dr. 14,636 15,000 0.98 E

4. Industrial Rd., between
PAMF Driveway and Holly St. 20,922 30,000 0.70 C

5. Holly St., between Industrial
Rd. and US-101 On Ramp 53,422 30,0003 1.78 F
Notes:

1. Capacity of Industrial Road with Plan changes from 30,000 to 20,000 due to the arterial changing to a 3-lane roadway for its extents within this segment.

2. Capacity of Old County Rd. between Harbor Blvd. and Quarry Rd. with Plan changes from 15,000 to 20,000 due to the arterial changing to a 3-lane roadway within this segment.

I I I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1695
NORTHEAST AREA SPECIFIC PLAN | TRANSPORTATION ANALYSIS
City of San Carlos
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 67
Key findings include:
Locations in the Existing with Plan scenario that continue to exceed General Plan thresholds:
Holly St., between Industrial Rd. and US-101 On Ramp (Note: Holly St. where data was collected is adjacent to the US-101 ramps and contains eight lanes of travel including turn pockets, whereas Holly St. typically is a four-lane, undivided roadway). In addition, the following locations do not meet performance standards in the Cumulative with Plan scenario that met performance standards in the Existing scenario:
Old County Rd., between Taylor Way and Norwood Dr. (v/c ratio, LOS)

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1696

APPENDIX

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1697

TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ASSUMPTIONS
San Carlos NEASP | June 2024 (Revised December 2024)
The following approach document details methods and assumptions the Nelson\Nygaard team will go by to conduct transportation study, including traffic modeling, for the San Carlos Northeast Area Specific Plan.

Future Land Uses
Analysis for the NEASP buildout will utilize land use/development yield data information provided by Perkins & Will and approved by the City of San Carlos and Placeworks team (Source file “240612_NEASP_DevelopmentYield_FINAL.xlsx”).

Existing land uses programmed for changes will utilize ITE land use codes designated and assumed in the aforementioned spreadsheet.

The following ITE equivalent land uses for proposed new uses will be used for trip and parking generation (more detailed descriptions at the end of this document):

NEASP Designated Land Use ITE Land Use
Light Industrial 110 General Light Industrial
Manufacturing 140 Manufacturing
Warehousing 150 Warehousing
Research and Development 760 Research and Development Center General Office/General Commercial 710 General Office Building Retail 821 Strip Retail Plaza
Utilities 170 Utility
Residential 221 Multifamily Mid-rise
General notes on land uses:
ITE trip generation will utilize average rates, general urban context, and AM/PM peak hour of adjacent street traffic
For Retail, Strip Retail Plaza (<40ksf) will be used. Although there is 80ksf retail proposed over entire Plan Area, it is assumed to be split between several blocks and developments, therefore the <40k subtype is most appropriate. General Office/General Commercial may serve a wide range of community service uses; typically in Plan Area analyses, General Office is used as it is most broad of the ITE land use types

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1698
Modeling Assumptions
San Carlos NEASP
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 2
Research and Development Center covers biotech uses and their accompanying office facilities.

Trip Reductions
Will assume 25% across all uses to match CCAG’s requirements for TOD projects Transportation Network
Will utilize the map shown below as the assumed full build transportation network.

The 10 study intersections and 5 segments from the Baseline Traffic Conditions Memo will be modeled throughout all scenarios, shown below:

Intersections

1. Industrial Rd / Harbor Blvd

2. Old County Rd / Harbor Blvd

3. US-101 On/Off Ramp / Holly St

4. Industrial Rd / Holly St

5. Old County Rd / Holly St
USIOI
.................. .,._...........+-++
~ l'lDlST-,_lltl
()+ 51.0WSTf:UnltWtft)IYIICUANOYO«US
()+ l'IIOTKltOlllmANU
0,. l'(tWIU$KARUIMfM
• STOl!MW.UU,INfl,\11-..C:w.t:
* REOl.alD~-NITV
===
rl';.l OOHTNDU511.WSV9AACA1
~ LIGHIINO\ISIIIIAl-aUlA2
ltlSIOENTIAI.MIXlO-ost: IUIMtli I
RESIOlNTIAlMIXlD-UKSUIA.UA,
GICUIOFLOOll...cTIV,o.noH
- ~~~ICAUMMJ-._
- 11:f()Uql)ll(!M
- JICTMUS((NC0Ul!,f,Q(O
\) Dl5Ta;l10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1699
Modeling Assumptions
San Carlos NEASP
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 3

6. Industrial Rd / Quarry Rd

7. Industrial Rd / Taylor Way

8. Industrial Rd / PAMF Driveway

9. Old County Rd / Quarry Rd

10. Old County Rd / Taylor Way
Segments

1. Industrial Rd between Harbor Blvd and Quarry Rd

2. Old County Rd between Harbor Blvd and Quarry Rd

3. Old County Rd between Taylor Way and Northwood Dr

4. Industrial Rd, between PAMF Driveway and Holly St

5. Holly St between Industrial Rd and On Ramp
Future 2045 No Build (Cumulative) Scenario Approach
As the NEASP is a study encompassing a plan area over a long horizon, no standalone Background Scenario will be analyzed, as the magnitude of regional growth surrounding the study area and would far exceed nearby approved background projects. The Cumulative Scenario will include individual background projects as well as traffic growth rates calculated from the VTA’s regional travel demand model.
The following Background Projects (nearby approved but not yet built) trip assignments will be aggregated throughout the study network based on their individual project transportation studies. If those studies did not assign trips to NEASP study intersections, assumptions were made based on prevailing traffic patterns
642 Quarry
405 Industrial (just south of plan boundaries, north of Holly Street) Palo Alto Medical Center, 301 Industrial (only the unbuilt hospital’s trip assignments will be included)
501 Industrial (south of Holly Street)
Sobrato
Alexandria Life Sciences

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1700
Modeling Assumptions
San Carlos NEASP
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 4
Regional Growth Rates
To estimate 2045 buildout year traffic on roadways that serve mobility needs outside of the NEASP, growth rates will be calculated using the latest VTA travel demand model
Traffic growth surrounding the Plan Area will be examined based on the 2019 baseline and 2050 future year of the VTA model received by C/CAG and VTA staff and normalized to a straight-line annual percentage rate The growth rates will be calibrated to the NEASP’s baseline data collection year of 2023 and buildout year of 2045 over 22 years
Growth within the traffic analysis zones (TAZs) of the Plan Area will be removed to better obtain an isolated gross growth in traffic independent of any buildout within the Plan Area, which this Specific Plan would calculate and incorporate on its own
Streets in Study Area Per Year Traffic Growth
Overall Traffic Growth
(2023 to 2045)
Harbor Blvd, Industrial Rd, Old County Rd 0.28% 6.2%
Holly St, including US-101 Ramp 1.07% 23.6%
All other streets No regional growth applied. Growth from background projects and NEASP new uses will be applied independently.
Trip Distribution
This project’s trip distribution will be based on the surrounding roadway network’s existing travel patterns and will consider freeway access points and recent transportation studies from the City of San Carlos within the Plan Area for consistency.
US-101 (S of Holly St): 20%
US-101 (N of Harbor Blvd): 34%
Old County (N of Harbor Blvd): 5%
Old County (S of Harbor Blvd): 5%
ECR (N of Harbor Blvd): 7%
ECR (S of Holly St): 26%
Holly St (E of US-101): 1%
Industrial Rd (S of Holly St): 2%
Changes to transportation network independent of NEASP 101/Holly interchange project (2015)
No other transportation changes included, such as TIF identified projects

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1701
Modeling Assumptions
San Carlos NEASP
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 5
Future 2045 Build (Cumulative + Project) Scenario
Approach
Old County Rd
A two-lane road (matching existing), assuming the existing lane configuration at intersections, with the option to explore repurposing right turn pockets to better accommodate ped/bike infrastructure.
Industrial Rd
A general three-lane section with left turn pockets at intersections At Harbor and Holly, will assume same configuration with the incorporation of additional turn pockets as needed after evaluation, understanding operational/safety tradeoffs
The Industrial Rd/Taylor Wy intersection will be signalized with the NEASP project Changes to study intersection approaches with respect to turn pockets, signalization schemes as recommended as part of the NEASP (to be confirmed with modeling) All other internal roadways will assume to be two-way single lane at the approaches and maintain existing traffic control, unless otherwise deemed necessary for signalization.

ITE Land Use Descriptions
110 General Light Industrial
A light industrial facility is a free-standing facility devoted to a single use. The facility has an emphasis on activities other than manufacturing and typically has minimal office space.

Typical light industrial activities include printing, material testing, and assembly of data processing equipment.
140 Manufacturing
A manufacturing facility is an area where the primary activity is the conversion of raw materials or parts into finished products. Size and type of activity may vary substantially from one facility to another. In addition to the actual production of goods, a manufacturing facility typically has an office and may provide space for warehouse, research, and associated functions.
150 Warehousing
A warehouse is primarily devoted to the storage of materials, but it may also include office and maintenance areas.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1702
Modeling Assumptions
San Carlos NEASP
Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates | 6
170 Utility
A utility is a free-standing building that can house office space, a storage area, and electromechanical or industrial equipment that support a local electrical, communication, water supply or control, or sewage treatment utility.
221 Multifamily Mid-rise
Mid-rise multifamily housing includes apartments and condominiums located in a building that has between four and 10 floors of living space. Access to individual dwelling units is through an outside building entrance, a lobby, elevator, and a set of hallways. 710 General Office Building
A general office building is a location where affairs of businesses, commercial or industrial organizations, or professional persons or firms are conducted. An office building houses multiple tenants that can include, as examples, professional services, insurance companies, investment brokers, a banking institution, a restaurant, or other service retailers. 760 Research and Development Center
A research and development center is a facility or group of facilities devoted almost exclusively to research and development activities. The range of specific types of businesses contained in this land use category varies significantly. Research and development centers may contain offices and light fabrication areas.
821 Strip Retail Plaza
A strip retail plaza is an integrated group of commercial establishments that is planned, developed, owned, and managed as a unit. Each study site in this land use has less than 40,000 square feet of gross leasable area (GLA). Because a strip retail plaza is open-air, the GLA is the same as the gross floor area of the building

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1703
Net New Development Breakdown
2045 projection for non-residential development:
4,508,000
Considering non-residential pipeline projects
1,888,000
Additional Non-residential development
2,620,000
Considering full build out for residential mixed use land area 1,890,000
Total: 6,398,000
NEASP Project Description - Summary
Total Net New Development 6,398,000
Non Residential Development 4,508,000
GSF
Go to Tab 4 for more information
Go to Tab 5 for more information
8,514,000 Go to Tab 2 for more information
Go to Tab 3 for more information
2,617,497
Pipeline Projects 1,888,000
Residential Development 1,890,000 (1,890 Units)
Total Gross New Development
Total Existing Development
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1704
Demolition of Existing
Buildings Net New
Land Use Category (ITE, via PW) GSF Units GSF Units GSF Units 110 - General Light Industrial 1,263,613 302,771 700,000 1,661,000 0 140- Manufacturing 104,397 0 492,000 596,000 0
150- Warehousing 233,544 60,398 40,000 213,000 0
760 - Research & Development Center 400,277 0 2,964,000 3,364,000 0 710- General Office Building 57,920 44,542 180,000 193,000 0 Retail 0 0 80,000 80,000 0
610- Hospital 415,100 0 0 415,000 0
Utilities 0 0 52,000 52,000 0
Residential 0 0 1,890,000 1,890 1,890,000 1,890
840- Automobile Sales (New) 26,915 0 0 27,000 0
942 - Automobile Care Center 13,875 0 0 14,000 0
640 - Animal Hospital/Veterinary Clinic 9,668 9,668 0 0 0 712- Small Office Building 8,678 0 0 9,000 0
715- Single Tenant Office Building 83,510 83,510 00 0
Total 2,617,497 0 500,889 6,398,000 1,890 8,514,000 1,890 Light Industrial Manufacturing Warehousing
Research
and
Developme
nt
General Office/General
Commercial/Retail Retail Hospital Utilities Residential 100% 16% 11% 1% 66% 4% 2% 0% 1% 0%
4,508,000 700,000 492,000 40,000 2,964,000 180,000 80,000 0 52,000 0 100% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 100%
1,890,000 - - - - - - - - 1,890,000
Total 6,398,000 700,000 492,000 40,000 2,964,000 180,000 80,000 - 52,000 1,890,000 Project Description - ITE Land Use Breakdown
Existing Full Future Build-Out
Residential
ITE Land Uses
sq.ft.

Non-Residential
I
I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1705

EXISTING
2,617,497
BASE
Block Land Use Block Area Acreage FAR DU/AC Maximum Height No. of Stories Non Residential Residential No of Units Parking Spaces Grand Total sqft Block Land Use sqft Acres ft sqft sqft Light Industrial Manufacturing Warehousing Research and Development General
Office/General
Commercial/Reta
il
Retail Hospital Utilities Residential sqft per unit sqft sqft per spaces BASE Light Industrial Manufacturing Warehousing Research and Development General
Office/Gener
al
Commercial/
Retail
Retail Hospital Utilities Residential
1,000 400
A Light Industrial Sub Area 1 441,000 10 2.0 100 4 617,000 - - - - 568,000 37,000 12,000 - - - - 265,000 663 882,000 A Light Industrial Sub Area 1 875,482 38,276 11,707 B Light Industrial Sub Area 2 365,000 8 1.5 75 4 383,000 - 84,000 - - 287,000 - 11,000 - - - - 165,000 413 548,000 B Light Industrial Sub Area 2 113,733 442,365 10,732C Light Industrial Sub Area 2 478,000 11 1.5 75 4 502,000 - 110,000 - - 377,000 - 15,000 - - - - 215,000 538 717,000 C Light Industrial Sub Area 2 148,936 581,086 14,634 D Light Industrial Sub Area 2 454,000 10 1.5 75 4 477,000 - 105,000 - - 358,000 - 14,000 - - - - 204,000 510 681,000 D Light Industrial Sub Area 2 142,166 551,800 13,659 E Light Industrial Sub Area 2 520,000 12 1.5 75 4 546,000 - 126,000 137,000 - 273,000 - 11,000 - - - - 234,000 585 780,000 E Light Industrial Sub Area 2 170,600 200,607 420,786 10,732 F Light Industrial Sub Area 3 568,000 13 1.0 75 4 398,000 - 92,000 199,000 40,000 60,000 8,000 - - - - - 170,000 425 568,000 F Light Industrial Sub Area 3 124,565 291,393 40,000 92,480 8,276 G Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 1 461,000 11 90 90 8 79,000 990,000 - - - - 69,000 10,000 - - 990,000 990 396,000 990 1,465,000 G Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 1 71,379 9,756 990 H Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 336,000 8 75 75, 35 6 60,000 600,000 - - - - 60,000 - - - 600,000 600 240,000 600 900,000 H Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 62,069 600 I Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 160,000 4 75 75, 35 6 9,000 300,000 - - - - - 9,000 - - 300,000 300 120,000 300 429,000 I Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 8,780 300 J Institutional 808,000 19 84,000 - - - - - - - - 84,000 - 84,000 J Institutional K Institutional 788,000 18 415,100 - - - - - - - 415,000 - - 415,100 K Institutional Total (Gross) 124 3,570,100 1,890,000 517,000 336,000 40,000 1,923,000 174,000 82,000 415,000 84,000 1,890,000 1,890 2,009,000 5,023 7,469,100 SUMMARY TOTAL (TAB 2) 700,000 492,000 40,000 2,964,000 180,000 80,000 1,890 Total (Net) 3,155,000 4,851,603 Validate 700,000 492,000 40,000 2,964,000 180,000 80,000 1,890 BONUS
Block Land Use Block Area Acreage FAR DU/AC Maximum Height No. of Stories Non Residential Residential No of Units Parking Spaces Grand Total sqft Block Land Use sqft Acres sqft sqft Light Industrial Manufacturing Warehousing Research and Development General
Office/General
Commercial/Reta
il
Retail Hospital Utilities Residential sqft per unit sqft sqft per space BONUS Light Industrial Manufacturing Warehousing Research and Development General
Office/Gener
al
Commercial/
Retail
Retail Hospital Utilities Residential
1,000 400
A Light Industrial Sub Area 1 441,000 10 3.0 155 8 926,000 - - - - 852,000 65,000 9,000 - - - 397,000 993 1,323,000 A Light Industrial Sub Area 1 709,362 55,714 9,000 B Light Industrial Sub Area 2 365,000 8 3.0 155 8 767,000 - 180,000 - - 575,000 - 12,000 - - - 328,000 820 1,095,000 B Light Industrial Sub Area 2 116,129 478,736 12,000C Light Industrial Sub Area 2 478,000 11 3.0 155 8 1,004,000 - 236,000 - - 753,000 - 15,000 - - - 430,000 1,075 1,434,000 C Light Industrial Sub Area 2 152,258 626,936 15,000 D Light Industrial Sub Area 2 454,000 10 3.0 155 8 953,000 - 224,000 - - 715,000 - 14,000 - - - 409,000 1,023 1,362,000 D Light Industrial Sub Area 2 144,516 595,298 14,000 E Light Industrial Sub Area 2 520,000 12 3.0 155 8 1,092,000 - 262,000 273,000 - 546,000 - 11,000 - - - 468,000 1,170 1,560,000 E Light Industrial Sub Area 2 169,032 189,177 454,591 11,000 F Light Industrial Sub Area 3 568,000 13 2.0 75 4 795,000 - 183,000 437,000 40,000 119,000 16,000 - - - - 341,000 853 1,136,000 F Light Industrial Sub Area 3 118,065 302,823 40,000 99,078 13,714 G Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 1 461,000 11 90 90 8 79,000 990,000 - - - - 69,000 10,000 - - 990,000 990 396,000 990 1,465,000 G Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 1 59,143 10,000 990 H Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 336,000 8 75 75, 35 6 60,000 600,000 - - - - 60,000 - - - 600,000 600 240,000 600 900,000 H Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 51,429 600 I Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 160,000 4 75 75, 35 6 9,000 300,000 - - - - - 9,000 - - 300,000 300 120,000 300 429,000 I Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 9,000 300 J Institutional 808,000 19 84,000 - - - - - - - - 84,000 - 84,000 J Institutional K Institutional 788,000 18 415,100 - - - - - - - 415,100 - - 415,100 K Institutional Total (Gross) 124 6,184,100 1,890,000 1,085,000 710,000 40,000 3,560,000 210,000 80,000 415,100 84,000 1,890,000 1,890 3,129,000 7,823 11,203,100 SUMMARY TOTAL (TAB 2) 700,000 492,000 40,000 2,964,000 180,000 80,000 1,890 Total (Net) 8,585,603 Validate 700,000 492,000 40,000 2,964,000 180,000 80,000 1,890 Note : Block Land Use
Allowable Maximum Heights do not take account of Mean Sea Level TRIP GEN Light Industrial Manufacturing Warehousing Research and Development General
Office/Gener
al
Commercial/
Retail
Retail Hospital Utilities Residential
Green Cells are assumptionsPink Cells are proposed FAR and Density A Light Industrial Sub Area 1 709,000 56,000 9,000 774,000 B Light Industrial Sub Area 2 116,000 479,000 12,000 607,000C Light Industrial Sub Area 2 152,000 627,000 15,000 794,000 D Light Industrial Sub Area 2 145,000 595,000 14,000 754,000 E Light Industrial Sub Area 2 169,000 189,000 455,000 11,000 824,000 F Light Industrial Sub Area 3 118,000 303,000 40,000 99,000 14,000 574,000 G Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 1 59,000 10,000 990 69,000 H Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 51,000 600 51,000
I Residential Mixed Use Sub Area 2 9,000 300 9,000
J Institutional
K Institutional
SUMMARY TOTAL (TAB 2) 700,000 492,000 40,000 2,964,000 180,000 80,000 1,890 Validate 700,000 492,000 40,000 2,964,000 180,000 80,000 1,890 BONUS (PROPORTIONS ONLY) ROUNDED - TOTAL BUILDOUT MATCHES LAND USE SUMMARY ON TAB 2 % of Total% of Total

PROPORTIONED LAND USES (NON-RESIDENTIAL ONLY) FROM SUMMARY TAB ASSIGNED TO BLOCKS BASED ON BASE/BONUS FROM THIS TAB

BASE BELOW- NOT USED
% of Total
ITE Land UsesITE Land Uses
Detailed Plan Development Yield These numbers assumes full redevelopment of the entire district including already approved projects such as 642 Quarry. This exceeds the City approved Project Description.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1706

BASE BONUS
Total Buildout (Gross) 7,469,100 11,203,100
Total Buildout (Net) 4,851,603 8,585,603
Only High High + Medium High + Medium + Low Only High High + Medium High + Medium + Low High 538,000 7% 863,000 8%
Medium 543,000 1,085,000Low 249,000 498,000
Total 1,330,000 - 2,446,000 -
Only High High + Medium High + Medium + Low Only High High + Medium High + Medium + Low High 198,000 4% 523,000 6%
Medium 388,000 930,000Low 186,000 435,000
Total 772,000 - 1,888,000 -
TOTAL BUILDOUT SUMMARY (SQ.FT.)
17%
22%
17%
22%
BONUS
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTION SUMMARY: GROSS (SQ.FT.)
Redevelopment
Probability
BASE
Percentage of Projected Total Buildout
Includes parcels that will require rezoning. Development yield is calculated using the NEASP Proposed Land Use and Zoning.

BONUS
Total NonResidential
(SQ.FT.)
Total Residential
(SQ.FT.)
Percentage of Projected Total Buildout
12%
16%
BASE
Percentage of Projected Total Buildout
NET (SQ.FT)
Pipeline Projects Development Yield
Total NonResidential
(SQ.FT.)
Total Residential
(SQ.FT.)
Redevelopment
Probability
Total NonResidential
(SQ.FT.)
Total Residential
(SQ.FT.)
18%
14%
NOTES:

Includes parcels with projects that have been approved or are in the approval / pre-application process by the City. Development yield numbers received from the city. Includes parcels that developers have expressed interest in redeveloping, but don't have plans yet. Development yield is calculated using the NEASP Proposed Land Use and Zoning.

Total NonResidential
(SQ.FT.)
Total Residential
(SQ.FT.)
Percentage of Projected Total Buildout

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1707
BASE
Parcel Address Block Area Acreage Existing GSF FAR DU/AC Maximum Height No. of Stories Non Residential Residential No of Units Parking Spaces Grand Total sqft Net New sqft sqft Acres ft sqft sqft sqft per unit sqft sqft per spaces 1,000 400
1 200 Industrial Road 312,000 7 152,000 325,000 325,000 173,000 2 275 Industrial Road (PG&E) 808,000 19 84,000 52,000 52,000 (32,000) 3 Delta Star 192,000 4 104,000 161,000 161,000 57,000
4 591 Quarry Road/500 Bragato Road 303,000 7 128,000 1.5 75 4 318,000 137,000 343 455,000 327,000 5 495 Bragato Road (Honda) 88,000 2 27,000 1.0 75 4 62,000 26,000 65 88,000 61,000 Low 6 266 Industrial Road 166,000 4 63,000 1.5 75 4 174,000 75,000 188 249,000 186,000 Total (Gross) 1,869,000 43 558,000 1,092,000 238,000 595 1,330,000 Total (Net) 772,000
BONUS
Parcel Address Block Area Acreage Existing GSF FAR DU/AC Maximum Height No. of Stories Non Residential Residential No of Units Parking Spaces Grand Total sqft Net New sqft sqft Acres ft sqft sqft sqft per unit sqft sqft per spaces 1,000 400
1 200 Industrial Road 312,000 7 152,000 650,000 650,000 498,000 2 275 Industrial Road (PG&E) 808,000 19 84,000 52,000 52,000 (32,000) 3 Delta Star 192,000 4 104,000 161,000 161,000 57,000
4 591 Quarry Road/500 Bragato Road 303,000 7 128,000 3.0 155 8 636,000 273,000 683 909,000 781,000 5 495 Bragato Road (Honda) 88,000 2 27,000 2.0 75 4 123,000 53,000 133 176,000 149,000 Low 6 266 Industrial Road 166,000 4 63,000 3.0 155 8 349,000 149,000 373 498,000 435,000 Total (Gross) 1,869,000 43 558,000 1,971,000 - - 475,000 1,188 2,446,000 Total (Net) 1,888,000
HighHigh
Replacing 3 aged building with 3 new buildings for more efficient storage for PG&E materials, tools and equipment. Net new building area would be 52,241 SF.Replacing 3 aged building with 3 new buildings for more efficient storage for PG&E materials, tools and equipment. Net new building area would be 52,241 SF.

MediumMedium
Redevelopment
Probability Notes
Submitted a preapplication in 2022 for 595,000 SF of life science, 30,000 SF of industrial, and 25,000 SF for "Amenity" (local businesses) Submitted a letter in 2023 with regards to the NEASP and shared they have interest in these properties, probably commercial use (waiting to hear back from the developer to get more information) Slated for redevelopment but no further details Paul Alchimsiti supports rezoning to high-intensity commercial. Submitted a preapplication in 2022 for 595,000 SF of life science, 30,000 SF of industrial, and 25,000 SF for "Amenity" (local businesses) Submitted a letter in 2023 with regards to the NEASP and shared they have interest in these properties, probably commercial use (waiting to hear back from the developer to get more information) Slated for redevelopment but no further details Paul Alchimsiti supports rezoning to high-intensity commercial.

Notes Redevelopment Probability

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1708
Block Address APN Property Use ITE LU Code Preferred LU "Block" GSF Demo? Notes 380 Industrial Rd 046-054-390 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial H 14,743 Y 046-054-450 STORE 710- General Office Building H Appears to be big box converted to office use 70 Glenn Way 046-053-190 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 7,050 Y90 Glenn Way 046-053-210 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 11,792 Y 120 Glenn Way 046-053-350 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 13,288 Y 620 Taylor Way 046-053-290 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 11,726 Y 100 Glenn Way 046-053-340 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 12,056 Y 80 Glenn Way 046-053-160 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 11,792 Y 565 Bragato Rd 046-053-180 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 9,490 Y 285 Old County Rd 046-053-330 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 14,784 Y295 Old County Rd 046-053-270 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 14,740 Y299 Old County Rd 046-053-280 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 25,213 Y 611 Taylor Way 046-054-130 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial I 18,670 Y 305 Old County Rd 046-054-080 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial I 6,384 Y 595 Taylor Way 046-054-280 WAREHOUSE 150- Warehousing I 29,214 Y 585 Taylor Way 046-054-300 WAREHOUSE 150- Warehousing I 12,992 Y 320 Industrial Rd 046-054-210 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial H 14,942 Y300 Industrial Rd 046-054-190 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial H 14,370 Y 541 Taylor Way 046-054-220 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial H 3,600 Y 046-054-310 110 - General Light Industrial H046-054-010 110 - General Light Industrial H 35 585 BRAGATO RD 046-053-200 WAREHOUSE 150- Warehousing G 12,600 Y36 235 OLD COUNTY RD 046-053-170 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial G 7,000 Y 37 239 OLD COUNTY RD 046-053-080 AUTO SALES / REPAIR 110 - General Light Industrial G 1,931 Y Google maps estimate; appears to be light industrial38 243 OLD COUNTY RD 046-053-070 SERVICE SHOP 110 - General Light Industrial G 2,465 Y Google maps estimate; light industrial 39 247 OLD COUNTY RD 046-053-060 WAREHOUSE 150- Warehousing G 5,592 Y 40 251 OLD COUNTY RD 046-053-310 PROFESSIONAL BLDG. 640 - Animal Hospital/Veterinary Clinic G 4,206 Y Dog care 41 255 OLD COUNTY RD 046-053-320 PROFESSIONAL BLDG. 640 - Animal Hospital/Veterinary Clinic G 5,462 Y Vet42 601 TAYLOR WAY 046-054-120 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial I 22,589 Y43 301 OLD COUNTY RD 046-054-100 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial I 13,750 Y44 390 INDUSTRIAL RD 046-054-020 LIGHT MFG 110 - General Light Industrial H 12,595 Y A 260,216
B 223,321
C 214,998
D 534,120
E 230,223F 238,630
G 171,187H 142,593
I 103,599
J 83,510
K 415,100
2,617,497
840- Automobile Sales (New) 1% 26,915150- Warehousing 9% 233,544110 - General Light Industrial 48% 1,263,613760 - Research & Development Center 15% 400,277
710- General Office Building 2% 57,920140- Manufacturing 4% 104,397712- Small Office Building 0% 8,678715- Single Tenant Office Building 3% 83,510610- Hospital 16% 415,100942 - Automobile Care Center 1% 13,875640 - Animal Hospital/Veterinary Clinic 0% 9,668 2,617,497
2,617,497
17 400 Industrial Rd LIGHT MFG 12,826
NEASP Existing Square Footage (Parcel)
NEASP Existing Square Footage (Block)
NEASP Existing Square Footage (ITE Land Use)

LIGHT MFG
Total Existing SQFT.
7 360 Industrial Rd 44,542 Y
YY
9 10
551 Taylor Way 24,975
1~ \~~=:afi-=~~1111bd:d l ~lJ' .. crJc _ ~oDft Q C
~fj
I
I
I
I
I
.;;
1:i
15 I
i
I
i
I
i
L_ _____ _1L--11;--=---r-:-i
§ •
·~ 1~=F'Fr~~
lld.'=-'.>='<;ni'=
r--i rr-..__ _____ 1=- 0 ---.
----------~L ll
~ 1'
- -
© !__ j \
-- \ L !
t !

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1709
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2 1
2 2
6 4
1 6
24 14
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 0.0% 0.25
TOTAL 4.5% 0.98
TH RT
WB 4.0% 0.91
NB 6.9% 0.89
Peak Hour: 7:30 AM 8:30 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 3.8% 0.88

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Industrial Rd Driveway 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 53 58 2 0 23
0 0 0 176 0
7:15 AM 0 0 44 21
7:00 AM 0 0 28 13 0 44 57 1 0 27 1 5 0
0 0 0 274 0
7:45 AM 0 0 71 26
3 0 34 0 4 0
208 0
7:30 AM 0 0 62 31 0 59 81
1 4 0 1 0 1
278 936
8:00 AM 0 0 55 20 0 46 79
0 48 79 0 0 48 0 6 0 0 0 0
0 46 73 0 0 47
0 0 0 262 1,022
8:15 AM 0 0 76 29
5 0 51 0 6 0
0 0 0 260 1,079
8:45 AM 0 1 60 30
1 0 34 2 8 0
279 1,093
8:30 AM 0 0 81 31 0 38 65
1 6 0 0 0 1
0 42 73 1 0 38 0 9 0 0 0 0 254 1,055
Count Total 0 1 477 201 0 376 565 1 0 2 1,991 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 264
13 0 302 5 48 0
14 0 0 10 0 4 0 0 0 0 49 0
1 1,093 0
HV 0 0 9 5 0 7
106 0 199 312 8 0 180 1 22 0 0 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - - 3% 5% - 4% 4% 0% - 6% 0% 18% - - - 0% 4%
2 0
7:15 AM 2 5 3 0 10 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 3 0 3 0 6 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 6 4 1 0 11
0 0 1 0 1 0
0 7:30 AM 4 5 6 0 15 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 3
8:15 AM 2 7 3 0 12 0 0
0 0 0 0 3 0
1 0 0
8:00 AM 2 5 4 0 11 0
1 0 0 0 1 1
8:45 AM 4 3 2 0 9
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 8:30 AM 1 8 5 0 14 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 2
8 5
Peak Hour 14 21 14 0 49 1 0
Count Total 24 37 27 0 88 1 0 0 0 1 10 1
0 0 1 7 1 3 3
1 0
0 0
00 00
0 0
0 0
3 3
1 7
N
Industrial Rd
Harbor Blvd
Harbor Blvd
Industrial Rd
Harbor Blvd
Driveway
TEV: 1,093
PHF: 0.98
1 0
0 1
9 0
8 312
199
519
286 0
22 1
180
305
203
0 106
264
0 370
493
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
E
::,
..J
~ .,J • l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
J ,_
J 1

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1710
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Industrial Rd Driveway 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 6 0
7:15 AM 0 0 2 0
0 0 3 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
10 0
7:30 AM 0 0 3 1 0 2 3
0 3 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 15 0
7:45 AM 0 0 3 3
0 0 5 0 1 0
0 0 0 11 47
8:15 AM 0 0 2 0
0 0 4 0 0 0
11 42
8:00 AM 0 0 1 1 0 1 4
0 1 0 0 0 0
12 49
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 3 5
0 2 5 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 1 2 0 0 1
0 0 0 14 48
8:45 AM 0 0 4 0
0 0 4 0 1 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 9 46
0 0 0 88 0
Peak Hour 0 0 9 5
Count Total 0 0 19 5 0 14 23 0 0 21 0 6 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
49 0
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Industrial Rd Driveway 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 7 14 0 0 10 0 4 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
1 8:00 AM
0 0 0 1
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
1 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 1
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
I ,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1711
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
5 9
3 15
4 7
4 2
49 17
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 5.5% 0.80
TOTAL 4.2% 0.86
TH RT
WB 6.0% 0.90
NB 6.2% 0.93
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.6% 0.81

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min Total

UT LT TH RT
0 11 31 5 0 8
5 5 1 139 0
7:15 AM 0 8 54 10
7:00 AM 0 4 31 4 0 15 27 7 0 10 25 5 0
7 15 3 261 0
7:45 AM 0 8 91 16
15 0 13 27 12 0
201 0
7:30 AM 0 9 82 16 0 28 34
34 10 0 7 21 2
289 890
8:00 AM 0 24 61 21 0 21 69
0 15 58 15 0 20 30 13 0 6 14 3
0 24 59 20 0 19
7 24 4 303 1,054
8:15 AM 0 23 111 25
17 0 20 26 9 0
10 20 5 313 1,279
8:45 AM 0 15 84 14
10 0 15 31 15 0
374 1,227
8:30 AM 0 19 92 24 0 16 56
37 5 0 10 33 8
0 17 60 15 0 14 26 9 0 11 25 6 296 1,286
Count Total 0 110 606 130 0 147 394 63 157 32 2,176 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 81 348
104 0 119 236 78 0
7 4 0 1 11 2 0 1 7 1 54 0
23 1,286 0
HV 0 1 5 2 0 12
84 0 78 244 62 0 68 120 38 0 38 102
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 1% 1% 2% - 15% 3% 6% - 1% 9% 5% - 3% 7% 4% 4%
1 2
7:15 AM 1 5 13 1 20 0 0
0 2 0 2 2 0
West North South
7:00 AM 0 4 14 1 19 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 2 5 6 0 13
0 0 3 0 0 0
3 7:30 AM 2 8 5 0 15 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 4 2
1 0
8:15 AM 3 8 6 3 20 0 0
0 4 1 5 2 1
5 4 3
8:00 AM 1 6 3 2 12 0
0 0 1 1 2 3
8:45 AM 2 4 2 3 11
1 2 1 0 3 0
1 8:30 AM 2 5 3 1 11 0 0 1
1 0 1 2 2 2
1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
14 9
Peak Hour 8 23 14 9 54 1 0
Count Total 13 45 52 11 121 1 0 9 3 13 14 12
6 2 9 6 3 7 1
0 0
1 0
20 06
0 0
0 0
7 1
3 6
N
Old Country Rd
Harbor Blvd
Harbor Blvd
Old Country
Rd
Harbor BlvdOld Country
Rd
TEV: 1,286
PHF: 0.86
23 102
38 163
263
0 62
244
78 384
424
0 38
120
68 264
226
0 84
348
81 513
335
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
~ .,J •
E
::,
..J
l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
I ,_
,_
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1712
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 1 0 19 0
7:15 AM 0 0 1 0
1 0 1 11 2 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
20 0
7:30 AM 0 0 2 0 0 1 3
0 0 4 1 0 1 11 1 0 0 1 0
0 0 3 2 0 1
0 0 0 15 0
7:45 AM 0 0 2 0
4 0 1 2 2 0
0 2 0 12 60
8:15 AM 0 0 2 1
1 0 0 2 1 0
13 67
8:00 AM 0 0 1 0 0 2 3
2 3 0 0 0 0
20 60
8:30 AM 0 1 0 1 0 3 2
0 5 1 2 0 1 5 0 0 0 3 0
0 2 1 1 0 0
0 0 1 11 56
8:45 AM 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 2 1 0
2 0 0 1 2 0 11 54
1 9 1 121 0
Peak Hour 0 1 5 2
Count Total 0 1 10 2 0 14 19 12 0 5 37 10 0
7:00 AM 2 0
RT
54 0
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 12 7 4 0 1 11 2 0 1 7 1

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
4 8:00 AM
0 1 0 2
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
2 10
8:45 AM
0 1 0 0
8 8:30 AM
0 1 0 0 0 0 1
5 7
8:15 AM
0 4 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 3
0 LT TH
0 6 0 0 2 0 9
0 9 0 0 13 0
1 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 1 0
0 1 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
,_
I ,_
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1713
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2 2
1 0
0 1
0 1
7 2
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 4.8% 0.88
TOTAL 4.9% 0.97
TH RT
WB 5.0% 0.90
NB 4.3% 0.86
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 4.9% 0.98

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St 101 On Ramps 101 Off Ramps 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 0 226 158 0 0
0 0 99 586 0
7:15 AM 0 0 158 70
7:00 AM 0 0 162 49 0 0 150 102 0 0 0 24 0
0 0 146 839 0
7:45 AM 0 0 229 88
124 0 0 0 49 0
767 0
7:30 AM 0 0 222 88 0 0 210
0 42 0 0 0 113
893 3,085
8:00 AM 0 0 250 95 0 0 244
0 0 241 127 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 148
0 0 206 147 0 0
0 0 141 920 3,419
8:15 AM 0 0 261 80
140 0 0 0 50 0
0 0 143 954 3,704
8:45 AM 0 0 272 80
151 0 0 0 77 0
937 3,589
8:30 AM 0 0 275 63 0 0 245
0 81 0 0 0 162
0 0 182 114 0 0 0 72 0 0 0 178 898 3,709
Count Total 0 0 1,829 613 0 0 1,704 0 0 1,130 6,794 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 1,058
1,063 0 0 0 455 0
38 34 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 30 181 0
624 3,709 0
HV 0 0 48 19 0 0
318 0 0 877 552 0 0 0 280 0 0 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - - 5% 6% - - 4% 6% - - - 4% - - - 5% 5%
0 2
7:15 AM 15 15 3 8 41 0 1
0 0 0 1 0 0
West North South
7:00 AM 9 16 0 0 25 1
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 16 23 2 7 48
0 1 0 0 0 1
2 7:30 AM 17 18 6 5 46 1 0 0
0 1 2 0 0 0
0 0
8:15 AM 12 13 4 7 36 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
8:00 AM 27 26 1 9 63 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 17 18 4 8 47
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 8:30 AM 11 15 3 6 35 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 7
Peak Hour 67 72 12 30 181 0 0
Count Total 124 144 23 50 341 2 1 0 1 4 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0
0 0
00 00
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 0
N
101 On Ramps
Holly St
Holly St
101 On
Ramps
Holly St101 Off Ramps
TEV: 3,709
PHF: 0.97
624
0 0
624
552
0 552
877
0 1,429
1,338 0
280
0 0
318
280
0 318
1,058
0 1,376
1,501
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
E
::,
..J
~ .,J • l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
L__ ,_
L__ I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1714
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St 101 On Ramps 101 Off Ramps 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 25 0
7:15 AM 0 0 13 2
10 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 6 3 0 0 6

UT LT TH RT UT LT
41 0
7:30 AM 0 0 12 5 0 0 9
0 0 11 4 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 8
0 0 16 7 0 0
0 0 5 46 0
7:45 AM 0 0 14 2
9 0 0 0 6 0
0 0 9 63 198
8:15 AM 0 0 10 2
13 0 0 0 1 0
48 160
8:00 AM 0 0 15 12 0 0 13
0 2 0 0 0 7
36 193
8:30 AM 0 0 11 0 0 0 10
0 0 7 6 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 7
0 0 8 10 0 0
0 0 6 35 182
8:45 AM 0 0 12 5
5 0 0 0 3 0
0 4 0 0 0 8 47 181
0 0 50 341 0
Peak Hour 0 0 48 19
Count Total 0 0 93 31 0 0 80 64 0 0 0 23 0
7:00 AM 1 0
RT
181 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St 101 On Ramps 101 Off Ramps 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 38 34 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 30

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
4 8:00 AM
0 0 0 0
1 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
1 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 4 0
0 0
0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
1 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 1 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
L_ ,_
L_ ,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1715
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
3 3
0 0
1 1
1 1
10 4
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 9.1% 0.92
TOTAL 4.7% 1.00
TH RT
WB 4.5% 0.98
NB 8.1% 0.85
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 2.0% 0.92

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

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

UT LT TH RT
0 113 124 102 0 6
27 8 2 492 0
7:15 AM 0 17 133 6
7:00 AM 0 8 112 3 1 81 65 100 0 4 11 70 0
39 17 2 717 0
7:45 AM 0 11 196 11
116 0 3 22 93 0
625 0
7:30 AM 0 9 174 1 0 95 146
13 64 0 29 12 6
788 2,622
8:00 AM 0 17 214 3 0 115 149
0 107 161 119 0 4 27 78 0 46 25 3
0 118 154 103 0 6
46 16 11 803 2,933
8:15 AM 0 19 205 3
117 0 6 19 90 0
29 24 6 802 3,192
8:45 AM 0 15 193 13
86 0 2 23 80 0
799 3,107
8:30 AM 0 15 235 6 0 129 167
16 97 0 39 32 7
0 120 163 81 0 7 29 105 0 50 18 9 803 3,207
Count Total 0 111 1,462 46 1 878 1,129 305 152 46 5,829 0 Peak
Hour
All 0 66 847
824 0 38 160 677 0
27 26 0 2 8 29 0 21 4 1 151 0
33 3,207 0
HV 0 3 15 1 0 14
25 0 482 633 387 0 21 87 372 0 164 90
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 5% 2% 4% - 3% 4% 7% - 10% 9% 8% - 13% 4% 3% 5%
0 2
7:15 AM 4 21 11 7 43 0 1
0 1 0 1 0 1
West North South
7:00 AM 5 5 4 3 17 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 6 23 9 9 47
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 7:30 AM 4 13 9 5 31 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 1 1
0 0
8:15 AM 3 15 7 7 32 0 0
1 0 1 2 0 1
0 0 0
8:00 AM 5 22 15 11 53 0
0 0 1 1 2 0
8:45 AM 6 14 6 7 33
0 0 0 1 0 0
1 8:30 AM 5 16 11 1 33 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
1 5
Peak Hour 19 67 39 26 151 0 1
Count Total 38 129 72 50 289 0 2 2 3 7 0 4
0 2 3 0 2 0 2
0 0
0 0
20 00
0 1
0 0
0 2
2 0
N
Industrial Rd
Holly St
Holly St
Industrial Rd
Holly St Industrial Rd
TEV: 3,207
PHF: 1
33 90
164
287
540
0 387
633
482
1,502
1,383 0
372
21 87
597
480
0 25
847
66 938
687
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
E
::,
..J
~ .,J • l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
·1 ,_
·1 l

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1716
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
3 0 0 17 0
7:15 AM 0 2 2 0
4 0 1 1 2 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 4 1 0 0 1

UT LT TH RT UT LT
43 0
7:30 AM 0 0 4 0 0 5 4
0 10 3 8 0 0 1 10 0 4 3 0
0 6 10 7 0 0
5 0 0 31 0
7:45 AM 0 0 4 2
4 0 0 1 8 0
9 1 1 53 174
8:15 AM 0 1 2 0
11 0 1 4 10 0
47 138
8:00 AM 0 0 5 0 0 5 6
2 7 0 6 3 0
32 163
8:30 AM 0 2 2 1 0 6 6
0 1 7 7 0 0 1 6 0 5 2 0
0 2 8 4 0 1
1 0 0 33 165
8:45 AM 0 0 6 0
4 0 0 3 8 0
0 5 0 6 1 0 33 151
39 10 1 289 0
Peak Hour 0 3 15 1
Count Total 0 5 29 4 0 35 45 49 0 3 13 56 0
7:00 AM 1 0
RT
151 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 14 27 26 0 2 8 29 0 21 4 1

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
4 8:00 AM
0 1 0 2
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
0 0 0
0 4
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
4 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 5
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 3
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 2 0 3
0 1 1 0 7 0
0 0
0 1
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 1
0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 1
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 1 0
0 1 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] I ,-
I ,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1717
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
9 7
5 6
6 6
4 7
50 23
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 6.5% 0.82
TOTAL 3.6% 0.98
TH RT
WB 4.6% 0.95
NB 4.4% 0.99
Peak Hour: 8:00 AM 9:00 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.7% 0.93

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 10 115 3 0 12
6 9 19 261 0
7:15 AM 0 15 106 10
7:00 AM 0 11 97 9 0 6 63 0 0 10 19 12 0
18 23 34 451 0
7:45 AM 0 29 167 16
5 0 13 36 24 0
359 0
7:30 AM 0 16 141 11 0 6 124
26 20 0 13 18 11
554 1,625
8:00 AM 0 13 189 21 0 5 156
0 7 153 8 0 23 38 36 0 15 29 33
0 7 139 9 0 15
9 33 44 553 1,917
8:15 AM 0 21 185 19
3 0 21 30 29 0
12 31 30 569 2,234
8:45 AM 0 21 180 37
2 0 9 31 38 0
558 2,116
8:30 AM 0 26 202 24 0 13 151
32 33 0 19 43 36
0 11 160 3 0 11 37 30 0 14 30 21 555 2,235
Count Total 0 152 1,267 147 0 65 1,061 106 216 228 3,860 0 Peak
Hour
All 0 81 756
33 0 114 249 222 0
22 4 0 2 7 5 0 2 13 6 81 0
131 2,235 0
HV 0 2 11 3 0 4
101 0 36 606 17 0 56 130 130 0 54 137
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 2% 1% 3% - 11% 4% 24% - 4% 5% 4% - 4% 9% 5% 4%
3 0
7:15 AM 3 3 2 1 9 0 0
0 2 0 2 6 0
West North South
7:00 AM 5 1 2 2 10 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 3 9 2 2 16
1 2 4 0 0 1
2 7:30 AM 3 3 3 4 13 0 0 1
0 0 0 4 0 1
1 1
8:15 AM 4 6 3 6 19 0 0
0 2 2 5 4 0
0 0 1
8:00 AM 4 8 1 3 16 1
0 0 1 1 2 5
8:45 AM 6 10 6 7 29
1 3 3 0 0 1
1 8:30 AM 2 6 4 5 17 0 0 2
2 2 4 5 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 4 0 2 1
7 8
Peak Hour 16 30 14 21 81 2 0
Count Total 30 46 23 30 129 2 0 10 7 19 35 0
6 5 13 16 0 3 4
1 0
1 0
50 06
0 0
0 0
3 4
0 16
N
Old Country Rd
Holly St
Holly St
Old Country
Rd
Holly StOld Country Rd
TEV: 2,235
PHF: 0.98
131
137
54 322
228
0 17
606
36 659
940 0
130
130
56 274
316
0 101
756
81 938
793
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
E
::,
..J
~ .,J • l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
L__ ,_
L__ I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1718
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 1 1 10 0
7:15 AM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 5 0 0 0 1

UT LT TH RT UT LT
9 0
7:30 AM 0 0 3 0 0 0 3
0 1 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0
0 2 6 1 0 0
0 2 2 13 0
7:45 AM 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 3 0 0
0 2 1 16 54
8:15 AM 0 1 2 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
16 48
8:00 AM 0 0 4 0 0 0 8
1 1 0 1 1 0
19 64
8:30 AM 0 1 1 0 0 1 4
0 0 5 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 3 3
0 3 5 2 0 0
2 2 1 17 68
8:45 AM 0 0 4 2
1 0 1 2 1 0
4 2 0 0 6 1 29 81
3 18 9 129 0
Peak Hour 0 2 11 3
Count Total 0 2 25 3 0 7 34 5 0 2 14 7 0
7:00 AM 2 0
RT
81 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 4 22 4 0 2 7 5 0 2 13 6

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
6 8:00 AM
0 1 0 2
2 0
7:45 AM
0 1 0 0
0 7:30 AM
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
3 14
8:45 AM
0 2 0 0
13 8:30 AM
0 2 0 0 2 0 4
5 9
8:15 AM
0 2 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 13
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 7
0 LT TH
0 6 0 0 5 0 13
0 10 0 0 19 0
1 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0
0 1 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
1 0
0 1 0
0 2 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
L_ ,_
L_ ,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1719
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
3 2
2 0
1 3
0 7
18 6
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 4.4% 0.83
TOTAL 4.7% 0.97
TH RT
WB 6.7% 0.75
NB 4.7% 0.90
Peak Hour: 7:30 AM 8:30 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 6.9% 0.60

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Quarry Rd Quarry Rd Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 1 0 0 0 5
9 41 6 106 0
7:15 AM 0 3 0 4
7:00 AM 0 0 1 2 0 5 0 8 0 3 25 6 0
11 63 15 145 0
7:45 AM 0 5 1 5
1 0 3 43 7 0
121 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 1 0
26 6 0 11 47 18
141 513
8:00 AM 0 2 1 2 0 2 0
0 3 0 0 0 2 51 2 0 6 55 11
0 3 0 2 0 10
9 44 11 139 546
8:15 AM 0 5 0 7
3 0 5 54 6 0
6 55 7 132 559
8:45 AM 0 4 0 4
0 0 6 43 7 0
147 572
8:30 AM 0 0 0 4 0 3 1
46 4 0 10 55 5
0 0 0 3 0 4 43 6 0 13 50 9 136 554
Count Total 0 19 3 29 0 18 1 75 410 82 1,067 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 12 2
17 0 38 331 44 0
0 1 0 0 11 0 0 0 12 1 27 0
42 572 0
HV 0 2 0 0 0 0
15 0 9 0 6 0 20 194 19 0 36 217
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 17% 0% 0% - 0% - 17% - 0% 6% 0% - 0% 6% 2% 5%
0 1
7:15 AM 0 0 3 5 8 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
West North South
7:00 AM 0 0 4 0 4 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 1 0 0 4 5
0 0 2 0 0 0
1 7:30 AM 0 1 4 5 10 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0
8:15 AM 1 0 3 2 6 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 4 2 6 0
0 0 0 1 1 0
8:45 AM 2 0 2 1 5
1 1 0 0 0 0
0 8:30 AM 0 0 6 4 10 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 3
2 5
Peak Hour 2 1 11 13 27 0 0
Count Total 4 1 26 23 54 0 0 0 2 2 8 3
0 1 1 5 1 0 0
0 0
0 0
01 00
0 0
0 0
0 0
1 5
N
Industrial Rd
Quarry Rd
Quarry Rd
Industrial Rd
Quarry Rd
Industrial Rd
TEV: 572
PHF: 0.97
42 217
36 295
212
0 6
0 9
15 57 0
19 194
20 241
233
0 15
2 12
29 62
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
E
::,
..J
~ .,J • l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
J ,_
J 1

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1720
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Quarry Rd Quarry Rd Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 4 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
8 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 2
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 4 1 10 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 0
1 0 0 4 0 0
0 2 0 6 29
8:15 AM 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 4 0 0
5 27
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 4 0
6 27
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 4 0 10 27
8:45 AM 0 0 0 2
0 0 1 5 0 0
2 0 0 0 1 0 5 27
0 20 3 54 0
Peak Hour 0 2 0 0
Count Total 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 1 24 1 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
27 0
Interval
Start
Quarry Rd Quarry Rd Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 1 0 0 11 0 0 0 12 1

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
1 8:00 AM
0 0 0 1
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
1 2
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
1 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Peak Hour
Count Total 1 1
0 LT TH
0 0 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 2 0
1 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
1 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
I ,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1721
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2 0
3 0
0 0
3 0
8 3
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 5.9% 0.97
TOTAL 6.0% 0.97
TH RT
WB 0.0% 0.25
NB 5.6% 0.90
Peak Hour: 7:30 AM 8:30 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 8.6% 0.91

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Taylor Way Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 0 0 0 0 23
2 33 10 130 0
7:15 AM 0 2 0 13
7:00 AM 0 1 1 9 0 0 0 0 1 18 52 3 0
1 55 13 163 0
7:45 AM 0 1 0 12
0 0 20 58 2 0
135 0
7:30 AM 0 1 0 13 0 0 0
49 7 0 1 30 10
182 610
8:00 AM 0 1 0 15 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 23 75 0 0 0 56 14
0 0 0 0 2 22
0 54 8 182 662
8:15 AM 0 0 0 15
0 1 16 86 1 0
0 58 9 156 696
8:45 AM 1 3 0 8
0 1 14 57 1 0
176 703
8:30 AM 0 4 0 12 0 0 0
65 2 0 0 60 10
0 0 0 0 2 18 58 0 0 0 51 12 153 667
Count Total 1 13 1 97 0 0 0 4 397 86 1,277 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 3 0
1 7 154 500 16 0
0 0 0 6 15 0 0 0 13 3 42 0
45 703 0
HV 0 0 0 5 0 0
55 0 0 0 1 3 81 284 5 0 1 225
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 0% - 9% - - - 0% 0% 7% 5% 0% - 0% 6% 7% 6%
0 0
7:15 AM 3 0 6 6 15 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
West North South
7:00 AM 1 0 2 3 6 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 2 0 2 5 9
0 0 1 2 0 0
0 7:30 AM 1 0 6 4 11 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
8:15 AM 1 0 5 4 10 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
8:00 AM 1 0 8 3 12 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:45 AM 3 0 3 5 11
0 0 2 1 0 0
0 8:30 AM 2 0 6 4 12 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
Peak Hour 5 0 21 16 42 1 0
Count Total 14 0 38 34 86 1 0 0 0 1 3 5
0 0 1 1 2 0 0
0 0
1 0
00 00
0 0
0 0
0 0
2 1
N
Industrial Rd
Taylor Way
Driveway
Industrial Rd
Taylor Way Industrial Rd
TEV: 703
PHF: 0.97
45 225
1 271
288
0 1
0 0
1 6 0
5 284
81 283
373
3 55
0 3
58 126
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
~ .,J •
E
::,
..J
l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
I ,_
,_
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1722
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Taylor Way Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 2 1 6 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 3
0 0 0 2 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
15 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 0 0 6 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 3 1 11 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 2
0 0 2 4 0 0
0 3 0 12 47
8:15 AM 0 0 0 1
0 0 2 6 0 0
9 41
8:00 AM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 5 0
10 42
8:30 AM 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 2 2
0 0 0 0 0 2
0 2 2 12 43
8:45 AM 1 2 0 0
0 0 0 6 0 0
1 0 0 0 5 0 11 45
0 28 6 86 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 5
Count Total 1 2 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 9 28 1 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
42 0
Interval
Start
Taylor Way Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 0 0 6 15 0 0 0 13 3

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 8:00 AM
0 0 0 0
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
1 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
8:15 AM
0 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
,-
I ,_
,-
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1723
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
5 2
4 0
0 1
4 0
16 5
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 8.4% 0.93
TOTAL 6.6% 0.95
TH RT
WB 0.0% 0.82
NB 7.1% 0.91
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.0% 0.38

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Driveway Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 14 0 2 0 0
5 38 0 115 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 69 0 0
18 46 0 168 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
6 0 1 71 11 0
141 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 1 14 0
76 3 0 9 37 0
190 614
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 21 0
0 17 0 4 0 0 97 3 0 14 55 0
0 18 0 5 0 2
17 52 0 199 698
8:15 AM 0 1 0 1
8 0 4 93 4 0
21 48 1 177 760
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
11 0 4 68 2 0
194 751
8:30 AM 0 0 1 0 0 21 0
85 5 0 14 63 0
0 34 0 9 0 5 67 3 0 13 46 0 177 747
Count Total 0 1 1 1 1 141 0 111 385 1 1,361 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 1 1
46 0 16 626 31 0
0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 24 0 50 0
1 760 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 77 0 28 0 10 343 14 0 66 218
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 0% 0% 0% - 0% - 0% - 0% 8% 0% - 0% 11% 0% 7%
1 0
7:15 AM 0 0 7 7 14 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 2
West North South
7:00 AM 0 0 2 3 5 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 0 4 7 11
0 0 2 2 0 0
0 7:30 AM 0 0 6 4 10 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0
0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 7 3 10 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 9 8 17 0
0 0 1 0 1 0
8:45 AM 0 0 4 6 10
0 0 2 0 2 0
0 8:30 AM 0 0 6 6 12 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0
Peak Hour 0 0 26 24 50 0 0
Count Total 0 0 45 44 89 0 0 1 0 1 8 5
1 0 1 3 0 2 0
0 0
0 0
00 00
1 0
0 0
2 0
0 3
N
Industrial Rd
Driveway
Driveway
Industrial Rd
Driveway Industrial Rd
TEV: 760
PHF: 0.95
1 218
66 285
372
0 28
0 77
105
81 0
14 343
10 296
367
0 1
1 1
3 11
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
~ .,J •
E
::,
..J
l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
I ,_
,_
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1724
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Driveway Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 3 0 5 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
14 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 7 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 4 0 10 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 6 0 0
0 8 0 17 52
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 9 0 0
11 40
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4 0 0 0 7 0
10 48
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 6 0 12 50
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 6 0 0
3 0 0 0 6 0 10 49
0 44 0 89 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 44 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0
RT
50 0
Interval
Start
Driveway Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 0 24 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
1 8:00 AM
0 0 1 1
0 0
7:45 AM
0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1
8:45 AM
0 0 0 0
1 8:30 AM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
8:15 AM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] I ,_
,-
- -
,_
I ,_
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1725
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1 0
0 1
1 3
1 0
7 6
WB 5.9% 0.77
NB 7.3% 0.79
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %: PHF
EB - -
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 7.0% 0.77
TOTAL 7.0% 0.88

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Quarry Rd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 2 0 5 0 0
1 20 0 78 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 3 0 0 41 7 0
6 49 0 115 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 43 5 0
99 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 6 0
45 7 0 7 33 0
128 420
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
0 4 0 2 0 0 61 13 0 8 40 0
0 2 0 8 0 0
10 51 0 119 461
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 44 7 0
8 48 0 119 511
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
7 2 0 43 7 0
145 507
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 4 0
42 14 0 12 67 0
0 1 0 4 0 0 37 9 0 5 50 0 106 489
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 57 358 0 909 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 0
40 2 0 356 69 0
0 2 0 0 16 1 0 2 15 0 36 0
0 511 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 12 0 22 2 0 190 41 0 38 206
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - - - - - 0% - 9% 0% - 8% 2% - 5% 7% - 7%
0 0
7:15 AM 0 1 12 1 14 0 0
0 2 0 2 1 0
West North South
7:00 AM 0 0 16 2 18 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 0 5 0 5
1 2 0 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM 0 2 5 2 9 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
8:15 AM 0 1 6 10 17 0 0
0 3 2 5 1 0
0 0 0
8:00 AM 0 0 5 4 9 0
0 0 0 2 2 1
8:45 AM 0 1 2 5 8
1 3 0 1 0 0
1 8:30 AM 0 1 1 3 5 0 0 2
2 1 3 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
Peak Hr 0 2 17 17 36 0 0
Count Total 0 6 52 27 85 0 0 10 7 17 5 1
7 6 13 4 1 0 1
N
Old Country Rd
Quarry Rd
Quarry Rd
Old Country Rd
Old Country Rd
TEV: 511
PHF: 0.88
206
38 244
212 0
22 12 34
79 0
41 190
220
233
2 60 7
0 0
0 0
1 1
4 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~
~
l i Jo
l l.U ...

L ~ : ~nn~nn->~
r ' c::':::i (
C: ~ ! r 0~ )
v v
n t ,.. , k·OO~OO~f r
l i 0~
,_
,_ I 1-
I l

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1726
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Quarry Rd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 2 0 18 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 15 1 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
14 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 12 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 9 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 4 1 0
1 3 0 9 37
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 5 0 0
5 46
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0
17 40
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 5 1 0 1 9 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 3 0 5 36
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
2 0 0 0 5 0 8 39
2 25 0 85 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 49 3 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
36 0
Interval
Start
0 Quarry Rd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound
0 0 0 2 0 0 16 1 0 2 15 0
0 0 2 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0
2 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 1 0
0 0 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0 5 9
6 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
0 0 0 2 0 2
3 13
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 1 0
0 3 12
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 11
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 7 0 17 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 0 6 0 13 0
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] I ,_
,-
,_
I ,_
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1727
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1 1
4 1
1 2
1 1
12 5
WB 8.0% 0.85
NB 4.9% 0.82
Peak Hour: 7:45 AM 8:45 AM
HV %: PHF
EB - -
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 7:00 AM 9:00 AM
SB 6.3% 0.78
TOTAL 6.0% 0.92

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Taylor Way Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 8 0 9 0 0
1 19 0 63 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 9 0 0 21 8 0
7 34 0 98 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
6 0 0 38 5 0
89 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0
30 13 0 4 25 0
130 380
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 15 0
0 11 0 11 0 0 61 8 0 3 36 0
0 8 0 12 0 0
5 40 0 121 438
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
11 0 0 39 11 0
4 51 0 126 518
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
16 0 0 38 13 0
141 490
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 4 0
44 11 0 6 60 0
0 8 0 11 0 0 35 12 0 6 40 0 112 500
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 67 0 36 305 0 880 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 0
85 0 0 306 81 0
0 1 0 0 8 3 0 1 12 0 31 0
0 518 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0 6
0 0 38 0 50 0 0 182 43 0 18 187
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - - - - - 16% - 2% - - 4% 7% - 6% 6% - 6%
0 0
7:15 AM 0 1 1 1 3 0 1
0 1 0 1 1 0
West North South
7:00 AM 0 0 2 2 4 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
7:45 AM 0 2 3 1 6
2 3 4 0 0 0
0 7:30 AM 0 2 3 1 6 0 0 1
0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0
8:15 AM 0 3 4 3 10 0 0
0 3 1 4 1 0
1 0 0
8:00 AM 0 1 0 3 4 0
0 0 1 2 3 0
8:45 AM 0 3 3 5 11
1 3 1 0 0 0
0 8:30 AM 0 1 4 6 11 0 0 2
2 3 5 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0
Peak Hr 0 7 11 13 31 0 0
Count Total 0 13 20 22 55 0 1 10 9 20 11 1
8 7 15 4 1 0 0
N
Old Country Rd
Taylor Way
Taylor Way
Old Country Rd
Old Country Rd
TEV: 518
PHF: 0.92
187
18 205
232 0
50 38 88
61 0
43 182
225
225
0 70 7
1 0
0 0
0 1
4 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ {
~
1 i Jo
1 l.U ...

L 1' DD DD ~ L
r ~
C: ~ , ~ i 0~
V V
n tr, 1-E □□□ , ,_ tr'
1 i 0~
1-
I 1-
I -
I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1728
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Taylor Way Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 2 0 4 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0
TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
3 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 2 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0
0 1 0 1 0 0
0 1 0 6 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 0 0
0 3 0 4 19
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
6 19
8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
2 1 0 0 1 0
10 26
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 3 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 3 0
0 2 0 1 0 0
1 5 0 11 31
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 2 0
2 1 0 1 4 0 11 36
2 20 0 55 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 2 0 0 15 5 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
31 0
Interval
Start
0 Taylor Way Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound
0 6 0 1 0 0 8 3 0 1 12 0
0 0 1 0
7:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
7:00 AM 0 0 0 0
3 0
7:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 1 0
0 1 0
7:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0
8:15 AM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 4 11
8 8:00 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
1 0 0 2 0 3
3 15
8:45 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 1 0
0 5 15
8:30 AM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 3
0 0 0 0 0 0 12
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 1 8 0 20 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 0 7 0 15 0
1 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] I ,_
,-
,_
I ,_
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1729
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
13 3
6 6
5 2
5 0
40 19
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.0% 0.66
TOTAL 1.7% 0.88
TH RT
WB 1.6% 0.89
NB 1.3% 0.78
Peak Hour: 4:30 PM 5:30 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 2.3% 0.90

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Industrial Rd Driveway 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 27 53 0 0 92
3 0 0 295 0
4:15 PM 0 0 54 21
4:00 PM 0 3 69 26 0 31 51 0 0 76 0 36 0
2 0 1 299 0
4:45 PM 0 1 60 15
0 0 77 1 32 0
282 0
4:30 PM 0 0 74 15 0 31 66
0 32 0 1 0 2
299 1,175
5:00 PM 0 1 71 24 0 15 57
0 30 74 1 0 106 1 8 0 2 0 1
0 21 78 1 0 148
5 0 3 313 1,193
5:15 PM 0 1 66 17
1 0 116 0 20 0
1 1 1 261 1,234
5:45 PM 0 0 48 11
0 0 97 0 13 0
361 1,272
5:30 PM 0 1 50 15 0 15 67
0 22 0 4 0 3
0 20 58 0 0 99 0 15 0 1 1 1 254 1,189
Count Total 0 7 492 144 0 190 504 19 2 12 2,364 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 3 271
3 0 811 2 178 0
1 0 0 5 0 2 0 0 0 0 21 0
8 1,272 0
HV 0 0 6 2 0 5
71 0 97 275 3 0 447 2 82 0 13 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 0% 2% 3% - 5% 0% 0% - 1% 0% 2% - 0% - 0% 2%
2 7
4:15 PM 2 3 5 0 10 0 1
0 0 0 0 4 0
West North South
4:00 PM 1 3 1 0 5 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 2 2 2 0 6
0 1 3 0 3 0
0 4:30 PM 2 3 2 0 7 0 0 1
0 0 1 2 0 1
5 0
5:15 PM 3 1 1 0 5 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 3
5:00 PM 1 0 2 0 3 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
5:45 PM 0 0 4 0 4
0 0 3 0 2 0
0 5:30 PM 2 2 3 0 7 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
17 10
Peak Hour 8 6 7 0 21 0 0
Count Total 13 14 20 0 47 0 1 1 0 2 13 0
1 0 1 4 0 12 3
0 0
0 0
00 10
0 0
0 0
12 3
0 4
N
Industrial Rd
Harbor Blvd
Harbor Blvd
Industrial Rd
Harbor Blvd
Driveway
TEV: 1,272
PHF: 0.88
8 0
13 21
8 0
3 275
97 375
366 0
82 2
447
168
531
0 71
271
3 345
730
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
E
::,
..J
~ .,J • l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
J ,_
J 1

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1730
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Industrial Rd Driveway 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 5 0
4:15 PM 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 3

UT LT TH RT UT LT
10 0
4:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 2 1
0 1 2 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 7 0
4:45 PM 0 0 1 1
0 0 1 0 1 0
0 0 0 3 26
5:15 PM 0 0 2 1
0 0 1 0 1 0
6 28
5:00 PM 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5 21
5:30 PM 0 0 1 1 0 1 1
0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 4
0 0 0 7 21
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 3 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 4 19
0 0 0 47 0
Peak Hour 0 0 6 2
Count Total 0 1 8 4 0 7 7 0 0 16 0 4 0
4:00 PM 0 0
RT
21 0
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Industrial Rd Driveway 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 5 1 0 0 5 0 2 0 0 0 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
2 5:00 PM
0 0 0 0
1 0
4:45 PM
1 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
1 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
1 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 0 0 0 2 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
I ,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1731
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
23 8
11 10
4 4
2 3
65 13
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.6% 0.90
TOTAL 0.8% 0.93
TH RT
WB 0.3% 0.82
NB 1.2% 0.94
Peak Hour: 5:00 PM 6:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.2% 0.92

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min Total

UT LT TH RT
0 21 87 23 0 25
8 25 8 374 0
4:15 PM 0 10 56 22
4:00 PM 0 24 67 17 0 20 50 26 0 34 71 24 0
8 18 9 367 0
4:45 PM 0 15 62 11
32 0 29 66 19 0
372 0
4:30 PM 0 10 66 12 0 19 79
61 23 0 6 32 6
365 1,478
5:00 PM 0 30 67 14 0 24 81
0 21 87 43 0 21 48 18 0 8 18 13
0 27 138 31 0 26
12 25 13 405 1,509
5:15 PM 0 24 62 26
39 0 30 45 25 0
10 24 13 405 1,616
5:45 PM 0 19 58 15
27 0 34 57 17 0
441 1,578
5:30 PM 0 28 48 21 0 19 107
52 22 0 4 21 8
0 14 102 31 0 29 54 15 0 6 32 11 386 1,637
Count Total 0 160 486 138 0 165 731 62 195 81 3,115 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 101 235
252 0 228 454 163 0
1 1 0 1 3 1 0 0 1 0 13 0
45 1,637 0
HV 0 3 2 0 0 0
76 0 84 428 128 0 119 208 79 0 32 102
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 3% 1% 0% - 0% 0% 1% - 1% 1% 1% - 0% 1% 0% 1%
6 5
4:15 PM 2 4 1 1 8 0 0
0 2 2 4 6 6
West North South
4:00 PM 4 2 1 0 7 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 2 3 2 0 7
2 4 0 4 2 5
2 4:30 PM 3 2 1 2 8 1 0 1
0 1 1 0 6 0
0 1
5:15 PM 1 0 1 0 2 0 0
0 2 0 3 0 3
5 3 1
5:00 PM 0 0 2 0 2 1
0 0 2 0 2 1
5:45 PM 0 1 0 0 1
2 3 1 0 1 0
0 5:30 PM 4 1 2 1 8 0 0 1
5 1 6 2 2 0
0 0 1 2 3 0 1 2 0
14 14
Peak Hour 5 2 5 1 13 1 0
Count Total 16 13 10 4 43 2 0 14 10 26 10 27
9 5 15 3 6 3 1
1 0
0 0
50 09
0 0
0 0
3 1
6 3
N
Old Country Rd
Harbor Blvd
Harbor Blvd
Old Country
Rd
Harbor BlvdOld Country
Rd
TEV: 1,637
PHF: 0.93
45 102
32 179
437
0 128
428
84 640
346 0
79 119
208
262
406
0 76
235
101
412
592
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
~ .,J •
E
::,
..J
l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
I ,_
,_
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1732
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 7 0
4:15 PM 0 0 1 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 2 2 0 2 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
8 0
4:30 PM 0 0 1 2 0 0 1
0 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
0 1 1 1 0 0
2 0 0 8 0
4:45 PM 0 0 2 0
1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 25
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 1 0
7 30
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
2 19
5:30 PM 0 3 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 1 0 8 19
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
1 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 13
3 1 0 43 0
Peak Hour 0 3 2 0
Count Total 0 3 8 5 0 3 6 4 0 2 5 3 0
4:00 PM 4 0
RT
13 0
Interval
Start
Harbor Blvd Harbor Blvd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 1 1 0 1 3 1 0 0 1 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
11 5:00 PM
0 2 0 2
4 0
4:45 PM
0 1 0 0
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
0 0
0 0 0
3 14
5:45 PM
0 1 0 0
15 5:30 PM
0 5 0 0 1 0 6
3 10
5:15 PM
0 2 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 15
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 10
0 LT TH
0 9 0 0 5 0 15
0 14 0 0 26 0
2 0
0 2
0 0 0 0
1 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0
0 0 0
0 1
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
2 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
,_
I ,_
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1733
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1 3
1 0
0 3
2 3
13 4
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 1.1% 0.83
TOTAL 1.5% 0.93
TH RT
WB 1.9% 0.87
NB 2.3% 0.95
Peak Hour: 4:30 PM 5:30 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.1% 0.95

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St 101 On Ramps 101 Off Ramps 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 0 208 132 0 0
0 0 141 979 0
4:15 PM 0 0 298 117
4:00 PM 0 0 329 123 0 0 176 159 0 0 0 51 0
0 0 132 963 0
4:45 PM 0 0 311 88
161 0 0 0 41 0
924 0
4:30 PM 0 0 372 90 0 0 167
0 50 0 0 0 119
893 3,759
5:00 PM 0 0 322 114 0 0 262
0 0 215 132 0 0 0 46 0 0 0 101
0 0 255 196 0 0
0 0 98 1,020 3,800
5:15 PM 0 0 361 89
178 0 0 0 46 0
0 0 100 871 3,836
5:45 PM 0 0 266 74
136 0 0 0 56 0
1,052 3,928
5:30 PM 0 0 267 67 0 0 245
0 42 0 0 0 109
0 0 228 148 0 0 0 48 0 0 0 101 865 3,808
Count Total 0 0 2,526 762 0 0 1,756 0 0 901 7,567 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 1,366
1,242 0 0 0 380 0
17 13 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5 59 0
440 3,928 0
HV 0 0 17 3 0 0
381 0 0 899 667 0 0 0 175 0 0 0
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - - 1% 1% - - 2% 2% - - - 2% - - - 1% 2%
0 1
4:15 PM 8 6 4 1 19 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
West North South
4:00 PM 6 12 0 3 21 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 3 12 2 1 18
0 1 0 0 0 1
3 4:30 PM 7 3 1 1 12 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0
5:15 PM 5 4 1 1 11 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0
5:00 PM 5 11 0 2 18 2
0 1 0 0 1 0
5:45 PM 1 7 2 2 12
0 0 0 0 0 2
3 5:30 PM 6 6 2 2 16 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 3
0 13
Peak Hour 20 30 4 5 59 3 1
Count Total 41 61 12 13 127 4 2 0 0 6 0 0
0 0 4 0 0 0 4
0 3
0 0
00 00
0 0
1 0
0 4
0 0
N
101 On Ramps
Holly St
Holly St
101 On
Ramps
Holly St101 Off Ramps
TEV: 3,928
PHF: 0.93
440
0 0
440
667
0 667
899
0 1,566
1,541 0
175
0 0
381
175
0 381
1,366
0 1,747
1,339
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
E
::,
..J
~ .,J • l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
J ,_
J 1

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1734
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St 101 On Ramps 101 Off Ramps 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 3 21 0
4:15 PM 0 0 5 3
8 0 0 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 4 2 0 0 4

UT LT TH RT UT LT
19 0
4:30 PM 0 0 7 0 0 0 2
0 0 5 1 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1
0 0 8 4 0 0
0 0 1 12 0
4:45 PM 0 0 3 0
1 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 2 18 67
5:15 PM 0 0 4 1
6 0 0 0 0 0
18 70
5:00 PM 0 0 3 2 0 0 5
0 2 0 0 0 1
11 59
5:30 PM 0 0 4 2 0 0 4
0 0 2 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
0 0 3 4 0 0
0 0 2 16 63
5:45 PM 0 0 1 0
2 0 0 0 2 0
0 2 0 0 0 2 12 57
0 0 13 127 0
Peak Hour 0 0 17 3
Count Total 0 0 31 10 0 0 33 28 0 0 0 12 0
4:00 PM 0 0
RT
59 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St 101 On Ramps 101 Off Ramps 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 17 13 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 5

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
3 5:00 PM
0 0 0 1
1 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0
0 1 0
0 3
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 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 4
0 0 0 0 6 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 1 0
1 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 2
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 3 0 0 1 0
0 4 0 0 2 0
0 0 0
0 1 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
I ,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1735
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
2 3
4 1
2 3
5 4
24 10
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 1.2% 0.76
TOTAL 1.4% 0.96
TH RT
WB 1.6% 0.90
NB 1.2% 0.95
Peak Hour: 4:30 PM 5:30 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 1.4% 0.85

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

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

UT LT TH RT
0 73 186 71 0 8
115 41 12 877 0
4:15 PM 0 10 173 11
4:00 PM 0 9 174 10 1 74 178 57 0 7 36 163 0
97 34 14 908 0
4:45 PM 0 6 159 8
59 0 9 46 202 0
878 0
4:30 PM 0 11 163 11 0 71 191
42 144 0 96 52 12
826 3,489
5:00 PM 0 8 166 6 0 78 184
0 81 144 72 0 18 47 181 0 63 33 14
1 85 199 90 0 15
101 44 22 938 3,550
5:15 PM 0 9 211 5
94 0 16 47 172 0
58 22 17 771 3,458
5:45 PM 0 9 152 8
83 0 11 33 136 0
923 3,595
5:30 PM 0 15 142 8 1 70 175
47 174 0 60 20 7
0 53 200 89 0 13 41 142 0 47 22 6 782 3,414
Count Total 0 77 1,340 67 3 585 1,457 637 268 104 6,903 0 Peak
Hour
All 0 34 699
615 0 97 339 1,314 0
6 13 0 0 4 8 0 5 1 0 51 0
57 3,595 0
HV 0 1 10 0 0 3
30 1 315 718 315 0 58 187 729 0 321 131
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 3% 1% 0% 0% 1% 1% 4% - 0% 2% 1% - 2% 1% 0% 1%
0 1
4:15 PM 4 4 8 2 18 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
West North South
4:00 PM 4 6 2 3 15 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 1 9 4 2 16
0 0 0 2 1 1
2 4:30 PM 6 4 3 2 15 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 2
5:15 PM 1 2 4 1 8 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0
5:00 PM 3 7 1 1 12 0
0 1 0 0 1 0
5:45 PM 1 7 4 0 12
0 0 0 3 0 2
2 5:30 PM 3 5 2 2 12 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3
2 13
Peak Hour 11 22 12 6 51 0 1
Count Total 23 44 28 13 108 0 1 0 0 1 0 9
0 0 1 0 3 2 5
0 0
0 0
00 00
0 0
1 0
2 5
3 0
N
Industrial Rd
Holly St
Holly St
Industrial Rd
Holly St Industrial Rd
TEV: 3,595
PHF: 0.96
57 131
321
509
536
0 315
718
315
1,349
1,750 1
187
729
58 476
974
0 30
699
34 763
833
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
~ .,J •
E
::,
..J
l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
I ,_
,_
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1736
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
2 1 0 15 0
4:15 PM 0 1 3 0
1 0 0 2 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 4 0 0 2 3

UT LT TH RT UT LT
18 0
4:30 PM 0 1 5 0 0 0 2
0 2 0 2 0 0 5 3 0 1 0 1
0 2 2 5 0 0
2 0 0 15 0
4:45 PM 0 0 1 0
2 0 0 1 2 0
1 0 0 12 61
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0
6 0 0 0 1 0
16 64
5:00 PM 0 0 3 0 0 1 0
2 2 0 1 1 0
8 51
5:30 PM 0 1 2 0 0 0 3
0 0 2 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 0
0 1 2 4 0 0
2 0 0 12 48
5:45 PM 0 1 0 0
2 0 0 0 2 0
3 1 0 0 0 0 12 44
10 2 1 108 0
Peak Hour 0 1 10 0
Count Total 0 4 19 0 0 8 14 22 0 0 14 14 0
4:00 PM 0 0
RT
51 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 3 6 13 0 0 4 8 0 5 1 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
1 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 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 1 0
0 1
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
1 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
,-
I ,_
,-
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1737
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
9 6
5 5
9 13
4 6
57 25
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 1.0% 0.84
TOTAL 1.5% 0.96
TH RT
WB 1.0% 0.98
NB 2.0% 0.94
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM 5:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 2.1% 0.88

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 8 189 6 0 21
9 31 36 597 0
4:15 PM 0 34 145 23
4:00 PM 0 22 172 14 0 10 193 1 0 26 58 25 0
8 37 46 565 0
4:45 PM 0 10 134 11
4 0 23 50 36 0
598 0
4:30 PM 0 21 131 13 0 1 195
63 33 0 11 32 33
530 2,290
5:00 PM 0 15 134 14 0 5 191
0 4 185 3 0 31 61 30 0 9 29 23
0 7 189 8 0 24
9 33 30 532 2,225
5:15 PM 0 19 166 22
5 0 21 44 31 0
3 34 41 541 2,182
5:45 PM 0 28 125 11
5 0 28 49 22 0
579 2,206
5:30 PM 0 22 123 17 0 8 189
51 21 0 10 29 33
0 6 184 4 0 19 53 25 0 5 27 29 516 2,168
Count Total 0 171 1,130 125 0 49 1,515 64 252 271 4,458 0 Peak
Hour
All 0 87 582
36 0 193 429 223 0
5 1 0 2 5 2 0 1 0 2 35 0
138 2,290 0
HV 0 3 11 1 0 2
61 0 23 762 14 0 101 232 124 0 37 129
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 3% 2% 2% - 9% 1% 7% - 2% 2% 2% - 3% 0% 1% 2%
3 0
4:15 PM 5 3 5 1 14 1 1
0 3 3 6 6 0
West North South
4:00 PM 5 2 1 0 8 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 1 1 0 0 2
1 2 3 0 0 2
1 4:30 PM 4 2 3 2 11 0 0 1
0 3 5 4 0 1
1 3
5:15 PM 1 2 0 0 3 0 1
1 2 0 3 5 0
0 1 2
5:00 PM 3 1 2 1 7 0
0 0 0 2 2 2
5:45 PM 0 2 0 0 2
1 3 1 0 0 3
1 5:30 PM 2 1 1 1 5 0 0 2
2 0 3 7 0 5
0 1 2 1 4 3 0 1 2
12 14
Peak Hour 15 8 9 3 35 1 1
Count Total 21 14 12 5 52 1 4 12 11 28 31 0
4 9 15 15 0 5 5
1 0
0 2
70 04
0 0
0 1
5 5
0 15
N
Old Country Rd
Holly St
Holly St
Old Country
Rd
Holly StOld Country Rd
TEV: 2,290
PHF: 0.96
138
129
37 304
333
0 14
762
23 799
743 0
101
232
124
213
457
0 61
582
87 730
1,001
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
~ .,J •
E
::,
..J
l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
I ,_
,_
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1738
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 8 0
4:15 PM 0 2 2 1
0 0 1 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 5 0 0 0 2

UT LT TH RT UT LT
14 0
4:30 PM 0 1 3 0 0 1 1
0 1 1 1 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 0 0
1 0 1 11 0
4:45 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 3 0 0
0 1 0 7 34
5:15 PM 0 0 1 0
0 0 1 1 0 0
2 35
5:00 PM 0 0 3 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
3 23
5:30 PM 0 0 2 0 0 1 0
0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 0 0
0 1 0 5 17
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 2 17
1 2 2 52 0
Peak Hour 0 3 11 1
Count Total 0 3 17 1 0 5 8 1 0 3 7 2 0
4:00 PM 6 0
RT
35 0
Interval
Start
Holly St Holly St Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 2 5 1 0 2 5 2 0 1 0 2

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
15 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 0 2 1 5
0 0
0 0 0
3 11
5:45 PM
0 2 0 0
10 5:30 PM
0 2 0 0 0 0 3
3 12
5:15 PM
0 2 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 13
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 9
0 LT TH
0 4 0 0 7 2 15
0 12 0 2 28 0
1 0
0 1
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 1
0 LT TH
0 0 0 3 0 0 2 1
0 0 0
0 0
1 0 0
1 0 0
0 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 1 3 0 1
0 0 0
0 0 1
1 0
0 2 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] I ,_
,-
,-
I ,_
,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1739
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
6 9
1 2
1 0
2 1
22 4
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 4.6% 0.88
TOTAL 2.2% 0.86
TH RT
WB 1.3% 0.88
NB 1.3% 0.75
Peak Hour: 4:30 PM 5:30 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 3.2% 0.83

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Quarry Rd Quarry Rd Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 6 3 29 0 11
1 46 15 215 0
4:15 PM 0 10 0 6
4:00 PM 0 15 0 15 0 9 7 26 0 13 68 0 0
3 37 10 177 0
4:45 PM 0 5 0 6
19 0 5 81 0 0
191 0
4:30 PM 0 7 0 12 0 2 1
77 0 0 0 36 13
169 752
5:00 PM 0 9 1 9 0 3 0
0 3 0 12 0 4 93 0 0 2 35 9
0 3 4 15 0 14
0 39 4 199 736
5:15 PM 0 9 0 5
15 0 11 108 0 0
1 25 10 175 766
5:45 PM 0 5 0 6
8 0 15 91 0 0
223 768
5:30 PM 0 9 0 11 0 5 0
137 0 0 1 24 11
0 3 0 7 0 15 96 0 0 1 16 14 163 760
Count Total 0 69 1 70 0 34 15 9 258 86 1,512 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 30 1
131 0 88 751 0 0
0 1 0 1 5 0 0 0 5 3 17 0
34 768 0
HV 0 1 0 1 0 0
32 0 11 5 61 0 34 419 0 0 6 135
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 3% 0% 3% - 0% 0% 2% - 3% 1% - - 0% 4% 9% 2%
0 5
4:15 PM 1 0 4 2 7 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
West North South
4:00 PM 0 0 1 0 1 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 2 5 7
0 1 0 1 0 0
7 4:30 PM 1 0 2 2 5 0 1 0
0 0 0 1 1 0
0 1
5:15 PM 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
5:00 PM 1 1 2 0 4 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
5:45 PM 0 0 5 0 5
0 0 0 0 0 2
0 5:30 PM 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 16
Peak Hour 2 1 6 8 17 0 1
Count Total 3 1 20 11 35 0 1 0 0 1 4 2
0 0 1 2 1 0 1
0 0
0 0
00 00
0 1
0 0
0 1
1 2
N
Industrial Rd
Quarry Rd
Quarry Rd
Industrial Rd
Quarry Rd
Industrial Rd
TEV: 768
PHF: 0.86
34 135
6 175
510
0 61
5 11
77 7
0 0
419
34 178
453
0 32
1 30
63 73
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
E
::,
..J
~ .,J • l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
J ,_
J 1

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1740
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Quarry Rd Quarry Rd Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 1 0
4:15 PM 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
7 0
4:30 PM 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 2 0 5 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 0
0 0 0 4 23
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 2 0 0
7 20
5:00 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 2 3
1 17
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 3
0 1 0 5 17
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0 5 15
0 8 3 35 0
Peak Hour 0 1 0 1
Count Total 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 5 15 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0
RT
17 0
Interval
Start
Quarry Rd Quarry Rd Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 1 0 1 5 0 0 0 5 3

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
1 5:00 PM
0 0 0 0
1 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
0 0 0
0 0
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
1 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
I ,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1741
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1 0
1 1
2 0
0 3
8 3
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 2.5% 0.72
TOTAL 2.5% 0.91
TH RT
WB - -
NB 2.4% 0.79
Peak Hour: 4:45 PM 5:45 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 2.4% 0.80

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Taylor Way Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 0 0 0 0 20
0 81 7 204 0
4:15 PM 0 3 0 18
4:00 PM 0 2 0 24 0 0 0 0 1 19 70 0 0
0 43 9 179 0
4:45 PM 0 2 0 21
0 1 15 88 0 0
188 0
4:30 PM 0 1 0 22 0 0 0
88 2 0 0 44 13
186 757
5:00 PM 1 3 0 22 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 2 14 101 0 0 0 40 6
0 0 0 0 1 20
0 60 9 224 777
5:15 PM 0 4 0 14
0 0 12 117 0 0
0 41 4 181 816
5:45 PM 0 2 0 15
0 1 12 105 2 0
225 814
5:30 PM 0 2 0 14 0 0 0
147 0 0 0 31 8
0 0 0 0 0 15 109 1 0 0 32 4 178 808
Count Total 1 19 0 150 0 0 0 0 372 60 1,565 0
Peak
Hour
All 1 11 0
0 6 127 825 5 0
0 0 0 2 11 0 0 0 3 2 20 0
27 816 0
HV 0 0 0 2 0 0
71 0 0 0 0 4 58 470 2 0 0 172
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% 0% 0% - 3% - - - - 0% 3% 2% 0% - - 2% 7% 2%
0 0
4:15 PM 3 0 5 2 10 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 1
West North South
4:00 PM 0 0 2 1 3 1
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 2 0 4 1 7
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 4:30 PM 0 0 3 2 5 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 1 1 2 0 0
0 0 1 1 0 2
1 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 4 2 6 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 1 0 5 0 6
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 5:30 PM 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0
0 0
Peak Hour 2 0 13 5 20 0 0
Count Total 6 0 28 10 44 1 0 0 2 3 2 6
0 2 2 0 3 0 0
0 0
0 0
20 00
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 0
N
Industrial Rd
Taylor Way
Driveway
Industrial Rd
Taylor Way Industrial Rd
TEV: 816
PHF: 0.91
27 172
0 199
481
0 0
0 0
0 2
0 2
470
58 247
534
4 71
0 11
83 86
1 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
~ .,J •
E
::,
..J
l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
I ,_
,_
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1742
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Taylor Way Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 1 0 3 0
4:15 PM 0 3 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
10 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 2 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 2 5 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 2
0 0 0 3 0 0
0 1 1 6 28
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0 0
7 25
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3 0 0 0 1 0
2 20
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 5 20
5:45 PM 0 0 0 1
0 0 1 3 0 0
5 0 0 0 0 0 6 19
0 6 4 44 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 2
Count Total 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 26 0 0
4:00 PM 1 0
RT
20 0
Interval
Start
Taylor Way Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 0 0 2 11 0 0 0 3 2

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
1 5:00 PM
0 0 0 0
0 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 2
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
2 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 1 0 1
1 1
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 2
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 2 0 2
0 0 0 0 3 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 1 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] I ,_
,_
- -
,_
I ,_
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1743
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
4 0
2 2
1 1
2 3
15 5
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 1.0% 0.82
TOTAL 2.3% 0.82
TH RT
WB 0.4% 0.79
NB 4.6% 0.83
Peak Hour: 4:15 PM 5:15 PM
HV %: PHF
EB 0.0% 0.40

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Driveway Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 45 0 18 1 3
1 104 0 276 0
4:15 PM 0 1 0 4
4:00 PM 0 0 1 4 0 77 0 16 0 1 70 2 0
2 68 0 236 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 1
12 0 1 91 2 0
234 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 1 0 59 0
89 2 0 2 69 0
211 957
5:00 PM 0 0 0 1 0 76 0
0 40 0 10 0 0 100 0 0 2 58 0
0 31 0 14 0 0
1 87 0 299 980
5:15 PM 0 1 0 3
9 0 1 123 1 0
0 65 0 213 957
5:45 PM 0 0 0 3
4 0 0 114 0 0
234 980
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 30 0
141 1 0 2 41 0
0 18 0 5 0 3 119 1 1 0 50 0 200 946
Count Total 0 2 1 17 0 376 0 10 542 0 1,903 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 1 0
88 1 9 847 9 1
0 1 0 0 19 0 0 0 3 0 23 0
0 980 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0 0
7 0 220 0 49 1 5 403 5 0 7 282
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - 0% - 0% - 0% - 2% 0% 0% 5% 0% - 0% 1% - 2%
2 0
4:15 PM 0 1 5 0 6 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 2
West North South
4:00 PM 0 0 2 2 4 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 5 2 7
0 0 0 2 0 0
0 4:30 PM 0 0 4 0 4 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 1
2 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 5 1 6 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
5:45 PM 0 0 7 1 8
0 0 0 2 0 0
0 5:30 PM 0 0 4 1 5 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0
3 0
Peak Hour 0 1 19 3 23 0 0
Count Total 0 1 32 7 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 12
0 0 0 0 5 0 0
0 0
0 0
00 00
0 0
0 0
0 0
5 0
N
Industrial Rd
Driveway
Driveway
Industrial Rd
Driveway Industrial Rd
TEV: 980
PHF: 0.82
0 282
7 289
453
0 49
0 220
269
12 0
5 403
5 510
414
1 7
0 1
8 5
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~ (
~
1 1 Jo
E
::,
..J
~ .,J • l.U
L
.....
~
E
J;1 D~ Ji = • = . ) ...... r ) 0 ~ , ~ , - 0~
::-io., t ,..e; 71~ D□ ~rr
1 1 0~
J ,_
J 1

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1744
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound
Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
Driveway Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 2 0 4 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
6 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0 0
0 1 0 6 23
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 5 0 0
7 21
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5 0 0 0 2 0
0 17
5:30 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 0
0 1 0 5 18
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 4 0 0
7 0 0 0 1 0 8 19
0 7 0 40 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 32 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0
RT
23 0
Interval
Start
Driveway Driveway Industrial Rd Industrial Rd
15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour
0 0 0 1 0 0 19 0 0 0 3 0

LT TH RT RT LT TH RT
0 5:00 PM
0 0 0 0
0 0
4:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0
5:45 PM
0 0 0 0
0 5:30 PM
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
5:15 PM
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Peak Hour
Count Total 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 LT TH
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ,_
I ,_
,_
I ,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1745
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
4 10
2 9
5 1
0 2
33 25
WB 0.7% 0.74
NB 1.4% 0.84
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM 5:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB - -
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 3.1% 0.80
TOTAL 1.8% 0.85

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Quarry Rd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 10 0 26 1 0
8 50 0 200 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 37 0 0 86 7 3
8 47 0 175 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
22 0 0 73 14 0
216 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 11 0
96 12 1 18 52 0
140 731
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 8 0
0 10 0 11 0 0 74 5 0 6 34 0
0 8 0 13 0 0
6 59 0 172 703
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
20 0 0 70 8 1
10 51 0 168 672
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
19 0 0 79 4 0
192 679
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 5 0
89 9 0 8 65 0
0 4 0 10 0 0 69 12 0 11 46 0 152 684
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 65 0 75 404 0 1,415 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 0
158 1 0 636 71 5
0 0 0 0 5 0 0 2 5 0 13 0
0 731 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0 1
0 0 40 0 96 1 0 329 38 4 40 183
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - - - - - 3% - 0% 0% - 2% 0% 0% 5% 3% - 2%
1 0
4:15 PM 0 1 1 3 5 0 0
0 2 1 3 3 0
West North South
4:00 PM 0 0 2 2 4 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 1 1 2
1 3 2 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 2
1 3 4 1 2 7
1 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 3 1 4 0 4
2 1 2
5:00 PM 0 0 1 1 2 0
0 1 1 1 3 4
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
2 4 0 0 0 0
0 5:30 PM 0 0 2 1 3 0 0 2
4 2 6 1 0 0
0 0 1 2 3 2 0 0 0
10 2
Peak Hr 0 1 5 7 13 0 1
Count Total 0 1 8 9 18 0 1 16 13 30 13 8
6 6 13 10 4 9 2
N
Old Country Rd
Quarry Rd
Quarry Rd
Old Country Rd
Old Country Rd
TEV: 731
PHF: 0.85
183
40 227
429 4
96 40 136
78 0
38 329
224
368
1 60 4
2 0
1 9
2 4
10 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] ~
~
l i Jo
1 l.U ... ,-, l. b
L 1' (·DODDDO·> 6 t..
r ~
C: ~ ~ i r 0~
v V
o t r r' -<-O DD -rr - t ,..
l i 0~
,_ I ,_
,-
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1746
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Quarry Rd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 2 0 4 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

UT LT TH RT UT LT
5 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 2 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
0 1 0 2 11
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
2 13
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 1 0
0 6
5:30 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 0
0 1 0 3 7
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
2 7 0 18 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 0 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
13 0
Interval
Start
0 Quarry Rd Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound
0 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 2 5 0
1 0 3 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 0 0

TH RT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0
3 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 1 0
0 4 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 3
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 4 14
13 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
1 0 0 1 0 3
4 17
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 1 0 2 0
0 6 16
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 4 0 0 2
1 0 0 2 0 3 17
Count Total 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 13 0 13 0 30 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 2 0 6 0 13 0
3 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] I ,_
,-
,-
I ,_
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1747
www.idaxdata.com
to
to
Two-Hour Count Summaries
Note: Two-hour count summary volumes include heavy vehicles but exclude bicycles in overall count.

Total
1 0
2 2
1 1
0 0
7 5
WB 1.8% 0.71
NB 3.0% 0.82
Peak Hour: 4:00 PM 5:00 PM
HV %: PHF
EB - -
Date: 03/01/2023
Peak Hour Count Period: 4:00 PM 6:00 PM
SB 0.9% 0.91
TOTAL 2.0% 0.88

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

UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Taylor Way Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total

UT LT TH RT
0 16 0 12 0 0
5 55 0 165 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 22 0 0 61 5 0
5 58 0 160 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
12 0 0 62 7 0
181 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 1 15 0
85 6 0 4 58 0
132 638
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0
0 6 0 10 0 0 68 3 0 1 44 0
0 7 0 12 0 0
4 61 0 145 618
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
17 0 0 53 3 0
3 59 0 155 597
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
18 0 0 64 4 0
165 602
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 7 0
72 7 1 4 62 0
0 12 0 11 0 0 65 6 0 2 49 0 145 610
Count Total 0 0 0 0 1 87 0 28 446 0 1,248 0
Peak
Hour
All 0 0 0
114 0 0 530 41 1
0 0 0 0 6 3 0 1 1 0 13 0
0 638 0
HV 0 0 0 0 0 2
0 1 54 0 56 0 0 276 21 0 15 215
0 Interval
Start
Heavy Vehicle Totals Bicycles Pedestrians (Crossing Leg) EB WB NB SB Total
HV% - - - - 0% 4% - 0% - - 2% 14% - 7% 0% - 2%
0 0
4:15 PM 0 1 3 2 6 0 0
0 3 4 7 1 0
West North South
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
EB WB NB SB Total East
4:45 PM 0 0 2 0 2
0 2 2 0 0 0
0 4:30 PM 0 1 4 0 5 0 1 1
1 4 5 0 0 0
0 0
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 1 1 0
0 0 0
5:00 PM 0 0 1 2 3 0
0 0 1 3 4 2
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0
2 4 0 0 0 0
0 5:30 PM 0 1 1 1 3 0 0 2
4 2 6 1 0 0
0 1 1 1 3 0 0 0 0
0 0
Peak Hr 0 2 9 2 13 0 1
Count Total 0 3 11 5 19 0 2 14 16 32 7 0
6 11 18 5 0 0 0
N
Old Country Rd
Taylor Way
Taylor Way
Old Country Rd
Old Country Rd
TEV 638
PHF 0.88
215
15 230
332 0
56 54 111
37 1
21 276
269
297
0 101 6
0 0
1 0
0 0
5 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] i(m{
~
l I Jo
J LU ...

L ~ ~~DD~DD->~
r ~
! c:::'.:J
• = '
C: ~ ~ § r oi
Ni v
n t r ,, Knntnn~TI
l I 0~
,_ I ,_
,-
I I

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1748
www.idaxdata.com
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Heavy Vehicles
Two-Hour Count Summaries - Bikes
Note: U-Turn volumes for bikes are included in Left-Turn, if any.

Northbound Southbound

UT LT TH RT UT LT TH RT
Interval
Start
0 Taylor Way Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound Westbound
0 0 0 0 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
6 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 1 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 5 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 2 0
1 1 0 3 16
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
2 13
5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2 0 0 0 0 0
0 10
5:30 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 0
0 1 0 3 8
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0
1 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6
2 3 0 19 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 0
Count Total 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 8 3 0
Westbound Northbound Southbound

LT TH RT LT TH RT LT
13 0
Interval
Start
0 Taylor Way Old Country Rd Old Country Rd 15-min
Total
Rolling
One Hour Eastbound
0 2 0 0 0 0 6 3 0 1 1 0
3 0 7 0
4:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 3 0 1

TH RT LT TH RT
4:00 PM 0 0 0 0
2 0
4:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0
0 5 0
4:30 PM 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 4
5:15 PM 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 1 12
18 5:00 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
1 0 0 3 0 4
4 15
5:45 PM 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 2 0 0 2 0
0 6 13
5:30 PM 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 4 0 0 2
1 0 0 1 0 3 14
Count Total 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 14 1 15 0 32 0
Peak Hour 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 6 0 1 10 0 18 0
0 Project Manager: (415) 310-6469 [email protected] I ,_
,-
,-
I ,_
,-

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1749
Location: Industrial Rd, Between Harbor Blvd and Quarry Rd Date Range: 2/23/2023 - 3/1/2023Site Code: 01
Time NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total 12:00 AM 32 3 35 40 13 53 36 17 53 40 16 56 6 5 11 16 11 27 40 10 50 29 8 371:00 AM 17 11 28 18 4 22 41 11 52 20 6 26 19 9 28 14 6 20 10 5 15 14 7 212:00 AM 9 9 18 10 16 26 14 11 25 11 11 22 17 10 27 21 9 30 11 8 19 14 9 223:00 AM 16 15 31 5 19 24 8 14 22 3 11 14 4 9 13 5 12 17 7 15 22 9 14 234:00 AM 9 38 47 8 38 46 9 9 18 2 6 8 8 37 45 11 31 42 15 34 49 12 34 465:00 AM 23 105 128 32 94 126 6 53 59 5 29 34 30 115 145 27 112 139 30 104 134 27 107 1346:00 AM 70 223 293 70 225 295 25 69 94 15 31 46 70 219 289 65 194 259 54 202 256 63 206 2697:00 AM 179 314 493 167 291 458 67 126 193 30 34 64 152 239 391 139 268 407 157 298 455 158 293 452 8:00 AM 193 261 454 182 251 433 56 76 132 33 55 88 190 233 423 211 230 441 197 276 473 200 256 456 9:00 AM 179 252 431 204 216 420 96 104 200 55 72 127 171 226 397 134 207 341 181 262 443 165 240 40510:00 AM 219 236 455 183 208 391 125 126 251 71 106 177 157 171 328 172 176 348 189 178 367 193 197 39011:00 AM 218 201 419 246 180 426 165 152 317 104 98 202 193 172 365 209 184 393 219 195 414 215 193 409 12:00 PM 276 223 499 298 216 514 166 113 279 139 99 238 225 173 398 249 233 482 232 189 421 252 215 467 1:00 PM 249 219 468 282 215 497 177 155 332 155 110 265 206 196 402 235 193 428 230 190 420 238 201 439 2:00 PM 264 206 470 253 202 455 205 154 359 135 93 228 277 163 440 272 207 479 294 196 490 277 203 4803:00 PM 314 214 528 342 217 559 206 168 374 169 93 262 283 213 496 279 211 490 329 192 521 307 206 513 4:00 PM 327 154 481 356 169 525 213 119 332 141 73 214 348 158 506 408 136 544 434 205 639 390 165 555 5:00 PM 382 134 516 291 132 423 167 88 255 114 94 208 305 133 438 389 144 533 511 149 660 427 142 5706:00 PM 276 99 375 234 114 348 150 88 238 101 65 166 195 77 272 217 97 314 304 96 400 266 97 3637:00 PM 171 77 248 151 75 226 86 49 135 88 52 140 105 57 162 121 46 167 156 48 204 149 57 2068:00 PM 114 44 158 88 48 136 73 40 113 61 25 86 70 28 98 83 32 115 106 49 155 101 42 1439:00 PM 51 52 103 82 49 131 70 37 107 33 20 53 48 26 74 54 52 106 70 49 119 58 51 10910:00 PM 54 21 75 65 31 96 61 25 86 35 14 49 39 25 64 58 15 73 57 22 79 56 19 7611:00 PM 45 19 64 54 23 77 52 22 74 17 6 23 21 20 41 26 5 31 37 11 48 36 12 48Total 3,687 3,130 6,817 3,661 3,046 6,707 2,274 1,826 4,100 1,577 1,219 2,796 3,139 2,714 5,853 3,415 2,811 6,226 3,870 2,983 6,853 3,657 2,975 6,632Percent 54% 46% - 55% 45% - 55% 45% - 56% 44% - 54% 46% - 55% 45% - 56% 44% - 55% 45% - AM Peak 10:00 07:00 07:00 11:00 07:00 07:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 10:00 11:00 11:00 07:00 08:00 08:00 07:00 08:00 11:00 07:00 08:00 11:00 07:00 08:00Vol. 219 314 493 246 291 458 165 152 317 104 106 202 193 239 423 211 268 441 219 298 473 215 293 456PM Peak 17:00 12:00 15:00 16:00 15:00 15:00 16:00 15:00 15:00 15:00 13:00 13:00 16:00 15:00 16:00 16:00 12:00 16:00 17:00 16:00 17:00 17:00 12:00 17:00Vol. 382 223 528 356 217 559 213 168 374 169 110 265 348 213 506 408 233 544 511 205 660 427 215 570

1. Mid-week average includes data between Tuesday and Thursday. 2/24/2023 2/25/2023 2/26/2023 2/27/2023 2/28/2023 3/1/2023 Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Mid-Week Average 2/23/2023
1 ,_ 1 - 1-
--
-
~
,_

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1750
Location: Old Country Rd, Between Harbor Blvd and Quarry Rd Date Range: 2/23/2023 - 3/1/2023Site Code: 02
Time NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total 12:00 AM 0 0 0 17 13 30 12 18 30 22 17 39 6 4 10 10 5 15 7 10 17 6 5 111:00 AM 10 6 16 8 6 14 13 15 28 24 19 43 5 5 10 7 5 12 7 4 11 8 5 132:00 AM 6 4 10 10 5 15 9 9 18 13 6 19 10 4 14 5 0 5 4 1 5 5 2 73:00 AM 4 6 10 5 4 9 3 4 7 1 2 3 8 7 15 5 5 10 5 4 9 5 5 104:00 AM 14 13 27 16 12 28 5 7 12 5 8 13 14 18 32 15 15 30 17 13 30 15 14 295:00 AM 33 35 68 29 38 67 13 13 26 9 4 13 28 41 69 42 42 84 26 41 67 34 39 736:00 AM 72 90 162 52 88 140 33 38 71 9 12 21 78 100 178 76 91 167 79 105 184 76 95 1717:00 AM 162 207 369 149 149 298 43 56 99 15 27 42 145 195 340 165 189 354 199 186 385 175 194 3698:00 AM 179 205 384 190 209 399 75 58 133 50 43 93 177 210 387 175 207 382 207 265 472 187 226 413 9:00 AM 192 189 381 169 167 336 102 109 211 65 69 134 186 161 347 162 191 353 191 189 380 182 190 37110:00 AM 175 210 385 178 165 343 141 132 273 103 95 198 134 161 295 154 167 321 135 149 284 155 175 330 11:00 AM 220 187 407 197 173 370 155 165 320 133 129 262 196 153 349 227 186 413 204 215 419 217 196 413 12:00 PM 239 230 469 269 205 474 200 166 366 154 124 278 210 169 379 231 193 424 234 217 451 235 213 448 1:00 PM 248 175 423 236 183 419 163 142 305 140 120 260 230 194 424 233 162 395 249 235 484 243 191 4342:00 PM 248 177 425 234 220 454 172 144 316 170 106 276 204 170 374 237 167 404 268 177 445 251 174 425 3:00 PM 262 252 514 280 221 501 162 131 293 130 111 241 269 230 499 290 221 511 293 232 525 282 235 5174:00 PM 356 256 612 331 209 540 187 124 311 150 102 252 331 199 530 350 212 562 398 266 664 368 245 613 5:00 PM 342 230 572 285 200 485 190 114 304 128 86 214 306 188 494 303 193 496 371 269 640 339 231 569 6:00 PM 275 151 426 206 138 344 126 105 231 114 70 184 219 134 353 230 178 408 279 179 458 261 169 4317:00 PM 159 88 247 135 96 231 87 78 165 100 66 166 116 72 188 135 102 237 146 93 239 147 94 2418:00 PM 107 64 171 96 40 136 80 81 161 58 29 87 80 45 125 85 55 140 102 78 180 98 66 1649:00 PM 45 43 88 82 46 128 70 55 125 21 18 39 39 32 71 68 38 106 49 49 98 54 43 9710:00 PM 42 32 74 55 40 95 72 55 127 12 15 27 30 12 42 46 22 68 35 17 52 41 24 6511:00 PM 31 16 47 35 10 45 30 32 62 12 11 23 9 10 19 18 16 34 23 7 30 24 13 37Total 3,421 2,866 6,287 3,264 2,637 5,901 2,143 1,851 3,994 1,638 1,289 2,927 3,030 2,514 5,544 3,269 2,662 5,931 3,528 3,001 6,529 3,406 2,843 6,249Percent 54% 46% - 55% 45% - 54% 46% - 56% 44% - 55% 45% - 55% 45% - 54% 46% - 55% 45% - AM Peak 11:00 10:00 11:00 11:00 08:00 08:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 08:00 08:00 11:00 08:00 11:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 11:00 08:00 11:00Vol. 220 210 407 197 209 399 155 165 320 133 129 262 196 210 387 227 207 413 207 265 472 217 226 413PM Peak 16:00 16:00 16:00 16:00 15:00 16:00 12:00 12:00 12:00 14:00 12:00 12:00 16:00 15:00 16:00 16:00 15:00 16:00 16:00 17:00 16:00 16:00 16:00 16:00Vol. 356 256 612 331 221 540 200 166 366 170 124 278 331 230 530 350 221 562 398 269 664 368 245 613

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1751
Location: Old Country Rd, Between Taylor Way and Northwood Dr Date Range: 2/23/2023 - 3/1/2023Site Code: 03
Time NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total 12:00 AM 0 0 0 13 6 19 13 16 29 17 16 33 9 3 12 ------ 000 1:00 AM 9 4 13 4 6 10 7 14 21 7 20 27 6 8 14 ------ 9 4 132:00 AM 2 5 7 7 5 12 8 13 21 4 8 12 7 6 13 ------ 2573:00 AM 8 6 14 7 4 11 8 5 13 1 4 5 8 4 12 ------ 8 6 144:00 AM 17 15 32 17 12 29 2 11 13 2 7 9 22 13 35 ------ 17 15 325:00 AM 53 16 69 67 14 81 16 12 28 15 7 22 63 15 78 ------ 53 16 696:00 AM 76 38 114 65 35 100 27 26 53 18 10 28 84 38 122 ------ 76 38 1147:00 AM 152 162 314 167 118 285 54 39 93 21 23 44 142 128 270 ------ 152 162 314 8:00 AM 191 184 375 193 180 373 82 48 130 69 41 110 188 169 357 ------ 191 184 3759:00 AM 184 145 329 185 125 310 116 89 205 71 68 139 186 124 310 ------ 184 145 329 10:00 AM 173 175 348 173 141 314 138 120 258 113 92 205 147 152 299 ------ 173 175 34811:00 AM 203 209 412 175 190 365 132 135 267 137 104 241 163 136 299 ------ 203 209 41212:00 PM 191 188 379 209 206 415 142 161 303 128 134 262 171 152 323 ------ 191 188 379 1:00 PM 214 164 378 185 174 359 123 141 264 120 119 239 175 171 346 ------ 214 164 378 2:00 PM 206 186 392 173 189 362 149 119 268 142 102 244 181 162 343 ------ 206 186 392 3:00 PM 234 230 464 195 194 389 134 136 270 118 105 223 201 194 395 ------ 234 230 464 4:00 PM 257 255 512 241 216 457 139 126 265 96 99 195 244 215 459 ------ 257 255 5125:00 PM 266 264 530 226 214 440 134 116 250 90 78 168 259 219 478 ------ 266 264 530 6:00 PM 212 179 391 164 166 330 94 103 197 61 71 132 133 167 300 ------ 212 179 391 7:00 PM 104 105 209 94 91 185 76 78 154 51 63 114 101 89 190 ------ 104 105 209 8:00 PM 57 70 127 62 58 120 67 58 125 42 36 78 50 68 118 ------ 57 70 1279:00 PM 33 37 70 54 52 106 41 45 86 17 21 38 27 45 72 ------ 33 37 7010:00 PM 23 27 50 30 45 75 32 42 74 13 17 30 12 14 26 ------ 23 27 5011:00 PM 11 28 39 7 13 20 20 32 52 8 10 18 7 11 18 ------ 11 28 39Total 2,876 2,692 5,568 2,713 2,454 5,167 1,754 1,685 3,439 1,361 1,255 2,616 2,586 2,303 4,889 ------ 2,876 2,692 5,568 Percent 52% 48% - 53% 47% - 51% 49% - 52% 48% - 53% 47% ------- 52% 48% - AM Peak 11:00 11:00 11:00 08:00 11:00 08:00 10:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 ------ 11:00 11:00 11:00 Vol. 203 209 412 193 190 373 138 135 267 137 104 241 188 169 357 ------ 203 209 412 PM Peak 17:00 17:00 17:00 16:00 16:00 16:00 14:00 12:00 12:00 14:00 12:00 12:00 17:00 17:00 17:00 ------ 17:00 17:00 17:00 Vol. 266 264 530 241 216 457 149 161 303 142 134 262 259 219 478 ------ 266 264 530

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1752
Location: Old Country Rd, Between Taylor Way and Northwood Dr Date Range: 3/7/2023 - 3/13/2023Site Code: 03
Time NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total 12:00 AM 7 6 13 10 1 11 21 8 29 ------------ 13 5 18
1:00 AM 8 2 10 4 6 10 9 5 14 ------------ 7 4 11
2:00 AM 5 7 12 8 4 12 3 7 10 ------------ 5 6 11
3:00 AM 5 5 10 7 7 14 7 14 21 ------------ 6 9 15
4:00 AM 21 9 30 19 10 29 31 9 40 ------------ 24 9 33
5:00 AM 52 14 66 58 20 78 53 22 75 ------------ 54 19 73 6:00 AM 73 45 118 69 39 108 75 58 133 ------------ 72 47 120 7:00 AM 187 150 337 175 159 334 170 150 320 ------------ 177 153 330 8:00 AM 195 203 398 197 218 415 222 218 440 ------------ 205 213 4189:00 AM 168 147 315 193 150 343 172 134 306 ------------ 178 144 321 10:00 AM 165 147 312 143 155 298 173 140 313 ------------ 160 147 308 11:00 AM 173 153 326 195 159 354 185 186 371 ------------ 184 166 350 12:00 PM 209 159 368 203 143 346 190 180 370 ------------ 201 161 361 1:00 PM 193 168 361 220 182 402 198 141 339 ------------ 204 164 367 2:00 PM 207 172 379 199 175 374 195 201 396 ------------ 200 183 383 3:00 PM 223 197 420 231 185 416 223 197 420 ------------ 226 193 419 4:00 PM 274 240 514 298 230 528 247 236 483 ------------ 273 235 5085:00 PM 288 248 536 310 277 587 233 210 443 ------------ 277 245 5226:00 PM 209 208 417 195 200 395 145 152 297 ------------ 183 187 370 7:00 PM 95 119 214 119 106 225 82 82 164 ------------ 99 102 201 8:00 PM 39 70 109 61 82 143 47 72 119 ------------ 49 75 124 9:00 PM 41 63 104 30 43 73 37 41 78 ------------ 36 49 85 10:00 PM 18 23 41 20 27 47 20 21 41 ------------ 19 24 43 11:00 PM 7 9 16 12 10 22 18 19 37 ------------ 12 13 25 Total 2,862 2,564 5,426 2,976 2,588 5,564 2,756 2,503 5,259 ------------ 2,865 2,552 5,416 Percent 53% 47% - 53% 47% - 52% 48% ------------- 53% 47% - AM Peak 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 ------------ 08:00 08:00 08:00 Vol. 195 203 398 197 218 415 222 218 440 ------------ 205 213 418 PM Peak 17:00 17:00 17:00 17:00 17:00 17:00 16:00 16:00 16:00 ------------ 17:00 17:00 17:00 Vol. 288 248 536 310 277 587 247 236 483 ------------ 277 245 522

1. Mid-week average includes data between Tuesday and Thursday. 3/13/2023 3/12/2023 3/11/2023 3/10/2023
Tuesday Wednesday Thursday
3/8/2023 3/7/2023 Mid-Week Average 3/9/2023
Friday Saturday Sunday Monday
1 Project Manager: (415) [email protected]

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1753
Location: Industrial Rd, N of Holly St
Date Range: 2/23/2023 - 3/1/2023Site Code: 04
Time NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total 12:00 AM 0 0 0 27 28 55 24 29 53 37 24 61 6 7 13 ------ 000 1:00 AM 0 14 14 16 28 44 29 36 65 24 12 36 13 12 25 ------ 0 14 142:00 AM 14 16 30 20 22 42 9 19 28 10 29 39 12 24 36 ------ 14 16 303:00 AM 32 21 53 19 19 38 24 11 35 13 13 26 15 10 25 ------ 32 21 534:00 AM 33 16 49 36 20 56 14 7 21 7 5 12 34 14 48 ------ 33 16 495:00 AM 156 42 198 125 39 164 40 16 56 26 17 43 155 28 183 ------ 156 42 198 6:00 AM 366 75 441 351 70 421 117 41 158 40 19 59 348 74 422 ------ 366 75 441 7:00 AM 556 231 787 532 192 724 188 106 294 67 24 91 540 188 728 ------ 556 231 787 8:00 AM 522 268 790 486 337 823 168 155 323 55 58 113 529 302 831 ------ 522 268 790 9:00 AM 415 330 745 403 294 697 216 181 397 104 80 184 437 317 754 ------ 415 330 745 10:00 AM 438 340 778 381 298 679 242 167 409 134 106 240 403 352 755 ------ 438 340 778 11:00 AM 361 448 809 404 392 796 260 247 507 160 117 277 377 395 772 ------ 361 448 809 12:00 PM 476 374 850 453 319 772 261 216 477 207 135 342 381 384 765 ------ 476 374 850 1:00 PM 466 353 819 446 331 777 258 184 442 218 125 343 400 320 720 ------ 466 353 819 2:00 PM 392 426 818 418 400 818 262 220 482 176 114 290 438 405 843 ------ 392 426 818 3:00 PM 390 470 860 455 470 925 257 181 438 213 126 339 422 465 887 ------ 390 470 8604:00 PM 352 519 871 372 457 829 244 206 450 178 137 315 355 547 902 ------ 352 519 871 5:00 PM 389 343 732 315 330 645 231 158 389 151 96 247 334 417 751 ------ 389 343 732 6:00 PM 338 185 523 305 214 519 190 130 320 122 124 246 233 243 476 ------ 338 185 523 7:00 PM 220 186 406 201 200 401 136 77 213 113 97 210 134 134 268 ------ 220 186 406 8:00 PM 151 124 275 98 114 212 115 80 195 73 70 143 99 78 177 ------ 151 124 275 9:00 PM 75 114 189 85 104 189 88 91 179 53 18 71 57 58 115 ------ 75 114 189 10:00 PM 70 67 137 80 93 173 60 70 130 34 22 56 39 58 97 ------ 70 67 13711:00 PM 48 78 126 55 72 127 60 52 112 17 10 27 22 39 61 ------ 48 78 126Total 6,260 5,040 11,300 6,083 4,843 10,926 3,493 2,680 6,173 2,232 1,578 3,810 5,783 4,871 10,654 ------ 6,260 5,040 11,300Percent 55% 45% - 56% 44% - 57% 43% - 59% 41% - 54% 46% ------- 55% 45% - AM Peak 07:00 11:00 11:00 07:00 11:00 08:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 07:00 11:00 08:00 ------ 07:00 11:00 11:00 Vol. 556 448 809 532 392 823 260 247 507 160 117 277 540 395 831 ------ 556 448 809 PM Peak 12:00 16:00 16:00 15:00 15:00 15:00 14:00 14:00 14:00 13:00 16:00 13:00 14:00 16:00 16:00 ------ 12:00 16:00 16:00 Vol. 476 519 871 455 470 925 262 220 482 218 137 343 438 547 902 ------ 476 519 871

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1754
Location: Industrial Rd, N of Holly St
Date Range: 3/7/2023 - 3/13/2023Site Code: 04
Time NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total NB SB Total 12:00 AM 16 15 31 9 15 24 15 19 34 ------------ 13 16 30 1:00 AM 10 24 34 12 40 52 13 29 42 ------------ 12 31 432:00 AM 13 10 23 13 9 22 11 11 22 ------------ 12 10 223:00 AM 13 20 33 16 16 32 23 20 43 ------------ 17 19 364:00 AM 43 9 52 38 11 49 39 20 59 ------------ 40 13 535:00 AM 157 29 186 155 29 184 155 25 180 ------------ 156 28 183 6:00 AM 347 86 433 346 78 424 399 109 508 ------------ 364 91 4557:00 AM 564 171 735 592 218 810 587 207 794 ------------ 581 199 780 8:00 AM 541 306 847 560 276 836 537 289 826 ------------ 546 290 836 9:00 AM 416 268 684 465 307 772 472 331 803 ------------ 451 302 753 10:00 AM 408 321 729 378 338 716 414 349 763 ------------ 400 336 73611:00 AM 389 412 801 391 413 804 414 384 798 ------------ 398 403 801 12:00 PM 416 364 780 401 371 772 407 323 730 ------------ 408 353 7611:00 PM 468 315 783 457 359 816 485 45 530 ------------ 470 240 7102:00 PM 445 442 887 443 443 886 452 9 461 ------------ 447 298 7453:00 PM 472 491 963 447 468 915 435 35 470 ------------ 451 331 7834:00 PM 485 538 1,023 479 498 977 391 34 425 ------------ 452 357 808 5:00 PM 518 332 850 564 355 919 493 19 512 ------------ 525 235 760 6:00 PM 324 210 534 422 261 683 267 42 309 ------------ 338 171 5097:00 PM 175 127 302 224 143 367 150 28 178 ------------ 183 99 2828:00 PM 109 78 187 99 83 182 99 18 117 ------------ 102 60 1629:00 PM 77 75 152 72 56 128 64 4 68 ------------ 71 45 116 10:00 PM 47 42 89 49 45 94 46 3 49 ------------ 47 30 77 11:00 PM 21 59 80 28 68 96 44 3 47 ------------ 31 43 74 Total 6,474 4,744 11,218 6,660 4,900 11,560 6,412 2,356 8,768 ------------ 6,515 4,000 10,515 Percent 58% 42% - 58% 42% - 73% 27% ------------- 62% 38% - AM Peak 07:00 11:00 08:00 07:00 11:00 08:00 07:00 11:00 08:00 ------------ 07:00 11:00 08:00Vol. 564 412 847 592 413 836 587 384 826 ------------ 581 403 836 PM Peak 17:00 16:00 16:00 17:00 16:00 16:00 17:00 12:00 12:00 ------------ 17:00 16:00 16:00Vol. 518 538 1,023 564 498 977 493 323 730 ------------ 525 357 808

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1755
Location: Holly St, Between Industrial Rd and On Ramp
Date Range: 2/24/2023 - 3/2/2023Site Code: 05
Time EB WB Total EB WB Total EB WB Total EB WB Total EB WB Total EB WB Total EB WB Total EB WB Total 12:00 AM 85 91 176 181 164 345 166 146 312 62 53 115 76 62 138 85 61 146 102 98 200 88 74 1611:00 AM 68 59 127 130 81 211 102 75 177 47 41 88 46 30 76 50 46 96 64 32 96 53 36 892:00 AM 47 48 95 57 49 106 65 43 108 51 30 81 40 29 69 41 30 71 50 38 88 44 32 763:00 AM 53 50 103 40 53 93 40 51 91 36 51 87 43 44 87 36 54 90 45 62 107 41 53 954:00 AM 112 102 214 55 56 111 46 37 83 93 115 208 105 108 213 113 126 239 120 109 229 113 114 2275:00 AM 206 303 509 97 106 203 79 77 156 207 357 564 220 335 555 243 408 651 210 364 574 224 369 5936:00 AM 399 723 1,122 215 279 494 132 127 259 435 759 1,194 427 764 1,191 484 807 1,291 483 720 1,203 465 764 1,2287:00 AM 813 1,134 1,947 403 413 816 225 201 426 918 1,217 2,135 933 1,252 2,185 1,034 1,315 2,349 983 1,280 2,263 983 1,282 2,2668:00 AM 1,195 1,273 2,468 651 609 1,260 408 330 738 1,332 1,278 2,610 1,305 1,365 2,670 1,304 1,393 2,697 1,301 1,300 2,601 1,303 1,353 2,656 9:00 AM 1,121 1,096 2,217 866 768 1,634 620 516 1,136 1,003 1,108 2,111 1,058 1,178 2,236 1,140 1,330 2,470 1,170 1,211 2,381 1,123 1,240 2,36210:00 AM 1,103 1,106 2,209 1,077 880 1,957 811 752 1,563 957 917 1,874 937 973 1,910 1,141 1,086 2,227 1,134 1,134 2,268 1,071 1,064 2,13511:00 AM 1,289 1,123 2,412 1,181 1,020 2,201 964 857 1,821 1,027 974 2,001 1,125 1,007 2,132 1,253 1,070 2,323 1,251 1,160 2,411 1,210 1,079 2,289 12:00 PM 1,368 1,181 2,549 1,333 1,050 2,383 1,089 985 2,074 1,191 939 2,130 1,131 1,012 2,143 1,284 1,147 2,431 1,284 1,119 2,403 1,233 1,093 2,3261:00 PM 1,417 1,150 2,567 1,244 1,040 2,284 1,061 944 2,005 1,227 913 2,140 1,158 1,105 2,263 1,411 1,140 2,551 1,295 1,121 2,416 1,288 1,122 2,410 2:00 PM 1,519 1,123 2,642 1,381 1,022 2,403 1,107 825 1,932 1,327 966 2,293 1,417 1,080 2,497 1,385 1,090 2,475 1,461 1,101 2,562 1,421 1,090 2,511 3:00 PM 1,606 1,140 2,746 1,367 975 2,342 1,136 803 1,939 1,424 1,004 2,428 1,470 1,055 2,525 1,473 1,248 2,721 1,530 1,225 2,755 1,491 1,176 2,667 4:00 PM 1,722 1,085 2,807 1,304 897 2,201 922 703 1,625 1,991 988 2,979 1,656 1,101 2,757 1,636 1,167 2,803 1,647 1,105 2,752 1,646 1,124 2,7715:00 PM 1,544 969 2,513 1,123 916 2,039 888 686 1,574 1,544 1,058 2,602 1,495 1,158 2,653 1,465 1,259 2,724 1,455 1,168 2,623 1,472 1,195 2,667 6:00 PM 1,192 994 2,186 1,025 890 1,915 721 663 1,384 1,191 859 2,050 1,152 915 2,067 1,320 1,063 2,383 1,248 971 2,219 1,240 983 2,2237:00 PM 1,019 793 1,812 799 673 1,472 616 544 1,160 901 665 1,566 962 691 1,653 1,081 761 1,842 999 694 1,693 1,014 715 1,7298:00 PM 828 571 1,399 696 524 1,220 525 456 981 657 454 1,111 739 480 1,219 763 551 1,314 856 482 1,338 786 504 1,2909:00 PM 743 455 1,198 628 381 1,009 356 305 661 424 312 736 483 402 885 578 408 986 514 388 902 525 399 92410:00 PM 470 340 810 426 307 733 209 191 400 246 188 434 323 260 583 335 253 588 316 257 573 325 257 58111:00 PM 301 217 518 247 258 505 137 136 273 165 119 284 178 136 314 232 150 382 247 161 408 219 149 368Total 20,220 17,126 37,346 16,526 13,411 29,937 12,425 10,453 22,878 18,456 15,365 33,821 18,479 16,542 35,021 19,887 17,963 37,850 19,765 17,300 37,065 19,377 17,268 36,645Percent 54% 46% - 55% 45% - 54% 46% - 55% 45% - 53% 47% - 53% 47% - 53% 47% - 53% 47% - AM Peak 11:00 08:00 08:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 11:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 08:00 Vol. 1,289 1,273 2,468 1,181 1,020 2,201 964 857 1,821 1,332 1,278 2,610 1,305 1,365 2,670 1,304 1,393 2,697 1,301 1,300 2,601 1,303 1,353 2,656 PM Peak 16:00 12:00 16:00 14:00 12:00 14:00 15:00 12:00 12:00 16:00 17:00 16:00 16:00 17:00 16:00 16:00 17:00 16:00 16:00 15:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 16:00 Vol. 1,722 1,181 2,807 1,381 1,050 2,403 1,136 985 2,074 1,991 1,058 2,979 1,656 1,158 2,757 1,636 1,259 2,803 1,647 1,225 2,755 1,646 1,195 2,771

1. Mid-week average includes data between Tuesday and Thursday. 3/2/2023 3/1/2023 2/28/2023 2/27/2023
Friday Saturday Sunday
2/25/2023 2/24/2023 Mid-Week Average 2/26/2023
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday
1 Project Manager: (415) [email protected] ,_ ,--

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1756
405 Industrial Road (San Carlos) Transportation Study September 15, 2022 Page | 5
laboratory space, therefore, this trip generation analysis assumed the same breakdown. The rates published for “General Office Building” (ITE Land Use 710) and for “Research and Development Center” (ITE Land Use 760) were used to estimate the trips generated by the proposed project. The ITE rates for General Office Building and Research and Development Center are typically used for projects such as this that include a combination of office and laboratory space. The rates published for “Mini-Warehouse” (ITE Land Use 151) were used to estimate the existing site trips. The ITE rates for Mini-Warehouse are typically used for sites such as the existing use that include selfstorage facilities plus some auxiliary facilities such as RV (recreational vehicle) parking. According to the San Carlos Municipal Code the project would be required to achieve a 20 percent reduction in vehicle trip generation. After applying the applicable ITE trip rates and the trip reduction requirement and subtracting trips for the existing buildings on the site, it is estimated that the project would generate 215 new vehicle trips during the AM peak hour and 208 new vehicle trips during the PM peak hour (see Table 1).

Table 1
Trip Generation Summary
Trip Distribution and Assignment
The trip distribution pattern for the project was estimated based on existing travel patterns on the surrounding roadway network that reflect typical weekday AM and PM peak commute patterns, the location of the project driveways, the locations of complementary land uses, and freeway access points (see Figure 3). The peak-hour trips generated by the project were assigned to the roadway network in accordance with the trip distribution pattern (see Figure 4).

Land Use Size Units In Out Total In Out Total
Proposed
Office1 82,109 s.f. 978 124 17 141 24 117 141
Laboratory2 123,164 s.f. 1,442 110 24 134 21 108 129
Gross Project Trips 2,420 234 41 275 45 225 270
TDM Reduction (20%) 3 (484) (47) (8) (55) (9) (45) (54) Subtotal Project Trips 1,936 187 33 220 36 180 216
Existing
Storage Facility4 55,000 s.f. 80 3 2 5 4 4 8
Net New Vehicle Trips 1,856 184 31 215 32 176 208
Notes:
s.f. = square feet
1 2
3 4 Existing storage facility trip generation based on the rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) for Mini-Warehouse (Land Use Code 151).

The project would be required to meet a 20 percent trip reduction based on the ITE trip generation rates, per the San Carlos Municipal Code (18.25.030).

AM Peak-Hour Trips PM Peak-Hour Trips
Office trip generation based on the rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) for General Office Building (Land Use Code 710).

Laboratory trip generation based on the rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) for Research and Development Center (Land Use Code 760).

Daily
Trips

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1757
Redwood City
San Carlos
Belmont
1 2
3 4
5 101
82 Old County Rd
20%
2%
21%
5%
5%
4%
5%
34%
3%
1%
X
= Trip Distribution
= Study Intersection
= Site Location
LEGEND
XX%
San Carlos
Caltrain
Station
405 Industrial Road (San Carlos) TransportaƟon Study
Figure 3
Project Trip Distribution
Cedar St
Elm St
El Camino Real
Industrial Rd
Laurel St
Chestnut St
Holly St
Skyway Rd
Walnut St
Twin Dolphin Dr
Hull Dr
San Carlos Ave
Brittan Ave
Cherry St
Harbor Blvd
Bransten Rd
Quarry Rd
Arroyo Ave
Olive St
Bayport Ave
Taylor Way
Magnolia Ave
Redwood
Shores Pkwy Shores Pkwy
Howard Ave
0 NORTH
Notto Scale

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1758
Redwood City
San Carlos
Belmont
1 2
3 4
5 101
82 Old County Rd
Cedar St
Elm St
El Camino Real
Industrial Rd
Laurel St
Chestnut St
Holly St
Skyway Rd
Walnut St
Twin Dolphin Dr
Hull Dr
San Carlos Ave
Brittan Ave
Cherry St
Harbor Blvd
Bransten Rd
Quarry Rd
Arroyo Ave
Olive St
Bayport Ave
Taylor Way
Magnolia Ave
Redwood
Shores Pkwy Shores Pkwy hores Pkwy
X = Study Intersection Howard Ave
= Site Location
LEGEND
XX(XX) = AM(PM) Peak-Hour Trips
San Carlos
Caltrain
Station
405 Industrial Road (San Carlos) TransportaƟon Study
Figure 4
Project Trip Assignment
4 12
5 3
Industrial
Rd
Camino
Real
Blvd
Harbor
St
Holly
Industrial
Rd
Industrial
Rd
St
Holly
St
Holly
County
Rd
El
Old
&
PPG Paint
Dwy
Alphascript
Project
Dwy
2(13)
2(9)
18(3)
14(2)
152(27)
32(5)
27(154)
4(22)
57(10)
5(1)
9(55)
1(4)
3(1)
10(59)
1(4)
62(11)
4(1)
11(62)1(4)15(87)
83(14)
65(12)
-'t_
+-
i
0 NORTH
Notto Scale

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1759
15 Draft Traffic Operations Analysis for the 501 Industrial Road Project July 1, 2022
Table 6 – Cumulative Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection
Approach
AM Peak PM Peak
V/C Delay* LOS V/C Delay* LOS

1. Harbor Blvd/Industrial Rd - 24.3 C - 85.1 F

2. Holly St/US 101 S Off Ramp - 9.9 A - 10.1 B

3. Holly St /Industrial Rd 1.023 - F 0.846 - D

4. Holly St/Old County Rd 0.942 - E 1.079 - F

5. Holly St/El Camino Real 0.825 - D 1.149 - F

6. E San Carlos Ave/Industrial Rd 0.565 - A 0.660 - B

7. Commercial St/Industrial Rd 0.600 - B 0.903 - E

8. Industrial Rd/Brittan Ave 1.089 - F 0.993 - E
Notes: Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; * = the analyzed service level measure (V/C or delay) corresponds to the jurisdiction’s significance criteria for intersections; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics; Bold text = deficient operation
Project Description
The proposed business class hotel would be located at 501 Industrial Road in San Carlos. The hotel would include 149 parking spaces and approximately 119,000 square feet of hotel use for 188 guestrooms, central lobby, dining area and meeting spaces. Business class hotels are predominantly occupied by a single business traveler and experience peak occupancy during weekdays. The proposed project site plan is shown in Figure 5.

Trip Generation
The anticipated trip generation for the proposed project was estimated using standard rates published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition, 2021 for “Business Hotel” (ITE LU #312). The site is currently unoccupied and therefore not generating any trips. The project is not anticipated to generate any internal capture trips, pass-by trips or trip reductions resulting from nearby land uses or transportation options. As shown in Table 7, the proposed project is expected to generate an average of 756 trips per day, including 68 trips during the a.m. peak hour and 58 during the p.m. peak hour. These new trips represent the net increase in traffic associated with the project.

Table 7 – Trip Generation Summary
Land Use Units Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Trips Rate Trips In Out Rate Trips In Out
Business Hotel 188 rooms 4.02 756 0.36 68 27 41 0.31 58 32 26 Trip Distribution
The pattern used to allocate new project trips to the street network was based on the distribution percentages from the San Carlos Landmark Hotel Transportation Impact Analysis and then applying manual adjustments to compensate for rounding. The applied distribution assumptions and resulting trips are shown in Table 8. Project volumes are shown in Figure 6.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1760
Traffic Operations Analysis for the 501 Industrial Road Project Figure 5 – Site Plan

HO T EL

I N DIG O HOLLY HOTEL GROVP, LLC
Source: RYS Architects 1/22
I
gl
...I
< ii:
ii
t
I
I I
,,
I I
I
I
I I
I
' ------...::::

HOLLY ST_ --=--
- - - ------~-=--=-- - _:-_:-_:--;ioLL '(slR~'f
-
-----
' '
@ ~~1:'!-WALL RAOIUS DAGRAM
N TRUE
SITE PLAN - "~~1
HOTEL INDIGO SAN CAAi.OS, CALIFORNIA II

ARCHITECTS
sca024.ai 1 / 22
~-Trans
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1761
Traffic Operations Analysis for the 501 Industrial Road Project Figure 6 – Project Traffic Volumes
6 7(4)5(3)
5 1 (1)11(7)1 (1)
(5)5
4 17(20)
(6)5
3 9(11)
2 (1)1
1 (6)5
7 8
e Study Intersection
xx AM PeakHourVolume
(xx) PM PeakHourVolume
+.
•
t...
+
;+
r "'
t...
+
'-
7 '
L
CD
N
co:;=--R"
.
--~ -
7 '
~41 N~ cry';::- .i +
_.l ,!
NojtnScalo +
sca024.ai 1 / 22
~-Trans
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1762
18 Draft Traffic Operations Analysis for the 501 Industrial Road Hotel Project July 1, 2022
Table 8 – Trip Distribution Assumptions
Route Percent Daily Trips AM Trips PM Trips
To/from the North via US 101 30% 227 21 17
To/from the South via US 101 30% 227 21 17
To/from the North via Industrial Rd 2% 15 2 2
To/from the North via El Camino Real 15% 113 10 9
To/from the North via Old County Rd 2% 15 1 1
To/from the South via Industrial Rd 2% 15 1 1
To/from the South via El Camino Real 15% 113 10 9
To/from the South via Old County Rd 2% 15 1 1
To/from the East via Holly St-Redwood Shores Pkwy 2% 16 1 1 TOTAL 100% 756 68 58
Intersection Operation
Existing plus Project Conditions
Upon the addition of project-generated traffic to the Existing volumes, the study intersections are expected to operate at the same service levels as under the existing condition, except at the intersection of Holly Street/ US 101 South Off Ramp where the LOS changes from A to B. These results are summarized in Table 9. Existing plus Project traffic volumes are shown in Figure 7 and copies of the Level of Service calculations are provided in Appendix E.

Table 9 – Existing and Existing plus Project Peak Hour Intersection Levels of Service Study Intersection
Approach
Existing Conditions Existing plus Project
AM Peak PM Peak AM Peak PM Peak
MOE* LOS MOE* LOS MOE* LOS MOE* LOS

1. Harbor Blvd/Industrial Rd 15.5 B 25.8 C 15.5 B 25.5 C

2. Holly St/US 101 S Off Ramp 8.3 A 10.0 A 8.5 A 10.2 B

3. Holly St /Industrial Rd 0.668 B 0.857 D 0.680 B 0.860 D

4. Holly St/Old County Rd 0.724 C 0.790 C 0.730 C 0.795 C

5. Holly St/El Camino Real 0.653 B 0.817 D 0.653 B 0.819 D

6. E San Carlos Ave/Industrial Rd 0.342 A 0.487 A 0.355 A 0.494 A

7. Commercial St/Industrial Rd 1.7 A 0.6 A 1.7 A 0.6 A
EB (Commercial St) Approach 21.7 C 17.8 C 22.0 C 17.9 C

8. Brittan Ave/Industrial Rd 0.827 D 0.753 C 0.829 D 0.758 C Notes: MOE = Measure of Effectiveness (either Delay or V/C); Delay is measured in average seconds per vehicle; LOS = Level of Service; * = the analyzed service level measure (V/C or delay) corresponds to the jurisdiction’s significance criteria for intersections; Results for minor approaches to two-way stop-controlled intersections are indicated in italics; Bold text = deficient operation

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1763
642 Quarry Road (San Carlos) Transportation Study November 14, 2022 Page | 6
Table 1
Trip Generation Summary
Trip Distribution and Assignment
The trip distribution pattern for the project was estimated based on existing travel patterns on the surrounding roadway network that reflect typical weekday AM and PM peak commute patterns, the location of the project driveways, the locations of complementary land uses, and freeway access points (see Figure 3). The peak-hour trips generated by the project were assigned to the roadway network in accordance with the trip distribution pattern (see Figure 4).

Land Use Size Units In Out Total In Out Total
Proposed
Office 1 307,554 s.f. 3,334 411 56 467 75 368 443
Laboratory 2 102,518 s.f. 1,136 87 19 106 16 84 100
CCAG Reduction (25%) 3 (1,118) (125) (19) (144) (23) (113) (136) Net Office and Laboratory Trips 3,352 373 56 429 68 339 407 Childcare 4 115 students 457 45 39 84 39 44 83
Internalization Reduction (70%) 5 (320) (32) (27) (59) (27) (31) (58) Net Childcare Trips 137 13 12 25 12 13 25
Subtotal Project Trips 3,489 386 68 454 80 352 432
Existing
Industrial 6 104,391 s.f. 352 28 7 35 8 27 35
Net New Vehicle Trips 3,137 358 61 419 72 325 397
Notes:
s.f. = square feet
1 2
3 4
5 6
Daily
Trips
AM Peak-Hour Trips PM Peak-Hour Trips
Existing industrial trip generation based on the rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) for Industry Park (Land Use Code 130).

Laboratory trip generation based on the rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) for Research and Development Center (Land Use Code 760).

Childcare trip generation based on the rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) for Day Care Center (Land Use Code 565).

Office trip generation based on the rates published in the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 11th Edition (2021) for General Office Building (Land Use Code 710).

The childcare facility is assumed to serve primarily the office and laboratory uses located on-site. Therefore, a 70 percent reduction was applied to account for this internalization of trips.

The project would be required to meet a 25 percent trip reduction based on the ITE trip generation rates, per the C/CAG TDM Checklist for a Non-Residential Land Use: Large project.

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1764
Belmont
Redwood
City
San
Carlos
101
Old County Rd
El Camino Real
Shoreway Rd
Holly St
Elm St
Hiller St
Twin Dolphin Dr
6th Ave
5th Ave
Hull Dr
Industrial Rd
Oneill Ave
Chestnut St
Marine Pkwy
Harbor Blvd
Shoreline Dr
Skyway Rd
Ralston Ave
Quarry Rd
Cherry St
Laurel St
Bayport Ave
Taylor Way
Walnut St
Terminal Way
Bransten Rd
34%
1%
2%
20%
31%
5%
7%
= Trip Distribution
= Site Location
LEGEND
XX%
San Carlos
Caltrain
Station
Belmont
Caltrain
Station
642 Quarry Road (San Carlos) TransportaƟon Study
Figure 3
Project Trip Distribution
-
0 NORTH
Notto Scale

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1765
Belmont
Redwood
City
San
Carlos
1 4
6 3
2 5
9 8
7 101
Old County Rd
El Camino Real
Shoreway Rd
Holly St
Elm St
Hiller St
Twin Dolphin Dr
6th Ave
5th Ave
Hull Dr
Industrial Rd
Oneill Ave
Chestnut St
Marine Pkwy
Harbor Blvd
Shoreline Dr
Skyway Rd
Ralston Ave
Quarry Rd
Cherry St
Laurel St
Bayport Ave
Taylor Way
Terminal Way
Walnut St
Bransten Rd
X = Study Intersection
= Site Location
LEGEND
XX(XX)
San Carlos
Caltrain
Station
Belmont
Caltrain
Station
= AM(PM) Peak-Hour Trips
642 Quarry Road (San Carlos) TransportaƟon Study
Figure 4
Project Trip Assignment
5 1
6 7
23 8
4 9
County
Rd
Camino
Real
Industrial
Rd
Ave
Ralston
Old
Blvd
Harbor
Blvd
Harbor
County
Rd
Industrial
Rd
Rd
Quarry
Old
Rd
Quarry
St
Holly
St
Holly
Industrial
Rd
St
Holly
El
ElCamino
Real
OldCounty
Rd
OldCounty
Rd
Harbor
Blvd
2(11)3(16)
21(111)
18(4)
13(3)
43(9)
13(3)
7(39)
2(11)
10(51)
26(138)
6(33)
30(6)
61(12)
56(11)
6(33)
61(12)
61(12)
6(33)
105(21)
12(63)
45(9)
61(12)
6(33)
2(8)
43(9)43(9)
7(39)
7(39)
25(5)
7(39)4(23)0(2)
38(8)
43(9)
7(1)
1(7)0(2)
38(8)
38(8)
0(2)
l
i
'L
l .,._
-+ i
l
l
i
+--
l
i ~
0 NORTH
Notto Scale

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1766
1 2 3 4 1:; "'O 0 C
a:: :, ., 0 "'O ;:::- a:: (.) a::
~
- 'L 32(118) ~ 'L 3(10) - 0
L. L. +- 4(16) +- 31 (115)
Harbor .r 79(33) Holly St r 24(89) Holly St
Harbor h r Blvd
0 Blvd r C 8(4)-g 108(46) _.
116(49) ---..] g §; 00 ·Eo .E
(.) 0., a:: N
~ ] ;,;- 0 0, <') (.) "'O w £ w c
5 "'O 6 ., ., 7 8 "., 2 0 0 .2 0 a:: .,,sz, ., o>
lnMM
_ ,__ "'O ir a:: ~~ 0 MG' =.e!..!:::!. 'L 126(53) _..,,._ "'O ., ~~ ("') r--. U") E +-12(45) ~~
Holly St .J ! 4 0
Son Carta..! ! +- 1(4) < ,r 2(9) Son Carlos Av Av Britton Av r 18(67) 108(46) J T r 47(20) .....7 T r
00 42(18) _.
i 0 4(2)- 0 C € 0 ;:::- E 0 ·c ;,;- "'O N
] <O 0 ., ~ u .... E ~ "'O 0
£ ;.- <
9 10 0 11 12 r .,
0::

CON ;:::- ~ _ .,,
? N- t::.
0 <') ..,.
+- 22(81) +-32(118) N
+- 0(2)
Britton .J ! Britton ! .r 10(37) Britton Howard Av l ,r 0(2) 111(47) J ~ T Av T r Av ~ Av
a:: T r
76132) -1 111(47)-% 2(1 ) -g c 0 vi'in :, .E m - ·c <D
~~ 0 N-
] ;,;- (.) [:; -
0, "' ;'!: "'"" <D
"'O
.E r; 0 r;:-
13 +--1(3)
Howard Av
~
3(1) - J
~
LEGEND
XX{XX) ~ AM(PM)
Figure 9
-Hexagon PAMF PROJECT TRIP ASSIGNMENT ~ Transportation Consultants, Inc. Polo Alto Medical Foundation Traffic Study

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1767
sca022.ai 4/24
Traffic *NQBDU"OBMZTJTGPSUIF"MFYBOESJB$FOUFSGPS-JGF4DJFODF1SPKFDUFigure 5 – 2040 No Project Traffic Volumes (xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
LEGEND
42 (58)
727(775)
249(227)
(113) 88
(357)647
(26) 16
(22) 1
(960)550
(354)287
224(322)277(462)387(490)
1 126(224)
234(153)
44 (27)
(125) 84(567)807(236)241
(278)167
(274)236
(98)150
14 (14)592(806)48(32)
2 63 (79)
428(616)
171(343)
(58) 132
(577)880
(89) 40
(62) 88
(470)426
(836)774
388(433)524(733)388(684)
3 304(385)
941(1337)
4 348(412)
841(919)
(304)276(273)384
(185) 257
(1001)628
5 35(43)16(23)
410(412)
79 (24)
(568)499
(22) 36
6 35 (49)
731(1306)
22 (30)
(34)58
(3) 9
(20)56
(13) 20
(1339)1224
(18) 20
44(14)4 (5)37(11)
7 10(31)32(33)
407(456)
13 (6)
(607)581
(11) 30
8 47 (26)
721(1320)
30 (2)
(31)40
(1) 6
(18)17
(9) 25
(1274)1167
(3) 14
15(16)3 (2)6 (15)
9 47 (95)
1193(1183)
(70)123
(90)118
(44) 22
(1170)815
10 28(33)40(46)
391(487)
60 (16)
(583)593
(16)122
11 49 (35)
709(1403)
115(7)
(20)39
(1)20
(28)46
(16) 31
(1258)1225
(6) 95
13(87)0 (2)12(79)
12 30 (72)
129(159)
43 (27)
(57) 40
(304)548
(40) 34
(88) 19
(272)182
(92) 79
53 (140)247(533)33 (94)
13 41 (53)
780(892)
605(356)
(63) 35
(293)601
(71) 39
(96) 65
(1010)641
(163)220
173(305)234(641)283(473)
14 143(159)
225(358)
61 (38)
(116) 233
(516)1064(205) 144
(175)129
(417)441
(43) 41
41 (86)417(1132)28 (108)
15 170(680)
395(532)
104(220)
(381)456(262)604
(65) 65
(247)125
(814)764
(116)120
56 (18)261(440)300(239)
16 98 (194)
271(427)
39 (54)
(212)252(225)491
(57)168
(157) 63
(345)290
(35) 56
32 (93)176(617)17 (44)
18 28 (54)
942(1340)
100(44)
(47) 52
(167)417
(79) 82
(66) 62
(1062)859
(295)433
56 (172)88 (310)189(475)
17 79 (197)
570(427)
49 (156)
(166)327
(62) 37(95)184
(346)137
(789)622
(130) 55
34(71)14(88)27(60)
19 US 101 Industrial Rd Old County Rd El Camino Real
Old County RdOld County Rd
Industrial Rd
Industrial Rd
Industrial Rd
El Camino Real
Old County Rd
Laurel St
Old County Rd
Industrial Rd
El Camino Real
El Camino Real
Old County Rd
Industrial Rd
El Camino Real
Holly St
Holly St
Holly St
Holly St
E San Carlos Ave Commercial St Brittan Ave
San Carlos Ave
E San Carlos Ave
Bransten Rd
Bransten Rd
Arroyo Ave
Commercial St
Brittan Ave
Brittan Ave
Howard Ave
Howard Ave
Howard Ave
Brittan Ave
r UI
C:

L f'D
- - ~ ~
r r
~ (~ r ~ r
.J
t
y
'- ~
r
L L L
r
L L L
J I ic:i • .i i. I~ J I ic:i J I ic:i
J , t t J J , t t J , t t
-
y - -
y -
y
'-
r ...., r 'I r

L L L L
'-----~ , ____ _
r
L L
J
- -

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1768
sca022.ai 4/24
Traffic INQBDU"OBMZTJTGPSUIF"MFYBOESJB$FOUFSGPS-JGF4DJFODF1SPKFDUFigure 14 - 2040 Phase 1&2&3 with TDM Traffic Volumes (xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
LEGEND
42 (64)
727(775)
265(248)
(113) 88
(357)740
(26) 18
(22) 1
(960)550
(354)287
236(365)282(548)455(507)
1 126(228)
262(154)
44 (27)
(125) 84(567)834(264)364
(400)202
(306)236
(97)167
14 (14)663(841)17 (12)
2 86 (79)
472(616)
189(343)
(58)147
(563)877
(89) 40
(71) 90
(534)426
(923)777
388(433)503(713)482(708)
3 351(389)
941(1339)
4 352(412)
841(936)
(304)276(273)384
(205)257
(1001)640
5 35(64)16(24)
482(410)
102(33)
(700)531
(22) 36
6 35 (53)
855(1330)
22 (30)
(34)63
(3) 11
(34)72
(30) 20
(1506)1227
(26) 20
44(14)4 (5)39(13)
7 10(31)37(52)
487(469)
13 (6)
(747)609
(30) 34
8 47 (26)
861(1345)
30 (2)
(31)40
(1) 6
(22)17
(9) 29
(1453)1170
(3) 22
15(31)3 (2)6 (51)
9 53 (109)
1193(1183)
(70)145(90)161
(51) 22
(1179)815
10 37(41)56(421)
355(504)
216(100)
(816)643
(3)182
11 36 (77)
129(175)
49 (29)
(57) 52
(304)561
(42) 34
(88) 19
(272)202
(92) 79
63 (140)247(557)33 (102)
13 362(251)
709(1403)
115(7)
(288)80
(1)20
(313)74
(38) 111
(1258)1225
(6) 95
13(87)0 (2)12(79)
12 41 (53)
780(896)
649(356)
(63) 35
(293)614
(71) 39
(96) 65
(1010)641
(163)244
173(315)234(663)283(473)
14 150(176)
227(418)
66 (42)
(128) 264
(516)1120
(205) 144
(175)140
(429)533
(43) 47
121(99)417(1132)28 (108)
15 170(715)
395(560)
104(268)
(381)488(262)628
(65) 77
(247)141
(824)768
(116)120
44 (17)265(440)300(239)
16 98 (194)
271(457)
47 (54)
(212)276(225)491
(63)168
(157) 63
(345)349
(35) 61
48 (93)176(628)19 (49)
18 28 (58)
942(1340)
100(44)
(49) 54
(170)418
(83) 97
(68) 64
(1062)871
(295)433
56 (172)88 (323)196(475)
17 79 (197)
570(429)
49 (156)
(166)353
(62) 37(96)201
(350)159
(794)622
(132) 55
34(71)14(88)27(61)
19 US 101 Industrial Rd Old County Rd El Camino Real
Old County RdOld County Rd
Industrial Rd
Industrial Rd
Industrial Rd
El Camino Real
Old County Rd
Laurel St
Old County Rd
Industrial Rd
El Camino Real
El Camino Real
Old County Rd
Industrial Rd
El Camino Real
Holly St
Holly St
Holly St
Holly St
E San Carlos Ave Commercial St Brittan Ave
San Carlos Ave
E San Carlos Ave
Bransten Rd
Bransten Rd
Arroyo Ave
Commercial St
Brittan Ave
Brittan Ave
Howard Ave
Howard Ave
Howard Ave
Brittan Ave
r UI
C:

L f'D
- - ~ ~
r r
~ (~ r ~ r
.J
t
y
'- ~
r
L L L
r
L L L
J I ic:i • .i i. I~ J I ic:i J I ic:i
J , t t J J , t t J , t t
-
y - -
y -
y
'-
r ...., r 'I r

L L L L
r
L L
- -

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1769
sca028.ai 10/22
5SBGGJD Operations Analysis for the 841 Old County Road ProjectFigure 7 – Project Trips Volumes (xx) PM Peak Hour Volume
xx AM Peak Hour Volume
LEGEND
-2(11)-4(27)
1 (-5)47
2 155(-14)
3 56(-5)
4 (-2)14
5 6
7 -6(46)
8 (91)-12
9 10
-8(59)
11 (72)-10
12 (-2)14
-2(11)
13 (-2)14
-2(14)-2(11)
14 (-3)30
15 16
(-2)20
18 -3(16)
17 19
US 101 Industrial Rd Old County Rd
Industrial Wy
Old County RdOld County Rd
El Camino Real
Industrial Rd
Industrial Rd
El Camino Real
Old County Rd
Laurel St
Old County Rd
Industrial Rd
El Camino Real Old County Rd
El Camino Real
Industrial Wy
El Camino Real
Brittan Ave Commercial St E San Carlos Ave Holly St
~
(6) -56(-5)
(67)
f (-3)
J . (46~ t
(-4)4 (-7)7 y
(-2)14y
Howard Ave Commercial St E San Carlos Ave Holly St
§ (14)
~4)~
§ 62(-15) .J iF10(-1)
(38)-5_1.
(-2) (91)- (8)-2-
(-2)20y
l ~
Brittan Ave Bransten Rd Holly St
i (
' L-3(16)
§ (19)
~ § -1)
r 56(-5)
(-3)
~ -
(6)
(86)-11 y
Howard Ave Brittan Ave Bransten Rd Holl St
§ (6)
(-4)4 ~ f'(-15) ~(-9)
(-2)17y
J I I l ~
Brittan Ave Arroyo Ave San Carlos Ave
'
( ...,
L-4(24)
f) § 35)
~ ~(11)
~ (-4)4
""'
a,
::a
UI I '- ,/ '--- ~

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1770
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G'ULYHZD\ +DUERU%OYG
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3HUP 1$ 3URW 1$ 3HUP 1$ 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F

YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH % % $ % % %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 % $ % %
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH %
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1771
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G +DUERU%OYG
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 3HUP 1$ 3HUP
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F

YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR
8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH % % & & & & % & %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 % & & &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH %
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH % $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS

EXISTING
-- "' t~ - "' .,, __

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1772
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

+ROO\6W
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV
)UW
)OW3URWHFWHG
6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG
6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3URW
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F

YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR
8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $ $ &
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 $ $ $ &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH $
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS

EXISTING
t
tt .,, __ tt

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1773
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G +ROO\6W
$03HDN

)OSESHGELNHV )UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3HUP 3URW 1$ SPRY 3URW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F
F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU

,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G 'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ( % & & ( ( % ( '
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ( & & (
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH % $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1774
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G +ROO\6W
$03HDN

)OSESHGELNHV )UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 3HUP 6SOLW 1$ 3URW 1$ 3URW 1$ 3HUP
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR &OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR
8QLIRUP'HOD\G 3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' & & ' ( ) ) '
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ' & ( (
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS

EXISTING
t
4; .,, __

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1775
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 4XDUU\5G
$03HDN

)OSESHGELNHV
)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3URW 1$ 3URW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G
3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH & & ' ' ' &
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 & & ' '
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V

6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1776
+&08QVLJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 7D\ORU:D\
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YHKK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
9HKK

6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH
*UDGH
3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

+RXUO\IORZUDWH
YSK

3HGHVWULDQV
/DQH:LGWK
IW

:DONLQJ6SHHG
IWV

3HUFHQW%ORFNDJH
5LJKWWXUQIODUH
YHK

0HGLDQW\SH 1RQH 1RQH
0HGLDQVWRUDJHYHK

8SVWUHDPVLJQDO
IW

S;SODWRRQXQEORFNHG
Y&FRQIOLFWLQJYROXPH

Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&XXQEORFNHGYRO

W&VLQJOH
V

W&VWDJH
V

W)
V

STXHXHIUHH

F0FDSDFLW\
YHKK

'LUHFWLRQ/DQH (% :% 1% 1% 1% 6% 6%
9ROXPH7RWDO

9ROXPH/HIW
9ROXPH5LJKW
F6+
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
4XHXH/HQJWK
WK
IW

&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

/DQH/26 $ $ $ $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 $ $
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
$YHUDJH'HOD\
,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

EXISTING
'i tt --- tl+

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1777
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 'ULYHZD\
$03HDN

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3URW 1$ 3URW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F
YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' ' ' ( $ ' $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ' ' $ %
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH %
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V

6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1778
+&08QVLJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G 4XDUU\5G
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH

0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7
/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YHKK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
9HKK

6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS )UHH )UHH
*UDGH
3HDN+RXU)DFWRU
+RXUO\IORZUDWH
YSK

3HGHVWULDQV
/DQH:LGWK
IW

:DONLQJ6SHHG
IWV

3HUFHQW%ORFNDJH
5LJKWWXUQIODUH
YHK

0HGLDQW\SH 1RQH 1RQH
0HGLDQVWRUDJHYHK

8SVWUHDPVLJQDO
IW

S;SODWRRQXQEORFNHG
Y&FRQIOLFWLQJYROXPH
Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&XXQEORFNHGYRO
W&VLQJOH
V

W&VWDJH
V

W)
V

STXHXHIUHH

F0FDSDFLW\
YHKK

'LUHFWLRQ/DQH :% 1% 6%
9ROXPH7RWDO

9ROXPH/HIW
9ROXPH5LJKW
F6+

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
4XHXH/HQJWK
WK
IW

&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

/DQH/26 % $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 %
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
$YHUDJH'HOD\
,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

EXISTING
~---- V

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1779
+&08QVLJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G 7D\ORU:D\
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7
/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YHKK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
9HKK

6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS )UHH )UHH
*UDGH
3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

+RXUO\IORZUDWH
YSK

3HGHVWULDQV
/DQH:LGWK
IW

:DONLQJ6SHHG
IWV

3HUFHQW%ORFNDJH
5LJKWWXUQIODUH
YHK

0HGLDQW\SH 1RQH 1RQH
0HGLDQVWRUDJHYHK

8SVWUHDPVLJQDO
IW

S;SODWRRQXQEORFNHG
Y&FRQIOLFWLQJYROXPH

Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&XXQEORFNHGYRO

W&VLQJOH
V

W&VWDJH
V

W)
V

STXHXHIUHH

F0FDSDFLW\
YHKK

'LUHFWLRQ/DQH :% 1% 6%
9ROXPH7RWDO

9ROXPH/HIW
9ROXPH5LJKW
F6+

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
4XHXH/HQJWK
WK
IW

&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

/DQH/26 % $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 %
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
$YHUDJH'HOD\
,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

EXISTING
~---- V

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1780
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G'ULYHZD\ +DUERU%OYG
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3HUP 1$ 3URW 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F

YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH % % & $ % % %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 % % % %
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH %
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1781
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G +DUERU%OYG
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 3HUP 1$ 3HUP
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR &OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP

YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH % % % & & & % & %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 % & & &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH & $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS

EXISTING
-- "' t~ - "' .,, __

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1782
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

+ROO\6W
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV
)UW
)OW3URWHFWHG
6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG
6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3URW
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR
8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $ $ &
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 $ $ $ &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH $
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS

EXISTING
t
tt .,, __ tt

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1783
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G +ROO\6W
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV )UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3HUP 3URW 1$ SPRY 3URW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F
F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP

YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU

,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' & & & ( ( % ( '
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ' & & (
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH & $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1784
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G +ROO\6W
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV )UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 3HUP 6SOLW 1$ 3URW 1$ 3URW 1$ 3HUP
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G 'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' & ' ' ( ( ) (
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ' ' ( (
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR

$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS

EXISTING
t
4; .,, __

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1785
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 4XDUU\5G
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV
)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3URW 1$ 3URW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH & & ' ' ' &
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 & & ' &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V

6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1786
+&08QVLJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 7D\ORU:D\
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YHKK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
9HKK

6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS 6WRS )UHH )UHH
*UDGH
3HDN+RXU)DFWRU

+RXUO\IORZUDWH
YSK

3HGHVWULDQV
/DQH:LGWK
IW

:DONLQJ6SHHG
IWV

3HUFHQW%ORFNDJH
5LJKWWXUQIODUH
YHK

0HGLDQW\SH 1RQH 1RQH
0HGLDQVWRUDJHYHK

8SVWUHDPVLJQDO
IW

S;SODWRRQXQEORFNHG
Y&FRQIOLFWLQJYROXPH

Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&XXQEORFNHGYRO

W&VLQJOH
V

W&VWDJH
V

W)
V

STXHXHIUHH

F0FDSDFLW\
YHKK

'LUHFWLRQ/DQH (% :% 1% 1% 1% 6% 6%
9ROXPH7RWDO

9ROXPH/HIW
9ROXPH5LJKW
F6+
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
4XHXH/HQJWK
WK
IW

&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

/DQH/26 % $ $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 % $
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
$YHUDJH'HOD\
,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

EXISTING
'i tt --- tl+

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1787
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 'ULYHZD\
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV
)OSESHGELNHV
)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3URW 1$ 3URW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F
YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR
8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH & ' ' ( $ ( $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 & ' $ $
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH %
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V

6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1788
+&08QVLJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G 4XDUU\5G
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH

0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7
/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YHKK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
9HKK

6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS )UHH )UHH
*UDGH
3HDN+RXU)DFWRU
+RXUO\IORZUDWH
YSK

3HGHVWULDQV

/DQH:LGWK
IW

:DONLQJ6SHHG
IWV

3HUFHQW%ORFNDJH
5LJKWWXUQIODUH
YHK

0HGLDQW\SH 1RQH 1RQH
0HGLDQVWRUDJHYHK

8SVWUHDPVLJQDO
IW

S;SODWRRQXQEORFNHG
Y&FRQIOLFWLQJYROXPH

Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&XXQEORFNHGYRO

W&VLQJOH
V

W&VWDJH
V

W)
V

STXHXHIUHH

F0FDSDFLW\
YHKK

'LUHFWLRQ/DQH :% 1% 6%
9ROXPH7RWDO
9ROXPH/HIW
9ROXPH5LJKW
F6+

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
4XHXH/HQJWK
WK
IW

&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

/DQH/26 & $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
$YHUDJH'HOD\
,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

EXISTING
~---- V

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1789
+&08QVLJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G 7D\ORU:D\
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW :%/ :%5 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7
/DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YHKK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
9HKK

6LJQ&RQWURO 6WRS )UHH )UHH
*UDGH
3HDN+RXU)DFWRU
+RXUO\IORZUDWH
YSK

3HGHVWULDQV
/DQH:LGWK
IW

:DONLQJ6SHHG
IWV

3HUFHQW%ORFNDJH
5LJKWWXUQIODUH
YHK

0HGLDQW\SH 1RQH 1RQH
0HGLDQVWRUDJHYHK

8SVWUHDPVLJQDO
IW

S;SODWRRQXQEORFNHG
Y&FRQIOLFWLQJYROXPH

Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&XXQEORFNHGYRO

W&VLQJOH
V

W&VWDJH
V

W)
V

STXHXHIUHH

F0FDSDFLW\
YHKK

'LUHFWLRQ/DQH :% 1% 6%
9ROXPH7RWDO
9ROXPH/HIW
9ROXPH5LJKW
F6+
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
4XHXH/HQJWK
WK
IW

&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

/DQH/26 % $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 %
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
$YHUDJH'HOD\
,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

EXISTING
~---- V

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1790
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G'ULYHZD\ +DUERU%OYG
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV
)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3URW 1$ 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR
8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH & & & & & &
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK /26 &&&&
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V

6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
-- , .. ,,

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1791
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G +DUERU%OYG
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ SPSW 1$ 3HUP 3HUP 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR &OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F
F
YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH & ' ( ' ' & & ( (
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ' ' ' (
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR

$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V

6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH (
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
-- "' 4~ - "' "'

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1792
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

+ROO\6W
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV
)UW
)OW3URWHFWHG
6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG
6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3URW
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F

YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G
3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $ % '
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 $ % $ '
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH %
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR

$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
t
tt .,, __ tt

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1793
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G +ROO\6W
$03HDN

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3URW 1$ 3URW 1$ SPRY 3HUP 1$ SPRY 3URW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU

,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ( & ' & % ' ( & & %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK /26 '&'&
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
--~~ tt ~ ~

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1794
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G +ROO\6W
$03HDN

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ SPRY 6SOLW 1$ SPRY 3URW 1$ SPRY 3URW 1$ SWRY 3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F F YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G 'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' % ' & ' ( & ) ) &
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ' ' ( (
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH ( $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
t
4; .,, __ 4; 'f' 'i

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1795
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 4XDUU\5G
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU
)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3URW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F
YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH % % % & ' %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 % % & &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH % $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1796
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 7D\ORU:D\
$03HDN

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3HUP 1$ 1$ 3URW 1$ 3HUP 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW
F

YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR
8QLIRUP'HOD\G
3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH % % % $ %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 % % $ %
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH $
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1797
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 'ULYHZD\
$03HDN

)OSESHGELNHV )UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3HUP SPSW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR &OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' ( ' $ & $ % $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ' ( & $
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1798
+&08QVLJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G 4XDUU\5G
$03HDN

SP
%DVHOLQH 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH

0HGLDQW\SH 1RQH 1RQH
0HGLDQVWRUDJHYHK

8SVWUHDPVLJQDO
IW

S;SODWRRQXQEORFNHG
Y&FRQIOLFWLQJYROXPH

Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&XXQEORFNHGYRO

W&VLQJOH
V

W&VWDJH
V

W)
V

STXHXHIUHH
F0FDSDFLW\
YHKK

'LUHFWLRQ/DQH :% :% 1% 6% 6%
9ROXPH7RWDO

9ROXPH/HIW
9ROXPH5LJKW
F6+

9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
4XHXH/HQJWK
WK
IW

&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

/DQH/26 ) % %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 )
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
$YHUDJH'HOD\
,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH % $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

EXISTING + PLAN
'ft ;

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1799
+&08QVLJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G 7D\ORU:D\
$03HDN

0HGLDQW\SH 1RQH 1RQH
0HGLDQVWRUDJHYHK

8SVWUHDPVLJQDO
IW

S;SODWRRQXQEORFNHG
Y&FRQIOLFWLQJYROXPH

Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&VWDJHFRQIYRO
Y&XXQEORFNHGYRO

W&VLQJOH
V

W&VWDJH
V

W)
V

STXHXHIUHH

F0FDSDFLW\
YHKK

'LUHFWLRQ/DQH :% 1% 6%
9ROXPH7RWDO
9ROXPH/HIW
9ROXPH5LJKW
F6+
9ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\
4XHXH/HQJWK
WK
IW

&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

/DQH/26 ( $
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 (
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
$YHUDJH'HOD\
,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

EXISTING + PLAN
~---- V

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1800
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G'ULYHZD\ +DUERU%OYG
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3URW 1$ 3HUP 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH & & & & & % '
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK /26 &&&'
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH & $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
-- , .. ,,

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1801
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G +DUERU%OYG
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ SPSW 1$ 3HUP 3HUP 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR &OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' ( & ( & ' % ' &
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ( ' ' &
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH * $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
-- "' 4~ - "' "'

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1802
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

+ROO\6W
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV
)UW
)OW3URWHFWHG
6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG
6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3URW
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR
8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH $ $ $ '
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 $ $ $ '
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH $
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V

6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH %
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
t
tt .,, __ tt

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1803
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G +ROO\6W
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3URW 1$ 3URW 1$ SPRY 3HUP 1$ SPRY 3URW 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW
F F F
YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G 3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ' & ' & % ' ( ( ' &
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 & & ( '
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
--~~ tt ~ ~

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1804
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

2OG&RXQW\5G +ROO\6W
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV )UW
)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ SPRY 6SOLW 1$ SPRY 3URW 1$ SPRY 3URW 1$ SWRY 3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR &OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F F F YV5DWLR3HUP
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU ,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G

'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH ( & ' & ( ) % ) ) '
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 ( ' ( (
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK

+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH '
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ ,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH ( $QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN
t
4; .,, __ 4; 'f' 'i

10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1805
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 4XDUU\5G
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU
)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV

)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F
YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR

8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH & & % & % %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 & & & %
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V

6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH )
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1806
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 7D\ORU:D\
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU
)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV
)UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+)

$GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

&RQIO%LNHV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 3HUP 1$ 3URW 1$ 3HUP 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR
&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F
F
YV5DWLR3HUP F
YF5DWLR
8QLIRUP'HOD\G

3URJUHVVLRQ)DFWRU
,QFUHPHQWDO'HOD\G
'HOD\
V

/HYHORI6HUYLFH & & $ %
$SSURDFK'HOD\
VYHK

$SSURDFK/26 & $ $ %
,QWHUVHFWLRQ6XPPDU\
+&0&RQWURO'HOD\
VYHK
+&0/HYHORI6HUYLFH %
+&09ROXPHWR&DSDFLW\UDWLR
$FWXDWHG&\FOH/HQJWK
V
6XPRIORVWWLPH
V

,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\8WLOL]DWLRQ
,&8/HYHORI6HUYLFH &
$QDO\VLV3HULRG
PLQ

F&ULWLFDO/DQH*URXS
EXISTING + PLAN 10.b
June 08, 2026 Packet Pg. 1807
+&06LJQDOL]HG,QWHUVHFWLRQ&DSDFLW\$QDO\VLV

,QGXVWULDO5G 'ULYHZD\
303HDN
SP 6\QFKUR5HSRUW
3DJH
0RYHPHQW (%/ (%7 (%5 :%/ :%7 :%5 1%/ 1%7 1%5 6%/ 6%7 6%5 /DQH&RQILJXUDWLRQV
7UDIILF9ROXPH
YSK

)XWXUH9ROXPH
YSK

,GHDO)ORZ
YSKSO

7RWDO/RVWWLPH
V

/DQH8WLO)DFWRU

)USESHGELNHV

)OSESHGELNHV )UW

)OW3URWHFWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SURW

)OW3HUPLWWHG

6DWG)ORZ
SHUP

3HDNKRXUIDFWRU3+) $GM)ORZ
YSK

57255HGXFWLRQ
YSK

/DQH*URXS)ORZ
YSK

&RQIO3HGV
KU

+HDY\9HKLFOHV

7XUQ7\SH 6SOLW 1$ 6SOLW 1$ 3HUP 1$ 3HUP 3HUP 1$
3URWHFWHG3KDVHV
3HUPLWWHG3KDVHV
$FWXDWHG*UHHQ*
V

(IIHFWLYH*UHHQJ
V

$FWXDWHGJ&5DWLR

&OHDUDQFH7LPH
V

9HKLFOH([WHQVLRQ
V

/DQH*US&DS
YSK

YV5DWLR3URW F F
F

San Carlos City CouncilJune 8, 2026

San Carlos City Council
June 8, 2026